Development and validation of an instrument for assessing job demands arising from accelerated change: The intensification of job demands scale (IDS)

Figures & data

TABLE 1 Demographic characteristics of the participants and constructs measured and analyses conducted in each sample

	Sample 1	Sample 2	Sample 3	Sample 4
	Varied sample of service employees	Varied sample of service employees	Employees of the sales departments of an Austrian firm with international subsidiaries	Office workers of a governmental institution
Country/region	Germany	Austria	Austria, Germany, Russia, Commonwealth of Independent States, Western Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East	Austria
Language	German	German	German, English	German
N (total)	491	185	193 (response rate: 38.1%)	628 (response rate: 55.4%)
N (after quality check)	406	163	193	601
Age	42.71 (SD = 13.44)	37.88 (SD = 9.87)	35.73 (SD = 10.31)	42.10 (SD = 8.84)
Organizational tenure	12.16 (SD = 11.08)	9.06 (SD = 9.53)	7.69 (SD = 8.07)	13.56 (SD = 10.10)
Weekly working hours	43.45 (SD = 8.98)	42.81 (SD = 7.47)	43.89 (SD = 9.39)	41.70 (SD = 7.42)
Male participants	47.5%	50.9%	44%	59.7%
Tertiary education	41.6%	38.7%	39.4%	61.7%
Factor structure	CFA, reliabilities	CFA, reliabilities
Invariance tests	Across samples 1 and 2	Across samples 1 and 2	Across language versions
Relation to job-related factors: convergent validity	Time pressure (H1), job control (H2a), RSC (H3), RSL (H4c–4d)	Time pressure (H1), work scheduling—(H2b), decision-making—(H2c), and work methods autonomy (H2d), RSC (H3), RSL (H4c–d), task variety (H4a–4b)
Relation to person-related factors: discriminant validity	Negative affectivity (H5)	Neuroticism (H5)
Differences in the intensification of demands between employees: construct validity			Use of ICTs (H6a), NWW (H6b–c)	Changes in work situation (H7a–7d)
Relation to outcomes: incremental validity	Emotional exhaustion, cynicism (H8a–8e)	Emotional exhaustion, job satisfaction (H9a–9e)

SD = standard deviation; CFA = confirmatory factor analysis; RSC = requirements for self-directed career development; RSL = requirements for self-directed learning; NWW = new ways of working; H = hypothesis; ICTs = information and communication technologies.

TABLE 2 Fit indices for measurement models in sample 1 and sample 2

Model	Sample	χ^2	df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA [90% CI]	AIC	Model comparison	Δχ^2	Δdf	p
Five-factor model (WI, IJP, ICP, IKL, ISL)	Sample 1	399.57	142	.96	.95	.067 [.059–.075]	495.57
	Sample 2	291.97	142	.92	.93	.081 [.068–.094]	387.97
Four-factor model (WI, IJP, ICP, IL)	Sample 1	524.53	146	.93	.92	.080 [.073–.087]	612.53	M2–M1	124.86	4	.001
	Sample 2	363.36	146	.89	.89	.096 [.084–.108]	451.36	M2–M1	71.39	4	.001
Three-factor model (WI, IP, IL)	Sample 1	764.91	149	.89	.88	.101 [.094–.108]	846.91	M3–M1	347.34	7	.001
	Sample 2	435.60	149	.86	.83	.109 [.097–.121]	517.60	M3–M1	143.63	7	.001
One-factor two-higher-order-factor model (WI, IP—IJP&ICP, IL—IKL&ISL)	Sample 1	420.43	145	.95	.94	.068 [.061–076]	510.43	M4–M1	20.86	3	.001
	Sample 2	293.59	145	.63	.91	.080 [.066–.093]	383.59	M4–M1	1.62	3	ns
Second-order model (with five first-order factors)	Sample 1	453.51	147	.95	.94	.072 [.064–.079]	539.51	M5-M1	53.94	5	.001
	Sample 2	314.02	147	.92	.90	.084 [.071–.097]	400.02	M5-M1	22.05	5	.001
Five-factor model: correlations between the latent factors		WI & IJP	WI & ICP	WI & IKL	WI & ISL	IJP & ICP	IJP & IKL	IJP & ISL	ICP & IKL	ICP & ISL	IKL & ISL
	Sample 1	.43	.52	.50	.57	.67	.66	.57	.70	.67	.89
	Sample 2	.52	.54	.52	.53	.66	.62	.57	.57	.56	.83

χ² = chi-square fit index; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index, TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square of approximation; CI = confidence interval; AIC = Akaike information criterion; Δχ² = chi-square difference; WI = work intensification; IP = intensified planning and decision-making demands; IJP = intensified job-related planning and decision-making demands; ICP = intensified career-related planning and decision-making demands; IL = intensified learning demands; IKL = intensified knowledge-related learning demands; ISL = intensified skill-related learning demands. Sample 1 (n = 406); Sample 2 (n = 163).

TABLE 3 Items, means (M), standard deviations (SD), corrected item-total correlations (CITC), and standardized loadings based on the confirmatory factor analysis of the IDS in sample 1

				Latent dimensions
Item wording	M	SD	CITC	1	2	3	4	5
1. Work intensification
… it is increasingly rare to have enough time for work tasks	2.97	1.36	.86	.91
… it is increasingly harder to take time for breaks	2.66	1.39	.80	.84
… the time between the more intense work phases has decreased	2.94	1.42	.78	.85
… one has more often to do two or three things at once (such as eating lunch, writing emails, and talking on the phone)	2.98	1.44	.75	.80
… ever more work has to be completed by fewer and fewer employees	3.41	1.48	.63	.67
2. Intensified job-related planning and decision-making demands
… it is increasingly becoming necessary to plan the workflow (activities, appointments, breaks, etc.) by oneself	3.65	1.31	.79		.85
… one increasingly has to determine by oneself how to do the work	3.41	1.34	.81		.87
… one increasingly has to determine the sequence of activities by oneself	3.46	1.34	.78		.84
… more often decisions have to be made without consultation with supervisors	3.15	1.37	.74		.78
… one increasingly has to check independently whether the work goals have been reached	3.02	1.38	.67		.71
3. Intensified career-related planning and decision-making demands
… one is increasingly demanded to maintain one’s attractiveness for the job market (e.g., through advanced education, networking)	3.12	1.41	.69			.79
… one’s own professional development increasingly requires to keep other alternatives open	2.80	1.27	.68			.79
… one increasingly has to plan one’s professional career independently	3.24	1.45	.65			.75
4. Intensified knowledge-related learning demands
… one has to acquire new expertise for the job more often	3.21	1.25	.84				.88
… one increasingly has to acquire new knowledge to handle job tasks	3.23	1.20	.81				.93
… one has to update one’s knowledge level more frequently	3.48	1.24	.58				.78
5. Intensified skill-related learning demands
… one increasingly has to familiarize oneself with new work processes	3.06	1.22	.81					.91
… one increasingly has to get used to new workflows	3.00	1.23	.80					.92
… one has to use new work equipment (devices, programs, etc.) more often	3.02	1.23	.63					.67

N = 406.

TABLE 4 Intercorrelations among and Cronbach’s alphas of the IDS subscales as well as variables assessed in samples 1 and 2

		2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
2	WI	(.91/.87)	.44***	.46***	.47***	.49***	–	.58***	.21**	.15	.27***	−.15*	−.15	−.17*	.08
3	IJP	.41***	(.90/.87)	.59***	.57***	.48***	–	.20**	.15	.21**	−.01	.20*	.19*	.20*	.27**
4	ICP	.44***	.60***	(.82/.79)	.50***	.47***	–	.24**	.35**	.23**	.13	.04	−.07	−.04	.06
5	IKL	.52***	.54***	.58***	(.90/.90)	.76***	–	.19*	.19*	.47***	.09	.06	.10	.16*	.30***
6	ISL	.45***	.62***	.61***	.79***	(.87/.87)	–	.17*	.15	.28***	.05	−.01	−.02	.04	.21**
7	Job control	−.05	.38***	.17**	.10*	.16**	(.89/–)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
8	Time pressure	.58***	.19***	.21***	.27***	.23***	−.07	(.88/.87)	.17*	.11	.22**	−.19*	−.17*	−.23**	.17*
9	RSC	.06	.29***	.31***	.22***	.34***	.44***	.08	(.92/.89)	.39***	.04	.12	.10	.09	.14
10	RSL	.12*	.32***	.31***	.31***	.42***	.38***	.12*	−54***	(.68/.81)	.04	.30***	.36***	.34***	.48***
11	Negative affectivity	.23***	−.05	.10*	.07	.03	−.29***	.24**	−.14**	−.11*	(.88/.69)	−.24**	−.27***	−.36***	−.20*
12	WS autonomy	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	(–/.88)	.75***	.76***	.42***
13	DM autonomy	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	(– /.94)	.87***	.57***
14	WM autonomy	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	(–/.92)	.58***
15	Task variety	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	(–/.90)

Intercorrelations for sample 1 (n = 406) are presented below the diagonal and intercorrelations for sample 2 (n = 163) are presented above the diagonal. Correlations that were included in hypotheses testing are in boldface. WI = work intensification; IJP = intensified job-related planning and decision-making demands; ICP = intensified career-related planning and decision-making demands; IKL = intensified knowledge-related learning demands; ISL = intensified skill-related learning demands; WS autonomy = work scheduling autonomy; DM autonomy = decision-making autonomy; WM autonomy = work methods autonomy; RSC = requirements for self-directed career development; RSL = requirements for self-directed learning.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

TABLE 5 Relations to outcomes in samples 1 and 2

	Dependent variables
	Sample 1 (German service workers)				Sample 2 (Austrian service workers)
	Emotional exhaustion		Cynicism		Emotional exhaustion		Job satisfaction
Independent variable	Step 1	Step 2	Step 1	Step 2	Step 1	Step 2	Step 1	Step 2
Time pressure	.483***	.325***	.276***	.112^†	.580***	.401***	−.320***	−.161^†
Work intensification		.274***		.282***		.310***		−.276**
ΔR^2		.050***		.053***		.064***		.051**
Job control	−.289***	−.336***	−.385***	−.433***
Work scheduling autonomy					.017	−.002	−.153	−.150
Decision-making autonomy					.031	.029	.188	.189
Work methods autonomy					−.449**	−.469**	.520***	.523***
Intensified job-related planning and decision-making demands		.123*		.126*		.181*		−.030
ΔR^2		.013*		.014*		.031*		.001
Requirements for self-directed career development	−.090^†	−.125*	−.209***	−.276***	.080	−.022	−.082	−.024
Intensified career-related planning and decision-making demands		.113*		.217***		.295***		−.165*
ΔR^2		.011*		.043***		.076***		.024*
Requirements for self-directed learning	−.057	−.115*	−.202***	−.239***	.069	.017	.033	.055
Task variety					−.189*	−.211*	.379**	.388**
Intensified skill-related learning demands		.140*		.089^†		.221**		−.095
ΔR^2		.016*		.007^†		.044**		.008
Requirements for self-directed learning	−.057	−.110*	−.202***	−.237***	.069	−.031	.033	.088
Task variety					−.189*	−.213*	.379**	.392**
Intensified knowledge-related learning demands		.172**		.113*		.239**		−.132
ΔR^2		.027**		.011*		.044**		.014

Sample 1: n = 406; Sample 2: n = 163.

^†p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.