Underload work and Challenging Work: Overcoming Boredom among Millennials
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v14i2.8758Keywords:
millennials, boredom, underload work, challengeAbstract
The research aimed to explore the moderation role of challenge in the relationship between underload work and boredom at work, especially among millennial employees. As part of the current productive age and some had even occupied essential positions in the company, millennials had characteristics that were easier to get bored than other generations, which could increase millennials’ vulnerability to feeling bored at work. Therefore, a special strategy was needed to deal with boredom among millennials to maintain company productivity and psychophysical health in millennials. The research involved 327 millennials employee in Indonesia aged 23-40. Data were collected from December 2021 – January 2022 via a Google Form. The data were analyzed using simple moderation by PROCESS Hayes. The findings show that boredom can be predicted by three underload work variables: perception of underload work, the expectation of workload, and desire for the workload. The moderation role of challenge can only be found to reduce the effect of underload work perception on boredom but not on workload expectation or workload desire. Based on this result, it can be concluded that seeking challenges or adding responsibilities at work can prevent boredom among employees who perceive low workloads in their current state. As a result, organizations must provide employees with the opportunity and support to take on new challenges at work. Employees must also be proactive in seeking new challenges to avoid boredom.
Plum Analytics
References
Agarwal, P., Swami, S., & Malhotra, S. K. (2022). Artificial intelligence adoption in the post COVID-19 new-normal and role of smart technologies in transforming business: A review. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-08-2021-0122.
Azizah, S. N., & Setyawati, H. A. (2019). Cyberloafing sebagai strategi mengatasi kebosanan kerja. Fokus Bisnis: Media Pengkajian Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 18(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.32639/fokusbisnis.v18i1.301.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115.
Chao, M., Chen, X., Liu, T., Yang, H., & Hall, B. J. (2020). Psychological distress and state boredom during the COVID-19 outbreak in China: The role of meaning in life and media use. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 11(1), 1769379. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2020.1769379.
Clemons, J. (2020). Investigating work engagement and affective commitment through a multi-dimensional work underload scale, mediated by work-related boredom. California: California State University. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/1028.
Costantini, A., Demerouti, E., Ceschi, A., & Sartori, R. (2022). Implementing job crafting behaviors: Exploring the effects of a job crafting intervention based on the theory of planned behavior. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(3), 477-512. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886320975913.
De Cooman, R., Mol, S. T., Billsberry, J., Boon, C., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2019). Epilogue: Frontiers in person–environment fit research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(5), 646-652. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1630480.
Devina, & Dwikardana, S. (2019). Indonesian millennials’ needs in the workplace: Case study in PR Akur Pratama. Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Bisnis, 15(2), 117-128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26593/jab.v15i2.3826.
Domurath, A., Taggar, S., & Patzelt, H. (2022). A contingency model of employees’ turnover intent in young ventures. Small Business Economics, 60, 901-927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00629-2.
Eid, M. (2018). Predictors of job. Undergraduate Theses. Retrieved from https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses/362.
Harju, L. K., Hakanen, J. J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2016). Can job crafting reduce job boredom and increase work engagement? A three-year cross-lagged panel study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95-96, 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.07.001.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Helmi, A., Sarasi, V., Kaltum, U., & Suherman, Y. (2021). Discovering the values of generation X and millennial consumers in Indonesia. Innovative Marketing, 17(2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.21511/im.17(2).2021.01.
Hoeng, C. L. L., Aditya, S., Bergita, E., Oeripto, V. G. S. ., Ichsan, A. M., Hesketh, W., Mayang, F. D., Radhitia, M. B., & Effency, O. D. (2019, September). Generasi milenial dalam industri 4.0: Bagi sumber daya manusia Indonesia atau ancaman? Deloitte Indonesia Organization, 1, 24-36.
Holman, D. J., & Hughes, D. J. (2021). Transactions between big-5 personality traits and job characteristics across 20 years. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 94(3), 762-788. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12332.
Husna, F. H., Silviandari, I. A., & Susilawati, I. R. (2020). Kebosanan kerja sebagai prediktor perilaku cyberloafing pada karyawan. Jurnal Studia Insania, 8(1), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.18592/jsi.v8i1.3516.
Khan, T. I., Kaewsaeng-On, R., & Saeed, I. (2019). Impact of workload on innovative performance: Moderating role of extrovert. Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 7(5), 123-133. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7516.
Knight, C., Tims, M., Gawke, J., & Parker, S. K. (2021). When do job crafting interventions work? The moderating roles of workload, intervention intensity, and participation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 124, 103522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103522.
Kural, A. I., & Özyurt, B. E. (2018). The associations between university adjustment, adult attachment styles, personality traits, and perceived stress. American International Journal of Social Science, 7(2), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.30845/aijss.v7n2a6.
Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, art-based, and community based participatory research approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Maden, C., Ozcelik, H., & Karacay, G. (2016). Exploring employees’ responses to unmet job expectations. Personnel Review, 45(1), 4-28. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2014-0156.
Marri, M. Y. K., Jamshaid, R., & Aqdas, R. (2021). Impact of perceived organizational support, servant leadership, creative self-efficacy, and conscientiousness on job boredom via job crafting: A study on banking sector of Pakistan. IRASD Journal of Management, 3(3), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.52131/jom.2021.0303.0042.
Maulina, R. (2018). Pengaruh pelatihan job crafting untuk menurunkan tingkat kebosanan kerja karyawan di perusahaan X Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Universitas Islam Indonesia.
Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. . (2005). Applied multivariate research : Design and interpretation. New York: SAGE Publications.
Naude, M. N. (2015). The development of a measure of work-related underload. Colorado: Colorado State University. Retrieved from https://mountainscholar.org/bitstream/handle/10217/170404/Naude_colostate_0053N_13381.pdf.
Ok, C., & Lim, S. (2022). Job crafting to innovative and extra-role behaviors: A serial mediation through fit perceptions and work engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 106, 103288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103288.
Oprea, B., Iliescu, D., Burtaverde, V., & Dumitrache, M. (2019). Personality and boredom at work: The mediating role of job crafting. Career Development International Emerald Publiishing, 24(4), 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-08-2018-0212.
Oprea, B., Miulescu, A., & Iliescu, D. (2022). Followers’ job crafting: Relationships with full-range leadership model. Current Psychology, 41(7), 4219-4230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00950-7.
Parker, S. K., Morgeson, F. P., & Johns, G. (2017). One hundred years of work design research: Looking back and looking forward. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 403-420. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000106.supp.
Pindek, S., Krajcevska, A., & Spector, P. E. (2018). Cyberloafing as a coping mechanism: Dealing with workplace boredom. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 147-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.040.
Reijseger, G., Schaufeli, W. B., Peeters, M. C. W., Taris, T. W., Beek, I. Van, & Ouweneel, E. (2013). Watching the paint dry at work: Psychometric examination of the Dutch boredom scale. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 26(5), 508-525. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2012.720676
Rose, C. L., Murphy, L. B., Byard, L., & Nikzad, K. (2002). The role of the big five personality factors in vigilance performance and workload. European Journal If Personality, 16, 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.451.
Seckin, S. N. (2018). Boredom at work: A research on public employees. Journal of Business Research Turk, 10(1), 639-651. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2018.411.
Sharp, J. G., Sharp, J. C., & Young, E. (2020). Academic boredom, engagement and the achievement of undergraduate students at university: A review and synthesis of relevant literature. Research Papers in Education, 35(2), 144-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2018.1536891.
Sutarto, A. P., & Izzah, N. (2022). Do job boredom and distress influence self-report individual work performance? Case study in an Indonesia muslim fashion industry. Jurnal Optimasi Sistem Industri, 21(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.25077/josi.v21.n1.p1-9.2022.
Teng, M., Hassan, Z., Kasa, M., Nor, N. N., Bandar, N. F. A., & Ahmad, R. (2020). Mediating role of boredom in the workplace on turnover intention: A proposed framework. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 10(12), 924-938. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i12/8385.
Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2012). Development and validation of the job crafting scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(1), 173-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.05.009.
van Hooff, M. L. M., & van Hooft, E. A. J. (2014). Boredom at work: Proximal and distal consequences of affective work-related boredom. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(3), 348-359. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036821.
van Hooft, E. A. J., & van Hooff, M. L. M. (2018). The state of boredom: Frustrating or depressing? Motivation and Emotion, 42(6), 931-946. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-018-9710-6.
van Wyk, S. M., de Beer, L. T., Pienaar, J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2016). The psychometric properties of a workplace boredom scale (DUBS) within the South African context. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 42(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v42i1.1326.
Vieira, A. L. (2011). Interactive LISREL in practice. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18044-6.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Don Ozzy Rihhandini, Endang Parahyanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
