Next Article in Journal
Review of the Organizational Structures of the Trail Running, Skyrunning and Mountain Running Modalities in Spain
Previous Article in Journal
The Effects of China’s Country-of-Origin Image on Uzbekistani Consumers’ Food Purchase Intentions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 19
10.3390/su141912392
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Empirical Analysis of the Relationships among Participatory Decision Making and Employees’ Task Performance and Personal Growth

by
Jeong Sik Kim
Department of Business Administration, Daejin University, Pocheon-si 11159, Korea
Sustainability 2022, 14(19), 12392; https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912392
Submission received: 15 July 2022 / Revised: 16 September 2022 / Accepted: 26 September 2022 / Published: 29 September 2022
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Due to rapid changes in technology and the resulting increase in uncertainty, the organization is becoming more horizontal, and participatory decision making as an effective method of decision making has attracted more attention. This study empirically explored and verified the path through which participatory decision-making leads to employees’ task performance and personal growth. The author focused on the sequential mediating role of perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. Hypotheses were tested using survey data from 453 supervisor–subordinate dyads within organizations, across multiple industrial sectors. The results confirmed the direct and indirect relationships between participatory decision making and employees’ task performance and personal growth. Additionally, perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement were found to sequentially mediate the relationship between participatory decision making and task performance, and that between participatory decision making and personal growth. This study empirically demonstrates the necessity and importance of participatory decision making and suggests a specific mechanism. Furthermore, it presents implications for using participatory decision making in organizations effectively.

1. Introduction

In the new technology era, the radical changes that organizations are subject to have increased uncertainty. Conventional organizational structures and ways of doing business are increasingly becoming obsolete to keep pace with tech-powered globalization. In an organizational management system, decision making by itself can be viewed as a representative example of this flux. In a vertical organization, decision making centered on the upper layer has been seen as more effective, whereas in a horizontal organization, a participatory decision making method based on the active participation of organizational members has been applied more effectively [1]. Considering that the modern organizational form is gradually changing from a vertical to a horizontal one, the application of a participatory decision making method is expected to be more effective in the organization [2].
Participatory decision making has been attracting attention because it has a positive relationship with the performance and effectiveness of the organization and its members [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. Despite the volume of research, there are still few studies on how participatory decision making is connected with the performance of organization members. On the other hand, Harman [12] emphasized that the reasons for making participatory decisions in an organization should not be found only in terms of performance and efficiency, but rather as a means to provide members with opportunities to pursue and implement meaningful goals at the individual level. According to this, participatory decision making is important not only in terms of organizational efficiency and productivity, but also as a means of individual growth. Participatory decision making allows members to have meaning within the organization [7], and through this, can become an opportunity for self-growth, and furthermore, can help self-actualization. Therefore, in this study, the positive aspects that can be derived from participatory decision making in previous studies were examined not only in terms of the performance of members, but also in their personal growth. While task performance is an aspect that can directly contribute to the organization, personal growth is a strong aspect that helps each member. Therefore, the approach of this study is expected to show that participatory decision making can have a positive relationship with both the organization and the individual by considering the results that can satisfy both the organizational and individual viewpoints.
Existing empirical studies focus on the direct relationship between participatory decision making and members [5,7]. As a result, there is a limitation in that the specific processes and mechanisms by which participatory decision making connects with members were not clearly identified. Paying attention to this aspect, this study tried to show a specific mechanism by exploring a specific path from participatory decision making to employees’ task performance and personal growth. These attempts will help us understand the specific principles and processes that participatory decision making influences. In addition, it will clearly suggest the points to be taken into consideration when applying participatory decision making at the practical level, further enhancing the effectiveness of participatory decision making.
In this regard, this study focused on job meaningfulness and job involvement, perceived as a mediating process in which participatory decision making is linked to employees’ task performance and personal growth. Meaningfulness is a positive psychological state in which one’s job is perceived as valuable and useful [14,15]. Perceived meaningfulness makes members value their jobs and plays a role as an important antecedent factor that can improve performance by enabling members to perform their jobs more diligently and successfully [14]. In addition, perceived meaningfulness is closely related to personal growth because it increases self-esteem and acts as a motivating factor to increase one’s own competency [16]. Next, job involvement refers to the degree to which one has an attachment to and identifies with one’s own job, which motivates members and makes them perform their assigned tasks more steadily, thereby achieving a high performance. Additionally, job involvement is expected to play an important role as a mediator because it can serve as a motivating factor for self-growth to enable members to invest time and effort to perform their duties well and to develop their own capabilities.
Through these studies, we expect to contribute to a more concrete and clear understanding of the mechanism through which participatory decision making leads to employees’ task and personal growth by empirically demonstrating the specific paths. In particular, the current study is more advanced than existing studies in that participatory decision making has been sequentially verified by presenting perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement as paths that can present themselves to employees and through these results, it provides insights on related studies in the future. Additionally, the importance of the use of participatory decision making is presented from a practical point of view, and it is expected to contribute in terms of presenting necessary and important matters for effective use.
Taken together, this study presents the research objectives as follows. First, this study will explore and empirically identify the mechanism of the influence relationship that participatory decision making has on employees’ task performance and personal growth. Second, the relationship between participatory decision making and perceived job meaningfulness will be investigated. Third, the relationship between perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement will be investigated. Fourth, the relationship between job involvement and task performance and the relationship between job involvement and personal growth will be investigated. Fifth, we will examine the sequential mediating roles of perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement in the path from participatory decision making to task performance and personal growth. Sixth, the discussion and implications of the important results of this study will be presented.
The remainder of this study is organized as follows. Section 2 presents a literature review and hypotheses. Section 3 introduces the research method. In Section 4, data analysis results are shown. Section 5 presents a discussion of the study results. Finally, Section 6 presents the conclusions and implications of this study.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses

2.1. Participatory Decision Making

Decision making within an organization is classified according to who the decision maker is and whether there is an opportunity to participate in the decision making process [17]. Decision makers within an organization range from the CEO to the members. In a centralized organization, decision making is concentrated at the upper echelons of leadership, whereas decentralized organizations expand the decision making to the lower echelons of the organization.
Other than decision making authority, whether stakeholders have the opportunity to participate in decision making is important because it can be related not only to future decision making outcomes but also their acceptance [18].
Participatory decision making is often reflected in the formal structure or decisions made under the discretion of the leader [19]. In the formal structure, decision making is made in a situation wherein authority and responsibility are delegated to lower-level members through formal statements or regulations; in the informal method, the leader gives the members discretion based on their own style and method. Decision making proceeds in a way that involves participation and progress. There is already an established literature on participatory decision making through leaders [17]. In participatory decision making, members participate and intervene in the decision making process within the organization [20]. This style of decision making has attracted scholarly attention because it could be highly beneficial for the organization and its members [12].

2.2. The Effects of Participatory Decision Making on Employees’ Performance and Well-Being

Participatory decision making can thus induce qualitative improvement in decision making by allowing members to express their opinions and ideas; it not only improves the performance of the organization and its members [6,7,8], but also improves the well-being of its members [12,13]. Many studies have focused on the improved performance of organizations and their members as a major result of participatory decision making. Participatory decision making can improve organizational performance by gathering the diverse opinions and ideas of members, and it enables members to achieve high performance by acquiring work-solving methods and improving work-processing capabilities [17].
Participation in decision making enhances the well-being of members by making them feel a sense of self-determination and autonomy [12]. Employees’ satisfaction was higher when they participated in decision making within general aspects of the organization rather than taking part in specific decision making related to their job [20]. In addition, when intrinsic aspects, such as the capability of employees to use their knowledge, were satisfied in the process of participation, their satisfaction was higher. Another study found that when managers implemented participatory management, employees’ job satisfaction was high. In particular, employees’ satisfaction was higher when they participated in important tasks of the organization, such as in strategic planning processes [9]. Additionally, participatory decision making provides opportunities and conditions for members to develop positive attitudes within the organization [21] and to improve their competency [22].

2.3. Job Meaningfulness

Job meaningfulness is defined as the perceived value and usefulness of one’s job [21]; that is, when there is a meaningful pursuit in a job [15]. It is the positive feeling that one’s job is important and valuable [15]. People psychologically experience meaning in their job when the job is differentiated and has value as opposed to when their role is generic or mediocre [22]. Although the intrinsic importance and value of a job must be premised on job meaning, “meaningfulness” is also a subjective psychological process that varies by an individual’s perception of the job [23]. In other words, when a job is perceived to have meaning, the “degree” of meaning can also be greatly increased. Indeed, greater synergy is created in job meaningfulness when the ability and skills of the individual performing the job are in harmony with the job requirements [24].
Some scholars consider job meaningfulness to be a factor of intrinsic motivation. That is, when job meaningfulness exists, individuals are more interested in the job they are performing and put effort into it [25]; it can ultimately enhance performance [26]. Job meaningfulness is also known to be an antecedent factor for positive job attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior, such as organizational commitment and job satisfaction [27,28]. Meanwhile, studies also show that a lack of job meaningfulness has negative consequences, such as indifference toward the job and, in severe cases, higher intention to resign [28,29].

2.4. Participatory Decision Making, Task Performance, and Personal Growth

Participatory decision making allows members to gain a general understanding of the organization’s policy direction and strategy. Understanding the work context from a macro perspective in the organization’s framework enables members to know if their current work is suitable for the direction that the organization is pursuing, and how they are connected.
Through participatory decision making, members receive information on tasks and activities within the organization and create their own opinions and ideas by linking this information with their knowledge, skills, and expertise [30]. As a result, employees understand and execute their work better, which, in turn, improves task performance [22].
By participating in decision making, members can directly experience other members’ thoughts and ideas, and other information. They can directly or indirectly learn the work methods and approaches of their superiors and peers to improve their own performance and growth. Above all, participatory decision making allows members to pursue their goals; they are given opportunities to choose and implement decisions, which creates a sense of professional independence [12]. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1.
Participatory decision making is positively related to employees’ task performance.
Hypothesis 2.
Participatory decision making is positively related to employees’ personal growth.

2.5. Participatory Decision Making and Perceived Job Meaningfulness

Job meaningfulness is a positive feeling that one’s job is worthwhile [21], and it is formed by the intrinsic characteristics of the job. The kind of thoughts an individual in charge of a job has about the job and how they perceive it greatly affects the formation of job meaningfulness [23]. Employees are affected by the emotional state in which they perform their job. When they have an intrinsic motivation to perform the job or are well equipped to perform their job, they form a positive attitude and recognition of the job [6].
In participatory decision making, members are guaranteed self-directed thinking and judgment [17]. They proceed with their work autonomously, present their honest opinions, and receive feedback on the results to further develop their work. This allows them to give value and meaning to their job and recognize its importance. Positive recognition further enhances perceived job meaningfulness. In line with the above discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 3.
Participatory decision making is positively related to employees’ perceived job meaningfulness.

2.6. Perceived Job Meaningfulness and Job Involvement

Job involvement is a state of cognitive belief through which one identifies oneself with one’s job [31]. In other words, it is a state of being attached to one’s job and recognizing it as a part of one’s body. Job involvement depends on the job characteristics and whether these characteristics match the job performer’s preferences.
Job involvement occurs when employees believe that the job itself is worthy of attention or investment of time and effort, it is consistent with their aptitude or competencies, and perceived job meaningfulness can be sufficiently conferred [25]. In particular, when job meaningfulness is experienced through positive emotions about one’s own job, attachment to the job is created, which leads to job involvement. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 4.
Perceived job meaningfulness is positively related to job involvement.

2.7. Job Involvement, Task Performance, and Personal Growth

When employees are involved in the job, the job occupies a central position in their lives [31]. In this psychological state, employees think more about their jobs and relate to them better. They devote their effort and time to performing their jobs, and pay more attention to them [32]. Members who become fully involved in the jobs are said to be “attached” to it; they enter a state of intrinsic motivation to perform better and they have a strong desire to achieve their job demands successfully [1]. Therefore, job involvement induces more effort in one’s performance, makes one actively engaged, and motivates one to add more effort, leading to high performance [33].
Job involvement increases the desire to improve the competencies and skills required to achieve the job; it has a positive relationship with short-term concentration as well as long-term personal growth by continuously inducing competency development. Above all, involvement in one’s job is a positive attitude formed voluntarily, which, as noted above, motivates competency development and, thus, natural personal growth [33]. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 5.
Employees’ job involvement is positively related to their task performance.
Hypothesis 6.
Employees’ job involvement is positively related to their personal growth.

2.8. Serial Mediating Role of Emotional Sharing and Communication Satisfaction

In order to examine the relationship between participatory decision making and the task performance of members, as well as that between participatory decision making and members’ personal growth, this study focuses on the role of perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. Participatory decision making does not simply play the functional role of providing opportunities for members to participate and intervene in the decision making process within an organization; it also provides opportunities for members to pursue and implement their meaningful goals [12]. At this time, individual members have their job as a means to achieve goals, while participatory decision making gives a sense of meaning to their job [17].
Sequentially, members integrate their jobs with themselves and become more attached to them, resulting in job involvement [25]. This job involvement induces better task performance by motivating members to devote more of their effort and time to their task performance [33]. It also helps in personal growth by creating a will to develop one’s self continuously in order to perform better [34]. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 7:
Perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement sequentially mediate the relationship between participatory decision making and employees’ task performance.
Hypothesis 8:
Perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement sequentially mediate the relationship between participatory decision making and employees’ personal growth.
All hypotheses are shown in Figure 1.

3. Method

3.1. Sampling

This study conducted a survey on employees working in South Korea to collect data. Companies that have been listed on stocks were studied. Representative companies were selected from among companies belonging to various industrial groups, and the person in charge was contacted in advance to obtain approval and conduct a survey. To maintain the objectivity of the data, the corresponding direct supervisor was asked to fill out the questionnaire related to task performance; and dyadic data were obtained by matching the responses prepared by the subordinates and their supervisors. The survey period was conducted over eight weeks and was distributed evenly by the company. A total of 500 copies were distributed, and 453 valid questionnaires were finally used in this study. In conducting the survey, respondents were allowed to fill out the questionnaire with time to spare, and the confidentiality of the survey respondents was notified in advance. Important points to be noted in the preparation were also emphasized and explained.
The demographic characteristics of the data used in this study were as follows: 62.9% were men and 37.1% were women. The average age was 36.2 years. By age, they were in their 20s (n = 122, 26.9%), 30s (n = 178, 39.3%), 40s (n = 118, 26.1%), and 50s (n = 34, 7.7%). High school graduates accounted for 17.0%, university graduates 71.4%, and graduate school graduates 10.6% of the total sample. The distribution by industry was as follows: finance (n = 51, 11.3%), electronics and electricity (n = 124, 27.4%), information and communication technology (n = 29, 6.4%), construction (n = 37, 8.2%), distribution and logistics (n = 61, 13.5%), textiles and clothing (n = 22, 4.9%), petroleum and chemicals (n = 20, 4.4%), machinery and automobiles (n = 55, 12.1%), and other (n = 54, 11.9%). The average tenure of the employees was 7.5 years, and the average period of working with the current boss was 4.3 years. The average number of group members was 14.2.

3.2. Measurement

In this study, questionnaires were used to measure five research variables. Based on the items validated in previous studies, it was measured by modifying them to fit this study. The five-point Likert scale was used to measure the variables. The respondents were asked to rate each item on a scale of 1 to 5 points, with 1 representing “strongly disagree” and 5 “strongly agree.” Table 1 shows the questionnaires and sources used to measure the variables.
Participatory decision making: Participatory decision making refers to using the opinions and information of members in making decisions [35]. Participatory decision making was measured using the four items used by Arnold et al. [35]. The representative items included “My boss encourages members to suggest ideas or opinions” and “My boss wants to reflect the opinions of members when making decisions.”
Perceived job meaningfulness: Perceived job meaningfulness is a psychological state in which one perceives one’s job as valuable and useful [21]. It was measured with the six items used in May et al. [36]. For example, “The work I do in my job is very important to me”, “My job activities are significant to me”, and “The work I do in my job is meaningful to me” were used.
Job involvement: Job involvement can be defined as the degree of unity with the current job [31]. The six items from Kanungo [31] were used to measure job involvement. Items such as “I am very much involved personally in my job”, “My job is at the center of most of my interests”, and “I want to devote most of my time to my job”, were used.
Task performance: Task performance is the degree to which one is successfully achieving the formal requirements and expectations of the task [37]. Task performance was measured with the seven items used by Williams and Anderson [37]. To objectively measure task performance, the direct supervisor working with the employee who responded to the questionnaire filled it out. Representative questions included “My subordinate…fulfills responsibilities specified in the job description” and “My subordinate…meets the formal performance requirements of the job”.
Personal growth: Personal growth refers to the level at which one perceives that one is continuously growing, and includes activities in which self-efforts are made to further improve the abilities or skills that one values [38]. For personal growth, the six items from Ryff [39] were used. Representative questions included “I have a feeling of continued development” and “I am changing in ways that reflect more self-knowledge and effectiveness”.
Table
Table 1. Questionnaires and Source.
Table 1. Questionnaires and Source.
VariableQuestionnaireSource
Participatory decision-making
(4 items)		My boss encourages members to suggest ideas or opinions.[35]
My boss uses my work group’s suggestions to make decisions that affects us.
My boss gives all work group members a chance to voice their opinions.
My boss wants to reflect the opinions of members when making decisions.
Perceived job meaningfulness
(6 items)		The work I do in my job is very important to me.[36]
My job activities are personally meaningful to me.
The work I do in this job is worthwhile.
My job activities are significant to me.
The work I do in this job is meaningful to me.
I feel that the work I do in my job is valuable.
Job involvement
(6 items)		The most important things that happen to me involve my present job.[31]
I am very much involved personally in my job.
My job is at the center of most of my interests.
I want to devote most of my time to my job.
I live, eat and breathe with my job.
Most of my personal life goals are job-oriented.
Task performance
(7 items)		My subordinate…adequately completes assigned duties.[37]
My subordinate…fulfills responsibilities specified in job description.
My subordinate…performs tasks that are expected of him/her.
My subordinate…meets formal performance requirements of the job.
My subordinate…engages in activities that will directly affect his/her performance evaluation.
My subordinate…doesn’t neglect aspects of the job he/she is obligated to perform.
My subordinate…doesn’t -fail to perform essential duties.
Personal growth
(6 items)		I have a feeling of continued development.[39]
I see myself as growing and expanding.
I am open to new experiences.
I have sense of realizing my potential.
I see improvement in self and behavior over time.
I am changing in ways that reflect more self-knowledge and effectiveness.
Control variables: We controlled for seven demographic variables that have been found to be significantly related to employees’ task performance and personal growth [17,40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. First, gender has been studied as a potential factor that can be related to task performance [41]. In particular, depending on the characteristics of each industry and job, gender can have a significant relationship with task performance. Therefore, gender was included as a control variable. Gender was measured as a dichotomous variable, coded as 1 for male and 2 for female. Second, we controlled for age. Age correlates with task performance and is closely related to work ability, energy, and work experience required to perform work, and as a factor that can induce growth, it can have various unobservable effects [41]. Age was measured in years. Third, education level has also been studied as a variable that is related to performance and personal growth [40]. Education level was included as a control variable because it can improve not only performance but also personal growth by contributing to the formation of knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for task performance. Educational level was measured as a variable, coded as 1 for high school graduation, 2 for college graduation, 3 for university graduation, 4 for graduate school master’s degree, and 5 for graduate school doctoral degree. Fourth, tenure was controlled. Tenure has been studied as a factor related to task performance and personal growth in various studies, and it has been shown to have a significant relationship [43,44]. Tenure was measured as the number of years that an employee had been in the company.
Fifth, job position was controlled. Job position also has been suggested to improve employees’ performance by motivating them [44]. In addition, job position has been studied as a factor that allows employees to accept new changes and challenges and induce self-development and growth [45]. A general employee was coded as 1, an assistant manager as 2, a section chief as 3, a deputy head of department as 4, and a head of department as 5. Sixth, tenure with supervisor is a factor that allows members to receive various work experiences and coaching from their supervisors and provides an opportunity to enhance performance and personal growth [17]. In this study, tenure with supervisor was measured as the number of years worked together. Seventh, department size was controlled. Department size is not only an important factor determining individual performance of members, but also a factor that can promote personal growth, especially when the job complexity is high [46]. Department size was measured by the number of members.

4. Results

4.1. Validity and Reliability Analysis

In this study, confirmatory factor analysis was performed for validity analysis (χ2 = 1003.93, df = 371, NFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.93, CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.06). Looking at the analysis results presented in Table 2, the factor loading was presented above the standard value of 0.50 for participatory decision making, perceived job meaningfulness, job involvement, task performance, and personal growth. Additionally, all average variance extraction (AVE) values were presented above 0.50, confirming that convergence validity was secured [47].
As presented above, convergence validity was secured [47]. As shown in Table 3, the AVE square roots of each variable were higher than the correlation values between other variables; hence, discriminant validity was sufficiently secured [48]. The composite reliability shows that participatory decision making (0.92), perceived job meaningfulness (0.94), job involvement (0.89), task performance (0.94), and personal growth (0.90) all presented values above the standard value of 0.70, indicating reliability [47].
Table 3 presents the correlation analysis between participatory decision making, perceived job meaningfulness, job involvement, task performance, and personal growth, and shows significant correlations among all variables.

