The impact of type of flexible contract on work engagement:

Transcription

1 Master thesis Human Resource Studies The impact of type of flexible contract on work engagement: The mediating role of psychological contract and the moderating role of job insecurity. Student: Annemiek de Ree EMPLID: Name supervisor: Dr. Charissa Freese Second supervisor: Karen Pak Msc. Project period: January July 2017 Project theme: Inclusive HRM: securing labor market transitions

2 Abstract Since the 1980s, employers have strongly desired to become more competitive by decreasing their employment costs. Consequently, the use of flexible contracts in the Dutch labor market increases constantly. Flexible contracts are often associated with negative outcomes. However, research about the heterogeneity of the group of flexible employees is limited. Drawing on social exchange theory and psychological contract (PC) theory, the present study examines the mediating effect of PC fulfillment and the moderating effect of perceived job insecurity in the relationship between type of flexible contract and work engagement. A quantitative crosssectional design is used. Data for this study were collected through an employee questionnaire (N = 127) covering multiple sectors in the Netherlands. The results suggest that PC fulfillment partially mediates the relationship between type of contract and work engagement. A temporary agency contract is associated with less PC fulfillment, that, in turn, negatively affects work engagement. The reverse applies to a more fulfilled PC: a fixed-term contract leads to more PC fulfillment, that relates positively to work engagement. In addition, perceived job insecurity does not alter the relationship between the type of contract, PC fulfillment and work engagement. Future research should therefore focus on further examination of other factors that might influence the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement. Limitations, recommendations for further research and practical implications are also discussed in this study. Keywords: flexible contract, temporary agency contract, fixed-term contract, psychological contract, psychological-contract fulfillment, work engagement, perceived job insecurity. 2

3 1. Introduction The labor market has shown a significant increase in flexible contracts in many countries over the last years (De Graaf-Zijl, Van den Berg & Heyma, 2011, Van Oorschot, 2004). High unemployment rates have begun to unfold, which caused that diverse types of flexible contracts have been developed (De Lange, Gesthuizen & Wolbers, 2014). Examples of these flexible contracts include temporary agency work and fixed-term contracts (Benach, Benavides, Platt, Diez-Roux & Muntaner, 2000; Kalleberg, 2000). In the Netherlands, the percentage of flexible contracts has gone up from 15% in 2005 to 21% in 2015, which is a large increase compared to other countries in Europe (Bolhaar, Brouwes & Scheer, 2016; Nienhüser & Matiaske, 2006). This growth will further accelerate in the coming years (Goudswaard, Van Wijk & Verbiest, 2014). There are many actors, institutions, trends and developments that feed into this proliferation of flexible contracts, for example globalization (e.g. increasing competition, crossborder production), technological innovation (e.g. digitization and robotics), socio-cultural developments (e.g. increasing desire for freedom and autonomy, including at work) and developments in labor law (e.g. dismissal law) (Bolhaar et al., 2016). Hence, the treatment of flexible employees becomes an essential subject in human resource strategy. In fact, flexible contracts are likely to be associated with higher job insecurity, a sense of marginalization and loss of opportunity for development, for career and organizational identification. In addition, the growth of flexible contracts moves the employer's risk to the individual. Flexible employees can therefore be depicted as marginal and disadvantaged (Guest, 2004; Kremer, Went and Knottnerus, 2017). However, the precise issues with flexible employment remains unclear, as previous research have not always supported these results. Contradictory results for example suggest that flexible employees experience less overload and work pace, and perform less often overtime work compared to permanent employees (Wagenaar, 2013). It is therefore important to study the group of flexible employees in more detail. Flexible employment is a multidimensional concept (Connelly & Gallagher, 2004). More specifically, it can occur in many ways and the group of flexible employees is very heterogeneous (Heyma, Hop & Smid, 2010). Research about the impact of flexible contracts on job behaviors and attitudes is limited because this group is often considered as a homogeneous group (De Cuper & Isaksson, 2017; Silla, Gracia & Peiró, 2005). There is a need to fully acknowledge the heterogeneity of flexible employees by distinguishing between temporary agency contracts and fixed-term contracts and to understand whether these groups differ in work engagement (De Cuper & Isaksson, 2017; De Cuyper & Witte, 2005). 3

4 When studying these different groups, work engagement is a particularly important aspect because it is beneficial for an organization and its employees (Saks, 2006). It is related to a positive work-related state that is characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010). Engaged employees experience high levels of energy and involvement in their organization, which results in positive organizational behaviors (Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011; Christian, Garza & Slaughter, 2011). Research has already shown that especially temporary agency contracts negatively affect work engagement (Wagenaar, 2013). It is, however, favorable to investigate more deeply whether employees with temporary agency contracts and fixed-term contracts differ in work engagement. A possible explanation for the differences in work engagement could be that these flexible employees experience a difference in psychological contract (PC) fulfillment (De Cuyper & Isaksson, 2017). PC is concerned with the employees perceptions in the mutual agreements in the employee-employer relationship (Rousseau, 1989). It is based on employees perceived promises from the employer, with two factors being critical to the creation of PC: external messages from the employer and individual interpretations. The PC develops and evolves continuously based on communication or lack of it between the employee and the employer. Promises of promotion or salary increases, for example, can be part of the PC. The fulfillment of PC can be explained by the norm of reciprocity. This means that employees who perceive their employer has failed to fulfill his or her responsibilities are likely to reciprocate by withdrawing their contributions to the employee-employer relationship. PC fulfillment has therefore strong effects on individual attitudes and behavior (Coyle-Shapiro & Kessler, 2002). Several studies have confirmed a significant relationship between different types of employment contracts and PC. For instance, Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler (2002) conclude that flexible employees experience a lower degree of obligations and inducements than permanent employees. Likewise, Guest (2004) states that flexible employees behavior is more easily affected by differences in the content of the PC than permanent employees. Research about the PC fulfillment of flexible employees stays speculative, however (Callea, Urbini, Ingusci and Chirumbolo, 2016; De Cuyper & De Witte, 2005). Although studies support the argument for a direct relationship between PC fulfillment and job attitudes and behaviors (Henderson, Wayne, Shore, Bommer & Tetrick, 2008), the mediating role of PC fulfillment between the type of contract and work engagement has not yet been examined. Whereas many previous research supports the negative relationship between flexible contracts and employee outcomes, De Witte and Näswall (2003) show contrasting results. They investigated the relationship between flexible contracts, job satisfaction and commitment. 4

5 When they ignored job insecurity, they did not find a significant relationship between flexible contracts, job satisfaction and commitment. Surprisingly, when statistically controlling for job insecurity, they even found the reverse: flexible employees experienced higher job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Hence the correlation between a flexible contract, job satisfaction and commitment may differ across different levels of job insecurity. Likewise, Callea, et al., (2016) confirmed that job insecurity moderates the relationship between type of contract and job satisfaction. For this reason, a possible underlying explanation for the relationship between type of contract, job satisfaction and commitment could be the degree of job insecurity. More specifically, having a flexible contract might not be problematic, but job insecurity might worsen the outcomes of flexible contracts. It is therefore beneficial to investigate whether flexible employees differ in PC fulfillment and work engagement as well as whether job insecurity could alter this relationship between the type of contract, PC fulfillment and work engagement. This study contributes to existing literature about PC fulfillment and the drivers of work engagement. The outcomes of this study will provide greater inside into the impact of flexible contracts on employees attitudes and behavior. Because it is not entirely clear whether different flexible contracts differ in PC fulfillment and engagement, the current study aimed to unravel some of this ambiguity in the flexible employment literature. On a practical level, the outcomes of this study can help organizations to make conscious decisions about how to invest in various employees within the organization. Because the use of flexible contracts still increases, a comprehensive understanding of the influence of a certain flexible contract on PC fulfillment and engagement is essential. The following research question is therefore proposed: To what extent do different flexible contracts differ in PC fulfillment and work engagement? And does job insecurity alter these differences in PC fulfillment and work engagement? In the next section, the research question is answered using empirical evidence and theories. 2.1 The flexible workforce 2. Theoretical framework According to Polivka (1996), a flexible contract is any contract where an employee does 5

