Insights on Canadian Society
The association between job flexibility and job satisfaction

by Steve Martin

Release date: December 4, 2018

Skip to text

Text begins

Start of text box

Overview of the study

This study explores the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction among men and women aged 18 to 64, using data from the 2014 Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA). Four aspects of job flexibility are examined: the order of work (or the sequence of tasks), how the work is done, the speed of work, and the hours of work.

  • Among men and women aged 18 to 64, about one-half were satisfied with their job. Respondents are considered to be “satisfied” if they report a score of 8 or higher to a job satisfaction question, where 0 corresponds to “very dissatisfied” and 10 corresponds to “very satisfied.”
  • Several facets of job flexibility are measured in the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA). About 40% of both men and women reported a high to a very high extent of control over their order of work. About 37% of men and 33% of women reported a high or a very high extent of control over how the work is done.
  • In addition, 3 in 10 men and women indicated that they had a high or a very high extent of control over the speed of work. About 2 in 10 men and women reported that they had a high or a very high extent of control over their hours of work.
  • Of the four facets of job flexibility mentioned above, control over the hours of work was most strongly associated with job satisfaction for both men and women, even after accounting for other factors associated with job satisfaction.
  • The association between control over hours of work and job satisfaction was stronger among younger individuals. Workers aged 18 to 33 who had a high to a very high extent of control over their hours of work were 17 percentage points more likely to be satisfied with their job than those who had less control, compared with 7 percentage points for those aged 34 to 49.

End of text box

Introduction

Job satisfaction is an important characteristic of a job. A satisfied worker is, all else being equal, less likely to quit their job or be absent from work.Note This relationship between job satisfaction and workplace attachment has important implications for employee turnover and absenteeism, and in turn workplace human relations, as job satisfaction can be a good predictor of an individual’s attachment to their job. Job satisfaction can also have a positive impact on an individual’s overall life satisfaction and perceived quality of life.Note

While there are a myriad of individual-specific and workplace characteristics that conspire to influence job satisfaction, one aspect that has received little attention is the influence that job flexibilitythe extent of control over various facets of a job—has on job satisfaction.Note While it is not difficult to imagine that job flexibility should be an important determinant of job satisfaction, this relationship is particularly relevant as employers increasingly move away from traditionally rigid work arrangements in favour of more flexible alternatives, while young workers place increasingly greater emphasis on flexible workplaces.Note

This study uses data from the second wave of the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA) to analyze the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction for men and women age 18 to 64. LISA collects information on multiple aspects of job quality, including four facets of job flexibility—the extent of control over the order of work; how the work is done; the speed of work; and the hours of work. LISA also includes a measure of job satisfaction, and a wealth of other demographic and socioeconomic variables. These control variables are useful for isolating the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction from other factors that influence job satisfaction. Despite these control variables, however, the job flexibility-job satisfaction relationship may not represent a causal relationship.

This study adds to the literature on job satisfaction by exploiting a new data source—LISA—and by examining the association between multiple facets of job flexibility and job satisfaction. In the first section of the article, job satisfaction and job stability figures are examined across a number of sociodemographic characteristics. The second section provides a detailed examination of the relationship between job satisfaction and job flexibility.

Likelihood of staying in current job is associated with job satisfaction

In LISA, job satisfaction is self-reported on an 11-point ordinal scale, where 0 corresponds to “very dissatisfied” and 10 corresponds to “very satisfied.” For the purpose of this study, a respondent is said to be satisfied with their job, or work, if they report a score of 8 or higher (see the Data sources, methods and definitions section). By that measure, 49% of men and 51% of women reported that they were satisfied with their job.Note

One of the main reasons for exploring the relationship between job flexibility and job satisfaction is to discover the potential influence job satisfaction could have on an individual leaving their current job. For instance, an individual with little job flexibility may become dissatisfied with their work and, in turn, leave to either find work elsewhere or exit the labour market entirely. An individual’s intention to stay in their current job is measured on a 100-point probability scale in LISA, and reflects an individual’s subjective belief that they will remain at their current job for at least the next year.

As might be expected, job satisfaction is associated with a higher probability to remain in the same job for at least the next year (Chart 1). For both men and women, those who were satisfied with their job were 17 percentage points more likely to report that they would stay in their current job than those who were less satisfied. In view of the above, the potential association between a higher degree of job flexibility and job satisfaction should be examined.

Chart 1 Probability of staying in a job for the next year, by job satisfaction and sex, 2014

Data table for Chart 1
Data table for Chart 1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 1. The information is grouped by Sex (appearing as row headers), Job satisfaction score of 7 or lower (less satisfied) and Job satisfaction score of 8 or higher (satisfied), calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Sex Job satisfaction score of 7 or lower (less satisfied) Job satisfaction score of 8 or higher (satisfied)
percent
Men 68.2 84.8Note *
Women 68.5 85.7Note *

Job satisfaction and job flexibility vary by sex, age, education and occupation

Among the entire population of workers aged 18 to 64, about one-half reported a job satisfaction score of at least 8 on a scale of 0 to 10, and are thus considered “satisfied.” This proportion, however, varied across personal and job characteristics (Table 1).

Table 1
Job satisfaction and job flexibility indicators among workers aged 18 to 64, by personal characteristics, 2014
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 1 Job satisfaction and job flexibility indicators among workers aged 18 to 64 Job satisfaction score of 8 or higher (satisfied), High to very high extent of control over order of work, High to very high extent of control over how to do work, High to very high extent of control over speed of work and High to very high extent of control over hours of work, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Job satisfaction score of 8 or higher (satisfied) High to very high extent of control over order of work High to very high extent of control over how to do work High to very high extent of control over speed of work High to very high extent of control over hours of work
percent
Sex
Male 49.1 40.6 37.0Note * 32.3Note * 19.4
Female (ref.) 51.2 40.3 33.4 28.9 18.7
Age
18 to 24 44.5Note * 33.2 30.2 29.1 22.4Note *
25 to 34 50.2 42.4Note * 36.4 31.3 20.4
35 to 44 48.9Note * 44.4Note * 38.0Note * 32.4 19.5
45 to 54 51.7 40.8Note * 35.2 29.8 16.6
55 to 64 (ref.) 53.7 36.2 33.0 29.5 17.6
Education
No postsecondary education 47.9 27.9Note * 26.7Note * 26.4Note * 15.5Note *
Postsecondary below bachelor's level 50.8 41.6Note * 34.5Note * 31.5 16.4Note *
Postsecondary at bachelor's level or above (ref.) 51.3 49.8 43.2 33.3 24.9
Occupational group
Manufacturing and utilities 42.5Note * 20.4Note * 19.9Note * 16.2Note * Note x: suppressed to meet the confidentiality requirements of the Statistics Act
Natural resources and agriculture 52.9 26.1Note * Note E: Use with caution 24.0Note * Note E: Use with caution 19.6Note * Note E: Use with caution Note x: suppressed to meet the confidentiality requirements of the Statistics Act
Trades, transport and equipment operators 50.1 26.5Note * 26.7Note * 27.1Note * 9.2Note *
Sales and service 42.4Note * 35.3Note * 29.9Note * 30.5Note * 19.1Note *
Art, culture, recreation and sport 51.8 45.9Note * 42.8Note * 30.7Note * Note E: Use with caution 24.4Note * Note E: Use with caution
Education, law and social, community and government services 56.1 43.3Note * 41.1Note * 29.3Note * 15.0Note *
Health 52.9 25.5Note * 19.9Note * 19.9Note * 11.4Note *
Natural and applied sciences 50.1 50.4Note * 46.3Note * 34.4Note * 28.6
Business, finance and administration 51.2 49.8Note * 37.2Note * 34.9Note * 24.3Note *
Management (ref.) 56.1 65.6 58.6 46.8 34.8

Compared with younger individuals, a larger proportion of older individuals (aged 55 to 64) were satisfied with their job.Note Similarly, there were also occupational differences in job satisfaction—individuals working in service and manufacturing occupations were less likely to be satisfied with their job than those working in management occupations.

Job flexibility levels reported by respondents also varied across socioeconomic characteristics. The four facets of job flexibility in LISA are each measured on a 5-point ordinal scale, measuring the extent to which an individual has control over that facet of job flexibility; the lowest category corresponds to “none” and the highest category corresponds to “a very high extent.” These five categories are collapsed into two job flexibility outcomes for each facet in this study: individuals with a high to a very high extent of control (i.e., those with control over a facet of job flexibility), and individuals with none, very little or some.

About 40% of both men and women reported a high to a very high extent of control over the order of work (defined as the extent to which a worker controls the sequence of their tasks). Furthermore, 19% of both men and women reported a high or a very high extent of control over the hours of work. A larger proportion of men reported a high to a very high extent of control over how the work is done (37% versus 33% for women) and the speed of work (32% versus 29%).

About one-third of individuals aged 18 to 24 and 55 to 64 reported a high to a very high extent of control over the order of work. By comparison, over 40% of individuals aged 25 to 54 reported that they had control over this facet of job flexibility to a high or a very high extent. Similar patterns across age groups were found for control over how the work is done. Interestingly, a larger proportion of younger individuals reported a high to a very high extent of control over hours of work than older individuals.

For all four facets of job flexibility, the proportion of individuals who reported a high to a very high extent of control increased with education. Those with no postsecondary education were 7 to 22 percentage points less likely to report a high to a very high extent of control over a facet of job flexibility than those with a degree at the bachelor’s level or above. Perceptions of job flexibility also varied across occupational groups, with individuals in nearly all occupational groups reporting a lower extent of control over each facet of job flexibility than those in management occupations.

Job flexibility is associated with greater job satisfaction

Each measure of job flexibility on its own is positively related with job satisfaction. For each facet of job flexibility, men with a high to a very high extent of control over each facet were 8 to 14 percentage points more likely to be satisfied with their job, compared with those who reported that they had none, very little or some (Chart 2.1).

Chart 2.1 Probability of being satisfied with job, by extent of control over aspects of job flexibility, men 2014

Data table for Chart 2.1
Data table for Chart 2.1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 2.1. The information is grouped by facets of job flexibility (appearing as row headers), Extent of control, None, very little or some and High or very high extent, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Facet of job flexibility Extent of control
None, very little or some High or very high extent
percent
Order of work 45.6 54.2Note *
How the work is done 45.4 55.4Note *
Speed of work 46.7 54.2Note *
Hours of work 46.3 60.7Note *

Among women who reported that they had a high or a very high extent of control over each facet, the likelihood of being satisfied with their job was higher by 6 to 11 percentage points, compared to those with less control over job flexibility (Chart 2.2).

Chart 2.2 Probability of being satisfied with job, by extent of control over aspects of job flexibility, women, 2014

Data table for Chart 2.2
Data table for Chart 2.2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for Chart 2.2. The information is grouped by facets of job flexibility (appearing as row headers), Extent of control, None, very little or some and High or very high extent, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Facet of job flexibility Extent of control
None, very little or some High or very high extent
percent
Order of work 47.6 56.6Note *
How the work is done 48.6 56.5Note *
Speed of work 49.5 55.4Note *
Hours of work 49.2 59.9Note *

For both men and women, the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction was the largest for control over hours of work, and was the smallest for control over speed of work. For instance, among men who had a high or a very high extent of control over their hours of work, 61% reported that they were satisfied with their job (i.e., they reported a job satisfaction score of at least 8 on a scale of 0 to 10). The same percentage was 46% for those who said that they had some, very little or no control over their hours of work. Among women, the difference in job satisfaction levels was smaller but significant—60% for those who had a great deal of control over their hours of work and 49% for those who had less control.

While each facet of job flexibility is associated with job satisfaction, flexibility can be correlated with other aspects of a job that influence job satisfaction, such as the industry or occupation. Individual characteristics (for example, age or recent unemployment) may also influence individual subjective well-being, as well as the type of job that an individual works in.Note In the next section, regression models are used to test the robustness of the association between job satisfaction and job flexibility.

Job satisfaction is higher among those who reported a high extent of control over many aspects of job flexibility

In order to take other factors into account when examining the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction, a logistic regression model is estimated with an indicator for whether an individual is satisfied with their job as the dependent variable.Note As in previous sections, workers are considered satisfied with their job if they report a score of 8 or higher to the job satisfaction question.

Job satisfaction is an ordinal variable with 11 categories; as such, one approach for regression would be to use an ordered model (for example, ordered logit or probit), rather than a binary model. Given the large number of categories for job satisfaction, however, reporting marginal effects for an ordered model is not possible; marginal effects are also easier to interpret than odds ratios. The results of the logistic model are discussed in this section and shown in Table 2. Readers should note, however, that none of the main qualitative results are changed if an ordered logit model is used instead of a binary model.Note

Table 2
Results associated with amount of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction, men and women, 2014
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 2 Results associated with amount of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction. The information is grouped by High to very high extent of control over facets of job flexibility (appearing as row headers), Men and Women, calculated using average marginal effects units of measure (appearing as column headers).
High to very high extent of control over facets of job flexibility Men Women
average marginal effects
No facets (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
One facet 0.010 0.047Table 2 Note 
Two facets 0.040 0.063Note *
Three facets 0.090Note ** 0.095Note **
All facets 0.186Note ** 0.177Note **

Individuals who have a high to a very high extent of control over a greater number of facets of job flexibility—out of the four facets measured in LISA—are more likely to be satisfied with their job than those who had lower levels of control over these facets.Note For men, having control over three of the four facets of job flexibility in LISA was associated with a 9 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being satisfied with their job, whereas control over all facets of job flexibility was associated with a 19 percentage point increase in the probability of being satisfied with their job (relative to those who did not have a high degree of control over any of the four facets). Having control over one or two facets of job flexibility was not associated with a statistically significant increase in job satisfaction.

For women, control over one or two facets of job flexibility was associated with a 5 to 6 percentage point increase in the probability of being satisfied with their job, relative to those who had no control. Similar to men, having control over three or all four of the facets of job flexibility in LISA was associated with a 10 to 18 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being satisfied with their job.

Control over hours of work is most strongly associated with job satisfaction

For both men and women, each facet of job flexibility on its own is associated with higher levels of job satisfaction—even after accounting for a number of socioeconomic and occupational variables that can influence job satisfaction. Having control over each facet of job flexibility increased job satisfaction levels by 6 to 13 percentage points for men and by 5 to 14 percentage points for women, depending on the facet examined (Table 3, Models 1 to 4). These results are broadly consistent with the results in charts 1 and 2. For both men and women, control over hours of work had the largest association with job satisfaction.

Table 3
Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction, men and women, 2014
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 3 Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction Model 1, Model 2, Model 3, Model 4 and Model 5, calculated using average marginal effects units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
average marginal effects
Men
Control over order of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.060Note ** Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.011
Control over how the work is done
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable 0.077Note ** Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.045Table 3 Note 
Control over speed of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.058Note ** Note ...: not applicable 0.013
Control over hours of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.131Note ** 0.112Note **
Women
Control over order of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.078Note ** Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.049Note *
Control over how the work is done
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable 0.054Note * Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.005
Control over speed of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.052Note * Note ...: not applicable 0.005
Control over hours of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable 0.139Note ** 0.122Note **

To account for the fact that each facet of job flexibility can be correlated with each other, the regression was also run with all facets together in the same model. Results indicate that control over hours of work had the largest association with job satisfaction (Table 3, Model 5). For men, a high to a very high extent of control over hours of work was associated with an 11 percentage point increase in the probability of being satisfied with their job. For women, control over hours of work was associated with a 12 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being satisfied with their job. With the exception of a small association between control over the order of work and job satisfaction for women, and control over how the work is done and job satisfaction for men, none of the other facets of job flexibility had a statistically or economically significant association with job satisfaction.

The results above suggest that the nature of the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction differs little between men and women. Women with children at home, however, may value job flexibility more than women without children at home, given that women are often the primary caretakers of children.Note To test this possibility, the models were run separately for women with and without children.

Among women who had at least one child under 18 at home, a high to a very high extent of control over hours of work was associated with a 13 percentage point increase in the probability of being satisfied with their job. For women without children at home, flexibility over hours of work was associated with a 12 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being satisfied with their job (Table 4).Note Although the association between control over hours of work and job satisfaction is slightly larger for women with children, this result suggests that the presence of children is not a main driver of the job flexibility–job satisfaction relationship among women.

Table 4
Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction, women with and without children at home, 2014
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 4 Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction Child at home and No children at home, calculated using average marginal effects units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Child at home No children at home
average marginal effects
Control over order of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.040 0.068Note *
Control over how the work is done
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.011 -0.007
Control over speed of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent -0.010 0.013
Control over hours of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.128Note ** 0.117Note **

Younger workers may also place greater value or emphasis on certain aspects of job flexibility than their older counterparts. Results examined separately by age group found that workers aged 18 to 33 experienced the largest increase in job satisfaction from control over hours of work (Table 5). In this age group, a high to a very high extent of control over hours of work was associated with a 17 percentage point increase in the probability of being satisfied with their job. In contrast, among individuals age 34 to 49, a high to a very high extent of control over hours of work was associated with a 7 percentage point increase in the probability of being highly satisfied with their job.

