The present research examined a relatively neglected dimension of empl terjemahan - The present research examined a relatively neglected dimension of empl Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

The present research examined a rel

The present research examined a relatively neglected dimension of employee wellbeing; the experience of low arousal, unchallenging and dissatisfying workor
boredom at work. Specifically, we aimed: (1) to conceive a measure of work boredom
that is based on the common denominator of previous general boredom measures;
(2) to test a theory-based nomological network of boredom to establish the construct
validity of boredom and enhance our understanding of its correlates. Our findings
show that the newly developed DUBS is one-dimensional and internally consistent,
and that it can be distinguished from scales that assess burnout and engagement.
Next, the relations of work boredom with potential antecedents and consequences
were studied, using the JD-R model as a conceptual framework. In line with our
expectations, boredom was negatively related to both job demandsandjob resources.
This underlines our assumption that work boredom results from a different
constellation of job characteristics as compared to burnout and engagement. The
former is likely to result from high demands and poor resources, whereas the latter is
due to the availability of abundant resources (Bakker & Demerouti,2007). Moreover,
the more bored employees felt, the less satisfied with their job and the less committed
to the organization they were.
These findings are in line with the assumption that especially workers with
so-called ‘‘passive jobs’’ (Karasek, 1979) are at risk for experiencing boredom.
Moreover, they support previous research that showed that employees felt less bored
and more enthusiastic when they experienced more autonomy, a higher workload,
more role clarity, and more support (Daniels,2000). Also, the present study
supported the idea that a lack of qualitative (i.e., mental demands) and quantitative
demands (i.e., work overload) is associated with work boredom; such jobs can be
characterized as unchallenging. Finally, consistent with findings that having
unfriendly and uncommunicative coworkers can cause feelings of boredom (Fisher,
1993), the current research indicated that having unsupportive coworkers is indeed
positively related to work boredom. Clearly, the social context of work is a risk factor
for boredom. Finally, the present research suggests that boredom may have negative
outcomes for the organization as well. Similar to previous research, boredom at work
was associated with low job satisfaction (Lee,1986), poor organizational commitment, and high turnover intentions (Kass et al.,2001)
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
The present research examined a relatively neglected dimension of employee wellbeing; the experience of low arousal, unchallenging and dissatisfying workorboredom at work. Specifically, we aimed: (1) to conceive a measure of work boredomthat is based on the common denominator of previous general boredom measures;(2) to test a theory-based nomological network of boredom to establish the constructvalidity of boredom and enhance our understanding of its correlates. Our findingsshow that the newly developed DUBS is one-dimensional and internally consistent,and that it can be distinguished from scales that assess burnout and engagement.Next, the relations of work boredom with potential antecedents and consequenceswere studied, using the JD-R model as a conceptual framework. In line with ourexpectations, boredom was negatively related to both job demandsandjob resources.This underlines our assumption that work boredom results from a differentconstellation of job characteristics as compared to burnout and engagement. Theformer is likely to result from high demands and poor resources, whereas the latter isdue to the availability of abundant resources (Bakker & Demerouti,2007). Moreover,the more bored employees felt, the less satisfied with their job and the less committedto the organization they were.These findings are in line with the assumption that especially workers withso-called ‘‘passive jobs’’ (Karasek, 1979) are at risk for experiencing boredom.Moreover, they support previous research that showed that employees felt less boredand more enthusiastic when they experienced more autonomy, a higher workload,more role clarity, and more support (Daniels,2000). Also, the present studysupported the idea that a lack of qualitative (i.e., mental demands) and quantitativedemands (i.e., work overload) is associated with work boredom; such jobs can becharacterized as unchallenging. Finally, consistent with findings that havingunfriendly and uncommunicative coworkers can cause feelings of boredom (Fisher,1993), the current research indicated that having unsupportive coworkers is indeedpositively related to work boredom. Clearly, the social context of work is a risk factorfor boredom. Finally, the present research suggests that boredom may have negativeoutcomes for the organization as well. Similar to previous research, boredom at workwas associated with low job satisfaction (Lee,1986), poor organizational commitment, and high turnover intentions (Kass et al.,2001)
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
Penelitian ini meneliti dimensi yang relatif terabaikan kesejahteraan karyawan; pengalaman gairah rendah, pekerjaan tidak menantang dan tidak memuaskan? atau
kebosanan di tempat kerja. Secara khusus, kami bertujuan: (1) untuk memahami ukuran kebosanan kerja
yang didasarkan pada common denominator dari sebelumnya langkah-langkah kebosanan umum;
(2) untuk menguji jaringan nomological berbasis teori kebosanan untuk membangun konstruk
validitas kebosanan dan meningkatkan pemahaman kita tentang korelasi nya. Temuan kami
menunjukkan bahwa baru dikembangkan DUBS adalah salah satu dimensi dan konsisten secara internal,
dan bahwa hal itu dapat dibedakan dari skala yang menilai burnout dan keterlibatan.
Berikutnya, hubungan kebosanan kerja dengan anteseden yang potensial dan konsekuensi
dipelajari, menggunakan JD-R Model sebagai kerangka konseptual. Sejalan dengan kami
harapan, kebosanan adalah negatif terkait dengan kedua sumber pekerjaan demandsandjob.
Ini menggarisbawahi asumsi kita yang bekerja hasil kebosanan dari berbagai
konstelasi karakteristik pekerjaan dibandingkan dengan burnout dan keterlibatan. The
pertama adalah mungkin hasil dari tuntutan tinggi dan sumber daya yang buruk, sedangkan yang terakhir ini
karena ketersediaan sumber daya yang melimpah (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Selain itu,
karyawan lebih bosan merasa, kurang puas dengan pekerjaan mereka dan kurang berkomitmen
untuk organisasi mereka.
Temuan ini sejalan dengan asumsi bahwa terutama pekerja dengan
apa yang disebut '' pekerjaan pasif '' (Karasek, 1979) beresiko untuk mengalami kebosanan.
Selain itu, mereka mendukung penelitian sebelumnya yang menunjukkan bahwa karyawan merasa kurang bosan
dan lebih antusias ketika mereka mengalami otonomi yang lebih, beban kerja yang lebih tinggi,
lebih peran kejelasan, dan lebih banyak dukungan (Daniels, 2000). Juga, penelitian ini
mendukung gagasan bahwa kurangnya kualitatif (yaitu, tuntutan mental) dan kuantitatif
tuntutan (yaitu, kelebihan beban kerja) terkait dengan kebosanan kerja; pekerjaan tersebut dapat
dicirikan sebagai tidak menantang. Akhirnya, konsisten dengan temuan bahwa memiliki
rekan kerja tidak ramah dan komunikatif dapat menimbulkan perasaan bosan (Fisher,
1993), penelitian saat ini menunjukkan bahwa memiliki rekan kerja yang tidak mendukung ini memang
positif berhubungan dengan pekerjaan kebosanan. Jelas, konteks sosial kerja merupakan faktor risiko
untuk kebosanan. Akhirnya, penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa kebosanan mungkin memiliki negatif
hasil bagi organisasi juga. Serupa dengan penelitian sebelumnya, kebosanan di tempat kerja
dikaitkan dengan kepuasan yang rendah pekerjaan (Lee, 1986), komitmen organisasi miskin, dan keinginan berpindah tinggi (Kass et al., 2001)
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2025 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: