APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2008, 57 (3), 488509 doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00332.

DE CUYPER EMPLOYABILITY AND JOBfor Applied Psychology, 2008 Original UK ET AL. Ltd XXX International Association INSECURITY 0269-994X Applied APPS Articles Oxford, Psychology Blackwell Publishing

Employability and Employees Well-Being: Mediation by Job Insecurity1

Nele De Cuyper*

Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology, K.U. Leuven, Belgium

Claudia Bernhard-Oettel and Erik Berntson

Stockholm University, Sweden

Hans De Witte and Barbara Alarco

Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology, K.U. Leuven, Belgium

The current studys aims are twofold: rst, we investigate the relationship between employability and both work-related (engagement) and general (life satisfaction) well-being. Second, we study how employability may be relevant in times of high job insecurity. Specically, we hypothesise (1) a positive relationship between employability and employees well-being, (2) a negative relationship between employability and job insecurity, and (3) a negative relationship between job insecurity and employees well-being, so that (4) job insecurity mediates the relationship between employability and employees well-being. Results based on a sample of 559 respondents from divisions of seven Belgian organisations support our hypotheses. We conclude that employability may be a means to secure ones labour market position, rather than a means to cope with job insecurity. Les objectifs de cette tude sont doubles: nous tudions dabord la relation entre lemployabilit et la fois le bien-tre relatif au travail (implication) et le bien-tre global (la satisfaction provenant de lexistence). Ensuite, nous nous interrogeons sur la pertinence de lemployabilit en priode de grande

* Address for correspondence: Nele De Cuyper, Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology, K.U. Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Email: nele.decuyper @psy.kuleuven.be 1 This research is part of the Psycones-project (PSYchological CONtracts across Employment Situations) supported by a grant from the EU, 5th framework programme (HPSE-CT-2002-00121). Further information about the project is available on the web-page www.uv.es/~psycon. The first authors contribution was supported by a grant from the FWO (Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Vlaanderen), G.039505. 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

489

inscurit professionnelle. Plus prcisment, nous posons les hypothses 1) dune relation positive entre lemployabilit et le bien-tre des employs, 2) dune relation ngative entre lemployabilit et linscurit professionnelle et 3) dune relation ngative entre linscurit professionnelle et le bien-tre des salaris, si bien que 4) linscurit professionnelle rgule la relation entre lemployabilit et le bien-tre des salaris. Les rsultats issus dun chantillon de 559 rpondants provenant de dpartements de sept organisations belges confortent nos hypothses. On conclut que lemployabilit peut tre une faon de scuriser sa situation sur le march du travail plutt quun moyen pour affronter linscurit professionnelle.

INTRODUCTION
Policy interventions in the realm of employability have concerned various ways to strengthen the employees labour market position. Specically, the interest in employability dates back to the 1950s, when employability interventions aimed at realising full employment by stimulating entry into the labour market. Much effort was directed towards vulnerable groups like youngsters, the long-term unemployed, or the disabled who experienced difculties in nding employment (Forrier & Sels, 2003a; McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005). More recently, employability policies have targeted the total working population rather than disadvantaged minorities or the unemployed, and they have addressed the problem of securing rather than nding employment (European Commission, 1997; Kluytmans & Ott, 1999). This was inspired by fundamental changes in the labour market, namely the rise in feelings of job insecurity among the workers owing to mergers, downsizing, and tight labour markets in general (Sparks, Faragher, & Cooper, 2001). Two beliefs have inspired the revived interest in employability; namely (1) that employability is benecial for the workers (de Vries, Grndemann, & Van Vuuren, 2001), and (2) that employability is relevant in the context of the evolution towards more job insecurity (Brown, Hesketh, & Williams, 2003). However, to date, potential consequences of employability are mostly evaluated in terms of labour market indicators, for example wages, employment history, or voluntary turnover (De Grip, Van Loo, & Sanders, 2004). By way of contrast, little research has concerned the association between employability and employees well-being. Furthermore, no satisfactory account has been provided for the potential importance of employability in job insecurity research, except for speculation that employable workers are less likely to perceive job insecurity. In response to these shortcomings, it is the intent of this study to investigate (1) the association between employability and employees well-being, and (2) job insecurity as a potentially important mediator of this relationship. As regards employees well-being, we select engagement (i.e. a positive, work-related state of mind that is typically characterised by vigour, dedication,
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

490

DE CUYPER ET AL.

and absorption; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2001, 2004) and life satisfaction to reect work-related and general well-being, respectively.

EMPLOYABILITY AND WELL-BEING

All employability denitions refer to the individuals ability to make labour market transitions (Brown et al., 2003; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; Hillage & Pollard, 1998; McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005). This ability results from the individuals know-how, skills, knowledge of the labour market, and adaptability (Dellipi & Arthur, 1994; De Grip et al., 2004; de Vries et al., 2001; Van Dam, 2004). It has traditionally been assessed using objective indicators of an individuals labour market position, such as education, training, or occupational position (Elman & ORand, 2002; Forrier & Sels, 2003a, 2003b; Van Dam, 2004; Virtanen, Kivimki, Virtanen, Elovainio, & Vahtera, 2003; Worth, 2002). Recently, however, authors have developed subjective indicators of employability with roots in research on perceived ease of movement, as originally proposed by March and Simon (1958); namely the individuals perception of the available alternatives in the internal and/or external labour market. Along these lines, Berntson and colleagues (Berntson & Marklund, 2007; Berntson, Sverke, & Marklund, 2006) dene employability as the individuals perception of his or her possibilities to achieve a new job. For the present study, we adopt this denition of employability based upon arguments that, particularly when aiming at investigating employees well-being, subjective indicators may more accurately capture the interplay between contextual and individual factors, which are key components in all employability models (e.g. Forrier & Sels, 2003a; Trevor, 2001). Employability is likely to relate favourably to employees job-related and general well-being. First, employability may promote feelings of being in control of ones career, which, in turn, relate to well-being (Fugate, Kinicki, & Ashforth, 2004; Marler, Barringer, & Milkovich, 2002). For example, Berntson and colleagues (Berntson, Bernhard-Oettel, & De Cuyper, 2007; Berntson & Marklund, 2007) speculate that employability may reduce the fear of becoming unemployed with likely favourable results. In this interpretation, employability provides workers with choices and alternatives that may make them less vulnerable in times of economic recession. Second, Trevor (2001) and Pfeffer (1998) theorise that employable persons are likely to quit jobs that are not rewarding or not satisfying; rather than feeling locked in jobs they do not like (Aronsson & Gransson, 1999), employable workers may act upon their perception that there are other and potentially better alternatives to engage in job search behaviour. This could imply that they eventually end up in jobs of good quality, which are known to promote well-being.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

491

Third, employability has been portrayed as a key indicator of the new psychological contract that exists between employers and employees; in particular, under the new psychological contract, employees commit to high performance and exibility in exchange for organisational support in promoting employability and facilities to exploit employability (Atkinson, 2002; De Vries et al., 2001; Forrier & Sels, 2003b; Hiltrop, 1995; Kluytmans & Ott, 1999; Sullivan, 1999; Van Buren, 2003). Leading scholars suggest that this type of psychological contract will become increasingly important (Anderson & Schalk, 1998; Coyle-Shapiro & Kessler, 2002; Kluytmans & Ott, 1999; Koh & Yer, 2000; Millward & Brewerton, 2000; Rousseau, 1995), and that it parallels the evolution from paternalistic employment relationships to partnerships in which employability is a shared responsibility of employer and employee, and in which both parties aim at a balanced exchange. This, in turn, has been related to well-being (De Cuyper, Rigotti, De Witte, & Mohr, 2008; Koh & Yer, 2000; Shore & Barksdale, 1998; Tsui, Pearce, Porter, & Tripoli, 1997). A related issue concerns the importance of employability in the postindustrial knowledge society (Szab & Ngyesi, 2005), where the continuous updating of knowledge is a critical asset to remain competitive in the globalised market. Plausibly, employees just as employers may be aware of this development (Griffeth, Steel, Allen, & Bryan, 2005). Employees who are familiar with the newest technology, the so-called intellectual capital (Butler & Waldroop, 1999, p. 152), may evaluate themselves as being highly employable, and they may feel capable of dealing with contemporary and future developments, including the shift towards the new psychological contract, which is likely to promote well-being. By way of contrast, individuals who do not have a unique mix of relevant experiences, updated skills and knowledge, and large social networks may feel low employability (Griffeth et al., 2005), and they may depend heavily on their present employer while at the same time realising that the era of lifelong employment in one company has come to an end. This, in turn, may stimulate feelings of job insecurity, and thus, poor well-being (De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006). However, to date, there has been little analysis of the relationship between employability and well-being, with the exception of the longitudinal study by Berntson and Marklund (2007) among a representative sample of Swedish employees. The authors establish that employability is associated with general health and mental well-being when controlled for health status or mental well-being at time 1. In keeping with this evidence, our rst hypothesis reads as follows:
Hypothesis 1: Employability relates positively to engagement (H1a) and life satisfaction (H1b).
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

492

DE CUYPER ET AL.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

Employability is often mentioned in association with job insecurity (Gallie, White, Cheng, & Tomlinson, 1998; Sverke & Hellgren, 2002). Like employability, job insecurity has been measured with objective and subjective indicators (Bssing, 1999). However, unlike in employability research, the subjective job insecurity interpretation has clearly dominated many of the earlier and recent writings. In line with this literature, we dene job insecurity as the employees perceptions about potential involuntary job loss (see e.g. De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Heany, Israel, & House, 1994; Sverke, Hellgren, & Nswall, 2002; Van Vuuren, 1990). Employability has been portrayed as a potential antecedent of job insecurity (Berntson et al., 2007; Forrier & Sels, 2003b; Sverke et al., 2002): high-employable compared with low-employable workers may be less likely to perceive job insecurity. This can be understood alongside assumptions formulated in theories on labour market use, such as the Flexible Firm Model (Atkinson, 1984) or Dual Labour Market Theory (Doeringer & Piore, 1971): employers may offer the most secure jobs to attract and retain highly valuable workers, who would easily nd alternative employment in the case of undesirable working conditions. For example, Schaufeli (1992) establishes that less educated workers are more likely to be employed in insecure jobs than highly educated workers, and thus, they may be more likely to perceive job insecurity. In this case, educational level might be a proxy of employability (Elman & ORand, 2002; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; Van Dam, 2004; Virtanen et al., 2003; Worth, 2002). Arguments expressed in Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1993) may lead to similar predictions: those with a strong labour market position, such as high-employable workers, expect a return on their earlier investments. These revenues are mostly described in terms of wage increases. However, employees decisions may be monitored by non-nancial motives as well (Brown et al., 2003; Marler et al., 2002), for example by motives related to reduced job insecurity. This aligns with the study by Worth (2002), who concludes that employees are committed to the ideal of long-term secure employment as a return for human capital investments. In sum, these theories suggest that perceptions of reduced job insecurity in high-employable workers result from employment in objectively secure jobs. Another potentially useful theoretical framework to explain the relationship between employability and reduced job insecurity is the Appraisal Theory as advanced by Lazarus and Folkman (1984; Berntson & Marklund, 2007). Employable workers may interpret the contemporary labour market and turbulent economic times favourably as a challenge rather than as a threat, which, in turn, could imply that they are less likely to perceive job insecurity. By way of contrast, low-employable workers cannot rely upon
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

493

such coping mechanisms: for them, labour market changes or organisational turbulence present a threat with likely higher job insecurity as a consequence. This aligns with the study by Berntson et al. (2007), who show that organisational changes predict job insecurity, particularly in workers who do not feel employable. Thus, we hypothesise the following:
Hypothesis 2: Employability relates negatively to job insecurity.

