The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-7592.

htm

Contingent workers: needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation

Vlad Vaiman
School of Business, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland

Contingent workers

311
Received November 2010 Revised May 2011 Accepted May 2011

Jeanette Lemmergaard
Department of Marketing & Management, University of Southern Denmark, Odense M, Denmark, and

Ana Azevedo
Faculty of Business, Athabasca University, Edmonton, Canada
Abstract
Purpose This paper seeks to challenge the claim that traditional and non-traditional employees differ signicantly in terms of their needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation patterns, by surveying management consultants in Canada. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on a quantitative online survey undertaken among 204 Canadian management consultants in 2008, representing both traditional employed consultants, contingent consultants, and company representatives. Findings The study demonstrated no signicant differences with regard to needs, motivation, and personality characteristics between traditional and non-traditional employed management consultants, which means that no signicant changes to existing human resource management policies seem to be needed. Originality/value The existing literature on contingent employees needs, personality characteristics and work motivation has mainly been devoted to the study of differences between traditional and non-traditional work arrangements seen as single groups. This study extends and complements the understanding of the underlying dimensions of both the explicit and the implicit contract within the contingent management consultant-organization relationship in order to explain the inuence of these dimensions on the human resource management strategies. The underlying assumption is that non-traditional work arrangements vary according to the type of job and the context in which the job is performed. Keywords Big Five personality traits, Context, Consultants, Contingent workers, Employee-organization relationship, The Big Five Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction The conventional employee-organization relationship has traditionally been that of full-time work under an unlimited-duration contract with a specic employer and protected against wrongful dismissal. Full-time and ongoing employment is still considered to be the most prevalent type of employment in industrialized countries, but during the last couple of decades a new pattern of employment has emerged that is changing the nature of the employment contract and the employee-organization relationship (Gallagher and Connelly, 2008). Despite the fact that the concept has

Team Performance Management Vol. 17 No. 5/6, 2011 pp. 311-324 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1352-7592 DOI 10.1108/13527591111159036

TPM 17,5/6

312

received increased attention over the last decade, the concept as such is not new and can be compared to a modern form of day laborers, where labor is hired and paid if not by the day, then by the assignment (Lemmergaard and Vaiman, 2007). In todays new economy, the traditional labor force seems to be decreasing, and a growing number of workers in particular knowledge and creative workers seem to prefer to work as autonomous and independent self-employed, freelance contractors, for example (Bergstrm and Storrie, 2003; Kalleberg et al., 2003; Quinlan and Bohle, 2004; Vaiman, 2010). From an organizational point of view, the growth of exible working patterns is presented as advantageous as rms have an ongoing need to complete customized projects and are constantly faced with the dilemma of nding the right, highly-skilled, and experienced employees to the right price. This development, combined with market changes (i.e. recession, globalization, the popularity of outsourcing, an ageing population, and the casualization of the workplace) is fostering a signicant growth in the number of contingent workers. Forecasts indicate that in the near future the labor market will be effectively split into two main groups: the traditional wage earners and the contingent, non-traditional workers, with a considerable increase in non-traditional work arrangements especially within professional services, such as, for example, management consultancy (Lockwood, 2006; Vaiman, 2010). Supporting this view, the Society for Human Resource Management (2011) predicts that one of the key changes to the workforce is an increase in the workforce ux with more roles automated or outsourced, more employees working exible hours, and more contingent workers. The overall number of contingent workers cannot be precisely estimated, as there is no consensus on which categories of workers should be included in the estimate (Parks et al., 1998). Although many of todays contingent workers are in low-quality, low-paying jobs, the number of contingent workers in professional positions is steadily increasing. A recent Japanese report demonstrates that the fraction of contingent workers in Japans total employment steadily increased from 17 percent in 1986 to 34 percent in 2008 (Hirokatsu et al., 2011). In Canada in 2009, 1 in 8 paid workers had some form of temporary employment, of which one-half (i.e. 52 percent) were contract positions held by professionals. These jobs were concentrated in public-sector industries (i.e. health, education, and public administration) and have been relatively less affected by the recent economic slowdown (Galarneau, 2010). Other reports have suggested that 43 percent of US rms used contingent workers in professional and technical functions that had the potential to impact core areas of the rms (Matusik and Hill, 1998). And yet others (e.g. Wysocki, 1996) have reported that many rms use contingent workers as technical experts on important projects. Adhering to the claim that traditional and non-traditional employees differ in terms of their needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation implies that attraction, hiring, and retention strategies should accommodate these differences in order to be efcient, effective, and viable (Robinson and Rousseau, 1994; Lemmergaard and Vaiman, 2007). This paper is questioning this presumption by empirically analyzing the needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation patterns of contingent consultants. While anticipating that consultants constitute a rather unique sample of workers, this paper compares self-employed (i.e. non-traditional contingent employed) consultants to traditionally employed consultants. The purpose of this comparison is not to develop a new grand theory of contingent worker behavior, but rather to address

contextual variables, which might affect the way in which existing theories apply to contingent workers. Building on an empirical renement of our understanding of contingent consultants, this paper concludes with a discussion on the extent to which there is a need for alternative human resource strategies. 2. Conceptual foundation Employee classications The term contingent employment arrangement was rst used in the 1980s by Audrey Freedman referring to [. . .] conditional and transitory employment relationships as initiated by a need for labor usually, because a company has an increased demand for a particular service or product or technology, at a particular place at a specic time (Polivka and Nardone, 1989, p. 11). Whereas the term contingent workers includes a great number of alternative employment arrangements, it general refers to employees who do not have a contract to stay with an organization for an indenite period of time (Redpath et al., 2007, p. 34). The broad term can be broken down into four categories: (1) temporary staff and leased employees; (2) independent contractors and freelance workers; (3) direct hires and in-house arrangements; and (4) seasonal workers (Connelly and Gallagher, 2004). Employees hired under any of these patterns are most commonly known as contingent workers, but also a variety of other monikers are used, such as for example non-traditional workers, on-call workers, contract workers, free agents, freelancers, solo practitioners, independent consultants, and home-based business operators (Bernasek and Kinnear, 1999; Kalleberg, 2000). In the beginning the phrase contingent workers was used with a negative connotation often referring to workers simply not being able to secure a more traditional job given the conditions of the labor market (Appelbaum, 1992) and therefore accepting contingent employment as a second-best alternative to a permanent employment arrangement (Bernasek and Kinnear, 1999). For example in 1999, Houseman and Polivka, (Houseman and Polivka, 1999) found that contingent jobs were viewed upon as being an alternative to unemployment and, as such, less desirable than traditional full-time employment. Others (e.g. Jakobsen and Rasmussen, 2009) have pointed to the vulnerabilities of contingent workers, who often are marginalized and used merely to achieve organizational exibility. Also, it has been argued that contingent work arrangements have grown as a response to employers limited abilities to legally terminate employees and to the imposed high costs associated with termination actions (Gallagher and Connelly, 2008). Today, the phrase is increasingly used with a positive connotation for workers holding temporary jobs for personal reasons and/or as a voluntary choice in response to for example high work pressure (Hipple, 2001). Some workers voluntarily choose temporary work arrangements as a way to exploit the possibilities at hand to create for example a satisfactory work-life balance (Jakobsen and Rasmussen, 2009). So, from being an employment phrase related to low wages, no benets, negligible job security, little training, and no possibility of advancement (for an overview see De Graaf-Zijl,

Contingent workers

313

TPM 17,5/6

314

2005), the term contingent workers is often used today in consistence with the emergence of boundaryless career strategies stemming from employees emphasis on exibility, autonomy, and freedom (Vaiman, 2010). For example Kunda et al. (2002) found that many temporary lawyers preferred to work outside the organizational boundaries because of the exibility and the ability to separate themselves from organizational politics, incompetence, and inequalities. Adding to the positive connotation, the effect of a general increase in the number of contingent workers inuences the risks associated with contingent job insecurity, as workers with specialized skills can be more assured of a string of opportunities (Marler et al., 2002). As such, there is a push from the rms themselves, as well as from the potential employees, which reinforces the development towards a split labor market, and consequently, the negative connotation is becoming less dominant. Today, contingent workers are found among clerks who typically perform administrative assignments for SMEs, IT experts especially those in the area of computer programming media consultants, arts and crafts people, entertainers, journalists, and management consultants. Whereas contingent workers within creative, design, and engineering have traditionally been in demand, today also interim executives, health care, and legal professionals are hired on contractual basis as contingent workers. A deeper look at employee-organization relationship Atkinsons (1984) exible rm model posits that most contemporary rms approach stafng needs through primary reliance upon a core workforce. Whereas the core workforce is supposed to provide functional exibility, periphery employees (i.e. contingent workers) are supposed to provide numerically exibility (i.e. disposable when not required due to uctuations in demand). Following this line of argument, an increase in the number of contingent workers may be interpreted as a positive development in the sense that it indicates greater exibility of the labor market. Contingent work arrangements allow rms to expand and subtract the labor force according to uctuations in demand and revenue (Matusik and Hill, 1998) without adding to the long-term cost of retaining them (Coolidge, 1996; Wysocki, 1996; Kalleberg and Marsden, 2005). Hereby, rms do not need to deal with complex issues related to layoffs of permanent workers. Moreover, contingent workers allow for substantial cost savings in terms of xed costs, and they may even provide new knowledge and insight into the employing rms (Marler et al., 2002). Lepak and Snell (1998) concur by arguing that in order to survive in the increasingly global and competitive business environment, rms must seek greater exibility and strict cost control, and a contingent labor force might respond to both of these concerns (Kunda et al., 2002; Lautsch, 2002). However, some researchers have been skeptical about the extent to which exibility have been enacted other than in a piecemeal and pragmatic fashion and whether exibility per see has increased organizational effectiveness (Legge, 1995). Empirical evidence is mixed, and as pointed out by Parks et al. (1998), it is difcult to make inference across studies in part because of the diversity of categories used to label contingent workers. Moreover, whether contingent work arrangements are always benecial to both employers and employees are not entirely clear. Consequently, the increase in the number of contingent workers is becoming a matter of growing concern