6 not have a contract for long-term employment. Likewise, Kremer, Went and Knottnerus (2017) use the term flexible contract if the employer and employee do not have a fixed contract relationship. They make a distinction between flexible contracts and those who are selfemployed. A flexible contract is a contract of limited duration or one lacking a fixed number of working hours. This includes, for example, temporary agency employees and fixed-term contracts. Self-employed work for oneself as a freelance or the owner of a business rather than for an employer. They seek rather than avoid flexible contracts and negotiate contracts that benefit them first and the organization second. So, self-employed have a contract of choice which makes them more likely to report positive outcomes than flexible contract employees (Kremer et al., 2017). Although flexible contracts are not the dominant form of employment, flexible contracts are critical indicators of the shape of future things. They are for example important due to the range of employees affected by them. Additionally, they may influence the margins of employment because these employees often lack skills and negotiation weight. This has meant that employers can treat them less fairly (Guest, 2004). The focus in this study therefore lies on employees with a flexible contract. Because the purpose of this study is to investigate the heterogeneity of this group, two types of flexible contracts are distinguished and compared, namely temporary agency employees and fixed-term contract employees. Two important differences exist between a temporary agency contract and a fixed-term contract. First, employees with a fixed-term contract are directly hired by an organization, whereas temporary agency employees are employed by a third party, namely the employment agency (Wagenaar, 2013). Within this employment relationship, the employer acts as a borrower and the employment agency as a lender. In other words, the borrower, the lender and the temporary agency employee have a three-way relationship (Alewell, Bähring & Thommes, 2005). Second, the contract durations are different. Fixed-term contract employees sign contracts for a certain period whereas the contract duration of temporary agency employees depends on the amount of work available. Temporary agency employees are therefore hired for short periods of time or specific services (Das, 2017; Wagenaar, 2013). According to the Dutch Collective Labour Agreement (CLA) for temporary agency employees, temporary agency contracts are divided into three phases: A, B and C. Temporary agency employees work in phase A if they have not worked for the same employment agency for more than 78 weeks. The count to 78 weeks continues unless there is an interruption of more than six months between two temporary agency contracts. A temporary agency employee in phase A can receive an unlimited number of contracts in succession. Furthermore, this temporary agency contract is automatically terminated if the client no longer need the employee or if the employee gets sick. 6

7 In addition, these employees are only entitled to wages for the hours worked. Phase B and C are based on a secondment agreement, which lasts up to four years in phase B and for an infinite period in phase C. Temporary agency employees in phase A could therefore experience much more job insecurity than the one s in phase B or C. In this study, only temporary agency employees in phase A are considered, because the duration of their contract is comparable with the duration of fixed-term contracts. (Collective Labor Agreements for temporary agency workers, 2017). Fixed-term contracts in principle only end on the date the employee and employer have jointly agreed on in advance. Furthermore, there is often set a number of hours the employee works and gets paid for. The successive number of fixed-term contracts is limited by Dutch legislation. The general rule is a maximum of three fixed-term contracts, with a total duration of two years and an intermediate period of up to six months. This law aims to encourage employers to give their employees a permanent contract more quickly (Stavenuiter, 2017). As mentioned before, the current study investigates whether these different flexible contracts differ work engagement and PC fulfillment and whether job insecurity alters this relationship. 2.2 Type of contract and work engagement Work engagement refers to the positive, motivated state characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption. Vigor refers to resilience, energy and the investment of efforts into work. Dedication is concerned with feelings of involvement, enthusiasm and being inspired. Absorption describes a pleasant state of concentrating on one s work, which means an individual is unable to detach oneself from work (Schaufeli, Martinex, Pinto, Salanova & Bakker, 2002a). Whereas commitment and job satisfaction are relatively passive attitudes, work engagement reflects an active personal attitude. Engaged employees express high energy in their work, which enables them to behave more actively (Rayton & Yalabik, 2014). Temporary agency employees are often hired for short periods of time and for specific services. One of the consequences of this is they must frequently switch from one location and organization to another. In doing this, they must adapt to the new location or organization every time, which can require large amounts of energy (Kremer et al., 2017). One similarity among all temporary agency employees is they have two parties as their employer, namely the employment agency and the client organization they work for. Responsibilities such as administrative control lies with the employment agency, while managerial control such as supervision and coordination lies with the client organization (Claes, 2005). Consequently, 7

8 temporary agency employees could feel less dedicated to the client organization. In addition, overall evidence shows that temporary agency work is stronger associated with negative workrelated attitudes like work engagement compared to other flexible contracts (Wagenaar, 2013). Temporary agency employees are sensitive to organizational treatment (Coyle-Shapira & Kessler, 2002). They do less challenging work than fixed-term contract employees and show more symptoms of depression and less work satisfaction, making their work engagement below average (Kompier, Ybema, Janssen & Taris, 2009). Fixed-term contract employees have a different experience because they are employed by a single party. These employees are hired by the organization itself and they work longer for one employer. Their employer is responsible for both the administrative and managerial tasks. They could therefore feel more involved in the organization (Mauno Kinnunen & Ruokolainen, 2007). Based on the above, the following hypothesis is formulated: H1: Temporary agency employees experience lower work engagement compared to employees with a fixed-term contract. 2.3 Type of contract and PC fulfillment The PC refers to the unwritten set of employees perceptions of mutual agreements in the employee-employer relationship. The extent to which these agreements are met makes it possible to fulfill an employee s PC or not. The concept of PC fulfillment therefore relates to the extent to which a party has held the promises made to the other party (Rousseau, 1989). Central is the norm of reciprocity: employees seek to find a balance between their contribution and what they receive in return. This connects the employee and employer in a reciprocal relationship based on the understanding that the employees perceived fulfillments of the mutual agreements offer an exchange for that (Rousseau and Tijoriwala, 1998). This study will focus on the fulfillment of the PC, as a less fulfilled PC has serious individual and organizational implications. Previous research has found that a less fulfilled PC leads to a negative impact on employee behavior, causing potentially valuable employees to reduce their contributions to the organization (Morrison and Robinson, 1997). PC fulfillment can be measured in several ways (Van der Smissen, 2015). The work of Freese & Schalk (2008) concluded based on a critical test that a complete PC measurement needs to include several scales to assess both the content and evaluation of the PC. This study therefore uses both the content and the evaluation-oriented approach of Freese, Schalk & Croon (2008) to measure PC fulfillment. The content oriented approach investigates the employer obligations perceived by the employee. The evaluation-oriented approach examines the degree 8

9 of fulfillment of these employer obligations. These approaches are measured along six dimensions, which include job content, career development, social atmosphere, work-life balance, organizational policies and rewards. Shore and Barksdale (1998) found that flexible employees in general perceive a less fulfilled PC than permanent employees. Nevertheless, both the content and fulfillment from the above-mentioned dimensions could be experienced differently by temporary agency employees and fixed-term contract employees because their work situations are so divergent. Wagenaar (2013) found that temporary agency employees have lower job quality than fixed-term contract employees in terms of physical load, autonomy, work complexity and income. Temporary agency employees therefore often experience their work as unsatisfactory, which results in fewer expectations regarding their employer obligations. Thus, temporary agency employees will experience a lower PC than fixed-term contract employees (Druker & Stanworth, 2004). In addition, De Cuyper, Notelaers and De Witte (2009) proposed that temporary agency employees not only experience a lower PC, but also a less-fulfilled PC than fixed-term contract employees. There are a few reasons for this difference. First, because of the three-way relationship, the client organization may feel less responsible for the temporary agency employees. Second, temporary agency contracts are in general referred as bad jobs with low earnings and poor job quality, which could be evaluated as unfair. Third, the temporary agency and the temporary agency employees could have different interpretations towards their purpose. The temporary agency employee, for example, may interpret their work as a profession, whereas the agency views their work as the experience of several temporary assignments. In this way, temporary agency employees may see contradictory demands from the client organization and the agency, leading them to perceive the relationship with the client organization as temporary (Gallagher & Sverke, 2005; De Cuyper et al., 2009). These work situations could therefore result in violations of the employer s obligations. In other words, the perceived employers obligations from the employee are not fulfilled. This results in the following hypotheses: H2: On average, temporary agency employees have a less fulfilled PC compared to fixed-term contract employees. The following hypotheses will contain the entire group of flexible employees, including both temporary agency employees and fixed-term contract employees. 2.4 The mediating role of PC fulfillment Although the PC is widely studied with regards to employees attitudes and behavior, 9

10 there is currently little known about the relationship between PC fulfillment and work engagement (Rayton & Yalabik, 2014). PC theory (Rousseau, 1989) presumes that an employment relationship characterized by reciprocal investment can evolve into a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is a positive or negative expectation that affect an employees behavior in a way that causes those expectations to be fulfilled. This makes the employee and employer feel more connected to each other (Dabos & Rousseau, 2004). Bal, Kooij and De Jong (2013) argued that if employees experience a fulfilled PC, they respond with increased work engagement. In line with social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), employees feel required to reciprocate if they have an expectation of receiving incentives from their employers, in this case in the form of a fulfilled PC (Sturges, Conway, Guest & Liefooghe, 2005). Employees with an unfulfilled PC therefore react strongly through reduced positive attitudes and behavior. In addition, Chambel and Oliveira-Cruz (2010) showed that PC unfulfillment reduces work engagement. Work engagement is dependent on certain resources the employee obtains in their work. Resources (such as participative management, social support, and team building) that have a great potential in the promotion of intrinsic motivation increases work engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). When employees perceive their PC as unfulfilled, they consider themselves to be deprived of these resources which decreases their work engagement. It might be expected, then, that employees with a fulfilled PC are more engaged in their work than those with a less fulfilled PC (Chambel & Oliveira-Cruz, 2010). Along the same lines, it can be argued that PC fulfillment partially mediates the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement. A less fulfilled PC serves as a negative mediator with a temporary agency contract negatively relates to less PC fulfillment, which, in turn, negatively affects work engagement. The reverse applies to a more fulfilled PC, where a fixed-term contract relates to more PC fulfillment, which relates positively to work engagement. Accordingly, the third hypotheses are formulated as follows: H3a: The higher the PC fulfillment, the higher the work engagement expressed by flexible employees. H3b: The fulfilment of PC positively partially mediates the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement. 2.5 Job insecurity Job insecurity relates to employees perceptions of possible job loss (cognitive insecurity) or fears they may lose their jobs (affective insecurity) (De Witte, 2000). Job insecurity is highly associated with flexible contracts (Kremer et al., 2017). Job insecurity is 10

11 assumed to negatively mediate the relationship between flexible contracts and their outcomes, which result in undesirable attitudes and behaviors among flexible employees in comparison to permanent employees. There has, however, been little empirical effort to validate this assumption (Callea et al., 2016; De Cuyper & De Witte, 2005). De Cuyper and De Witte (2005) state that it is not the type of contract affecting job insecurity. However, they suggest that job insecurity could change the relationship between type of contract and a set of outcomes. They showed that job insecurity moderates the relationship between type of contract and outcomes like job satisfaction, engagement, organizational commitment and trust. Likewise, Callea et al., (2016) confirmed that job insecurity moderates the relationship between type of contract and job satisfaction. These authors, however, distinguish only between flexible contracts and permanent contracts. It is therefore necessary to investigate whether this model also holds for different types of flexible contracts. Some authors suggest that flexible contracts do not negatively affect PC fulfillment (De Jong, Schalk, & De Cuyper, 2009). Flexible employees feelings of insecurity might, however, change the perceived fulfillment of the employees expectations regarding the relationship with their employer (Callea et al., 2016). The connection between the type of flexible contract and PC fulfillment could therefore be changed by how secure the flexible employees feel about their work. The same applies to work engagement. Job insecurity is consistently associated with decreased engagement (Bosman, Rothmann & Buitendach, 2005; Mauno et al., 2007), whereas the type of contract is not always associated with work engagement (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2005). The relationship between the type of contract and PC, and the relationship between the type of contract and engagement, could therefore vary in strength among employees who perceive a different level of job insecurity. It is therefore necessary to investigate if job insecurity moderates the relationship between the type of contract and PC fulfillment, and between the type of contract and work engagement as well. This leads to the following hypotheses: H4a: Perceived job insecurity moderates the negative relationship between the type of contract and work engagement so that the relationship is stronger when perceived job insecurity is high and weaker when perceived job insecurity is low. H4b: Perceived job insecurity moderates the negative relationship between the type of contract and PC fulfillment so that the relationship is stronger when perceived job insecurity is high and weaker when perceived job insecurity is low. 11

12 As discussed above, it is expected that perceived job insecurity has a moderating effect on the relationships between the type of contract and engagement, and type of contract and PC fulfillment. This moderation, in turn, could influence the mediation effect of PC fulfillment between the relationship of the type of contract and work engagement. This is called moderated mediation (Hayes, 2013). It can therefore be hypothesized that: H4c: The expected mediation relationship between the type of contract and work engagement by PC fulfillment is moderated by job insecurity so that this mediation is stronger for employees who perceive high job insecurity and weaker for those who perceive low job security. Combining the above hypotheses, the research model in Figure 1 has been developed. Figure 1. Research model 3. Method This section describes the methodology used in this study. It covers the research set-up and describes the test subjects, the instruments, the research procedure and the statistical analyses. 3.1 Research set-up The present study focuses on two specific groups of flexible employees: temporary agency employees in phase A and fixed-term contract employees. The aim is to explain the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement, as well as the mediating role of PC fulfillment and the moderating role of job insecurity. A quantitative and explanatory research design is used to test the conceptual model and its seven constructed hypotheses. The data used in this study is cross-sectional, meaning that the data is collected at one specific 12

13 moment in time. The unit of analysis is the individual employee, because the study s variables were assessed through the perceptions of employees. These employees were classified into those with a temporary agency contract and those with fixed-term contract. 3.4 Procedure The data was gathered in April A convenience sampling method was utilized, meaning that the most accessible respondents were selected. This method was chosen as it is the least costly in terms of time, effort and money (Marshall, 1996). At the beginning of March 2017, different organizations and people in the network of the student were contacted to participate in the research. Each participating organization received an with a link to the questionnaire or received a questionnaire in paper-form. The managers distributed the questionnaires to their employees both electronically and on paper. In order to increase the response rate, a reminder was sent to the employees after a week. A cover letter explaining the general aim of the study was included on the introductory page. To guarantee anonymity, the respondents were not required to fill in their names. The questionnaire took about five minutes to complete. The questionnaire that was used is included in Appendix A. 3.2 Population and sample In the Netherlands, 8.3% of employment contracts are fixed-term and 2.3% are through temporary agencies. These flexible contracts are used across many different sectors (Bolhaar, Brouwes & Scheer, 2016; Kremer et al., 2017). The population of the present study therefore consists of flexible employees representing a variety of sectors in the Netherlands, to get as many respondents as possible to test the hypotheses in this study. The respondents were both men and women and had different age categories, with a minimum age of 18 years. The goal was to include a minimum of 100 responses, with approximately half coming from employees with a temporary agency contract and the other half with a fixed-term contract. Because the percentage of temporary agency contracts is much lower than that of fixed-term contracts, a deviation to a sample that consisted of more fixed-term contracts than temporary agency contracts was accepted. In total, 127 flexible employees filled out the questionnaire, including 48 temporary agency employees (37.8%) and 79 fixed-term contract employees (62.2%). The sample included 57 men (44.9%) and 70 women (55.1%). The average age was 28.4 years (SD = 10.33) and ranged from 18 to 61 years. Most of them had at least a secondary-level education and others a primary-school education. Most of the respondents were employed in the health and welfare sector, the trade sector and the industrial sector. The other respondents worked in the 13

14 educational sector, the catering sector, the transport sector, the culture, sports and recreation sector or in business services, agriculture, construction and in government. Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the sample. Table 1. Demographic characteristics. Characteristic N %/Mean SD Min Max Age Gender Male % Female % Contract type Temporary agency contract % Fixed-term contract % Educational level Primary school 2 1.6% Secondary school % Secondary vocational school 35 27,6% Higher professional school 37 29,1% University 23 18,1% Sector Health and welfare % Trade % Industrial % Educational % Catering 8 6.3% Transport 6 4.7% Culture, sports and recreation 7 5.5% Business services 4 3.1% Agriculture 2 1.6% Construction 1 0.8% Government 1 0.8% 3.3 Instruments The variables measured in this study were type of contract, work engagement, PC fulfilment, and job insecurity. All the constructs are based on previously published scales to ensure their validity. The number of components was determined based on the Kaiser-Meyer- Olkin measure (>.6), the eigenvalue (>1) and the scree plot. To test for reliability, the Cronbach s alpha coefficient (>.6) was calculated (Pallant, 2013) (Appendix B). Type of contract. Contract type is a binary variable contrasting temporary agency contracts with fixed-term contracts (1 = temporary agency; 0 = fixed-term). Work engagement. Work engagement was measured using a nine-item scale developed by Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma and Bakker (2002). This scale contains of three 14

15 dimensions: Vigor (VI), Absorption (AB) and Dedication (DE). All three dimensions were measured with three items each. The scale uses a five-point Likert scale ranging from (1) never to (5) very often. Category (3) is a neutral category. Three examples of items on this scale are: When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work (VI), When I m working, I forget everything around me (AB), I am enthusiastic about my job (DE). All items on the scale are positively worded and therefore none of them need to be reversed. Principal component analysis for the vigor dimension supports a one-factor solution with one eigenvalue above 1 (1.608), a KMO value of 0.57 and the scree plot showing one factor. This factor explains 53.6% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the vigor dimension is not sufficient (α = 0.56). Principal component analysis for the absorption dimension supports a one-factor solution with one eigenvalue above 1 (2.162), a KMO value of 0.67 and the scree plot showing one factor. This factor explains 72.1% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the absorption dimension is good (α = 0.81). Principal component analysis for the dedication dimension supports a one-factor solution with one eigenvalue above 1 (1.790), a KMO value of 0.59 and the scree plot showing one factor. This factor explains 59.7% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the dedication dimension is good (α = 0.65). The engagement scale has been validated among Spanish (Schaufeli et al., 2002), Finnish (Hakanen, 2002), and Dutch employees (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004), and the internal consistencies of the three subscales turned out to be sufficient in each study (Bakker, Demerouti, Hakanen & Xanthopoulou, 2007). Therefore, a decision was made to create one scale, despite the low KMO value of vigor and dedication, and the low Cronbach s alpha for vigor. Cronbach s alpha for the entire engagement scale is good (α = 0.84). Psychological contract fulfillment. The concept of fulfilment of PC was measured by the employees perceptions about the employer obligations towards them. The items from The Tilburg Psychological Contract Questionnaire were used (Freese, Schalk & Croon, 2008). The scale consisted of six dimensions where respondents were asked which expectations they have regarding their employer obligations and to what extent they believe that their employer is meeting these expectations. Those six dimensions were job content, career development, social atmosphere, organization policies, work-life balance and rewards. Each set of items is introduced with a question which measures PC: In the employment relationship employees have expectations about what the organization will offer. To what extent is your organization obliged to offer you the following? Sample questions within the dimensions were about: varied work (job content), career opportunities (career development), support from colleagues (social atmosphere), working at home (work-life balance), open communication (organization policies) and job security (rewards). All items are assessed by 15

