Job Diagnostic Survey

Abstract

The Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS), developed by J. Richard Hackman and Greg R. Oldham, is a highly influential and frequently cited instrument in organizational psychology for assessing the objective characteristics of jobs and their resulting impact on employee attitudes and behavior. The scale exhibits satisfactory psychometric characteristics, including robust internal consistency reliabilities and strong discriminative power among its items. The JDS is theoretically grounded in the Job Characteristics Model (JCM), aiming to diagnose specific workplace issues such as low employee motivation and job satisfaction. Its utility lies in determining if a job possesses low motivational potential, pinpointing the specific job aspects causing difficulty, and assessing employee readiness for potential job redesign or organizational change.

Keywords

Job Diagnostic Survey, JDS, Job Characteristics Model, work motivation, job satisfaction, skill variety, autonomy, task identity, growth need strength, organizational psychology.

Authors

J. Richard Hackman, Greg R. Oldham.

Purpose

The fundamental purpose of the JDS is to serve as a comprehensive diagnostic tool for evaluating the structural characteristics of a job environment. By measuring employee perceptions of their work, the instrument allows researchers and managers to objectively determine whether suboptimal employee attitudes—such as low motivation or dissatisfaction—are rooted in the design of the job itself.

The survey’s results can be used to calculate a Motivating Potential Score (MPS), which quantifies the inherent capacity of a job to foster intrinsic motivation. This diagnostic capability helps organizations identify specific areas of deficiency, evaluate the feasibility and likely success of job redesign interventions, and assess the workforce’s receptivity to change.

Construct

The JDS is built directly upon the foundation of the Job Characteristics Theory, drawing heavily from the prior work of Turner and Lawrence (1965) and Hackman and Lawler (1971). This theory posits that positive personal and work outcomes are achieved when employees experience three specific critical psychological states:

• Experienced meaningfulness of the work.
• Experienced responsibility for work outcomes.
• Knowledge of results.

These psychological states are generated by the presence of five measurable core job dimensions, which form the primary construct measured by the JDS. The instrument measures these five core dimensions, along with two supplementary dimensions, the three psychological states, and several key affective outcomes, including internal work motivation and specific facets of satisfaction. Furthermore, the JDS measures individual growth need strength, recognizing that the impact of job characteristics is moderated by individual differences.

Validity

The substantive validity of the JDS is supported by its strong theoretical consistency. The relationships observed between the various dimensions assessed by the survey align closely with the predictions made by the underlying Job Characteristics Model. This indicates that the instrument accurately captures the interplay between job characteristics and psychological outcomes as conceptualized by the theory.

Additionally, the JDS demonstrates robust criterion-related validity, as its measured job dimensions correlate meaningfully with objective behavioral indicators. Specifically, the scale scores relate inversely to measures of employee absenteeism and positively to supervisory ratings of performance effectiveness, confirming the practical relevance of the survey’s findings in predicting real-world work behaviors.

Reliability

The JDS exhibits satisfactory internal consistency reliabilities (as indicated by alpha coefficients) across its numerous scales, suggesting that the items within each subscale effectively measure a unified construct. The reliability figures for the various dimensions and outcomes are generally acceptable:

• Reliabilities of 0.71 were reported for skill variety, feedback from the job itself, and the job choice format.
• The scales for task significance and autonomy demonstrated a reliability of 0.66.
• Stronger reliabilities were observed for feedback from agents (0.78), growth satisfaction (0.84), and the “would like” format (0.88).
• The critical psychological states and motivational outcomes also showed high consistency: 0.74 (experienced meaningfulness), 0.72 (experienced responsibility), and 0.76 (knowledge of results, general satisfaction, and internal work motivation).
• Lower, though still reported, reliabilities included 0.59 for task identity and dealing with others, and 0.56 for social satisfaction. Median off-diagonal correlations were also calculated to ensure sufficient differentiation between the measured constructs.

Factor Analysis

While the source content does not explicitly detail a dedicated factor analysis procedure, the data analysis reported supports the distinctiveness and structural integrity of the JDS scales. Between-job differences were examined using one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA), and the results showed that these differences were statistically significant for all JDS scale scores. This finding confirms the instrument’s ability to discriminate between different jobs based on their characteristics, which is a key requirement for a scale derived from the Job Characteristics Model.

Further support for the scale structure is provided by the reporting of intercorrelations among the JDS scales, alongside means and standard deviations. These statistical measures are crucial for assessing the independence of the latent constructs (the core job dimensions and psychological states) and ensuring that the instrument is measuring seven distinct job dimensions rather than a single, overarching factor.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric Self-Report Survey / Diagnostic Tool

Format: Multi-section questionnaire using various seven-point Likert-type response formats (e.g., Very Little to Very Much; Disagree Strongly to Agree Strongly; Extremely Dissatisfied to Extremely Satisfied) and a job choice format.

Language Available: Original development in English (US).

Population Group: Employees and workers across diverse organizational settings, including blue collar, white collar, and professional roles.

Age Group: Adult working population.

Population Details: The initial validation sample consisted of 658 employees spanning 62 distinct jobs across seven industrial and service companies. The overall development and refinement process incorporated data from over 1,500 employees representing 100 jobs across 15 distinct companies. Demographic data were collected.

Test Methodology: The JDS is structured into seven sections measuring:

• Five core job dimensions (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback from the job itself) and two additional dimensions (feedback from agents and dealing with others). (Sections 1 & 2).
• Three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility, and knowledge of results). (Sections 3 & 5).
• Three affective reactions (general satisfaction, internal work motivation, and satisfaction with specific facets like pay, security, peers, supervision, and growth). (Sections 3, 4 & 5).
• Individual growth need strength, measured using both a “would like” format and a forced-choice “job choice” format. (Sections 6 & 7).

Keywords

Motivating Potential Score, MPS, job design, organizational behavior, absenteeism, performance effectiveness, critical psychological states, internal work motivation.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Job Diagnostic Survey was initially published in 1974 by J. Richard Hackman and Greg R. Oldham. The instrument was cataloged in the Tests in Microfiche collection by the ETS Test Collection in Princeton, NJ. A shorter form of the JDS is also known to be available. Information regarding current licensing fees or commercial permissions is not included in the source material.

Reference’s

De Matas, S. S. (2012). A case study on job satisfaction within a VHA HIMS department. Psy.D. dissertation, University of the Rockies.

Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R. (1974). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory (Technical Report No. 6). New Haven, CT: Yale University.

Kappel, A. M. (2012). Generational cohort as a moderator of the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. PhD dissertation, Walden University.

Mello, J. A. (2012). The relationship between reports of psychological capital and reports of job satisfaction among administrative personnel at a private institution of higher education. EdD dissertation, University of Hartford.

Moore, H. L. (2012). Ethical climate, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction of full-time faculty members. EdD dissertation, East Tennessee State University.

Zahedi, K. J. (2010). Middle school teacher satisfaction with response to intervention (RtI): An assessment between inception and implementation. PhD dissertation, State University of New York at Albany.

Items of the Job Diagnostic Survey

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 1

1. To what extent does your job require you to work closely with other people (either clients, or people in related jobs in your organization)?

• 1. Very little; dealing with other people is not at all necessary in doing the job.
• 4. Moderately; some dealing with others is necessary.
• 7. Very much; dealing with other people is an absolutely essential and crucial part of doing the job.

2. How much autonomy is there in your job? That is, to what extent does your job permit you to decide on your own how to go about doing the work?

• 1. Very little; the job gives me almost no personal “say” about how and when the work is done.
• 4. Moderate autonomy; many things are standardized and not under my control, but I can make some decisions about the work.
• 7. Very much; the job gives me almost complete responsibility for deciding how and when the work is done.

3. To what extent does your job involve doing a “whole” and identifiable piece of work? That is, is the job a complete piece of work that has an obvious beginning and end? Or is it only a small part of the overall piece of work, which is finished by other people or by automatic machines?

• 1. My job is only a tiny part of the overall piece of work; the results of my activities cannot be seen in the final product or service.
• 4. My job is a moderate-sized “chunk” of the overall piece of work; my own contribution can be seen in the final outcome.
• 7. My job involves doing the whole piece of work, from start to finish; the results of my activities are easily seen in the final product or service.

