- Email: [email protected]
The effects of understaffing on individual and group performance in professional and trade occupations
Journal of Management 1995, Vol. 21, No. 2, 175-190
The Effects of Understaffing on Individual and Group Performance in Professional and Trade Occupations Daniel C. Ganster University of Arkansas-Fayetteville Deborah J. Dwyer University of Toledo Drawing on prior research on staffing sufficiency theory, we hypothesized that individuals working in understaffed groups would experience higher levels of perceived task scope and utilization of skills, and that these task perceptions would lead to higher levels of organizational commitment and work performance. Data were gatheredfrom 684 workers from 160 blue-collar groups and 55 whitecollar groups. Our path analyses indicated that moderate levels of understaffing were associated with higher levels of task perceptions and commitmentfor both blue-collar and white-collar individuals. But only for the white-collar sample did task perceptions, in turn, lead to higher performance. At the group level of analysis, however, understaffing was associated with lower levels of group performance. We suggest that these findings have important implications for organizations and departments that are considering structural downsizing.
Early work by Barker and his colleagues (Barker & Wright, 1955; Barker, 1960; Barker & Gump, 1964; Barker, 1968) on Behavior Setting Theory has prompted a number of studies in the past few years on the effects of understaffing on employees’ attitudes and behavior (e.g., Greenberg, 1979; Greenberg, Wang & Dossett, 1982; Oxley & Barrera, 1984). Barker’s original treatise is grounded in an ecological psychology perspective that argues for the behavioral influence of extra-individual phenomena. In essence, ecological psychology dictates that in order to study environment-behavior relationships, the environment (i.e., a function of objective reality) and the behavior (i.e., a function of perceptions flowing from one’s psychological life space) must be described and measured independently. The major environmental unit of interest in this theory is what Barker refers to as the “behavior setting” (Barker, 1968; Wicker, 1973). Direct all correspondence OH 43606. Copyright
to: Deborah
J. Dwyer, University
@ 1995 by JAI Press Inc. 0149-2063 175
of Toledo, Department
of Management,
Toledo,
176
DWYER
AND GANSTER
Behavior settings are public places and activities characterized by (1) regular and constant patterns of member behavior; that are (2) bounded by time and place, making the setting unique from other settings; in which (3) there is coordination between member behavior and the physical surroundings. These settings are considered to be homeostatic, and members wish to keep them operational because they satisfy a number of personal and task goals. The behavior or actions that members engage in to keep the settings consistent are infhtenced by a number of factors. One factor that has received particular attention has been considered under the general rubric of “undermanning” (Barker, 1960), which we will refer to here as “understaffing.” According to understaffing theory, the extent to which a behavior setting has too few, too many, or an adequate number of members (in relation to the number and types of tasks to be done) influences members’ participation in, and their general level of effort directed toward, task accomplishment. In an understaffed condition, where there is insufficient or barely sufficient personnel to carry out the essential tasks, a threat to the behavior setting exists. That is, if the members of a setting are to continue to attain their desired goals, the setting must continue to function. These threats result in felt pressure on the members to maintain the setting. The individual perception of satisfaction that results from the obligation a member feels to help keep the setting operational is what Oxley and Barrera (1984) define as “claim,” and it is assumed to be greater under conditions of understaffing than when the setting is adequately staffed or overstaffed. This is due to the feelings of increased involvement and responsibility on the part of members. Barker and Gump (1964) note that in settings with fewer members than are needed, each individual is called upon to engage in a wider variety of activities, to expend greater effort on the goals and maintenance of the setting, and to take on added responsibility. However, by reason of the demands of greater versatility, the maximal level of a person’s performance on any one task may be reduced. As Barker (1960) points out, judgments concerning an individual’s performance in an understaffed setting are more a function of whether the job got done (i.e., task accomplishment), and less a function of fine discriminations in process behaviors. Thus, while an understaffed setting may promote increased motivation in workers, it is not hypothesized to have significant, direct effects on individual performance behavior. Research in staffing sufficiency has suggested that there generally exists a curvilinear relationship between degree of staffing and the extent of felt motivation to perform (see Bechtel, 1974 for a review). In fact, Perkins (1982) has noted that increased behavioral and psychological claim can result in a variety of positive organizational and personal outcomes, such as (1) greater role involvement; (2) increased individual and group responsibility; (3) less reliance on individual personality characteristics (and more emphasis on taskrelated functions) in evaluating within-group performance; and (4) a greater feeling of personal versatility for individual members. Several studies have investigated the effects of staffing levels on task design variables, such as variety, identity, autonomy and feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1975). The underlying JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
117
proposition is that as work units become understaffed, task identity and skill utilization increase. Additionally, perceptions of task significance are also expected to increase because of the increased importance of expanded individual roles (Greenberg, 1979). Vecchio and Sussman (1981) obtained data that provided support for a curvilinear relationship between staffing levels and job enrichment constructs. Their study also found that a moderate level of understaffing was optimally related to one’s satisfaction with work. Greenberg et al. (1982) found that only skill variety had an interaction effect with group size and task. They also found only main effects for task identity and feedback. These authors concluded that understaffed groups possess greater amounts of the requisite task attributes than do adequately-staffed or overstaffed groups, and their data show that staffing is inversely related to the motivating potential of the work group. The generalizability of these results is limited, however, because (1) the work group size measure consisted of an arbitrary assignment of either two or four workers (i.e., small vs. large size, respectively); and (2) the core job characteristics were rated by outside raters (undergraduate subjects) who viewed videotaped segments of assembly line work. Because the perceptions of the workers themselves were not directly assessed, whether or not the size of the work group affected group members’ motivation could not be ascertained precisely. Despite the evidence for the effects of staffing level on motivation, there remain few studies of its effects on actual performance (e.g., Petty & Wicker, 1974; Wicker, Kirmeyer, Hanson & Alexander, 1976; Perkins, 1982). If a higher claim on the setting produces a higher motivation to perform in that setting, then overall job performance should also be expected to improve. Perkins (1982), for example, concluded that occupants of understaffed settings perform more important and varied tasks and exert more effort in doing so than occupants of overstaffed settings. For this reason we investigate the relationships among staffing sufficiency and worker motivation, as well as individual and work group performance in ongoing work groups. Our central hypothesis is that understaffing can have a positive impact on worker performance, and that this effect is mediated by a motivational process involving increased task scope, skill utilization, and commitment. Specifically, we propose that staffing levels will be negatively related to the motivating potential of the job and the number of skills used by individuals: Hl: Understaffing should have direct effects on employee motivation, such that workers in moderately understaffed groups should perceive that their jobs entail greater levels of task characteristics (e.g., autonomy, feedback, task significance, etc.) and that they utilize more skills in doing their jobs.