 also for policy-makers as it reects further weakening of the labor market position of the workers involved (De Grip et al., 1997). Many researchers have assumed that contingent workers, due to the nature of their employment contract, are less committed to the rm, less satised, and less likely to exhibit extra-role behaviors. Beard and Jeffrey (1995), for example, found that job insecurity and lack of control has a negative impact on job satisfaction and commitment among contingent workers. In contrast, Lee and Johnson (1991), in a study of workers in the US National Park Service, found that contingent workers had signicantly higher levels of job satisfaction and organizational commitment than the core workers. Kidder (1996) compared full-time nurses with their contingent colleagues and found no difference in satisfaction and commitment. The only proven fact was that contingent nurses tended to demonstrate fewer extra-role behaviors than full-time nurses. Other studies (Peter and Stephen, 1998; Kunda et al., 2002; McGowan, 2005; Redpath et al., 2007) also attempted to provide some meaningful answers to this problem, all with mixed success. It should, however, be acknowledged that there are organizational and individual costs associated with the contingent form of employment (e.g. Pearce, 1993). The major disadvantages that most contingent workers experience are uncertainty of income and lack of company benets (Barker and Christensen, 1998; Osterman et al., 1999). Labor and employment laws in most industrialized countries are designed for traditional wage-and-salary workers and imply that criteria for eligibility and benets assume an enduring employment relationship with a single rm. Therefore, contingent workers often lack basic protection for minimum wage, health and safety, and retirement security (Olsen, 2003). Also, unions have few incentives to include non-traditional workers preferences in collective bargaining, and non-traditional workers therefore lose an institutional channel to pressure for improvements in their inferior working conditions (Malo, 2006). In addition, contingent workers often point to the feeling of loneliness in the job (Parker, 1994; Henson, 1996; McAllister, 1998; Smith, 1998; Rogers, 2000). A common statement from the contingent workers is that they lack daily social and professional togetherness a nding which has also been empirically supported in this study. Finally, the contingent workers are on their own in regard to handling contracts, legal issues, accounting, marketing, and other business functions. Moreover, they often have to supply the work tools and ofce facilities (e.g. ofce supplies and computer equipment) that they themselves need in order to perform the job or service (Vaiman, 2010). Given the circumstances around working as a contingent employee, conceptual studies often assume that contingent workers especially independent professionals possess certain personality characteristics, as being a contingent worker is a go-between being both a supplier and a risk taker (Lemmergaard and Vaiman, 2007). Driven by evolving work and family roles, the independent professionals are individuals who most likely have made a personal choice of wanting autonomy, exibility, and self-control over work processes and time. Often they have not been able to settle in a traditional wage-and-salary job. They have a high level of self-efcacy. They want to be their own boss, and they take charge of their own careers as they move across rms (Bridges, 1994; Pink, 2001). Their mobility is high, as they have more focus on job contents than on status in the rm. They have a high need for achievement, and they highly value direct feedback on their performances.

