Selection, optimization, and compensation strategies: Interactive effects on daily work engagement

The theory of selective optimization with compensation (SOC) proposes that the “orchestrated” use of three distinct action regulation strategies (selection, optimization, and compensation) leads to positive employee outcomes. Previous research examined overall scores and additive models (i.e., main effects) of SOC strategies instead of interaction models in which SOC strategies mutually enhance each other's effects. Thus, a central assumption of SOC theory remains untested. In addition, most research on SOC strategies has been cross-sectional, assuming that employees' use of SOC strategies is stable over time. We conducted a quantitative diary study across nine work days (N = 77; 514 daily entries) to investigate interactive effects of daily SOC strategies on daily work engagement. Results showed that optimization and compensation, but not selection, had positive main effects on work engagement. Moreover, a significant three-way interaction effect indicated that the relationship between selection and work engagement was positive only when both optimization and compensation were high, whereas the relationship was negative when optimization was low and compensation was high. We discuss implications for future research and practice regarding the use of SOC strategies at work.

[1]  William A. Kahn Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work , 1990 .

[2]  S. Hobfoll Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. , 1989, The American psychologist.

[3]  H. Zacher,et al.  The moderating effects of job control and selection, optimization, and compensation strategies on the age-work ability relationship , 2013 .

[4]  A. Bakker,et al.  Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology , 2008, Bioscience trends.

[5]  A. Bakker,et al.  The job demands-resources model of burnout. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  B. Baltes,et al.  Reduction of work-family conflict through the use of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  Michael Frese,et al.  Maintaining a focus on opportunities at work: The interplay between age, job complexity, and the use of selection, optimization, and compensation strategies , 2011 .

[8]  R. Hansson,et al.  Successful aging at work: an applied study of selection, optimization, and compensation through impression management. , 1995, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[9]  B. Baltes,et al.  The relationship between selection optimization with compensation, conscientiousness, motivation, and performance , 2003 .

[10]  Lars Bäckman,et al.  Compensating for psychological deficits and declines: Managing losses and promoting gains. , 1995 .

[11]  S. Hornung,et al.  Job resources and work engagement: the contributing role of selection, optimization, and compensation strategies at work , 2014, Journal for Labour Market Research.

[12]  Paul B. Baltes,et al.  The orchestration of selection, optimization and compensation: An action–theoretical conceptualization of a theory of developmental regulation. , 2000 .

[13]  P. Baltes,et al.  On the incomplete architecture of human ontogeny. Selection, optimization, and compensation as foundation of developmental theory. , 1997, The American psychologist.

[14]  B. Heijden,et al.  Compensating Losses in Bridge Employment? Examining Relations between Compensation Strategies, Health Problems, and Intention to Remain at Work. , 2013 .

[15]  A. Bakker,et al.  The job demands-resources model : state of the art , 2007 .

[16]  P. Baltes,et al.  Subjective career success and emotional well-being: Longitudinal predictive power of selection, optimization, and compensation , 2002 .

[17]  Phil Wood Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research , 2008 .

[18]  Alexandra M Freund,et al.  Life-management strategies of selection, optimization, and compensation: measurement by self-report and construct validity. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  P. Baltes,et al.  Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. , 1990 .

[20]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[21]  Enno Siemsen,et al.  Common Method Bias in Regression Models With Linear, Quadratic, and Interaction Effects , 2010 .

[22]  A. Bakker,et al.  The Measurement of state work engagement: A multilevel factor analytic study , 2012 .

[23]  P. Baltes,et al.  Selective optimization with compensation: Life-span perspectives on successful human development , 1995 .

[24]  B. Baltes,et al.  Using Life-Span Models in Industrial-Organizational Psychology: The Theory of Selective Optimization With Compensation , 2001 .

[25]  Elizabeth L. Rogers,et al.  Successful Aging: Perspectives from the Behavioral Sciences , 1992 .

[26]  A. Bakker,et al.  The Role of Personal Resources in the Job Demands-Resources Model , 2007 .

[27]  M. Frese,et al.  The buffering effect of selection, optimization, and compensation strategy use on the relationship between problem solving demands and occupational well-being: a daily diary study. , 2012, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[28]  A. Bakker,et al.  Burnout and job performance: the moderating role of selection, optimization, and compensation strategies. , 2014, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[29]  H. Fung,et al.  Aging and work: how do SOC strategies contribute to job performance across adulthood? , 2009, Psychology and aging.

[30]  Eean R. Crawford,et al.  JOB ENGAGEMENT: ANTECEDENTS AND EFFECTS ON JOB PERFORMANCE , 2010 .

[31]  Paul B. Baltes,et al.  Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences , 1990 .