Control and Complexity Scale

Abstract

The Control and Complexity scale, developed by Frese, Kring, Soose, and Zempel in 1996, is a specialized instrument designed to measure two critical dimensions of the work environment: job control and work complexity. This assessment focuses on an employee’s perceived ability to influence their working conditions and determine their work strategies. The scale defines complexity based on the difficulty of an individual’s job decisions. Research indicates that high levels of job control and complexity are associated with positive psychological outcomes, such as enhanced feelings of empowerment and increased development of skills necessary to overcome professional barriers and setbacks.

Keywords

Job control, Work complexity, Personal initiative, Self-efficacy, Empowerment, Job design, Organizational psychology, Decision-making power.

Authors

Michael Frese, Wolfgang Kring, Astrid Soose, Jürgen Zempel

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Control and Complexity scale is to quantify key psychological aspects of job design within organizational settings. Specifically, it aims to measure the extent to which employees experience autonomy in their work roles and the degree of cognitive challenge inherent in their tasks.

By assessing these variables, the scale helps researchers and practitioners understand how structural job characteristics influence employee behavior, motivation, and developmental outcomes, particularly regarding proactivity and persistence in the face of obstacles. High levels of control foster a sense of responsibility, while high levels of complexity drive the acquisition of new skills and knowledge.

Construct

The scale measures two distinct but related constructs: Job Control and Work Complexity. Job Control refers to the perceived power an employee has to influence their working conditions, scheduling, and strategic approach to tasks. When employees perceive high job control, they are more likely to exhibit resilience and persistence, even after experiencing setbacks.

Work Complexity is defined by the demands placed on the employee’s cognitive abilities, specifically focusing on the difficulty and uniqueness of the decisions required in the job role. Jobs high in complexity generally necessitate the continuous development and application of advanced skills and knowledge, which are crucial for overcoming operational barriers.

Validity

The validity of the Control and Complexity scale has been supported through correlations with several key constructs in organizational psychology. Studies by Frese et al. (1999) demonstrated that the combined measure of job control and complexity exhibited significant positive correlations with desirable employee attributes, including aspirations, proactivity, and self-efficacy.

Further analysis of the subscales (Frese et al., 1996) indicated that Control at work correlated positively with work complexity, self-efficacy, and an employee’s willingness to adopt an active approach and tendency to successfully overcome professional barriers. These findings support the scale’s ability to predict motivational and proactive behaviors stemming from enriched job characteristics.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the Control and Complexity scale has been established using Coefficient alpha. In the initial study (Frese et al., 1996), the subscale reliabilities were reported as 0.67 for Complexity and 0.78 for Job Control.

Subsequent research confirmed the stability of the measure. In a later study by Frese, Teng, and Wijnin (1999), when the complexity and control subscales were combined into a single measure, the resulting Coefficient alpha increased to 0.81, indicating strong reliability for the overall construct encompassing both control and complexity aspects of the job.

Factor Analysis

Although specific details regarding exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis (EFA/CFA) are not provided in the source content, the scale is structured around two empirically distinct factors: Job Control and Work Complexity. The reliability data reporting separate coefficient alphas for the two dimensions confirms the intended two-factor structure.

The items are clearly segregated into two sets, suggesting that the underlying factor structure supports the measurement of these two independent constructs which, while related (as evidenced by positive correlation), are intended to capture different facets of job design.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric scale measuring job characteristics and design.

Format: Self-report questionnaire utilizing a 5-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: Originally developed and utilized in German samples (East and West Germany); English translation available (as provided in the reference appendix).

Population Group: Employees/Workers in organizational settings.

Age Group: Adult working population.

Population Details: Used initially in studies comparing personal initiative in East and West Germany.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their job characteristics based on frequency or degree of agreement/description, typically using varying anchors depending on the specific item.

Keywords

Job characteristics model, Job autonomy, Occupational psychology, Scale development, Organizational behavior, Frese, Personal initiative.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was initially published in 1996 in the Academy of Management Journal. The items were taken from the appendix, p. 64, and were reproduced with permission of the Academy of Management via Copyright Clearance Center. Users seeking to apply the scale should consult the Academy of Management regarding appropriate usage permissions and potential fees.

Reference’s

• Frese, M., Kring, W., Soose, A., & Zempel, J. (1996). Personal initiative at work: Differences between East and West Germany. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 37-64.
• Frese, M., Teng, E., & Wijnin, R. (1999). Study confirming reliability and validity findings of Control and Complexity scale (Referenced in source content).

Items of the Control and Complexity scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Responses are obtained using a 5-point Likert-type scale. The anchors vary among items. The end-point anchors are provided with each item. An example response scale is 1 = very little, 2 = rather little, 3 = somewhat, 4 = rather much, and 5 = very much.

Complexity of work items:

1. Do you receive tasks that are extraordinary and particularly difficult? (End-point anchors are 1 = never, 5 = several times a week)
2. A must make very complicated decisions in his/her work; B only has to make very simple (End-point anchors are 1 = exactly like A, 5 = exactly like B)
3. Can you use all your knowledge and skills in your work? (End-point anchors are 1 = very little, 5 = very much)
4. Can you learn new things in your work? (End-point anchors are 1 = very little, 5 = very much)

Control at work items:

(End-point anchors for all these items are 1 = very little, 5 = very much)

1. If you look at your job as a whole: how many decisions does it allow you to make?
2. Can you determine how you do your work?
3. Can you plan and arrange your work on your own (e.g., calculate which material/ tools you need)?
4. How much can you participate in decisions of your superior (e.g., the superior asks you for your opinion and asks for suggestions)?