individual values

7/30/2019 individual values

1/23

APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 1999,48 ( I ) , 49-71

Basic Individual Values, Work Values, and theMeaning of Work

Maria RosUniversidad Complutense de M adrid, Spain

Shalom H. Schwartz and Shoshana SurkissTh e Hebrew University of Jerusalem , IsraelO n prCsente ici une thCorie des valeurs individuelles d e base qui est appliquCeau m ond e de lenseignement. Les objectifs ou les valeurs du travail seraient desexpressions d e valeurs de base d ans la situation de travail. Les valeurs d e baserecouvrent quatre types de valeurs professionnelles: intrinseques,extrinseques, sociales, et d e prestige. C es qua tre categories proviennent durCexamen de recherches antCrieures et dune premiere Ctude port ant sur unCchantillon reprksentatif israklien (N =999). Les intercorrClations trouvCesentre ces qu atre types vont dan s le sens des hypotheses concernant la structuredes valeurs professionnelles. La deuxieme Ctude explore la signification dutravail en tant q ue locomotion vers un but. D es enseignants espagnols (N =193) et d es CEves-professeurs ( N = 179) ont CvaluC limportance du travail e tdune serie dCtaillCe de valeurs d e base com me principes directeurs. P ou r lesenseignants, le travail perm et ap pa rem men t dobten ir la stabilitC sociale et desrelations sociales Ctroites. Pour les Ctudiants, le travail est liC h ces o bjectifs,mais aussi h la promotion personnelle, h autonomie et h la recherche desensations.Nous insistons, dans la conclusion, sur lutilite d e lapplication d e lathCorie des valeurs d e base h dautres investigations portant sur le travail.A the ory of basic individual values is presente d an d applied in studying work.W ork goals or values ar e seen as expressions of basic values in the work s etting.Bas ic values imply four types of work values-intrinsic, extrinsic, social, andprestige. These four types emerge in re-examinations of past research and inStudy 1of a representative Israeli sample ( N =999). Intercorrelations among

Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. Maria Ros, Dept. Psicologia Social, F. de C.C.Pol. Y Sociologia, Campus de Somosaguas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28223Madrid, Spain.T he work of the second author was supported by grant 94-00063 from the l initedStates-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF),Jerusalem, Israel, by grant N o. 187/92 romthe Basic Research Foundation (Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities), and by the Leonand Clara Sznajderman Chair of Psychology.

0 999 International Association of Applied Psychology


2/23

50 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSthese value types support theoris ing ab ou t the s tructu re of work values . Stu dy2 explores the meaning of w o r k as a vehicle for goal a t ta inm ent . Spanishteachers (N = 193) and educa t ion s tuden t s (N = 179) r a t ed the impor tance ofwork and of a comprehensive set of basic values as guiding principles. Fo r theteachers . work apparently serves to at tain social s tabil i ty and close socialrelat ions . For th e s tu dent s , work is associated with the se goals and withpromoting personal interes ts , independence, and excitement. In conclusion,we identify advant age s of applying the the ory of basic values to fu r ther s tudiesof work.

INTRODUCTIONA major goal of research on values has been to explore the ways in whichindividuals' value priorities relate to their attitudes, behaviour, and socialexperiences and roles. One branch of this research has focused primarily onwork (e.g. Elizur. 1984: Hofstede. 1980, 1991: Super, 1980).N o attempt hasbeen made. however, to clarify how work values and other aspects of workrelate to basic individual values. For this purpose, we adopt a recent theoryof the structure and content of the basic values distinguished by individuals(Schwartz. 1992,1994). This theory has been used to predict and explain howwhole value systems relate to various attitudes and behaviours (e.g.cooperationxompetition, voting, contact with outgroups, religiosity; Ros,1994:Ros, Grad, & Martinez, 1996: Schwartz & Sagiv. 1995; Schwartz, 1996;Schwartz & Huismans, 1995). This is the first attempt to integrate thisgeneral theory of the basic values of individuals with research on work.'

As background for the studies to be reported, the current article brieflypresents the theory of basic individual values and notes some results ofvalidation studies. Then, in Study 1,we employ this theory as an approachfor clarifying the nature of work values, specifying the types of work valuespeople a re likely to distinguish, and postulating the structure of relationshipsexpected among these work values. We also use the theory to organise someof the prominent theorising about work values found in the literature.Finally, we report an empirical study of a national sample in Israel thattested hypotheses regarding the relations of basic values to work values.In Study 2. we employ the theory of basic values to explore thesignificance of work as a vehicle f o r reaching cherished goals. That is, weseek to infer the types of goals that people believe their work may enablethem to attain. We do this by investigating the associations of work, treatedas a value. with the different basic human values. We examine this questionin two Spanish samples, secondary school teachers and education students.

' ' Ihe current ar t icle uses a theory of 10types o f hasic individual values o explain individualdillcrenccs in w o r k values. Schwartz (this issuc) present s a theory o f seven types o f valuesappropriate for comparing cul tures hut not individuals . For discussions of the differencesbetwecn thc individual and cul tural lew ls of value theo ry and analysis . see Schw artz ( this issue)and Smi th and Sc l ihar tz (1997) .


3/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 51Both samples focus on the same type of work-teaching. One sample haddirect experience with teaching while the other did not. By comparing theassociations of work with basic values in the two samples, we sought todeduce the effects of occupational experience as a teacher on the meaning ofwork. This study exemplifies the use of basic values to uncover groupdifferences in, and influences of experience on, the meaning of work.

A THEORY OF BASIC INDIVIDUAL VALUESThe theory of basic human values has two core components (see Schwartz,1992, 1994, for a fuller elaboration). First, it specifies 10 motivationallydistinct types of values that are postulated to be recognised by members ofmost societies and to encompass the different types of values that guide them.Second, the theory specifies how these 10 types of values relate dynamicallyto one another. That is, it specifies which values are compatible and mutuallysupportive, and which are opposed and likely to conflict with one another.