4. How much variety is there in your job? That is, to what extent does the job require you to do many different things at work, using a variety of your skills and talents?

• 1. Very little; the job requires me to do the same routine things over and over again.
• 4. Moderate variety.
• 7. Very much; the job requires me to do many different things, using a number of different skills and talents.

5. In general, how significant or important is your job? That is, are the results of your work likely to significantly affect the lives or well-being of other people?

• 1. Not very significant; the outcomes of my work are not likely to have important effects on other people.
• 4. Moderately significant.
• 7. Highly significant; the outcomes of my work can affect other people in very important ways.

6. To what extent do managers or coworkers let you know how well you are doing on your job?

• 1. Very little; people almost never let me know how well I am doing.
• 4. Moderately; sometimes people may give me “feedback”; other times they may not.
• 7. Very much; managers or coworkers provide me with almost consistent “feedback” about how well I am doing.

7. To what extent does doing the job itself provide you with information about your work performance? That is, does the actual work itself provide clues about how well you are doing aside from any “feedback” coworkers or supervisors may provide?

• 1. Very little; the job itself is set up so I could work forever without finding out how well I am doing.
• 4. Moderately; sometimes doing the job provides “feedback” to me; sometimes it does not.
• 7. Very much; the job is set up so that I get almost constant “feedback” as I work about how well I am doing.

Scoring: Various seven-point scales are used for the seven sections of the JDS. Section one of the JDS measures the seven job dimensions. Very Little: the job requires me to do the same routine things over and over again = 1; Moderate Variety = 4; and Very Much: the job requires me to do many different things, using a number of different skills and talents = 7.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 2

1. The job requires me to use a number of complex or high-level skills.
2. The job requires a lot of cooperative work with other people.
3. The job is arranged so that I do not have the chance to do an entire piece of work from beginning to end.
4. Just doing the work required by the job provides many chances for me to figure out how well I am doing.
5. The job is quite simple and repetitive.
6. The job can be done adequately by a person working alone—without talking or checking with other people.
7. The supervisors and coworkers on this job almost never give me any “feedback” about how well I am doing in my work.
8. This job is one where a lot of other people can be affected by how well the work gets done.
9. The job denies me any chance to use my personal initiative or judgment in carrying out the work.
10. Supervisors often let me know how well they think I am performing the job.
11. The job provides me the chance to completely finish the pieces of work I begin.
12. The job itself provides very few clues about whether or not I am performing well.
13. The job gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do the work.
14. The job itself is not very significant or important in the broader scheme of things.

Scoring: Section two also measures the seven job dimensions. Very Inaccurate = 1; Mostly Inaccurate = 2; Slightly Inaccurate = 3; Uncertain = 4; Slightly Accurate = 5; Mostly Accurate = 6; and Very Accurate = 7.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 3

1. It’s hard, on this job, for me to care very much about whether or not the work gets done right.
2. My opinion of myself goes up when I do this job well.
3. Generally speaking, I am very satisfied with this job.
4. Most of the things I have to do on this job seem useless or trivial.
5. I usually know whether or not my work is satisfactory on this job.
6. I feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when I do this job well.
7. The work I do on this job is very meaningful to me.
8. I feel a very high degree of personal responsibility for the work I do on this job.
9. I frequently think of quitting this job.
10. I feel bad and unhappy when I discover that I have performed poorly on this job.
11. I often have trouble figuring out whether I’m doing well or poorly on this job.
12. I feel I should personally take the credit or blame for the results of my work on this job.
13. I am generally satisfied with the kind of work I do on this job.
14. My own feelings generally are not affected much one way or the other by how well I do on this job.
15. Whether or not this job gets done right is clearly my responsibility.

Scoring: Section three measures general satisfaction and internal work motivation. Disagree Strongly = 1; Disagree = 2; Disagree Slightly = 3; Neutral = 4; Agree Slightly = 5; Agree = 6; and Agree Strongly = 7.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 4

1. The amount of job security I have.
2. The amount of pay and fringe benefits I receive.
3. The amount of personal growth and development I get in doing my job.
4. The people I talk to and work with on my job.
5. The degree of respect and fair treatment I receive from my boss.
6. The feeling of worthwhile accomplishment I get from doing my job.
7. The chance to get to know other people while on the job.
8. The amount of support and guidance I receive from my supervisor.
9. The degree to which I am fairly paid for what I contribute to this organization.
10. The amount of independent thought and action I can exercise in my job.
11. How secure things look for me in the future in this organization.
12. The chance to help other people while at work.
13. The amount of challenge in my job.
14. The overall quality of the supervision I receive in my work.

Scoring: Section four measures specific satisfactions. Extremely Dissatisfied = 1; Dissatisfied = 2; Slightly Dissatisfied = 3; Neutral = 4; Slightly Satisfied = 5; Satisfied = 6; Extremely Satisfied = 7.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 5

1. Most people on this job feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when they do the job well.
2. Most people on this job are very satisfied with the job.
3. Most people on this job feel that the work is useless or trivial.
4. Most people on this job feel a great deal of personal responsibility for the work they do.
5. Most people on this job have a pretty good idea of how well they are performing their job.
6. Most people on this job find the work very meaningful.
7. Most people on this job feel that whether or not the job gets done right is clearly their own responsibility.
8. People on this job often think of quitting.
9. Most people on this job feel bad or unhappy when they find that they have performed the work poorly.
10. Most people on this job have trouble figuring out whether they are doing a good or a bad job.

Scoring: Section five measures the three psychological states as well as general satisfaction and internal work motivation. It also measures general satisfaction and internal work motivation. Disagree Strongly = 1; Disagree = 2; Disagree Slightly = 3; Neutral = 4; Agree Slightly = 5; Agree = 6; and Agree Strongly = 7.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 6

1. 1. High respect and fair treatment from my supervisor.
2. 2. Stimulating and challenging work.
3. 3. Chances to exercise independent thought and action in my job.
4. 4. Great job security.
5. 5. Very friendly coworkers.
6. 6. Opportunities to learn new things from my work.
7. 7. High salary and good fringe benefits.
8. 8. Opportunities to be creative and imaginative in my work.
9. 9. Quick promotions.
10. 10. Opportunities for personal growth and development in my job.
11. 11. A sense of worthwhile accomplishment in my work.

Scoring: Section six measures individual growth need strength. Would like having this only a moderate amount (or less) = 4; Would like having this very much = 7; and Would like having this extremely much = 10.

Job Diagnostic Survey: Section 7

1. a. A job where the pay is very good.
b. A job where there is considerable opportunity to be creative and innovative.
2. a. A job where you are often required to make important decisions.
b. A job with many pleasant people to work with.
3. a. A job in which greater responsibility is given to those who do the best work.
b. A job in which greater responsibility is given to loyal employees who have the most seniority.
4. a. A job in an organization which is in financial trouble—and might have to close down within the year.
b. A job in which you are not allowed to have any say whatever in how your work is scheduled, or in the procedures to be used in carrying it out.
5. a. A very routine job.
b. A job where your coworkers are not very friendly.
6. a. A job with a supervisor who is often very critical of you and your work in front of other people.
b. A job which prevents you from using a number of skills that you worked hard to develop.
7. a. A job with a supervisor who respects you and treats you fairly.
b. A job which provides constant opportunities for you to learn new and interesting things.
8. a. A job where there is a real chance you could be laid off.
b. A job with very little chance to do challenging work.
9. a. A job in which there is a real chance for you to develop new skills and advance in the organization.
b. A job which provides lots of vacation time and an excellent fringe benefit package.
10. a. A job with little freedom and independence to do your work in the way you think best.
b. A job where the working conditions are poor.
11. a. A job with very satisfying teamwork.
b. A job which allows you to use your skills and abilities to the fullest extent.

12. a. A job which offers little or no challenge.
b. A job which requires you to be completely isolated from coworkers.

Scoring: Section seven measures individual growth need strength. Strongly Prefer A = 1; Slightly Prefer A = 2; Neutral = 3; Slightly Prefer B = 4; and Strongly Prefer B = 5. A scoring key for the JDS is provided. In addition, a short form of the JDS is available.