2-1 Job Insecurity
In recent years, due to changes in working life, brought on by organizations’
having to adjust to a more global context and especially the recessions that have hit many countries, job insecurity is now a major issue for many employees (Burke &
Cooper, 2000). In literature on motivation at work, job insecurity has only been considered indirectly. Both Herzberg (1959) as well as Maslow (1954) suggested that having secure employment motivates employees to perform and it has been
considered as part of the basis for well-being of the workforce. Over time, the
scientific focus has shifted from job security being a motivator to job insecurity being a work-related stressor (Ashford, et al., 1989; Herzberg, 1959; Maslow, 1954). The concept of job insecurity, as we know it today, has mainly developed out of research conducted over the last few decades.
Job insecurity has been defined as the employee’s “perceived powerlessness to maintain desired continuity in a threatened job situation (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984)”. The two key aspects affecting the experiencing and severity of job insecurity, are: (1) powerlessness, a feeling of not being able to change the situation; and (2) the perceived threat of job loss. Research on job insecurity is based on the assumption that a potential job loss is an undesired event, especially since employment provides income and financial security. Besides this function, employment also provides individuals with a time structure, social contacts, a collective purpose, a social
identity, status, and activities (Jahoda, 1982). According to Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984), another important aspect that contributes to job insecurity perceptions is the
perceived probability of job loss, which in combination with the powerlessness felt and the severity of the threat contributes to the strength of job insecurity experiences (Ashford et al. 1989; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Kinnunen & Nätti, 1994). This shows that the individual’s interpretation is crucial to understanding the job insecurity experience.
In addition, there is also evidence that job insecurity is linked to improved productivity, this is explained by employees working harder in order to stand out from their colleagues, and trying to increase their value to the organization (Sverke,
Hellgren & Naswall , 2006). However, research evidence also indicates that in the long run this leads to increased long term sickness absence (D’Souza, Strazdins, Broom, Rodgers & Berry, 2006), and creativity and problem solving ability decrease with job insecurity (Probst, Stewart, Gruys & Tierney, 2007); which ultimately suggests job insecurity to be detrimental to an organization’s performance.
2-2 Mentoring Relationships
According to social information processing approach (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978), individual’s perception and judgment of the job environment are affected by
coworkers’ attitudes. In this case, protégés are the less experienced and
knowledgeable ones in the company. When the protégés encounter uncertainty or difficulty in a work setting, they are very likely to approach their mentors for guidance or assistance. During the process of communication and socialization, protégés perception of meaningfulness and importance of the job is affected by mentors. For instance, if the mentors continuously maintain that a job is horrible, boring or undesirable, the protégés would probably assimilate the judgments into their own. Thus, the development of protégés’ job attitude is highly influenced by mentors.
On the basis of theory and research reviewed above, this study hypothesized that mentors would pass on their job insecurity to their protégés and affecting protégés’
perceived job insecurity.
Hypothesis 1: Mentors’ job insecurity will be positively related to protégés’ job insecurity.
According to Ragins and Scandura (1999), there were expected costs and benefits associated with being a mentor, five categories of benefits were identified:
rewarding experience, improved job performance, loyal base of support, recognition by others and generativity. Expected costs were that mentoring was more trouble than it was worth, the relationship could be dysfunctional, nepotism could occur, poor protégés could reflect badly on the mentor and energy drain could result. The
researchers used total costs and benefits, they found out that intention to mentor was positively related to expected benefits and negatively related to expected costs. On the other hand, study has found that the outcomes of job insecurity include increased emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, psychological distress, psychosomatic complaints, and decreased personal accomplishment (De Witte et al., 2010).
Therefore, we can assume that job insecurity could be a cost or factor affecting the willingness of mentoring, as the mentors with job insecurity are already exhausted and unsatisfied with the company. Thus, those mentors will provide less mentoring support.
On the basis of theory and research reviewed above, this study also expected that the mentors would provide different types or levels of mentoring functions depending on their severity of job insecurity.
Hypothesis 2: Mentor’s job insecurity will be negatively related to mentoring supports perceived by protégés.
According to Kram's mentor role theory (1985a), mentors can provide two broad categories of mentoring support. First, they provide career development support, which help protégés learn the business and facilitate the protégé's advancement in the organization. Kram (1985a) theorized that mentors can provide five specific career development functions: sponsoring promotions and lateral moves (sponsorship);
coaching the protégé (coaching); protecting the protégé from adverse forces (protection); providing challenging assignments (challenging assignments); and increasing the protégé's exposure and visibility (exposure). Then, the second broad category of mentoring functions consists of psychosocial functions. These behaviors address interpersonal aspects of the mentoring relationship and enhance the protégé's sense of competence, self-efficacy, professional and personal development. Career development functions depend on the mentor's power and position in the organization, whereas psychosocial functions depend on the quality of the interpersonal relationship and the emotional bond that underlies the relationship. Career development functions focus on the organization and the protégé's career, whereas psychosocial functions affect the protégé on personal level and extend to other parts of life, such as the protégé's personal development. In addition, Kram (1985a) mentioned that mentors may provide four psychosocial functions: helping the protégé develop a sense of professional self (acceptance and confirmation), providing problem-solving
(counselling), giving respect and support (friendship), and providing identification and role modeling (role modeling). Also, mentoring is not an all or none phenomenon, a mentor may provide all or just some of these functions.
Furthermore, past research has shown that individuals felt anxious and insecure about their jobs are more likely to seek out the feedback of a senior person via the mentoring relationship. Uncertainty is an aversive state for such individuals and feedback may reduce ambiguity by giving them information about appropriate behaviors (Ashford & Black, 1996). Thus, mentors may help to alleviate some of protégés’ anxiety about work performance or job insecurity in the workplace.
On the basis of theory and research reviewed above, this study also expected that the amount of protégés’ perceived job insecurity could be alleviated by the effect of mentoring supports.
Hypothesis 3: Mentoring supports that protégés received will be negatively related to protégés’ job insecurity.
2-3 Research Framework
Based on literature review and hypothesis above, Figure 2.1 below demonstrates the framework of this study.
Mentors’ job insecurity
Mentoring supports
Protégés’ job insecurity H1
H2 H3
Figure 2.1 Research Framework