Table 5
Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction, by age group, 2014
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 5 Results associated with individual facets of job flexibility in a logit model of job satisfaction Age group, 18 to 33, 34 to 49 and 50 to 64, calculated using average marginal effects units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Age group
18 to 33 34 to 49 50 to 64
average marginal effects
Control over order of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.040 0.035 0.038
Control over how the work is done
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.003 0.034 0.011
Control over speed of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent -0.015 0.017 0.026
Control over hours of work
None, very little or some (ref.) Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
High or very high extent 0.170Note ** 0.068Note * 0.101Note **

For individuals aged 50 to 64, a high to a very high extent of control over their hours of work was associated with a 10 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being satisfied with their job. This non-linear association between job flexibility and job satisfaction by age is similar to the U-shaped relationship between age and job satisfaction found in other studies.Note

A possible explanation for the finding that younger workers experience greater job satisfaction from control over their hours of work than older workers is that the relative importance of hours of work decreases with age.Note This is consistent with the observation that millennials—individuals between the ages of 18 and 33 in 2014—often place greater value on flexible working arrangements than older generations.Note

Conclusion

This study examines the association between job flexibility and job satisfaction by providing new information on their relationship. It does so by using the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA), a relatively new dataset that includes multiple indicators of job quality. Examining this association is important because workers who are more satisfied with their job are more likely to report that they intend to stay in their current job for at least the next year than those who report lower levels of satisfaction.

A novel feature of this study is the use of multiple facets of job flexibility to gain a better understanding of the association between control over an individual’s job and overall job satisfaction. The results show that job flexibility—particularly flexibility over hours of work—is an important predictor of job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction and control over the four facets of job flexibility in LISA vary by sex, age, highest level of education and occupation. Job satisfaction is positively associated with each facet of job flexibility. A number of person-level and job-level characteristics are accounted for. The likelihood that an individual is highly satisfied with their job is higher for individuals with control over a greater number of facets of job flexibility, while each facet is positively associated with job satisfaction on its own. Of the four facets of job flexibility covered in LISA, control over hours of work had the strongest association with job satisfaction, even after accounting for other factors associated with job satisfaction.

For women, the presence of children does not seem to drive the job flexibility–job satisfaction relationship. There are, however, important differences by age group. Individuals aged 18 to 33, in particular, experienced the largest increase in job satisfaction from control over hours of work, followed by those age 50 to 64, and finally individuals age 34 to 49. More research is needed to understand why greater control over hours of work has more of an impact on job satisfaction for younger workers.

Steve Martin is an analyst with the Income Statistics Division at Statistics Canada.

Start of text box

Data sources, methods and definitions

Data sources

The data for this study come from the second wave (2014) of the Longitudinal and International Study of Adults (LISA). LISA is a longitudinal, self-reported household survey that is conducted every two years, starting in 2012. The target population is the non-institutionalized Canadian population in 2012, plus their descendants, living in the 10 provinces. Excluded are individuals living on reserves and in communes, and members of the Canadian Armed Forces stationed overseas. See Statistics Canada (2015) for a full definition of the target population. This study includes individuals aged 18 to 64 who were employed during the reference week of the survey, for a sample size of 8,610.

Methods

Model coefficients are average marginal effects from a logistic regression. All estimates are weighted to be representative of LISA’s target population. As LISA uses a complex, stratified sampling scheme, the standard errors used to determine statistical significance are computed using bootstrap weights.

Definitions

Job satisfaction in LISA is measured as the response to the question “How do you feel about your job?” on an 11-point scale, where 0 corresponds to “very dissatisfied” and 10 corresponds to “very satisfied.” An individual is said to be satisfied with their job if they report a score of 8 or higher to this question.

Job flexibility in LISA is measured as the response to the question, “To what extent can you choose or change…,” followed by a particular facet of job flexibility. The four facets considered in LISA are “the sequence of your tasks?;” “how you do your work?;” “the speed or rate at which you work?;” and “your working hours?” The response to each of these four questions is measured on the same 5-point scale—(1) “not at all;” (2) “very little;” (3) “to some extent;” (4) “to a high extent;” (5) “to a very high extent.” An individual is said to have control over a particular facet of job flexibility if they respond that they have a high extent or a very high extent of control over that facet of job flexibility.

End of text box

Related information

Related articles

Data sources

Bibliographic references

Date modified: