Organization Dimension

Author

Community Insights Group

Published

March 30, 2026

Job Demands and Resources

The job demands and resources model is a occupation-generic theoretical framework that explains how job characteristics influence employee wellbeing, motivation, and performance through two distinct psychological processes (for more details see Demerouti, E. and Bakker, A.B. (2011) The Job Demands-Resources model: Challenges for future research.). Accordingly:

  • Job demands are any physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of work that require sustained effort and are therefore associated with physiological and/or psychological costs. They include, for example, high quantitative workload and time pressure, complex cognitive tasks, emotionally demanding interactions with clients or stakeholders, role conflict or ambiguity, and frequent changes or interruptions that force constant adaptation. Demands are not inherently negative, but they become hindrance demands when they are intense, chronic, and recovery is insufficient, contributing to fatigue, stress, and eventually burnout.
  • Job resources are physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of work that (a) help employees achieve work goals, (b) reduce job demands and the associated costs, or (c) stimulate personal growth, learning, and development. Typical resources include autonomy and decision latitude, clear feedback on performance, social support from colleagues and supervisors, opportunities for learning and development, fair rewards, and a supportive organizational climate. Resources not only buffer the negative impact of high demands on strain, but also have their own motivational role by fulfilling basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, thereby fostering engagement and performance.

In our study demands and resources were measured using single items developed by the authors (respectively, “My organization has reasonable demands about work goals for social and human rights practice teams” and “My organization provides adequate resources for social and human rights practitioners to achieve their work goals”).

Figure 1: Job Demands and Resources scores (±1 SD; scale: 1 = Very low to 5 = Very high).
Table 1: Descriptive statistics for Job Demands and Resources dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low to 5 = Very high).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Reasonable Demands 281 3.33 1.10 1 3 3 4 5
Adequate Resources 281 3.04 1.21 1 2 3 4 5
Note: Note: Higher scores indicate greater job demands (stressor) and greater job resources (buffer). Scale midpoint = 3 (Moderate). According to the Job Demands-Resources model, high demands plus low resources predict burnout risk where as high demands plus high resources predict engagement.

Value Congruence

Value congruence refers to the perceived alignment between an individual’s personal values and the values espoused and enacted by their organization, reflecting the degree to which employees experience harmony between what they personally consider important and what the organization prioritizes in its culture, decisions, and practices (for more details see Vveinhardt, J. and Gulbovaitė, E. (2016) Expert Evaluation of Diagnostic Instrument for Personal and Organizational Value Congruence. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(3), pp. 481–501). This construct captures not merely cognitive recognition of shared values but the subjective experience of value fit, where congruence fosters identification with the organization, commitment, and psychological well-being, while incongruence may trigger role strain, disengagement, or turnover intentions

In our study value congruence was measured using an adaptation of three items from the Personal and Organizational Value Congruence scale (e.g., “My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life”). These items were computed into a single composite measure with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80.

Figure 2: Distribution of value congruence (average in dashed read; scale: 1 = Very to 5 = Very high).
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for value congruence (scale: 1 = Very to 5 = Very high).
Variable N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Value Congruence 281 3.43 1.02 1 2.67 3.33 4.33 5

Team Psychological Safety

Psychological safety is a shared team climate characterized by mutual trust and respect in which members feel safe to take interpersonal risks—expressing ideas, asking for help, admitting mistakes, and voicing dissent—without fear of embarrassment, rejection, or punishment. Psychological safety is not about being “nice” or avoiding conflict; rather, it enables productive dialogue, learning from failure, and collective problem-solving by reducing the self-protective behaviors that silence valuable input. It functions as a team-level property (not merely an aggregation of individual traits) and serves as a foundation for team learning, innovation, and adaptive performance in complex, interdependent work environments (for more details see Edmondson, A.C. and Bransby, D.P. (2023) Psychological Safety Comes of Age: Observed Themes in an Established Literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10, pp. 54–78). This construct manifests through four interrelated experiential dimensions:

  • Attitudes Towards Risk: Confidence that interpersonal vulnerability (e.g., proposing untested ideas or acknowledging errors) will not trigger negative social consequences;
  • Inclusion and Diversity: A sense of belonging and acceptance as a legitimate team member whose presence and perspective are valued;
  • Willingness to Help: Comfort in seeking assistance or admitting knowledge gaps without appearing incompetent; and
  • Open Conversataion: Motivation to speak up with concerns, suggestions, or dissenting views to improve team functioning.

In our study psychological safety was measured using a selection 4 items of the Team Psychological Safety scale, one per dimension (e.g., “If people make a mistake, it is often held against them”). The four items were computed into a single composite variable named Team Psychological Safety with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.72).

Figure 3: Team psychological safety scores (±1 SD) across four dimensions (scale: 1 = Very to 5 = Very high).
Table 3: Descriptive statistics for team psychological safety dimensions (scale: 1 = Very to 5 = Very high).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Attitudes Towards Risk 281 3.24 1.28 1 2 3 4 5
Inclusion and Diversity 281 3.34 1.17 1 2 3 4 5
Willingness to Help 281 3.55 1.19 1 3 4 5 5
Open to Conversations 281 3.53 1.18 1 3 4 4 5

Organizational Trust

Organizational trust is a cognitive-affective orientation toward the organization characterized by confidence in its reliability, integrity, and benevolent intentions. This multidimensional view positions trust not as a static attitude but as a dynamic, experience-based judgment that underpins employee commitment, risk-taking, and organizational citizenship behaviors (for more details see Rempel, J.K., Holmes, J.G. and Zanna, M.P. (1985). Trust in Close Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(1), pp. 95–112). Organizational trust structured across three developmental dimensions:

  • Predictability: The perception that the organization behaves in consistent, expected ways over time, allowing employees to anticipate organizational responses and decisions with confidence;
  • Dependability: Belief in the organization’s competence, responsibility, and willingness to fulfill its commitments and act in employees’ interests, even under pressure or uncertainty; and
  • Faith: A forward-looking, emotionally grounded confidence in the organization’s enduring responsiveness and goodwill, transcending specific past transactions to sustain trust during ambiguity or change.

In our study oganizational trust was measured using three items from Rempel’s et al. (1985) Trust Scale, one per trust dimension (faith, dependability, and predictability; e.g., “When we encounter difficult and unfamiliar new circumstances I feel safe and comfortable by letting my organization do what they wanted”). The three items were computed into a single composite variable named Organizational Trust with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.77).

Figure 4: Organizational trust scores (±1 SD) across three dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low to 5 = Very high).
Table 4: Descriptive statistics for organizational trust dimensions (scale: 1 = Very low to 5 = Very high).
Dimension N Mean SD Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Faith 281 2.95 1.24 1 2 3 4 5
Dependability 281 3.26 1.21 1 2 3 4 5
Predictability 281 3.38 1.14 1 3 4 4 5

Organization Dimensions by Demnographics

Organization Dimensions by Gender

Figure 5: Organization dimension scores across Gender (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).

Organization Dimensions by Age Categories

Figure 6: Organization dimension scores across age categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 5: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by age category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Age Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Age Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity 35 or younger 27 2.59 1.09 0.21 1.00 1.67 2.33 3.33 5.00
Role Ambiguity 36–50 154 2.24 0.99 0.08 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00 5.00
Role Ambiguity 51 or older 67 2.06 0.79 0.10 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.67 4.00
Role Conflict 35 or younger 27 2.61 1.01 0.19 1.00 2.00 2.67 3.17 5.00
Role Conflict 36–50 154 2.69 0.89 0.07 1.00 2.00 2.50 3.25 5.00
Role Conflict 51 or older 67 2.46 0.97 0.12 1.00 1.62 2.50 3.00 4.75
Role Stress 35 or younger 27 3.09 0.84 0.16 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.75 5.00
Role Stress 36–50 154 3.32 0.79 0.06 1.50 2.75 3.25 3.94 5.00
Role Stress 51 or older 67 3.15 0.81 0.10 1.25 2.50 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Valuation 35 or younger 27 3.51 0.91 0.18 1.00 3.00 3.60 4.20 5.00
Role Valuation 36–50 154 3.43 0.80 0.06 1.40 2.85 3.50 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation 51 or older 67 3.62 0.77 0.09 1.80 3.10 3.60 4.20 5.00
Value Congruence 35 or younger 27 3.30 0.90 0.17 2.00 2.67 3.33 3.83 5.00
Value Congruence 36–50 154 3.40 0.97 0.08 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence 51 or older 67 3.60 1.11 0.14 1.00 3.00 3.67 4.67 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 35 or younger 27 3.43 0.79 0.15 2.25 2.75 3.50 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 36–50 154 3.35 0.92 0.07 1.00 2.75 3.29 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 51 or older 67 3.55 0.80 0.10 2.00 3.00 3.50 4.25 5.00
Trust 35 or younger 27 3.10 0.74 0.14 2.00 2.67 3.00 3.67 4.33
Trust 36–50 154 3.19 1.00 0.08 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust 51 or older 67 3.33 1.14 0.14 1.00 2.67 3.67 4.00 5.00

Organization Dimensions by Years of Experience

Figure 7: Organization dimension scores across years of experience categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 6: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by years of experience (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Years of Experience
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Years of Experience N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity 5 or less 23 2.46 1.18 0.25 1.00 1.33 2.33 3.17 5.00
Role Ambiguity 6–10 51 2.29 0.96 0.13 1.00 1.50 2.00 3.00 4.33
Role Ambiguity 11–20 116 2.25 1.00 0.09 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00 5.00
Role Ambiguity 21 or more 50 2.03 0.70 0.10 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.58 3.67
Role Conflict 5 or less 23 2.62 1.06 0.22 1.00 1.88 2.25 3.50 4.50
Role Conflict 6–10 51 2.67 0.85 0.12 1.00 2.00 2.75 3.12 5.00
Role Conflict 11–20 116 2.62 0.92 0.09 1.00 1.94 2.50 3.25 5.00
Role Conflict 21 or more 50 2.45 0.97 0.14 1.00 1.75 2.50 3.00 5.00
Role Stress 5 or less 23 3.04 0.70 0.15 2.00 2.58 3.00 3.75 4.25
Role Stress 6–10 51 3.22 0.72 0.10 2.00 2.75 3.25 3.75 4.75
Role Stress 11–20 116 3.28 0.85 0.08 1.50 2.75 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Stress 21 or more 50 3.24 0.84 0.12 1.25 2.56 3.25 3.94 5.00
Role Valuation 5 or less 23 3.27 0.88 0.18 1.60 2.60 3.00 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation 6–10 51 3.61 0.78 0.11 1.40 3.20 3.80 4.10 5.00
Role Valuation 11–20 116 3.45 0.84 0.08 1.00 2.80 3.60 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation 21 or more 50 3.60 0.71 0.10 1.80 3.20 3.60 4.00 4.80
Value Congruence 5 or less 23 3.28 0.97 0.20 1.33 2.67 3.33 3.67 5.00
Value Congruence 6–10 51 3.51 0.88 0.12 1.00 3.00 3.33 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence 11–20 116 3.43 1.03 0.10 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.33 5.00
Value Congruence 21 or more 50 3.49 1.12 0.16 1.00 3.00 3.67 4.33 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 5 or less 23 3.38 1.03 0.21 1.50 2.62 3.25 4.12 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 6–10 51 3.44 0.93 0.13 1.00 2.88 3.50 4.12 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 11–20 116 3.35 0.86 0.08 1.25 2.75 3.25 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety 21 or more 50 3.62 0.84 0.12 1.50 3.00 3.75 4.25 5.00
Trust 5 or less 23 2.91 0.85 0.18 1.33 2.17 3.33 3.67 4.33
Trust 6–10 51 3.32 0.91 0.13 1.00 2.67 3.50 4.00 5.00
Trust 11–20 116 3.26 1.01 0.09 1.33 2.58 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust 21 or more 50 3.13 1.19 0.17 1.00 2.42 3.50 4.00 5.00

Organization Dimensions by Residence Region

Figure 8: Organization dimension scores across residence regions (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 7: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by residence region (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Residence Region
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Residence Region N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity Asia 10 1.60 0.64 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.33 2.33
Role Ambiguity Australia 32 2.34 0.87 0.15 1.00 1.67 2.00 3.00 4.00
Role Ambiguity Canada 10 2.47 1.06 0.33 1.33 1.75 2.17 2.92 5.00
Role Ambiguity Europe/UK 73 2.65 0.94 0.11 1.00 2.00 2.67 3.33 5.00
Role Ambiguity Latin America 33 1.93 0.81 0.14 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.33 4.00
Role Ambiguity Other 4 2.00 0.47 0.24 1.67 1.67 1.83 2.17 2.67
Role Ambiguity Sub-Saharan Africa 59 1.82 0.89 0.12 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.33 4.33
Role Ambiguity USA 12 2.64 1.02 0.29 1.00 2.00 2.67 3.33 4.00
Role Conflict Asia 10 2.30 0.77 0.24 1.00 1.81 2.25 2.94 3.50
Role Conflict Australia 32 2.92 0.90 0.16 1.25 2.25 2.75 3.50 5.00
Role Conflict Canada 10 2.33 1.19 0.38 1.00 1.50 2.50 2.69 5.00
Role Conflict Europe/UK 73 2.74 0.90 0.11 1.00 2.00 2.75 3.50 4.75
Role Conflict Latin America 33 2.27 0.87 0.15 1.00 1.50 2.25 2.75 4.25
Role Conflict Other 4 2.62 0.48 0.24 2.00 2.38 2.75 3.00 3.00
Role Conflict Sub-Saharan Africa 59 2.53 0.93 0.12 1.00 1.75 2.50 3.25 5.00
Role Conflict USA 12 2.64 0.98 0.28 1.00 2.31 2.71 2.81 4.75
Role Stress Asia 10 2.75 0.51 0.16 2.00 2.56 2.75 2.94 3.50
Role Stress Australia 32 3.38 0.78 0.14 2.00 2.75 3.38 4.00 5.00
Role Stress Canada 10 3.20 0.78 0.25 2.25 2.62 3.25 3.25 5.00
Role Stress Europe/UK 73 3.26 0.74 0.09 1.67 2.75 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Stress Latin America 33 2.87 0.87 0.15 1.25 2.25 3.00 3.50 4.75
Role Stress Other 4 3.38 0.60 0.30 2.75 2.94 3.38 3.81 4.00
Role Stress Sub-Saharan Africa 59 3.37 0.83 0.11 2.00 2.75 3.25 4.00 5.00
Role Stress USA 12 3.12 0.90 0.26 1.67 2.50 3.12 3.50 5.00
Role Valuation Asia 10 3.86 0.85 0.27 3.00 3.05 3.70 4.65 5.00
Role Valuation Australia 32 3.16 0.72 0.13 2.00 2.60 3.30 3.65 4.80
Role Valuation Canada 10 3.50 1.17 0.37 1.00 3.30 3.80 4.30 4.60
Role Valuation Europe/UK 73 3.38 0.77 0.09 1.40 3.00 3.60 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation Latin America 33 3.63 0.68 0.12 2.60 3.20 3.60 4.20 4.80
Role Valuation Other 4 3.70 0.62 0.31 3.20 3.35 3.50 3.85 4.60
Role Valuation Sub-Saharan Africa 59 3.61 0.83 0.11 2.00 2.90 3.80 4.20 5.00
Role Valuation USA 12 3.66 0.93 0.27 2.20 3.00 3.60 4.43 5.00
Value Congruence Asia 10 3.63 0.76 0.24 2.33 3.42 3.67 3.92 5.00
Value Congruence Australia 32 3.25 1.04 0.18 1.00 2.83 3.33 3.67 5.00
Value Congruence Canada 10 3.90 1.11 0.35 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
Value Congruence Europe/UK 73 3.18 0.93 0.11 1.33 2.33 3.33 3.67 5.00
Value Congruence Latin America 33 3.86 1.01 0.18 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.67 5.00
Value Congruence Other 4 3.50 0.79 0.40 3.00 3.00 3.17 3.67 4.67
Value Congruence Sub-Saharan Africa 59 3.53 0.98 0.13 1.00 3.00 3.67 4.33 5.00
Value Congruence USA 12 3.58 1.13 0.33 1.33 2.67 3.83 4.42 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Asia 10 3.70 0.86 0.27 2.75 2.88 3.62 4.19 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Australia 32 3.34 0.79 0.14 1.75 2.88 3.38 3.81 4.75
Team Psychological Safety Canada 10 3.95 0.85 0.27 2.25 3.50 4.12 4.44 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Europe/UK 73 3.39 0.92 0.11 1.00 2.75 3.50 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Latin America 33 3.46 0.86 0.15 2.00 2.75 3.25 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Other 4 3.69 0.66 0.33 3.00 3.19 3.75 4.25 4.25
Team Psychological Safety Sub-Saharan Africa 59 3.39 0.91 0.12 1.25 2.75 3.25 4.25 5.00
Team Psychological Safety USA 12 3.48 0.92 0.27 1.50 3.00 3.62 4.06 5.00
Trust Asia 10 3.30 0.97 0.31 2.00 2.75 3.17 3.92 5.00
Trust Australia 32 3.06 1.04 0.18 1.00 2.33 3.17 3.75 5.00
Trust Canada 10 3.52 0.75 0.24 2.33 3.00 3.67 4.00 4.50
Trust Europe/UK 73 3.07 1.09 0.13 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust Latin America 33 3.38 0.86 0.15 1.67 3.00 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust Other 4 2.92 1.26 0.63 1.33 2.33 3.00 3.58 4.33
Trust Sub-Saharan Africa 59 3.34 1.00 0.13 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust USA 12 3.58 1.03 0.30 1.67 2.83 4.00 4.08 5.00

Organization Dimensions by Education Categories

Figure 9: Organization dimension scores across education categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 8: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by education category (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Education Category
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Education Category N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity Bachelor's 46 2.26 0.95 0.14 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.67 5.00
Role Ambiguity Master's 165 2.18 0.95 0.07 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.67 5.00
Role Ambiguity Doctoral 33 2.33 1.02 0.18 1.00 1.67 2.33 3.00 5.00
Role Conflict Bachelor's 46 2.52 0.86 0.13 1.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 4.25
Role Conflict Master's 165 2.63 0.90 0.07 1.00 2.00 2.67 3.25 5.00
Role Conflict Doctoral 33 2.67 1.15 0.20 1.00 1.75 2.75 3.50 5.00
Role Stress Bachelor's 46 3.03 0.74 0.11 1.50 2.50 3.00 3.50 5.00
Role Stress Master's 165 3.27 0.83 0.06 1.25 2.75 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Stress Doctoral 33 3.42 0.69 0.12 2.00 2.75 3.50 3.75 5.00
Role Valuation Bachelor's 46 3.36 0.78 0.11 1.60 2.80 3.40 4.00 4.60
Role Valuation Master's 165 3.55 0.80 0.06 1.40 3.00 3.60 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation Doctoral 33 3.40 0.84 0.15 1.00 2.80 3.60 4.00 4.80
Value Congruence Bachelor's 46 3.46 0.91 0.13 1.33 2.75 3.50 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence Master's 165 3.47 1.02 0.08 1.00 3.00 3.33 4.33 5.00
Value Congruence Doctoral 33 3.18 1.08 0.19 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Bachelor's 46 3.40 1.00 0.15 1.25 2.38 3.50 4.25 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Master's 165 3.47 0.84 0.07 1.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Doctoral 33 3.17 0.88 0.15 1.50 2.75 3.00 3.50 5.00
Trust Bachelor's 46 3.31 0.93 0.14 1.33 2.67 3.17 4.00 5.00
Trust Master's 165 3.19 1.02 0.08 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust Doctoral 33 3.15 1.14 0.20 1.00 2.33 3.33 4.00 5.00

Organization Dimensions by Employment Status

Figure 10: Organization dimension scores across employment status categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 9: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by employment status (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error).
Dimension
Employment Status
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Employment Status N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity Employed full-time 155 2.19 0.95 0.08 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.83 5.00
Role Ambiguity Employed part-time 18 1.98 0.76 0.18 1.00 1.42 2.00 2.25 3.67
Role Ambiguity Out of work and looking for work 12 2.72 1.04 0.30 1.00 1.92 3.00 3.42 4.00
Role Ambiguity Self-employed 45 2.24 0.91 0.14 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00 4.00
Role Conflict Employed full-time 155 2.65 0.92 0.07 1.00 2.00 2.50 3.25 5.00
Role Conflict Employed part-time 18 2.31 0.82 0.19 1.00 1.56 2.50 2.94 3.75
Role Conflict Out of work and looking for work 12 3.01 1.15 0.33 1.00 2.56 3.12 3.75 4.67
Role Conflict Self-employed 45 2.35 0.79 0.12 1.00 1.75 2.50 2.75 3.75
Role Stress Employed full-time 155 3.24 0.79 0.06 1.50 2.75 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Stress Employed part-time 18 3.22 0.73 0.17 2.00 2.56 3.38 3.75 4.50
Role Stress Out of work and looking for work 12 3.53 0.73 0.21 2.50 3.00 3.50 3.81 5.00
Role Stress Self-employed 45 3.14 0.86 0.13 1.25 2.50 3.00 3.75 5.00
Role Valuation Employed full-time 155 3.50 0.83 0.07 1.40 3.00 3.60 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation Employed part-time 18 3.72 0.57 0.14 2.60 3.25 3.90 4.20 4.40
Role Valuation Out of work and looking for work 12 3.03 0.90 0.26 2.00 2.35 3.10 3.45 5.00
Role Valuation Self-employed 45 3.66 0.68 0.10 2.20 3.20 3.60 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence Employed full-time 155 3.41 1.00 0.08 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence Employed part-time 18 4.00 0.78 0.18 2.67 3.33 4.17 4.58 5.00
Value Congruence Out of work and looking for work 12 2.50 1.02 0.29 1.00 2.00 2.33 2.75 5.00
Value Congruence Self-employed 45 3.60 0.98 0.15 1.33 3.33 3.67 4.33 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Employed full-time 155 3.35 0.90 0.07 1.00 2.75 3.25 4.00 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Employed part-time 18 4.04 0.70 0.17 2.75 3.81 4.12 4.50 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Out of work and looking for work 12 2.94 0.83 0.24 1.50 2.44 2.75 3.75 4.25
Team Psychological Safety Self-employed 45 3.61 0.81 0.12 1.50 3.00 3.75 4.25 5.00
Trust Employed full-time 155 3.21 0.94 0.08 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00
Trust Employed part-time 18 3.97 0.84 0.20 2.67 3.42 4.17 4.62 5.00
Trust Out of work and looking for work 12 2.11 1.10 0.32 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.33 5.00
Trust Self-employed 45 3.26 1.10 0.16 1.00 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00

Organization Dimensions by Sector of Activity

Figure 11: Organization dimension scores across sector of activity categories (±1 SE; non-overlapping SE bars suggest statistically significant differences).
Table 10: Descriptive statistics for organization dimensions by sector of activity (SD = Standard Deviation; SE = Standard Error). Higher scores indicate greater levels on each dimension; note directionality differs by construct (see fig-cap).
Dimension
Sector of Activity
Descriptive Statistics
Dimension Sector of Activity N Mean SD SE Min Q1 Median Q3 Max
Role Ambiguity Consultancy 85 2.10 0.96 0.10 1.00 1.33 2.00 2.67 5.00
Role Ambiguity Energy 32 2.32 0.84 0.15 1.00 1.67 2.33 3.00 4.00
Role Ambiguity Financial Institution 17 2.25 0.77 0.19 1.00 1.67 2.00 2.67 4.00
Role Ambiguity Government 13 1.59 0.75 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.33 2.00 3.00
Role Ambiguity Mining and Metals 51 2.37 0.90 0.13 1.00 1.67 2.33 3.00 4.33
Role Ambiguity NGO & Foundation 20 2.65 1.11 0.25 1.00 2.00 2.33 3.67 5.00
Role Conflict Consultancy 85 2.35 0.87 0.09 1.00 1.75 2.50 3.00 4.67
Role Conflict Energy 32 2.62 0.84 0.15 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.50 4.50
Role Conflict Financial Institution 17 2.75 0.97 0.23 1.25 2.25 2.75 3.25 4.67
Role Conflict Government 13 2.62 0.80 0.22 1.25 2.25 2.75 3.00 4.33
Role Conflict Mining and Metals 51 2.84 0.90 0.13 1.00 2.25 2.75 3.38 5.00
Role Conflict NGO & Foundation 20 2.67 0.94 0.21 1.00 1.94 2.88 3.27 4.50
Role Stress Consultancy 85 3.17 0.78 0.08 1.50 2.67 3.25 3.75 5.00
Role Stress Energy 32 3.37 0.72 0.13 2.00 2.75 3.25 3.81 5.00
Role Stress Financial Institution 17 3.30 0.70 0.17 2.00 3.00 3.25 3.75 4.50
Role Stress Government 13 3.06 0.67 0.19 2.00 2.50 3.25 3.50 4.00
Role Stress Mining and Metals 51 3.40 0.80 0.11 1.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 5.00
Role Stress NGO & Foundation 20 2.78 0.80 0.18 1.67 2.44 2.50 3.25 5.00
Role Valuation Consultancy 85 3.74 0.77 0.08 1.60 3.40 3.80 4.20 5.00
Role Valuation Energy 32 3.41 0.69 0.12 2.00 2.95 3.40 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation Financial Institution 17 3.51 0.60 0.15 2.00 3.00 3.60 3.80 4.40
Role Valuation Government 13 3.55 0.85 0.23 2.40 3.00 3.20 4.00 5.00
Role Valuation Mining and Metals 51 3.27 0.74 0.10 2.00 2.60 3.40 3.80 4.60
Role Valuation NGO & Foundation 20 3.49 0.93 0.21 1.60 3.00 3.70 4.20 5.00
Value Congruence Consultancy 85 3.72 1.00 0.11 1.00 3.33 3.67 4.67 5.00
Value Congruence Energy 32 3.26 0.98 0.17 1.00 2.67 3.17 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence Financial Institution 17 3.23 0.72 0.18 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.67 5.00
Value Congruence Government 13 3.13 0.81 0.22 1.33 2.67 3.00 3.33 4.67
Value Congruence Mining and Metals 51 3.33 0.98 0.14 1.33 2.67 3.33 4.00 5.00
Value Congruence NGO & Foundation 20 3.47 1.20 0.27 1.00 2.33 3.67 4.33 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Consultancy 85 3.72 0.89 0.10 1.25 3.00 3.75 4.50 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Energy 32 3.26 0.73 0.13 2.00 2.75 3.12 3.81 5.00
Team Psychological Safety Financial Institution 17 3.44 0.86 0.21 1.50 2.75 3.25 4.00 4.75
Team Psychological Safety Government 13 3.17 0.89 0.25 1.50 2.75 3.25 3.75 4.50
Team Psychological Safety Mining and Metals 51 3.25 0.80 0.11 1.25 2.75 3.00 3.75 5.00
Team Psychological Safety NGO & Foundation 20 3.54 0.84 0.19 2.00 2.94 3.62 4.25 5.00
Trust Consultancy 85 3.51 1.09 0.12 1.00 2.67 3.67 4.33 5.00
Trust Energy 32 3.03 0.88 0.16 1.00 2.62 3.00 3.67 4.67
Trust Financial Institution 17 3.37 0.73 0.18 1.67 3.00 3.67 4.00 4.00
Trust Government 13 3.15 1.03 0.29 1.67 2.33 3.00 3.33 5.00
Trust Mining and Metals 51 3.05 0.91 0.13 1.00 2.33 3.00 4.00 4.67
Trust NGO & Foundation 20 3.15 1.28 0.29 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.33 5.00