Skill utilization refers to the perceptions of job incumbents that their work requires them or allows them to employ their valued skills, thus providing a major source of challenge in the job (Caplan, Cobb, French, Harrison & Pinneau, 1975). As such, because an increase in task characteristics is generally JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
I78
DWYER AND GANSTER
accompanied by more and varied utilization of skills, we hypothesize a direct, positive relationship between the two perceptual variables which, in turn, should lead to greater felt “claim” (i.e., commitment of group members to the organization): H2:
Perceivedjob scope will be positively related to skill utilization.
H3: Skill utilization and job scope will be positively related to organizational commitment.
Finally, it is through these motivational processes that underst~~ng exert significant effects on performance levels:
should
EM ~~~rsta~~~~ will indirectly effect work pe~orma~~e t~ro~~~ skill utilization, job scope and commitment.
Examining the effects that staffing levels may have on a variety of organizational outcomes assumes increasing importance to work organizations today, especially in light of the suggestions of popular management writers that “well-managed” organizations have leaner organizational structures (Peters & Waterm~, 1982). Additionally, do~sizing continues to be a prominent strategy for many firms, especially those in which mergers, acquisitions, and take-overs have occurred. The effects of such strategies may have important implications for the motivation and performance of those employees who remain with the firm (Brockner, 1988). The complaint by workers that they are “overworked and underpaid” may reflect an underlying belief that understaffed departments typically result in work overload, and that the employees who staff those departments should feel less motivated and expend less effort toward task and goal accomplishment. However, the understaffing hypothesis would argue that, in fact, employees should be more motivated, use more and varied skills, and perform better in moderately understaffed situations. Thus, there are opposing theoretical arguments regarding the consequences of underst~~ng, and there is vi~uaIly no empiricai basis for adopting one over another. Method
The sample consisted of individuals involved in ongoing work groups and employed in either blue-collar trade occupations or white-collar and professional occupations. Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) classifications were used to distinguish between gross categories of occupations. Those considered to be employed in “blue-collar” occupations worked as electricians, electronics inspectors, welders, telephone cable workers, and construction workers. The “white-collar” occupations category contained engineers, clerical workers, accountants, auditors, and secretaries. Fifty-five JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2.1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
179
blue-collar and 160 white-collar work groups constituted the subsamples used in the analyses. Thus, there was a total sample of 215 groups containing a total of 684 individuals. We decided to analyze these subsamples separately in case there were systematic differences in the findings arising out of the fundamental differences in the nature of the work in these groups. The actual sizes of the groups ranged from 5 to 16. Data were used only from those groups from whom at least three members provided complete data. Questionn~re data were collected from individu~s in group sessions at the workpIace during regular working hours. Interviews with supervisors were also conducted during working hours, as were the interviews with higher managers. S~~~~ S~~icie~ey. The independent variable of staffing suf~ciency was measured using a scale developed for this study. The immediate supervisors of each group responded to a five-item structured interview in which they were asked to report: (I) what they felt to be the ideal number of workers for the tasks which needed to be done by the group; (2) the minimum number of workers needed; (3) the maximum number of workers which could be utilized; (4) the actual number of workers now in the work groups; and (5) to rate the present level of staffing in their group on a five-interval, Likert-type continuum anchored by the poles “Very Underst~fed” and “Very Overstaffed.” For the purposes of this analysis, this latter item was used as the primary measure of staffing sufficiency. The other four items together accounted for 90% of the variance in this last measure for those cases that contained data on all variables. Because there were more cases of incomplete data on some of the other items, use of the last item maximized the sample of work groups for the analysis. Task Scope. The Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) was used to measure the individual workers’ perceptions of their tasks. Five task characteristics were used in the analyses: Autonomy, Feedback, Task Significance, Task Identity, and Skill Variety. The data were aggregated in two ways. First, all the items were summed to create an overall index of task scope. The additive scores were used in light of previous criticism surrounding the use of the Motivating Potential Score formulation which uses a multiplicative term for Autonomy and Feedback. This overall index was used as the individuallevel task scope score. Second, the task scope scores for individuals were then averaged within each group to create one score for the entire work group. Seize U~iliz~~i~~. This scale assesses the extent to which the worker feels that the job requires him or her to use valued skills and knowledge acquired in school or training. The scale was used in the Caplan, Cobb, Franch, Harrison & Pinneau (1975) survey of 23 occupations, and consists of three Likert-scaled items. Perfomance. The performance constructs of interest in this study are both the performance of the overall work group and the performance of indi~du~ members. Rather than aggregate the performance ratings of work group members, managers at the next level higher than the work group’s supervisor were interviewed regarding the group’s performance. These managers were asked JOURNAL OF MANAGEME~,
VOL. 21, NO. 2,19X
DWYER AND GANSTER
180
to evaluate the groups under them on the criteria relevant to the performance of those particular groups. Because the work groups differed greatly on these criteria, the managers were asked to summarize their performance rating on a single 5-point scale that provided a common metric across the differing work groups. Individual-level performance was assessed by the work group supervisor in the same way. Thus, distinct methods were used to measure each level of performance. Supervisors and managers were assured that the performance ratings were being collected only for research purposes and that they would not be revealed to anyone in the organization. We hoped that the confidentiality of these ratings would reduce tendencies for halo and leniency bias. Organizational Commitment. Commitment was measured with 9 items taken from the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1978). Of the original 15 items in the OCQ, we used only those items that referred to affective commitment, eliminating those items that referred to turnover intentions. We made this decision on the basis of work by Meyer, Paunonen, Gellatly, Goffin and Jackson (1989) that indicates that affective commitment, reflecting the individual’s identification with and desire to further the goals of the organization, is positively related to performance. Conversely, continuance commitment, reflecting the individual’s perceived costs associated with leaving the organization, is negatively associated with performance. Responses to these nine affective commitment items were then averaged to yield an individual commitment score, and the mean response for each of the groups was used as the group measure of commitment. Analyses Individual-level The first set of analyses was completed at the individual level. Here we used the responses of individuals to perceptual and motivational constructs. Staffing sufficiency, of course, remained a group-level measure. The individual performance variable was taken from the worker’s direct supervisor, as mentioned previously, The hypotheses were tested by estimating a recursive path model using ordinary least squares regression analyses. The model was tested separately for the blue-collar and white-collar samples in the event that the occupational differences across these samples might have an impact on our results. Before estimating the full structural model in each sample, tests for curvilinear effects of staffing sufficiency on the perceptual and motivational variables were computed by performing hierarchical regressions in which a quadratic term for staffing was entered after the linear term. None of these tests yielded a significant quadratic effect, so the term was dropped from subsequent analyses that focused solely on linear effects. Group-level The second set of analyses was completed at the group level. As noted above, responses of individuals to perceptual (task scope and skill utilization) and JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
181
STAFFING SUFFICIENCY
motivational (organizational com~tment) constructs were averaged within each group to provide aggregated group-level variables. The exogenous variable of staffing sufficiency was itself a group-level variable obtained from the supervisor of each group. Finally, the performance outcome variable is also a true grouplevel construct obtained from managers at a higher level of the organization, and is not a function of the aggregated individual performance appraisals. The group-level model was tested in the same way as the individual model. It, too, was tested separately for the blue-collar and white-collar samples for any occupational differences across the samples. Tests for curvilinear effects of staffing sufficiency on the perceptual and motivational variables were again computed by performing hierarchic~ regressions in which a quadratic term for staffing was entered after the linear term. No quadratic effects were found. Consequently, the quadratic terms were dropped from subsequent analyses. Results Individual-Level Table 1 lists the correlations and descriptive statistics for the blue-collar individuals, while Table 2 contains them for the white-collar sample. An examination of the two subsamples reveals that staffing sufficiency is significantly and negatively related to perceived task scope in both subsamples. Table 1.
