The purpose of this literature review is to examine the construct of job embeddedness. Job embeddedness is a construct first developed by Mitchell et al (2001) to better explain employee turnover. Job embeddedness is described as the forces that keep an individual in their job. Over the years this construct has been researched and used to explain other beneficial employee behaviors (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviors). This review will bring to light the historical and theoretical background of job embeddedness will be discussed. Along with this, this review will define job embeddedness and conceptually differentiate it from similar constructs. Next, common antecedents of job embeddedness will be described. Fourth, this review will discuss the many different effects of job embeddedness has on organizations and work behavior. After that, there will be a further conceptual discussion about job embeddedness as both a mediating and moderating variable. Finally, a section on future directions for job embeddedness research will be presented.
Contents
Abstract
Introduction
Historical and Theoretical Background
Defining Job Embeddedness
Antecedents of Job Embeddedness
The Impact of Job Embeddedness on Organizations
Job Embeddedness: A Mediator and Moderator
Conclusion and Future Directions
References
Abstract
The purpose of this literature review is to examine the construct of job embeddedness. Job embeddedness is a construct first developed by Mitchell et al (2001) to better explain employee turnover. Job embeddedness is described as the forces that keep an individual in their job. Over the years this construct has been researched and used to explain other beneficial employee behaviors (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviors). This review will bring to light the historical and theoretical background of job embeddedness will be discussed. Along with this, this review will define job embeddedness and conceptually differentiate it from similar constructs. Next, common antecedents of job embeddedness will be described. Fourth, this review will discuss the many different effects of job embeddedness has on organizations and work behavior. After that, there will be a further conceptual discussion about job embeddedness as both a mediating and moderating variable. Finally, a section on future directions for job embeddedness research will be presented.
Introduction
When dealing with relationships either personal or work-related there are always variables that can be attributed as the reasons why that relationship continues. Often it seems people do not consider the specific variables that make their relationships work and settle to describe things more generally. One common general reason someone may feel a relationship works is simply due to compatibility or fit. Another reason could be that the individuals feel like they have an unbreakable connection or that they feel linked together. Conversely, they may feel that there is just too much to lose; too much they would have to sacrifice to end that relationship. People like to feel that they fit with other people. People like feeling that they have strong ties with others. Likewise, people want to keep the internal or external incentives they gain from certain relationships and will take great lengths to not lose them. This is the same when it comes to an employee’s relationship with their job or organization they work for. There are reasons for why someone stays in a job, just like there are reasons for why they would leave. Yet, for many years’ researchers have focused primarily on why someone leaves a job and not why they stay. In fact, it was over eighty years from the first paper published about turnover before researchers decided to focus on why employees stay instead of why they leave (Hom et al, 2017). The paradigm shifted when Mitchell et al. (2001) made a groundbreaking contribution to the turnover literature by introducing the concept of job embeddedness.
Job embeddedness theory focuses on understanding the forces that keep an individual in a job (Mitchell et al, 2001). Job embeddedness can be broken up into two subtypes: on-the job embeddedness (organizational job embeddedness) and off-the job embeddedness (community job embeddedness) (Mitchell et al, 2001). Each subtype is made up of three forces: links, fit, and sacrifice. Job embeddedness has become a major player in the turnover research and has great predictive power when it comes to turnover (Mitchell et al, 2001). When employees feel embedded, they are less likely to leave, when they do not feel embedded, they are more likely to leave (Mitchell et al, 2001). Though predicting turnover is a very useful application and the original purpose for job embeddedness theory, research has also found that it has other positive outcomes in the workplace (Lee et al, 2004; Holtom et al, 2006; Coetzer et al, 2018). These other positive outcomes include task performance, adaptive performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors among other things (Lee et al, 2004). The purpose of this literature review is to discuss in-depth the theoretical understanding of job embeddedness, antecedents of job embeddedness, the impact of job embeddedness on organizations, both the relationships job embeddedness has as a mediating and moderating variable, and future directions for job embeddedness research.
Historical and Theoretical Background
Traces of Job embeddedness theory can be found dating all the way back to Kurt Lewin’s Field theory in the 1930s (Hom et al, 2017). Field theory states that behavior is a function of a person and their environment (Lewin, 1939). An important concept in Field theory is called life space, which Lewin describes to be produced when a person interacts with their environment. Life space is all the factors found in the environment affecting the behavior of an individual (Lewin, 1939). Job embeddedness as described briefly, is a collection of forces keeping someone in a job (Mitchell et al, 2001). These forces could also be considered as the factors affecting their behavior in their environment, which within the Field theory framework makes these forces the life space (Holtom & Inderrieden, 2006). So, someone connected to these forces, or embedded in their job, is someone highly linked with the life space (Holtom & Inderrieden, 2006). This is important to note because it sets in place why links and fits (two components of job embeddedness) would have an effect on employee turnover behavior (Holtom & Inderrieden, 2006).
Another influencing theory is the unfolding model of turnover first described by Lee and Mitchell (1994). In the unfolding model, Lee and Mitchell went against the leading thought on turnover and stated that turnover was not primarily caused by job dissatisfaction or opportunities for better alternative jobs (Lee & Mitchell, 1994). Instead, they posited that there were four main paths that people go down that lead to leaving their jobs. Three of these paths begin with a phenomenon they described as “shocks”. These “shocks” are some event that takes place either within the job or externally to the job that leads to the first thought of leaving. In the first path, the shock is an event that prompts a preexisting desire to leave. In a second path the shock violates something personal to the employee like their values or goals and makes them reconsider their role in the organization. Within the third path, the “shock” is an unsolicited job offer which leads the employee to begin comparing their current job situation with others. The fourth and final path follows along with the more prevalent theories of turnover, and that is that employee leaves due to an affect-related issue like dissatisfaction (Lee & Mitchell, 1994). Now to connect this model of turnover to job embeddedness. As discussed earlier, an individual who is embedded in their job is more likely to stay than someone who is not (Mitchell et al, 2001). This cannot be misunderstood though to mean that not being embedded, causes an individual to leave their job (Mitchell & Lee, 2001). On the contrary, what not being embedded likely does is make one more susceptible to these “shocks” described in the unfolding model (Mitchell & Lee, 2001). Therefore, it is important to consider the unfolding model of turnover when describing job embeddedness, because it sheds light on the relationship between being embedded and the actions that are a result of that (Mitchell & Lee, 2001).
A final theory that helps to build a foundational theoretical framework for job embeddedness is Conservation of Resources theory (Wheeler et al, 2012). Conservation of Resources (COR) theory is a theory of motivation that explains why employees are motivated to gain, protect, and enhance personally valued resources (Hobfoll, 1989). COR Theory states that the loss of resources is a stronger motivational force than the gain of resources, referred to the primacy of resource loss (Wheeler et al, 2012). Second, COR Theory states that in order to protect resources and gain new resources, employees will be motivated to invest resources, termed resource investment (Wheeler et al, 2012). Due to this resource-investment motive, employees who have more resources are more motivated to gain more resources (Wheeler et al, 2012). In contrast, employees that lack resources will be less motivated to gain more resources. Further, when employees store up these acquired resources they create “resource caravans” (Wheeler et al, 2012). Applying COR theory, Job embeddedness is one of these described resource caravans (Wheeler et al, 2012). On-the job embeddedness is a work-related resource caravan, while off-the job embeddedness is a community-related resource caravan (Wheeler et al, 2012). Employees that are embedded will desire to protect their resource caravans, and therefore will be less likely to sacrifice their jobs (Wheeler et al, 2012). Employees who are embedded will also more motivated to invest their resources into job performance or organizational citizenship behaviors in order to gain more resources which will increase and replenish their on-the job embeddedness (Wheeler et al, 2012).
[...]