IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijtisy/v1y2011i3p207-227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative study of meaning of working and work values in developed and developing countries

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Zavyalova
  • Anna Akinshina
  • Alexandre Ardichvili
  • K. Peter Kuchinke
  • Maria Cseh
  • Zsolt Nemeskéri
  • Urmat M. Tynaliev

Abstract

This article presents the results of a comparative study of the meaning of work and work values in developed capitalist and developing post-socialist countries. The authors utilised the meaning of working (MOW) methodology. The study sample consisted of 724 respondents from five countries: Hungary, Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Germany and the USA. The value of work in relation to other life domains differed among countries: for Hungary and Russia, the value of work came after family and leisure, while in other countries work took second place in importance after family. Moreover, in Hungary and Russia overall value of work was significantly lower than in other countries. The items that differentiated between developed (Germany and the USA) and developing countries (Hungary, Russia, Kyrgyzstan) are: importance of income, status, interesting contacts, and interesting work. For the cluster of developing countries, the value of these items was significantly lower, signifying a presence of avoidance motivation that is opposite to achievement motivation.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Zavyalova & Anna Akinshina & Alexandre Ardichvili & K. Peter Kuchinke & Maria Cseh & Zsolt Nemeskéri & Urmat M. Tynaliev, 2011. "A comparative study of meaning of working and work values in developed and developing countries," International Journal of Transitions and Innovation Systems, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 207-227.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijtisy:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:207-227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=42658
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijtisy:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:207-227. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=160 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.