16 a 5-point Likert scale ranging from (1) totally not (5) a very large extent. After each of the six dimensions respondents were asked to answer a more general question: To what extent did your employer fulfill the previous obligations?. This question measures PC fulfillment. A five-point Likert scale was used which ranged from (1) less than expected to (5) more than expected. All items of the scale were positively worded and therefore none of them had to be reversed. Principal component analysis supports a one-factor solution for almost all the PC dimensions except for work-life balance, which has a KMO of 0.56, meaning a miserable score. However, it can be yet accepted (Pallant, 2013). Furthermore, principal component analysis yields two eigenvalues above 1 (1.486; 1.057). The first factor explains 37.1% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the work-life balance scale was not sufficient (α = 0.35). To test whether this might be explained by a significant difference between the two types of contract in terms of PC work-life balance, a one-way ANOVA test was performed (Appendix C). This analysis shows that the two types of contract significantly differ regarding PC work-life balance. An explanation for this difference may be that temporary agency employees are likely to have less freedom in their work regarding determining the order of their tasks and when to take holidays. Despite the low alpha value for this dimension, it was decided to include it in the analysis because otherwise comparing the results with other studies would be very difficult (Pallant, 2013). The results of this scale must, however, be interpreted with great caution. The jobcontent dimension shows one eigenvalue above 1 (2.384) and a KMO of.68. This factor explains 59.6% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the job-content dimension was good (α = 0.77). The career-development scale shows one eigenvalue above 1 (2.846) and a KMO of.82. This factor explains 71.2% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the career-development scale is good (α = 0.87). The social-atmosphere scale showed one eigenvalue above 1 (3.016) and a KMO of.82. This factor explains 75.4% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha of the social atmosphere scale is good (α = 0.89). The organizational-policies scale shows one eigenvalue above 1 (2.876) and a KMO of.83. This factor explains 71.9% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the organizational policies scale is good (α = 0.87). The rewards scale shows one eigenvalue above 1 (2.496) and a KMO of.78. This factor explains 62.4% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha of the rewards dimension is good (α = 0.79). Principal component analysis shows that the fulfillment items are not a one-factor solution with two eigenvalues above 1 (2.641; 1,073). The scree plot, however, supports a one-factor solution. The first factor explains 43.6% of the variance, and the KMO value is Based on the outcome of the scree plot, a decision was made to create one scale. Cronbach s alpha of the PC fulfillment scale is good (α = 0.72). 16

17 Job insecurity. The concept of job insecurity was measured with a four-item scale develop by De Witte (2000). The scale uses a five-point Likert scale which ranges from (1) strongly agree to (5) strongly disagree. Category (3) is a neutral category. An example of an item on this scale is: There is a chance that I will lose my job soon. The item I am certain I can keep my job is negatively worded and was therefore reversed. Principal component analysis supports a one-factor solution with one eigenvalue above 1 (2.750), a KMO value of 0.79 and the scree plot showing one factor. This factor explains 68.7% of the variance. Cronbach s alpha for the job-insecurity scale is good (α = 0.85). Control variables. Several control variables were included in this study to rule out alternative explanations for the findings. Age, gender, education level and sector were chosen because they might have an impact on engagement and job insecurity (De Witte and Näswall, 2003; Mauno et al., 2007; Schaufeli, Bakker and Salanova 2006). Age was measured in years as a continuous variable. Gender was measured on a nominal two-point scale (0 = female, 1 = male). Education level was measured as an ordinal variable (1 = primary school, 2 = secondary school, 3 = secondary vocational education, 4 = higher professional education, 5 = university, 6 = Doctorate of Philosophy). Sector was coded as a dummy variable (1 = agriculture, 2 = industrial, 3 = construction, 4 = trade, 5 = catering, 6 = transport, 7 = financial, 8 = business services, 9 = government, 10 = educational, 11 = health and welfare, 12 = culture, sports and recreation). 3.5 Statistical analysis The software IBM SPSS (version 24) was used to analyze the data. The data was entered in SPSS and checked for missing values, outliers and errors. A few outliers were found. Pallant (2013), however, advises to include the outliers in the data when the trimmed mean and the mean values are very similar, and if the outlier values are not too different from the overall distribution. Because these criteria were met, the outliers were kept in the data set. Mean scores were calculated for work engagement, PC, PC fulfillment and job insecurity by adding up the item scores for each scale and then dividing the sum by the total items of the scale. A dummy variable was created for the type of contract. The conceptual model included direct effects, a mediation effect and a moderated mediation effect which estimates the indirect effect of an interaction between an independent variable and a moderator on an outcome through a mediator (Hayes, 2012). Hayes (2013) has created an SPSS macro called PROCESS to estimate mediation and moderated mediation effects. The current study used models 4 (simple mediation) and 8 (conditional process model) 17

18 (Appendix D and E) of this macro. Hayes method makes use of asymmetric bootstrapping confidence intervals, which involves drawing many small samples from the dataset. A total of 5,000 bootstrap samples are calculated to test the effects of the predicted model. The effect is significant when the confidence intervals do not contain 0. Because PROCESS also generates direct effects, this macro was used to analyze the direct effects as well. In any case, PROCESS only generates output with unstandardized coefficients instead of standardized betas (Hayes, 2013). 4. Results 4.1 Correlation matrix The means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlations between the variables are displayed in Table 2. Noticeable, the PC dimension social atmosphere scored 4.08 (SD. = 0.66), which is high. The Pearson correlation describes a relationship between two variables in terms of both the strength and the direction of the relationship, without indicating causality (Pallant, 2013). Preliminary analysis was performed to check the variables for any violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity; no such violation was found. As can be seen from Table 2, contract type is significantly positively related to engagement (r =.349, p = 0.01), PC fulfillment (r =.223, p = 0.05) and all PC dimensions (r =.278; r =.517; r =.283; r =.269; r = 390, p = 0.01; r = 188, p = 0.05). Engagement is significantly positively related to PC fulfillment (r =.408 p = 0.01) and all PC dimensions (r = -.590; r =.567; r =.378; r =.456; r =.347; r =.351, p = 0.01). PC fulfillment is also significantly negatively related to job insecurity (r = p = 0.01), PC social atmosphere (r = -.221, p = 0.05) and PC policies (r = -.238, p = 0.01). The four control variables (age, sex, education level and sector) are significantly positively related to at least one of the research variables. This illustrates they may influence the hypothesized relationships. The correlation between the type of contract and sector is, in fact, very high (r =.716, p = 0.01). To test whether this could be explained by a significant difference between the two types of contract in sector, a one-way ANOVA test was performed (Appendix C). The analysis shows that the two types of contract differ significantly depending on sectors. This is quite reasonable, because certain sectors make more use of temporary agency contracts (e.g. industry), whereas other sectors make more use of fixed-term contracts (e.g. health and welfare). The results, however, indicate multicollinearity, which makes it more 18

19 difficult to determine the correct results and could undermine the statistical power of the analysis by causing the coefficients to switch signs (Pallant, 2013). Pallant (2013) advises considering the removal of a variable when the bivariate correlation is higher than.7. Because of this, the variable sector was not used as a control variable. The variables age, sex and education were, however, included in the analysis. 4.2 Hypothesis testing The mediating effect Hypotheses 1, 2, 3a and 3b were tested using model 4 (simple mediation) of PROCESS (Appendix D). Because PROCESS generates direct effects in addition to mediation (hypothesis 3b), hypotheses 1, 2 and 3a could be tested with this model as well. These analyses were performed whilst controlling for age, education and gender. Hypothesis 1 stated that temporary agency employees experience lower work engagement compared to employees with a fixed-term contract. As can be seen in Table 3, PROCESS analysis showed that the effect of contract type on engagement is significant (b = -.20, p = 0.05). This means that employees with a temporary agency contract experience lower vigor, absorption and dedication in their work compared to those with a fixed-term contract. Hypothesis 1 is thus confirmed. Hypothesis 2 stated that, on average, temporary agency employees have a less fulfilled PC compared to that of fixed-term contract employees. As laid out in Table 3, PROCESS analysis showed that the effect of contract type on PC fulfillment is significant (b = -.28, p = 0.01). This means that temporary agency employees experience that the expectations they have 19

20 regarding their employer obligations are less fulfilled than that of fixed-term contract employees. This result confirms hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 3a stated that the higher PC fulfillment, the higher work engagement expressed by flexible employees. The PROCESS analysis results listed in Table 3 show that the direct effect of PC fulfillment on engagement is significant (b =.40, p = 0.01). This means that the more flexible employees experience their PC as fulfilled, the more vigor, dedication and absorption they will experience in their work. This result confirms hypothesis 3a. Hypothesis 3b stated that the fulfillment of PC positively partially mediates the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement. The direct effect between the type of contract and work engagement is significant (confidence interval: -.393, -.001). The indirect effect of the type of contract on work engagement through PC fulfillment is significant (confidence interval: -.224, -.038). This means that the degree of PC fulfillment partly explains why temporary agency employees experience less work engagement than fixed-term contract employees. Hypothesis 3b is thus confirmed. Looking at the control variables, it appears that age was positively significantly related to work engagement (B =.01, p = 0.05), meaning that the higher age is related to more work engagement. 20

21 Table 3. Simple mediation model. Bootstrap results of the total effect and the direct effects of type of contract and PC fulfillment on work engagement. B SE t LLCI ULCI Total effect -.31 ** Type of contract -.20 * PC fulfillment.40 ** Gender Age.01 * Education Bootstrap results of the direct effect of type of contract on PC fulfillment. B SE t LLCI ULCI Type of contract -.28 ** Gender Age Education Bootstrap results of the indirect effect of type of contract on work engagement. Effect Boot SE LLCI ULCI Indirect effect *** Correlation is significant at the level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). N=127 Type of contract: 1 = temporary agency contract 0 = fixed-term contract Number of bootstrap resamples = 5000 LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit CI = confidence interval The moderated mediation effect Hypotheses 4a and 4b were tested using template 8 of PROCESS (Appendix E). As with the previous analyses, the control variables age, education and gender were included. Hypothesis 4a stated that perceived job insecurity moderates the negative relationship between the type of contract and work engagement, resulting in the relationship being stronger when the perceived job insecurity is high in comparison to when the perceived job insecurity is low. As can be seen in Table 4, no moderating effect of job insecurity on the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement was found. Hypothesis 4a is therefore not 21

22 confirmed. Hypothesis 4b stated that perceived job insecurity moderates the negative relationship between the type of contract and PC fulfillment, resulting in the relationship being stronger when the perceived job insecurity is high in comparison to when the perceived job insecurity is low. As shown in Table 4, the moderating effect of job insecurity on the relationship between the type of contract and PC fulfillment is not significant. Because of this, hypothesis 4b is not supported. Because job insecurity does not moderate the relationships between the type of contract and engagement or the type of contract and PC fulfillment, the moderated mediation effect cannot be significant. This means that hypothesis 4c, the expected mediation relationship between the type of contract and work engagement by PC fulfillment is moderated by job insecurity, such that this mediation is stronger for employees who perceive high job insecurity than for those who perceive low job security, was not supported. The control variable gender (B = -.20, p = 0.05) was negatively significantly related to work engagement, meaning that men experience more work engagement than women, when controlling for job insecurity. 22

23 Table 4. Conditional direct and indirect effects of contract type on work engagement, mediated by PC fulfillment and moderated by perceived job insecurity. Controlled for gender, age, and education. Bootstrap results of the conditional direct effects of type of contract, PC fulfillment and the moderator on work engagement. B SE t LLCI ULCI Type of contract PC fulfillment.33 ** Job insecurity * Type of contract Gender -.20 * Age.01 ** Education Bootstrap results of the conditional direct effect of type of contract, the moderator and job insecurity on PC fulfillment. B SE T LLCI ULCI Type of contract Job insecurity * Type of contract Job insecurity -.18 ** Gender Age Education Bootstrap results of the moderated mediation effect of type of contract on work engagement. B Effect Boot SE LLCI ULCI Moderated mediation Boot indirect effect 2.15 (SD-1) (SD) (SD+1) *** Correlation is significant at the level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). N=127 Type of contract: 1 = temporary agency contract 0 = fixed-term contract Number of bootstrap resamples = 5000 LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit CI = confidence interval 23

24 Additional analysis In this section, additional analyses that were not included in the original investigated hypotheses are discussed. To test whether different types of flexible employees differ in their expectations regarding their employer obligations, a regression analysis was executed. This shows that the type of contract is negatively significantly related to all PC variables (PC content: β =-.203, p = 0.05; PC career development: β = -.542, p = 0.01; PC social atmosphere: β = -.295, p = 0.01; PC policies: β = -.207, p = 0.05; PC rewards: β = -.359, p = 0.01), with the exception of PC work-life balance (Table 5). This means that temporary agency employees have less expectations regarding their work content, career development, social atmosphere, policies and rewards than fixed-term contract employees. Furthermore, age was positively significant when predicting PC content (β =.289, p = 0.01), meaning that the higher age, the more expectations the employee has about their job content. De moderation effect of job insecurity in the relationship between type of contract and engagement and type of contract and PC fulfillment is not significant. Importantly, PROCESS analysis (Table 4) show that perceived job insecurity is significantly negatively related to PC fulfillment (r = -.18, p = 0.01). This means that the higher job insecurity perceived by flexible employees, the more they experience that their PC is less fulfilled. 24

25 Table 5. Regression analysis of type of contract and PC, controlled for gender, age, and education. Dependent variable: PC content B SE β Constant Type of contract * * Gender Age.020 ** ** Education R² =.197 Dependent variable: PC career development Constant Type of contract ** ** Gender Age Education R² =.277 Dependent variable: PC social atmosphere Constant Type of contract ** ** Gender Age Education R² =.111 Dependent variable: PC policies Constant Type of contract * * Gender Age Education R² =.098 Dependent variable: PC work-life balance Constant Type of contract Gender Age Education R² =

26 Dependent variable: PC rewards Constant Type of contract ** ** Gender Age Education R² =.157 *** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) N= Discussion As discussed in the introduction, previous research has considered flexible employees as a homogeneous group. The present study investigated the heterogeneity of flexible employees by distinguishing between temporary agency contracts and fixed-term contracts. The aim was to investigate what effect these types of flexible contracts had on work engagement and whether this possible relationship could be mediated by PC fulfillment and moderated by perceived job insecurity. A quantitative and cross-sectional approach was used to answer the research questions, which included: To what extent do different flexible contracts differ in PC fulfillment and work engagement? And can job insecurity alter these differences in PC fulfillment and work engagement? In total, 127 flexible employees (consisting of 48 workers with a temporary agency contract and 79 with a fixed-term one), representing a variety of sectors in the Netherlands, filled out the questionnaire. This study shows a meaningful contribution to the HRM literature. The results enhanced the belief of the importance of PC fulfillment in the relationship between type of flexible contract and work engagement. This emphasizes the relevance of reciprocity in social exchange. The results showed that temporary agency employees experience lower work engagement compared to those with a fixed-term contract. This in in line with Wagenaar (2013), who demonstrated that temporary agency employees express more negative work-related attitudes such as low work engagement compared to people holding other types of flexible contracts. Temporary agency employees are often hired for short periods of time and specific services, they consider two parties as their employees, and they are sensitive to organizational treatment. In this regard, fixed-term contract employees are more likely to express a more positive, motivated state characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption, in comparison to temporary agency employees. 26

27 The present study found that temporary agency employees place fewer expectations on their employer obligations about job content, career development, social atmosphere, organizational policies and rewards compared to fixed-term contract employees. This supports the work of Druker & Standworth (2004) who found that temporary agency employees have lower expectations for the organization where they work. A reason for this result could be that they often experience their work as unsatisfactory When comparing the mean PC in this study with the study of Van der Smissen (2015) it appears that the sample in this study scored between 0.10 and 0.50 lower. This means that the employees in the sample in the present study have lower expectations for their employer obligations. Van der Smissen (2015) used a sample which is comparable to the average Dutch employee. He sampled 2500 employees with mainly permanent contracts in six different industries. Because in the current study only flexible employees have been considered, the different scores of PC in the present study and of Van der Smissen makes sense. Namely, flexible employees have lower expectations for their employer obligations than employees with a permanent contract (Wagenaar, 2013). Furthermore, the results of this study showed that the levels of PC fulfillment are likely to vary based on the type of contract a flexible employee has. On average, temporary agency employees have a less fulfilled PC in comparison with those on a fixed-term contract. This is in line with De Cuyper et al. (2009), who proposed that fixed-term contract employees experience a more fulfilled PC than temporary agency workers. This could be explained by the poor job quality of temporary agency contracts, the different interpretations of the purpose of the job and low feelings of responsibility of the client organization with respect to temporary agency employees. Thus, temporary agency employees experience their expectations for their employer as less fulfilled compared to fixed-term contract employees. Drawing upon literature on PC theory (Rousseau, 1989) and social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), this study found that the higher the PC fulfillment, the higher the work engagement expressed by flexible employees. An employment relationship characterized by a reciprocal investment could evolve into a self-fulfilling prophecy. To add to this, if an employee s expectations are fulfilled by their employer, they will feel required to reciprocate with positive behavior such as a high level of work engagement. In other words, if employees perceive their PC as fulfilled, this enables them to behave more actively in their work. As postulated, the fulfillment of PC positively partially mediates the relationship between the type of contract and work engagement. This indicates that a less fulfilled PC serves as a negative mediator, with a temporary agency contract negatively relating to PC fulfillment, which in turn, negatively affects work engagement. The reverse applies to a more fulfilled PC: 27

28 a fixed-term contract relates to more PC fulfillment, which in turn relates positively to work engagement. The moderating effect of perceived job insecurity on the relation between the type of contract and work engagement was not confirmed. This means that perceived job insecurity does not alter this relationship. Possible explanations for this non-significant result will be explained later. No moderating effect of perceived job insecurity was found on the relationship between the type of contract and PC fulfillment, meaning that perceived job insecurity does not change this relationship. Possible explanations for this non-significant result will be explained later. Additional analysis showed, however, that the direct effect of perceived job insecurity is significantly negatively related to PC fulfillment. Perceived job insecurity could therefore be a separate construct which has a direct effect on PC fulfillment but does not act as a moderator. This means that the higher the perceived job insecurity, the less the employees perceived their PC as fulfilled. This is in line with the argument by Ashford, Lee, and Bobko (1989) that perceived job insecurity may reflect an employees perception that important features of the PC are threatened and that the organization is withdrawing from their PC. In other words, if an employee experience high job insecurity, they may feel that the organizations threats their PC which results in a less fulfilled PC, regardless of their contract type. It was expected that the mediated relationship between the type of contract and work engagement by PC fulfillment should be moderated by job insecurity, with the mediation being stronger for employees who perceive high job insecurity. This relationship was not found, which makes sense because the moderation effects of job insecurity in hypotheses 4a and 4b were not supported, either. A few reasons for the non-significant results regarding job insecurity as a moderator can be offered. First, the non-significant results could be explained based on the findings of Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (2010). They have argued that job insecurity in terms of work engagement is far less problematic for flexible than for permanent employees. Flexible employees expect their contracts will be terminated, causing them not to suffer from job insecurity in both PC fulfillment and work engagement (De Cuyper et al., 2009). This could explain why job insecurity does not alter the relationship between the type of flexible contract and work engagement, and type of contract and PC fulfillment. Second, it could be that the respondents in the study did not significantly suffer from of job insecurity because their age was, on average, low. Van Vuuren, Klandermans, Jacobson and Hartley (1991) have noted that older employees experience higher levels of job insecurity than younger employees. This could 28

29 be explained by the fact that middle-aged employees (between 30 and 50 years) are more dependent on their income because they are more likely to have children and family obligations. They therefore express higher levels of job insecurity when their jobs are threatened (Näshwall & De Witte, 2003). Given, then, the low average age of the respondents in this study, they might worry less about their income and not yet suffer from job insecurity. Third, one concept which could be related to this, is work centrality. Work centrality refers to the beliefs that employees have with respect to the degree of importance their job plays in their lives. Someone with high work centrality sees his work as an important aspect of his live, whereas someone with low work centrality sees his work as less central (Bal & Kooij, 2011). This individual difference could have effects on perceived job insecurity, where employees with high work centrality suffer more from job insecurity than employees with less work centrality (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). In addition, Boyce, Ryan, Imus and Mogeson (2007) stated that flexible employees could experience their job as less central because their jobs provide little opportunity for the expression of skills. Therefore, they might not suffer from perceived job insecurity. Limitations Several factors potentially limit the generalizability of the results. First, the design of this study was cross-sectional. This means that the data were gathered at a single point in time, which is only a snapshot. It is therefore difficult to investigate a causal inference. The data might show different results if another timeframe had been chosen (Levin, 2006). Earlier research has shown, however, that flexible contracts are more likely to cause employees attitudes and behavior than vice versa (De Witte & Näswall, 2003). Similarly, Bal et al. (2013) have demonstrated that PC fulfillment relates to positive employee outcomes. This may also be true for the relationship between the type of contract, PC fulfillment and work engagement. Future researchers should nevertheless consider designing a longitudinal study. Second, the study used self-reported data, which increases the chance of social desirability bias. Social desirability bias means that the questionnaire items may motivate responses that present the employee in a favorable light (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986), for example trying to appear more engaged or less anxious to feel more socially accepted. This study, however, protected anonymity, which should decrease the social desirability bias. Third, fixed-term contract employees dominated the sample of flexible employees. Whereas this accurately reflects the distribution of flexible contracts in the Netherlands, caution is required when generalizing from these results. The results might have been different if more temporary agency employees had been included in the sample. 29

30 Fourth, the mean age of the sample was 28, which is low. While young people have a high chance to get a flexible contract, the number of flexible contracts among older people also increases (Bolhaar et al., 2016). The sample in the present study is therefore not representative for the entire population. Because work engagement, psychological contract fulfillment and job insecurity can be experienced differently by different age groups, the results could have been different if more flexible employees with a higher age had completed the questionnaire (Bal, De Lange, Jansen, Van Der Velde, 2008, De Witte and Näswall, 2003; Mauno et al., 2007; Schaufeli et al., 2006, Van Vuuren et al., 1991). Fifth, the use of convenience sampling undermines the ability to generalize from the results to the general population. Because the sample was not chosen at random, a particular group could be under- or overrepresented (Farrokhi & Mahmoudi-Hamidabad, 2012). Whilst convenience sampling should be treated with caution, the advantages of low cost and ease of application made it the preferred choice for this study. Future research Despite these limitations, several recommendations for future research are made, based on the findings of this study. First, whereas previous research focused especially on the homogeneity of flexible contracts, this study emphasizes the importance of investigating the differences within the group of flexible employees. This opens new areas of research, which is relevant because the use of flexible contracts is still increasing and highly associated with detrimental effects. By differentiating between temporary agency contracts and fixed-term contracts it appears these groups indeed experience different outcomes in PC fulfillment and work engagement. Additional empirical research about flexible contracts and its consequences may result in further insights into the effects of different flexible employees on work engagement. This may additionally result in more knowledge about the existence of differences within flexible work. Second, in this study, job insecurity did not moderate the negative relationship between temporary agency contract, PC fulfillment and engagement. Future research should focus on other factors that might influence this relationship. For example, personal resources such as self-esteem, optimism and self-efficacy. These resources are related to stress-resilience as well as physical and emotional well-being. Previous studies have shown that personal resources can moderate the relationship between unfavorable work characteristics and negative outcomes. Employees with high levels of self-esteem, optimism and self-efficacy could deal more effectively with demanding conditions and protect them from negative outcomes 30

31 (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti & Schaufeli, 2007). Future research could therefore investigate whether flexible employees with high levels of personal resources suffer less from the negative consequences of a temporary agency contract. Third, perceptions of job stigmatization could play a role in the relationship between flexible contract, PC fulfillment and engagement. Flexible employees are more often stigmatized than permanent employees, which involves they are being treated in a devalued manner because one has a flexible contract. Previous studies showed that stigmatization is negatively related to work engagement, and that this could weaken the positive effects of PC fulfillment (Boyce et al., 2007; Pramudita, 2008). Future research may examine in further detail how different flexible contracts are related to perceptions of job stigmatization and whether this has an effect in the relationship between type of contract, PC fulfillment and work engagement. Fourth, the mean age in the present study was 28, while a large group of the flexible workforce includes also employees in the age category of years (Bolhaar et al., 2016). Future research should therefore investigate whether the results of this study are different for flexible employees of a higher age. Bal et al., (2008) argued that PC fulfillment differs for younger versus older employees. For instance, older employees may have more realistic expectations about their work than younger workers. Therefore, older flexible employees could experience more PC fulfillment than younger employees. However, Bal et al., (2008) included mainly employees with a permanent contract in their study. It should therefore be investigated, if this also applies to flexible employees in different age groups. Fourth, more categories of flexible employees exist than the ones included in this study. These flexible employees differ in contract duration, hours worked per week and contract preferences (Connelly & Gallagher, 2004). This heterogeneity of the flexible workforce could form an important research domain in the field of flexible work. Practical implications The results of this study have important practical implications for organizations who use flexible contracts. First, temporary agency employees express less work engagement than fixed-term contract employees, which might be caused by the non-fulfillment of their PC. These insights can help managers and HR professionals to better understand the consequences of using certain types of flexible contracts. Although employing temporary agency employees has many benefits for an employer, decreased work engagement could be detrimental for an organization because it can negatively affect organizational behaviors (Bakker et al., 2011; Christian et al., 31

32 2011). Research shows that 70% of the employers report differences in the way they treat their flexible employees versus their permanent employees (Das, 2017; Isaksson et al., 2010). The quality of working life therefore needs to be improved in terms of salary, career opportunities and training for flexible employees, and perhaps more for temporary agency employees than fixed-term contract employees. In this way, employers can meet the expectations of flexible employees to a greater extent, which is profitable for both employer and flexible employee. Second, the significant differences between the types of flexible contracts indicate how important it is for organizations to be aware of dissimilarities within the group of flexible employees in engagement. This emphasizes the value of using more diverse and adjusted HRM practices to motivate and engage different types of employees. For example, a temporary agency employee may need more evaluation moments than a fixed-term employee, because they often work for short periods of time at the same organization. This can help the employment agency to easily find a suitable new workplace for the temporary agency employee. Third, the insights about the effects of PC fulfillment emphasize the importance for organizations to manage the expectations of their flexible employees. This study showed that, in addition to the type of flexible contract, perceived job insecurity is negatively related to PC fulfillment. Organizations should therefore design and implement HRM practices that meet the expectations of flexible employees in such a way that PC non-fulfillment is prevented. This can be realized with realistic job previews and job descriptions, ongoing feedback and tailoring HRM practices to contract-related needs (Bal et al., 2008). Conclusion The most impactful and original findings this study adds to the field of flexible work are that employees in different flexible contracts might have different expectations towards their employer and they might experience the fulfillment of these expectations in a different way. The degree of PC fulfillment influences work engagement, with temporary agency employees expressing less work engagement than fixed-term contract employees. One reason for the nonsignificant mediated moderation could be that job insecurity is less problematic for flexible employees than it is to permanent ones. This, however, should be further investigated in future research. Regardless, this study offers an important lesson for organizations using flexible contracts: they should offer more diverse and adjusted HRM practices to meet the expectations of their flexible employees to a greater extent. This will help to increase their flexible employees feelings of engagement. 32

33 References Alewell, D., Bähring, K., & Thommes, K. (2005). Institutional structures of the flexible assignment of personnel between enterprises. An economic comparison of temporary agency work, interim management and consulting. management revue, Ashford, S. J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, cause, and consequences of job insecurity: A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management journal, 32(4), Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Work engagement: Further reflections on the state of play. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., Hakanen, J.J., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G., & Van Der Velde, M. E. (2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of vocational behavior, 72(1), Bal, P. M., & Kooij, D. (2011). The relations between work centrality, psychological contracts, and job attitudes: The influence of age. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(4), Bal, P. M., Kooij, D. T., & De Jong, S. B. (2013). How do developmental and accommodative HRM enhance employee engagement and commitment? The role of psychological contract and SOC strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 50(4), Benach, J., Benavides, F. G., Platt, S., Diez-Roux, A., & Muntaner, C. (2000). The healthdamaging potential of new types of flexible employment: a challenge for public health researchers. American Journal of Public Health, 90(8), Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley and Sons Bolhaar, J., A. Brouwers & B. Scheer (2016). De flexibele schil van de Nederlandse arbeidsmarkt: een analyse op basis van microdata, cpb Achtergronddocument, Den Haag: Centraal Planbureau. 33

34 Bosman, J., Rothmann, S., & Buitendach, J. H. (2005). Job insecurity, burnout and work engagement: the impact of positive and negative effectivity. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(4), Boyce, A. S., Ryan, A. M., Imus, A. L., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Temporary worker, permanent loser? A model of the stigmatization of temporary workers. Journal of Management, 33(1), Callea, A., Urbini, F., Ingusci, E., & Chirumbolo, A. (2016). The relationship between contract type and job satisfaction in a mediated moderation model: The role of job insecurity and psychological contract violation. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 37(2), Chambel, M. J., & Oliveira-Cruz, F. (2010). Breach of psychological contract and the development of burnout and engagement: A longitudinal study among soldiers on a peacekeeping mission. Military Psychology, 22(2), 110. Claes, R. (2005). Organization promises in the triangular psychological contract as perceived by temporary agency workers, agencies, and client organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17(3), Collective Labour Agreements for temporary agency workers (2017) Retrieved from: agency_workers/index.html#1/z Connelly, C. E., & Gallagher, D. G. (2004). Emerging trends in contingent work research. Journal of management, 30(6), Coyle-Shapiro, J. & Kessler, I. (2002). Contingent and non-contingent working in local government: contrasting psychological contracts. Public Administration, 80, Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), Dabos, G. E., & Rousseau, D. M. (2004). Mutuality and reciprocity in the psychological contracts of employees and employers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, Das, D. (2017). Intermezzo: Werkgevers over flexibiliteit: Ik hoef geen flexibele contracten, liever wil ik dat vaste contracten flexibeler zijn. In Kremer, Went & Knottnerus (red.), voor de zekerheid: de toekomst van flexibel werkenden en de moderne 34

35 organisatie van arbeid. Den Haag: Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. Retrieved from: voor-de-zekerheid/v036-voor-de-zekerheid.pdf De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity: Mediator or moderator of the relationship between type of contract and various outcomes. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(4), De Cuyper, N., & Isaksson, K. (2017). Employment contracts and well-being among European workers. Routledge. De Cuyper, N., Notelaers, G., & De Witte, H. (2009). Job insecurity and employability in fixedterm contractors, agency workers, and permanent workers: associations with job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment. Journal of occupational health psychology, 14(2), 193. De Graaf-Zijl, M., Van den Berg, G. J., & Heyma, A. (2011). Stepping stones for the unemployed: the effect of temporary jobs on the duration until (regular) work. Journal of population Economics, 24(1), De Jong, J., Schalk, R., & De Cuyper, N. (2009). Balanced versus unbalanced psychological contracts in temporary and permanent employment: Associations with employee attitudes. Management and Organization Review, 5(3), De Lange, M., Gesthuizen, M., & Wolbers, M. H. (2014). Consequences of flexible employment at labour market entry for early career development in the Netherlands. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 35(3), De Witte, H. (2000). Arbeidethos en jobonzekerheid: Meting en gevolgen voor welzijn, tevredenheid en inzet op het werk. [Labour ethics and job insecurity: Measurement and consequences for well-being, satisfaction and labour input]. In R. Bouwen, K. de Witte, H. de Witte & T. Taillieu (Eds.), Van groep tot gemeenschap. Liber Amicorum Prof. Dr L. Lagrou. Leuven: Garant. De Witte, H., & Näswall, K. (2003). Objective vs subjective job insecurity: Consequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment in four European countries. Economic and industrial democracy, 24(2),

36 Druker, J., & Stanworth, C. (2004). Mutual expectations: a study of the three way relationship between employment agencies, their client organisations and white collar agency temps. Industrial Relations Journal, 35(1), Farrokhi, F., & Mahmoudi-Hamidabad, A. (2012). Rethinking convenience sampling: Defining quality criteria. Theory and practice in language studies, 2(4), 784. Freese, C., & Schalk, R. (2008). How to measure the psychological contract? A critical criteria-based review of measures. South African Journal of Psychology, 38(2), Freese, C., Schalk, R., & Croon, M. A. (2008). De tilburgse psychologisch contract vragenlijst. Gedrag en Organisatie, (3), Gallagher, D. G., & Sverke, M. (2005). Contingent employment contracts: are existing employment theories still relevant?. Economic and industrial democracy, 26(2), Goudswaard, A., Van Wijk E. & Verbiest S. (2014) De toekomst van flex: Een onderzoek van TNO naar flexstrategieën van Nederlandse bedrijven.fscha Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job Insecurity: Toward Conceptual Clarity. The Academy of Management Review, 9(3), Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (2010). Evolution of research on job insecurity. International Studies of Management & Organization, 40(1), Guest, D. E. (2004). The psychology of the employment relationship: An analysis based on the psychological contract. Applied psychology, 53(4), Hakanen, J.J. (2002). From burnout to job engagement Validation of the Finnish version of an instrument for measuring job engagement (UWES) in an educational organization. Tyo ja ihminen, 16, Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press. 36

37 Henderson, D. J., Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2008). Leader- -member exchange, differentiation, and psychological contract fulfillment: a multilevel examination. Journal of applied psychology, 93(6), Chicago Heyma, A., Hop J.P. & Smid T., (2010) Langdurig verblijf in de flexibele schil van de Arbeidsmarkt; Aantal werknemers en hun kenmerken, SEO rapport , Amsterdam: SEO Economisch Onderzoek. Isaksson, K., Bernhard, C., Claes, R., De Witte, H., Guest, D., Krausz, M.,... & Schalk, R. (2003). Employment contracts and psychological contracts in Europe. SALTSA report, 1. Isaksson, K., Peiró, J. M., Bernhard-Oettel, C., Caballer, A., Gracia, F. J., & Ramos, J. (2010). Flexible employment and temporary contracts: the employer s perspective. In D. E. Guest, K. Isaksson & H. De Witte (Eds.), Employment contracts, psychological contracts, and employee well-being (pp ). New York: Oxford University Press. Kalleberg, A. L. (2000). Nonstandard employment relations: Part-time, temporary and contract work. Annual review of sociology, 26(1), Klandermans B & Van Vuuren T (1999) Job insecurity: Introduction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2): Kompier, M., Ybema, J. F., Janssen, J., & Taris, T. (2009). Employment Contracts: Crosssectional and Longitudinal Relations with Quality of Working Life, Health and Wellbeing. Journal of Occupational Health, 51, Kremer, M., Went, R. & Knottnerus, A. (2017). Voor de zekerheid. De toekomst van flexibel werkenden en de moderne organisatie van arbeid. In Kremer, Went & Knottnerus (red.), voor de zekerheid: de toekomst van flexibel werkenden en de moderne organisatie van arbeid. Den Haag: Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. Retrieved from: voor-de-zekerheid/v036-voor-de-zekerheid.pdf Levin, K. A. (2006). Study design III: Cross-sectional studies. Evidence-based dentistry, 7(1), Näswall, K., & De Witte, H. (2003). Who feels insecure in Europe? Predicting job insecurity from background variables. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24(2),

38 Nienhüser, W., & Matiaske, W. (2006). Effects of the principle of non discrimination on temporary agency work: compensation and working conditions of temporary agency workers in 15 European countries. Industrial Relations Journal, 37(1), Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice, 13(6), Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Ruokolainen, M. (2007). Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of vocational behavior, 70(1), Morrison, E. W., & Robinson, S. L. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of management Review, 22(1), Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual. Berkshire, England: Open University Press. Pramudita, A. (2008). The Consequences of Psychological Contract: The Moderating Effects of Job Stigmatization, Interactional Justice, and Supervisor Support. 成功大學國際經營管理研究所碩士班學位論文, Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of management, 12(4), Polivka, A. (1996b). Into contingent work and alternative employment: by choice? Monthly Labor Review, October, Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate behavioral research, 42(1), Rayton, B. A., & Yalabik, Z. Y. (2014). Work engagement, psychological contract breach and job satisfaction. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(17), Rousseau, D. M. (1989). 'Psychological and implied contracts in organizations'. Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal, 2, Rousseau, D. M., & Tijoriwala, S. A. (1998). Assessing psychological contract: Issues, alternatives and measures. Journal of organizational Behavior, Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of managerial psychology, 21(7),

39 Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). The conceptualization and measurement of work engagement: A review. In A. B. Bakker, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp ). New York: Psychology Press Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A.B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002a). Burnout and engagement in university students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, Shore, L. M., & Barksdale, K. (1998). Examining degree of balance and level of obligation in the employment relationship: A social exchange approach. Journal of organizational behavior, Silla, I., Gracia, F. J., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Job insecurity and health-related outcomes among different types of temporary workers. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 26(1), Stavenuiter, M. (2017). Intermezzo: Compensatie voor flexwerkers: wat willen werkgevers? In Kremer, Went & Knottnerus (red.), voor de zekerheid: de toekomst van flexibel werkenden en de moderne organisatie van arbeid. Den Haag: Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. Retrieved from: voor-de-zekerheid/v036-voor-de-zekerheid.pdf Sturges, J., Conway, N., Guest, D., & Liefooghe, A. (2005). Managing the career deal: The psychological contract as a framework for understanding career management, organizational commitment and work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(7),

40 Van Der Smissen, S. (2015). Contemporary psychological contracts: How organizational change and generational differences affect employer employee relationships. Van Oorschot, W. (2004). Balancing work and welfare: activation and flexicurity policies in The Netherlands, International Journal of Social Welfare, 13(1), Van Vuuren, T., Klandermans, B., Jacobson, D., & Hartley, J. (1991). Employees reactions to job insecurity. Job insecurity: Coping with jobs at risk, Wagenaar, A. F. (2013). Temporary work and health and well-being: a two-way street?. Nijmegen: Boxpress. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International journal of stress management, 14(2),

41 Appendix A: Questionnaire Vragenlijst werknemers Beste medewerker, Mijn naam is Annemiek de Ree, student Human Resource studies aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. In het kader van mijn master scriptie doe ik onderzoek naar de effecten van verschillende soorten flexibele contracten voor de organisatie en werknemer. Daarom wil ik u vragen om deze vragenlijst in te vullen. U kunt alle vragen in deze vragenlijst beantwoorden door het aankruisen van een van de antwoordmogelijkheden. Bij het invullen van de vragen is er geen goed of fout antwoord mogelijk; het gaat om uw mening. Het invullen van deze vragenlijst neemt ongeveer 5 minuten in beslag. U hoeft nergens uw naam in te vullen en uw antwoorden zijn volledig anoniem. Tot slot wil ik benadrukken dat dit onderzoek alleen gericht is op mijn master scriptie, de resultaten zullen enkel voor wetenschappelijke doeleinden gebruikt worden. Mocht u nog vragen of opmerkingen hebben over de vragenlijst of het onderzoek, dan kunt u contact met mij opnemen. Alvast bedankt voor uw medewerking! Met vriendelijke groet, Annemiek de Ree 41

42 Algemene vragen 1. Wat is uw geslacht? o Man o Vrouw 2. Wat is uw leeftijd in jaren? jaren 3. Wat is uw hoogst genoten opleiding? o Basisonderwijs o Voortgezet onderwijs (VMBO/MAVO, HAVO, VWO) o MBO o HBO o Universiteit o Overig 4. Wat voor soort contract heeft u? o Uitzendovereenkomst o Tijdelijk contract o Anders, namelijk: 5. In welke sector bent u werkzaam? o Landbouw en visserij o Industrie o Bouwnijverheid (bijv. bouwbedrijf, installatiebedrijf, afwerking) o Handel (bijv. winkel, detailhandel, groothandel, garage) o Horeca o Transport en communicatie (bijv. vervoer over de weg, water en door de lucht, post, telecommunicatie) o Financiële sector (bijv. banken, verzekeringsmaatschappijen, pensioenfondsen) o Zakelijke dienstverlening (bijv. onroerend goed, ICT, onderzoeksinstellingen [geen universiteiten], juridische en economische dienstverlening, architecten en technische adviesbureaus, beveiliging, schoonmaakbedrijven) 42

43 o Overheid (bijv. openbaar bestuur, defensie, politie, gemeente) o Onderwijs (bijv. basisonderwijs, voortgezet, hoger en overig onderwijs) o Gezondheids- en welzijnszorg (bijv. ziekenhuis, woonzorgcentra, ouderenzorg, verpleeghuis, maatschappelijk werk, thuiszorg) o Cultuur, sport, recreatie en overige diensten o Anders, namelijk: Werkbeleving In het volgende onderdeel zullen vragen gesteld worden over hoe u zich voelt op en over het werk. Geef aan in hoeverre u het eens bent met de volgende stellingen door per vraag één getal te omcirkelen: 1. Als ik s morgens opsta heb ik zin om aan het werk te gaan. 2. Op mijn werk zet ik altijd door, ook als het tegenzit. Nooit Zelden Soms Vaak Zeer vaak Als ik werk, voel ik me fit en sterk Ik ben enthousiast over mijn baan Ik ben trots op het werk dat ik doe Ik vind het werk dat ik doe nuttig en zinvol Als ik aan het werk ben, dan vliegt de tijd voorbij Ik kan me niet van mijn werk losmaken Ik ga helemaal op in mijn werk Psychologisch contract In de arbeidsrelatie heeft u opvattingen over wat de organisatie u zou bieden met betrekking tot de inhoud van het werk, loopbaanontwikkeling, sociale sfeer, organisatiebeleid, werkprivé balans en beloningen. In het volgende onderdeel zullen vragen gesteld worden over uw verwachtingen met betrekking tot uw arbeidsrelatie. Geef aan in hoeverre u het eens bent met de volgende stellingen door per vraag één getal te omcirkelen: 43

44 Inhoud van het werk Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vind u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? In zeer grote mate 1a. Afwisselend werk b. Uitdagend werk c. Interessant werk d. Autonomie In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van de inhoud van uw werk? Loopbaanontwikkeling Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vindt u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? 1a. Loopbaanmogelijkheden b. Trainingen en opleidingen c. Coaching in het werk In zeer grote mate 1d. Brede professionele ontwikkelingsmogelijkheden In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van uw loopbaanontwikkeling? Sociale sfeer Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vind u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? 1a. Goede werksfeer In zeer grote mate 1b. Mogelijkheden om plezierig samen te werken c. Steun door collega s d. Waardering Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht 44

45 2. In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van de sociale sfeer? Organisatiebeleid Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vind u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? 1a. Een rechtvaardige leidinggevende b. Duidelijke en rechtvaardige regels c. Open communicatie In zeer grote mate 1d. Ethisch beleid ten aanzien van maatschappij en omgeving In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van het organisatiebeleid? Werk-privé balans Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vind u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? 1a. Begrip voor persoonlijke omstandigheden In zeer grote mate b. Zelf vakantiedagen kunnen inplannen c. Thuiswerken d. Werktijden af kunnen stemmen op privé leven 2. In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van werkprivé balans? Beloningen Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht Totaal niet Nauwelijks Enigszins In grote mate 1. In hoeverre vind u dat de organisatie de verplichting heeft u het volgende te bieden? 1a. Werkzekerheid b. Passend salaris In zeer grote mate 45

46 1c. Beloningen voor bijzondere prestaties d. Passende secundaire arbeidsvoorwaarden In hoeverre heeft de organisatie voldaan aan de verplichtingen ten aanzien van uw beloningen? Veel minder dan verwacht Minder dan verwacht Zoals verwacht Meer dan verwacht Veel meer dan verwacht Baanonzekerheid In het volgende onderdeel zullen vragen gesteld worden over uw gevoel van baanzekerheid binnen de organisatie waar u uw werk verricht. Geef aan in hoeverre u het eens bent met de volgende stellingen door per vraag één getal te omcirkelen: 1. Het is mogelijk dat ik op korte termijn mijn baan kwijt raak. 2. Ik ben er zeker van dat ik mijn baan kan houden. 3. Ik voel me onzeker over de toekomst van mijn baan. 4. Ik denk dat ik in de nabije toekomst mijn baan verlies. Helemaal mee oneens Mee oneens Neutraal Mee eens Helemaal mee eens

47 Work engagement: vigor Appendix B: Factor analysis and reliability analysis Table 1. KMO and Bartlett s Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity,569 Approx. Chi-Square 37,520 df 3 Sig.,000 Table 2. Total Variance Explained Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 1,608 53,601 53,601 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Table 3. Scree plot Table 4. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items,559,

48 Work engagement: absorption Table 5. KMO and Bartlett s Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity,667 Approx. Chi-Square 130,635 df 3 Sig.,000 Table 6. Total Variance Explained Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 2,162 72,062 72,062 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Table 7. Scree plot Table 8. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items,805,

49 Work engagement: dedication Table 9. KMO and Bartlett s Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity,592 Approx. Chi-Square 61,618 df 3 Sig.,000 Table 10. Total Variance Explained Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 1,790 59,678 59,678 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Table 11. Scree plot Table 12. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items,645,657 3 Work engagement: entire scale Table 13. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items,843,

50 PC content Table 14. KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity,680 Approx. Chi-Square 177,383 df 6 Sig.,000 Table 15. Total Variance Explained Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 2,384 59,595 59,595 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Table 7. Scree plot Table 16. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items,768,