The theory defines values as desirable, trans-situational goals that vary inimportance as guiding principles in peoples lives (cf. Kluckhohn, 1951;Rokeach, 1973). The crucial content aspect that distinguishes among valuesis the type of motivational goals they express. A typology of the differentcontents of values was derived using the following reasoning: in order tocope with the challenges inherent in human existence, groups andindividuals translate the needs and demands they experience into conceptsabout which they can communicate, expressing them in the language ofvalues. Values represent, in the form of conscious goals, responses to threeuniversal requirements with which all individuals and societies must cope:needs of individuals as biological organisms, requisites of coordinated socialinteraction, and requirements for the smooth functioning and survival ofgroups.

Ten motivationally distinct types of values were derived from these threeuniversal requirements (Schwartz, 1992). Table 1 lists these value types,defining each in terms of its central goal and noting, in parentheses, specificsingle values that primarily represent it.

The key to identifying the structure of value relations is the assumptionthat actions taken in the pursuit of each type of values have psychological,practical, and social consequences that may conflict or may be compatiblewith the pursuit of other value types. Analyses of the conflicts andcompatibilities likely to arise when people pursue these types of valuessimultaneously suggest a potentially universal set of relations among values.For example, the pursuit of achievement values often conflicts with thepursuit of benevolence values; seeking personal success for oneself is likelyto obstruct actions aimed at enhancing the welfare of close others who needones help. In like manner, the pursuit of tradition values conflicts with the


4/23

52 ROS, CHWARTZ, SURKISSTABLE 1

Definitions

P O W E K : Social \ t i i tu\ arid prestige. cont rol o r dominance over people and resources (Socia lPower. Authorit! . Wealth).AC'HIEVEMEN'I ' : I'craonal w c c e s th rough demons t ra t ing conipc tence according t o socialI l E D O N I S M : Pleasure and scnsuou s grati f icat ion for oneself (Pleasu re. Enjoying Life) .S'TlMt TLA'I 'ION: Excite me nt. no\el ty and chal lenge in l ife (Daring. a Varied Life, an Excitinglife).S E L F - I I I R E ( T 1 0 N : Inde pen den t though t and act ion-choosing. creat ing. explor ing(('re ' it ibi ty. Frccdo m. Ind epen dent . ( 'ur inus. ( 'hoosing o m n < ; o a k )I . N I V E R S A L I S M : C'ndrrstanding. appreciat ion. tolerance and protect ion fo r the welfare o fal l people and f o r na tu re (Broadm inded. W isdom. Social Jus t i ce . Equal ty . A World a t Peace. aM:orld o f Beaut!. I'nity with Nature . Protecting the Envi ronment ) .H E N E V O L E N ( ' E : Pre \er \a t ion and enhancem en t of the welfare of people with whom one i s111 f rcquent personal contact ( He lpful . Honest . F orgiving. Loyal . K esponsible).I R A D I ' I ~ I O N : espect . commitmcnt and acceptance of the customs and ide as that t radi t ional

cu l tu re or religion pr ov ides ( Hu m b l e . Accep ti ng my Port ion in Life. Devout , Respect for-rr.id ' t i o n . Moder a t e ) .( ' O S F O R M I Y r ' : Restraint of act ions. inclinations atid impulws likely to upset or harm othersm c l violate wci ; rl expec tat ion\ or nornis (Pol i tcness. Oh cdicn t . Sclf-discipl ine. Hon ouringI 'arent\ and E l de r s ) .

rrniony and stabilit) oi society. o f relationships. an d of self (Familyrit! .Social Orde r . C'lcan. Reciproca t ion o f Favours ) .

ful. ( 'apable. Ambit ious. Inf luent ial ) .

I)elinitions ot motivationnl t!pes o f \ i i l u e \ i n t e rms of their goals and the s ingle values thatrcprc\ci i t them.

pursuit of stimulation values: accepting cultural and religious customs andideas handed down from the past is likely to inhibit seeking novelty,challenge. and excitement. On the other hand, the pursuit of benevolencea nd of conformity values is compatible; both entail behaving in a mannerapproved by one's close group. And the pursuit of security and power is alsocompatible: both stress avoiding uncertainty by controlling relationshipsand resources.The total pattern of relations of conflict and compatibility among valuepriorities that is postulated to structure value systems is represented inFig. 1.Competing value types emanate in opposing directions from the centre:compatible types are in close proximity going around the circle. The locationof tradition outside of conformity implies that these two value types share asingle motivational goal-subordination on self in favour of sociallyimposed expectations.As shown in Fig. 1. the total value structure is organised into two sets ofopposing higher-order value types. arrayed on two bipolar dimensions.Thesc higher-order types will be used to link basic values to work values.The first dimension-openness to change versus conservation-opposes


5/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 53

FIG. 1. The structure of relations among the value types according to the theoryvalues that emphasise own independent thought and action and favourchange (self-direction and stimulation) to values that emphasise submissiveself-restriction, preservation of traditional practices, and protection ofstability (security, conformity, and tradition). The second dimension-self-transcendence versus self-enhancement-opposes values thatemphasise acceptance of others as equals and concern for their welfare(universalism and benevolence) to values that emphasise the pursuit of onesrelative success and dominance over others (power and achievement).Hedonism includes elements of both openness to change and self-enhancement.

