Description

The Work Control Scale (WCS-22) was developed by Dwyer and Ganster (1991) to assess the degree of control employees perceive over their work and immediate working environment.

Perceived work control refers to employees’ ability to influence how, when, and under what conditions they perform their work. It is a central concept in occupational stress research, particularly within Karasek’s Job Demands–Control model.

The WCS should not be confused with the Work Locus of Control Scale, which assesses generalized beliefs about whether occupational outcomes depend primarily on the individual or on external factors.

Purpose

The WCS-22 measures the extent to which employees believe they can influence important aspects of their work. These may include work pace and scheduling, the order and method of completing tasks, the quantity and quality of output, break times, the arrangement of the physical workspace, and certain procedures or policies within the work unit.

The scale can be used to investigate relationships between work control and job satisfaction, occupational stress, performance, psychological well-being, burnout, absenteeism, and turnover intentions.

Structure and Administration

The original scale consists of 22 self-report items. Respondents indicate how much personal control they have over different aspects of their work using a five-point response scale:

1 = Very little control
2 = Little control
3 = A moderate amount of control
4 = Considerable control
5 = A great deal of control

The WCS has primarily been used as a unidimensional measure of perceived work control. However, because its items cover different aspects of control, including task, time, and environmental control, its factor structure should be re-examined when used in a new population or cultural context.

Scoring

The overall score can be calculated by summing or averaging the item responses, in accordance with the appropriate scoring instructions. When a sum score is used, the theoretical range is 22–110. When the mean score is calculated, values range from 1 to 5.

Higher scores indicate greater perceived control over work, whereas lower scores suggest limited influence over workplace decisions and working conditions.

No universal diagnostic cut-off scores have been established. Interpretation should therefore be based on the score distribution within the sample, suitable reference data, and the specific occupational context.

Statistical Analysis

Analysis may include the mean, standard deviation, range, and distribution of total scores. Comparisons can also be conducted across occupational groups, organizational departments, hierarchical levels, or categories of work experience.

Relationships between work control and job satisfaction, stress, burnout, or other outcomes may be examined using correlation and regression analyses. Within the Job Demands–Control model, it is particularly important to test the interaction between work demands and perceived control rather than examining only their independent effects.

Reliability and Validity

The original study reported high internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of approximately 0.87. The findings also provided evidence of construct validity through theoretically expected associations between perceived control and occupational outcomes.

For each new application, internal consistency should be examined using Cronbach’s alpha or McDonald’s omega. Factor structure, convergent validity, and discriminant validity should also be assessed. Translated versions require systematic cultural adaptation, pilot testing, and renewed psychometric evaluation.

Applications and Limitations

The WCS-22 can be used in organizational psychology, occupational health research, human resource management, and the evaluation of job-redesign interventions.

As a self-report measure, it assesses perceived rather than objectively available control. Responses may be influenced by job satisfaction, relationships with management, and employees’ recent experiences. The results should therefore be considered alongside objective information about job responsibilities, decision-making authority, and organizational structure.

References

Dwyer, D. J., & Ganster, D. C. (1991). The effects of job demands and control on employee attendance and satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(7), 595–608.

Ganster, D. C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1989). Control in the workplace. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 235–280). Wiley.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279.

Karasek, R. A., Jr. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308.

Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. Basic Books.

Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work. Human Relations, 39(11), 1005–1016.