Contingent workers

315

TPM 17,5/6

316

Given the allegedly special personality characteristics of the contingent workers which can be summarized under labels such as extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, openness, and general self-efcacy; it would be only natural that special human resource management strategies are needed in order to meet the requirements of the contingent workforce. In addition, human resource management strategies and techniques aimed specically to retain the non-traditional professionals knowledge, skills, and abilities are becoming very important. As many contingent workers have skills that are in great demand, organizational strategies to deal with the externalization of specialized work may be needed. This trend is further emphasized by the growth of the contingent workforce industry. Some studies have found that managing the employment relationship with contingent workers is at least as challenging and complex as that of traditional full-time workers (Marler et al., 2002). All of the conceptual factors above compel rms to reconsider their human resource management strategies by taking into account the needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation patterns of the non-traditional workforce. However, in order to create meaningful human resource policies for each type of employment arrangement, some important questions must be asked. Are the differences between traditional and non-traditional employees signicant enough to justify the creation and implementation of separate human resource strategies and policies? If yes, what should be the main components of such strategies? If not, what are the major differences between the needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation of non-traditional workers versus their traditional counterparts, and what kind of human resource management adjustments will they require? The empirical study below was designed to try and answer these questions. 3. Methodology To shed light on the differences between non-traditional (NTC) and traditional (TC) consultant workers in terms of their needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation, this paper presents selected ndings from a quantitative survey study undertaken among Canadian management consultants in 2008. The survey was designed and administered in an online survey platform. An invitation letter was sent out by e-mail to all members of the Canadian Association of Management Consultants, also known as CMC-Canada. The letter explained the purpose of the study and invited participants from three groups of respondents: (1) non-traditional or contingent consultants (NTCs); (2) traditional or full-time consultants (TCs); and (3) company representatives (i.e. either senior partners who are involved in recruitment or staff members from the human resource management department of consulting rms). In terms of measuring the needs of the contingent workers, the respondents were asked to evaluate the importance of specic needs (e.g. independence, self-fulllment, status, empowerment, physical well-being). The non-traditional employees were additionally asked to elaborate on why (e.g. work content, goals and feedback, and/or social aspects) they have chosen to become contingent workers as opposed to being traditionally employed. Finally, the contingent workers personality characteristics

were measured using the short version (i.e. BFI-10) of the Big Five Personality Dimensions (for elaboration see for example McCrae and Costa, 1990; Schwarzer, 1992; Deary and Matthews, 1993; Rammstedt and John, 2007) of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness. This was combined with the respondents general perception of self-efcacy. Perceived self-efcacy is to be understood as an optimistic self-belief in ones capacity to perform novel or difcult tasks or successfully cope with adversity (e.g. Bandura, 1986; Schwarzer, 1992). In this study, 10 items were summed up to form a general self-efcacy score (GSE), which can range from 10 to 40. Finally, respondents were asked to describe recruitment sources (e.g. professional networks, job fairs, newspapers, headhunters) and selection methods (e.g. interviews, tests, assessment centers) most frequently used by them. In addition, all the three groups of respondents (i.e. TCs, NTCs and Company Representatives) were asked to rate reasons for staying with their respective companies (e.g. adequate payment, working autonomy, training and mentoring opportunities) and to suggest retention strategies which could help better retain consultants in the future (e.g. provide clear goals, deliverables and feedback; recognize achievement and offer career advancement opportunities; provide exible working hours and exible compensation plans). 4. Results A total of 204 respondents contributed to the study (see Table I). Among them 65 respondents were traditional consultants (TCs), 109 were non-traditional consultants (NTCs), and 30 respondents were company representatives. With respect to age, the majority of respondents across the three groups were experienced (i.e. above the age of 51), although the group of traditional workers was notably younger than the groups of non-traditional workers and company representatives. Regarding gender, approximately 2/3 of non-traditional and traditional consultants were male, while in the group of company representatives, 4/5 of respondents were male. Contrary to the presumptions (for elaboration see for example Lemmergaard and Vaiman, 2007, Vaiman and Lemmergaard, 2008), this empirical study did not nd signicant differences between traditional and non-traditional consultancy professionals in regard to their specic needs (e.g. independence, self-fulllment, status, empowerment, physical well-being). Also, no differences were found between traditional and non-traditional consultants in regard to personality characteristics measured by the BFI-10 and general

Contingent workers

317

Non-traditional consultants (NTCs) Sample size (N) Age Above 51 Gender Males Females N 109 70% 66% 34%

Traditional consultants (TCs) N 65 47% 65% 35%

Company representatives N 30 55% 80% 20% Table I. Distribution of survey respondents