Analyses of responses to a questionnaire developed to measure the 10value types, in 155 samples from 55 countries, provide substantial support


6/23

54 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSfor the postulates of the values theo ry (Schw artz, 1994; Schw artz & Sagiv,1995: plus unpublished data). Results of separate analyses of the matchbetween the observed a nd theorised con tent and structu re of values in eachsample suggest that all 10 of the postulated value types are indeeddiscriminated in th e vast majority of cultures. Mor eov er, the value types ar eusually related to one another in the pattern of oppositions andcompatibilities described in Fig. 1. In addit ion, the four high er-order valuetypes. arrayed on two bipolar dimensions. organise values in virtually allsocieties stud ied. Th at is. values tha t em phasise self-enhancement opp osethose that em phasise self-transcendence. an d values that emp hasise open -ness to change oppose those that em phasise preservation of th e status quo.

Th e analyses also perm itted an assessment of the conceptua l meaning ofeach single value in each sam ple. T h e results suggest that 45 of the valueshave cross-culturally consistent m eanings. The se values can be used to formindexes o f the importance of each of the 10value ty pes for ind ividuals, foruse in group comparisons. This addresses the common problem ofcomparing values whose meanings are not the same across groups, aproblem not tackled directly by othe r values resea rch.STUDY 1 BASIC INDIVIDUAL VALUES AND WORK

VALUESFrom the viewpoint of the theory of basic human values, work goals orvalues are specific expressions of general values in th e w ork setting. Th isstudy employs the theory of basic individual values to generate and testhypotheses regarding the different types of work values that people arelikely to distinguish, and regarding the structure of relationships amongthese work v alues. We also directly rela te basic values and w ork values.Like basic values. work values are beliefs pertaining to desirableend-states (e .g . high pay) or behaviour (e.g. working with people). Thedifferent work goals are or de red by their im por tanc e as guiding principlesfor evaluating work outcomes and settings, and for choosing amongdifferent work alternatives. Because work values refer only to goals in thework setting, they are more specific than basic individual values. But thework values usually stu die d ar e still quite b road: they refer to w hat a personwants out of work in general. rathe r than to the narrowly defined outc om eso f particular jobs. Finally. work values. like basic values, are verbalrepresentations of individual, group. an d interaction requ iremen ts.

Work value researchers have assumed that a l imited number of broadorientations towards work underlie people's ideas of what is important tothem when making occupational choices. Re searc hers have th erefo resought to identify a set of genera l type s of work values. Viewing work v aluesas specific expressions of basic values in th e w ork setting implies that th er e


7/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 55should be four general types of work values, each parallel to one of the fourhigher-order basic types of individual values. Moreover, these four types ofwork values should form two dimensions that parallel the self-enhancementversus self-transcendence and the openness to change versus conservationdimensions of basic individual values.

Despite a plethora of different labels, most work researchers appear toidentify the same two or three types of work values: (1) intrinsic orself-actualisation values, (2) extrinsic or security or material values, (3)social or relational values (e.g. Alderfer, 1972; Borg, 1990; Crites, 1961;Mottaz, 1985; Pryor, 1987; Rosenberg, 1957). Elizur (1984) arrived at arelated trichotomous classification of work values by considering themodality of their outcomes: instrumental outcomes such as work conditionsand benefits; cognitive outcomes such as interest and achievement; affectiveoutcomes such as relations with associates. This classification largelyoverlaps extrinsic, intrinsic, and social, respectively.

These three types of work values can be viewed as conceptually parallel tothree of the higher-order basic human values: intrinsic work values directlyexpress openness to change values-the pursuit of autonomy, interest,growth, and creativity in work. Extrinsic work values express conservationvalues; job security and income provide workers with the requirementsneeded for general security and maintenance of order in their lives. Social orinterpersonal work values express the pursuit of self-transcendence values;work is seen as a vehicle for positive social relations and contribution tosociety.

The theory of basic individual values suggests that there should be afourth distinctive type of work values, one that parallels the basic self-enhancement higher-order value type. This type of work values, likeself-enhancement, should be concerned with prestige or power. Items thatrefer to prestige, authority, influence, power, and achievement in work arecommon in empirical research on work. These values have usually beenclassified as extrinsic (Ginzberg, Ginsburg, Axelrod, & Herma, 1951;Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959; Rosenberg, 1957) or intrinsic(Borg, 1990; Crites, 1961; Elizur, 1984). Few theorists have recognised adistinctive prestige or power type (OConnor &Kinnane, 1961;Pryor, 1987).

Re-examination of many past studies reveals that there is empiricalevidence for a fourth, prestige type even in data that the researchersinterpreted as revealing three types. To illustrate the results of ourreexamination, we consider data from Elizur (1984). Elizur (1984) asked a

Elizur, Borg, Hunt, and Beck (1991) also distinguish work values on a second facet-a5resources that workers obtain merely by being located in the system (e.g. work conditions) or asrewards that are contingent on workers performance (e.g. ob status). This facet does not relateto the motivational aspect of values of concern here.


8/23

56 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSrepresentative Israeli sample how important each of 21 work outcomes(value s) is to them. H e analysed th e intercorrelat ions amo ng these i temswith the sam e multidimensional techn ique used t o validate t he theo ry ofbasic individual values. Elizur partition ed the empirical space for m ed by th e21 work values into three regions th at m atched his concep tual distinctionsbetw een instrum ental, effective, and cognitive ou tcom es of work.Several anom alies in Elizur's results can be resolved by distinguishing afo ur th, prestige value typ e. Specifically, th e region of values th at E lizurlabelled cognitive outcomes can be divided into intrinsic and prestigeregions that m ake b etter sense of the dat a. Th e work values in th e intrinsicregion (m eaningfulness. responsibility, use of o ne's abilities) are values th atcontribute to a sense of personal growth and whose attainment derivesdirectly from the na ture of the work expe rience. T h e wo rk values in theprestige region (achievement. advancement, status, recognition,independence, company that you are proud to work for, influence in wo rk,influence in the organisation) are values whose attainment entails acomparison of self with o th ers that implies per son al superiority.In a cross-cultural study. Elizur e t al. (1991) par tition ed a different s et ofwork values into three regions following Elizur's inst rum enta l, affective, an dcognitive distinctions. Exa min ation of th e results in the sam ples from each ofthe e ight countr ies (U S A ,Taiwan, China, Ko rea, Hungary, the Netherlands,Israel) revealed that the region design ated as cognitive by the auth ors couldbe split into two se pa rat e regions of intrinsic and of prestige values in eve rysingle sam ple. A m on g the distinctive intrinsic work values w ere inte restin gwork, meaningful work. opportunity for growth, and use of ability andknowledge. Am ong the prest ige values were co mpan y that you ar e proud towork for. advancem ent. influence in the org anisation , and influence in w ork.In this case. the implications of the theory of basic values regarding thenumber and content o f work values that should be found po inted to a cleardis tinction in the data that had b een overlooked. Th e assump tion that asep arat e type of work values should parallel eac h hig her -ord er type of basicvalues ena ble d us to identify distinctive s ets of intrinsic (pa ral lel to opennessto change) and prestige (paral lel to self-enhancem ent) work values. T hedistinction betw een these two types of work values is pro bab ly of sub stan tialpractical impo rtan ce. Th eir associations with oth er variables are most likelyvery d ifferent. as is the case for the high er-orde r basic value types on whichthey are based (Schwartz, 1994. 1996).Evidence fr om som e factor analytic s tudies also suggests that there arefou r types of work values. with one including largely prestige item s (Pr yo r,1980:Rob ey. 1974). In s um , secon dary analyses of da ta from earlier researchsupport the existence of four types of work values that correspond t o thefou r higher-order types of basic values. T he c urre nt study directly ex am inedassociations between work values and basic individual values.


9/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 57Method

Samples and ProceduresA representative national sample of the adult, urban Jewish population in

Israel ( N =999) completed a questionnaire as part of a survey conducted in1992. Respondents first completed the measure of basic values and thenanswered a work values questionnaire. Background and opinion data werealso gathered.

Ana IysesHypotheses regarding the content and structure of values were tested

with smallest space analysis (SSA; Guttman, 1968), a nonmetricmultidimensional scaling technique used widely in the literature on workvalues (e.g. Elizur et al., 1991) and basic values (Schwartz, 1992,1994).SSArepresents items (here, single values) as points in a multidimensional spacesuch that the distances between the points reflect the intercorrelationsamong the items. To test whether the hypothesised distinctive types ofvalues were discriminated, we examined whether the items intended tomeasure each value type formed separate regions in the space. To test thestructure of relations among the value types-their conflicts andcompatibilities-we examined whether the regions were located in the spacerelative to one another in a way that fits the hypothesised structure ofrelations.

InstrumentsBasic Val ue Survey An abbreviated version of the Schwartz Value

Survey that included 37 single values, chosen to cover the comprehensive setof ten value types (Schwartz, 1992), was used. Respondents rated theimportance of each value as a guiding principle in their lifeon a 9-point scalefrom opposed to my values (-l), not important (0), to important ( 3 ) ,to of supreme importance (7).3The values were presented in three sets of12,12, and 13, listed on cards. Before rating each set, respondents chose themost and least important value in the set, in order to anchor their use of theresponse scale.

To index the importance of tach basic value type for each individual, theratings given to the single values that represent the value type were summed

In principle, responses lie on a bipolar scale from values that respondents rate mostimportant to revere and pursue to those most important to condemn and avoid. Testing inmultiple cultures revealed that respondents view most values as worthy of pursuit and very fewas worthy o f avoidance. The current scale provides more positive and fewer negativediscriminations, thereby eliciting a distribution of responses that optimally captures the actualdistribution of respondents value assessments.


10/23

58 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSand divided hy the num ber of values included. T h e values included in eachindex ar e listed in Tab le 1.Th ey were selected o n th e basis of a p r i o r i theory ,corrected for the results of a smallest space analysis of the in terc or rela tion samong the values in this study.

W o r k Value Sz4rvej Te n i tems, selected to re present th e fo ur types ofwork values we postula ted, were included. Th ese items we re based on i temswidely used in the work values l i terature. Respo nden ts rated each i tem on ascale from 1 (very impo rtant ) to 4 (n ot at a ll im por tant) in response t o thequestion: How important is each of the following to you in choosing anoccupation? Table 2 lists the 10 items, categorising the m according t o the aprinri value type they were intended to represent. Both multidimensionalscaling analysis ( SSA )and principal com pon ents factor analysis with ob liquerotation were performed on the matrix of intercorrelations am ong the 10items. T able 2 provides th e result of the factor analysis.Bo th types of analysis suppo rted the aprior i assignm ent of work value s t ovalue types. As shown in Tab le 2. for exa m ple, fou r factors (w ith eigenvaluesgreater than 1 .O ) em erge d. equivalent to the four postula ted types of wor kvalues. In the SSA . fou r regions em erge d. with item 10 in the cen tre of thespace. Both typ es of analyses were also pe rfo rm ed in subsamples for m ed offive occupa tional group s (unsk illed blue collar, skilled blue collar, clerical,managerial. professional). The analyses yielded similar results for all butitcms 6 (being your ow n boss) and 10 (advanc em ent in wo rk). 'To index theimportance of each of the fo ur types of work values for eac h individual, theratings given to the single values that re prese nt the value type w ere summ ed.Itenis 6 and 10 were excluded because they had m ultiple and inconsistentloadings in th e factor analyses, an d cen tral or inconsistent location s in theSSAs in the different subsamples.

Results and DiscussionFirst we examined wh ethe r the stru cture of relations am on g the fou r types ofwork values too k the form implied by the view of these values as expressions,in the work setting, of basic individual values. Intrinsic work values werehypothesised to oppose extrinsic work values because these typespresumably express the opposing hig her-o rder ope nne ss to change versus' Itcrn h c m e r ~ e i l t l i tlic prestige \ d u e s in al l occupatic)nal groups but professionals. This

\ussc\ts t 1 i ; i t hcinp !our OM n hoas m ean t heins l rcc o f others ' con tro l a n d l iav ins con tro l overirc\ourcc\. t or profcss iona l r . i t cmcrzed n i t h the intrinsic values. appare ntly signifying f r ecdomr r i pursuc indepcncienr g u A . I t e m 10 e n ie rg c d nit11 different value types in dif fcren toccupat ional g r o u p \ . susgcs t ing cunsiderah le v a r i a t i o n i n the meaning of a d v a n c e m e n t : g rea te rtnc lcpcndcncc ( in t r in4c) to r p ro tc s s io n a h : g rea te r i ndcpcndence a n d p o w c r over o th e r sj intt-in\ic ; tnJ prcs t ipe) fo r manage r \ : g rea te r i n c o m e and securit! (ex trins ic) for skilled bluec(iI1~1rt o r l , < n .


11/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 59TABLE 2Factor Loadings for the Work Value Survey Items

W ork Va lue Type and ItemFactor Loadings

I I 1 I I ISocial Extrinsic Prestige IVIntrinsic

Social7. Contributing to people and4. Work with people9. Social contact with co-workers

society

ExtrinsicI. Good salary and work conditions2. Job security (permanent job,

pension)Prestige

8. Authority to make decisions over5. Prestigious, highly valued work

peopleIntrinsic

3. Interesting and varied work6. Work in which you are your own

bossMixed

10. Opportunities for occupationaladvancementPercent of Variance Explained

0.79 -0.090.77 -0.010.67 0.08

-0.13 0.900.09 0.79

0.18 -0.080.15 0.05

0.30 0.17-0.21 0.17

0.20 0.4331% 14%

-0.06-0.04

0.12

-0.04-0.07

0.690.63

0.100.61

0.3211%

0.150.240.18

-0.10-0.07

0.140.030.800.50

0.348%

N =999.conservation basic value types, respectively. Prestige work values wereexpected to oppose social work values because these types presumablyexpress the opposing higher-order self-enhancement versus self-transcendence basic value types, respectively. The SSA confirmed thesehypotheses. The regions representing the four types of work values wereordered in a two dimensional space in precisely this manner.

Second, we directly tested the conceptual relationship between the fourtypes of work values and the four higher-order basic individual values bycorrelating their indexes (see Table 3). As expected, extrinsic work valuescorrelated positively with conservation values (0.24) and negatively withopenness to change values (-0.28), whereas intrinsic work values correlatednegatively with conservation values (-0.23) and positively with openness tochange values (0.23; allP


12/23

SSlXtlnS 'ZltlVMH3S 'SOH 09


13/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 61As noted in the introduction to Study 1, one widely recognised and

influential perspective distinguishes between work activities as means toattain goals extrinsic to the work itself (e.g. pay) and work activities assources of intrinsic satisfaction (e.g. interest; Herzberg, 1996; Hertzberg etal., 1959). The presumed importance of intrinsic and extrinsic work goals hasbeen measured directly in self-report questionnaires. In Study 2 we employ aless direct approach to identifying the goals associated with work andprovide a wider selection of possible goals.

A second perspective considers the social and psychological functions ofwork (Jahoda, 1981,1982; Warr, 1987). Jahoda, for example, distinguishedfive latent functions: to structure time, provide shared experiences and socialcontact, promote social goals, grant status and identity, and provide regularactivities. People may or may not be aware of the importance of these latentfunctions in their own work. The indirect approach in Study 2 can identifylatent functions that respondents associate with their work.

Two international projects have also studied the meaning of work as anarena in which valued goals are pursued, expressed, and attained. Harding,Phillips, and Fogarty (1986) identified three main dimensions of work valuesor goals: personal development, pleasant climate, and security and materialrewards. The approach employed in Study 2 permits us to relate work to thisset of goals and to others overlooked by these authors (cf. goals identified inStudy 1).

The MOW (1987) project team conceptualised the meaning of work onmultiple dimensions4entrality in peoples lives, importance both in itselfand relative to other life areas, the goals it promotes, and the societal normsthat define it. In a reanalysis of the MOW work goal data, England and RuizQuintanilla (1994) identified three categories of goals: social, expressive,and instrumental. These categories recall those found by other researchers,and they parallel the social, intrinsic, and extrinsic types, respectively, thatwe derived from the theory of basic values and validated in Study 1. Theprestige type is notably missing from this classification. Study2 relates workto these goals and examines two other aspects of work meaningconceptualised by the MOW team-its centrality and its importance.

One way to elucidate the meaning of work for individuals is to identify thebasic values that people associate with work. They might view workprimarily as a way to attain public acclaim, for instance, or as an opportunityto exercise power, to gain security, or to express their independence.Rewarding work can itself be an important goal in life, one that serves as aguiding principle that influences decisions and evaluations. Hence workcan be included in the list of values to which people respond.

The motivational meaning of work for people can be revealed by itsempirical associations with the whole integrated system of basic values. Say,for example, that the primary meaning of work to the members of a sample is


14/23

62 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSto provide a secure living. enabling them to support their families and toacquire basic necessities. Th en , the m ore im porta nce these people a ttributeto security values as guiding principles in their lives, the more importancethey will attribute t o work.Th e structural postulates of the theory of basic values ena ble us to predictthat the im porta nce of work will corre late not only with security values bu talso with the other value types that form the higher-order conservationdimension together with se curity -con form ity and tradit ion. M oreover , insuch a sam ple, the im portance of work would cor rela te negatively with theimportance of the higher-order openness to change value types-self-direction. stimulation, and hedonism. That is. people who see workprimarily as a vehicle for actualising values of conservation are unlikelyto see it as a vehicle for actualising openness to change values, and viceversa.Study 2 uses the basic values theory a nd the m etho ds for examining thestructure of value systems to explore the meaning and imp ortance of workamong educators (Ros & Grad, 1991. provide a fuller report) . I t alsoinvestigates the effect of the occupational expe rienc e of teaching on themeaning of work am ong educators. Th e value pr ior it ies of m em bers of a noccupational group reflect both selection into the occupation andsocialisation through occupational experience (Kohn & Schooler, 1983;Mortimer & Lorence. 1979). W e postulate that occupational experience alsoinfluences the m eaning of th e work of teaching. Ed uca tion st ude nts, lackingconcrete experience, are likely to have an idealised conception of th e workof teaching. Te ac he rs. who ha ve faced the realities of teach ing, are likely tohave ada pted their und ersta ndin g of their work to the structura l dem ands ofthe job experienced in the school setting.Specifically. we hypothesise that, for e duc ation stud ents , the im porta nceof work is positively associated with th e im po rta nc e of all fou r higher-ordervalue types. Having an idealised view of their planned occupation, theyanticipate that work can provide op portu nities to pursu e and express manyof their valued goals. In co ntrast , we hypothesise th at work has a na rrow ermeaning for teachers. This meaning should reflect the struct ural constraintson seconda ry school teachers built into the school setting-low au ton om y,m ode rate income, an d a high level of inte rperso nal contact (Ros, Munoz-Repiso, Mendez , & R om ero . 1989 ). In light of these constraints, work is notlikely to be associated with the self-enhancing power, ac hiev em ent, andhedonism value types am ong experienced teachers. T he goals of the se valuetypes can not readily be attain ed throu gh their job. In co ntras t, work shouldbe associated w ith the self-transcending benevolence an d universalism valuetypes, and with the conservative tradition and conformity value types. Th esetypes of values are compatible with and o ften dem and ed by the structure ofteaching in the scho ol system.


15/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 63Method

Samples and ProcedureFor the teacher sample, 179 currently employed Spanish secondary

school teachers, averaging approximately five years of occupationalexperience, were randomly sampled from a pool of teachers attendingsummer school courses at a university in Madrid. These courses, needed forcareer advancement, are standardly attended by a large number of teachersin the Madrid district. For the sample of students with no teachingexperience, 193 education students at the Complutense University inMadrid, who were training to become secondary school teachers, wererecruited in classroom sessions. In both samples 75% of respondents werewomen, and the distribution of political orientations (mostly leftist) andyears of formal education were similar. Mean age was 30 for teachers and 25for education students. The only socio-demographic characteristic on whichthe two samples differed substantially was years of teaching experience, thecrucial variable used to interpret differences between the samples in theimportance or meaning of values.

Respondents completed the Schwartz (1992) value survey that was usedin the studies that validated the theory of basic individual values. This surveyincludes 56 single values, each followed by a parenthetical explanation thatclarifies its meaning, and selected to represent the 10 value types specified bythe theory. As described in Study 1, respondents rated each value on a9-point scale of importance as a guiding principle in their life. Most of thevalues in this survey were listed in Table 1. One item was added to the surveyas value number 57. This value was WORK (to earn a living with dignity).The phrase in parentheses narrowed the conception of work to the activity ofearning a living rather than simply exerting effort on a short-term task. Thewords with dignity helped to define the work as a value-a desirableend-state.

AnalysesAn SSA was performed to reveal the structure of relations of similarity

and distance among the 57 values (including work)? The two-dimensionalspatial protection of the values yielded a set of regions for the value typessimilar to the theorised structure of regions in Fig. 1. The coefficient ofalienation was 0.27 in both the teacher and student samples. Although this isabove the conventional level for good representation of the correlationmatrix, it is a reasonable stress value when 57 items are represented in onlytwo dimensions (Schwartz, 1994). The fact that the theorised motivational

The correlation matrixes on which the SSAs in Figs. 2 and 3 are based, and the coordinatesof each value in the two dimensional space, are available from the first author.


16/23

64 ROS, SCHWARTZ, SURKISSstructure of relations among values emerged even in this representationindicates that this motivational structure is the most important organisingprinciple accounting for correlations among values. It was therefore possibleto assess the associations (meaning) of work by examining the location ofthis item relative to the regions of each of the 10value types.

To index the importance of each basic value type for each individual, theratings given to the single values that represent the value type were summedand divided by the number of values included. Indexes of the importance ofthe four higher-order value types were computed by averaging the ratingsgiven to the two value types that constitute that higher-order type (three,including hedonism, for the self-enhancement higher-order type). Tosimplify presentation here, we use only the higher-order types. Data arereported as standardised scores.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThere were no differences between the teacher and education studentsamples in the importance they attributed to the higher-order value types orto work (see Table 4). Both groups rated self-transcendence values mostimportant, openness to change values second, self-enhancement valuesthird, and conservation values last. Moreover, both groups rated work as avery important value, on a par with the self-transcendence values. Bothgroups attributed significantly greater importance to self-transcendencevalues and to work than to the three other higher-order types (allcomparisons, t >7.5, P


17/23

BASIC VALUES AND WOR K VALUES 65TABLE 4Teachers and Students

Teachers Students( N = 138) ( N = 168)

Work 0.88(0.58)

Self-transcendence 0.59(0.25)(0.37)(0.43)

Self-enhancement -0.23Openness to Change 0.18Conservation -0.30

(0.33)

0.91(0.59)0.55

(0.24)-0.22

0.24(0.45)

-0.35

(0.32)

(0.33)Means and standard deviations for the importance ofwork and of the higher-order value types among teachersand students.Importance ratings have been standardised.

types form the expected structure of compatible types around the circle andconflicting types emanating in opposite directions from the centre (cf. Fig.1).Work is located virtually at the centre of the multidimensional valuespace. This is because it correlates positively with all the different valuetypes. Thus students viewed work as a potential vehicle for attaining all typesof values.

For teachers, the importance of work was associated only with theimportance of two higher-order value types. As hypothesised, workcorrelated positively and significantly ( P


18/23

3

Es.-

66


19/23

/

67


20/23

68 ROS, SCHWARTZ,SURKISSme aning in life (lo), forgiving (54), accepting my por tion of life (44),an d spiritual life (6). W or k is especially distant from the regions of t hehedonism and stimulation value types. Apparently, work has taken on ameaning for teachers that entai ls accepting external requirements andfinding significance in life thr ou gh fulfilling one s duties t o ot he rs whileforgoing pleasure and excitement for self.Study 2 dem ons trates how the theory of basic hu m an values can beexploited to identify the particular meanings of work in any occupationalgroup or other sample. The location of work in the SSA also providesinformation about the centrality of work in respon dents lives. T he mo recentral a n item is in an SSA projection, the more it serves as an organisingprinciple for the whole set of o the r items. T hu s, ou r findings suggest that , inits idealised fo rm , work as teache rs is very cen tral to the stud ent sample.W ork ap pea rs less centra l for teachers. W ith the experience of teaching in aconstraining school setting, they have ap pare ntly learned th at work ca nno torganise and contribute much to pleasure and excitement in life. Nor,judging by its location, is work a vehicle for achieving much recognition o rexercising much power.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONSMuch of the literature on work values has dev elop ed without atten tion to thebroader research on general values. Th e types of work values pro pos ed untilnow have d erived from empirical analyses, from attem pts to operationaliseisolated theoretical hunches, or from applications of classical distinctions(cognitive, affective, instrumental) that have no relevance to themotivational content of values-the essence of values as goals. W e havepre sen ted an overview of a theory of basic individual values, of the methodsdeveloped to operationalise it , and of its cross-cultural validation. Thistheory has the prom ise of providing so m e of th e missing infras tru ctu re fortheorising about the content and structure of work values. G rou ndin g thetheory of work values in the bro ade r theory of values is one ke y streng th ofour app roac h. Because th e theory holds across cultures, it may b e useful forintegrating cross-cultural research on w ork values, an oth er streng th of t heapproach presented here .We have demonstrated that drawing on the basic types of individualvalues can organ ise the findings of past research on work values (goals). T h ebasic values ap pro ach h as several advantages:

1. It suggests how many g en era l types of work values it is worthw hile todistinguish.2. It gives a reasonable basis for postulating that these types of workvalues, like the basic human values of which they are specificexpressions. are likely to be foun d in mo st cultures.


21/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 693. It suggests that there is a structure of dynamic relations of compati-

bility and opposition among the different types of work values, notmerely a typology, and it specifies what this structure is likely to be.

Application of the theory and methods of research on basic individualvalues has the potential for other types of contributions to the study of workas well. We have demonstrated a method for determining the meaning thatpeople attribute to work as a vehicle for reaching goals. The associations ofwork with the full range of basic values reveal its motivational significance.Differences in the meaning of work can be independent of differences in itsimportance, as shown by the teacherhtudent comparison. Moreover,differences in the meaning of work apparently reflect differences in theexperiences that respondents have had in the world of work.

The method employed here of determining the meaning of work throughits location in the SSA is applicable to assessing the meaning of any conceptwithin its network of associations. Caution must be exercised in adoptingthis method, however. The location of a single concept in the multi-dimensional space may vary somewhat as a function of chance. Therefore,replications of the analyses with subsamples from the population of interestare crucial (Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995).

Finally, application of the theory can help work researches to generatehypotheses about the correlates of work values. There is a growing literaturethat relates basic individual values, as integrated systems, to their socialstructural antecedents (e.g. age, income, occupation), correlates andconsequences (attitudes and behaviours: see Schwartz,1996,for references).In so far as work values are specifications of basic values, the same types ofreasoning can be used to generate hypotheses about their relations toattitudes, behaviour, background, and social experience variables.

REFERENCESAlde rfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, relatedness and growth: Human needs in organizational

settings. New Y ork: Free Press.Borg, I. (1990). M ultiple facetisatio ns of wo rk values. Applied Psychology:An lnternationalReview, 3 9 , 4 0 1 4 1 2 .Crites, J.O. (1961). Facto r analytical definitions of vocational motivation. Journal ofApplie dPsychology, 43,33&337.Elizur, D. (1984). Facets of work values: A structural analysis of work outcom es. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 69,379-389.

Elizur, D., Borg, I., Hunt , R . , & Beck, I.M. (1991). The structure of work values: Across-cultural comparison. Journal of Organizational Beh avior, 12,21-38.England, G.W. &Ruiz Quintanilla, S.A. (1994). W or k m eanings: Th eir structure and stability.W O R C P ape r 94.11.046/6, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.Ginzberg, E., Ginsbu rg, S.W., Axelrod, S.,& He r m a , J.L. (1951). Occupa tional choice. NewYork: Colum bia University Press.


22/23

70 ROS. SCHWARTZ, SURKISS( iu t tn ian . L.. (1968). A genera l non-met r ic t echnique for finding the smallest coordinateHarding. S . . Phillips. 13.. 6c F o p r t y . M . ( 1986). Conrrasritig vnl i res it i We.stern Europe.Her r be r p . I:. ( 1966). Ct'orA mid the ticifrrru ofrr ic in . Chicago: World.He r r he r g , I - . . Mausner . 13.. k Snydcrman. B.B. (1959).

W i l q .Hofstede. C;. ( 1980). Ci r l t i i re ' s cotisei7iieticc5. Beverly Hills. CA : Sage.Hofs tede . ( i , ( I991 ). Cirltrire3 arid orginii:ariomt Sciftware of the t r 7 i m f . London: McGraw

Hill .J ahoda . M. (1981). Work, employment and unem ployment : Values , theor ies and approaches

i n social rcsearch. Amerrccrti f sxchologis t . 36. 183-191.J a h o d a . M . ( 1982). Etfip/o), t i iet ir atid r i t i e t f ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ t ~ i e ~ i f tsocinl-psychologicul nnnlysis.

( 'ambridge: ( 'amhr idge University Press.Kluckhohn. ('. ( 19.51). Value a nd value or ientat ions in the theory of ac t ion . In T. Parsons &E. Shils (Eds . ) . T o ~ ~ 7 r dgetiernl thcwr:\. ofmiori. Cambr idge . M A : Harvard I in ivers i tyI're 5s.

space for a confiyuration of points. f s ~ c l i o m r r i c n , 3.469-506.London: Macmil lan.

I%r tnorii~afioti0 w o r k . New Yor k :

K o h n , M.. & Schuoler . C' . i 9S3). W o r k or id p m o t i a l i r y . N o r w o o d . NJ: Ablex.Mort inier . -1..& Lorcnce . J . (1979). Wo rk experience an d occup at ional value socialization:AMo t t a r . < ' . J . (1985). The relat ive importance of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards asM O W In te rna tiona l Research Team . (1987). The m c ~ i r i i r i go.f ~vorl i i i ig. ondon: Academic

O'( 'onnor . J .P . . & Kinnane . J.F. (1961) . A factor analysis of work values. Journal ofI'rvor. K. G. L . ( I 980). Som e typeb of stability in th e study of students ' w ork values. Joiirnnl ofPryor . K. G. L . ( 1987). Difference s amon g differences-in search of general work preferenc ei tobey. I ) . ( 1 9 7 1 ) . ' l ask design. work values and worker response: A n experimental test .Kokeach. M. (197.3). Tl7e tiotirre N f ' h i i t m 1 1 i .n / r tes . Ncw York: Frcc Press.Kos. >I.1994). The s t ru m i re orid riieatiing of r,nlires a,id polirical or ien ta t ions . Pape r

presented a t thc 23rd Internat ional Congress of App lied Psychology. 17-22 July. Madr id .Spain.Kus. M.. & Gr ad . H . (1991). El significado del valor t raba jo como re lac ionado a laesper ienc ia ocupac iona l : I :na comparac ion de profesores de E G B y es tudiantes de ( 'AP.Rcvisrri tl r Psicologia Social. 6 . 181-208.KO\. . . ( i d . H.. 8: Martinez. E. (1996). El cambio de va lorcs para la mejora de l ases t ra tegias dc aprendi ra je y rendimien to aead cmico. Madrid: lnform e C'ide. Mec.

R s s . M.. Muno/ -Kepiso . M. . Mcndcz . A.M. .& K o m ero , 3. (1989). Intermeion Didnctica enla ErIiicizcio)i Sccrrt idarin. Madr id : Cent ro I l e Publicac iones, M EC.

longi1udinal stud y. Anier icc i r i Joirrtrnl of Sociology, @ ( I ) . 361-385.determinants of \\ark satisfaction, Sociological Qiiarrerly. 26. 365-385.Prehs.corrtl\elitlg P,?.cllolog?.. 8, 263-267.L ' o i i i t i o r ~ r i l ehiirior. 16. 146-1.57.dimensions. Joi r rml o f Applic7ii f svchologx. 72. 426433.Or,qotii;nrioriril Helinvror o i i d Hirnicrti Pc~rformcincr,13.264-273.

M. i1957). Occiiparioris a n d inlire.s. Glcnco e , 1L: Free Press..H . (1992). IJniversals in the content and s t ruc ture of values: Theoret ical

advanc e\ and empir ical tests in 20 countr ies . In M. anna ( Ed . ), Advtrtices in e.rperinienml.\ocinl psvchol0,q~. o l. 2.5 (pp.l-6S). New York: Academic Press.S c h ~ a r t ~ ..H . (1994). A re there universa l aspec t s in the s t ruc ture an d con tent s of h u m a nvalues? Jo i r r t i n l of Social l s s i r r . 50 . 1945.

Schnar tL, S .H. (1996). Value pr ior i ties and behavior : App lying a thcory of integrated v aluesystems. In


23/23

BASIC VALUES AND WORK VALUES 71Schwartz, S.H. (this issue). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work.

Applied Psychology: A n International Review, 48 .Schwartz, S.H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Tow ard a univ ersal psychological struc ture of humanvalues. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53,[email protected], S.H., & Huismans, S. (1995). Value priorities and religiosity in four Westernreligions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58 , 8&107.Schwartz, S.H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identify ing culture-specifics in the con tent and struct ureof values. Journal of Cross Cultural Psycho logy, 26.92-116.Smith, P.B., & Schwartz, S.H. (1997). Values. In J.W. Berry , M.H. Segall, & C. Kagitcibasi(Eds.) , Ha n d b o o k of cross-culturalpsychology, Vol.3 ,2 n d E d n . (pp.77-118). B oston : Allyn& Bacon.

Super, D.E . (1980). A life-span, life-space ap proach to c areer developm ent. Journal ofOccupational Psychology, 52,129-148.Warr , P. (1987). Jo b characteristics and m ental health. In P. Warr (Ed) , Psychology at work(3rd Edn.) . Harmondsw orth, UK: Penguin.

individual values

Documents