Adkins

GROUPet&al.ORGANIZATION
/ JOB INSECURITY
MANAGEMENT

A Field Study of Job Insecurity

During a Financial Crisis

CHERYL L. ADKINS
Longwood College
JAMES D. WERBEL
Iowa State University
JIING-LIH FARH
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

A major trend in the workplace is a recognition of the increasingly temporary nature of the work
relationship. Even universities, which have traditionally offered long-term job security in the
form of academic tenure, are not immune from that trend. Some universities no longer offer ten-
ure, and financial pressures sometimes threaten the job security of tenured faculty. The increased
focus on the temporary nature of the work relationship may lead to a sense of job insecurity
among employees. The present study examined antecedents and outcomes of job insecurity fol-
lowing significant budget cuts at a major university. Perceptions of receiving sufficient and
accurate information from organizational sources, tenure status, and tolerance for ambiguity
predicted job insecurity. Job insecurity, in turn, predicted job satisfaction, organizational com-
mitment, and withdrawal behaviors. Turnover for a 2-year period following the budget cuts was
predicted by survey variables.

Articles in both the academic literature (e.g., Brockner, 1988; Roskies &
Louis-Guerin, 1990) and the popular press (e.g. Lieber, 1996; Nocera, 1996)
have stressed the increasingly temporary nature of employment relation-
ships. Many organizations have found it necessary to lay off employees, and
individuals are advised to manage their careers to increase their employabil-
ity in case of layoffs (e.g., Hirsch, 1987). Such a climate in the general labor
market may lead to feelings of job insecurity among employees. Job insecu-
rity is defined as “perceived powerlessness to maintain desired continuity in
a threatened job situation” (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984, p. 438). As
many organizations downsize and lay off workers, even those individuals
who survive the layoffs may experience feelings of job insecurity (Brockner,
1988).

The authors thank Sonya Premeaux and Jeremy Short for assistance on data analysis.
Group & Organization Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, December 2001 463-483
© 2001 Sage Publications
463

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
464 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

Job insecurity may have serious consequences for organizations and indi-
viduals. For organizations, Bedeian and Armenakis (1998) noted that in
times of organizational turbulence, the most capable and competent workers
tend to leave organizations; hence, less capable and competent workers are
left to lead the organization through uncertainties. Bedeian and Armenakis
labeled this phenomenon the “cesspool syndrome.” For individuals, job inse-
curity is related to negative consequences, ranging from psychological dis-
tress to physical ailments (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992; Roskies & Louis-Guerin,
1990).
Although job insecurity is usually associated with the industrial sector,
job insecurity appears to be an increasingly relevant construct in public and
private universities. Universities are increasingly exposed to financial pres-
sures (Kerlin & Dunlap, 1993). Tenure is being threatened, with some uni-
versities no longer offering tenure contracts (Bess, 1998; Slaughter, 1993).
As Bess (1998) noted, the trend to eliminate tenure is part of a larger trend of
increasing bureaucratization of professional work. All of this suggests that
job insecurity is highly relevant in academe and other professional settings.
The purpose of the present study is to extend the literature on job insecu-
rity by examining antecedents and outcomes of job insecurity during a bud-
get crisis at a large university. In this setting, we examine the relationship
between job insecurity and type of employment contract (in this case, tenured
and untenured faculty), perceptions of receiving sufficient and accurate
information about the organizational crisis, and an individual personality
variable, specifically, tolerance for ambiguity. The latter two antecedents
have not been examined previously in the job insecurity literature. We fur-
ther examine the relationship between job insecurity and outcomes including
job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job search behavior, and turn-
over for a 2-year period following the crisis. In the following sections, the lit-
erature on job insecurity will be reviewed, and hypotheses will be presented.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES

JOB INSECURITY

Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984) brought the study of job insecurity to

the forefront with their review of the existing research and their proposal that
job insecurity be measured as a multidimensional construct. Ashford, Lee,
and Bobko (1989) built on Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt’s proposition to
develop a job insecurity scale designed to assess the multidimensional nature
of job insecurity. Current research in the area of job insecurity continues to

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 465

examine individual and organizational antecedents and outcomes of job inse-

curity. For example, King (2000) examined the role of the psychological con-
tract in reactions to job insecurity among white-collar employees. Rosenblatt
and Ruvio (1996) found that unionization and kibbutz affiliation predicted
the job insecurity levels of Israeli teachers. Job insecurity, in turn, predicted
organizational commitment, perceived performance, perceived organiza-
tional support, and intention to quit, consistent with the literature. Kinnunen,
Mauno, Natti, and Happonen (2000), in a study of antecedents and outcomes
of job insecurity in three organizations in Finland, found that gender and
organization were significant predictors of job insecurity. The present study
builds on the existing literature by measuring job insecurity as a multidimen-
sional construct and by examining job insecurity during a crisis in an organi-
zation as opposed to during a period of organizational stability, as is often the
case (cf. Arnold & Feldman, 1982; Ashford et al., 1989).
As noted above, job insecurity is “perceived powerlessness to maintain
desired continuity in a threatened job situation” (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt,
1984, p. 438). Job insecurity is a multidimensional construct encompassing
perceived threat to job features, perceived threat to the total job, and power-
lessness (Ashford et al., 1989). Job insecurity may stem from an event affect-
ing the entire organization (such as the budget crisis of the present study) or
from an event affecting only one individual (an individual receiving a nega-
tive performance appraisal, for example). A sense of job security is fre-
quently cited as a focus of the psychological contract that employees form
with their employing organizations (e.g., Rousseau, 1995; Shore & Tetrick,
1994; Turnley & Feldman, 2000). Psychological contracts, which may be
described as employees’ perceptions of reciprocal obligations with their
employer (Rousseau, 1989), function to reduce uncertainty for individuals in
organizations. Hence, events that lead to job insecurity may constitute viola-
tions of the psychological contract (cf. King, 2000). The fact that job insecu-
rity is a psychological construct that may result from the violation of the psy-
chological contract distinguishes it from a mere lack of job security. Job
security is a more objective condition resulting from real or implied employ-
ment contracts. (See Pearce, 1998, for an alternative perspective on job
insecurity.)

ANTECEDENTS

Tenure status. The first antecedent of job insecurity we examined was

academic tenure status. In the academic setting, tenure represents a long-term
employment contract that is generally believed to be inviolable except for
cases of gross misconduct. Ashford et al. (1989) suggested that it would be

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
466 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

useful to compare groups, such as tenured and untenured faculty, who might
be expected a priori to differ on job insecurity. Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt
(1984) suggested that factors such as formal contracts or union membership
contributed to reduction of the powerlessness dimension of job insecurity.
Although tenure is a type of contract that is unique to the academic setting,
similar long-term employment contracts (whether formal or implied) may be
found in the private sector; however, it is acknowledged that such agree-
ments are less prevalent. For example, in organizations with a formal senior-
ity system, employees with more years of service are likely to perceive that
they have more job security than do those with fewer years of service.
It is important to note that although tenure does offer formal job security,
in situations of financial crisis, tenure is not a guarantee of job security in aca-
demic settings (Slaughter, 1993). In fact, as Rhoades (1993) noted, financial
exigency has been formally included in union contracts as an exception to the
job security implied by academic tenure. In the present setting, faculty were
informed that, should the university be forced to declare financial exigency,
layoffs could occur without regard to tenure status. Although objective infor-
mation suggested that tenure status would not be the sole determining factor,
should layoffs occur, we predicted that tenure status would have a psycho-
logical effect on experienced job insecurity such that tenured faculty would
be lower in job insecurity than untenured faculty. It should be noted that in
the present study, untenured faculty were also covered by employment con-
tracts of up to 3 years in duration. Thus, although untenured faculty did not
have the long-term job security implied by tenure, they did have promises of
short-term job security.

Hypothesis 1: Tenure status will predict job insecurity such that tenured faculty
will have lower levels of job insecurity than will untenured faculty.

Although predicting that individuals with long-term employment con-

tracts (in this case, academic tenure) experience less job insecurity than indi-
viduals without such contracts is straightforward, it is important that we
empirically examine the effect of such contracts on job insecurity (cf. Ash-
ford et al., 1989; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984).

Information. The second possible antecedent of job insecurity that we

examine is perceptions of information received about the organizational cri-
sis. It is proposed here that individuals’ perceptions of the sufficiency and
accuracy of information about the financial crisis will be related to job inse-
curity. Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984) posited that job insecurity is
derived from the individual’s perception of information about the situation.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 467

They specified three sources of information: official organizational announce-

ments, unintended organizational clues evident to employees, and rumors.
Ashford et al. (1989) found that perceptions of lack of predictability and con-
trol contributed to job insecurity. They concluded that information may rees-
tablish the individual’s sense of control and predictability, thus reducing job
insecurity. Robinson and Morrison (1997) proposed that individuals will
monitor for information when they perceive that their psychological contract
is not being fulfilled. Ashford and Taylor (1990) predicted that information
about organizational changes would predict adaptation in work role transi-
tions. Similarly, Schweiger and DeNisi (1991), in a longitudinal field experi-
ment, found that realistic information given during a period following the
announcement of a merger reduced the dysfunctional consequences of the
merger. Individuals who received realistic information were lower on per-
ceived uncertainty and higher on job satisfaction, organizational commit-
ment, and perceptions of the organization’s trustworthiness, honesty, and
caring than were individuals who received no information. Thus, individuals
who perceive that they are receiving sufficient and accurate information
about crises in organizations may experience lower job insecurity. Percep-
tions of receiving sufficient and accurate information may increase trust in
the organization and decrease perceived powerlessness. We examined the
following hypothesis regarding the relationship between perceived accuracy
and sufficiency of information and job insecurity:

Hypothesis 2: The extent to which individuals perceive that they have received
sufficient and accurate information about the financial crisis will be negatively
related to job insecurity.

Tolerance for ambiguity. The third antecedent of job insecurity that we

examined is tolerance for ambiguity. Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984) and
Ashford et al. (1989) stated that individual differences may play a role in
experienced job insecurity. Some individuals may be more likely to experi-
ence perceptions of job insecurity than others. For example, Ashford et al.
(1989) found that an internal locus of control was associated with lower job
insecurity.
Tolerance for ambiguity is an individual difference variable that affects
the extent to which the individual is able to cope with uncertainty (Ashford &
Cummings, 1985; Budner, 1962; Norton, 1975). Ashford (1988) found that
tolerance for ambiguity served as a buffer for organizational stress. Ashford
and Taylor (1990) suggested that tolerance for ambiguity would be an indi-
vidual difference variable predicting success in work role transitions. Thus,
individuals with low tolerance for ambiguity may be less able to cope with

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
468 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

the uncertainty of an organizational crisis and thus may be more likely to

experience job insecurity during turbulent times.

Hypothesis 3: Tolerance for ambiguity will be negatively associated with job

insecurity.

Outcomes

Job insecurity may be related to a range of work-related attitudes and

behaviors including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job search
behavior, and turnover (Ashford et al., 1989; Brockner, 1988; Davy, Kinicki, &
Scheck, 1997; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). Consistent with Ashford
et al. (1989), we predicted that job insecurity would be negatively related to
job satisfaction. Individuals who are experiencing job insecurity are likely to
experience fewer positive feelings about their job and organization. We also
predicted a relationship between job insecurity and organizational commit-
ment. Individuals who are experiencing job insecurity may psychologically
distance themselves from the organization. As Ashford et al. (1989) noted,
individuals experiencing job insecurity may feel that the organization will be
less dependable in carrying out commitments to employees, and thus they
may be more likely to act on self-interest. Similarly, the literature on psycho-
logical contracts suggests that individuals will experience lower levels of job
satisfaction and organizational commitment and increased likelihood of
turnover when psychological contracts are violated (e.g., Cavanaugh & Noe,
1999; Robinson & Morrison, 1997; Shore & Tetrick, 1994).

Hypothesis 4: Job insecurity will be negatively related to job satisfaction and orga-
nizational commitment.

Consistent with the job insecurity and psychological contracts literatures,

we predicted that job insecurity would be positively related to thoughts of
leaving the organization, job search behavior, and actual turnover (cf. Ash-
ford et al., 1989; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). As Bedeian and
Armenakis (1998) and Cavanaugh and Noe (1999) noted, in times of organi-
zational turmoil, individuals with alternative employment opportunities are
likely to leave the organization. Consistent with the turnover literature, we
predicted that thoughts of quitting and job search behavior would be predic-
tors of actual turnover (cf. Arnold & Feldman, 1982; Peters, Jackofsky, &
Salter, 1981). We also predicted that the extent to which the individual antici-
pates difficulty in relocating because of nonjob factors would be related to
turnover (Steel & Griffeth, 1989).

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 469

Hypothesis 5: Job insecurity will be positively related to thoughts of leaving the

organization and job search behavior.
Hypothesis 6: Job insecurity will be positively associated with turnover.
Hypothesis 7: Intent to leave the organization and job search behavior will be posi-
tively associated with turnover.
Hypothesis 8: Perceptions of difficulty in leaving the organization will be nega-
tively associated with job search behavior and turnover.

METHOD

OVERVIEW

The present study examines job insecurity during a financial crisis at a

large state university during a period of extreme financial distress. After
2 years of declining state support, a major funding crisis was occurring. The
state contributed about two thirds of all funding to the university. Politicians
publicly warned that state contributions to universities could decrease as
much as 40%. University officials met to plan for the worst-case scenario.
The president of the university publicly announced that if these budget cuts
occurred, the university would need to declare financial exigency. This
would render all contracts including tenure invalid. After a lengthy period
of public political debate, there was a midyear budget cut of $9 million. All
university employees were asked to participate in a voluntary 2% pay cut to
assist in balancing the university budget. The terms of employment con-
tracts for most faculty dictated that the pay cut be voluntary; however, for all
staff members and for the faculty in one academic unit, the pay cut was
involuntary.
The sample for the present study was faculty members at a major state uni-
versity. Data were collected in the spring semester after major budget cuts
were announced during the fall semester. Surveys were sent to all full-time
instructors, assistant professors, associate professors, and professors.
Full-time administrators were excluded from the sample. Usable surveys
were returned by 371 faculty members for a response rate of 28%. Of the
respondents, 10% were instructors, 28% were assistant professors, 24% were
associate professors, 36% were full professors, and 2% were other. About
28% of the respondents were female. The average age of the respondents was
45, and the average number of years of service at the university was 10.7. The
profile of the sample by academic rank and demographics compares favor-
ably with the profile of the faculty as a whole.
Participants received surveys coded with an individual, survey-specific
identification code. The cover letter accompanying the surveys described the

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
470 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

TABLE 1
Comparison of Study Samples to Entire Faculty

Sample With
Entire Sample ID Code
Entire Faculty (N = 371) (n = 306)

Average age 46 45 45
Average years of service 11 10 11
Gender (%)
Female 25 28 24
Male 75 72 76
Rank (%)
Instructor 16 10 8
Assistant professor 22 28 28
Associate professor 24 24 24
Full professor 37 36 39
Other 1 2 1

code and assured faculty that individual responses to the survey were strictly
confidential. Furthermore, individuals were instructed that if they were will-
ing to participate in the survey but wished to remain anonymous, they could
do so by clipping the numerical code from the survey form. Of the total,
306 respondents returned the surveys with the identification code intact.
Table 1 compares demographic data for the entire faculty, the larger sample
(N = 371), and those who returned the surveys with the identification code
intact (n = 306). Table 2 presents the composition of the larger sample and
subsample by rank and tenure status.

MEASURES

Job insecurity. Job insecurity was measured using a scale based on Ash-
ford et al. (1989). The job insecurity scale is a multiplicative scale assessing
the importance of various job features to the individual, the likelihood of neg-
ative change to those features, the importance of possible changes in aspects
of the total job, the likelihood of changes in aspects of the total job, and the
powerlessness of the individual with respect to job changes. In the present
study, the scale was modified to better reflect faculty members’ jobs. For
example, in the job features measures, Ashford et al.’s item “The physical
demands your job places on you” was changed to “The intellectual demands
your job places on you.” Items measuring the total job were also changed to
be relevant to faculty jobs. For example, items assessing losing the job and

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 471

TABLE 2
Composition of Sample by Rank and Tenure Status

Entire Sample Sample With ID Code

(N = 371) (n = 306)
Untenured (%) Tenured (%) Untenured (%) Tenured (%)

Instructor 30 (8.1) 23 (7.6)

Assistant professor 105 (28.3) 1 (0.3) 84 (27.7) 1 (0.3)
Associate professor 11 (2.9) 82 (22.1) 10 (3.3) 62 (20.5)
Professor 3 (0.8) 133 (35.8) 3 (1) 116 (38.3)
Other 5 (1.3) 1 (0.3) 3 (1) 1 (0.3)

being moved to other positions within the same organization were not realis-
tic for the present population; therefore, they were deleted. However, items
referring to involuntary pay cuts, involuntary furloughs, or increased teach-
ing loads (all real possibilities for the situation) were added. Our final scale
consisted of 15 items measuring the importance of job features (alpha = .79)
and the likelihood of negative change in those features (alpha = .91) and
8 items measuring the importance of aspects of the total job (e.g., importance
of the possibility that you may be laid off, pressured to accept early retire-
ment, have teaching load increased, etc.; alpha = .77) and the likelihood that
such events might occur in the total job (alpha = .82). Ashford et al.’s (1989)
3 items measuring powerlessness were used without modification (alpha =
.88). All items were measured using a 5-point response scale. Reliabilities for
all component measures compare favorably with those reported by Ashford
et al. (1989). The final job insecurity measure was calculated according to the
following formula:
Job Insecurity = [(∑ (IF × LF) ) + (∑ (IJ × LJ ))] × PP, (1)

where

IF = importance of job feature,

LF = likelihood of losing job feature,
IJ = importance of total job,
LJ = likelihood of job loss, and
PP = perceived powerlessness to resist threat.

See Ashford et al. (1989) for a more complete description of the job insecu-
rity measure.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
472 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

Tolerance for ambiguity. Tolerance for ambiguity was measured using

the seven-item scale (alpha = .78) used by Ashford and Cummings (1985).
They drew the items from Norton (1975). Participants responded to these
items on a 5-point response format (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree).

Information. Perceptions of sufficiency and accuracy of information

about the crisis were measured using items developed for the present study.
Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they believed they
obtained sufficient (accurate) information from organizational sources (for
example, direct communication from the chancellor, department chair, fac-
ulty senate, etc.) on a 5-point scale (1 = very insufficient [inaccurate], 5 =
very sufficient [accurate]). Five items measured perceptions of sufficiency
of information from organizational sources (alpha = .82), and five items mea-
sured perceptions of accuracy of information from organizational sources
(alpha = .85).

Tenure. Tenure status was assessed on the survey. Respondents were

asked to indicate whether they were tenured (coded 1) or untenured (coded 0).

Outcomes. Job satisfaction was measured using two items from the Porter
and Smith (1970) job satisfaction scale (alpha =.63 ) and a 5-point response
scale (1 = disagree strongly, 5 = agree strongly). A third item, “I often think
about quitting this job,” was omitted because of its redundancy with items in
the intent to leave the organization scale (described below). Organizational
commitment was measured using Penley and Gould’s (1988) scale. Four
items measured normative commitment (alpha = .82). Again, a 5-point
response scale (1 = disagree strongly, 5 = agree strongly) was used.
Cognitions and behaviors associated with withdrawal were measured
using a scale developed by Peters et al. (1981). Three items assessed thoughts
of quitting (alpha = .86), and four items measured job search behavior (alpha =
.93). An additional two items were developed for the present study to mea-
sure difficulty in relocating (e.g., “It would be difficult for me to relocate out-
side of [state] because of non-work related factors—spouse, children, other
family members, etc.; alpha =.82). Items assessing withdrawal behaviors
were measured using a 5-point scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly dis-
agree). It should be noted that these items were scored such that a low score
indicates a greater degree of withdrawal; however, for ease of interpretation,
the signs of relationships with these variables have been reversed (so that
they may be interpreted as a high score indicating greater withdrawal
behaviors).

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 473

Turnover data were gathered from university sources. It was only possible
to assess turnover for individuals who returned surveys with the identifica-
tion code intact. For those individuals, names were matched with university
listings of turnover for the 2 years following the budget crisis. Thus, analyses
with actual turnover as the dependent variable were limited to 306 respon-
dents (all other analyses included the entire sample of 371 respondents).

RESULTS

Means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations for study variables are

reported in Table 3. Hypotheses 1 through 3 were examined by regressing job
insecurity on perceptions of receiving sufficient and accurate information
from organizational sources, tolerance for ambiguity, and tenure status. As
Table 4 shows, perceptions of receiving sufficient and accurate information
from organizational sources, tolerance for ambiguity, and tenure status were
significant predictors of job insecurity. Thus, Hypotheses 1 through 3 are
supported.
Hypotheses 4 and 5 were also examined using regression analysis. The
predictors of job insecurity—specifically, perceptions of receiving sufficient
and accurate information from organizational sources, tolerance for ambigu-
ity, and tenure status—together with job insecurity were regressed on the
outcome variables.
As Table 5 shows, job insecurity was a significant predictor of job satis-
faction, organizational commitment, thoughts of quitting, and job search
behavior. Not surprisingly, tenure status was also a significant predictor of
organizational commitment, thoughts of quitting, and job search behavior.
Thus, it is notable that job insecurity has significant effects above and beyond
those of tenure status.
Hypotheses 6 through 8 predicted that job insecurity, intent to leave the
organization, job search behavior, and difficulty in relocating would predict
turnover. Logistic regression was used to examine these hypotheses. Turn-
over data were regressed on the above-listed predictors. The predictors as a
group explained significant variance in turnover (–2 log likelihood = 150.86,
χ2 = 21.58, p < .01); however, job insecurity was not a significant predictor.
Anticipated difficulty in relocating was the only individual variable that sig-
nificantly predicted turnover (parameter estimate = .24, p < .05). Thus, there
is no support for Hypotheses 6 and 7 and general support for Hypothesis 8.
As a supplemental analysis, we conducted a one-way MANOVA to exam-
ine the relationship between tenure status and other survey variables. There

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 474
Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015

TABLE 3
Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorelations Among Study Variables
a
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Job insecurity 3313.8 1200.25

2. Tenure 0.59 0.49 –.19***
Sufficiency of information
3. Organizational sources 14.54 4.48 –.19*** –.16***
Accuracy of information
4. Organizational sources 16.92 4.01 –.19*** –.07 .54***
5. Tolerance for ambiguity 19.21 4.38 –.18*** –.04 .04 .01
6. Job satisfaction 7.89 1.56 –.19*** .09* .20*** .17*** .08
7. Normative commitment 14.08 3.45 –.14*** .20*** .07 .19*** –.10 .35***
8. Thoughts of quitting 9.11 3.31 .23*** .10* –.22*** –.22*** .13** –.51*** –.33***
9. Job search behavior 14.77 5.76 .22*** .24*** –.10 .10** .12** –.30*** –.30*** .66***
10. Difficulty in relocating 6.73 2.59 .04 –.01 .17*** .15*** .09 .08 .07 –.12** –.18***
b
11. Turnover .10 0.30 .11 –.09* –.10 –.01 –.14** –.09 –.05 .23*** .23*** –.17***

a. The possible range of the job insecurity scale was 30 to 8,625; tenure was coded 0 = Untenured; 1 = Tenured; sufficiency and accuracy of information could
range from 5 to 25; job satisfaction could range from 2 to 10; the possible range of the commitment scale was 4 to 20; and the possible ranges of the withdrawal cog-
nition scales were 3 to 15 for thoughts of quitting, 4 to 20 for job search behavior, and 2 to 10 for difficulty in relocating.
b. Data on turnover were available for 306 participants. Coded 0 = No turnover; 1 = Turnover.
*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 475

TABLE 4
Results of Regression Predicting Job Insecurity

Sufficiency of information
Organizational sources –.120**
Accuracy of information
Organizational sources –.140**
Tolerance for ambiguity –.185***
Tenure status –.219***
F 11.91***
2
Adjusted R .114

**p < .05. ***p < .01.

TABLE 5
Results of Regressions Predicting Outcome Variables

Job Organizational Intent to Job Search

Satisfaction Commitment Leave Behavior
B B B B

Sufficiency of information
Organizational sources .120* –.011 –.138** –.096
Accuracy of information
Organizational sources .083 .182*** –.143** –.057
Tolerance for ambiguity .009 –.127** –.097* –.077
Tenure status .096* .197*** –.105* –.223***
Job insecurity –.140*** –.096* .152*** .155***
F 4.98*** 7.17*** 9.48*** 8.80***
2
Adjusted R .058 .084 .111 .104

*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.

was a significant effect for tenure status (F = 5.77, p < .01), so we conducted
paired comparisons between tenured and untenured faculty for survey vari-
ables. We conducted t tests and used the Bonferroni adjustment. There were
significant differences between untenured and tenured faculty in job insecu-
rity (t = 3.76, p < .01), organizational commitment (t = 3.97, p < .01), and job
search behavior (t = 4.73, p < .01). Tenured faculty exhibited significantly
lower levels of job insecurity than did untenured faculty (means 3127.6 and
3591.8, respectively, t = 3.76, p < .01); however, it should be noted that even
tenured faculty exhibited high levels of job insecurity relative to Ashford
et al.’s (1989) sample. This finding provides further evidence of the construct
validity of the job insecurity scale.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
476 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

Thus, it is especially notable that job insecurity predicted organizational

commitment and job search behavior above and beyond the effects of tenure
status. We also conducted moderated regressions to examine the effect of
tenure on the relationship between job insecurity and its antecedents or con-
sequences. These additional analyses indicated that tenure did not moderate
the relationship between job insecurity and its antecedents or consequences.
This suggests that despite differences in the means of some survey variables
between tenured and untenured faculty, the nomological net for job insecu-
rity was the same for tenured and untenured faculty.

DISCUSSION

The present study examined antecedents and outcomes of job insecurity

during a financial crisis in a university. We examined antecedents and out-
comes of job insecurity in a sample of faculty members, both tenured and
untenured. We will now discuss the contributions of the present study to the
literature, the limitations of the study, and the implications for future research
and for practice.
This study makes two important contributions to the literature on job inse-
curity. First, we provided empirical evidence of the relationship between for-
mal employment contracts, in this case, academic tenure, and job insecurity.
We also examined additional antecedents of job insecurity, most notably per-
ceptions of receiving sufficient and accurate information about an organiza-
tional crisis. In addition, we examined an individual difference variable, spe-
cifically, tolerance for ambiguity, as an antecedent of job insecurity.
Perceptions of sufficient and accurate information and tolerance for ambigu-
ity have not previously been examined in the job insecurity literature. Out-
comes examined included job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job
search intentions, and turnover from the organization. It is important to note
that the study was conducted during a time of organizational crisis. As Ash-
ford et al. (1989) noted, it is important to examine job insecurity during times
of organizational turbulence. Furthermore, the present study also had a longi-
tudinal component. Turnover from the organization was measured for a
2-year period following the budget crisis.
Second, the study is important because it provides additional evidence of
the construct validity of the Ashford et al. (1989) measure. Although Ashford
and her colleagues provided considerable evidence of the validity of the mea-
sure, it is important to test new measures in a variety of settings and samples.
Each contribution of the present study will be discussed in more detail below.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 477

Antecedents of job insecurity. Tenure status was found to be a significant

predictor of job insecurity. This suggests that the psychological effects of
employment contracts such as academic tenure may extend beyond the
objective job security that they guarantee. As Bess (1998), Slaughter (1993),
and Rhoades (1993) noted, the implications of academic tenure for long-term
job security are greatly reduced in an era of cuts in university budgets. Fur-
thermore, in the present setting, faculty were informed that tenure status
would not be the sole criterion used in decision making, should layoffs
become necessary. This finding has important implications for career plan-
ning. Individuals must be proactive in managing their careers to maintain
long-term employability (e.g., Cavanaugh & Noe, 1999); however, to do so,
they must be aware that employment contracts do not necessarily guarantee
security.
We examined the relationship between perceptions of sufficient and accu-
rate information from official organizational sources. The significant rela-
tionship between perceptions of information flow and job insecurity suggests
that in times of organizational turmoil, employees may tend to focus on offi-
cial organizational announcements. The present results, together with those
of Schweiger and DeNisi (1991) and Mansour-Cole and Scott (1998), high-
light the importance of communicating with employees during times of
uncertainty within organizations.
Tolerance for ambiguity was found to be associated with job insecurity
such that individuals who are higher in tolerance for ambiguity were less
likely to experience job insecurity. Together with earlier findings regarding
locus of control (Ashford et al., 1989) and the findings of Roskies and her col-
leagues suggesting that personality variables may be related to job insecurity
(Roskies & Louis-Guerin, 1990; Roskies, Louis-Guerin, & Fournier, 1993),
the present study suggests that individual difference variables may predis-
pose individuals to experience job insecurity.

Outcomes of job insecurity. Our findings with respect to outcomes of job

insecurity were, in general, consistent with those of earlier studies. Consis-
tent with Ashford et al. (1989), job insecurity was negatively related to job
satisfaction. It should be noted that the reliability of the general job satisfac-
tion measure was low for this sample. The two items used were “Generally
speaking, I am very satisfied with this job” and “I am generally satisfied with
the kind of work I do in this job.” It is likely that present respondents made a
distinction between satisfaction with the job itself and the type of work done
in the job. In evaluating satisfaction with the type of work done in the job,
respondents may have been assessing career satisfaction more than job

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
478 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

satisfaction. Job insecurity was negatively related to normative commitment,

consistent with Ashford et al. (1989). This suggests that job insecurity may
represent a violation of the individual’s trust in the organization to uphold the
psychological contract.
Turnover for a period of 2 academic years was predicted by study vari-
ables, albeit, not directly by job insecurity. The relationship between study
variables and an objective outcome measure is notable when the low variance
in turnover is considered (30 respondents, or 9.8% of the sample on which we
could gather turnover data, left the organization). Furthermore, the study was
conducted during a time period when many universities were experiencing
budget shortfalls (e.g., Slaughter, 1993), thus theoretically placing severe
constraints on the academic job market. The relationship between the objec-
tive outcome of turnover and survey variables is encouraging because it
greatly reduces concerns about method variance; however, the relationship
between job insecurity and turnover clearly warrants further examination. In
the present study, the variable most strongly predicting turnover was percep-
tions of difficulty in relocating. This is an especially important issue, given
that changing jobs in academia typically involves moving to an entirely new
location, not just changing to a new job in a same town. Steel and Griffeth
(1989) noted the importance of considering the extent to which turnover
requires geographic relocation in examining turnover.

Validity of job insecurity scale. Another major contribution of the present

study is that it provides additional evidence of the construct validity of the
Ashford et al. (1989) job insecurity scale. A simple comparison of levels of
job insecurity between our sample and that of Ashford et al. shows a dramatic
difference in both level of job insecurity and the amount of variance in job
insecurity (present sample: M = 3314, SD = 1200, maximum value possible =
8,625; Ashford et al. sample: M = 754, SD = 331, maximum value possible =
10,125). (Note: The maximum value possible for the job insecurity scale was
computed by assigning a score of 5 to each scale item. The difference in max-
imum values between our scale and that of Ashford et al. reflects the fact that
there were fewer items on our scale.) The larger mean and standard deviation
in job insecurity in our sample, collected during a time of organizational tur-
moil, compared to those found by Ashford et al. (1989) in a stable organiza-
tional situation provide additional evidence of the construct validity of the
scale.
Finally, to examine criterion-related validity, we also measured satisfac-
tion with security using two items from the Porter and Smith (1970) scale

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 479

(alpha = .81). Job insecurity was significantly correlated with satisfaction

with security (r = –.38, p < .01), thus providing evidence of criterion-related
validity.
It should also be noted that job insecurity in this setting is high, given the
nature of a public university. Unlike private sector organizations, which can
and do go out of business or experience acquisition by other organizations, it
can be argued that there is a relatively low probability that a large flagship
university would close entirely. Thus, job insecurity in the present setting
would stem from individuals perceiving that they as individuals may be fur-
loughed or laid off or that their academic unit might close.

LIMITATIONS

The present study is limited by the fact that all of the data, with the excep-
tion of the turnover data, were gathered from a single survey. However, the
modest size of the interrelationships among variables in the present sample,
together with the relationship between survey data and turnover data gath-
ered over a 2-year period, suggest that common method variance is not a seri-
ous problem. Furthermore, the nature of the proposed predictors of job inse-
curity make common method variance less of a concern. Academic tenure is
an objective measure, and granting of tenure would have preceded the study.
Similarly, tolerance for ambiguity is a stable personality trait that should be
unaffected by the budget crisis.
Although a fully longitudinal design in which job insecurity and outcome
variables were measured prior to the budget crisis and at multiple points in
time during it would have been ideal; in the present situation, it was not feasi-
ble. First, the crisis was unforeseen, thus making a precrisis, baseline mea-
sure impossible. Furthermore, the length of the job insecurity scale (57 items
on the original Ashford, et al., 1989, and 49 items on our version modified for
an academic sample) would make multiple surveys difficult. Several partici-
pants commented on the length of the survey.
The nature of the sample and setting may limit the generalizability of the
findings to other settings such as manufacturing; however, it is important that
we study job insecurity in a variety of settings. In fact, Ashford et al. (1989)
specifically suggested the academic setting as potentially fruitful for a study
of job insecurity. Furthermore, college and university faculty represent a seg-
ment of the labor market that is increasingly likely to experience a sense of
job insecurity, given environmental trends toward eliminating tenure (e.g.,
Bess, 1998). Findings in an academic setting may well generalize to other
professional jobs.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
480 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH

The present study has practical implications for both organizations and
individuals. We found, not surprisingly, that formal employment contracts in
the form of academic tenure were associated with job insecurity and its out-
comes. In the present study, job insecurity was related to job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and job search behavior. Hence, to the extent
that individuals perceive that their psychological contract with the organiza-
tion has been violated, they will be more likely to leave the organization;
thus, the organization will incur costly turnover.
The findings of the present study also have critical implications for indi-
viduals. As Rousseau (1995) noted, changes in the business environment are
leading to changes in the meaning of employment contracts—both written
and psychological. Similarly, Arthur (1994) and Bird (1994) suggested that
boundaryless careers may allow both individuals and organizations to adapt
to a rapidly changing economic environment. Job insecurity may be some-
what positive for individuals to the extent that it causes them to view their
career as boundaryless and to be proactive in managing their career. The
finding that academic tenure was a strong predictor of job insecurity sug-
gests that individuals with employment contracts may need to be more
aware of the importance of proactive career planning and to be socialized
toward what Cavanaugh and Noe (1999) have labeled the new psychological
contract, that is, reduced expectations of long-term employment with any one
organization.
The findings of the present study, together with those of Schweiger and
DeNisi (1991), suggest that organizations should be proactive in providing
information in times of crisis. Individuals who perceive that they are receiv-
ing accurate and sufficient information are less likely to experience job inse-
curity. Although job insecurity was not directly related to turnover in the
present study, it was related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
thoughts of quitting, and job search behavior, all traditional predictors of
turnover (e.g., Peters et al., 1981). As Bedeian and Armenakis (1998) noted,
in times of organizational turmoil, it is likely that higher performers will be
the first to leave the organization. This leaves an organization without its top
performers to guide it though a crisis situation.
Future research should continue to study additional antecedents and out-
comes of job insecurity. The finding that perceptions of receiving sufficient
and accurate information from organizational sources was related to job inse-
curity suggests that it would be fruitful to examine individual differences in
information seeking in job insecurity. Furthermore, especially during times
of organizational turmoil, it is important to gather longitudinal data. In the

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 481

present study, we gathered turnover data longitudinally; however, multiple

measures of perceptual and attitudinal variables over time would allow us a
richer understanding of job insecurity.

REFERENCES

Arnold, H. J., & Feldman, D. C. (1982). A multivariate analysis of the determinants of job turn-
over. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 350-360.
Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A new perspective for organizational inquiry.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 295-306.
Ashford, S. J. (1988). Individual strategies for coping with stress during organizational transi-
tions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 24, 19-36.
Ashford, S. J., & Cummings, L. L. (1985). Proactive feedback seeking: The instrumental use of
the information environment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58, 67-79.
Ashford, S. J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, causes, and consequences of job insecurity:
A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management Journal, 32,
803-829.
Ashford, S. J., & Taylor, M. S. (1990). Adaptations to work transitions: An integrative approach.
In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 8,
pp. 1-39). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Bedeian, A. G., & Armenakis, A. A. (1998). The cesspool syndrome: How dreck floats to the top
of declining organizations. Academy of Management Executive, 12(1), 58-67.
Bess, J. L. (1998). Contract systems, bureaucracies, and faculty motivation. Journal of Higher
Education, 69, 1-22.
Bird, A. (1994). Careers as repositories of knowledge: A new perspective on boundaryless
careers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 325-344.
Brockner, J. (1988). The effects of work layoffs on survivors: Research, theory, and practice. In
B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 10,
pp. 213-255). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30,
29-50.
Cavanaugh, M., & Noe, R. A. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of relational components
of the new psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 323-340.
Davy, J. A., Kinicki, A. J., & Scheck, C. L. (1997). A test of job security’s direct and mediated
effects on withdrawal cognitions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 323-349.
Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Toward conceptual clarity. Academy of
Management Review, 9, 438-448.
Hirsch, P. (1987). Pack your own parachute. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Kerlin, S. P., & Dunlap, D. M. (1993). For richer, for poorer: Faculty morale in periods of auster-
ity and retrenchment. Journal of Higher Education, 63, 348-377.
King, J. E. (2000). White-collar reactions to job insecurity and the role of the psychological con-
tract: Implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management, 39,
79-92.
Kinnunen, U., Mauno, S., Natti, J., & Happonen, M. (2000). Organizational antecedents and out-
comes of job insecurity: A longitudinal study in three organizations in Finland. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 21, 443-459.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
482 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

Kuhnert, K. W., & Vance, R. J. (1992). Job insecurity and moderators of the relation between job
insecurity and employee adjustment. In J. C. Quick, L. R. Murphy, & J. J. Harrell (Eds.),
Stress and well-being at work: Assessments and interventions for occupational mental
health (pp. 48-63). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Lieber, R. B. (1996, April 1). How safe is your job? Fortune, 72-83.
Mansour-Cole, D. M., & Scott, S. G. (1998). Hearing it through the grapevine: The influence of
source, leader-relations, and legitimacy on survivors’ fairness perceptions. Personnel Psy-
chology, 51, 25-54.
Nocera, J. (1996, April 1). Living with layoffs. Fortune, 69-71.
Norton, R. W. (1975). Measure of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39,
607-619.
Pearce, J. L. (1998). Job insecurity is important, but not for the reasons you might think: The
example of contingent workers. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organi-
zational behavior (Vol. 5). New York: John Wiley.
Penley, L. E., & Gould, S. (1988). Etzioni’s model of organizational involvement: A perspective
for understanding commitment to organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9,
43-59.
Peters, L. H., Jackofsky, E. F., & Salter, J. R. (1981). Predicting turnover: A comparison of
part-time and full-time employees. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 89-98.
Porter, L. W., & Smith, F. J. (1970). The etiology of organizational commitment. Unpublished
manuscript, University of California at Irvine.
Rhoades, G. (1993). Retrenchment clauses in faculty union contracts. Journal of Higher Educa-
tion, 63, 312-347.
Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (1997). When employees feel betrayed: A model of how
psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review, 22, 226-256.
Rosenblatt, Z., & Ruvio, A. (1996). A test of a multidimensional model of job insecurity: The
case of Israeli teachers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 587-605.
Roskies, E., & Louis-Guerin, C. (1990). Job insecurity in managers: Antecedents and conse-
quences. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 345-359.
Roskies, E., Louis-Guerin, C., & Fournier, C. (1993). Coping with job insecurity: How does per-
sonality make a difference. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 617-630.
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Rights
and Responsibilities Journal, 2, 121-139.
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schweiger, D. M., & DeNisi, A. S. (1991). Communication with employees following a merger:
A longitudinal field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 110-135.
Shore, L. M., & Tetrick, L. (1994). The psychological contract as an explanatory framework in
the employment relationship. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organiza-
tional behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 91-109). New York: John Wiley.
Slaughter, S. (1993). Introduction [Special issue on retrenchment]. Journal of Higher Educa-
tion, 64, 247-249.
Steel, R. P., & Griffeth, R. W. (1989). The elusive relationship between perceived employment
opportunity and turnover behavior: A methodological or conceptual artifact? Journal of
Applied Psychology, 74, 846-854.
Turnley, W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2000). Re-examining the effects of psychological contract
violations: Unmet expectations and job dissatisfaction as mediators. Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior, 21, 25-42.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015
 Adkins et al. / JOB INSECURITY 483

Cheryl L. Adkins (Ph.D., the University of South Carolina) is an associate professor of

management at Longwood College. Her research interests include organizational selec-
tion, socialization, work values, and work and family.

James D. Werbel (Ph.D., Northwestern University) is a professor of management and

codirector of the Murray Bacon Center for Ethics in Business at Iowa State University.
His research interests include organizational entry, work and family, and career
development.

Jiing-Lih Farh is a professor and head of the Department of Management of Organiza-

tions at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. His research interests
include organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese
societies.

Downloaded from gom.sagepub.com at NANYANG TECH UNIV LIBRARY on June 19, 2015