Abstract
Work centrality and meaningfulness at work have been conceptualized consistently in research in a positive way. Nevertheless, based on the too-much-of-a-good-thing effect, if they are present in excess, their positive effect seizes to exist and negative outcomes follow. For this reason, a curvilinear model suits best to investigate the presence of the complex interplay between these variables. At the same time, workaholism could act as a risk factor and trait positive affect could act as a protective factor, moderating this relationship.
This confirmatory study utilized quantitative data derived from a cross-sectional design with 93 participants. An online survey was developed in Qualtrics and using two non-probability sampling methods, the convenience and snowball sampling, participants received the link and completed the Informed Consent, the Demographics, the Work Centrality scale, the Work as Meaning Inventory, the Bergen Work Addiction scale, and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Once data were collected, statistical analysis was performed on SPSS, and specifically the following analyses: Hierarchical Quadratic Regression, Moderated Polynomial Regression, Analysis of Covariance (independent sample t-test and one-way ANOVA), and Correlation Analysis.
Overall, the study revealed that the first hypothesis was partially supported, since a curvilinear relationship only existed with the subscale of meaningfulness Greater Good Motivations. Meanwhile, the second hypothesis was not supported, since work addiction did not moderate the relationship between work centrality and meaningfulness. At last, the third hypothesis was partially supported, since trait positive affect moderated the relationship between work centrality and the subscale of meaningfulness Greater Good Motivations as well as the total score on meaningfulness.
In general, this study highlights the dark side of variables that have always been perceived in a positive way. Meanwhile, it indicates that work centrality is important, but its levels should be managed within organizations so as to reach optimum levels that will benefit both the company and the employee. Lastly, this paper is one of the view quantitative studies that provide empirical evidence and propose a nonlinear relationship between work centrality and meaningfulness at work, challenging the idea that too much of a good thing is by nature good. Overall, these findings can be utilized by organizations so as to guide them in the process of facilitating work centrality and meaningfulness at work, avoiding their negative effects.