TPM 17,5/6

318

self-efcacy. Before group comparisons were made scores on each of the ve personality characteristics were computed for traditional and non-traditional consultants by averaging two items from the BFI-10 scale (Rammstedt and John, 2007). Each of the ten items was rated on a ve-point scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. Similarly, general self-efcacy scores were calculated for traditional and non-traditional consultants by summing up the ten items for the general self-efcacy (GSE) scale (Schwarzer, 1992). Each of these ten items were designed in a four-point scale ranging from 1 not at all true to 4 exactly true. To compare responses for these two groups, a number of t-tests were performed. In particular, concerning the BFI-10, ve t-tests were performed in order to compare the mean response for traditional and non-traditional consultants on extraversion (TC mean 3.36 vs NTC mean 3.64), agreeableness (TC mean 3.85 vs NTC mean 4.00), conscientiousness (TC mean 4.59 vs NTC mean 4.42), emotional stability (TC mean 4.19 vs NTC mean 4.19) and openness (TC mean 4.01 vs NTC mean 4.14). The results showed that none of these t-tests were found signicant. Regarding general self-efcacy, a t-test comparison of mean responses for the two groups (TC mean 35.26 vs NTC mean 35.14) was also not signicant. Regarding work motivation, this study found similar motivational factors for either joining a company, in the case of TCs, or for accepting projects with a new company, in the case of NTCs. Furthermore, there were similar motivational factors for both groups concerning the possibility of continuing to work with a rm (TCs) or of continuing to accept projects from the same rm (NTCs). Common motivational factors which were highly ranked by the two groups were exciting and challenging work, autonomy, exibility, adequate pay, respect and professional appreciation, great colleagues, and an atmosphere of openness. The only signicant difference was in found in the top priority of each group TCs emphasized adequate pay as the most important motivating factors, while NTCs mentioned independence and exibility as their main motivators. However, the empirical ndings of this study did demonstrate differences concerning the expectations that the company representatives placed on non-traditional consultancy workers, versus what NTCs reported. In particular, company representatives had higher expectations of non-traditional workers in regard to agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness (t-tests comparing the means for actual versus expected scores i.e. between NTCs scores on these personality variables and company representatives scores on what they consider important when recruiting non-traditional consultants were found signicant). On the other hand, the comparison of expected versus actual GSE scores showed that non-traditional consultants have higher general self-efcacy than what is expected by company representatives. While this self-efcacy surplus represents good news for non-traditional consultants, the former ndings regarding four out of ve personality characteristics indicate there is room for personal improvement from the part of non-traditional consultants. Also, when company representatives were asked to list advantages and disadvantages of employing traditional and non-traditional consultants, they specically listed the lack of commitment, the issues of availability, and the lack of continuity of non-traditional workers as areas of special importance. Considering that non-traditional consultants appear to be receptive to a longer work relationship with specic companies we were able to make this conclusion based on their open-ended comments regarding issues of retention there is an opportunity for both sides to

solidify relationships through longer contractual arrangements and/or continued engagement in different projects. Finally, among the more interesting ndings of the survey is the identication of specic areas for improvement with respect to retention of consultants. While adequate payment was a key factor, many other issues related to improvement of work itself (e.g. providing clear goals and appropriate feedback, ensuring work autonomy and good communication), quality of the work environment (e.g. creating an organizational culture of openness, collaboration and trust; nurturing an environment with fun people), and career growth opportunities (e.g. providing training and coaching opportunities, implementing individualized career paths) were highlighted by the respondents. The extensive list of suggestions provided by the three groups of respondents seem to indicate that there is much room for improvement on the part of consulting rms with regards to the issue of retention. Therefore, this study concludes that rms can clearly benet from investing in more effective and efcient retention strategies. But if they are contingent by choice why would retention be an issue? 5. Brief discussion The empirical results of this study showed no signicant differences between traditional and non-traditional consultants regarding their key personality characteristics measured by the Big Five Personality Dimensions and the general level of self-efcacy. Also, no signicant differences were found in regard to personal needs between the two groups of consultants. This may be explained by the fact that in general professional service employees tend to exhibit the same personality characteristics, despite personality distinctions and rm afliation (Vaiman, 2004). It is important to note, however, that the survey ndings indicated that company representatives have high expectations of NTCs, especially concerning agreeableness, conscientiousness and emotional stability. Since company representatives expected scores were higher in those dimensions than the actual scores found in our sample of NTCs, this study points to an interesting area for further research. For example, if contingent professionals are expected to demonstrate high emotional stability in order to better handle high-stress work situations, be more straightforward, cooperative, and self-disciplined, NTCs must be equipped to meet these expectations. Another area of discrepancy between NTCs self-perception and company representatives expectations is found in regard to NTCs level of commitment. Indicted in open-ended comments to the questionnaire, NTCs appear to be receptive to longer-term work relationship with specic rms (for example expressed as wanting more social interaction with rm employees, interest in participating in training and development, and a desire for longer-term contractual arrangements). However, when company representatives were asked to list advantages and disadvantages of hiring NTCs, they specically mentioned as key disadvantages NTCs lack of commitment and the apparent lack of continuity. From these indicative ndings it seems clear, that it would be benecial to employee-organization relationship if the relationship is solidied and a mutual understanding is created. Both parties must clarify their roles and long-term objectives leading to more opportunities for longer contractual arrangements and/or continued engagement in different projects. Obviously, this begins already with the recruiting process, but continues in what could be labeled the retention process where all communication channels between the NTCs and the rm

Contingent workers

319

TPM 17,5/6

320

should be kept open, so that the parties can keep each other informed on future plans and opportunities. Finally, among the more interesting ndings of this study was that all three groups could identify specic areas for improvement with respect to the retention of consultants. While adequate payment was a key factor identied by respondents in all the three groups, many other issues related to the improvement of the work itself were mentioned (e.g. setting clear goals, deadlines, milestones; giving appropriate feedback; ensuring greater work autonomy and no micro-management; ensuring better communication), as well as the issues associated with the quality of the work environment (e.g. creating an organizational culture of openness, collaboration and trust; nurturing an environment with fun people), and career growth opportunities (e.g. providing training and coaching opportunities, implementing well-designed and individualized career paths and/or clear opportunities to upgrade skills). Among specic retention strategies aimed exclusively at NTCs, it is noteworthy to mention such important measures as providing NTCs with annual retainer contracts, treating them like a part of the team, providing them with a fair market compensation for their services, setting clear and measurable objectives at the beginning of each engagement, encouraging ongoing mutual respect and trust, and arranging for long-term mutually benecial alliance with a rm. 6. Conclusion This paper challenges the claim that traditional and non-traditional employees differ in terms of their needs, personality characteristics, and work motivation patterns, by surveying Canadian management consultants. The main aim of the study was to see how these differences would inuence the most effective and efcient attraction, selection, and retention strategies that should be at the center of every rms human resource management efforts. As it turned out, traditional and non-traditional consultant workers demonstrate no signicant differences in regard to their needs, motivation, and personality characteristics. In terms of the future research opportunities, it would be very interesting to investigate deeper the issue of personality differences between traditional and non-traditional employees to see if there are any other characteristics that could distinguish the two groups more clearly, so that necessary changes in HRM policies could be implemented. Among major limitations of the paper is the fact that it is based on employees who have voluntarily chosen a non-traditional work arrangement, as opposed to the population forced to non-traditional arrangements due to being unable to nd full-time work. Another signicant limitation, which may easily be overcome in future studies is this papers focus on professional service employees who, in general, do tend to display different characteristics than other types of employees. Therefore future research should investigate other types of traditional and non-traditional workers in order to see whether and how professional afliation affects differences in the needs, personality characteristics, and motivation patterns of the two groups. Despite recession, the right talent at the right place to the right price is still scarce (a few respondents specically mentioned the continuing war for talent). The recruiting process is costly, but hiring the wrong applicant is even costlier. When comparing contingent workers with more traditional full-time workers, rms need to compare short-time hiring costs with long-time investment in permanent, relatively stable jobs.

Although the compensation rates of contingent workers are often quite high, they are offset by a proven set of skills and the elimination of benets and other employee services. Furthermore, by attracting non-traditional applicants the long-term viability of the rm might be improved, as imparting new skills, methods, and viewpoints are critical to organizational adaptability and creativeness. Therefore rms can clearly benet from investing in better recruitment, selection, and retention strategies. Moreover, both traditional and non-traditional consultants have also much to gain in maintaining good, long-term working relationships that not only encourage, but also nurture their own professional development.
References Appelbaum, E. (1992), Structural change and the growth of part-time and temporary employment, in DuRivage, V. (Ed.), New Policies for the Part-Time and Contingent Workforce, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, pp. 1-14. Atkinson, J. (1984), Manpower strategies for exible organizations, Personnel Management, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 28-31. Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Barker, K. and Christensen, K. (1998), Controversy and challenges raised by contingent work arrangements, in Barker, K. and Christensen, K. (Eds), Contingent Work: American Employment Relations in Transition, ILR Press, Ithaca, NY, pp. 1-20. Beard, K.M. and Jeffrey, R.E. (1995), Employees at risk: contingent work and the psychological experience of contingent workers, in Cooper, C.L. and Rousseau, D.M. (Eds), Trends in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 2, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 109-26. Bergstrm, O. and Storrie, D. (2003), Contingent Employment in Europe and the United States, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Bernasek, A. and Kinnear, D. (1999), Workers willingness to accept contingent employment, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 461-9. Bridges, W. (1994), Job Shift: How to Prosper in a Workplace Without Jobs, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA. Connelly, C. and Gallagher, D. (2004), Emerging trends in contingent work research, Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 959-83. Deary, I.J. and Matthews, G. (1993), Personality traits are alive and well, Psychologist, Vol. 6 No. 7, pp. 299-311. Coolidge, S.D. (1996), Temping is now a career with an upside for workers, The Christian Science Monitor, p. 1, 7 October. De Grip, A., Hoevenberg, J. and Willems, E. (1997), Atypical employment in the European Union, International Labour Review, Vol. 136 No. 1, pp. 49-71. De Graaf-Zijl, M. (2005), The economic and social consequences of temporary employment: a review of the literature, SEO Discussion Paper, SEO Economic Research, Amsterdam. Galarneau, D. (2010), Temporary Employment in the Downturn, pp. 5-17, Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 75-001-X, November 2010 Perspectives. Gallagher, D.G. and Connelly, C.E. (2008), Nonstandard work arrangements: meaning, evidence, and theoretical perspectives, in Barling, J. and Cooper, C.L. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Behavior, Volume 1: Micro Approaches, Sage, London, pp. 621-40. Henson, K.D. (1996), Just a Temp, Temple University Press, Philadelphia. Hipple, S. (2001), Contingent work in the late-1990s, Monthly Labor Review, pp. 3-27, March.

