Modeling Human Resource Outcomes

Abstract

Who are the knowledge workers perceiving high versus low location autonomy? Do these workers consistently select work environments to enhance their well-being or to enhance their productivity? The study here frames the causal conditions for answering these research questions for case outcomes in response to calls (Misangyi et al. 2017; Woodside 2014) to embrace complexity theory in management research by constructing and testing asymmetric case-based models of decisions and outcomes. Complexity theory includes the tenet that both negative (low) and positive (high) scores for the same antecedent condition may be present in different configurations indicating the same outcome condition (i.e., the equifinality tenet) . A second complexity tenet is the causal conditions (i.e., configurations) indicating cases having high outcome scores (e.g., outcome of a “go” decision) may have a few of the same as well as different ingredients than the causal conditions indicating cases having low outcome scores (e.g., the outcome of a “no-go” decision). The present study examines eight propositions relating to knowledge workers’ choices of work environments including the following statements. P1: Knowledge workers high in intrinsic work motivation consistently select work environment choices to enhance productivity. P2: Knowledge workers with high scores in perceived location autonomy (PLA) are workers who consistently select work environment choices to enhance well-being and/or work productivity. The study includes examining these two and six additional propositions empirically using a sample of full-time professional knowledge workers. The findings deepen and expand on prior symmetric-based theory and analysis.