Our work and the organization in which we work play significant roles in many of our lives. Yet, theoretically grounded understanding of when is it that the relationships with our work and that with our work environment make a great place to work is almost non-existent. So far the organizations that feature in the Fortune Best Companies to Work For, or the Forbes the Happiest Companies to Work For, or the Glassdoor Best Places to Work, etc., are considered as proxies for great places to work. However, the characterizations of the antecedents of these workplaces are fragmented, idiosyncratic, and confounding, as they cover a wide span of factors (e.g., pride, job satisfaction, flexibility, inspiring leadership, camaraderie, trust, work-life balance, etc.), and adopt a one-size fits all approach, without a theoretical underpinning, limiting their generalizability and usefulness. In my dissertation, I addressed these shortcomings through the fit perspective and through the mechanism of meaning in and at work. I proposed the meaning-through-fit model of great places to work, underpinned by identity (Stryker & Berke, 2000), social identity (Ashforth & Mael, 1989), and social information processing theories (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). The model hypothesized that the employees’ perception of a great place to work is built and sustained by meaning in work (from the relationship with the work itself) based on the underlying person-work fit, and by meaning at work (from the relationship with the work environment) based on the underlying person-supervisor, the person-group, and the person-organization fits. I tested the proposed model using a mixed methods approach, with the help of three Studies. In Study 1, I conducted 26 semi-structured interviews to assess the face validity of the model and to obtain inputs for the survey instrument and for the scenario descriptions to be used in Study 2. In Study 2, I tested the hypothesized model with the help of quantitative data gathered through a three-wave Main Survey with participants from MTurk (N=481), after two Pilot Surveys (N=95 and 247). I confirmed the results through Scenario Analysis with participants from MTurk (N=399). Out of the seven main variables in the proposed model, I developed scales to measure three variables (employees’ perception of a great place to work, meaning at work, and person-group fit), and refined the scales to measure four variables (person-work fit, person-supervisor fit, person-organization fit, and meaning in work). In Study 3, I conducted 45 structured interviews in order to gain a deeper understanding of the findings from Study 2. The quantitative data gathered in Study 2 provided partial support to the proposed model, indicating that meaning in work partly mediated the relationship between person-work fit and employees’ perception of a great places to work, and meaning at work partly mediated the relationship between person-organization fit and employees’ perception of a great place to work. The data also indicated that meaning at work is the more significant predictor compared to meaning in work. Among the fits, person-organization fit mattered the most. Study 3 provided interesting insights and explanations about the findings from Study 2. The meaning-through-fit model of great places to work works around the problematic one-size fits all approach, acknowledges the differences among the employees in the understanding of and expectations from a great places to work, offers increased generalizability and a pathway to leaders to build great places to work from the employees’ perspective, and contributes theoretically and empirically to Positive Organizational Scholarship. / Graduate / 2019-08-26

No description available.

Studien har genomförts på en svensk organisation som står inför en branschomställning vilket innebär att rekryteringsbehovet ökar och fler medarbetare behöver anställas. Syftet med studien är att undersöka vad en attraktiv arbetsplats är, hur attraktiva arbetsplatser skapas, om det går att mäta och hur den studerade organisationen förhåller sig till det.   Datainsamlingen bestod av marknadsundersökningar som behandlar vad som utgör attraktiva arbetsplatser, organisationens egen medarbetarundersökning samt intervjuer med ledning och medarbetare. Data analyserades med teorier och tidigare forskning inom organisatorisk förändring, ledarskap och sensemaking, offensiv kvalitetsutveckling, attraktiv arbetsplats samt arbetsgivarvarumärke.   Organisationens medarbetare trivs väldigt bra, men organisationen har ett arbete framför sig för att bli mer attraktiva bland potentiella arbetstagare. Förbättringspotential ligger i att skapa delaktighet bland medarbetarna, ökad transparens i kommunikation och beslutsfattande, ledarskap och sensemaking samt att arbeta aktivt med ständiga förbättringar och innovation.   Med hänsyn till hur en attraktiv arbetsplats kan mätas presenteras en mognadsmodell med fem dimensioner. Dessa är sociala värderingar, maximera potential, effektivt ledarskap, ömsesidig tillit samt utveckling och innovation. Organisationen utvärderas med hjälp av modellen och nuläge identifieras. Slutligen presenteras förbättringsförslag som organisationen kan använda sig av för att göra en förflyttning mot att bli en mer attraktiv arbetsplats. / The study has been conducted at a Swedish organization facing industry changes and scaling, meaning the organization need to reconsider their strategies for attraction and retention of employees. The study aims to investigate what makes a workplace attractive, how great places to work are created and how this can be measured. Further, the study investigates where the specific organization fits into this and how they can create a workplace to attract more talent.   Data for the study was collected through market research, the organization's employee survey and through interviews with top management as well as employees. The data was analyzed using theories and previous research within organizational change, leadership and sensemaking, total quality management, great place to work and employer branding.   There is an overall high satisfaction amongst employees of the organization, however, there are areas of improvement. The organization needs to work with involving and engaging employees at all levels, increase transparency in communication and decision making, leading through sensemaking, and working actively with continuous improvements to innovate.   In regards of measuring how attractive a workplace is, a maturity grid has been presented. The maturity grid is based on five dimensions for creating a great place to work. These are social values, maximizing potential, efficient leadership, mutual trust in addition to continuous improvement and innovation. The studied organization has been evaluated in the maturity grid and suggestion for improvement to create a better workplace has been presented.

Subject background and discussion: In recent decades, issues of human rights, labor and environmental change has been hot topics world wide, which also has influenced the financial market. More and more investors use socially responsible investing (SRI) screens when constructing their portfolios. One form of SRI screen is to choose companies that have satisfied employees. Existing theory says that employee satisfaction is an intangible asset to the firm that will positively affect a firm’s performance in the future. Intangible assets are often unrecognized by the market and thereby not incorporated in the stock price. The efficient market hypothesis has been studied and debated for several decades. Proponents of the EMH argue that all available information is incorporated in the stock price, thus it is not possible to systematically beat the market. However, EMH is controversial, since research has shown different results regarding the possibility to make abnormal return from various investing strategy. Research question: Is it possible to make abnormal returns by investing in a portfolio of worldwide firms with top scores on the SRI screen employee satisfaction? Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to examine investor’s possibility to make abnormal return with controls for multiple risk factors by investing in worldwide firms with top scores in employee satisfaction. One sub-purpose is to examine how the market values intangibles depending on the degree of market efficiency. Another sub-purpose of the study is to test two different portfolio weighting methodologies, equally- and value weighted, and observe the differences between them. Theory: This study deals with the efficient market hypothesis and the concepts of SRI, employee satisfaction, intangible assets and several risk-adjusted measurements. Method: We have chosen to perform a quantitative study with a deductive approach to answer our research question. We used a sample size of 696 firms based on “Great Place to Works”- lists of companies with high employee satisfaction to construct sex portfolios with different holding periods and strategies. These portfolios have been explored and tested significantly with both equally and value weighted methods. Result/Analysis: The study finds significant evidence of an average annual abnormal return of 3,66% and 2,43% for our main portfolio over the market for equally- and value weighted, respectively, using the three-factor model. When adjusting for momentum, thus employing the four-factor model, all the predictive variables still identify strong persistence in the abnormal return, with statistical significance. Conclusion: The results show that it is possible to make abnormal returns, during the observed time period, regardless of the weighing methodology, although the equally weighted received higher abnormal returns. Thus, the market efficiency appears to be in weak form and does not fully value intangibles.