Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Copyright UCT
1 of 83
Meaningfulness-making strategies at work
A Research Report
Presented to
The Graduate School of Business
University of Cape Town
In partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the
Masters of Business Administration Degree
By
Patricia Udekwe
December 2012
Supervised by: Warren Nilsson
Copyright UCT
2 of 83
MEANINGFULNESS-MAKING STRATEGIES AT WORK
“For meaning is the essence of what it means to be human; you and
I, homo sapiens, search constantly for tiny flickers of meaning in every
tangle and buzz of the world around us, and it defines our experience
not just as living things — but as human beings”. (Haque, 2012)
Copyright UCT
3 of 83
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I never expected that this research project would turn into such an incredible journey. It took
me a bit of courage to take on this particular research topic. Meaningfulness, and especially
meaningfulness-making is not so often discussed in a business-school environment, and yet,
to have working lives that we believe are meaningful, is in the mind of many MBA students.
I wish to begin by acknowledging my supervisor, Warren Nilsson. Thank you for giving me
the courage to continue on this path. Thank you for your patience, for your guidance, for your
encouragement; and for revealing the researcher in me.
I have met incredible leaders along the way. Dean, Christophe, Kevin; I thank you for your
insights and for kindly accepting participation in the study. I am, of course, most thankful to
all the participants who have so generously agreed to give their time and to share their stories.
Lastly, I wish to express my sincere thanks to my friends and family, whom I have greatly
neglected over the last two years, but who have remained a constant source of inspiration and
encouragement. And to my beautiful children, Solal and Thais, who have been my biggest
supporters, I won’t mislead you by saying that the journey ends here, but I can tell you for
sure, this is a major milestone.
Copyright UCT
4 of 83
ABSTRACT
Purpose – The study explores strategies used by employees to make their work more
meaningful. The focus is on the active role people play in shaping experiences of work that
are perceived as meaningful. It complements the existing knowledge of meaningful work in
terms of its antecedents and the practices fostering meaningfulness in work and at work.
Design / methodology / approach – The study uses a “positive” approach to organizational
studies in line with positive psychology and Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS). It
uses a qualitative research methodology. It is an open-ended, inductive exploration, based on
a grounded theory approach to theory development. 25 semi-structured interviews were
conducted across three organizations. The research participants were all “meaningfulness-
makers”; a mix of gender, race, and position.
Findings – The study showed that meaningfulness-making was an ongoing process that could
be expressed through six main strategies: reconnecting with one’s purpose; keeping a positive
mental attitude; shifting the focus onto others; developing relationhips with others;
seeking/embracing challenge; and expanding one’s scope.
Practical implications – Individuals may improve the quality of their work lives by engaging
themselves in meaningfulness-making strategies.
Originality/value – This research is the second known qualitative study on meaningfulness-
making strategies, with a focus on employee perspectives. It is the first study to use a positive
psychology approach; it focuses on “meaningfulness-makers” in three diverse organizational
contexts.
Keywords – Meaningfulness; meaningful work; positive meaning; transcendence;
craftsmanship; meaningfulness-making.
Copyright UCT
5 of 83
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... 3
1.Research Topic ........................................................................................................................ 7
1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 7
1.2. Research context and question ..................................................................................... 8
1.3. Purpose and significance of the research ................................................................... 10
1.4. Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 11
2. Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 11
2.1. The need for meaning in life and work ...................................................................... 11
2.2. Defining work-meaningfulness .................................................................................. 13
2.3. Antecedents and consequences of meaningful work ................................................. 15
2.4. Finding and creating meaningful work ...................................................................... 18
2.4.1.Work orientation and meaningfulness ....................................................................... 18
2.4.2.Meaningfulness at work vs. meaningfulness in work ................................................ 20
2.5. Meaningfulness-making strategies ............................................................................. 21
2.5.1.Conceptualization of meaningfulness-making ........................................................... 21
2.5.2.Meaningfulness-making through vital engagement ................................................... 21
2.5.3.Sensemaking .............................................................................................................. 22
2.5.4.Job crafting ................................................................................................................. 23
2.6. Conclusion on literature review ................................................................................. 24
3. Research Methodology ......................................................................................................... 25
Copyright UCT
6 of 83
3.1. Research approach ..................................................................................................... 25
3.2. Research design.......................................................................................................... 28
3.3. Participant selection ................................................................................................... 30
3.4. Data analysis method ................................................................................................. 31
4. Research Findings and Discussion........................................................................................ 33
4.1. Findings ...................................................................................................................... 33
4.2. Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 46
4.3. Discussion .................................................................................................................. 53
4.3.1.Contribution ............................................................................................................... 53
4.3.2.Research implications ................................................................................................ 58
4.4. Research limitations ................................................................................................... 60
5. Research Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 62
6. Future Research Directions ................................................................................................... 63
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 64
Appendix 1 – Lessons from meaningfulness-makers ............................................................... 70
Appendix 2 – Study participants ............................................................................................... 73
Appendix 3 – Coding ................................................................................................................ 74
Appendix 4 – Confidentiality agreement .................................................................................. 81
Appendix 5 – Informed consent form ....................................................................................... 82
Appendix 6 – Plagiarism declaration ........................................................................................ 83
Copyright UCT
7 of 83
1. RESEARCH TOPIC
1.1. Introduction
Understanding how the human experience may be improved and how people can flourish in
organizations has for years been a matter of personal interest. To find answers to the
declining levels of job satisfaction reported in countless national and international surveys, a
great deal of managerial literature has focused on employee motivation (Maslow, 1954;
Myers, 1966; Hertzberg, 1968; Hackman & Oldman, 1976) and employee engagement
(Kahn, 1990; May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004; Macey & Schneider, 2008).
In his research on the psychological conditions for engagement at work, Kahn (1990) showed
that of all variables affecting employee engagement, meaningfulness had the strongest effect.
Yet there seems to be very limited understanding of work-meaningfulness and of the ways in
which work-meaningfulness happens. This is highlighted by Baumeister (1991), who calls on
positive psychologists, and who suggests that “by understanding how people seek and find
meaning in their lives, positive psychology can enhance the human experience
tremendously”.
Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS), as cited by Nilsson (2009), is an emerging stream
of thought within organizational studies. It finds its roots in positive psychology,
organizational development, community psychology, humanistic organizational behaviour,
pro-social motivation (behaviour benefiting the society at large), citizenship behaviour, and
corporate social responsibility (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003). “POS seeks to explore
positive outcomes, processes, and attributes of organizations and their members” (Cameron,
Dutton & Quinn, 2003).
In fact, positive scholars have been the main contributors to the research on work-
meaningfulness (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Wrzesniewski, 2003; Nakamura &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2003). While motivation theorists have contributed to a better
understanding of the antecedents and consequences of work-meaningfulness, positive
psychologists have explored people’s relationship with work and ways in which
organizations may foster meaningfulness.
Copyright UCT
8 of 83
The employee perspective, however, remains under-researched. By using an empirical
approach to the way in which individuals make their work meaningful, this study provides an
important contribution to the literature; it increases the understanding of the dynamics and
relationships between individuals, their work, the organizations and society.
This research report is divided into three main sections: in the first section, the existing
research on meaningfulness in work is explored. We consider studies from POS on people’s
relationship with work; positive meaning; and approaches to fostering meaningfulness in and
at work (Wrzesniewski, 1997; Wrzesniewski, 2003; Pratt & Ashforth, 2003). Previous
research, especially from motivation theorists, is also explored. The second section gives a
detailed account of the methodology used for the research. Lastly, the research findings are
presented, analysed and discussed in the third section of the report.
1.2. Research context and question
In this age of corporate social responsibility, purpose-driven organizations, and value-led
leadership, people may/could think differently about the work they do and the places at which
they work. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) suggested that, “with changing economic conditions,
organizational structures and job requirements, what may once have provided a measure of
meaning and purpose for individuals in the workplace is eroding”. Employee job satisfaction
is desperately low to the point where Martin (2005) warned that the situation has reached a
critical stage. He argued that, although corporations may believe that they face problems of
ethics or credibility, the underlying issue may well be a crisis of meaning. He urges
companies to “start paying attention to how people find meaning” (Martin, 2005).
A review of the academic literature reveals that existing research has developed a good
understanding of the antecedents and consequences of meaningful work. Motivation theorists
have been large contributors to the research on work-meaningfulness (Maslow, 1954; Myers,
1966; Hertzberg, 1968; Hackman & Oldman, 1976) and have supported the notion that
“individuals have an inherent need for a work-life that they believe is meaningful” (Maslow
1943, 1971; Hertzberg et al.. 1959; Alderfer, 1972). These scholars have also supported the
idea that meaningful work could and ought to be provided in particular through leadership or
organizational culture.
Copyright UCT
9 of 83
Lips-Wiersma (2009) warned that much of the managerial research on meaningful work has
focused on researching ways in which to “provide and manage meaning”. She noted that “this
stands in sharp contrast to the literature of the humanities, which suggests that
meaningfulness does not need to be provided, because the distinct feature of a human being is
that he or she has an intrinsic ‘will to meaning’ (Frankl, 1946/1985)”. This apparent
contradiction constitutes an interesting gap in the literature, which this study will explore (see
Figure 1 below).
Figure 1: Individuals as recipients or shapers of work-meaningfulness (Udekwe, 2012)
This report looks at meaningfulness-making as a dynamic process. We consider
meaningfulness as the result of an ongoing process of meaningfulness-making where
individuals are active shapers of their own experiences. We do acknowledge that these
meaningfulness-making strategies cannot be separated from an organizational context or from
a larger personal and societal context; but these variables are not included in our study.
As of today, few scholars have explored meaningfulness-making strategies at work. In a
recent article, Vuori et al. (2012) observed that “there is only limited understanding of the
meaningfulness-making process through which employees can themselves make their work
more meaningful”. He defined meaningfulness-making as the process during which people
actively influence their work and their interpretation of their work to make it more
meaningful”. I chose the term “strategy” to reflect the underlying sense of control or
Copyright UCT
10 of 83
“agency” that people use in the creation of work experiences that are perceived to be
meaningful.
We ask the question: “What are the strategies that people use to make their work more
meaningful?”
Sub-questions include: Do they consciously or unconsciously seek to make their experience
of work meaningful or more meaningful? What are the underlying processes involved in
creating meaningful work experiences?
This study explores these questions, using a theory-building methodology and a positive
psychology approach.
1.3. Purpose and significance of the research
As indicated earlier, the main purpose of the study is to fill a gap in the literature. The
objective is to add to the limited understanding of the meaningfulness-making strategies and
process by which employees make their work meaningful (Baumeister, 1991; Martin, 2005;
Vuori, San, & Kira, 2012). This in itself represents an important contribution to the academic
literature.
This research is the second known qualitative study on meaningfulness-making strategies,
with a focus on employee perspectives. It is the first study to use a positive psychology
approach and focuses on “meaningfulness makers” in three diverse organizational contexts.
The researcher believes that the employee perspective is important, as it will:
serve as the basis of a practical guide for employees needing to improve the quality of
their work lives or who are going through change. As such, the research has the
potential to generate insight that could help people make their experience of work
more meaningful; and
complement the research on management practices to foster work-meaningfulness;
the results of the study could serve as a valuable input for managers. With such
understanding, managers would be better equipped to comprehend and support the
strategies led by their teams.
Copyright UCT
11 of 83
This research is therefore an important contribution to the POS literature.
1.4. Assumptions
One important assumption was made apropos the study; it relates to the relationship between
work orientation and meaningfulness. While there does not seem to be an agreement among
scholars, the study assumes that, in line with Frankl (1946/85), meaning is not only for the
higher tier on Maslow’s pyramid (Maslow, 1943); in other words, meaning is not just the
icing on the cake (Haque, 2012) but a fundamental need of all human beings. As such, people
may engage in meaningfulness-making strategies regardless of their work orientation. This
assumption has especially affected the approach to the selection of participants for the study.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. The need for meaning in life and work
The idea that people need meaning in their lives and that different needs emerge once others
have been satisfied has long been present in the academic literature. As quoted by Chalofsky
(2003), several scholars (Maslow, 1943, 1954, 1971; Frankl, 1946/1985; Hertzberg 1959;
McClelland, 1965; Alderfer, 1972) have argued “that individuals are motivated to take certain
actions based on fulfilling needs believed to be inherent in all human beings”.
Building on Maslow’s theory, Baumeister (1991) identified four specific needs (Figure 2)
that shape our pursuit of a meaningful life: the need for a sense of purpose in life; feelings of
efficacy (having influence); value for one’s actions; and self-worth. For Baumeister,
satisfying these four basic needs leads to experiencing life as meaningful.
Figure 2: Four Needs for Meaning – (Baumeister, 1991)
Copyright UCT
12 of 83
Baumeister emphasized that “a single source rarely provides satisfaction for all four needs
but rather, people find satisfaction through several sources such as family, love, work,
religion, and various personal projects” (Baumeister & Vohs, 2002). There is therefore no
absolute need for people to find meaning from work, as long as other sources exist with
which people may satisfy their need for meaningfulness.
Frankl (1946/1985), inspired by his observations while detained in a concentration camp,
identified three basic sources through which people find meaning in life: love, work, and
suffering (Figure 3). He said: “A man who becomes conscious of the responsibility he bears
toward a human being who affectionately waits for him, or to an unfinished work, will never
be able to throw away his life. He knows the ‘why’ for his existence, and will be able to bear
almost any ‘how’”.
Figure 3: Three sources of meaning – (Frankl, 1946)
Focusing on work as a source of meaning, motivation theorists and humanistic psychologists
have argued that “individuals have an inherent need for a work-life that they believe is
meaningful” (Maslow 1943, 1971; Hertzberg et al. 1959; Alderfer 1972). They also believed
that there was a relationship between employee productivity and meaningfulness. Maslow
(1971) argued that “individuals who do not perceive the workplace as meaningful and
purposeful would not work to their professional capacity”.
The search for meaning in work has also been referred to as work spirituality (Neck &
Milliman, 1994). These researchers defined work spirituality as “expressing the desire to find
meaning and purpose in our lives; and as a process of living out one’s set of deeply held
personal values”. Meaning, in this context, refers to the experience of a connection between
the work and a higher purpose.
Copyright UCT
13 of 83
2.2. Defining work-meaningfulness
Before we can begin our investigation on how people can make their work more meaningful,
however, it is important that we have an understanding of the definition of work-
meaningfulness. Scholars note that the concept of work-meaning or work-meaningfulness is
often discussed but not often defined (Colby, Sippola & Phelps, 2002). An effort to define
the work-meaningfulness construct takes us to the definition of the words “meaning” and
“meaningfulness”.
It is important to distinguish between meaning and meaningfulness. While meaning refers to
comprehensibility, meaningfulness refers to a “positive significance of an activity”
(Baumeister & Vohs, 2002). Meaningful work therefore refers to an activity that is
cognitively experienced as positive.
For Morin (2006), meaningful work refers to the significance, the purpose, and the coherence
of work with deeply held values (Figure 4). Meaningful work is therefore seen as a much
broader concept than the actual characteristics of the work (Hackman & Oldham, 1980).
Figure 4: Defining Meaningful work – (Morin, 2006)
Defining the notion of meaningful work is difficult, because the experience of meaning is by
definition a subjective experience (Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2009). In fact, what is
meaningful to one employee may not be meaningful to his colleague. Meaningful work may
Copyright UCT
14 of 83
therefore be defined as “a subjective kind of sense that people make of their work” (Pratt &
Ashforth, 2003).
While most scholars agree on the subjective nature of meaningfulness, one must also
acknowledge that people draw from meaning archetypes as they experience a role or situation
as meaningful (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003). In other words, it is important to bear in mind that
people’s structures of interpretation are influenced by social archetypes, which affect the
experience of meaningfulness.
Reframing meaningfulness as “psychological meaningfulness”, Kahn (1990) presented
meaningfulness as a psychological experience:
“Psychological meaningfulness can be seen as a feeling that one is receiving a return
on investment of one’s self in a currency of physical, cognitive, or emotional energy.
People experienced such meaningfulness when they felt worthwhile, useful, and
valuable – as though they made a difference and were not taken for granted. They felt
able to give to others and to the work itself in their roles and also able to receive.”
Most researchers agree that work-meaningfulness and life meaning are intertwined. For
Chalofsky (2003) for instance, meaningful work is used as a term which “gives essence to
what we do, and which brings a sense of fulfilment to our lives”. As such, meaningful work
may be a significant contributor to achieving one’s purpose in life. The MOW International
Research team (1987) and Svendsen (1997) both embrace the holistic nature of the construct,
and claim that meaningful work suggests an “inclusive state of being”.
Svendsen (1997) further claimed: “Meaningful work is not just about the meaning of the paid
work we perform, it is about the way we live our lives. It is the alignment of purpose, values
and the relationships and activities we pursue in life. It is about living our lives and
performing our work with integrity. It is about integrated wholeness.”
Pratt and Ashforth (2003), in turn, see that meaningfulness arises when “work and/or its
context are perceived by its practitioners to be, at minimum, purposeful and significant”.
They identify 3 sources of work-meaningfulness: “the intrinsic qualities of the work itself;
Copyright UCT
15 of 83
the goals, values, and beliefs that the work is thought to serve; and the organizational
community within which the work is embedded”.
For the purpose of this paper, meaningfulness or work-meaningfulness is defined as the
psychological condition associated with meaningful work, where work not only refers to the
work itself but also to the environment in which the work is performed.
2.3. Antecedents and consequences of meaningful work
The academic literature varies in the degree to which work-meaningfulness is associated with
the work itself.
Antecedents of meaningful work
Starting with the antecedents and in the tradition of motivation theorists (Hackman &
Oldham, 1980; Kahn (1990) described antecedents of psychological meaningfulness as
including task characteristics, role characteristics and work interactions (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Antecedents of work-meaningfulness – (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Kahn, 1990)
Building on Kahn’s work, Chalofsky (2003) defined “integrated wholeness” as the
pathway to work-meaningfulness. He distinguished three elements of integrated
wholeness, the work itself, the sense of self and the sense of balance (Figure 6). The
work itself refers to the act of performing, challenging, creativity, learning,
continuous growth; the opportunity to carry out one’s purpose in the work; autonomy,
Copyright UCT
16 of 83
and empowerment. The sense of self refers to bringing one’s whole self to work;
recognizing and developing one’s potential; knowing one’s purpose in life and how
work fits into that purpose. Lastly, the sense of balance refers to the balance of work
self and personal self; the balance of giving to oneself and giving to others.
Figure 6: Integrated wholeness (Chalofsky, 2003)
Lips-Wiersma et al. (2009), in their effort to identify the dynamics around work-
meaningfulness considered four dimensions in their framework: being, doing, self, and
others. They found that meaningful work consisted of four sources: developing and becoming
self; expressing full potential; serving others; and unity with others (see Figure 7).
Figure 5: Meaningful work framework – (Lips-Wiersma, 2002)
Copyright UCT
17 of 83
For Isaksen (2000), meaningful work is about coherence. He highlighted eight categories of
meaningful work (Table 1):
Meaningful work antecedents Keyword
The possibility of attachment to the workplace or the work as such Attachment
The possibility of engaging in social relations at work and caring for others Relationships
The feeling that the work is useful and a necessary part of a larger meaningful project
Useful
The feeling that the work accomplished is important to the well-being of other people
Significance
The possibility of learning and the pleasure of finding fulfilment in one’s work
Fulfilment
The possibility of contributing to the development of work procedures and the improvement of working conditions
Contribution
The experience of autonomy that gives a sense of freedom Autonomy
A sense of responsibility and pride in one’s work Control
Table 1: Eight categories of meaningful work – (Isaksen, 2000)
Consequences of meaningful work
Consequences of work-meaningfulness have also been documented in academic literature,
from higher-life satisfaction to psychological and physical health (Morin, 2006).
Furthermore, as they find meaning at work, “employees contribute to the broadest purposes
for which the organization exists, creating value for customers, investors and communities”
(Ulrich, 2010). He added that “when employees find meaning at work, they care enough
about it to develop their competence; they work harder and are more productive; they stay
longer and are more positive” (Ulrich, 2010).
Rather than exploring in depth all consequences of work-meaningfulness, one should
consider employee engagement.
In their empirical studies on meaningful work, May, Gilson & Harter (2004) studied
meaningfulness in relation to employee engagement. The study builds on Kahn’s work
(1990) on the psychological conditions for personal engagement and disengagement at work.
Copyright UCT
18 of 83
Kahn (1990) argued that people occupy roles at work and use themselves to varying degrees
physically, cognitively and emotionally.
“The more people draw on their selves to perform their roles, the more stirring are
their performances and the more content they are with the fit of the costumes they
don” (Kahn, 1990).
Kahn (1990) identified three conditions for engagement: meaningfulness, safety and
availability. Of the three conditions, he found that meaningfulness has the strongest effect on
engagement. He found that “people experience meaningfulness when they feel worthwhile,
useful, and valuable”.
The study by May et al. (2004) found that the relationship between job enrichment and work-
role fit with engagement were facilitated by meaningfulness.
Through this particular example we can better evaluate the stakes and the primary importance
of understanding the mechanisms behind meaningfulness and meaningfulness-making at
work.
2.4. Finding and creating meaningful work
2.4.1. Work orientation and meaningfulness
Bringing a different perspective to bear on work-meaningfulness, Wrzesniewski (2003)
argued that it is not so much the “characteristics of work” that matter as the “relationship to
work” that creates possibilities for individuals and organizations (Wrzesniewski, 2003;
Bellah, Madsen, Sulllivan, Swidler & Tipton, 1985).
Bellah et al. (1985) initially proposed the idea that the sense of meaning people can derive
from work is dependent on their relationship with work. Bellah et al. (1985) argued that there
are three distinct relationships that people can have with their work: “work as a job, as a
career, or as a calling”.
In the first orientation, work as job, “people focus on the material benefits they obtain from
their work and do not seek any other type of reward from it”. The work is not an end in itself,
but a means to an end, outside of the job. In the second orientation, work as career, “people
have a deeper personal investment in their work”; they work for the reward that comes from
Copyright UCT
19 of 83
advancement through an organization (Bellah et al., 1985). In the third orientation, work as
calling, “people do not work for financial reward or for advancement, but for the fulfilment
brought about by doing the work”. For people with a calling orientation, work is inseparable
from their lives (Bellah, 1985).
These three orientations guide people’s basic goals for working and are reflected in
behavioural attitudes around work and the role of work in life.
The typology is useful but suggests that work-meaningfulness would be mostly associated
with calling orientations and to some extent to career orientation.
There is no doubt that people with a calling orientation have a stronger and more rewarding
relationship with their work (Wrzesniewski, 2003). For them, work is enriching and
meaningful. As such, callings are very important to positive organizational scholarship,
because they capture the most positive and generative manifestation of the connection
between people and their work (Wrzesniewski, 2003).
“People with calling orientation work not for financial rewards or for advancement,
but for the fulfilment that doing the work brings to the individual”. (Wrzesniewski,
2003)
Because of such attributes, research on callings has become an important part of the literature
on work-meaningfulness. “Callings have stolen the centre stage in our imaginations as
offering a special gateway to fulfilment and meaning in work” (Wrzesniewski, 2003). The
word “calling” is used here in a modern sense and with no religious connotation. Callings and
meaningful work share a number of characteristics, however, they are not the same thing.
Vuori et al. (2012) convincingly argued that “work-meaningfulness is a broader concept than
callings”. While a calling is assumed to be unique to the person, comprising activities people
believe they must do to fulfil their unique purpose in life and offering a path to connect with
one’s true self (Wrzesniewski, 2003), empirical evidence shows that “the subjective
experience of meaningfulness may arise from any association”, as long as it is perceived as
positive.
Building on the work-orientation theory, Clark (2012) argued that an additional type of work
orientation must be considered: work as fulfilment. Work as fulfilment is described as a
strongly interest–driven approach to work, but lacking the overwhelming nature of a
“calling”. People pursuing work-as-fulfilment may choose unconventional career paths that
Copyright UCT
20 of 83
favour personal interests over other aspects. Work-as-fulfilment is described as “the ultimate
source of meaning in work and life” (Clark, 2012).
2.4.2. Meaningfulness at work vs. meaningfulness in work
Pratt (2003) built on the identity theory and the social identity theory and argued that the
primary determinant of meaningfulness is identity (who am I?).
He made a distinction between “meaningfulness in work” and “meaningfulness at work”.
Meaningfulness in work answers the question: “What am I doing?” whereas meaningfulness
at work, answers the question: “Where do I belong?” As the two questions lead to “Who am
I?” Pratt & Ashforth (2003) concluded that the question of identity is at the heart of
meaningfulness and that meaningfulness arises through an integration of identity with roles
(see Figure 8 below).
Figure 8: Meaningfulness in and at work – (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003)
Pratt & Ashforth (2003) suggested that creating meaningfulness in work involves tapping into
desired identities by making the tasks one performs at work intrinsically motivating and
purposeful. Creating meaningfulness at work, on the other hand, involves changing the nature
of one’s organizational membership.
Copyright UCT
21 of 83
“One finds meaning not in what one does, but in whom one surrounds oneself with as
part of organizational membership, and/or in the goals, values, and beliefs that the
organization espouses.” (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003)
2.5. Meaningfulness-making strategies
2.5.1. Conceptualization of meaningfulness-making
Meaningfulness-making refers to “the process during which people actively influence their
work and their interpretation of their work to make it more meaningful” (Vuori, San, & Kira,
2012). As pointed out earlier, few scholars have examined this process; conceptualization of
meaningfulness-making is therefore still at an early stage.
2.5.2. Meaningfulness-making through vital engagement
Considering the concept of vital engagement as defined by Nakamura gives us another
perspective on how meaning can emerge, regardless of one’s work orientation. Nakamura
(2003) focused on the relation to one’s environment and suggested that one can find meaning
in work through vital engagement. Vital engagement is described as a “relationship to the
world that is characterized both by experiences of flow (enjoyed absorption) and by meaning”
(subjective significance). Nakamura argued that meaning emerges as an outcome of the flow
state; in this context, people are seen as having an active role in creating meaning. As such,
meaning and its associated flow condition are created, not found.
A number of environmental factors are described as necessary to attain a state of subjective
significance (meaning); the main one is merely being involved in activities that afford scope.
According to Nakamura (2003), “even trivial activities become meaningful over time if
conducted with care and concentration”.
The flow state is described as preceding the state of subjective significance (meaning). This
flow state, according to Csikszentmihalyi (2000), is characterized by: “an intense and focused
concentration on the here and now; a loss of self-consciousness as action and awareness
emerge; a sense that one will be able to handle the situation”; flow state is also characterized
by a “sense that time has passed more quickly or slowly than normal; and an experience of
the activity as rewarding in and of itself regardless of the outcome” (Nilsson, 2009).
Copyright UCT
22 of 83
Reaching a flow state requires a number of factors: “clarity on one’s immediate goals,
continuous and unambiguous feedback on the progress that one is making and, finally,
perceived opportunities for action that stretch one’s existing capabilities” (Nakamura &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2003).
Nakamura’s research suggests that flow experiences lead to vital engagement and
meaningfulness through enjoyed experiences. This research provides valuable insight into
meaningfulness-making; the main limitation in the context of our current research being that
individuals do not seem to exercise much agency, because meaningfulness arises as a by-
product of engagement and cannot therefore be considered an active strategy for
meaningfulness-making.
The academic literature has documented two strategies by which people may play an active
role in making their work more meaningful: sense-making (Weick, 2005) and job crafting
(Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001).
2.5.3. Sense-making
The concept of sense-making emanates from social psychology. Sense-making is related to
interpretation and cognitive psychology, but looks at the “way in which the cues are
internalized and the way in which individuals decide to focus on specific cues” (Weick, 2005;
Vuori, 2012). Central to sense-making is the notion that people are constantly confronted
with cues from their environment; selectively choosing to internalize some cues while
ignoring others. Positive cues received by employees become input in the dynamic process
through which employees make meaning of their work (Wrzesniewski et al., 2003).
According to the sense-making theory, people can change their behaviour to receive more
positive cues and consequently to extract more meaning.
Vuori (2012) saw the positive cues as the basis for meaningfulness-making. He argues that
“if people believe that cues indicate that the work is valued and provides benefits for
themselves, they start to see their work as meaningful”. While people constantly receive a
mix of positive and negative cues, they experience their work as meaningful when they are
given more positive cues than negative.
Copyright UCT
23 of 83
Sense-making happens at the individual level but as a result of interaction with an
environment. This supports the view that meaningfulness tends to be “socially constructed
among individuals within their work groups, departments, etc.” (Weick 1995; Pratt &
Ashforth, 2003). Meaningfulness-making therefore, cannot be separated from social
validation, which, according to the sense-making theory, plays an important part in the
creation of meaning. Colleagues and leaders will play an important role in the interpretation
of cues as positive or negative and in the creation of meaningful work experiences.
2.5.4. Job crafting
In their research on the practice of job crafting, Wrzesniewski & Dutton (2001) have shown
how people with different work orientations can structure their work in ways that help them
extract more meaning for themselves. By crafting their jobs, people are able to change the
way in which they approach the tasks they do, but also change the way they interact with the
people they encounter in their work.
The job-crafting literature has highlighted the worker’s active role in making work more
meaningful. Job crafting goes beyond sense-making as workers engaged in job crafting make
both “cognitive and physical changes to the tasks or relational boundaries of their work”.
Figure 9: A Model of Job Crafting – (Wrzesniewski, Dutton, & Debebe, 2003)
Copyright UCT
24 of 83
2.6. Conclusion on literature review
Drawing from the identity theory and from the work motivation theory, the review of
literature has offered several dimensions through which to consider work-meaningfulness: the
work itself (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003); the sense of
self in work (Kahn, 1990; Chalofsky, 2003; Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2009); but also the
work as part of a larger context with which a sense of balance or congruence may be
achieved (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Wrzesniewski, 2003; Wrzesniewski, 2003; McClure &
Brown, 2008).
The literature has highlighted the active role that workers can play in shaping their work or
their experiences of work in such a way that they become meaningful (Wrzesniewski, Dutton,
& Debebe, 2003; Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003; Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2009).
It has also highlighted the interplay between the work, the individual, the organization and
society at large in the process of meaningfulness-making (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Weick,
2005).
It has shown that most scholars share the view of a need for meaning in life (Baumeister,
1991) and work despite the disagreements on whether meaning ought to be provided (Bowie,
1998) or whether it is the inherent will to meaning (Frankl, 1946/1985) that should drive the
creation of meaningful work.
Finally, the literature has confirmed the limited knowledge on the processes by which people
make their work meaningful (Vuori, San, & Kira, 2012). Although it has pointed to sense-
making and job crafting as mechanisms through which people make their work meaningful, it
has also stressed that more empirical research is needed in order to increase the understanding
of the strategies that people use to make their work meaningful.
The literature has also confirmed that scholars have found in callings-orientations a great deal
of potential for increasing the understanding of work-meaningfulness, and this appears in
several recent articles from POS scholars (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Wrzesniewski, 2003;
Dobrow, 2010).
Copyright UCT
25 of 83
Through interviews with “meaningfulness-makers” in various roles and in various
organizational contexts, the study will explore individual experiences of meaningfulness-
making at work.
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research approach
The objective of the study is to take an employee perspective on meaningfulness-making at
work. With this approach, the study aims at filling a gap in the literature on work-
meaningfulness, which is, for the most part, focused on externally driven approaches to
“providing” meaningful work. The study seeks to explore, using individual narratives, the
way in which individuals actively make their work meaningful.
Informed consent and research ethics
Because the study deals with human participants and personal accounts, ethical issues have
been taken very seriously throughout the research process. Ethical clearance for this research
was granted by the GSB Research Ethics Committee on 21 September 2012.
A confidentiality agreement was signed with each organization; and the confidential nature of
the interviews was made clear at the beginning of each session. An informed-consent form
was also obtained before each session, in accordance with the University of Cape Town
research ethics standards.
Positive Psychology and Positive Organizational Scholarship
The study uses a “positive” approach to organizational studies in line with positive
psychology and POS. POS focuses on the “generative dynamics in organizations that lead to
the development of human strength, foster resilience in employees, enable healing and
restoration to occur, and cultivate extraordinary individual and organizational performance”
(Cameron & Spreitzer, 2011). POS is not about seeing only the positive, it does not “ignore
Copyright UCT
26 of 83
dysfunctional or atypical patterns of behaviour”; the specificity of POS is that it is “most
interested in the motivations and effects associated with remarkably positive phenomena,
how they are facilitated, why they work, how they can be identified, and how organizations
may capitalize on them” (Cameron & Spreitzer, 2011).
Appreciative Inquiry
With the positive-psychology approach chosen for the study, the choice of Appreciative
Inquiry (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987) to guide the interview process came naturally.
Appreciative Inquiry is about “finding out, and expanding on, what is “right” within an
organization” (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). In this application of appreciation inquiry, I
became committed to expanding on the positive experience of finding meaning in work at the
individual level. For instance, rather than asking whether or not participants had experienced
meaningfulness in their work, a lead-in statement was used, such as: “Many people have
supported the idea that people need to have work experiences that are meaningful, that it is
part of human nature. Tell me, in your own words, what it is that makes your work
meaningful and tell me about a time when you felt that your work was particularly
meaningful.”
Through such sensitively-worded questions, it was found that people were better able to focus
on the positive dynamics first, and they felt more confident to share their personal anecdotes.
Qualitative research methodology
The study uses a qualitative research methodology. The qualitative method is appropriate
here as this is the method normally used to “describe and interpret people’s feelings and
experiences in human terms rather than through quantification and measurement” (Terre
Blanche, Durrheim, & Painter, 2006). Should the researcher have chosen to measure the
impact of a number of variables on meaningfulness, then a quantitative method would have
been more appropriate. Instead, the objective of the study is to allow a number of variables to
emerge from the interactions with the research participants. This kind of open-ended,
inductive exploration is only possible with qualitative research.
Copyright UCT
27 of 83
In addition, the lack of an existing theory implies that a deductive or theory-testing approach
could not have been considered. A theory-testing approach would have involved prior
identification of a set of organizational traits and evaluation of the traits. In this study, a
predefined set of organizational traits or practices is not used, rather, the data emerges as the
anecdotes are shared and as patterns emerge.
The study is therefore seen as an opportunity for identifying potentially important variables
and to generate hypotheses for future research on possible relationships among variables.
This approach is what Terre Blanche et al. (2006) referred to as the “common sense
perspective” on qualitative research. The study goes beyond the common sense perspective,
offering an interpretative perspective, by making sense of people’s subjective experiences
through interacting with them, and paying careful attention to their anecdotes. As such, the
study is not only focused on isolating themes and variables but also on “harnessing and
extending the power of ordinary language and expression” (Terre Blanche et al., 2006).
Grounded theory approach
Given the need to analyse and interpret ample numbers of observations collected in the
interview process, a grounded-theory approach was used. Grounded theory is defined as “a
practical method for conducting research that focuses on the interpretive process by analysing
the actual production of meanings and concepts used by social actors in real settings” (Glaser
and Strauss, 1967). Through the grounded-theory approach, new theory may be developed by
paying careful attention to the contrast between “the daily realities (what is actually going on)
of substantive areas” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and the interpretations of those daily realities
made by those who participate in them (the “actors”).
The grounded-theory approach fits the research question because, while it is useful for
working with phenomenological (subjectively experienced) data, it seeks to go beyond such
data, focusing on how “subjective experiences can be abstracted into theoretical statements
about causal relations between actors” (Nilsson, 2009).
Pre-research hypotheses are not used for the study, because grounded theory typically does
not utilize pre-research hypotheses. Instead, it involves an iterative pattern of data-gathering
Copyright UCT
28 of 83
and data analysis during which induction and deduction are symbiotic, and sampling is
emergent (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
Constant comparison and theoretical sampling (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) were used as the
guiding technique in the data-collection and analysis stages. Constant comparison implies
that there is no clean separation between data collection and data analysis but rather, data is
collected and analysed simultaneously. Theoretical sampling implies that “the direction of
new data collection is determined by the ongoing interpretation of data and emerging
conceptual categories” (Suddaby, 2006).
3.2. Research design
Research focus
As highlighted by Eisenhardt (1989), the research focus is important as it helps throw light on
the kind of data to be gathered, but also on the requirements for the research participants.
Keeping a clear research focus has proven challenging because of the very subjective nature
of meaningful work. In order to maintain a clear focus, the study encouraged participants to
focus on the subjective experience of meaningfulness as a psychological state. With this clear
focus in mind, the researcher invited the participants to explore their particular roles in
creating these experiences.
Data-collection methods and research instruments
As emphasized by Terre Blanche et al. (2006), a central axiom of qualitative research is to
work with data in context. To make sense of feelings and experiences, the data collection was
set in “the real world” as opposed to artificially created conditions. All the interviews were
conducted at the workplaces, not at the workstation, but in quiet meeting rooms. The
principle of “minimal disturbance” defended by interpretative researchers was therefore not
adhered to, as the purpose of the study was not to observe the participants in their daily
interaction with their environment, but to engage in dialogue. However, in an effort to
become part of the context (Terre Blanche et al., 2006) the researcher engaged with
participants in an open and empathetic manner.
Copyright UCT
29 of 83
Data was gathered by conducting semi-structured interviews in line with the explorative
nature of the study.
A pilot study was conducted with 5 participants to test the research questions and to assess
the nature and number of questions necessary to trigger the expected level of engagement
with the participants.
25 semi-structured interviews were conducted using open-ended questions, which gave
participants scope fully to articulate their responses, thus adding depth to the responses.
The approach taken was to start with a few questions in mind and then to exploit some of the
cues taken from participants’ answers (constant comparison and theoretical sampling). The
interview questions and language changed as the interview progressed, not to validate the
hypothesis, because the focus was not on theory testing, rather to further explore cues. Also,
as some participants were rephrasing the questions, the researcher would also make use of
this new language especially within the organizational context. For instance, asked about a
time when he felt his work was particularly meaningful, one participant rephrased: “you
mean, when I get goosebumps?”
Particular attention was paid to body language and non-verbal communication. For instance,
if a participant seemed particularly enthusiastic while sharing a story, the researcher would
say something like: “I can see how evoking this episode brings a sparkle to your eyes; can
you tell me more about …?”
To facilitate analysis, the sessions were recorded.
Interview Protocol
Three areas were explored in the interviews.
(1) Factors they value in work: The first part of the interviews was geared toward creating
an environment where people would feel confident to share their accounts at a deeper,
personal level. Information about their jobs and values had to be gathered so as to understand
what their personal drivers for meaningfulness were; later to explore the ways in which they
actively pursued them.
Copyright UCT
30 of 83
(2) The experience of meaningfulness in work: Exploring personal accounts of
meaningfulness in work was particularly important in the study as it allowed for confirmation
of a number of theories on the antecedents of meaningfulness in work. It was also a way of
identifying forms of contribution and individual agency in creating these experiences.
(3) Overcoming the lack or loss of meaning: Although the focus of the study was on
meaningfulness-making, it was necessary also to discuss meaninglessness. As Weisskopf-
Joelson (1968) pointed out in her analogy with air, it is difficult to know what makes work
meaningful until it is no longer meaningful. Additionally, when people experience the lack of
or the loss of meaning, they engage in meaningfulness-making strategies. It is for this reason
that people were asked to think about such times: this has proven a very successful
questioning strategy.
After several interviews, having realized that people placed great value on educating others, it
was decided to include another perspective towards the end of the session. The researcher
would ask people to share their advice to a new staff member in an attempt to make his
experience of work meaningful. By focusing on an external subject, people found it
sometimes easier to recount and to share strategies.
3.3. Participant selection
Participants were selected using a combination of purposive sampling and snowball
sampling. A purposive sample is defined as “a sample that includes representatives from
within the population being studied who have a range of characteristics relevant to the
research project” (Gorman & Clayton, 2005). In the present situation, the relevant
characteristic is the experience of meaningfulness in work by individuals within several
organizations. In an attempt to answer our research question, it was imperative to focus on
participants who have that characteristic. The purposive sampling methodology therefore
appeared most relevant.
In the interviewing process, other participants (who also met the requirements) were
suggested to the researcher by early participants or by management (snowball sampling).
After the completion of the pilot study (5 participants), several organizations were
approached; three agreed to participate in the study.
Copyright UCT
31 of 83
The first organization, an environmental service-provider, was suggested by one of the
participants in the pilot study. The company had been known for its highly committed
workforce but also for its unique culture and investment in developing its staff. Participants
represented various positions within the organization, including botanists, project managers,
the receptionist, and senior management.
The second organization, a non-profit organization dedicated to youth development is one I
have known through previously working with them. I had been struck by their extraordinary
motivation and by the interesting personal anecdotes of the staff members. Participants
included office-based and programme facilitators.
The third organization is a luxury hotel. This was included in the study as it gave me the
opportunity to interview people in a much wider spectrum of positions, from the cleaning
staff to the security manager, again with a focus on the engaged and internally motivated staff
members. This organization was interesting because of the huge contrast between the work
setting and the ordinary lives of the employees.
Organization Industry Size Participants
Environmental service-provider Environment 210 staff 11 participants
Youth development centre Education 80 staff 3 participants
Five-star hotel Hospitality 500+ 8 participants
Table 2 – Participant organizations
3.4. Data analysis method
A 5-step interpretive data-analysis methodology was used (Terre Blanche, 2006 p. 322). As
argued by Terre Blanche et al. (2006), the key to good interpretive analysis is to stay close to
the data. I sought, as researcher, to achieve this throughout the analysis, by keeping the
narratives alive in my mind.
Familiarization and immersion: After each interview I spent a few minutes making notes on
some of the key words that had been used and on some of the important comments. I spent a
great deal of time listening to the tapes so as to fully immerse myself in the data, which I like
Copyright UCT
32 of 83
to define as living data. The people, their accounts, their verbal and non-verbal
communication, their body language, all this became part of the living data. Familiarization
was made possible by investing time in listening to the tapes, and by making additional notes.
I decided to examine most of the transcripts myself, which brought me even closer to the
data. Familiarization and immersion happened as a recurring effort from beginning to end of
the data-collection phase in preparation for the next interviews. I went back to the tapes
several times during and after that phase.
Inducing themes: I examined closely the data collected, after concluding the interviews with
the second organization (17 interviews). By that time, I was beginning to see some trends in
the data. I went back to each interview transcript and began to extract propositions and
keywords. By proposition is meant the question: “What is he/she saying/doing?” For each
proposition 1 or 2 keywords, a subject and a predicate, would be identified. For each keyword
the language of the interviewee was used, rather than a more abstract, theoretical language
with which to label the categories. The process took a few iterations and, bearing in mind the
focus on “living data”, a theme for each proposition was chosen.
Coding: The themes were then further mapped to categories; and the relevant sections of the
data were marked as being instances of one or more themes. This mapping is shown in
Appendix 3.
Elaboration: Elaboration typically involves a further exploration of the themes in order to
capture the finer nuances not captured in the initial coding. At that stage I considered data
from the third organization (8 semi-structured interviews), looking for keywords and related
themes. All data collected from the last series of interviews was consistent with the themes
already identified. This was a good indicator in terms of the sample size and showed that,
despite the relatively small sample size, a pattern emerging from the data could be identified.
Interpretation and checking: Here the objective was to keep ‘playing’ with the data until a
good account could be given of the results uncovered (Terre Blanche, Durrheim, & Painter,
2006). Themes were revised again until I was comfortable with the link between each
proposition and the theme. The account of the meaningfulness-making strategies as expressed
in the study is presented in Table 3 (Meaningfulness-making strategies).
Copyright UCT
33 of 83
4. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Findings
The study showed that meaningfulness-making was an ongoing process that could be
expressed through six main strategies (see Table 3 – Meaningfulness-making strategies):
Reconnecting with one’s purpose
Keeping a positive mental attitude
Shifting the focus onto others
Developing relationships with others
Seeking and embracing challenge
Expanding one’s scope
These meaningfulness-making strategies are either cognitive or physical in nature and may be
further framed within three groups of meaningfulness-making strategies: self-focused
strategies; people-focused strategies; and task or work-focused strategies.
Copyright UCT
34 of 83
The meaningfulness-making strategies are summarized in Table 3 below:
Strategies Cognitive Physical
Self-focused strategies
Reconnecting with one’s purpose
Staying grounded in values and purpose
Creating routines and engaging in activities that help reconnect with themselves
Sharing experience of work
Keeping positive mental attitude
Cognitively emphasizing the positives cues
Focusing on the bigger picture
Finding love in work
Having a positive philosophy on life
Engaging in relationships with positive people
People-focused strategies
Shifting the focus onto others
Emphasizing the ways in which work affects people’s lives
Making a difference in people’s lives
Using own knowledge and experience to educate or help others grow
Developing relationships with others
Creating an emotional attachment to work
Connecting, listening and engaging with people on a human level
Task-focused strategies
Seeking and embracing challenge
Applying one's mind to every new challenge
Learning to recognize opportunities for growth
Throwing oneself into difficult situations
Going the extra mile
Expanding scope/borders
Expressing self at work Creating the opportunity to learn and grow in and outside the job
Developing skills for excellence and continuously seeking to improve
Engaging in extra-role behaviour
Contributing new ideas
Table 3 – Meaningfulness-making strategies (Udekwe, 2012)
Copyright UCT
35 of 83
Self-focused strategies
Strategy 1: Reconnecting with one’s purpose
Participants have consistently expressed the need to reconnect with their Why of Work. The
terminology is used here not only as a reminder of Ulrich’s book on creating abundant
organizations (Ulrich, 2010), but it is also the way in which some participants have rephrased
work-meaningfulness. This recurring need to ‘reconnect’ was consistently expressed by
people, even by those who were extremely passionate about their work. In the environmental
context, participants felt that it was important for them to engage in nature-related activities
in their own time, but also with their colleagues, for instance through their corporate social
responsibility (CSR) initiatives. One organization had set up an internal platform to give staff
the opportunity collectively or individually to reconnect with nature through nature-centred
challenges or activities. This emphasized the need for balance (Chalofsky, 2003).
“You have to keep the passion alive and to me my passion is plants. And even that
aquarium for example, I planted that, so that time to time, when you feel that the work
you are doing is just not in line with that purpose, I will come up here and have a look
at that, and remind myself of what it is that drives me. And you take that energy back
with you and you direct it to whatever it is that you are doing. Or even just to engage
with someone, who you know is also excited about certain things. You need to
reengage yourself with your passion. Sometimes, you lose track of it. My whole entire
life is around plants, everything I do. For me that is how to reengage yourself. Even
walk outside and look at the most simplistic plant to understand how it is that it is
what it is. It puts it all back into perspective again. And it reenergizes you. That is
what I do, I find a way of reengaging myself with that that is my bigger purpose.”[#6]
For most participants, reconnecting with their purpose, involved having, in the first place, a
clear sense of values and purpose; it also involved remaining true to their values. Participants
also appeared quite uncompromising on their values. Whether it was the HR manager,
dedicated to excellence, who could not accept going for quantity instead of quality; or
whether it was the environmental manager, ready to lose a major client for fear of betraying
his values, there were many examples illustrating how clear the values were, and how
important it was for participants to remain grounded in their values and sense of purpose.
Copyright UCT
36 of 83
“I’m hiring so many people that I didn’t feel I was hiring meaningful people. Not to
judge the people but I’d like to feel like we are hiring people that share our values.
But when you only have a week to find the person and you are starting to feel
pressured by management, I started to feel it’s more about the money than about the
reason that I do what I do. So I went through why I am here, I‘m not here to just
recruit random people. But it’s not for the money, I’m here for another reason and I
was starting to lose sight of that reason because it felt like it was about the money”.
[#11]
As participants described their ways of reconnecting, they evoked cognitive strategies but
they also evoked physical strategies. The cognitive strategies typically involved creating a
mental space, putting things into perspective and focusing on values and purpose.
“I don’t spend a lot of time analyzing the issues. My biggest guiding light is my gut
feeling and I use my gut feeling more than my head”. [#2]
“Sometimes when it is getting too much and I feel I can’t cope anymore, I just
disappear for 5 minutes. I take a glass of water and find myself a quiet space in the
back; I don't even turn the light on and I don’t even tell anybody where I am going.
My doctor actually suggested that and it is really helping me. Sometimes I try not to
think, sometimes I think of all the years that I have been here and the people that I
love and it gives me a good feeling”. [#25]
In some cases, physical steps also reinforce these cognitive strategies. People have brought
their passion to work physically as an opportunity to step aside and refocus. Building an
aquarium at work, “to be reminded of some of the simple things in life”; starting a vegetable
garden and spending time nurturing the plants; walking outside, enjoying and showing
appreciation for the view of the beautiful mountains; sitting in a dark corner to find peace of
mind: all of these are examples of routines that individuals create in order to reconnect with
their purpose, to reconnect with their why of work. Participants have stressed that it was very
easy to lose track, and these strategies were important in helping them to remain true to
themselves.
“At the back, I’ve got a little veggie garden that a colleague and I initiated two years
ago now. It gives me time, especially if I’m feeling a bit stressed, to zip out, and even
Copyright UCT
37 of 83
if I’m taking a call, instead of sitting at the office, I step out and walk to the garden”.
[#16]
Participants have also described reconnecting strategies that implied reconnecting with their
purpose through others. For the environmentalists for instance, the availability of an internal
support system, made of people who share their values and passion for the environment,
plays an important role in helping them reconnect with their purpose. By sharing their
experience of work, they are able to reinforce the belief that their work is useful and
worthwhile. This highlights the importance of shared values and purposes within an
organizational context. That is not to say that all organizational members should share the
same values; rather, this suggests that when they are able to find an “internal support
system”, they may use these relationships to reconnect with their own values.
The personal accounts suggest that the need for meaningfulness may arise from a temporary
loss of meaning or from uncertainty. In most cases, the participant could easily find accounts
to share about disconnecting with purpose and no longer finding meaning in work. This is
testimony to the level of honesty and humility that predominated during the interviews. Of
the 25 participants, only 2 participants could not think of a time when they had felt
disconnected from purpose. These 2 participants had an unquestionable sense of conducting
meaningful work. They were constantly reminded of how they were affecting people’s lives.
They also had a very strong sense of duty or responsibility for people’s lives. It is possible
that, through this focus on people’s lives, they were engaged in another type of
meaningfulness-making strategy, shifting focus onto others, which will be discussed later.
As I walked through the hallway in one of the organizations, I could not help but notice on
the wall the beautiful photographs of lanscapes and wildlife, all signed by staff members. I
wondered whether this also helped employees reconnect with their passion and purpose, but I
did not have the opportunity to discuss this.
Copyright UCT
38 of 83
Strategy 2: Keeping a positive mental attitude
This is a strategy that straddles active and passive strategies. As the study focuses only on
active strategies, the initial response was not to include the positive mental attitude factor in
the study. Later in the interviewing process, it appeared that the participants were in fact
actively influencing their own perception of work so as to sustain a positive mental attitude.
By cognitively emphasizing the positives, participants have shown their ability to transform
challenging circumstances into meaningful experiences. This is what some have called
benefit-finding (Affleck, 1996) or coping (Schwarzer, 2000). For Affleck, benefit-finding
refers to “an individual's perception that major positive changes have occurred as a result of
challenging life events”. Within the coping theories to which benefit-finding refers, proactive
coping (Schwarzer, 2000) is the strategy that was illustrated by many of the participants.
Proactive coping behavior was observed; people in proactive coping “see risks, demands, and
opportunities in the distant future, but they do not appraise them as potential threats, harm, or
loss. Rather, they perceive demanding situations as personal challenges. Coping becomes
goal management instead of risk management” (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004).
“When I was working at the bank, there was one day they wanted me to go work on
switchboard. I was horrified. It was a female’s job, I was upset and started
wondering what I had done wrong. The boss called me and said, we just know that
you will tackle it with the right attitude, we were short of staff, had no choice. So I
did it for a month, and enjoyed it. So whatever I did I always made sure I made the
most of it. My philosophy has always been, make the most of what you do, be the best
at whatever you can. I believe there’s scope in every job”. [#17]
Putting things into perspective and viewing the bigger scheme of things is another example of
benefit-seeking. People actively questioning their experiences and trying to find a benefit
beyond them makes their work more meaningful.
“You must know how to turn the situation in a positive way. You must also
understand and think about how your work is impacting on others, colleagues,
customer”. [#21]
Copyright UCT
39 of 83
“You just know that your work is having an impact on the environment, even when
you are not able to see that”. [#15]
Finding love in work is described as another way in which to keep a positive mental attitude.
Some participants find love in work by: (1) choosing work that is based on their values, (2)
attaching value to the act of working or (3) developing quality relationships that go beyond
the requirements of the job.
“If you do what you love, you don’t need to motivate yourself”. [#1]
“My work is very meaningful to me, and that’s because that’s what I love; I love
working with computers and I love working with kids. I try to get involved in the kids
social lives, it’s not just a job, it’s about the relationship that you build”. [#5]
“I love my work, it’s not because of the people I work with, it’s a love of work. When I
come here to work I consider this place as my house, so I put attention on what I’m
doing and I know I am serving others. My duty is to make them others happy”. [#18]
Life philosophy, spirituality, knowing that one fits into a larger scheme, although the
participants didn’t discuss this in depth, appears to be another enabling factor for keeping a
positive mental attitude. Here body language was a good indicator of the role of work
spirituality.
“Even when I see my own limitations, I know there is something else happening, an
extra hand”. [#5]
“I believe that we’ve all here for a reason and my reason for being here is to help
others”. [#17]
Lastly, it was found that participants were able to make their work more meaningful when
they stayed away from the influences they considered to be negative, and when they
surrounded themselves with positive people.
Copyright UCT
40 of 83
“I regard myself as a positive person. And when you come in you choose your
attitude for the day. And when I wake up and come to work I choose my attitude for
the day. And when I choose it to be positive, I remain positive. And I don’t surround
myself with negative people because they will actually exhaust your energy.
Whatever may be happening in my life, I cut it out completely, I don’t bring it to
work, I don’t carry my feelings on my sleeves”. [#21]
People-focused strategies
Strategy 3: Shifting the focus onto others
Shifting focus onto others has been the predominant strategy used by study participants. I
found that a large majority of participants, regardless of age, gender or position in the
organization, related the experience of work-meaningfulness to a focus on others.
48% of the participants expressed the focus on others as being a key strategy for making their
work meaningful. Making an impact on someone’s life was consistently associated with high
points of participants’ work lives. As they connect and focus on others, participants described
being able to strengthen their sense of being useful. The ability to have an impact on
someone’s life was described as a key contributor.
“For me, when I see that you can make a difference in people’s lives, that makes it
meaningful. Everything I’ve ever done. I was a banker. So when I was a banker my
aim was to make a difference in the customer’s lives and make a difference in the
staff member’s lives. That’s what got me going every day. When it was about staff in
the bank, it was about making their careers successful, giving them job satisfaction”.
[#17]
“My job is to keep everybody safe, and looking after people every day keeps me
driven. I never know what I’m going to see when I get to work in the morning. We are
living in quite a dangerous environment. Every day for me is different, every day for
me is fulfilling”. [#20]
Shifting focus on others here is seen as give-and-take. By educating or influencing others,
people were able to reinforce their self-worth and thus make their work more meaningful.
Copyright UCT
41 of 83
What was also interesting was that for many participants, this was done as part of extra-role
behaviour, when work had been concluded, or even after hours.
Organizations in the sample varied in the degree to which they were driven by a cause. For
both environmental and non-profit organizations, the core mission driving the business was
constantly present in people’s minds, and was reinforced by their daily tasks. For the
members of these organizations, however, although they do find meaning in being involved
in a cause in which they believe, they tend to link meaningfulness to more tangible realities.
There is no doubt that the cause gives significance to the work, however, participants have
also highlighted the need to focus on particular people and visible impact rather than distant
others, to make their work more meaningful. They do so by sharing their knowledge with
other organizational staff members or by focusing on community-based activities where they
can influence, educate or see an effect.
“Sometimes you think one step forward and ten steps back. So you never really see
the actual impact, what I do is more at the policy level, but you know it is having a
good impact. But the other thing that we do as a company is that we do a lot of things
where we can see the impact. So we go clean up a wetland for example, we’ve done
this as part of our CSI and that’s really important”. [#15]
Strategy 4: Developing relationships with others
Participants also experience work as meaningful as a result of engaging with others on a
personal level. When I talked to one of the cleaners at the luxury hotel, she said that “the most
important thing was to love your work” and in fact, she did love her job. Two things stood
out: one, she mentioned treating her workplace as her home. Two, she mentioned actively
seeking connections with people, always bringing out her smile, her friendly personality, and
opening a conversation. Through her actions, she connected with people on a human level,
her sense of belonging was reinforced, which further enhanced work-meaningfulness.
Other participants also expressed engaging with people on a personal level, creating an
emotional attachment with work that enhances the experienced meaningfulness at work. They
Copyright UCT
42 of 83
do so by “paying attention to the people”, by “trying not to be invasive but understand the
individuals from different perspectives”.
“We mix family and business all the time, some will tell you that is not a good thing
but that’s how we are”; “We listen to what’s happening in people’s lives, we don’t
get involved but we it is useful to create an environment where people can be
happy”.[#2]
“Many families come back every year so when I see them now I will tell them
“welcome home”, I see the kids growing year after year. I also talk to them about my
children. So now when they see me they also ask about my family and many of them
also bring presents for me. To me, guests are important, and I always go the extra
mile for them, because we are a 5 star hotel. That’s how it is, and it’s in me
now”.[#25}
The study suggests that people have an active role in creating emotional attachment with
work. In one of the organizations, however, it was quite clear that this was not happening to a
great extent. Some participants mentioned, “I know I don’t come here to make friends”, or, “I
don’t bring my personal stuff to work, I disconnect completely.” But in the other
organizations, the emotional attachment was facilitated by the ability to use the organization
as a platform on which to share individual experiences.
“We really are like a family here. And management encourages us to share even
small achievements in work but also outside of work”.[#14]
“It’s comforting to know that you can always find people you can talk to”.[#12]
“We listen to what’s happening in people’s lives, we’re trying not to be invasive but
we try to understand the individuals from different perspectives, not only through
their work”. [#2]
The study thus suggests that a genuine emotional attachment with work can emerge from
one’s actions, but also from a certain way of relating to people.
Copyright UCT
43 of 83
Work and task-focused strategies
Strategy 5: Seeking and embracing challenge
Seeking and embracing challenges, intellectual or physical, is another positive strategy for
making one’s work more meaningful. In a way, it is part of one’s strategy to maintain a
positive mental attitude. I decided to look at it separately, however, because the study
highlighted that people also create challenging situations for themselves by the way in which
they approach situations (even repetitive tasks) or by their choice of going the difficult route.
Embracing challenges is about changing one’s approach to a given situation. The study
suggests that work becomes more meaningful when people apply their minds fully to the
situation as if each were a unique and new experience. This is a cognitive effort that has
implications for people’s experience of work. The study also showed that discernment is
often required to “recognize opportunities to grow”. Those who indicated applying their mind
(and heart) fully, taking every day as a new day, recognized being filled with work
satisfaction, enjoyment and meaningfulness. They made their work more meaningful by
taking every situation as a challenge and as an opportunity for applying their mind, to do
better, to solve problems.
“I love my work, my heart is in it. I’m excited about going there every morning.
Every day is a new challenge, nobody’s perfect, I’m not perfect, but I do my best”.
[#23]
Challenge is also something that participants said that they actively pursued. The lack of
challenge in work is associated with boredom or meaninglessness. Conversely, choosing a
road that is less travelled or choosing the path that seems most challenging makes one’s work
more meaningful.
“You actually have to force yourself into difficult circumstances so you know how to
get out. That makes my work meaningful”. [#9]
At the task level, many people described “going the extra mile”, “improving processes”,
“doing excellent work, not for the recognition but for the sake of doing the work”, as a
successful strategy to infuse more meaningfulness in work. This describes people’s
Copyright UCT
44 of 83
willingness to challenge themselves to excel in what they do, finding scope in any job and
performing and perfecting as an end in itself.
Strategy 6: Expanding one’s scope
Participants engage in strategies to broaden their scope through personal development and
growth; they varied in the degree to which they proactively sought opportunities to grow.
“I have two years cycles. I just know that usually after two years this is going to
happen. So I anticipate and force myself to learn something new”. [#9]
“I always created for myself the opportunity to move on”. [#17]
For the most part, it is when lack or loss of meaning in work is experienced that people
engage in strategies to grow inside or outside of their organizations. This involves reaching
out to management to access opportunities to develop competencies.
“I was doing the same things every day and I became bored. So I challenged my
manager and the HR department and said: you need to give me more, otherwise I’m
going to have to leave. And I have done that with all my promotions at the hotel. I am
a person who needs to grow; I don’t like to do the same thing all the time”. [#24]
By engaging with others in extra-role behaviour, people have described feeling more useful
and more satisfied with their work. By helping out someone in his/hers duties, or “going the
extra mile” for a client, participants have found that their work became more meaningful.
One of the hotel staff members described how helping a lady walk had made her feel truly
valued and appreciated.
“There was a guest who wasn’t feeling well. She had problems with her leg. So every
time I went to her room, she was always crying, so I used to tell her it’s just a phase,
it’s going to pass. When she left I was on leave, when I came back I found a note. She
wrote a note for me; she left, she was now walking, and the pain was gone. I felt very
good about that note”. [#19]
Being self at work, was described as the result of a conscious cognitive decision to change
the perceptions of the boundaries of one’s work. While roles are the predominant determinant
Copyright UCT
45 of 83
of identities in organizations, the study suggested that people who were able to ‘play’ with
these role boundaries had a much more positive experience of work. This challenges the
notion of job description and stresses the benefit of fuller expression of selves in work.
“I always say, your job is created around you. The best compliment I have ever had
was: Jeez’ you’re not a typical banker!”. [#17]
“People here can actually live their lives and be part of making a difference”. [#2]
“I work for an organization whose purpose is aligned with what I think my purpose
is in life. I have a passion for the environment and I share that passion with the
company. Here you get to be yourself and the company is interested in you as a
person. When I started here, I was the first black person in the company; it was
always in your face and always in the back of my mind that I was outnumbered. But
for some reason, this place is the only place I would come to and feel that the colour
of the skin doesn’t matter, as long as you do your job properly. You feel like you
belong, you fit in and you are accepted like anyone else. I have made great friends
here”. [#13]
Lastly, people have described making their work meaningful through the contribution of
ideas and through the expression of one’s creativity. As they formulate new ideas and present
them to management, people experience an increased sense of excitement and self-worth
through the contribution they are making.
“Coming up with new ideas and having the courage to bring them to management
makes my work more meaningful”. [#5]
Copyright UCT
46 of 83
4.2. Analysis
With the positive-psychology approach and the grounded-theory methodology, the outcomes
of the study were somewhat uncertain. There was absolutely no guarantee that I would be
able to extract useful information from the data. Most of the respondents defined themselves
as people who loved their jobs, or who were passionate about what they do. This was as
much an opportunity as it was a risk. In order to talk about meaningfulness one also had to
talk about the lack or loss of meaningfulness. I was unsure whether participants, “positive
outliers” for the most part, would allow themselves to share both positive and negative
experiences of work. I realized that choosing a one-on-one interview format over focus
groups was a good choice. In the only small group interview I conducted, I could see that
participants were trying to convince themselves or one another with statements such as “you
must love what you are doing because if you don’t love what you are doing you can’t work
here”. The length of silence revealed some degree of discomfort. I could see that participants
were not very willing to share personal experiences of meaningfulness in the presence of a
colleague. The interview format and appreciative inquiry approach helped create an
environment where people felt compelled to share personal stories honestly. The quality of
the data collected and the rigorous approach to coding are the basis of the analysis.
The analysis was guided by an exploration of the conflicting realities, but also of the
similarities in the data. Even the most passionate employees had actively to seek to reconnect
with their “Why of work”. As a botanist mentioned, “even an environmentalist needs to
reconnect with nature”. They never had to search very far in their memories to illustrate this;
they always had a very recent example to share of instances where they had felt disconnected.
This presented a turning point in the interviews. Participants would say “actually, it happened
not so long ago” or “you are right, it does happen quite often actually”.
Of the sample of 25 participants, only two participants maintained that they had never
experienced the lack or loss of meaning in work. For the other 23, this provided the
opportunity to explore their meaningfulness-making strategies in more depth.
This suggests that the construction of meaningful work is a dynamic and ongoing process
regardless of one’s relation to work (job, career or calling).
Copyright UCT
47 of 83
Acknowledging the recurrence of such disconnects was a very important step in the interview
process especially coming from “positive outliers”. This idea that “a negative experience can
trigger actions leading to positive outcomes” is consistent with several psychological theories
such as coping (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). Coping refers to “constantly changing
cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands”
(Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). Coping therefore involves expending conscious effort to
solve personal and interpersonal problems. In this context of inherent need for meaning,
however, coping becomes a conscious effort to make work meaningful.
By creating routines, and engaging in activities that help them reconnect, people contribute to
creating a positive work environment, as expressed by Ulrich (2010), “routines and patterns
driven by our deepest values help us stay grounded in what matters most and available to
those who matter most”. The uniqueness of the routines described by the participants reflects
their unique styles and personalities and reinforces the idea that such tools should not be
externally provided but rather shaped from inside out.
Meaningfulness-making through self, others and the work itself
When asked about what made their work meaningful or more meaningful, there was a clear
divide between those experiences of meaningfulness that were inward-focused and those that
were outward-focused (others, the cause, the work as an end in itself).
Whether it is in the self, in others, in a cause, or in the tasks, these factors are important to
identify as they allow for the experience of meaningfulness to happen in distinct ways.
Within self
For some of the participants, the meaningfulness-making involved mostly cognitive
strategies. This is to some extent consistent with theories of work motivation (Maslow, 1943)
but evoking intrinsic motivation, which remains one of the least understood aspects of work
motivation. It also evokes philosophies of life and work spirituality (Neck & Milliman, 1994)
with the idea that one’s actions are congruent with a larger framework.
Copyright UCT
48 of 83
The strategies anchored in the self are also consistent with Pitts (1995) who indicated that
“the ability to find meaning in work is an expression of one’s sense of self”. In the sense of
self, he includes bringing one’s whole self to work, recognizing and developing one’s
potential, knowing one’s purpose in life, and having a positive belief system about achieving
one’s purpose.
The need to reconnect with one’s purpose highlights the gap between the work and the sense
of self, between roles and identities. Similarly, the strategy to maintain a positive mental
attitude may raise the question of authenticity. Both strategies are in line with the idea that
meaningfulness is socially constructed (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Baumeister et al., 2012) and
suggest some degree of internally driven positive reinforcement (the term is used carefully
here because positive reinforcement is usually used to describe externally driven attempts to
change unwanted behaviour and to drive desired outcomes). This again is consistent with the
idea that meaningfulness arises through an integration of identity with roles (Pratt, 2003).
Through others
Relationships are a primary source of meaning in people’s lives (Baumeister, 1991). It is
therefore not a surprise that for a large majority of the participants, the experience of
meaningfulness in work was related to their interaction with others. Participants have
expressed this in various ways. For some, it was about relationships and belonging, but for
the most part, it was about being of service to others (“willing to grow others”, “willing to
educate others”, or “making a difference in someone’s live”). These two aspects are also well
described in Lips-Wiersma’s framework of meaningful work (figure 5). Participants have
linked the experience of meaningfulness to serving others, making a direct difference in
people’s lives. They also indicated that the impact on people was usually tangible. Some
“noticed small changes in others”, other times they witnessed an “a-ha moment” or a “light-
bulb’ moment”. Participants paid attention to changes in behaviour or changes in language.
They also mentioned moments of “deep connection through eye contact or handshakes”.
The role of others in the making of meaningfulness may also be seen through the concept of
sense-making (Weick, 2005). Weick (2005) argues that “people extract cues from their work
Copyright UCT
49 of 83
situations and interpret them as positive or negative through the process known as sense-
making”. In this context, cues were referred to as feedback or impact; they played an
important role in the ongoing meaningfulness-making process. When people extract more
positive cues, they are likely to sustain a more positive mental attitude. In the opposite
scenario, they may experience loss of meaning.
In the case of a purpose-driven organization, the focus on others can provide tangibility in
areas where an individual contribution to the organizational impact is difficult to measure.
The sample provided some good examples of purpose-driven organizations, with one
organization dedicated to conservation, another to youth development. Both organizations
employed passionate people, committed to the mission of the organization. What was
interesting, however, was that it was difficult for most participants to relate their individual
contribution to impact: “you don’t necessarily see it, but you know your work is having a
positive impact”. To compensate for the distance between self and the greater impact, they
made sure that they engaged in activities where they could see the impact, focusing on people
around them.
Lastly, others play an important role because they allow for experiences to be shared. Being
able to talk to someone, being listened to, being able to share experiences of work or life
outside work, is another important way in which people make their work meaningful
(Allport, 1961). Allport found that the quality of one’s social relationships is a strong
determinant of meaningfulness in life. This suggests that social validation contributes to the
experience of meaningfulness and may explain why meaningfulness also arises from shared
experiences. Nilsson (2009) stressed the importance of shared meaningfulness. He suggested
that overall understanding and experience of meaning must be rooted not just in own
individual experiences of meaningfulness but also in the experiences of colleagues.
Shared meaningfulness may be achieved through inscaping (Nilsson, 2009), a set of practices
that bring to the surface the inner, subjective experiences of organizational members.
Inscaping involves three sets of practices, checking-in, paying appreciative attention, and
shifting focus from behaviour to intention (Nilsson, 2009). It is suggested that by sharing at
an experiential level though these practices, “the inner lives of those with whom we work are
honored”, people feel acknowledged (in their authentic selves) and understood at a deeper
level (Nilsson, 2009). Inscaping, however, may imply that professional and personal
boundaries be loosened (Kahn, 1990).
Copyright UCT
50 of 83
The personal accounts shared in the study suggested that the practice did not take place in
equal measure within the three organizations, and suggested that some organizational cultures
were more prone to inscaping than others. In the organizations where the practice of
inscaping was described, there seemed to be an increase in the sense of belonging and
camaraderie: this is consistent with the theories on meaningfulness-making at work (Pratt &
Ashforth, 2003).
Self-focused strategies vs. others-focused strategies: is there a contradiction?
Reconnecting with one’s purpose and shifting the focus onto others are two strategies that
point to an apparent contradiction. While reconnecting with one’s purpose suggests a focus
on self, the other strategy suggests shifting the focus onto others. This apparent contradiction
may be better understood when exploring the concept of self-transcendence, and in particular
what Frankl has called "the self-transcendence of human existence".
“By declaring that man is responsible and must actualize the potential of his life, I
wish to stress that the true meaning in life is to be discovered in the world rather
than within man or his own psyche, as though it were a closed cycle. I have termed
this constitutive characteristic "the self-transcendence of human existence". It
denotes the fact that being human always points and is directed to something or
someone other than oneself – be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to
encounter. The more one forgets himself – by giving himself a cause to serve or
another person to love – the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself.
What is called self-actualization is not an attainable aim at all, for the simple reason
that the more one would strive for it, the more he would miss it. In other words, self-
actualization is possible only as a side-effect of self-transcendence”.
(Frankl, 1946/1985, p115)
Participants have consistently linked the experience of meaningfulness in work to self-
transcendence, shifting the focus away from the self and onto others. As they shift the focus
onto others, especially with the desire to see others grow, people have experienced a strong
sense of fulfilling their raison d’être.
Copyright UCT
51 of 83
Pratt & Ashforth (2003) further argued that one of the outcomes of transcendence is that it
creates strong linkages between who we are and what we do and why we are here.
Transcendence thus reinforces identities, self-worth, and belonging. This link between
transcendence and identities suggest that sifting the focus on others may, in fact, help people
remain grounded in their deeply held values and in their purpose.
Through the work itself
For some of the participants, meaningful work was strictly related to the accomplishment of a
particular task. Attaining excellence in the performance of a task, in particular, was closely
related to the experience of meaningfulness.
Strategies focused on the work itself evoke both the self-concept (Shamir, 1991) and the flow
theory.
Shamir (1991) framed the self-concept as an important addition to the work-motivation
theories. He developed a theory of “self-concept motivation” on the assumption that people
are “not only goal-orientated, but also self-expressive, and motivated to enhance self-esteem,
self-worth and self-consistency by striving to achieve goals”. He suggests that self-concept-
based behaviour is “not necessarily related to specific outcomes”. This is partly supported by
the evidence from the study; participants have expressed their “love of work”. But
participants also indicated that recognition was an important motivator.
Some of the anecdotes suggested a flow state and supported the view that people make their
work meaningful through vital engagement (Nakamura, 2003).
In the discussion on vital engagement, Nakamura (2003) described a state of flow
characterized by enjoyment and meaning. This is in the process of performing the task such
that it becomes a source of joy and meaningfulness. Some of the participants who illustrated
that flow state were those most excited by challenge and accomplishment. Again, this is
consistent with the flow model, in which Nakamura (2003) insists that “neither challenges
nor skills have to be strongly valued for an experience to become involving. It is the level of
perceived challenge in relation to the person's level of skill or capacities for action that is an
Copyright UCT
52 of 83
essential condition for flow”. As a result, “meaning can grow out of flow in the context of a
sustained relationship with an object” (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003).
While the flow state arises when activities are conducted with care and concentration, the
study nevertheless suggests that the pursuit of growth or mastery is what drives
meaningfulness-making strategies. This is what may be called a craftsmanship approach,
working to the highest possible standard; working because of the belief in the intrinsic value
of the work. A craftsmanship approach is about becoming an expert in a particular domain; it
is about quality of work and about passion for challenge. Craftsmanship is not part of the
academic literature but it captures an approach that is highly relevant in the context of
meaningfulness-making strategies.
Copyright UCT
53 of 83
4.3. Discussion
4.3.1. Contribution
Meaningfulness-making as a dynamic process
The first particularity of the study is that it is focused on meaningfulness-making, from an
individual perspective, not from a leadership perspective. Secondly, this is done by focusing
on “meaningfulness-makers” at various levels of their organization.
The first and main contribution of this study is that, in answering the question: “How do
people make their work meaningful?”, it illustrates the dynamic nature of meaningfulness-
making. The experience of work-meaningfulness is seen as more than the result of a
particular environment; it is viewed as a dynamic process in which the individual can play an
active role. The six meaningfulness-strategies identified are:
Reconnecting with one’s purpose
Keeping a positive mental attitude
Shifting the focus on others
Developing relationships with others
Seeking and embracing challenge
Expanding one’s scope
These strategies are described in details in section 4.1 of this report.
New perspectives on meaningfulness-making strategies
More meaningfulness-making strategies were identified than found in previous research. In
fact, of the six meaningfulness-making strategies identified in the study, two of them:
broadening one’s scope and keeping a positive mental attitude; were also highlighted in the
recent work from Vuori (2012), who considered meaningfulness-making from an individual
perspective. He argued that “workers try to increase the proportion of positive cues extracted
from work to make their work more meaningful”. He identified three main tactics used to
Copyright UCT
54 of 83
increase the proportion of positive cues: (1) cognitively emphasizing the positive qualities of
work; (2) developing competencies; and (3) influencing the work content.
In our framework, developing competencies and influencing the work content are contained
in the same strategy: expanding one’s scope. People increase their scope by developing new
skills but also by cognitively changing their relation to work and especially the boundaries of
their work.
The following strategies are additions to the literature on meaningfulness-making:
reconnecting with one’s purpose; shifting focus onto others; developing relationships with
others; and seeking and embracing challenge.
Three approaches to meaningfulness-making
The study has highlighted 3 main approaches to meaningfulness-making from an individual
perspective: reinforcement, transcendence and craftsmanship (Figure 9).
Motivation theorists have mostly focused on the first approach, reinforcement, with research
on intrinsic motivation, feedback, recognition and rewards. All have mostly focused on
enhancing the sense of self-worth. Such strategies may certainly lead to the experience of
meaningfulness in or at work but, as the study suggests, constant reinforcement and a positive
mental attitude are needed to maintain the connection with meaning.
The second approach, fostering transcendence, has retained little attention in the management
literature and draws more from the spirituality literature. Ashforth & Pratt (2002) have used
the term transcendence to describe a “connection to something greater than oneself; an
integration of various aspects of oneself into a coherent belief system, and a realization of
one’s aspirations and potential”. This research suggests that self-transcendence (Frankl,
1946/1985), through a shift of focus away from the self and specifically onto others
(developing others, educating and influencing others) strongly contributes to the experience
of work-meaningfulness. It also suggests that people engage in such behaviour not because
they have to but because they choose to (extra-role behaviour).
The third approach, the craftsmanship approach shares many similarities with the flow theory
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003). A craftsmanship approach,
Copyright UCT
55 of 83
as with flow interaction is intrinsically rewarding and characterized by “enjoyed absorption”.
A craftsmanship approach, although it suggests a focus on physical objects can also apply to
relationships with ideas or people, as with flow. Flow dynamics involve attunement, growth
and mutuality (Nilsson, 2009). The same may be said of craftsmanship. The one factor that
may distinguish the craftsmanship approach is the focus on developing skills and excellence
not only through physical work, but also through intellectual challenges.
Figure 9: Approaches to meaningfulness-making (Udekwe, 2012)
The reinforcement approach suggests that people have a clear sense of what their purpose is
or, at minimum, a knowledge of their why of work. The transcendental and craftsmanship
approaches are consistent with the views that people make their work meaningful through
either accomplishments or connections (Ulrich, 2010).
The three approaches of meaningfulness-making are useful as they provide an alternative to
the work-orientation model for work-meaningfulness (Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, &
Tipton, 1985) where work-meaningfulness is seen as primarily dependent on one’s work
orientation (job, career, calling). In this model (see Figure 10), work orientation is less
relevant and the focus is on “how” people make their work meaningful.
Copyright UCT
56 of 83
Figure 10 – Meaningfulness-making processes (Udekwe, 2012)
Job crafting as a manifestation of scope-expansion strategies
That people actively seek to influence the scope of their work is to some extent consistent
with the job-crafting theory (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Job crafting is defined as “the
physical and cognitive changes individuals make in the tasks or relational boundaries of their
work”. (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). As a participant mentioned, “I always say, a job is
created around a person, it’s not the other way around” [#17]. In the job-crafting theory,
employees are seen as active crafters of their work. By physically or cognitively changing the
tasks and relational boundaries, they reshape interactions and relationships with others at
work and make their work more meaningful. The job-crafting theory is, as beautifully
expressed in the above participant’s quote, to a great extent about “being self” in work (Kahn,
1990). The idea that work becomes meaningful when one’s preferred self can be expressed is
one of the key drivers of the meaningfulness-making strategy. This suggests another way at
which to look at the job-crafting theory, not in the ways individuals relate to their tasks but in
individuals “being” themselves at work. Job crafting is seen as an extension of simply
“being” and “expressing self” at work. The story of a cleaner who goes well beyond her
duties in assisting a mother to change a baby’s wet nappy captures this quite well.
Copyright UCT
57 of 83
Beyond the job characteristics theory
For people to make their work meaningful they need to do more than rely on the five core job
characteristics linked to meaningful work (Job characteristic theory, Hackman & Oldham,
1976). The five characteristics include “skills variety (the degree to which the job requires a
variety of different activities); task identity (the degree to which a job requires completing a
whole and identifiable piece of work from beginning to end); task significance (the degree to
which the job has a substantial impact on the lives of other people); autonomy (the degree to
which the job provides substantial freedom and independence); and job-based feedback”. The
study indicates that it is not only about the job characteristics, although they are seen as
equally important. Making work meaningful begins by engaging the self in work and
involves developing relationships with people at work; seeking and embracing challenge,
expanding one’s scope. This is consistent with the view that it is not about the circumstances
but about the way in which people react to the circumstances (Frankl, 1946/1985). This is
also in line with the literature on integrated wholeness (Chalofsky, 2003), which suggests that
work becomes meaningful when, in addition to developing the potential of the work itself,
individuals are able to express a “sense of self and a sense of balance”.
Callings
Much attention has been focused on calling orientations; these are seen as the pathway to
work-meaningfulness. In this study however, the focus was not on work orientations;
participants are very likely to be spread across the three work orientations (job, career and
calling). All participants had accounts of meaningfulness-making to share, and, judging by
the body language, the associated emotions were genuine. The study suggests that
meaningfulness-making strategies may take place regardless of work orientation. Frequency
and intensity may vary, but this was not quantified in the study. In addition, the study
suggests that the proactive steps that people take, cognitively or physically over time, can
shape their relation to work in such a way that people no longer work primarily for financial
gain or career advancement, but for the fulfilment that the work itself brings. Work then
acquires the characteristics typically associated with calling orientations. The research
findings, in line with Dobrow (2010), therefore challenge the assumption that callings are
discovered rather than developed.
Copyright UCT
58 of 83
Work spirituality
Another strategy that emerged from the data and that was also identified by Vuori (2012) is
that of maintaining a positive mental attitude. This immediately evokes a number of theories
from sense-making (Weick, 2005), coping (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004) or benefit-finding
(Affleck, 1996), that also explain the ways in which people may sustain meaning in adverse
circumstances. It is interesting to note that all of these theories involve some degree of
reinforcement. In the study, it was seen that positive reinforcement especially from feedback,
played an important role in the experiencing of meaningfulness; there was, however, also a
great deal of intrinsic reinforcement, i.e. reinforcement that is triggered internally. Going
deeper into the ‘why’ lay outside of the scope of the study. Some of the terminology used,
such as “philosophy of life”, “guiding light” or “extra hand” suggested that work-spirituality
played an important role in maintaining positive mental attitudes. Spirituality at work, or the
belief that one’s work has meaning and purpose, appears to contribute significantly to one’s
attitude towards life and work.
Personal strategies and organizational values
The analysis of the relationship between the organizational context and meaningfulness-
making strategies is beyond the scope of this research. It is, however, interesting to note for
future research that the study points to a congruence between organizational values and
individual strategies. A craftsmanship approach, for instance, was predominant in the luxury
hotel environment, where excellence in service was the ultimate goal. By contrast, in the
environmental company, where the mission was to achieve growth for the environment and
for people, transcendental behaviour predominated. The similarities in the language used by
participants and at the corporate level suggest that the strategies were strongly embedded into
their organizational context.
4.3.2. Research implications
Implications for leaders - the study participants represented all levels of the organization. All
the strategies described also apply to leaders, who must, however, acknowledge that they set
Copyright UCT
59 of 83
the tone for their organizations and that engagement in meaningfulness-making strategies at
the leadership level can only encourage members of their organization to pursue their own
strategies. For instance, “when leaders support individual and policy-level routines that help
work, they create a positive environment that not only sustains productivity but that fosters
connection” (Ulrich, 2010).
Implications for human-resources practitioners – while the retention of human capital is one
of the top concerns for HR practitioners, understanding work-meaningfulness from an
employee perspective should also remain a top concern. Among the most important factors
prompting career changes, meaningful work stands out from the rest (Cartwright & Holmes,
2006), which confirms the view that “money is losing some of its appeal as a central
motivator” (Seligman, 2002; Wrzesniewski, 2003). To understand meaningfulness-making,
HR practitioners need not only consider some of the practices which foster meaningfulness in
work (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003); they also need to understand the ways in which employees
must create meaningfulness for themselves. Bringing meaning into work is more than a noble
intention; it may well become a necessity in this 21st century (Ulrich, 2010). It must,
however, be considered with caution and not become a form of “normative control” (Lips-
Wiersma & Morris, 2009). What must be focused on is creating the conditions for
meaningfulness in and at work; conditions must also respect and support the individual’s
meaningfulness-making strategies.
Implications for organizational members - the realization that work-meaningfulness goes
beyond having a calling orientation or being dedicated to a cause, may provoke a mental shift
for many individuals. It could also open up new opportunities for them to make their working
lives more meaningful. By becoming aware of the role they can play and the strategies they
can use to make their work meaningful, regardless of the circumstances, they can transform
their experience of work. Meaningfulness requires proactive behaviour, and is “the result of
searching for, discovering, and engaging in that which makes one’s experience meaningful
(Lips-Wiersma, 2002). This is also fully accessible as all of the strategies described in the
study may easily be implemented and do not require management intervention or approval.
Copyright UCT
60 of 83
4.4. Research limitations
Secular approach - The approach taken in this paper is secular; no explicit reference was
made in the interview questions on spirituality. Further exploration of workplace spirituality
could help our understanding of meaningfulness-making strategies at work. Such insights
could have been achieved by inviting participants more explicitly to consider the relationship
between their spirituality and meaningfulness-making at work.
Focus on active strategies - Participants stressed the importance of feedback and recognition;
this is considered when we talk about sense-making (people looking for positive cues,
tangible impacts, etc.). The study only considers active strategies and therefore did not
explore the effect of receiving feedback. The approach taken did not allow for an analysis of
the relationship between passive and active meaningfulness-making strategies.
Time perspective – The research participants have all been in their positions for more than
three years; seniority of position was an important criterion for participation in the study.
However, such a study would have benefited from a longitudinal approach, allowing for the
observing of change over time.
Political correctness – Participants may have excluded some strategies that could have been
perceived as inappropriate. Playful attitudes to create enjoyment in work, for instance, were
only mentioned at the top level, never by employees. In future studies, the researcher could
be more proactive and explicit in discussing such strategies.
Geographical limitation - The study was conducted in a South African context, drawing on
South African organizations and South African participants. Although this may not constitute
a limitation, there remains an invitation to see similar research conducted in other parts of the
world.
Copyright UCT
61 of 83
4.5. Internal and external validity
Internal validity
The interpretation by a sole researcher is seen as the main risk affecting the internal validity
of the study. To mitigate this risk, the researcher has:
made consistent use of open-ended questions;
used an evidence-based approach to anchor interviewee responses into reality. It will
be particularly important in the formulation of the questions. For instance, the
researcher will begin the questions with: “Tell me about a time when …”, or “You
have mentioned that….tell me more”.
remained very close to the data, and especially in her choice of language (trying not to
substitute terms used by participants).
External validity
Although the sample used may not be representative of the entire population, the primary
objective of the study was to gather a sample large enough for patterns to be identified, and
until such time as theoretical saturation has been reached (incremental learning is minimal).
This is exactly what happened in the study as I listened to the accounts of 25 individuals in
three different organizations. The study included not just one but several organizations, each
with very diverse cultures and leadership styles; this is recognized as a strength (Eisenhardt,
1989), “creating insight from the juxtaposition of contradictory or paradoxical evidence”
(Cameron & Quinn, 1988). As the juxtaposition of conflicting realities tends to force the
researcher into new ways of thinking, the chosen approach may generate less researcher-bias
than other approaches based on incremental studies (Eisenhardt, 1989).
Copyright UCT
62 of 83
5. RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS
At the beginning of the research project the question was asked: “What are the strategies that
people use to make their work meaningful?” Through interviews with 25 meaningfulness-
makers, six key strategies were identified: reconnecting with self; keeping a positive mental
attitude; shifting the focus onto others; seeking and embracing challenge; and expanding
one’s scope.
The study therefore confirms the view that people have an intrinsic will to meaning (Frankl,
1946/1985, Baumeister, 1991); responding to this by actively engaging in an ongoing process
of meaningfulness-making. The study has illustrated the way in which individuals engage in
such strategies in various organizational contexts and when holding various positions within
the organizations; suggesting that the need to make work meaningful transcends the frontiers
of roles and work orientation.
These strategies may be related to three main approaches to meaningfulness-making:
reinforcement; transcendence; and craftsmanship. These approaches offer an alternative to
the work-orientation model, in that they suggest the way in which individuals, based on their
unique traits and needs, may consider meaningfulness-making at work.
The study also highlighted the relationship between the sense of self (Shamir, 1991;
Chalofsky, 2003) and work-meaningfulness, framing the job-crafting concept (Wrzesniewski
& Dutton, 2001) and the job-characteristics theory in a larger scope expansion strategy
characterized by a better integration of selves with roles (Kahn, 1990; Pratt & Ashforth,
2003).
The role of work-spirituality in relation to meaningfulness-making strategies, although it was
not made explicit in the study, certainly plays a role and could be considered in additional
research.
The level of interest that the study has generated and the ease of involving the participants,
has confirmed that meaningfulness in work is indeed a highly topical issue, and not only for a
small group wandering at the top of Maslow’s pyramid. Societal changes and generational
changes are affecting the ways in which people view work; people are “increasingly looking
for more than a mere salary from their work” (Rousseau, Ho, & Greenberg, 2006). A better
Copyright UCT
63 of 83
understanding of the ways in which people can themselves make their work meaningful is
therefore critical, justifying further research.
6. FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
Meaningfulness-making and personal context - The complex relationship between
meaningful work and meaningful life would need further examination.
Meaningfulness-making and organizational context – The relationship between the
organizational context and meaningfulness-making deserves to be further explored. To what
extent are the strategies related to a particular context? How do externally-driven and
employee-driven strategies interact?
Feedback - the study highlights the importance of feedback in the experience of
meaningfulness at work. People receive constant feedback from their environment; this
affects how they feel and behave at work. Feedback is not only the result of one’s actions
(impact) but can also be seen as an antecedent to meaningfulness-making strategies. That
relationship between feedbacks as antecedents and meaningfulness-making strategies could
be included in further research.
Leadership and organizational cultures - While the study suggests that meaningfulness is
made by individuals, it is not argued that leadership and organizational cultures do not
influence work-meaningfulness. The study did not seek to compare the relative influence of
one over the other, neither did the study consider the influence of leadership and culture on
the meaningfulness-making strategies. Further research is needed to consider the relationship
between intrinsic and extrinsic strategies.
Beyond the South African context – The research is deeply embedded in western philosophies
on meaning and life-meaningfulness. Cross-cultural research would be needed for the
research findings to be applicable outside of western countries.
Copyright UCT
64 of 83
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aberbach, J. &. (2002). Conducting and coding elite interviews. Political Science and
Politics,, 35(4), pp. 673-676.
Affleck, G. &. (1996). Construing Benefits from Adversity: Adaptational Significance and
Dispositional Underpinnings. Journal Of Personality, 64(4), 899-922.
Alasuutari, P. (2010). The rise and relevance of qualitative research. International Journal of
Social Research Methodology, 13(2), 139-155.
Alderfer, C. (1972). Existence, Relatedness, and Growth: Human Needs in Organizational
Settings. New York: The Free Press.
Alexiadou, N. (2001). Researching policy implementation: interview data analysis in
institutional contexts. International Journal Of Social Research Methodology, 4(1),
51-69.
Allport, G. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.
Bakker, A., & Schaufeli, W. (2008). Positive organizational behavior: Engaged employees in
flourishing organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 147–154.
Baumeister, R. F. (1991). Meanings of life. . New York: Guilford.
Baumeister, R., & Stillman, T. (2009). Uncertainty, Belongingness, and Four Needs for
Meaning. Psychological Inquiry, 20(4), 249-251.
Baumeister, R., & Vohs, K. (2002). The pursuit of meaningfulness in life. In Handbook of
positive psychology (pp. 608–618).
Baumeister, R., Vohs, K., Aaker, J., & Garbinsky, E. (2012). Some Key Differences between
a Happy Life and a Meaningful Life. Forthcoming in Journal of Positive Psychology.
Bellah, R., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1985). Habits of the
Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life. New York: Harper and Row.
Copyright UCT
65 of 83
Bowie, N. E. (1998). A Kantian Theory of Meaningful Work. Journal Of Business Ethics,
17(9/10), 1083-1092.
Brown, T. (2008, June). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review, 84.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Cameron, K. S., & Spreitzer, G. M. (2011). The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational
Scholarship. Oxford.
Cameron, K., & Quinn, R. (1988). Organizational paradox and transformation. Cambridge,
MA: Ballinger.
Cameron, K., Dutton, J., & Quinn, R. (2003). Positive Organizational Scholarship:
Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Cartwright, S., & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining
employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management Review,
199-208.
Chalofsky, N. (2003). An emerging construct for meaningful work. Human Resource
Development International, 6(1), 69.
Clark, T. (2012). Business Model You. Wiley.
Cooperrider, D. L. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change (2nd ed.).
Brunswick, Ohio: Crown Custom publishing, Inc.
Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry into organizational life.
Research in Organizational Change and Development.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper.
Dilthey, W. (1962). Pattern and Meaning in History. Thoughts on History and Society. New
York: Harper Torchbooks.
Copyright UCT
66 of 83
Dobrow, S. (2010). The dynamics of calling: A longitudinal study of musicians. Working
paper.
Driver, M. (2007). Meaning and suffering in organizations. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 20(5), 611-632.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14(No. 4.), 532-550.
Emmons, R. (1997). Motives and Goals. In R. Hogan, & J. Johnson, Handbook of personality
psychology (pp. 485-512). San Diego: Academic Press.
Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual Review of
Psychology, 55, 745-774.
Frankl, V. E. (1946/1985). Man's search for meaning. Pocket.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. New York: Aldine.
Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Hackman, J., & Oldman, G. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory.
Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Haque, U. (2012, 10 11). Wanting Meaningful Work Is Not a First World Problem. Retrieved
11 7, 2012, from Harvard Business Review Blog:
http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2012/10/is_meaning_a_first_world_probl.html
Hertsberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New Yorl:
Wiley.
Hertzberg, F. (1966). Work and the Natur of Man. Cleveland: The World Publishing
Company.
Hertzberg, F. (1968). One more time: how do you motivate employees? Harvard Business
Review, 46(1), pp. 53-62.
Copyright UCT
67 of 83
Isaksen, J. (2000). Constructing meaning despite the drudgery of repetitive work. Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 40, 84-107.
Kahn, W. (1990, Dec.). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and
Disengagement at Work. The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33(No. 4), 692-
724.
Lips-Wiersma, M. (2002). Analyzing the career concerns of spiritually oriented people:
lessons for comtemporary organizations. Career Developmnt International, 7(7), 385-
397.
Lips-Wiersma, M., & Morris, L. (2009). Discriminating Between ‘Meaningful Work’ and the
‘Management of Meaning’. Journal Of Business Ethics, 88(3), 491-511.
Macey, W., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 1, 3-30.
Martin, R. L. (2005, February). Breakthrough ideas for 2005. The Harvard Business Review,
17-25.
Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 370-396.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and Personnality. New York: Harper.
Maslow, A. (1965). Eupsychian Management. Homewood, Illionois: Dow Jones-Irving.
Maslow, A. (1971). The Farther reaches of Human Nature. New York: Penguin.
May, D., Gilson, R., & Harter, L. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness,
safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11–37.
McClure, J., & Brown, J. (2008). Belonging at work. Human Resource Development
International, 11(1), 3-17.
Michaelson, C. (2005). Meaningful Motivation for Work Motivation. TheoryAcademy Of
Management Review, 30(2), 235-238.
Copyright UCT
68 of 83
Morin, E. (2006). The Meaning of Work, Mental Health and Organizational Commitment.
IRSST.
MOW International Research Team. (1987). The Meaning of Working. London: Academic
Press.
Moxley, R. (2000). Leadership and Sprit. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Myers, M. S. (1966, January-February). Conditions for Manager Motivation. Harvard
Business Review, p. 58.
Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). The Construction of Meaning Through Vital
Engagement. In J. Haidt, & C. Keyes, Flourishing: Positive Psychology and the Life
Well-Lived. (pp. 83-104). Washington, DC,: American Psychological Association.
Neck, C., & Milliman, J. (1994). Thought Self-leadership: Finding Spiritual Fulfilment in
OrganizationalLife. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9(6), 9 - 16.
Nilsson, W. (2009). Sustaining Engagement in Social Purpose Organizations. PhD Thesis.
Overell, S. (2008, May). The Rise of Meaningful Work. Retrieved November 2012, from The
Work Foundation: www.theworkfoundation.com
Pink, D. H. (2005). A Whole New Mind. New York: Riverhead Hardcover.
Pitts, C. (1995). Self as metaphor: empirical, psychological, and theological approaches.
Emory University.
Pratt, M., & Ashforth, B. (2003). Fostering Meaningfulness in Working and at Work. In K.
Cameron, J. Dutton, & R. Quinn, Positive Organizational Scholarship (pp. 309–327.).
San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers.
Quigley, N., & Tymon, W. (2006). Toward an integrated model of intrinsic motivation and
career self-management. Creer Development International, 11(6), 522-543.
Roche, W., & MacKinnon, N. (1970). Motivating people with meaningful work. Harvard
Business Review, 48(3), 97.
Copyright UCT
69 of 83
Rousseau, D., Ho, V., & Greenberg, J. (2006). I-deals: Idiosyncratic terms in employment
relationships. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 977–994.
Schwarzer, R. (2000). Manage stress at work through preventive and proactive coping. In E.
Locke, The Blackwell handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 342-
355). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Seligman, M. E. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize
your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York: Free Press.
Shamir, B. (1991). Meaning, self and motivation in organizations. Organizational Studies,
12, 405-424.
Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. The Academy of
Management Journal, 633-642.
Svendsen, D. (1997). A heuristic study of women's attempsts to integrate utilitarian and
expressive aspects of self through work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Terre Blanche, M., Durrheim, K., & Painter, D. (2006). Research in Practice: Applied
Methods for the Social Sciences. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Uchitelle, L. (2012, July 21). The dilution of American craftsmanship. The New York Times.
Ulrich, D. (2010). Creating Abundance. Leadership Excellence, 27(6), 8.
Ulrich, D. (2010). Leaders who make meaning meaningful. Ivey Business Journal, 74(4), 1.
Ulrich, D., & Ulrich, W. (2010). The Why of Work. How Great Leaders Build Abundant
Organizations That Win. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Vuori, T., San, E., & Kira, M. (2012). Meaningfulness Making at Work. Qualitative
Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 7.
Weick, K. E. (2005). Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking. Organization Science,,
16(4), 409-421.
Copyright UCT
70 of 83
Weisskopf-Joelson, E. (1968). Meaning as an integrating factor. In C. &. Bühler, The course
of human life: A study of goals in the humanistic perspective (pp. 359-382). Oxford:
Springer.
Whitney, D. &.-B. (2003). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive
change. San Francisco, California: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Whitney, D., Cooperrider, D., & Trosten Bloom, A. (2001). The encyclopaedia of positive
questions (Vol. One). Euclid, Ohio: Lakeshore Publications.
Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Callings. In K. S. Cameron, Positive Organizational Scholarship:
Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Finding Positive Meaning in Work. In K. S. Cameron, Positive
Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler.
Wrzesniewski, A. M. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People’s relations to their work.
Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21-33.
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton , J. (2001). Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active
Crafters of Their Work . Academy of Management Review , 26(2), 179-201.
Wrzesniewski, A., Dutton, J., & Debebe, G. (2003). Interpersonal sensemaking and the
meaning of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol 25, 93-135.
Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential Psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.
APPENDIX 1 – LESSONS FROM MEANINGFULNESS MAKERS
Reconnect with purpose
Choose work that is based on your values
Stay grounded in your values
Copyright UCT
71 of 83
Craft work around self
Trust your guiding light
Participate in activities with colleagues that bring you together around shared
values
Choose work that is in line with passion
Create opportunities to reconnect with passion
Rationalizing by looking at the bigger picture
Shift focus onto others
Make a difference in people’s lives
Focus on changing mindsets and attitudes
Listen to others
Focus on developing others
Take care of others
Look at the bigger picture
Developing relationships with others
Developing relationships with the business and the people
Invest in relationships with people at work
Seek high quality connections
Develop stronger relationships
Talk to your management
Keeping a positive mental attitude
Limit self-questioning and self-criticism
Focus on process, don’t take responsibility for outcome especially when it’s
beyond one's control
Find something that you love about your work
Look for small victories
Look for tangible impact
Pay attention to small changes in people
Block negative influences to remain focused on work
Display a positive attitude at work, focus on the positives
Copyright UCT
72 of 83
Show appreciation for the external environment and life in general
Stay away from negative people
See the value in your work
Don’t let a situation get you down, look at the positive
Expanding one's scope
Focus on the future state, define a clear mission
Making oneself be seen, develop your network
Come up with new ideas and bring them up to management
Anticipate boredom and proactively seek new opportunities to learn
Request additional training
Learn to recognize the opportunities to grow, even if it comes as constructive
criticism
Always challenge management to grow
Seeking and embracing challenge
Applying your mind in every new challenge
Seek intellectual challenge
Engaging your brain and your heart each time
Throw yourself into challenging situations
Continuously improve
Seek excellence
Copyright UCT
73 of 83
APPENDIX 2 – STUDY PARTICIPANTS
# Industry Role Years in job Gender
1 Personal development Owner 4 M
2 Environment Owner 10 M
3 Energy Senior Manager 5 M
4 Non-profit Program coordinator 5 F
5 Non-profit Program facilitator 5 M
6 Environment Botanist 5 M
7 Environment Office Manager 4 M
8 Environment Environmental manager 3 F
8 Environment Business strategy 6 M
10 Environment Program Manager 4 F
11 Environment HR Manager 6 F
12 Environment Environmental manager 5 F
13 Environment Business strategy 4 F
14 Environment Receptionist 4 F
15 Environment Environmentalist 5 F
16 Environment Senior Manager 6 M
17 Non-profit Director 5 M
18 Hospitality Clean Lady 4 F
19 Hospitality Clean Lady 3 F
20 Hospitality Security Manager 10 M
21 Hospitality Executive housekeeper 7 F
22 Hospitality HR Manager 5 F
23 Hospitality Banqueting Manager 2 M
24 Hospitality Events Manager 5 F
25 Hospitality Waitress 28 F
Copyright UCT
74 of 83
APPENDIX 3 – CODING
Theme Level 2 coding Level 1 coding Defining a clear mission Broaden scope but also clear sense of
personal goals Expanding one's scope
Wanting to be seen Increasing visibility by expanding one's connections
Expanding one's scope
Innovation Bringing new ideas up to management Expanding one's scope
Tackling new challenges and seeking opportunities to learn
Seeking opportunities to learn and grow Expanding one's scope
Access to training Asking for opportunity to learn Expanding one's scope
Craftsmanship Seeking pleasure in the task itself Expanding one's scope
Personal growth Seeking opportunities to grow Expanding one's scope
Personal growth Recognizing opportunities to grow Expanding one's scope
Developing skills Actively seek opportunities to grow Expanding one's scope
Investing in process not outcome
Keeping a positive mental attitude Keeping a positive mental attitude
Focus on process Celebrate small victories Keeping a positive mental attitude
Philosophy of life, belief in future positive outcome
Positive mental attitude Keeping a positive mental attitude
Accepting one's limitations Looking for small victories Keeping a positive mental attitude
Looking for tangible cues Focusing on small victories and tangible impact
Keeping a positive mental attitude
Positive cues Celebrating small victories Keeping a positive mental attitude
Mental attitude Emphasizing positive cues Keeping a positive mental attitude
Negative influences Focusing on the positives Keeping a positive mental attitude
Mental attitude Emphasizing positive cues Keeping a positive mental attitude
Mental attitude Appreciate the good things in life and work
Keeping a positive mental attitude
Positive people Surround self with positive people Keeping a positive mental attitude
Tangible impact Looking for tangible impact Keeping a positive mental attitude
Look at the positives Cognitively emphasis the positives Keeping a positive mental attitude
Copyright UCT
75 of 83
Theme Level 2 coding Level 1 coding Celebrations, fun activities n/a n/a
Enjoyment Find love in what you do n/a
Feedback Passive strategy, receiving feedback n/a
External validation Passive strategy, receiving feedback n/a
Know what your love and do not compromise
Choosing work based on values Reconnecting with purpose
Self-awareness, knowing what one's values are
Living by one's values Reconnecting with purpose
Person-role fit Craft work around self Reconnecting with purpose
Guiding light Trusting one's guiding light Reconnecting with purpose
Finding passion Find something that you love about your work
Reconnecting with purpose
Organized socializing activities Participating in activities with colleagues that bring them together around shared values
Reconnecting with purpose
Having a guiding light Having a purpose Reconnecting with purpose
Living by one's values Remaining true to one's values and principles
Reconnecting with purpose
Finding passion Finding work that is in line with passion Reconnecting with purpose
Keeping the passion alive Create opportunities to reconnect with passion
Reconnecting with purpose
Passion at work Create opportunities to reconnect with passion
Reconnecting with purpose
Passion at work Seeking opportunities to reconnect with passion
Reconnecting with purpose
Shifting focus from self to the cause
Rationalizing by looking at the bigger picture
Reconnecting with purpose
Passion at work Reconnect to passion Reconnecting with purpose
Providing work that remains intellectually challenging
Applying one’s mind in every new challenge
Seeking and embracing challenge
Work that remains challenging over time
Seek intellectual challenge Seeking and embracing challenge
Engaged brain Engaging the brain and the heart each time
Seeking and embracing challenge
Tackling challenges Throwing oneself into challenging situations
Seeking and embracing challenge
Craftsmanship Seeking excellence Seeking and embracing challenge
Copyright UCT
76 of 83
Theme Level 2 coding Level 1 coding Improving processes Continuous improvement Seeking and embracing
challenge
Excellent work Seeking excellence Seeking and embracing challenge
Challenging work Applying one's mind in every new challenge
Seeking and embracing challenge
Influencing for the greater good Influencing others Shifting focus onto others
Relationships Developing relationships with the business and the people
Developing relationships with others
Shared values, belonging Support system, quality relationships with like-minded individuals
Developing relationships with others
Being able to see the change in others
Focusing on others, influencing others Shifting focus onto others
Surfacing personal experiences at work
Listening to others, inscaping Developing relationships with others
Work environment where people can talk to each other.
Investing in relationships with people at work
Developing relationships with others
Open communication Seeking high quality connections Developing relationships with others
Developing others, helping them grow as individuals and employees
Focusing on developing others Developing relationships with others
Quality relationships Developing stronger relationships Developing relationships with others
Being able to see the change in others
Focusing on others Shifting focus onto others
Focusing on others Focusing on others Shifting focus onto others
Quality relationships at work Focus on relationships Developing relationships with others
Shift the focus Focusing on others / cause Shifting focus onto others
Belonging Sharing experience of work with management
Developing relationships with others
Relationships with guests Developing quality relationships Developing relationships with others
Others Shift focus on taking care of others Shifting focus onto others
Focus on others Focus on developing others Shifting focus onto others
Bigger picture Looking at the bigger picture Shifting focus onto others
Copyright UCT
77 of 83
Coding
Copyright UCT
78 of 83
Coding
Copyright UCT
79 of 83
Copyright UCT
80 of 83
Coding
Copyright UCT
81 of 83
APPENDIX 4 – CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
RESEARCH PROJECT
CONFIDENTIALITY AND USE OF INFORMATION FROM INTERVIEWS
I understand that confidentiality and high ethical standards are important prerequisites for
your participation in the study. I undertake to abide by the following:
1. To keep confidential all information gained during the study. Names will not be used in the report.
2. Not to share personal information shared by individual members of the organization with the management or any other members of the organization.
I acknowledge that these obligations continue after completion of the MBA course work.
SIGNATURE:
NAME (PRINT):
Copyright UCT
82 of 83
APPENDIX 5 – INFORMED CONSENT FORM
Informed Consent Form Principal Researcher/s: Patricia UDEKWE Project Title: Meaningfulness-making strategies at work
Brief overview of the project and its purpose, and what is expected from the respondent:
The objective of the study is to understand how people find meaning in work. We recognize that are a lot of things that employees do not have control over and organizations will have a role to play in creating an environment where people can find meaning. But his is not part of the study. What we are most interested in is the particular roles individuals play and how shape work experiences that are experienced as meaningful to them. We are hoping that by getting a better understanding of how people seek and find meaning in work, organization can learn to reinforce such behaviours and others employees can find ways to improve their own experience of work. There are no known risks or dangers to you associated with this study. Unless you provide an explicit approval, the researchers will not attempt to identify you with the responses to the questionnaire, or to name you as a participant in the study, nor will they facilitate anyone else's doing so.
I acknowledge that I am participating in this study of my own free will. I
understand that I may refuse to participate or stop participating at any time
without penalty. If I wish, I will be given a copy of this consent form.
Subject’s signature:_____________________ Date:_________________
Copyright UCT
83 of 83
APPENDIX 6 – PLAGIARISM DECLARATION
1) I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another’s work and pretend
that it is one’s own.
2) I have used the American Psychological Association (APA) convention for citation
and referencing. Each contribution to, and quotation in, this research report from the
works of other people has been attributed, and has been cited and referenced.
3) This research report is my own work.
4) I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of
passing it off as his or her own work.
5) I acknowledge that copying someone else’s assignment or essay, or part of it, is wrong
and declare that this is my own work.
Signed: ____________________________
Name: ____________________________