4.2. Hypothesis Testing

Structural equation analysis using AMOS was performed to verify the proposed model and hypotheses. In the structural equation analysis, seven demographic variables such as gender, age, education level, tenure, job position, tenure with supervisor, and department size were controlled. According to the analysis results, the model was found to be adequate, as per both chi-square values and fit indices (χ2 = 1190.98, df = 553, TLI = 0.93, CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.05). Additionally, it was examined whether there was a significant improvement in the fit index through comparison between the hypothesized model and the alternative models. Table 4 summarizes all the model fit indices.
Model 1 is the hypothesized model. In this model, paths were specified from participatory decision making to perceived job meaningfulness, from perceived job meaningfulness to job involvement, and from job involvement to initiative behavior and task performance. Furthermore, this model has direct paths from participatory decision making to task performance and personal growth. The author tested three nested models against the hypothesized model. In Model 2, the direct path from participatory decision making to personal growth was removed. In Model 3, the direct path from participatory decision making to task performance was removed. In the third alternative model, Model 4, the direct paths from participatory decision making to task performance and personal growth were removed.
As Table 4 shows, the differences between chi-squares were significant for Model 1 compared with Models 2, 3, and 4. These alternative models provided good fits to the data but were not significantly better than the hypothesized model. Because the fit to the data was acceptable, even when compared to competing models, the hypothesized model was adopted as the final model.
The path coefficient is presented in Figure 2; based on it, the research hypotheses were verified. Hypothesis 1 is about the relationship between participatory decision making and task performance, and Hypothesis 2 is about the relationship between participatory decision making and personal growth. According to the results of the study, participatory decision making had a significant positive relationship with members’ task performance (β = 0.30, p < 0.01) and personal growth (β = 0.28, p < 0.01). These results show that members can not only express their thoughts and opinions by participating in decision making, but can also listen to the thoughts and opinions of their bosses and colleagues at the same time, increasing the likelihood of task performance and personal growth. This is consistent with existing studies demonstrating that people can develop their own competencies as well as perform tasks effectively through participatory decision making [1,22]. This confirms that participatory decision making has a significant relationship not only with employees’ task performance, but also with their personal growth. Therefore, both Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 were accepted. Hypothesis 3 is about the relationship between participatory decision making and employees’ perceived job meaningfulness. Hypothesis 3 was also adopted because there is a significant relationship between participatory decision making and perceived job meaningfulness (β = 0.40, p < 0.01). The results of the analysis are consistent with the existing research, demonstrating that participatory decision making increases satisfaction and motivates members by giving them the impression that they are participating in important and valuable work [12]. Hypothesis 4 deals with the relationship between employees’ perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement, and employees’ perceived job meaningfulness had a significant positive relationship with job involvement; so, Hypothesis 4 was adopted (β = 0.47, p < 0.01). These results empirically show that employees’ perceived job meaningfulness is related to their job involvement.
Next, Hypothesis 5 and Hypothesis 6 concern the relationship between employees’ job involvement and task performance, and the relationship between employees’ job involvement and personal growth. Job involvement was found to have a positive relationship with both task performance and personal growth. It was found that the relationship between job involvement and personal growth was relatively larger than the relationship between job involvement and task performance. These results support the idea that job involvement is significantly related to both task performance and personal growth. Through this, Hypothesis 5 (β = 0.20, p < 0.01) and Hypothesis 6 were both accepted (β = 0.33, p < 0.01). Next, to verify Hypothesis 7 and Hypothesis 8, bootstrapping was used to confirm the indirect relationship between participatory decision making with task performance, and between participatory decision making and personal growth through perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. The indirect relationship sequentially mediated by perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement between participatory decision making and task performance was 0.03 (p < 0.01), and that between participatory decision making and personal growth was 0.05 (p < 0.01). These results show that perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement are sequentially linked and play an important mediating role in the path from participatory decision making to task performance and personal growth. Therefore, both Hypothesis 7 and Hypothesis 8 were accepted.
The results related to the control variables are as follows. Educational level was found to be significantly related to both task performance (β = 0.16, p < 0.01) and personal growth (β = 0.17, p < 0.01). These results are consistent with existing studies [17,46], and it is thought that the higher the education level, the higher the likelihood of encountering task-related professional knowledge and skills, and through this, higher performance is achieved. Additionally, department size was significantly related to both task performance (β = 0.10, p < 0.05) and personal growth (β = 0.13, p < 0.01). These are consistent with previous studies [46], showing that the larger the department, the higher both the performance and personal growth of members. On the other hand, gender (β = −0.12, p < 0.01) and tenure (β = −0.20, p < 0.01) were negatively related to personal growth. Looking at gender, it can be interpreted that men have higher personal growth than women. Next, from the results related to tenure, it can be interpreted that the shorter tenure, the more that active personal growth occurs.

5. Discussion

This study empirically explored and verified the path through which participatory decision making leads to employees’ task performance and personal growth. Significant results obtained are as follows. First, participatory decision making was found to have a significant direct relationship with employees’ task performance and personal growth. In addition, participatory decision making had a significant indirect relationship with performance and personal growth of employees through sequential mediation of perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. These results are consistent with the existing research [1,3]. Therefore, the role of participatory decision making in improving task performance and personal growth is confirmed. The achievement of task performance within the organization is important at the individual level, but it also contributes to the organization, and it is close to the obligation to be officially achieved by the employees. On the other hand, considering that personal growth is a matter that can be seen as more interesting from the point of view of employees rather than the organization, the result that there is a significant relationship between participatory decision making and personal growth has a more important meaning at the individual level of employees. Recently, organizations are also interested in the career development of employees, demonstrated through the introduction of career development programs (CDPs), and are focusing on personal growth through individual competency improvement and career development. When we think about it, the concept of personal growth is expected to have more important meaning not only at the level of individual members but also at the level of the organization as a whole.
Second, participatory decision making was found to have a significant positive relationship with perceived job meaningfulness, implying that decision making activates the psychological processes of employees at work. This result reconfirmed prior findings that participatory decision making increases employee satisfaction and motivates them to participate in valuable work [12]. In particular, this study empirically demonstrated that through participatory decision making, members can recognize the importance of their jobs and be inspired to provide more attention and effort. Therefore, members’ participation in decision making can effectively change their perceptions and attitudes toward their jobs.
Third, perceived job meaningfulness was significantly related to job involvement. Therefore, giving meaning to one’s own job is an important antecedent factor in developing an attachment toward and involvement in the job. Studies on the antecedents of job involvement mention the importance of motivation [49,50,51]. When members give sufficient meaning to their jobs, intrinsic motivation for their jobs is already established and they become involved in their jobs. The results of this study highlight the importance of perceived job meaningfulness within an organization. This study is valuable because there is still a lack of empirical literature on perceived job meaningfulness, and the results reassert the need for more studies in the area.
Fourth, job involvement was shown to be a leading factor for improving task performance and personal growth. This result confirmed those of previous studies that job involvement improves task performance, and went a step further to show that job involvement was also related to personal growth. Additionally, the result complemented prior findings that claim job involvement increases effort undertaken in the job [22,32].
Fifth, gender and tenure, which were included as control variables in this study, were found to have a negative relationship with employees’ personal growth. It can be interpreted that men have higher personal growth than women. These results can be attributed to the fact that in South Korea, male preference within recruitment and promotion is prominent, and men can stay in companies for a longer periods of time than women, and have more opportunities to change jobs. Next, from the results related to tenure, it can be interpreted that the shorter tenure, the more that active personal growth occurs. In South Korea, there are many cases of permanent employment at one workplace, and promotion and compensation are made according to seniority, so the higher tenure, the higher the position within the organization. Accordingly, the lower tenure, the lower the position and the level of compensation within the organization, so more effort is needed for growth.
On the other hand, education level had a positive relationship with both task performance and personal growth. This result means that the higher education level, the higher the task performance and personal growth. It is inferred because highly educated employees are more likely to have access to and possess task-related professional knowledge and skills, and can achieve higher performance by using them. Furthermore, the reason for the positive relationship between education level and personal growth is that highly educated employees are more likely to have already taken an interest in their own growth and put in more effort than those with lower education level. Additionally, department size had a significant relationship with the task performance and personal growth of employees. This is thought to be possible because, if the department size is large, it is possible not only to give and receive business help through exchanges with various members, but also to share knowledge and experience of various tasks. Thinking in conjunction with the models and hypotheses of this study, it shows that gender, tenure, education level, department size need to be considered together when participatory decision making is successfully linked to task performance and personal growth.

6. Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship mechanism between participatory decision making and members’ task performance and personal growth, and it was focused on examining the sequential mediating role through the employees’ perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. For this purpose, related literature studies were conducted, and based on these, research hypotheses and research models were presented. In addition, empirical analysis was conducted through structural equations, and the following significant research results and implications were derived.
First, it was found that participatory decision making had a significant direct relationship with employees’ task performance and personal growth, as well as a significant indirect relationship through perceived job meaningfulness and job involvement. In addition, participatory decision making had a significant relationship with perceived job meaningfulness and perceived job meaningfulness was positively related to job involvement. Sequentially, job involvement was found to have a significant relationship with task performance and personal growth. Through these results, it can be confirmed that participatory decision making has a significant relationship with the improvement of task performance and the personal growth of employees both directly and indirectly.
Second, by expanding existing studies on the usefulness of participatory decision making, this study successfully explored and identified specific mechanisms by which participatory decision making leads to employees. This approach supplements the limitations of existing studies examining the direct relationship between participatory decision making and outcomes such as attitude, behavior, and performance, and shows concretely through what process and mechanism participatory decision making influences. In addition, by looking at the process and results of participatory decision making on the employees in an integrated way, it helps to understand the interactions that occur simultaneously. Additionally, it is expected that it will be used as a good reference for more in-depth and sophisticated follow-up studies in the future.
Third, participatory decision making is influenced by culture, institutions, systems, and leadership [9,20,52,53,54]. In order to activate participatory decision making within the organization, it is necessary to make efforts to establish a learning-oriented culture, a horizontal culture, and a culture of accepting change [20]. From a system perspective, it is necessary to apply an evaluation method that can strengthen cooperation with colleagues and create synergy [17]. Through this, rather than focusing only on individual performance, it is necessary to pay attention to the performance of the group and organization to which I belong, and to increase the motivation to contribute. From a leadership perspective, leaders should support employees to actively participate in decision making, and strive to increase their competence and will through intellectual stimulation, coaching, and information sharing as a facilitator [22].
Fourth, this study suggests that it is also necessary to pay attention to the personal growth of employees from a mid- to long-term perspective rather than only focusing on task performance improvement from a short-term perspective in organizational management. The competence of the entire organization can be completed through various means, but it is the competence of individual employees that should not be overlooked. In current study, in order to emphasize this point, the study was conducted by applying the personal growth perspective to the study. The individual growth of the employees will be their primary need, but as the employees grow, the organization is more likely to benefit from it as well. In connection with the results of this study, it can be seen that the introduction of decision making is also related to the personal growth of employees. Therefore, it is necessary for organizations to take an active interest in providing and encouraging employees the opportunity to participate so that they can naturally complete self-growth by giving meaning to their jobs and allowing them to be more involved in their jobs.
Although significant results and research implications were derived through theoretical discussion and empirical analysis, current study has the following limitations. First, efforts were made in the data collection process, such as having the supervisor directly evaluate the task performance in order not to commit the error of using the same method. Nevertheless, in the relationship among some variables, problems may arise in using the same method using data collected through the same subject. Second, a possible endogeneity issue of participatory decision making is still present, and this is a limitation of the research conducted. Third, due to this possible issue and the methodology adopted in this study, results are interpreted as correlations and not as effects. Fourth, to highlight the role of participatory decision making clearly, it may be necessary to analyze the relationships with a time lag, but this could not be reflected owing to practical limitations. In future follow-up studies, if these points are actively supplemented, it is expected that the research results will be more powerful. Fifth, considering that this study focuses on participatory decision making, various factors may exist that can control participatory decision making when dealing with the outcome variables. Therefore, it is judged that richer research results and implications can be derived in follow-up studies if personal traits, job characteristics, and organizational situational factors are evenly reflected as moderators.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by ethical committee of Daejin University.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kim, J.S.; Chah, D. Effects of leaders’ participative decision making on employees’ creative behavior and performance: Focusing on the role of psychological empowerment and job involvement. J. Manag. Organ. 2013, 21, 331–370. [Google Scholar]
  2. Valverde-Moreno, M.; Torres-Jimenez, M.; Lucia-Casademunt, A.M. Participative decision-making amongst employees in a cross-cultural employment setting: Evidence from 31 European countries. Eur. J. Train. 2021, 45, 14–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Somech, A. Explicating the complexity of participative management: An investigation of multiple dimensions. Educ. Adm. Q. 2002, 38, 341–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Freeman, R.B.; Kliner, M.M. Who Benefits Most from Employee Involvement: Firms or Workers? Am. Econ. Rev. 2000, 90, 219–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Goñi-Legaz, S.; Ollo-López, A. Temporary contracts, participation in decision making and job satisfaction in European work-ers: Is there a buffering effect? Int. J. Manpow. 2017, 38, 875–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Huang, X.; Iun, J.; Liu, A.; Gong, Y. Does participative leadership enhance work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? The differential effects on managerial and non-managerial subordinates. J. Organ. Behav. 2010, 31, 122–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kimpah, J.; Ibrahim, H.I. Participative decision-making, psychological empowerment and job performance: Evidence from the Malaysian Electrical and Electronic manufacturing firms. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2020, 28, 791–802. [Google Scholar]
  8. Lam, S.S.K.; Chen, X.; Schaubroeck, J. Participative decision making and employee performance in different cultures: The moderating effects of allocentrism/idiocentrism and efficacy. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45, 905–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. García, G.A.; Gonzales-Miranda, D.R.; Gallo, O.; Roman-Calderon, J.P. Employee involvement and job satisfaction: A tale of the millennial generation. Empl. Relat. 2019, 41, 374–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yammarino, F.J.; Naughton, T.J. Individualized and group-based views of participation in decision making. Group Organ. Manag. 1992, 17, 398–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Srivastava, A.; Bartol, K.M.; Locke, E.A. Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, effi-cacy, and performance. Acad. Manag. J. 2006, 49, 1239–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Harman, W.W. Two contrasting concepts of participatory leadership. Theory Pract. 1981, 20, 225–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kim, S. Participative Management and Job Satisfaction: Lessons for Management Leadership. Public Adm. Rev. 2002, 62, 231–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Meyerson, S.L.; Kline, T.J.B. Psychological and environmental empowerment: Antecedents and consequences. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2008, 29, 444–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cameron, K.; Dutton, J. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline; Berrett-Koehler Publishers: Oak-land, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kimpah, J. The Effect of Participative Decision Making and Empowerment on Job Performance of Engineer in Electrical and Electronic Sectors. Ph.D. Thesis, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  17. Yukl, G. Leadership in Organizations, 8th ed.; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Daft, R.L. Leadership Experience, 2nd ed.; South-Western: Mason, OH, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  19. Yukl, G. Leadership in Organizations; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kaufman, B.E. The theory and practice of strategic HRM and participative management. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2001, 11, 505–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chaudhary, N. Early childhood education in contemporary Indian society: Finding meaning through cultural traditions and developmental science. J. Psychosoc. Res. 2020, 15, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kahn, W.A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad. Manag. J. 1990, 33, 692–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Spreitzer, G.M. An empirical test of a comprehensive model of intrapersonal empowerment in the workplace. Am. J. Community Psychol. 1995, 23, 601–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Samson, S. Impact of Person-Job Fit on Innovative Work Behavior with Mediating Role of Psychological Meaningfulness and Moderating Role of Trust in Management. Ph.D. Thesis, Capital University, Koderma, India, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  25. Thomas, K.W.; Velthouse, B.A. Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1990, 15, 666–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yidong, T.; Xinxin, L. How ethical leadership influence employees’ innovative work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic mo-tivation. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 116, 441–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Glavas, A.; Kelley, K. The effects of perceived corporate social responsibility on employee attitudes. Bus. Ethics Q. 2014, 24, 165–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Swart, J.; Rothmann, S. Authentic happiness of managers, and individual and organisational outcomes. S. Afr. J. Psychol. 2012, 42, 492–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Aktouf, O. Management and theories of organizations in the 1990s: Toward a critical radical humanism? Acad. Manag. Rev. 1992, 17, 407–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Scully, J.A.; Kirkpatrick, S.A.; Locke, E.A. Locus of knowledge as a determinant of the effects of participation on performance, affect, and perceptions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1995, 61, 276–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kanungo, R.N. Measurement of job and work involvement. J. Appl. Psychol. 1982, 67, 341–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pierro, A.; Kruglanski, A.W.; Higgins, E.T. Progress takes work: Effects of the locomotion dimension on job involvement, ef-fort investment, and task performance in organizations. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2006, 36, 1723–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Brown, S.P.; Leigh, T.W. A new look at psychological climate and its relationship to job involvement, effort, and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 1996, 81, 358–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ryff, C.D.; Keyes, C.L.M. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1995, 69, 719–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Arnold, J.A.; Arad, S.; Rhoades, J.A.; Drasgow, F. The empowering leadership questionnaire: The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring leader behaviors. J. Organ. Behav. 2000, 21, 249–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. May, D.R.; Gilson, R.L.; Harter, L.M. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the en-gagement of the human spirit at work. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2004, 77, 11–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Williams, L.J.; Anderson, S.E. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Geise, C.A. Personal Growth and Personality Development: Well-Being and Ego Development. Master’s Thesis, The University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ryff, C.D. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1989, 57, 1069–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Iksyaniyah, N.; Hakim, L.; Listyadi, A. Effects of work experience, education level, and wages on employee performance with religiosity as moderating variables. Tech. Soc. Sci. J. 2021, 16, 355–368. [Google Scholar]
  41. Megna; Dixt, V. Impact of age, gender, and experience on task performance in service sector: An empirical study. Delhi Bus. Rev. 2021, 22, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Nemanich, L.A.; Keller, R.T. Transformational leadership in an acquisition: A field study of employees. Leadersh. Q. 2007, 18, 49–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Shaw, K.; Lazear, E.P. Tenure and output. Labour Econ. 2008, 15, 704–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Oyewole, G.O.; Popoola, S.O. Personal Factors and Work Locus of Control as Determinants of Job Performance of Library Personnel in Federal Colleges of Education in Nigeria. Chin. Librariansh. 2015, 40, 15–31. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kuciapski, M. How the Type of Job Position Influences Technology Acceptance: A Study of Employees’ Intention to Use Mobile Technologies for Knowledge Transfer. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 177397–177413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mao, A.; Mason, W.; Suri, S.; Watts, D.J. An Experimental Study of Team Size and Performance on a Complex Task. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0153048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed.; Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  48. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Moon, M.J. Organizational commitment revisited in new public management: Motivation, organizational culture, sector, and managerial level. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 2000, 24, 177–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Naff, K.C.; Crum, J. Working for America: Does public service motivation make a difference? Rev. Public Pers. Adm. 1999, 19, 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rainey, H.G. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, 2nd ed.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  52. Cabrera, E.F.; Ortega, J.; Cabrera, Á. An exploration of the factors that influence employee participation in Europe. J. World Bus. 2003, 38, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Franca, V.; Pahor, M. Influence of management attitudes on the implementation of employee participation. Econ. Ind. Democr. 2014, 35, 115–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kouakou, D.C.M. Determinants of employees’ participation in decision-making in developing countries: Does a firm’s formal versus informal status matter? Manag. Decis. Econ. 2022, 43, 1501–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 14 12392 g001 550
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Sustainability 14 12392 g001
Sustainability 14 12392 g002 550
Figure 2. Results of structural equation modeling. Note: The effect of the control variables is not shown. ** p < 0.01.
Figure 2. Results of structural equation modeling. Note: The effect of the control variables is not shown. ** p < 0.01.
Sustainability 14 12392 g002
Table
Table 2. Validity and reliability.
Table 2. Validity and reliability.
ConstructsFactor
Loading		Cronbach’s αComposite ReliabilityAVE
Participatory decision making
(4 items)		0.800.950.920.78
0.89
0.91
0.85
Perceived job meaningfulness
(6 items)		0.790.910.940.76
0.84
0.87
0.86
0.88
0.89
Job involvement
(6 items)		0.750.840.890.64
0.61
0.68
0.86
0.88
0.71
Task performance
(7 items)		0.850.940.940.72
0.87
0.86
0.87
0.73
0.78
0.83
Personal growth
(6 items)		0.770.890.900.65
0.82
0.62
0.74
0.82
0.83
Table
Table 3. Means, standard deviations, and correlations.
Table 3. Means, standard deviations, and correlations.
VariablesMeanS.D.12345
1. Participatory decision making3.710.89(0.88)
2. Perceived job meaningfulness3.970.800.37 **(0.87)
3. Job involvement3.200.750.25 **0.45 **(0.80)
4. Task performance3.960.650.31 **0.32 **0.29 **(0.85)
5. Personal growth3.690.700.32 **0.47 **0.39 **0.38 **(0.81)
Note: The AVE square roots are in parentheses along the diagonal. ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 4. Structured Equation Model Comparison.
Table 4. Structured Equation Model Comparison.
Variablesχ2△χ2df△dfχ2/d.TLICFIRMSEA
1. Hypothesized model1190.98-553-2.150.930.940.05
2. Alternative model 1: Remove a direct path from participatory decision making to personal growth1223.5132.53 **55412.210.930.940.05
3. Alternative model 2: Remove a direct path from participatory decision making to task performance1227.5736.59 **55412.220.930.940.05
4. Alternative model 3: Remove direct paths from participatory decision making to task performance and personal growth.1257.5866.60 **55522.230.930.940.05
Note: All △χ2, △df values are in reference to the hypothesized model. ** p < 0.01.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kim, J.S. An Empirical Analysis of the Relationships among Participatory Decision Making and Employees’ Task Performance and Personal Growth. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12392. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912392

AMA Style

Kim JS. An Empirical Analysis of the Relationships among Participatory Decision Making and Employees’ Task Performance and Personal Growth. Sustainability. 2022; 14(19):12392. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912392

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kim, Jeong Sik. 2022. "An Empirical Analysis of the Relationships among Participatory Decision Making and Employees’ Task Performance and Personal Growth" Sustainability 14, no. 19: 12392. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912392

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop