Employee benefit availability, use, and subjective evaluation: A meta-analysis of relationships with perceived organizational support, affective organizational commitment, withdrawal, job satisfaction, and well-being.
{"title":"Employee benefit availability, use, and subjective evaluation: A meta-analysis of relationships with perceived organizational support, affective organizational commitment, withdrawal, job satisfaction, and well-being.","authors":"Yeong-Hyun Hong, Michael T Ford, Jaehee Jong","doi":"10.1037/apl0001202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Employee benefits constitute 38.1% of compensation costs, representing a sizeable investment in the workforce. Unlike other forms of support that depend on the actions of individuals throughout the organization, benefits can be changed through decisions at the highest level and influence employees throughout the company. Yet, the literature on benefits has been largely disjointed, resulting in theoretical ambiguity and practical questions about the role of employee benefit experiences in individual employee outcomes. To inform theory and practice, we organized the benefits literature using social exchange theory as a framework and conducted a meta-analysis on the relationships of employee benefit availability, use, and subjective evaluation with perceived organizational support, employee attitudes, and well-being. Our review (<i>k</i> = 134, <i>N</i> = 260,604) found unique relationships between the availability and subjective evaluation of employee benefits and affective organizational commitment, withdrawal intentions, job satisfaction, and well-being, with these relationships partially mediated by perceived organizational support. Benefit use contributed little to these outcomes beyond benefit availability and subjective evaluation. Benefit subjective evaluation was also more strongly related to most outcomes than were benefits availability and use. These relationships varied across types of benefits, with training benefits more strongly related to job satisfaction and health care and retirement benefits more strongly related to turnover intentions. Altogether, this meta-analysis integrates the empirical literature on employee benefits and highlights the implications of benefit experiences and types for the employee-organization relationship and employee well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1921-1947"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001202","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Employee benefits constitute 38.1% of compensation costs, representing a sizeable investment in the workforce. Unlike other forms of support that depend on the actions of individuals throughout the organization, benefits can be changed through decisions at the highest level and influence employees throughout the company. Yet, the literature on benefits has been largely disjointed, resulting in theoretical ambiguity and practical questions about the role of employee benefit experiences in individual employee outcomes. To inform theory and practice, we organized the benefits literature using social exchange theory as a framework and conducted a meta-analysis on the relationships of employee benefit availability, use, and subjective evaluation with perceived organizational support, employee attitudes, and well-being. Our review (k = 134, N = 260,604) found unique relationships between the availability and subjective evaluation of employee benefits and affective organizational commitment, withdrawal intentions, job satisfaction, and well-being, with these relationships partially mediated by perceived organizational support. Benefit use contributed little to these outcomes beyond benefit availability and subjective evaluation. Benefit subjective evaluation was also more strongly related to most outcomes than were benefits availability and use. These relationships varied across types of benefits, with training benefits more strongly related to job satisfaction and health care and retirement benefits more strongly related to turnover intentions. Altogether, this meta-analysis integrates the empirical literature on employee benefits and highlights the implications of benefit experiences and types for the employee-organization relationship and employee well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including:
1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses).
2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research.
3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
