Adaptation and Psychometrics of the Indonesian Version of Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI)
Resumen
Indonesia nowadays is incessantly encouraging the spirit of work. With the current ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), Indonesia must immediately step up to other countries by enhancing not only the performance but also the well-being of the employees. Meaningful work is one of the antecedents of per- formance and well-being. That is why it needs to be investigated in Indonesia. Thus, a valid and reliable meaningful work measurement tool is required to be used. A valid and reliable Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI) is not yet available in Indonesian version and research on meaningful work has also not been conducted much in Indonesia. Thus, the development of WAMI valida- tion and adaptation is a noteworthy effort to be conducted. Objectives - The purpose of this research was to adapt and measure psychometric properties of the Indonesian version of WAMI. Method – A cross-sectional study was conducted. There were 193 respondents obtained from one local bank with a number of branches in Indonesia. Confirmatory factor analysis was tested to examine the scale. The convergent validity was examined by correlating WAMI with Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) and Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). Discriminant validity was tested using Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), while reliability was assessed by using AVE and CR. Result – The con- firmatory factor analysis revealed the model of the WAMI that fitted the data best. The reliability of the scale was good. Work engagement and job satisfac- tion were positively associated with meaningful work; perceived stress was negatively associated with meaningful work.There were no differences across gender, but the differences appeared be- tween group ages and length of work. Conclusions – The finding of the study indicated that WAMI has satisfactory psychometric properties and provided supportive evidence for use in Indonesian context.Citas
Arnold, K. A., Turner, N., Barling, J., Kelloway, E. K., & McKee, M. C. (2007). Transformational Leadership and Psychological Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Meaningful Work. Journal of Occupational Health Psy- chology, 12(3), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.193 Azra, M. V, Etikariena, A., & Haryoko, F. F. (2018). The Effect of Job Satisfaction in Employee’s Readiness for Change. Diversity in Unity: Per- spective from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 503–510.
Cohen, S., & Janicki -Deverts, D. (2012). Who’s Stressed? Distributions of Psychological Stress in the United States in Probability Samples from 1983, 2006, and 2009. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(6), 1320– 1334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00900.x
Deloitte. (2017). Rewriting the Rules for the Digital Age: 2017 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends. Report, 1–137. Retrieved from https:// www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/HCTrends_2017/ DUP_Global-Human-capital-trends_2017.pdf
Duffy, R. D., & Dik, B. J. (2013). Research on Calling: What Have We Learned and Where are We Going? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.06.006
Dwi, K., & Saraswati, H. (2017). Perilaku Kerja, Perceived Stress, dan Social Support pada Mahasiswa Internship. Jurnal Muara Ilmu Sosial, Hu- maniora, Dan Seni, 1(1), 216–222.
Ghadi, M. Y., Fernando, M., & Caputi, P. (2015). Describing Work as Mean- ingful: Towards a Conceptual Clarification. Journal of Organizational Ef- fectiveness, 2(3), 202–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-11-2014-0064 Harpaz, I., & Fu, X. (2002). The Structure of the Meaning of Work: A Rel- ative Stability amidst Change. Human Relations, 55(6), 639–667. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0018726702556002
Isaksen, J. (2000). Constructing Meaning Despite the Drudgery of Repet- itive Work. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 40(3), 84–107. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022167800403008
Lopez, S. J., Snyder, C. R., & Rasmussen, H. N. (2004). Striking a Vital Balance: Developing a Complementary Focus on Human Weakness and Strength through Positive Psychological Assessment. Positive Psycholog- ical Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures., 3–20. https://doi. org/10.1037/10612-001
May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The Psychological Conditions of Meaningfulness, Safety, and Availability. Journal of Occu- pational and Organizational Psychology, 11–37. https://doi.org/https://doi. org/10.1348/096317904322915892
Rahmadani, V. G., Schaufeli, W. B., Ivanova, T. Y., & Osin, E. N. (2019). Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Mediates the Relationship between Engaging Leadership and Work Engagement: A Cross-national Study. Hu- man Resource Development Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21366 Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of Human Service Staff Satisfaction: Development of the Job Satisfaction Survey. American Journal of Com- munity Psychology, 13(6), 693–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00929796 Steger, M. F., & Dik, B. J. (2009). Work as Meaning: Individual and Organ- izational Benefits of Engaging in Meaningful Work. In Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology and Work (pp. 131–142). https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780195335446.013.0011
Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring Meaningful Work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career As- sessment, 20(3), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072711436160
