Building Bridges of Meaning: Bridging Purpose, Meaning and Meaningfulness of Work
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Why do people work, and what does work mean for them? Not long ago, there was consensus that work was mainly a means for survival, where individuals would engage in labor in exchange for pay (Dik et. al., 2013; Toaddy, 2019). Personal goals such as satisfaction, fulfillment and wellbeing were attained outside of work in domains such as family, hobbies, and the broader community (Bailey et al., 2017). Yet, the last few decades were characterized by growing interest in the personally meaningful aspects of work. Technological advances allowed to redesign work such that humans could do less repetitive work and focus on tasks that are more creative and interesting (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Development of psychological theories such as the self- determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), led to managers realizing the advantages of intrinsic motivation for individual and organizational performance. As a result, organizational researchers started exploring ideas of what makes work engaging and meaningful, how do individuals find meaning in trivial and even dirty jobs, and how this can be leveraged so support employees and employers. Within career theory, the meaning of work has a special place. Throughout one’s life cycle, people prefer to make career choices that will be aligned with their values. This notion has been essential in multiple theories (for example, Super’s lifespan theory (1990) that explains how career preferences shift over time, thus highlighting the different meanings of work). Protean career theory (Hall, 1996) emphasizes personal values and psychological success, and the kaleidoscope career model (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005) considers authenticity as one of its key factors. The sustainable careers framework (De Vos et al., 2020) places meaning as one of the central concepts in the development of satisfying, sustainable careers. Finally, the career construction theory (Savickas, 2001) focuses on individual interpretations and assigning meanings, which is particularly beneficial for career counselling. Beyond the question of how individuals perceive their work, and what makes work meaningful for them, the place of work in human life also has another closely related aspect, namely, purpose. Psychology of Working theory (Blustein et al., 2023; Duffy et al., 2016) posits that work has additional importance beyond monetary compensation, fulfilling multiple needs: survival, but also self-determination and social connection. Therefore, access to work, and particularly, decent work, is important not just for financial reasons, but also for mental health and general wellbeing. As another round of industrial revolution is unfolding, contemporary discourse on work considers questions such as: What would people do if work is not necessary anymore? Where would they find purpose and meaning, and can work be reinvented to this goal? The purpose of this symposium is to explore the different aspects of the purpose of work, meanings people assign to work, and what makes work meaningful for them. While our presentations distinguish between the three aspects, they also aim to provide an integrative view. By exploring meaning, meaningfulness, and purpose separately, while at the same time acknowledging their interconnectedness, we create a more holistic picture that allows a better understanding of human fulfillment at work, leading to improved personal and organizational outcomes. From Joining the Force to Staying the Course: Female Police Officers and the Meaning of Work Author: Galina Boiarintseva; Niagara University Author: Hina Kalyal; Author: Megha Yadav; Indiana University South Bend “Keep on Keeping On”: Individuals’ Strategies to Cope with Situations That Harm Meaningful Work Author: Claire Schulze Schleithoff; Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Can we help? The social facilitation of individual vocational purpose - from meaning to purpose Author: Jon P. Briscoe; Northern Illinois University Author: Brittany Buis; Northern Illinois University Author: Benjamin Briscoe; Northern Illinois University Working around: Temporary residents and multiple meanings of work Author: Mirit K. Grabarski; Lakehead University Author: Viktoriya Voloshyna; Thompson Rivers University Author: Jelena Zikic; York University Meaning Systems: An Integrative Framework for Meaning of Work Research Author: Bryan Dik; Colorado State University Author: Michael Steger; Colorado State University Author: Denise Daniels; Wheaton College
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».