As regards potential consequences, job insecurity has been highlighted as perhaps one of the most important stressors in contemporary working life: job insecurity may cause stress reactions owing to feelings of uncontrollability and unpredictability (Dekker & Schaufeli, 1995; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Van Vuuren, 1990), potential frustration of needs related to social participation and recognition, and the potential loss of nancial resources (Jahoda, 1982). More recently, job insecurity has been described as a severe breach of the old psychological contract that still dominates an important contingent of workers, and that fosters employees loyalty through the employers provision of job security (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2006, 2007; De Witte & Nswall, 2003). Such breaches predict poor well-being (Lambert, Edwards, & Cable, 2003; Rousseau, 1995). A wealth of literature has provided support for the relationship between job insecurity and poor well-being (for review studies, see e.g. De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002). For example, job insecurity predicts job dissatisfaction (Ashford, Lee, & Bobko, 1989; Heany et al., 1994; Lim, 1997). Likewise, job insecurity has been related to poor psychological well-being (Burchell, 1992; Van Vuuren, Klandermans, Jacobson, & Hartley, 1991). Furthermore, longitudinal studies suggest that job insecurity is more likely to cause poor well-being than vice versa (Ferrie, Shipley, Marmot, Stansfeld, & Smith, 1998; Hellgren & Sverke, 2003; Nelson, Cooper, & Jackson, 1995). In keeping with this evidence, we hypothesise the following:
Hypothesis 3: Job insecurity relates negatively to engagement (H3a) and life satisfaction (H3b).

Hypotheses 1 to 3 are summarised in Figure 1. Obviously, this pattern of assumptions encourages thinking within a mediation framework. Specically, the relationship between employability and well-being (H1) might be mediated by job insecurity. Other conditions for mediation are that employability relates to job insecurity (H2), and that job insecurity relates to well-being (H3).This assumption of mediation will be investigated in Hypothesis 4, as follows:
Hypothesis 4: The relationship between employability and engagement (H4a) and life satisfaction (H4b) is mediated by job insecurity.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

494

DE CUYPER ET AL.

FIGURE 1. Summary of hypotheses: Mediation of the relationship between employability and well-being by job insecurity.

A potential criticism may concern the possibility of reversed causation. In this respect, Berntson and Marklund (2007) have established that employability is related to subsequent health (Hypothesis 1). Also, rm causal evidence has been reported for the relationship between job insecurity and well-being (Ferrie et al., 1998; Hellgren & Sverke, 2003; Nelson et al., 1995, hypothesis 3), thus making reversed causation unlikely. However, causality still needs to be demonstrated for the relationship between employability and job insecurity: instead of our assumption that employability is an antecedent of job insecurity, it could be argued that job insecurity predicts low employability, which, in turn, associates with unfavourable outcomes. For example, employers may be inclined to offer training opportunities only to workers in the most secure jobs, which may increase these workers employability (Virtanen et al., 2003; Wiens-Tuers & Hill, 2002). The employers motives in this case may concern guarantees that training costs are recovered in terms of future and long-term productivity. However, research shows that employers tend to nance company-specic rather than general training (Forrier & Sels, 2003b), which may relate to the employers wish to reduce turnover among trained workers (Groot & Maassen-Van der Brink, 2000). Accordingly, while employers training investments may increase mobility and promotion chances within the company, it may in fact limit external mobility for those in secure jobs. This suggests that job security may not lead to employability, at least not when employability is dened as in the context of this study, namely as the perceived chance of achieving a new job.

METHOD

Data Collection and Respondents

In the spring of 2004, divisions from seven Belgian companies agreed to participate in a survey on the quality of working life, yielding a total sample
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

495

size of 559: one industrial setting (N = 257; 46.0%) with a response rate of 87.6 per cent, and six smaller retail organisations (N = 302; 54.0%) with response rates varying between 33 per cent and 58 per cent in ve out of six organisations. The response rate was somewhat lower in one retail organisation (20.8%), probably because this organisation did not have a Human Resources department to actively support the research goals. Organisations as well as sectors were recruited based on possibilities for generalising ndings, and on expected variation in levels of employability and job insecurity. The participants completed condential questionnaires during working time, either during group sessions facilitated by the researchers or individually, or, if preferred, at home. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter from the Human Resources manager or the general manager, stressing condentiality, voluntary participation, as well as the importance of the study for all parties involved. Feedback on the research results was provided to all companies, mostly in group sessions in which respondents could participate. A total of 27.5 per cent (N = 154) of the respondents were employed on a xed-term employment contract, while 72.5 per cent (N = 405) were permanently employed. About one respondent in three (34.4%; N = 185) reported being employed as a white-collar worker. The remaining of 353 respondents (65.6%) were blue-collar workers. On average, respondents had been employed for 10 years (SD = 9.42) in their current company, and they worked 31 hours per week (SD = 9.7). Mean age was 34 years (SD = 10.22). More women (64.7%; N = 355) than men (35.3%; N = 194) participated. A minority reported being single (32.7%; N = 178). The others were married or cohabiting (67.3%; N = 367), and 22.3 per cent (N = 119) of the sample continued education beyond high school level.

Measures
All scales reported in this section were used and validated in earlier research in many employment settings and with various types of workers (for more information, see Clinton, Guest, Budjanovcanin, Stainvarts, Krausz, Bernhard, Bellaagh, Isaksson, Rigotti, Mohr, De Cuyper, De Witte, Claes, De Jong, Schalk, Silla, Cabbaler, Gracia, Ramos, & Peir, 2005; Isaksson, Bernhard, Claes, De Witte, Guest, Krausz, Peir, Mohr, & Schalk, 2003; Rigotti, Mohr, De Cuyper, De Witte, Bernhard, Isaksson, de Jong, Schalk, Caballer, Gracia, Peir, Ramos, Clinton, Guest, Krausz, & Staynvarts, 2003). Conrmatory Factor Analysis supported single-factor structures with good t for all scales. Information about means, standard deviations, and correlations between scales is reported in Table 1. Employability was measured with four items which were developed by De Witte (2000). Respondents had to indicate their agreement with items such as I am condent that I could quickly get a similar job or I am optimistic
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

496

2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

DE CUYPER ET AL.

TABLE 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations between Scales (listwise deletion; N = 484)
M 1. Employability 2. Job insecurity 3. Engagement 4. Life satisfaction 5. Industry 6. Tenure 7. Working hours 8. Training 9. Permanent 10. Male 11. Academic 12. Married
* p < .05; ** p < .01.

SD .97 .88 1.11 1.04 .50 9.46 9.84 33.64 .45 .48 .42 .47

1 1 .14** .08 .13** .05 .31** .02 .09 .09 .17** .05 .13**

10

11

2.81 2.44 3.79 5.48 .44 10.43 31.19 13.94 .72 .35 .22 .67

1 .18** .20** .33** .25** .15** .03 .42** .05 .11* .27**

1 .30** .13** .04 .02 .03 .14** .03 .01 .03 1 .04 .08 .01 .01 .06 .06 .06 .09* 1 .10* .52** .07 .04 .15** .33** .03 1 .11* .04 .56** .07 .14** .37** 1 .13** .23** .27** .25** .12** 1 .03 .07 .02 .01 1 .14** .17** .42** 1 .06 .07 1 .16**

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

497

that I would nd another job if I looked for one (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Reliability equalled .90 (N = 532, 2 = 7.17, df = 2, p < .05; GFI = .99; AGFI = .97; RMSEA = .09). Perceived job insecurity was measured using four items (De Witte, 2000). Sample items were I feel insecure about the future of my job and I think I might lose my job in the near future. Respondents had to indicate their agreement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Reliability equalled .86 (N = 531, 2 = 9.30, df = 2, p < .01; GFI = .99; AGFI = .95; RMSEA = .07). As job insecurity and employability were potentially overlapping, we calculated their discriminant validity. The CFA showed a better t for the two-factor model as compared with the single-factor model (N = 523, 2 = 60.74, df = 19, p < .001; GFI = .97; AGFI = .95; RMSEA = .07). Well-Being. Engagement was measured using the dimensions vigour and dedication of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003). These dimensions have been found to represent the core aspects of engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2001, 2004; Storm & Rothman, 2003). The scale included 10 items (e.g. I am enthusiastic about my job) with responses varying from 1 (never) to 6 (always). Reliability was high ( = .95; N = 542, 2 = 155.72, df = 30, p < .001; GFI = .95; AGFI = .90; RMSEA = .092). Life satisfaction was measured with six items (Isaksson et al., 2003). A sample item was How satised do you currently feel about your leisure time? Responses varied from 1 (very dissatised) to 7 (very satised). Reliability equalled .87 (N = 542, 2 = 47.20, df = 9, p < .001; GFI = .97; AGFI = .93; RMSEA = .09). Control Variables. In order to rule out alternative explanations, important work-related variables as well as demographics were controlled for. These variables were identied in earlier research as potentially important confounders when employability and/or job insecurity are concerned (for employability, see e.g. Berntson et al., 2006; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; for job insecurity, see e.g. Kinnunen & Ntti, 1994; Mauno & Kinnunen, 2002; Nswall & De Witte, 2003). As respects work-related variables, we controlled for sector (0 = retail; 1 = industry), tenure (years), weekly working hours (average hours per week), training (hours per year), and contract type (temporary, xed term contract = 0; permanent, open-ended contract = 1). As respects demographics, the following controls were included: gender (0

2 Unlike with the other scales, this model included ve error variance between items for which the wording was similar.

2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

498

DE CUYPER ET AL.

= female; 1 = male), education (0 = no academic degree; 1 = academic degree), and family status (0 = single; 1 = married or cohabiting). We did not control for occupational position (blue-collar versus white-collar) because of its high association with sector (r = .65, p < .001). Similarly, we did not control for age, because of its high correlation with tenure (r = .74, p < .001). However, we ran analyses using age and occupational position instead of tenure and sector. As the results did not change signicantly, we decided to use one variable from each pair.

Analyses
The hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analyses, following recommendations by Baron and Kenny (1986) for testing mediation. Listwise deletion was applied in all analyses, which resulted in slightly smaller samples. Conditional for mediation was (1) that employability was related to engagement and life satisfaction (Hypothesis 1); (2) that employability was related to job insecurity (Hypothesis 2), and (3) that job insecurity was related to engagement and life satisfaction (Hypothesis 3). To investigate conditions 1 and 3, the control variables were entered in the rst step, employability in the second step, and job insecurity in the third step. To investigate condition 2 on the relationship between employability and job insecurity, we regressed the control variables (step 1) and employability (step 2) on job insecurity. Evidence for mediation was found when employability had a smaller or non-signicant relationship with the outcomes when introducing job insecurity (regression equation described in condition 3) as compared to the regression equation in which job insecurity was not introduced (regression equation described in condition 1). When the regression was indicative for a mediator effect, the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) was used to assess the extent to which job insecurity carried the effect of employability on the outcome variables.

RESULTS
To test Hypothesis 1 on the association between employability and wellbeing, we inspected the second step of the regression analyses shown in Table 2. Employability added in explaining variance in both engagement (H1a) and life satisfaction (H1b): specically, employability was positively related to engagement and life satisfaction, in keeping with Hypothesis 1. However, the variance that could be explained by employability was rather small, namely .01 for engagement and .04 for life satisfaction. Hypothesis 2 concerned the relationship between employability and job insecurity. Table 3 summarises the corresponding regression analyses. Employability was negatively associated with job insecurity, meaning that
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

499

TABLE 2 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analyses: Predicting Engagement and Life Satisfaction
Engagement (N = 484) Step 1 Industry Tenure Working hours Training Permanent Male Academic Married Employability Job insecurity R2 R2 .23*** .08 .16** .02 .26*** .01 .05 .10 Step 2 .23*** .12* .17** .01 .27*** .03 .05 .10 .10* .08 .01* Step 3 .15** .09 .20*** .00 .37*** .04 .07 .06 .05 .28*** .13 .05*** Life satisfaction (N = 484) Step 1 .09 .10 .03 .01 .05 .05 .08 .16** Step 2 .10 .05 .02 .02 .06 .08 .09 .16** .14** .05 .02** Step 3 .18** .08 .02 .03 .17** .09 .06 .12* .08 .31*** .11 .06***

.07 .07***

.04 .04*

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

TABLE 3 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analyses: Predicting Job Insecurity

Job insecurity (N = 484) Step 1 Industry Tenure Working hours Training Permanent Male Academic Married Employability R2 R2 .28*** .03 .12* .05 .39*** .07 .06 .14* .33 .33*** Step 2 .28*** .10 .11 .04 .36*** .04 .07 .14** .19*** .36 .03***

high-employable compared with low-employable workers were less likely to feel insecure. This supported Hypothesis 2. In Hypothesis 3, we predicted that job insecurity would relate to poor well-being. This was supported for engagement (H3a) and life satisfaction
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

500

DE CUYPER ET AL.

(H3b), as shown in the third step of the regression analyses shown in Table 2; specically, job insecurity was related to reduced engagement and life dissatisfaction. Finally, we investigated possible mediation of the relationship between employability and well-being by job insecurity (H4). Support for Hypotheses 1 to 3 was conditional for mediation. In addition, we established that the relationship between employability and engagement was no longer signicant when introducing job insecurity in the regression analyses. Similarly, employability did not contribute to explaining life satisfaction when adding job insecurity. Moreover, the Sobel test suggested that the drop in regression weights was substantial for both engagement (z = 3.31, p < .001) and life satisfaction (z = 3.44, p < .001). This suggested that the relationship between employability and well-being is mediated by job insecurity, as predicted in Hypothesis 4. The control variables added signicantly in predicting engagement, life satisfaction, and job insecurity. In particular, employment in the industrial compared with in the retail sector, and permanent compared with temporary employment, were negatively related to engagement. Weekly working hours were positively related to engagement. Being married or cohabiting was positively related to life satisfaction. Job insecurity was associated with working in the industrial versus in the retail sector, weekly working hours, temporary compared with permanent employment, and being married or cohabiting versus being single.

DISCUSSION
The present study aimed to advance understanding about the psychological correlates of employability. Recent literature has focused upon potential consequences of employability in terms of labour market positioning and organisational productivity. In contrast, this study examined the relationship between employability and employees work-related (engagement) and general (life satisfaction) well-being under control of a range of work-related variables (e.g. sector, training) and demographics (e.g. education) that have been assigned a critical role in studies in the realm of employability research. In keeping with results reported by Berntson and Marklund (2007), we established that employability was associated with well-being: employability was positively related to engagement (H1a) and life satisfaction (H1b). The latter may represent an ultimate outcome (Sverke et al., 2002), that is, an outcome outside the workplace, which suggests that employability may be a powerful predictor. Still, not much variance could be attributed to employability, possibly because well-being is a fairly broad concept that is predicted by many other variables, or because employability prevents the development of negative experiences, such as unemployment or feelings of
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

501

being locked-in. This idea of employability as a prevention tool does not imply strong favourable correlates; employability may have the potential to reduce negative feelings rather than to induce positive feelings. Another aim of this study was to situate employability within the context of increased levels of job insecurity. We argued that employability may relate negatively to job insecurity (H2): high-employable workers may feel more secure, possibly because they choose the most secure jobs out of many alternatives (Human Capital Theory), because they are offered such jobs (Dual Labour Market Theory; Flexible Firm Model), or because they interpret turbulent times as challenging rather than as threatening (Appraisal Theory). Evidence for this assumption was provided in our data. This observation underlined our earlier speculation that employability may prevent the development of undesirable experiences: general favourable beliefs about future employment prospects may positively affect employees perception about the future of their current job. Taking this one step further, we draw upon job insecurity literature to predict an association between job insecurity and poor well-being (H3; see e.g. De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002). As expected, job insecurity was negatively related to engagement (H3a) and life satisfaction (H3b), even to the extent that employability was no longer a signicant predictor. This implied that the relationship between employability and well-being was mediated by job insecurity (H4), so that highly employable workers feel less job insecure, which, in turn, associates with well-being. Conversely, lowemployable workers are likely to feel insecure about the future of their jobs, which, in turn, relates to poor well-being. Altogether, this suggests that employability relates to well-being because it is a means to secure jobs, in line with earlier speculations by Worth (2002). Support for this mediation framework is most innovative in the realm of employability research: it provides an alternative to earlier studies that have considered employability as a potential moderator of the relationship between job insecurity and the outcomes. The idea of employability as a moderator was originally proposed by Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984), and it was further developed by scholars such as Fugate et al. (2004), Nswall (2004, 2005), and Sverke and Hellgren (2002). These authors think of employability as an appropriate coping resource when confronted with job insecurity, or otherwise, employability may buffer likely unfavourable outcomes of job insecurity. This has been demonstrated in some studies, where the interaction term between employability and job insecurity adds in explaining variance in psychosomatic complaints (Bssing, 1999; Mohr, 2000), distress (Bssing, 1999), and depression (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992). However, other studies did not establish the hypothesised interaction effects on well-being indicators such as anxiety (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992; Mohr, 2000) and job satisfaction (Bssing, 1999). This study provides a potential
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

502

DE CUYPER ET AL.

explanation for the absence of interaction effects between employability and job insecurity: specically, employability and job insecurity may relate differently to well-being; namely through mediation rather than moderation mechanisms. An important question to be addressed in future research then is how and under which conditions mediation or moderation mechanisms operate. In either case, however, employability is important for the workers well-being, either because it represents a means to secure jobs in the case of mediation, or because it buffers potential negative consequences of job insecurity in the case of moderation. Finally, our results could be important for practitioners, and they may have implications beyond employees well-being. The observation that employable workers are less likely to perceive job insecurity may provide employers with ample opportunities to create a loyal workforce, given the rm association between job security and organisational commitment and reduced turnover intention (De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002). Specically, employers may engage in promoting employability through company-provided training as a strategy to reduce concerns about potential job loss, and as a signal of excellent entrepreneurship (Kluytmans & Ott, 1999; de Vries et al., 2001). This may associate with favourable attitudes towards the organisation; unlike earlier speculations that turnover among valued employees is perhaps the most important drawback of employability (De Grip et al., 2004; Elman & ORand, 2002). Accordingly, the association between employability and organisational outcomes could be a potentially fruitful avenue for future research.

Limitations
There were some limitations inherent to this study. First, the cross-sectional design did not allow for causal interpretations. In particular, feeling employable may be conditional upon employees health and well-being. However, the longitudinal study by Berntson and Marklund (2007) demonstrates that employability relates to subsequent health. Similarly, research in the realm of job insecurity has convincingly shown that job insecurity is more likely to cause poor well-being than vice versa. Also, based on theoretical arguments, we are inclined to hypothesise that employability reduces job insecurity. Still, a longitudinal design could further strengthen our conclusions (see e.g. Chen, Matthews, Spector, & Barnes-Farrell, 2006). A second limitation concerned sample restrictions: for example, our sample included a fairly large share of blue-collar workers and temporary workers, and only a minority of respondents followed academic education. This may suggest that our sample was not highly employable, given earlier studies on potential antecedents of employability. Still, we sampled organisations in different sectors, namely industry and retail, which are known to differ in
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

503

job insecurity and employability. They may imply good possibilities for generalising ndings. However, future research may want to replicate our results using other samples. Third, we relied on employees perceptions to assess employability, job insecurity, as well as well-being. Hence, common method variance may have inuenced the correlations. A related issue may concern the idea that relationships between variables such as employability, job insecurity, and well-being are inuenced by personality factors, most notably positive or negative affectivity or self-efcacy. To date, there is considerable debate on the magnitude of possible ination of relationships owing to common method variance (Crampton & Wagner, 1994; Spector, 1987) or personality (for a review of studies on this issue, see Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). With respect to self-efcacy, recent evidence suggests that employability and self-efcacy are clearly distinct constructs (Berntson, Sverke, Nswall, & Hellgren, 2006). However, to reduce potential risks on common method variance, we followed many of the suggestions on questionnaire design formulated by Podsakoff et al. (2003; e.g. changes in the response format, anonymity, instructing the participants that there are no right or wrong answers). Furthermore, with respect to statistical techniques to inspect the possibility of common method variance, we performed the so-called Harmans single-factor test (in Podsakoff et al., 2003): we loaded all variables into an exploratory factor analyses. The factor solution suggested four factors, which reected the key constructs in this paper, namely, employability, job insecurity, engagement, and life satisfaction. The fact that there was no single factor or a general factor accounting for the majority of the variance may indicate that common method variance may not explain the pattern of results in this study.3

Concluding Remarks
The current study addressed two topical themes of the contemporary labour market, namely employability and job insecurity. Furthermore, it added to earlier research in at least two ways. First, we investigated the relationship between employability and employees well-being, where earlier studies are concerned with the association between employability and labour market outcomes. In this respect, we demonstrated that employability relates to employees well-being. This implies that employability may not only be a labour market instrument to increase wages or to promote organisational

3 We were unable to perform more advanced techniques to control for common method variance such as partial correlation procedures (Podsakoff et al., 2003) owing to the limited sample size.

2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

504

DE CUYPER ET AL.

functioning, but that it can also be used as a human resource instrument to advance well-being at work as well as outside work. Second, we advanced a framework in which job insecurity mediates the relationship between employability and employees well-being, where other authors interpreted employability as a moderator of the relationship between job insecurity and employees well-being. In this respect, our results suggested that highly employable workers are more likely to perceive their jobs as secure, which, in turn, relates positively to well-being. We would like to invite researchers to further explore possible consequences of employability for employees as well as their organisations, and to investigate the conditions under which mediation or moderation mechanisms occur.

REFERENCES
Anderson, N., & Schalk, R. (1998). The psychological contract in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 637647. Aronsson, G., & Gransson, S. (1999). Permanent employment but not in a preferred occupation: Psychological and medical aspects, research implications. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4(2), 152 163. 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. Atkinson, C. (2002). Career management and the changing psychological contract. Career Development International, 7(1), 14 23. Atkinson, J. (1984). Manpower strategies for exible organizations. Personnel Management, August, 28 31. Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182. Becker, G.S. (1993). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. Chicago, IL: National Bureau of Economic Research, The University of Chicago Press. Berntson, E., Bernhard-Oettel, C., & De Cuyper, N. (2007). The moderating role of employability in the relationship between organizational changes and job insecurity. Paper presented at the 13th European Congress of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9 12 May, Stockholm. Berntson, E., & Marklund, S. (2007). The relationship between employability and subsequent health. Work & Stress, 21(3), 279292. Berntson, E., Sverke, M., & Marklund, S. (2006). Predicting perceived employability: Human capital or labour market opportunities? Economic and Industrial Democracy, 27, 223 244. Berntson, E., Sverke, M., Nswall, K., & Hellgren, J. (2006). The relationship between self-efcacy and employability. Poster presented at the 7th Conference of the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology, 810 November, Dublin, Ireland.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

505

Brown, P., Hesketh, A., & Williams, S. (2003). Employability in a knowledge-driven society. Journal of Education and Work, 16(2), 107126. Burchell, B. (1992). Towards a social psychology of the labour market: Or why we need to understand the labour market before we can understand unemployment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(4), 345354. Bssing, A. (1999). Can control at work and social support moderate psychological consequences of job insecurity? Results from a quasi-experimental study in the steel industry. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 219 242. Butler, T., & Waldroop, J. (1999). Job sculpting: The art of retaining your best people. Harvard Business Review, SeptemberOctober. Chen, P., Matthews, R.A., Spector, P.E., & Barnes-Farrell, J.L. (2006). Statistical control: Challenges and suggestions for future research in occupational health psychology. Paper presented at the 7th Conference of the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. Clinton, M., Guest, D., Budjanovcanin, A., Stainvarts, N., Krausz, M., Bernhard, C., Bellaagh, K., Isaksson, K., Rigotti, T., Mohr, G., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., Claes, R., De Jong, J., Schalk, R., Silla, I., Cabbaler, A., Gracia, F., Ramos, J., & Peir, J.M. (2005). Investigating individual and organizational determinants of the psychological contract: Data collection and analysis. Unpublished working document, Kings College, London. Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.M., & Kessler, I. (2002). Contingent and non-contingent working in local government: Contrasting psychological contracts. Public Administration, 80(1), 77101. Crampton, S.M., & Wagner, J.A. (1994). Percept-percept ination in microorganizational research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 6776. De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract type on attitudes, well-being and behavioural reports: A psychological contract perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 395 409. De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2007). Job insecurity among temporary versus permanent workers: Effects on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, life satisfaction and self-rated performance. Work & Stress, 21(1), 120. De Cuyper, N., Rigotti, T., De Witte, H., & Mohr, G. (2008). Balancing psychological contracts: Validation of a typology. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(4), 543561. Dellipi, R.J., & Arthur, M.B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency based perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 307324. De Grip, A., Van Loo, J., & Sanders, J. (2004). The industry employability index: Taking account of supply and demand characteristics. International Labour Review, 14(3), 211233. Dekker, S., & Schaufeli, W. (1995). The effects of job insecurity on psychological health and withdrawal: A longitudinal study. Australian Psychologist, 30(1), 57 63. de Vries, S., Grndemann, R., & Van Vuuren, T. (2001). Employability policy in Dutch organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(7), 1193 1202.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

506

DE CUYPER ET AL.

De Witte, H. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the literature and exploration of some unresolved issues. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 155 177. De Witte, H. (2000). Arbeidsethos en jobonzekerheid: Meting en gevolgen voor welzijn, tevredenheid en inzet op het werk [Work ethic and job insecurity: Measurement and consequences for well-being, satisfaction and productivity]. In R. Bouwen, K. De Witte, H. De Witte, & T. Taillieu (Eds.), Van groep naar gemeenschap. Liber amicorum Prof. Dr Leo Lagrou (pp. 325350). Leuven: Garant. De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on denitions, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(4), 1 6. De Witte, H. (2006). Onzeker over de toekomst van je baan: Een groeiend maatschappelijk fenomeen. Peilen naar oorzaken, gevolgen en oplossingen [Job insecurity: A growing phenomenon. Causes, consequences and solutions]. In B. Raymaekers & G. Van Riel (Eds.), Weten in woorden en daden. Lessen voor de eenentwintigste eeuw (pp. 251277). Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven. De Witte, H., & Nswall, K. (2003). Objective versus subjective job insecurity: Consequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment in four European countries. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24(2), 149188. Doeringer, P.B., & Piore, M.J. (1971). Internal labour market and manpower analysis. Lexington, MA: Heath Lexington Books. Elman, C., & ORand, A.M. (2002). Perceived job insecurity and entry into work-related education and training among adult workers. Social Science Research, 31, 49 76. European Commission (1997). Proposal for guidelines for member states employment policies in 1998. Brussels: European Commission. Ferrie, J., Shipley, M., Marmot, M., Stansfeld, S., & Smith, D. (1998). The health effects of major organisational change and job insecurity. Social Science and Medicine, 46(2), 243 254. Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003a). The concept employability: A complex mosaic. International Journal of Human Resource Development and Management, 3(2), 103124. Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003b). Temporary employment and employability: Training opportunities and efforts of temporary and permanent employees in Belgium. Work, Employment and Society, 17(4), 641 666. Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J., & Ashforth, B.E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions and applications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 1438. Gallie, D., White, M., Cheng, Y., & Tomlinson, M. (1998). Restructuring the employment relationship. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Towards conceptual clarity. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 438 448. Griffeth, R.W., Steel, R.P., Allen, D.G., & Bryan, N. (2005). The development of a multidimensional measure of job market cognitions: The Employment Opportunity Index (EOI). Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 335349. Groot, W., & Maassen-Van der Brink, H. (2000). Education, training and employability. Applied Economics, 32, 573 581.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

507

Heany, C., Israel, B., & House, J. (1994). Chronic job insecurity among automobile workers: Effects on job satisfaction and health. Social Science and Medicine, 38(10), 14311437. Hellgren, J., & Sverke, M. (2003). Does job insecurity lead to impaired well-being or vice versa? Estimation of cross-lagged effects using latent variable modelling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(2), 215 236. Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: Developing a framework for policy analysis. Research Brief 85, DFEE, London. Hiltrop, J.M. (1995). The changing psychological contract: The human resource challenge of the 1990s. European Management Journal, 13(3), 286294. Isaksson, K., Bernhard, C., Claes, R., De Witte, H., Guest, D., Krausz, M., Peir, J.M., Mohr, G., & Schalk, R. (2003). Employment contracts and psychological contracts in Europe. Results from a Pilotstudy. SALTSA Report, 1. Jahoda, M. (1982). Employment and unemployment: A social-psychological analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kinnunen, U., & Ntti, J. (1994). Job insecurity in Finland: Antecedents and consequences. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 4(3), 297321. Kluytmans, F., & Ott, M. (1999). Management of employability in the Netherlands. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 261272. Koh, W.L., & Yer, L.K. (2000). The impact of employeeorganization relationship on temporary employees performance and attitudes: Testing a Signaporean sample. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(2), 366387. 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. Hurrell (Eds.), Stress and well-being at work. Washington, DC: APA. Lambert, L., Edwards, J.R., & Cable, D.M. (2003). Breach and fulllment of the psychological contract: A comparison of traditional and expanded views. Personnel Psychology, 56, 895 934. Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Lim, V. (1997). Moderating effects of work-base support on the relationship between job insecurity and its consequences. Work & Stress, 11(3), 251266. McQuaid, R.W., & Lindsay, C. (2005). The concept of employability. Urban Studies, 42(2), 197219. March, J.G., & Simon, H.A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley. Marler, J.H., Barringer, M.W., & Milkovich, G.T. (2002). Boundaryless and traditional contingent employees: Worlds apart. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 425 453. Mauno, S., & Kinnunen, U. (2002). Perceived job insecurity among dual earner couples: Do its antecedents vary according to gender, economic sector and the measure used? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 295 314. Millward, L.J., & Brewerton, P.M. (2000). Psychological contracts: Employee relations for the twenty-rst century? In C.L. Cooper & I.T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 161). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

508

DE CUYPER ET AL.

Mohr, G.B. (2000). The changing signicance of different stressors after the announcement of bankruptcy: A longitudinal investigation with special emphasis on job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 21, 337 359. Nswall, K. (2004). The buffering effect of employability on job insecurity outcomes. Poster presented at the XXVIII International Congress of Psychology, 8 13 August, Beijing, China. Nswall, K. (2005). Job insecurity and well-being: Moderating factors of a negative relationship. Paper presented at the 12th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, 12 15 May, Istanbul. Nswall, K., & De Witte, H. (2003). Who feels insecure in Europe? Predicting job insecurity from background variables. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 24(2), 189 215. Nelson, A., Cooper, C., & Jackson, P. (1995). Uncertainty amidst change: The impact of privatization on employee job satisfaction and well-being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68, 5771. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879903. Rigotti, T., Mohr, G., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., Bernhard, C., Isaksson, K., de Jong, J., Schalk, R., Caballer, A., Gracia, F., Peir, J.M., Ramos, J., Clinton, M., Guest, D., Krausz, M., & Staynvarts, N. (2003). Instruction work and blue print for methodology. Unpublished research report. Leipzig, Germany. Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Schaufeli, W. (1992). Unemployment and mental health in well and poorly educated schoolleavers. In C. Verhaar & L. Jansma (Eds.), On the mysteries of unemployment: Causes, consequences and policies (pp. 253271). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2001). Werk en welbevinden: Naar een positieve benadering in de arbeids-en gezondheidspsychologie [Work and well-being: Towards a positive approach within work and health psychology]. Gedrag en Organisatie, 17, 229 252. Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2003). UWES: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Universiteit Utrecht. Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004). Bevlogenheid: Een begrip gemeten [Engagement: measurement]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 89 112. Shore, L.M., & Barksdale, K. (1998). Examinig degree of balance and level of obligation in the employment relationship: A social exchange approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(SI), 731 744. Sobel, M.E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290 312. Sparks, K., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C.L. (2001). Well-being and occupational health in the 21st century workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 489 509. Spector, P.E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Myth or signicant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434 443.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.

EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY

509

Storm, K., & Rothman, S. (2003). The validation of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale in the South African police services. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29, 62 70. Sullivan, S.E. (1999). The changing nature of careers: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 25(3), 457 484. Sverke, M., & Hellgren, J. (2002). The nature of job insecurity: Understanding employment uncertainty on the brink of a new millennium. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(1), 23 42. Sverke, M., Hellgren, J., & Nswall, K. (2002). No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7(3), 242 264. Szab, K., & Ngyesi, A. (2005). The spread of contingent work in the knowledgebased economy. Human Resource Development Review, 4(1), 6385. Trevor, C.O. (2001). Interactions among actual ease-of-movement determinants and job satisfaction in the prediction of voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 621 638. Tsui, A.S., Pearce, J.L., Porter, L.W., & Tripoli, A.M. (1997). Alternative approaches to the employeeorganization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off ? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 10891121. Van Buren, H. (2003). Boundaryless careers and employability obligations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 131149. Van Dam, K. (2004). Antecedents and consequences of the employability orientation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(1), 2951. Van Vuuren, T. (1990). Met ontslag bedreigd. Werknemers in onzekerheid over hun arbeidsplaats bij veranderingen in de organisatie [Threat of dismissal: Job insecurity during organizational changes]. Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. Van Vuuren, T., Klandermans, B., Jacobson, D., & Hartley, J. (1991). Employees reactions to job insecurity. In J. Hartley, D. Jacobson, B. Klandermans, & T. van Vuuren (Eds.), Job insecurity: Coping with jobs at risk (pp. 6578). London: Sage. Virtanen, M., Kivimki, M., Virtanen, P., Elovainio, M., & Vahtera, J. (2003). Disparity in occupational training and career planning between contingent and permanent employees. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12(1), 19 36. Wiens-Tuers, B., & Hill, E.T. (2002). Do they bother? Employer training of temporary workers. Review of Social Economy, 60(4), 543 566. Worth, S. (2002). Education and employability: School leavers attitudes to the prospect of non-standard work. Journal of Education and Work, 15(2), 163179.

2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied Psychology.