Descriptive
Statistics Mean
1.
2. 3. 4. 5.
Staffing Task Scope Skill Utilization
Commitment Performance
Notes:
2.64
.76
4.69
.81
3.20 4.16 5.37
1.03 1.25 .99
1
n/a
2
-.13* .93
3
.02 .50* .89
Iudividu~s 4
-.14* .48* .22* .87
5
-.07 .03 .03 .06 n/a
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of White-Collar Individuals N=172 Mean
1. Staffing 2. Task Scope Skill Utilization Commitment Performance
Notes:
S.D.
of Blue-Collar
*p<.os ReIiabilities are on diagonal
Table 2.
3. 4. 5.
and Correlations N=512
S.D.
2.33
.72
5.03 3.46 4.92 5.39
.77 1.01 1.09 1.06
I
n/a
2
3
4
5
-.18*
-.I2
-.02
~08
.92
.56* .87
.36* .33* .88
.24* .20* .14 n/a
*p<.os Reliabiiities are on diagonal JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 21, NO. 2,1995
182
DWYER AND GANSTER
Task Scope
-.02
.52*’ -.14*
Skill Utilization
/I\\ Staffing
’
*08
)
.03 ~ Performance
,th
CoMMitMent
-.07 l
p < .05
l
* p < .Ol
Rre
Adimed
Task Scope
.02
.Ol
Skill
.26
.26
commitment
.24
.23
Performance
.Ol
.oo
Util
Figure 1.
Blue-Collar
R Sauare
Path Model (Individuals)
For the blue-collar workers staffing is negatively correlated with commitment but this effect is not evident in the white-collar sample. For the blue-collars, none of the model variables correlate significantly with performance. However, for the white-collars, both task scope and skill utilization correlate positively with performance. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
Task Scope
\
I\ \
f
183
SUFFICIENCY
.18’
Staffing Performance Sufficien
commitment
-.04
l
p c .05
l
* p < .Ol e
dRSauilre
Task Scope
-03
.03
Skill
-31
.3f
Commitment
.16
.14
Performance
.07
.05
Util
Figure 2.
White-Collar
Path Model (Individuals)
The path coefficients and explained variance at the individual level of analysis for each sample are displayed in Figures 1 and 2. For the blue collar sample (Figure l), staffing shows a negative direct effect on perceived task scope (Hl) which, in turn, is associated with higher reported levels of skill utilization (H2) and commitment (H3). However, staffing level has no significant direct JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2,195
184
DWYER AND GANSTER
or indirect effect on individual performance (H4). Thus, understaffing is associated with an apparent increase in task perceptions and commitment, but this effect does not translate into higher levels of actual performance for the blue-collar sample. For the white-collar sample (Figure 2) staffing also has no direct effect on individual performance. However, staffing is inversely associated with task scope (Hl) and, in this sample, task scope perceptions are associated with higher levels of job performance. The indirect effect of staffing on performance through task scope is negative. Thus, understaffing is associated with higher performance because of its effect on task scope (H4). Addition~ly, both H2 and H3 were supported, since task scope and skill utilization were positively associated, and both led to more commitment. As with the blue collar sample, skill utilization and commitment do not lead to higher levels of performance. Group-Level
The descriptive statistics and the correlations among study variables are listed in Table 3 for the blue-collar sample and in Table 4 for the white-collar sample. Examining just these zero-order coefficients indicates that group performance is significantly associated with the staffing sufficiency variable only for blue-collar workers. No other variable correlates with group performance for either sample. In both samples, however, staffing sufficiency is negatively correlated with the perceptual and motivational variables, indicating that understaf~ng is associated with more task scope, skill utiIization (blue~ollar), and commitment, as hypothesized. Also as expected, the relationships among Table 3.
Descriptive
Statistics Mean
1. Staffing 2. Task Scope 3. Skill Utilization 4. Commitment 5. Performance Note:
2.64 4.63 3.32 4.17 5.45
and Correlations N=160
of Blue-Collar
S.D.
2
.76 .85 .91 1.12 .79
1
-
-.39* -
3 -.48* .79* -
Groups 4
-.32* .71* .48*
5
.29* .04 -.Ol -.OI -
*p<.os
Table 4.
Descriptive
Statistics
and Correlations
of White-Collar
Groups
N=55
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Staffing Task Scope Skill Utilization Commitment Performance
Note:
Mean
S. D.
1
2.33 4.90 3.33 4.67 5.50
.72 .64 .74 .94 .75
-
*p<.o5
JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
2
-.29*
3
-.16 .63* -
4
-.25* .57* .33*
5
.I6 .03 .oo .lO
STAFFING
SU~~~CIENC~
185
Task
Performance Staffing
4
* p < .05
** p < .Ol
mare
Adiysted R Sauarg
Task Scope
.08
.08
Skill
.40
.39
Commitment
.34
.33
Performance
.05
.02
Util
Figure 3.
Blue-Collar Path Model (Groups)
the perceptual and motivational variables are positive and significant. This pattern of zero-order relationships holds across both subsamples, with relationships being somewhat stronger in the blue-collar sample. The path analyses (Figures 3 and 4) provide further insight into the relationships suggested by the correlation matrices. In the case of both JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
DWY ER AND GANSTER
Task
Performance
Commitment
* p < ,a5
l
* p < .Ol
R Sauare
Adiusted R Square
Task Scope
.I5
.14
Skill
.62
.61
Commitment
-52
.49
Performance
-11
.04
Util
Figure 4.
White-Collar Path Model (Groups)
subsamples, staffing sufficiency has a direct and positive impact on group performance. However, there is no evidence of an indirect effect of staffing on performance operating through the perceptual and motivational constructs (H4). As hypothesized, some level of underst~~ng appears to produce higher levels of perceived task scope, but not skill utilization (HI), and task scope seems JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 199.5
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
187
to be strongly related to both skill utilization (H2) and organizational commitment (H3). Staffing sufficiency’s effect on commitment was indirect through perceptions of task scope, as was its effect on skill utilization. Somewhat unexpectedly, skill utilization had no direct effect on organizational commitment. Thus, for groups there appears to be some positive motivational effect of understaffing because of its influence on task scope perceptions. But this motivational effect does not seem to translate into higher levels of group performance. In fact, at the group level of analysis, understaffing is associated with lower levels of group performance. Discussion
In this study we examined the effects of staffing sufficiency on job performance at both the group and individual levels of analysis. Our hypotheses were derived from staffing sufficiency theory and predicted that members of understaffed work groups would see their jobs as more complex and as requiring greater use of their skills and abilities. These perceptions, in turn, were hypothesized to have a positive motivational effect (affective organizational commitment) that would result in higher levels of job performance. At the group level of analysis, however, staffing had a positive direct effect on group performance. Although staffing sufficiency was negatively associated with the perceptual and motivational variables as hypothesized, these variables had no significant effect on group performance. This pattern of relationships held equally for samples of white-collar and blue-collar workers, though the results were somewhat more robust in the blue-collar sample. Thus, at the group level of analysis, groups that are adequately or over-staffed appear to be more productive than understaffed groups. At the individual level of analysis the same relationships between staffing sufficiency and the perceptual and motivational variables were found. However, as the theory predicts, staffing had no direct effect on ratings of individual performance. Moreover, in the white-collar sample staffing sufficiency showed a significant and negative indirect effect on performance. This effect was mediated through the task perceptions with understaffing leading to higher perceived task scope which, in turn, led to higher levels of individual performance. Thus, at least with the white-collar sample, there is some support for the staffing sufficiency theory hypotheses at the individual level of analysis. The issue still remains of reconciling the findings of the group and individual levels of analysis. A fruitful direction for future research would be to explore the role that performance interdependencies play in the impact of staffing sufficiency. The present data clearly suggest some positive motivational effects of understaffing. And, at least with the white-collar workers, understaffing has a positive effect on individual performance. Where the group’s success was determined by the joint cooperation of members rather than simply the amount of manpower available, we might expect understaffed groups to outperform their overstaffed counterparts just as individuals in understaffed groups appear to outperform those in overstaffed settings. JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
188
DWYER AND GANSTER
Although Vecchio and Sussman (1981) found evidence for a curvilinear effect of staffing level on task perceptions, we found no such effects in the present study. Theoretically and intuitively, however, we would expect there to be a curvilinear relationship if the full range of staffing levels was represented in a sample under study. We had virtually no case in which supervisors rated their groups as more than moderately understaffed. We would expect that the effect of extreme understaffing would be perceived work overload and that the stressful consequences of this condition would overwhelm the positive motivational effects of increased task scope. Thus, our conclusions regarding the positive effects of understaffing clearly pertain to moderate levels of understaffing. In staffing sufficiency theory terms, the greater claim of members in understaffed settings would lead to greater motivation and satisfaction only if there were an adequate number of people to maintain the viability and integrity of the setting. Methodologically, the present study overcomes some of the limitations of prior research on staffing theory in the organizational literature. For one, we believe that we have employed the appropriate levels of analysis in the present case. Obtaining data on staffing sufficiency from the leader of the group obviated the need to aggregate the perceptions of individual group members. Staffing sufficiency was thus a true group-level variable operationally as well as conceptually. The same can be said for the group performance variable because these evaluations were obtained from managers higher in the hierarchy. Aggregating the performance appraisals of individual members could not have provided a valid examination of the effects of staffing on group performance. Finally, data were obtained from individuals at three different levels of the organization to represent the constructs of staffing sufficiency (group leader), perceived task scope and commitment (group members), individual performance (group leader), and group performance (managers above the group leader). Consequently, observed relationships among these variables cannot be attributed to artifacts such as common method variance and consistency effects that often arise from the use of same-source data. One exception was that employees’ immediate supervisors rated both their individual performances and reported the staffing sufficiency rating for their work group. It is possible that an immediate supervisor might take into account the staffing levels within which individuals work and rate them accordingly. Similarly, higher-level managers might have been influenced in their ratings of group performance by their knowledge of the staffing sufficiency of the groups. We would expect this effect to occur especially when that manager, through his or her resource allocation decisions, determined the staffing levels of the groups. Because the group-level “staffing-performance” direct effects were significantly different from the individual-level direct effects, perhaps different frames of reference used by the raters could be one source of explanatory variance. Finally, organizational commitment may not be the most direct indicator of behavior setting claim. We might have expected even stronger results had we had a measure such as, “commitment to the work group.” JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
189
In summary, the present study extended the findings of laboratory studies that have examined the effects of staffing sufficiency on group and individual performance. The findings suggest that moderate levels of understaffing can have both positive and negative effects. On the one hand, individuals in moderately understaffed groups are likely to experience higher levels of task scope which could result in higher levels of individual motivation and performance. This appears to be the case for white-collar and professional workers. On the other hand, understaffing may lead to lower levels of aggregate group output. These findings have important implications for both blue-collar and whitecollar workers in underst~fed departments. For white-collar occupations, it is likely that the overall accomplishment of tasks and goals of the group may suffer due to more work being delegated to fewer members. On the other hand, in downsized departments, such employees may be called upon to use more and varied skills, and this could translate into greater individual motivation. Downsizing may have a more deleterious effect on the motivation and productivity of blue-collar workers, however. This may be due, in part, to the nature of semi-skilled and unskilled tasks, since the overall performance of bluecollar work groups is more a function of the sum of the individual efforts of the group members, rather than of the poorest member’s performance, as stated for the white-collar groups. Thus, a general decrease in sheer numbers would result in more and varied task requirements, but less actual commitment to or performance within their downsized groups. References Barker,
R.G. (1960). Ecology and motivation. In M. Jones (Ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ~. (1968). Ecologicalpsychology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Barker, R.G. & Gump, P.V. (1964). Bigschool, smallschool: High schoolsize andstudent behavior. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Barker, R.G. & Wright, H.F. (1955). Midwest and irs children: The psychological ecology of an American town. New York: Row, Peterson. Bechtel, R.B. (1974). The undermanned environment: A universal theory? In D.H. Carson (Ed.), Man environment interactions, Part VIII. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchison and Ross. Brockner, J. (1988). The effects of work layoffs on survivors: Research, theory and practice. Pp. 213-255 in B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizu~ionu~ behavior, VoI IO. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Caplan, R., Cobb, S., French, J., Harrison, R.V. & Pinneau, S. (1975). Job demands and worker health. Washington, DC: HEW publication No. NIOSH 75-160. Greenberg, C. (1979). Toward an integration of ecological psychology and industrial psychology: Undermanning theory, organization size, and job enrichment. Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 314~ 228-242. Greenberg, CL, Wang, Y. & Dossett, D.L. (1982). Effects of work group size and task size on observers’ job characteristics ratings. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3: 53-66. Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60: I59- 170. Meyer, J.P, Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goflin, R.D. &Jackson, D.N. (1989). Organizational commitment and job performance: It’s the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal ofApp/ied Psychology, 74: 152-156. Mowday, R., Steers, R. & Porter, L. (1978). 7&e me~~emen~ of organizational commi~menz: A progress report. Technical report No. 15, Department of Management, University of Oregon, Eugene.
JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
19Q
DWYER AND GANSTER
The Effects of Understaffing on Individual and Group Performance in Professional and Trade Occupations Daniel C. Ganster University of Arkansas-Fayetteville Deborah J. Dwyer University of Toledo Drawing on prior research on staffing sufficiency theory, we hypothesized that individuals working in understaffed groups would experience higher levels of perceived task scope and utilization of skills, and that these task perceptions would lead to higher levels of organizational commitment and work performance. Data were gatheredfrom 684 workers from 160 blue-collar groups and 55 whitecollar groups. Our path analyses indicated that moderate levels of understaffing were associated with higher levels of task perceptions and commitmentfor both blue-collar and white-collar individuals. But only for the white-collar sample did task perceptions, in turn, lead to higher performance. At the group level of analysis, however, understaffing was associated with lower levels of group performance. We suggest that these findings have important implications for organizations and departments that are considering structural downsizing.
Early work by Barker and his colleagues (Barker & Wright, 1955; Barker, 1960; Barker & Gump, 1964; Barker, 1968) on Behavior Setting Theory has prompted a number of studies in the past few years on the effects of understaffing on employees’ attitudes and behavior (e.g., Greenberg, 1979; Greenberg, Wang & Dossett, 1982; Oxley & Barrera, 1984). Barker’s original treatise is grounded in an ecological psychology perspective that argues for the behavioral influence of extra-individual phenomena. In essence, ecological psychology dictates that in order to study environment-behavior relationships, the environment (i.e., a function of objective reality) and the behavior (i.e., a function of perceptions flowing from one’s psychological life space) must be described and measured independently. The major environmental unit of interest in this theory is what Barker refers to as the “behavior setting” (Barker, 1968; Wicker, 1973). Direct all correspondence OH 43606. Copyright
to: Deborah
J. Dwyer, University
@ 1995 by JAI Press Inc. 0149-2063 175
of Toledo, Department
of Management,
Toledo,
176
DWYER
AND GANSTER
Behavior settings are public places and activities characterized by (1) regular and constant patterns of member behavior; that are (2) bounded by time and place, making the setting unique from other settings; in which (3) there is coordination between member behavior and the physical surroundings. These settings are considered to be homeostatic, and members wish to keep them operational because they satisfy a number of personal and task goals. The behavior or actions that members engage in to keep the settings consistent are infhtenced by a number of factors. One factor that has received particular attention has been considered under the general rubric of “undermanning” (Barker, 1960), which we will refer to here as “understaffing.” According to understaffing theory, the extent to which a behavior setting has too few, too many, or an adequate number of members (in relation to the number and types of tasks to be done) influences members’ participation in, and their general level of effort directed toward, task accomplishment. In an understaffed condition, where there is insufficient or barely sufficient personnel to carry out the essential tasks, a threat to the behavior setting exists. That is, if the members of a setting are to continue to attain their desired goals, the setting must continue to function. These threats result in felt pressure on the members to maintain the setting. The individual perception of satisfaction that results from the obligation a member feels to help keep the setting operational is what Oxley and Barrera (1984) define as “claim,” and it is assumed to be greater under conditions of understaffing than when the setting is adequately staffed or overstaffed. This is due to the feelings of increased involvement and responsibility on the part of members. Barker and Gump (1964) note that in settings with fewer members than are needed, each individual is called upon to engage in a wider variety of activities, to expend greater effort on the goals and maintenance of the setting, and to take on added responsibility. However, by reason of the demands of greater versatility, the maximal level of a person’s performance on any one task may be reduced. As Barker (1960) points out, judgments concerning an individual’s performance in an understaffed setting are more a function of whether the job got done (i.e., task accomplishment), and less a function of fine discriminations in process behaviors. Thus, while an understaffed setting may promote increased motivation in workers, it is not hypothesized to have significant, direct effects on individual performance behavior. Research in staffing sufficiency has suggested that there generally exists a curvilinear relationship between degree of staffing and the extent of felt motivation to perform (see Bechtel, 1974 for a review). In fact, Perkins (1982) has noted that increased behavioral and psychological claim can result in a variety of positive organizational and personal outcomes, such as (1) greater role involvement; (2) increased individual and group responsibility; (3) less reliance on individual personality characteristics (and more emphasis on taskrelated functions) in evaluating within-group performance; and (4) a greater feeling of personal versatility for individual members. Several studies have investigated the effects of staffing levels on task design variables, such as variety, identity, autonomy and feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1975). The underlying JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
117
proposition is that as work units become understaffed, task identity and skill utilization increase. Additionally, perceptions of task significance are also expected to increase because of the increased importance of expanded individual roles (Greenberg, 1979). Vecchio and Sussman (1981) obtained data that provided support for a curvilinear relationship between staffing levels and job enrichment constructs. Their study also found that a moderate level of understaffing was optimally related to one’s satisfaction with work. Greenberg et al. (1982) found that only skill variety had an interaction effect with group size and task. They also found only main effects for task identity and feedback. These authors concluded that understaffed groups possess greater amounts of the requisite task attributes than do adequately-staffed or overstaffed groups, and their data show that staffing is inversely related to the motivating potential of the work group. The generalizability of these results is limited, however, because (1) the work group size measure consisted of an arbitrary assignment of either two or four workers (i.e., small vs. large size, respectively); and (2) the core job characteristics were rated by outside raters (undergraduate subjects) who viewed videotaped segments of assembly line work. Because the perceptions of the workers themselves were not directly assessed, whether or not the size of the work group affected group members’ motivation could not be ascertained precisely. Despite the evidence for the effects of staffing level on motivation, there remain few studies of its effects on actual performance (e.g., Petty & Wicker, 1974; Wicker, Kirmeyer, Hanson & Alexander, 1976; Perkins, 1982). If a higher claim on the setting produces a higher motivation to perform in that setting, then overall job performance should also be expected to improve. Perkins (1982), for example, concluded that occupants of understaffed settings perform more important and varied tasks and exert more effort in doing so than occupants of overstaffed settings. For this reason we investigate the relationships among staffing sufficiency and worker motivation, as well as individual and work group performance in ongoing work groups. Our central hypothesis is that understaffing can have a positive impact on worker performance, and that this effect is mediated by a motivational process involving increased task scope, skill utilization, and commitment. Specifically, we propose that staffing levels will be negatively related to the motivating potential of the job and the number of skills used by individuals: Hl: Understaffing should have direct effects on employee motivation, such that workers in moderately understaffed groups should perceive that their jobs entail greater levels of task characteristics (e.g., autonomy, feedback, task significance, etc.) and that they utilize more skills in doing their jobs.
Skill utilization refers to the perceptions of job incumbents that their work requires them or allows them to employ their valued skills, thus providing a major source of challenge in the job (Caplan, Cobb, French, Harrison & Pinneau, 1975). As such, because an increase in task characteristics is generally JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
I78
DWYER AND GANSTER
accompanied by more and varied utilization of skills, we hypothesize a direct, positive relationship between the two perceptual variables which, in turn, should lead to greater felt “claim” (i.e., commitment of group members to the organization): H2:
Perceivedjob scope will be positively related to skill utilization.
H3: Skill utilization and job scope will be positively related to organizational commitment.
Finally, it is through these motivational processes that underst~~ng exert significant effects on performance levels:
should
EM ~~~rsta~~~~ will indirectly effect work pe~orma~~e t~ro~~~ skill utilization, job scope and commitment.
Examining the effects that staffing levels may have on a variety of organizational outcomes assumes increasing importance to work organizations today, especially in light of the suggestions of popular management writers that “well-managed” organizations have leaner organizational structures (Peters & Waterm~, 1982). Additionally, do~sizing continues to be a prominent strategy for many firms, especially those in which mergers, acquisitions, and take-overs have occurred. The effects of such strategies may have important implications for the motivation and performance of those employees who remain with the firm (Brockner, 1988). The complaint by workers that they are “overworked and underpaid” may reflect an underlying belief that understaffed departments typically result in work overload, and that the employees who staff those departments should feel less motivated and expend less effort toward task and goal accomplishment. However, the understaffing hypothesis would argue that, in fact, employees should be more motivated, use more and varied skills, and perform better in moderately understaffed situations. Thus, there are opposing theoretical arguments regarding the consequences of underst~~ng, and there is vi~uaIly no empiricai basis for adopting one over another. Method
The sample consisted of individuals involved in ongoing work groups and employed in either blue-collar trade occupations or white-collar and professional occupations. Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) classifications were used to distinguish between gross categories of occupations. Those considered to be employed in “blue-collar” occupations worked as electricians, electronics inspectors, welders, telephone cable workers, and construction workers. The “white-collar” occupations category contained engineers, clerical workers, accountants, auditors, and secretaries. Fifty-five JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2.1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
179
blue-collar and 160 white-collar work groups constituted the subsamples used in the analyses. Thus, there was a total sample of 215 groups containing a total of 684 individuals. We decided to analyze these subsamples separately in case there were systematic differences in the findings arising out of the fundamental differences in the nature of the work in these groups. The actual sizes of the groups ranged from 5 to 16. Data were used only from those groups from whom at least three members provided complete data. Questionn~re data were collected from individu~s in group sessions at the workpIace during regular working hours. Interviews with supervisors were also conducted during working hours, as were the interviews with higher managers. S~~~~ S~~icie~ey. The independent variable of staffing suf~ciency was measured using a scale developed for this study. The immediate supervisors of each group responded to a five-item structured interview in which they were asked to report: (I) what they felt to be the ideal number of workers for the tasks which needed to be done by the group; (2) the minimum number of workers needed; (3) the maximum number of workers which could be utilized; (4) the actual number of workers now in the work groups; and (5) to rate the present level of staffing in their group on a five-interval, Likert-type continuum anchored by the poles “Very Underst~fed” and “Very Overstaffed.” For the purposes of this analysis, this latter item was used as the primary measure of staffing sufficiency. The other four items together accounted for 90% of the variance in this last measure for those cases that contained data on all variables. Because there were more cases of incomplete data on some of the other items, use of the last item maximized the sample of work groups for the analysis. Task Scope. The Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) was used to measure the individual workers’ perceptions of their tasks. Five task characteristics were used in the analyses: Autonomy, Feedback, Task Significance, Task Identity, and Skill Variety. The data were aggregated in two ways. First, all the items were summed to create an overall index of task scope. The additive scores were used in light of previous criticism surrounding the use of the Motivating Potential Score formulation which uses a multiplicative term for Autonomy and Feedback. This overall index was used as the individuallevel task scope score. Second, the task scope scores for individuals were then averaged within each group to create one score for the entire work group. Seize U~iliz~~i~~. This scale assesses the extent to which the worker feels that the job requires him or her to use valued skills and knowledge acquired in school or training. The scale was used in the Caplan, Cobb, Franch, Harrison & Pinneau (1975) survey of 23 occupations, and consists of three Likert-scaled items. Perfomance. The performance constructs of interest in this study are both the performance of the overall work group and the performance of indi~du~ members. Rather than aggregate the performance ratings of work group members, managers at the next level higher than the work group’s supervisor were interviewed regarding the group’s performance. These managers were asked JOURNAL OF MANAGEME~,
VOL. 21, NO. 2,19X
DWYER AND GANSTER
180
to evaluate the groups under them on the criteria relevant to the performance of those particular groups. Because the work groups differed greatly on these criteria, the managers were asked to summarize their performance rating on a single 5-point scale that provided a common metric across the differing work groups. Individual-level performance was assessed by the work group supervisor in the same way. Thus, distinct methods were used to measure each level of performance. Supervisors and managers were assured that the performance ratings were being collected only for research purposes and that they would not be revealed to anyone in the organization. We hoped that the confidentiality of these ratings would reduce tendencies for halo and leniency bias. Organizational Commitment. Commitment was measured with 9 items taken from the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1978). Of the original 15 items in the OCQ, we used only those items that referred to affective commitment, eliminating those items that referred to turnover intentions. We made this decision on the basis of work by Meyer, Paunonen, Gellatly, Goffin and Jackson (1989) that indicates that affective commitment, reflecting the individual’s identification with and desire to further the goals of the organization, is positively related to performance. Conversely, continuance commitment, reflecting the individual’s perceived costs associated with leaving the organization, is negatively associated with performance. Responses to these nine affective commitment items were then averaged to yield an individual commitment score, and the mean response for each of the groups was used as the group measure of commitment. Analyses Individual-level The first set of analyses was completed at the individual level. Here we used the responses of individuals to perceptual and motivational constructs. Staffing sufficiency, of course, remained a group-level measure. The individual performance variable was taken from the worker’s direct supervisor, as mentioned previously, The hypotheses were tested by estimating a recursive path model using ordinary least squares regression analyses. The model was tested separately for the blue-collar and white-collar samples in the event that the occupational differences across these samples might have an impact on our results. Before estimating the full structural model in each sample, tests for curvilinear effects of staffing sufficiency on the perceptual and motivational variables were computed by performing hierarchical regressions in which a quadratic term for staffing was entered after the linear term. None of these tests yielded a significant quadratic effect, so the term was dropped from subsequent analyses that focused solely on linear effects. Group-level The second set of analyses was completed at the group level. As noted above, responses of individuals to perceptual (task scope and skill utilization) and JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
181
STAFFING SUFFICIENCY
motivational (organizational com~tment) constructs were averaged within each group to provide aggregated group-level variables. The exogenous variable of staffing sufficiency was itself a group-level variable obtained from the supervisor of each group. Finally, the performance outcome variable is also a true grouplevel construct obtained from managers at a higher level of the organization, and is not a function of the aggregated individual performance appraisals. The group-level model was tested in the same way as the individual model. It, too, was tested separately for the blue-collar and white-collar samples for any occupational differences across the samples. Tests for curvilinear effects of staffing sufficiency on the perceptual and motivational variables were again computed by performing hierarchic~ regressions in which a quadratic term for staffing was entered after the linear term. No quadratic effects were found. Consequently, the quadratic terms were dropped from subsequent analyses. Results Individual-Level Table 1 lists the correlations and descriptive statistics for the blue-collar individuals, while Table 2 contains them for the white-collar sample. An examination of the two subsamples reveals that staffing sufficiency is significantly and negatively related to perceived task scope in both subsamples. Table 1.
Descriptive
Statistics Mean
1.
2. 3. 4. 5.
Staffing Task Scope Skill Utilization
Commitment Performance
Notes:
2.64
.76
4.69
.81
3.20 4.16 5.37
1.03 1.25 .99
1
n/a
2
-.13* .93
3
.02 .50* .89
Iudividu~s 4
-.14* .48* .22* .87
5
-.07 .03 .03 .06 n/a
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of White-Collar Individuals N=172 Mean
1. Staffing 2. Task Scope Skill Utilization Commitment Performance
Notes:
S.D.
of Blue-Collar
*p<.os ReIiabilities are on diagonal
Table 2.
3. 4. 5.
and Correlations N=512
S.D.
2.33
.72
5.03 3.46 4.92 5.39
.77 1.01 1.09 1.06
I
n/a
2
3
4
5
-.18*
-.I2
-.02
~08
.92
.56* .87
.36* .33* .88
.24* .20* .14 n/a
*p<.os Reliabiiities are on diagonal JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 21, NO. 2,1995
182
DWYER AND GANSTER
Task Scope
-.02
.52*’ -.14*
Skill Utilization
/I\\ Staffing
’
*08
)
.03 ~ Performance
,th
CoMMitMent
-.07 l
p < .05
l
* p < .Ol
Rre
Adimed
Task Scope
.02
.Ol
Skill
.26
.26
commitment
.24
.23
Performance
.Ol
.oo
Util
Figure 1.
Blue-Collar
R Sauare
Path Model (Individuals)
For the blue-collar workers staffing is negatively correlated with commitment but this effect is not evident in the white-collar sample. For the blue-collars, none of the model variables correlate significantly with performance. However, for the white-collars, both task scope and skill utilization correlate positively with performance. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
Task Scope
\
I\ \
f
183
SUFFICIENCY
.18’
Staffing Performance Sufficien
commitment
-.04
l
p c .05
l
* p < .Ol e
dRSauilre
Task Scope
-03
.03
Skill
-31
.3f
Commitment
.16
.14
Performance
.07
.05
Util
Figure 2.
White-Collar
Path Model (Individuals)
The path coefficients and explained variance at the individual level of analysis for each sample are displayed in Figures 1 and 2. For the blue collar sample (Figure l), staffing shows a negative direct effect on perceived task scope (Hl) which, in turn, is associated with higher reported levels of skill utilization (H2) and commitment (H3). However, staffing level has no significant direct JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2,195
184
DWYER AND GANSTER
or indirect effect on individual performance (H4). Thus, understaffing is associated with an apparent increase in task perceptions and commitment, but this effect does not translate into higher levels of actual performance for the blue-collar sample. For the white-collar sample (Figure 2) staffing also has no direct effect on individual performance. However, staffing is inversely associated with task scope (Hl) and, in this sample, task scope perceptions are associated with higher levels of job performance. The indirect effect of staffing on performance through task scope is negative. Thus, understaffing is associated with higher performance because of its effect on task scope (H4). Addition~ly, both H2 and H3 were supported, since task scope and skill utilization were positively associated, and both led to more commitment. As with the blue collar sample, skill utilization and commitment do not lead to higher levels of performance. Group-Level
The descriptive statistics and the correlations among study variables are listed in Table 3 for the blue-collar sample and in Table 4 for the white-collar sample. Examining just these zero-order coefficients indicates that group performance is significantly associated with the staffing sufficiency variable only for blue-collar workers. No other variable correlates with group performance for either sample. In both samples, however, staffing sufficiency is negatively correlated with the perceptual and motivational variables, indicating that understaf~ng is associated with more task scope, skill utiIization (blue~ollar), and commitment, as hypothesized. Also as expected, the relationships among Table 3.
Descriptive
Statistics Mean
1. Staffing 2. Task Scope 3. Skill Utilization 4. Commitment 5. Performance Note:
2.64 4.63 3.32 4.17 5.45
and Correlations N=160
of Blue-Collar
S.D.
2
.76 .85 .91 1.12 .79
1
-
-.39* -
3 -.48* .79* -
Groups 4
-.32* .71* .48*
5
.29* .04 -.Ol -.OI -
*p<.os
Table 4.
Descriptive
Statistics
and Correlations
of White-Collar
Groups
N=55
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Staffing Task Scope Skill Utilization Commitment Performance
Note:
Mean
S. D.
1
2.33 4.90 3.33 4.67 5.50
.72 .64 .74 .94 .75
-
*p<.o5
JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
2
-.29*
3
-.16 .63* -
4
-.25* .57* .33*
5
.I6 .03 .oo .lO
STAFFING
SU~~~CIENC~
185
Task
Performance Staffing
4
* p < .05
** p < .Ol
mare
Adiysted R Sauarg
Task Scope
.08
.08
Skill
.40
.39
Commitment
.34
.33
Performance
.05
.02
Util
Figure 3.
Blue-Collar Path Model (Groups)
the perceptual and motivational variables are positive and significant. This pattern of zero-order relationships holds across both subsamples, with relationships being somewhat stronger in the blue-collar sample. The path analyses (Figures 3 and 4) provide further insight into the relationships suggested by the correlation matrices. In the case of both JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
DWY ER AND GANSTER
Task
Performance
Commitment
* p < ,a5
l
* p < .Ol
R Sauare
Adiusted R Square
Task Scope
.I5
.14
Skill
.62
.61
Commitment
-52
.49
Performance
-11
.04
Util
Figure 4.
White-Collar Path Model (Groups)
subsamples, staffing sufficiency has a direct and positive impact on group performance. However, there is no evidence of an indirect effect of staffing on performance operating through the perceptual and motivational constructs (H4). As hypothesized, some level of underst~~ng appears to produce higher levels of perceived task scope, but not skill utilization (HI), and task scope seems JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 199.5
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
187
to be strongly related to both skill utilization (H2) and organizational commitment (H3). Staffing sufficiency’s effect on commitment was indirect through perceptions of task scope, as was its effect on skill utilization. Somewhat unexpectedly, skill utilization had no direct effect on organizational commitment. Thus, for groups there appears to be some positive motivational effect of understaffing because of its influence on task scope perceptions. But this motivational effect does not seem to translate into higher levels of group performance. In fact, at the group level of analysis, understaffing is associated with lower levels of group performance. Discussion
In this study we examined the effects of staffing sufficiency on job performance at both the group and individual levels of analysis. Our hypotheses were derived from staffing sufficiency theory and predicted that members of understaffed work groups would see their jobs as more complex and as requiring greater use of their skills and abilities. These perceptions, in turn, were hypothesized to have a positive motivational effect (affective organizational commitment) that would result in higher levels of job performance. At the group level of analysis, however, staffing had a positive direct effect on group performance. Although staffing sufficiency was negatively associated with the perceptual and motivational variables as hypothesized, these variables had no significant effect on group performance. This pattern of relationships held equally for samples of white-collar and blue-collar workers, though the results were somewhat more robust in the blue-collar sample. Thus, at the group level of analysis, groups that are adequately or over-staffed appear to be more productive than understaffed groups. At the individual level of analysis the same relationships between staffing sufficiency and the perceptual and motivational variables were found. However, as the theory predicts, staffing had no direct effect on ratings of individual performance. Moreover, in the white-collar sample staffing sufficiency showed a significant and negative indirect effect on performance. This effect was mediated through the task perceptions with understaffing leading to higher perceived task scope which, in turn, led to higher levels of individual performance. Thus, at least with the white-collar sample, there is some support for the staffing sufficiency theory hypotheses at the individual level of analysis. The issue still remains of reconciling the findings of the group and individual levels of analysis. A fruitful direction for future research would be to explore the role that performance interdependencies play in the impact of staffing sufficiency. The present data clearly suggest some positive motivational effects of understaffing. And, at least with the white-collar workers, understaffing has a positive effect on individual performance. Where the group’s success was determined by the joint cooperation of members rather than simply the amount of manpower available, we might expect understaffed groups to outperform their overstaffed counterparts just as individuals in understaffed groups appear to outperform those in overstaffed settings. JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
188
DWYER AND GANSTER
Although Vecchio and Sussman (1981) found evidence for a curvilinear effect of staffing level on task perceptions, we found no such effects in the present study. Theoretically and intuitively, however, we would expect there to be a curvilinear relationship if the full range of staffing levels was represented in a sample under study. We had virtually no case in which supervisors rated their groups as more than moderately understaffed. We would expect that the effect of extreme understaffing would be perceived work overload and that the stressful consequences of this condition would overwhelm the positive motivational effects of increased task scope. Thus, our conclusions regarding the positive effects of understaffing clearly pertain to moderate levels of understaffing. In staffing sufficiency theory terms, the greater claim of members in understaffed settings would lead to greater motivation and satisfaction only if there were an adequate number of people to maintain the viability and integrity of the setting. Methodologically, the present study overcomes some of the limitations of prior research on staffing theory in the organizational literature. For one, we believe that we have employed the appropriate levels of analysis in the present case. Obtaining data on staffing sufficiency from the leader of the group obviated the need to aggregate the perceptions of individual group members. Staffing sufficiency was thus a true group-level variable operationally as well as conceptually. The same can be said for the group performance variable because these evaluations were obtained from managers higher in the hierarchy. Aggregating the performance appraisals of individual members could not have provided a valid examination of the effects of staffing on group performance. Finally, data were obtained from individuals at three different levels of the organization to represent the constructs of staffing sufficiency (group leader), perceived task scope and commitment (group members), individual performance (group leader), and group performance (managers above the group leader). Consequently, observed relationships among these variables cannot be attributed to artifacts such as common method variance and consistency effects that often arise from the use of same-source data. One exception was that employees’ immediate supervisors rated both their individual performances and reported the staffing sufficiency rating for their work group. It is possible that an immediate supervisor might take into account the staffing levels within which individuals work and rate them accordingly. Similarly, higher-level managers might have been influenced in their ratings of group performance by their knowledge of the staffing sufficiency of the groups. We would expect this effect to occur especially when that manager, through his or her resource allocation decisions, determined the staffing levels of the groups. Because the group-level “staffing-performance” direct effects were significantly different from the individual-level direct effects, perhaps different frames of reference used by the raters could be one source of explanatory variance. Finally, organizational commitment may not be the most direct indicator of behavior setting claim. We might have expected even stronger results had we had a measure such as, “commitment to the work group.” JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
STAFFING
SUFFICIENCY
189
In summary, the present study extended the findings of laboratory studies that have examined the effects of staffing sufficiency on group and individual performance. The findings suggest that moderate levels of understaffing can have both positive and negative effects. On the one hand, individuals in moderately understaffed groups are likely to experience higher levels of task scope which could result in higher levels of individual motivation and performance. This appears to be the case for white-collar and professional workers. On the other hand, understaffing may lead to lower levels of aggregate group output. These findings have important implications for both blue-collar and whitecollar workers in underst~fed departments. For white-collar occupations, it is likely that the overall accomplishment of tasks and goals of the group may suffer due to more work being delegated to fewer members. On the other hand, in downsized departments, such employees may be called upon to use more and varied skills, and this could translate into greater individual motivation. Downsizing may have a more deleterious effect on the motivation and productivity of blue-collar workers, however. This may be due, in part, to the nature of semi-skilled and unskilled tasks, since the overall performance of bluecollar work groups is more a function of the sum of the individual efforts of the group members, rather than of the poorest member’s performance, as stated for the white-collar groups. Thus, a general decrease in sheer numbers would result in more and varied task requirements, but less actual commitment to or performance within their downsized groups. References Barker,
R.G. (1960). Ecology and motivation. In M. Jones (Ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ~. (1968). Ecologicalpsychology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Barker, R.G. & Gump, P.V. (1964). Bigschool, smallschool: High schoolsize andstudent behavior. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Barker, R.G. & Wright, H.F. (1955). Midwest and irs children: The psychological ecology of an American town. New York: Row, Peterson. Bechtel, R.B. (1974). The undermanned environment: A universal theory? In D.H. Carson (Ed.), Man environment interactions, Part VIII. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchison and Ross. Brockner, J. (1988). The effects of work layoffs on survivors: Research, theory and practice. Pp. 213-255 in B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizu~ionu~ behavior, VoI IO. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Caplan, R., Cobb, S., French, J., Harrison, R.V. & Pinneau, S. (1975). Job demands and worker health. Washington, DC: HEW publication No. NIOSH 75-160. Greenberg, C. (1979). Toward an integration of ecological psychology and industrial psychology: Undermanning theory, organization size, and job enrichment. Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 314~ 228-242. Greenberg, CL, Wang, Y. & Dossett, D.L. (1982). Effects of work group size and task size on observers’ job characteristics ratings. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3: 53-66. Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60: I59- 170. Meyer, J.P, Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goflin, R.D. &Jackson, D.N. (1989). Organizational commitment and job performance: It’s the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal ofApp/ied Psychology, 74: 152-156. Mowday, R., Steers, R. & Porter, L. (1978). 7&e me~~emen~ of organizational commi~menz: A progress report. Technical report No. 15, Department of Management, University of Oregon, Eugene.
JOURNAL
OF MANAGEMENT,
VOL. 21, NO. 2, 1995
19Q
DWYER AND GANSTER