Contingent workers

321

TPM 17,5/6

322

Hirokatsu, A., Takahiro, I. and Daiji, K. (2011), Why has the fraction of contingent workers increased? A case study of Japan, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 11-E-021. Houseman, S.N. and Polivka, A.E. (1999), The implications of exible stafng arrangements for job stability, working paper, Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. Jakobsen, K.G. and Rasmussen, A.M. (2009), Not just a temp, Tidskrift for Arbejdsliv, Vol. 11 No. 9, pp. 9-23. Kalleberg, A.L. (2000), Nonstandard employment relations: part-time, temporary and contract work, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 341-65. Kalleberg, A.L., Reynolds, J. and Marsden, P.V. (2003), Externalizing employment: exibility stafng arrangements in US organizations, Social Science Research, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 525-52. Kalleberg, A.L. and Marsden, P.V. (2005), Externalizing organizational activities: where and how US establishments use employment intermediaries, Socio-Economic Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 389-416. Kidder, D.L. (1996), On call or answering a calling? Temporary nurses and extra-role behaviors, unpublished dissertation, University of Minnesota. Kunda, G., Barley, S.R. and Evans, J. (2002), Why do contractors contract? The experience of highly skilled technical professionals in a contingent labor market, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 234-61. Lautsch, B.A. (2002), Uncovering and explaining variance in the features and outcomes of contingent work, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 23-43. Lee, T.W. and Johnson, D.R. (1991), The effects of work schedule and employment status on the organizational commitment and job satisfaction of full versus part time employees, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 204-24. Legge, K. (1995), Human Resource Management Rhetorics and Realities, MacMillan Business, Houndmills. Lemmergaard, J. and Vaiman, V. (2007), Retention of non-traditional workers in professional service rms: a pressing issue for HRM in the 21st century, Proceedings of the 22nd Workshop on Strategic Human Resource Management, No. 22, Brussels, Belgium, April 19-20, 2007. Lepak, D.P. and Snell, D.P. (1998), Virtual HR: strategic human resource management in the 21st century, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 215-34. Lockwood, N. (2006), Talent management: driver for organizational success, SHRM Research Quarterly, available at www.shrm.org/Research/Articles/Articles/Documents/ 0606RQuartpdf.pdf (accessed 22 May 2011). Malo, M.A. (2006), Temporary workers and direct voting systems for workers representation, Economic and Industrial Democracy, Vol. 27, X, pp. 505-35. Marler, J.H., Barringer, M.W. and Milkovich, G.T. (2002), Boundaryless and traditional contingent employees: worlds apart, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 425-53. Matusik, S. and Hill, C. (1998), The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation, and competitive advantage, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 680-97. McAllister, J. (1998), Sisypus at work in the warehouse: temporary employment in Greenville, South Carolina, in Barker, K. and Christensen, K. (Eds), Contingent Work: American Employment Relations in Transition, ILR Press, Ithaca, NY, pp. 221-42. McCrae, R.B. and Costa, P.T. (1990), Personality in Adulthood, Guilford, New York, NY. McGowan, S. (2005), The lure of autonomy: a global study of professional workers, available at http://ca.hudson.com/documents/us-papers-autonomy.pdf (accessed 5 December 2008).

Olsen, K.M. (2003), Contingency reversed: the role of agency temporaries and contractors in client organizations, paper presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Seattle, WA. Osterman, P., Kochan, T.A., Locke, R.M. and Piore, M.J. (1999), Working in America: A Blueprint for the New Labor Market, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Parker, R.E. (1994), Flesh Peddlers and Warm Bodies, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. Parks, J.M., Kidder, D.L. and Gallagher, D.G. (1998), Fitting square pegs into round holes: mapping the domain of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological contract, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19, special issue, pp. 697-730. Pearce, J.L. (1993), Toward an organizational behavior of contract laborers: their psychological involvement and effects on employee co-workers, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 1082-96. Peter, A. and Stephen, S. (1998), Job motivations of professional and technical contingent workers: are they different from permanent workers?, Journal of Employment Counseling, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 169-79. Pink, D.H. (2001), Free Agent Nation: How Americas New Independent Workers Are Transforming the Way We Live, Warner Books, New York, NY. Polivka, A. and Nardone, T. (1989), On the denition of contingent work, Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 112 No. 98, pp. 9-16. Quinlan, M. and Bohle, P. (2004), Contingent work and occupational safety, in Barling, J. and Frone, M.R. (Eds), The Psychology of Workplace Safety, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 81-105. Rammstedt, B. and John, O.P. (2007), Measuring personality in one minute or less: a 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 203-12. Redpath, L., Hurst, D. and Devine, K. (2007), Contingent knowledge worker challenges, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 33-8. Robinson, S.L. and Rousseau, D.M. (1994), Violating the psychological contract: not the exception but the norm, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 245-59. Rogers, J.K. (2000), Temps: The Many Faces of the Changing Workplace, Cornell University Press/ILR Press, Ithaca, NY. Schwarzer, R. (1992), Self-Efcacy: Thought Control of Action, Hemisphere, Washington, DC. Smith, V. (1998), The fractured world of the temporary worker: power, participation, and fragmentation in the contemporary workplace, Social Problems, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 411-30. Society for Human Resource Management (2011), SHRM workplace forecast. The top workplace trends according to HR professionals, February 2011, United States of America. Vaiman, V. (2004), Retention management in international professional services rms: an empirical study of best practices in management consultancies, doctorate dissertation of the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, University of Toronto Press. Vaiman, V. (2010), Talent Management of Knowledge Workers: Embracing the Non-Traditional Workforce, Palgrave MacMillan, London. Vaiman, V. and Lemmergaard, J. (2008), The hiring process as a human resource investment strategy: linking human resource planning with strategic planning in knowledge-intensive rms, Proceedings of the 23rd Workshop on Strategic Human Resource Management, Bled, Slovenia, April 3-4, 2008. Wysocki, B. (1996), High tech nomads write new program for future work, Wall Street Journal, p. A1, 19 August.

Contingent workers

323

TPM 17,5/6

324

About the authors Vlad Vaiman is Professor of International Management and Director of Graduate Programs at the School of Business of Reykjavik University in Iceland and is a visiting professor at several top universities around the world. His professional experience included working on various consulting assignments for a number of major organizations throughout the world, including USA, Canada, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Russia, and some other European countries. Dr Vaiman is a long time member of the Canadian Association of Management Consultants. His research interests include issues of both organizational behaviour and international management, and more specically, matters of cultural differences and their inuences on leadership, motivation, and talent management in multinational companies. Jeanette Lemmergaard is Associate Professor of Human Resource Management and Internal Communication at University of Southern Denmark, Department of Marketing & Management. Jeanette Lemmergaard has a long-standing interest in the role of values in management and organization studies. Her current research focuses on the human in contemporary workplaces, diversity management, and leadership. Her most recent works have been published in for example Journal of Business Ethics, Service Industries Journal, Employee Relations, European Journal of International Management and Philosophy of Management. Currently Jeanette Lemmergaard is working on a edited book Critical Perspectives on Leadership Emotion, Toxicity and Dysfunction to be published by Edward Elgar. Jeanette Lemmergaard is the corresponding author and can be contatced at: jla@sam.sdu.dk Ana Azevedo is Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship in the Faculty of Business at Athabasca University, in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Prior to her relocation to Canada, Dr Azevedo has taught at Florida International University, the University of Texas in El Paso (UTEP), Florida A&M University, and the University of Applied Sciences FH Joanneum, Austria. Over the last twenty years, Dr Azevedo has also consulted and implemented many applied projects for small and mid-size businesses in the US and Austria. In addition, Dr Azevedo has published case studies and several research articles in scientic journals. Her research interests include management education, international entrepreneurship, cross-cultural management issues, migration and narrative research.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints