JD-R Job Crafting Intervention: What Works? What Doesn't?
Despite some research limitations, job crafting is the most exciting thing to happen to employee wellbeing in some time.
The following is a combination of two articles originally published on LinkedIn around 2018. They’ve been edited for brevity, accuracy, and to include updated links (not all links are updated). Looking back, I’m not sure why these articles understate the work of Arnold Bakker and Evangelia Demerouti, who have been the foremost researchers and thought leaders on the topics of JD-R and its version of job crafting.
Part I
All job characteristics can be thought of as either demands or resources. This is the foremost proposition of the Job Demands-Resources theory.
Job demands cost energy and affect job stress and health.
Resources affect motivation and performance and can buffer the negative affects of demands.
Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman’s classic 1984 work, Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, defined different kinds of demands: challenges and hindrances. Jeffery LePine and his team at University of Florida expanded on this and found that challenge demands are linked to improved job performance, whereas hindrance demands lead to impaired work engagement and performance.
The Good and The Bad.
We'll get to some examples, but for now know that:
Challenge demands cost energy but are viewed by workers as opportunities to grow, improve, advance, achieve.
Hindrance demands cost energy and are perceived as unnecessary obstacles, thwarting personal growth, wellbeing, and achievement.
(By the way, there also are different types of resources — for example, job resources and personal resources. Job resources include things like performance feedback, training, and autonomy; personal resources include self-efficacy (confidence in your ability to have an effect) and optimism. For a more detailed and expert analysis of different types of demands and resources, see Maria Tims and Arnold Bakker's article, "Job Crafting: Towards a New Model of Job Redesign.”)
The Crafty
In job crafting with the JD-R model, employees
Seek resources
Seek challenge demands
Reduce hindrance demands
Potentially confusing about JD-R is the fact that some of what researchers point to as resources — like performance feedback and training — are sometimes viewed by employees as hindrances. And occasionally there’s a fine line between a resource like autonomy and a hindrance demand like role ambiguity.
For clarification, it’s helpful to see what experts consider demands and resources. Below are examples adapted from a book chapter called “A Critical Review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for Improving Work and Health,” by Wilmar Schaufeli and Toon Taris.
Notice the authors didn’t sub-divide the demands into “hindrances” and “challenges.” Why do you think that is? And how do you think an employer, a trainer, or a job-crafting employee — when in doubt — could determine whether a job trait is a demand or a resource?
Job Demands
Cognitive demands
Computer problems
Downsizing
Emotional demands
Interpersonal conflict
Job insecurity
Work-family conflict
Difficult customers
Physical demands
Reorganization
Inadequate rewards
Role ambiguity
Harassment
Unfavorable shift work schedule
Unfavorable work conditions
Work pressure
Work-home conflict
Work overload
Job Resources
Advancement
Appreciation
Autonomy
Rewards
Goal clarity
Information
Innovative climate
Leadership
Professional development
Participation in decision making
Performance feedback
Procedural fairness
Positive customer interactions
Quality of the relationship with the supervisor
Safety climate
Social support
Skill utilization
Strategic planning
Task variety
Team harmony
Trust in management
Values
Personal Resources
Emotional and mental competencies
Intrinsic motivation
Self-determination
Optimism
Organization-based self-esteem
Resilience
Self-efficacy
Values
Part II
Oodles of studies that include workers with diverse jobs in various countries show that JD-R job crafting, in which employees modify their job demands and resources, is an employee-forward way to improve person-job fit -- a win-win for employees and employers. It leads to improved wellbeing, stronger work engagement, better adaptability to change, and more productive job performance.
But when it comes to pulling their job demands and resources into an ideal level of balance -- ie. JD-R job crafting -- workers often aren't aware of the possibility, and some aren't confident in their ability to do it. Then again, some employers haven't yet come to appreciate job crafting or don't know how to inspire it.
These are among the reasons we, especially those of us trained and experienced in operationalizing workplace wellbeing programs, want to know how to structure JD-R job crafting interventions and what kinds of interventions work.
In a previous post, I reported studies of what I dubbed "Job Crafting Classic," the original model proposed by Wrzesniewski, Dutton, and Berg. Here, let's navigate the more rugged terrain of the JD-R job crafting landscape.
The following are studies of JD-R job crafting interventions -- almost every study I could find. Almost all are based on a "quasi-experimental" design, meaning that -- consistent with most studies of workplace interventions -- neither the participant group nor the control group was selected randomly. They're mostly pre- and post-test study designs, meaning measurements -- of things like job crafting behaviors, work engagement, levels of demands and resources, and job performance -- were measured before the intervention and after. This is a relatively detailed overview, with links to the original studies in case you want more detail.
4-Week Job Crafting Intervention for Police District Employees
Van den Heuvel et al paved the way with phased intervention for employees of a police district. The first stage was a one-day workshop that taught participants about JD-R job crafting; had them assess the current state of their demands and resources; and raised their awareness of opportunities to find more meaning and satisfaction in their jobs via crafting. The workshop concluded with creation of a job crafting plan. This was followed by four weeks of independent work on their plan, which included two or three goals per week. At the end of the study period, a half-day “reflection session” was held.
The study included 39 employees in a Dutch police district and 47 employees in a control group.
Outcomes:
Increased wellbeing;
Increased self-efficacy (confidence in one's ability to influence results);
Greater access to developmental opportunities.
The same team recently published another study (in Dutch) of a similar intervention — with only one goal per week and more participant interaction between each other and with the trainers — with 83 civil servants. They found increases in job crafting behaviors, increases in access to job resources, and improved wellbeing, compared to controls).
The researchers found the findings of their police district study, generally, to be "not significant." But they concluded,
The job crafting intervention seems to have potential to enable employees to proactively build a motivating work environment and to improve their own well‐being.
[Van den Heuvel, Machteld, Evangelia Demerouti, and Maria CW Peeters. "The job crafting intervention: Effects on job resources, self‐efficacy, and affective well‐being." Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 88.3 (2015): 511-532. This pilot intervention was originally described with additional detail in Van den Heuvel, Machteld, Evangelia Demerouti, and Maria Peeters. "Succesvol job craften door middel van een groepstraining." Scherp in werk 5 (2012): 27-49. [Dutch], worth noting because it may be the first published study of a JD-R job crafting intervention.]
Simplified Job Crafting Intervention for Medical Specialists and Nurses
Intervention: Gordon et al tested a fine-tuned version of the 4-week intervention (above). They explained:
“As the effects found by Van den Heuvel and colleagues were rather weak, we modified their intervention in several respects. Adjustments were made to the intervention to increase individuals' understanding and application of job crafting behaviors into their daily work…”
The intervention started with a three-hour workshop in which participants learned about JD-R job crafting — seeking resources, seeking challenges, and reducing demands. It encouraged participants to learn from their own or others' real–life experiences by sharing stories of how their proactive behavior changed their thoughts, feelings, or relationships at work. The workshops were customized to support the employer and its workers during a period of organizational change. At the end of the workshop, participants created individual job crafting plans to follow for next three weeks.
The team conducted one study with 119 medical specialists and another with 58 nurses. The interventions were customized for each group based on the needs of the organization and the employees during a period of organizational change.
Outcomes: Overall, the participants experienced increases in their job crafting behaviors, improved wellbeing, and better performance compared to controls. The medical specialists improved adaptive performance — that is, their ability to effectively modify behavior in response to changes at work. Consistent with other JD-R research, reducing demands did not clearly lead to positive outcomes — a dynamic that’s not yet fully understood.
The interventions led to “medium to large” increases in job crafting behavior and wellbeing.
The researchers concluded that the intervention was...
...a promising job redesign intervention strategy that individual employees can use to improve their well-being and job performance… Individual and organizational interests … can be integrated by adopting the theoretical framework of the 'job demands-resources model.'
[Gordon, Heather J., et al. "Individual job redesign: job crafting interventions in healthcare." Journal of Vocational Behavior 104 (2018): 98-114.]
Blending The Job Crafting Exercise and JD-R Interventions for Healthcare Workers
Van Wingerden published several studies of job crafting interventions in recent years. She and her team published a relatively early study of a JD-R job crafting intervention, delivering a hybrid of the style of interventions described above and the Michigan Job Crafting Exercise™. The subjects were 67 healthcare workers who diagnose, identify, and treat hearing-impaired patients.
The intervention led to increased work engagement and improved job performance in the participants. Van Wingerden continued to use this "hybrid" (my word) intervention, weaving the JD-R model into the Job Crafting Exercise framework, in other studies.
[Wingerden, Jessica van, Arnold B. Bakker, and Daantje Derks. "A test of a job demands-resources intervention." Journal of Managerial Psychology 31.3 (2016): 686-701.]
Comparing Resource Interventions and Job Crafting Interventions for Special Education Teachers
Van Wingerden et al compared different interventions for primary school special education teachers at multiple sites: 26 participants took part in an intervention geared exclusively to increasing personal resources (specifically, psychological capital… hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience); 32 participated in a complete job crafting intervention; 26 participated in a combined personal resources and job crafting intervention. 18 study subjects were assigned to a control group.
The study found...
The personal resources intervention improved work engagement
Job crafting intervention can, in contrast to Van den Heuval’s study above, increase employees’ job crafting behavior.
An intervention combining personal resources and job crafting leads to improved performance, but not increased work engagement.
The researchers concluded that job crafters probably should focus on increasing resources if they seek to boost work engagement. They suggested that, in addition to interventions, senior managers could do more to support employees' balance of demands and resources, especially by expanding available resources.
[Van Wingerden, Jessica, Daantje Derks, and Arnold B. Bakker. "The impact of personal resources and job crafting interventions on work engagement and performance." Human Resource Management 56.1 (2017): 51-67. (first published in 2015)]
Lasting Effects of Job Crafting in Teachers
Van Wingerden took it a step further in a study of 75 teachers, in which she and her team evaluated the sustainability of outcomes one year after completion of a JD-R job crafting intervention, in addition to the measurements they took shortly after the intervention’s conclusion.
They found that
Participants exhibited significantly increased job crafting behaviors one week after the intervention was completed and 1 year later.
Feedback, professional development, and self-efficacy resources had increased at the conclusion and one year after the job crafting intervention.
Significant performance improvements weren't found at the conclusion of the study, but were found one year after the intervention. The researchers explained this lag by suggesting that participants increased their challenge job demands during the intervention, which could result in a short-term suppression of performance improvement but long-term growth.
They concluded...
The job crafting intervention may be a promising tool to facilitate a resourceful work environment which enables employees to achieve their personal and organizational goals.
(This study, which focused on reducing hindering demands, did not lead to increased work engagement -- a recurring finding in JD-R studies. A study Van Wingerden led and published in 2017, Fostering Employee Well-Being Via a Job Crafting Intervention, however, found that an intervention focused on increasing challenge demands did lead to increased work engagement.)
[Van Wingerden, Jessica, Arnold B. Bakker, and Daantje Derks. "The longitudinal impact of a job crafting intervention." European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 26.1 (2017): 107-119.]
Broad Study on Effects of Job Crafting Opportunities
Finally, Van Wingerden and Poell published a study in 2017 that, based on questionnaire responses of 2,090 Dutch employees from various walks of life, supports the value of job crafting interventions: “Results indicated that individuals who experience a high level of opportunities to craft reported higher levels of job crafting behavior. In turn, perceived opportunities to craft and job crafting behavior related to higher levels of work engagement and subsequently performance.” [Emphasis added.] Interventions are one means of creating "opportunities" to craft jobs.
The research team advised:
Managers who positively influence employees’ perceived opportunities to craft before offering job crafting interventions, in the organization, can create optimal conditions that may in fact strengthen intervention effects.
[Wingerden, Jessica Van, and Rob F. Poell. "Employees’ Perceived Opportunities to Craft and In-Role Performance: The Mediating Role of Job Crafting and Work Engagement." Frontiers in psychology 8 (2017): 1876.]
"Awareness" Intervention in Chemical Plant Workers
Tims et al surveyed chemical plant workers regarding their levels of demands, resources, work engagement, job satisfaction, and burnout. Surveys were sent at the outset and at the conclusion of a 2-month study period, with another survey specific to job crafting sent midway. All participants received standardized feedback that scored their levels of job demands and resources, with examples illustrating how demands and resources can be crafted by employees. 288 workers completed all three surveys and were, therefore, included in the analysis.
(This study generally isn't described as an intervention, but it obviously is one -- more of an "awareness" campaign rather than a behavioral intervention, but an intervention all the same. In health promotion terms, it's comparable to, say, assessing someone's level of physical activity and, if it's low, providing boilerplate feedback on the risk of sedentary lifestyle and strategies people use to add physical activity into their life. The fact we aren't telling them what they have to do or that they have to do anything at all doesn't mean it's not an intervention. In fact, it would be a fairly typical health intervention.)
Access to different types of resources had increased for respondents who reported, at the midway point, that they craft resources. This was positively related to increased engagement and job satisfaction, and decreased burnout. Those who said they craft job demands did not necessarily experience a change in job demands, but crafting challenge demands was linked to increases in wellbeing. This is consistent with findings in other studies that suggest, perhaps counter-intuitively, that positive outcomes may be rooted in the empowerment to engage in job crafting, if not with actual changes in resources and, especially, demands.
These researchers offered this caution:
Our results do not suggest that employees should be held responsible for their work environment and well-being. Rather, they suggest that management interventions should focus more on the effects of job demands on employee well-being because employees seem to change their job demands less often than their job resources.
They added...
These results obviously suggest that employees can optimize their own well-being when allowed to. Therefore, organizations should not only facilitate employee well-being by providing sufficient job resources and an optimal level of job demands, but they should also offer opportunities for employee job crafting.
[Tims, Maria, Arnold B. Bakker, and Daantje Derks. "The impact of job crafting on job demands, job resources, and well-being." Journal of occupational health psychology 18.2 (2013): 230.]
Harvard Meta-Analysis: Job Crafting is Associated Positively with Work Engagement, but Interventions...
Harvard’s Frederick and VanderWeele conducted a meta-analysis on job crafting. The researchers searched for studies of various outcomes, but only found enough studies of sufficient quality to examine work engagement as an outcome.
Their analysis showed that job crafting is positively associated with work engagement, but they weren't able to say the same thing about interventions, specifically.
The studies of interventions, rather than just job crafting behaviors, that we did identify found no effect of the intervention (Van den Heuvel et al., 2015; Van Wingerden et al., 2015).
Presumably, they mean "no effect" on work engagement. Frederick and VanderWheele acknowledge that the intervention studies may not have had sufficiently large subject pools to demonstrate such an effect. Take note, however:
The authors don’t mention Van Wingerden's 2016 and 2017 studies (above) -- perhaps they were published after the meta-analysis was conducted -- that did demonstrate increased improvements in work engagement.
The analysis didn't include Tims et al’s “Impact of Job Crafting…” stealth intervention from 2012 (above), understandably since the authors didn’t describe it as an intervention. But it was an intervention and it did lead to greater work engagement.
[Link updated March 14, 2023:] [Frederick, D. E., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2020). Longitudinal meta-analysis of job crafting shows positive association with work engagement. Cogent Psychology, 7(1), 1746733.]
If you've paid close attention, you may notice a few red flags about these studies: small study populations, apparently homogenous demographics, limited number of studies, and a concentrated group of researchers.