HR & organizational behavior
Job insecurity scale: what it is and how to measure it
- Concept
- Job Insecurity
- Field
- HR & organizational behavior
- Scales in the library
- 2
- Items
- 7
Job insecurity is an employee's worry about the future of their job. Hellgren, Sverke and Isaksson (1999) split the concept into two dimensions: quantitative insecurity (fear of losing the current job itself) and qualitative insecurity (fear that valued features of the job will deteriorate, such as promotion prospects or pay rises). The two dimensions relate differently to employees' attitudes and health. In Vietnam, the concept suits theses on restructuring, layoffs, and the effects of AI and automation, and works as a predictor of satisfaction, commitment, or turnover intention.
Comparing the scales
| Scale | Author (year) | Items | Response format | When to use it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantitative Job Insecurity (QNJI) Job insecurity scale | Hellgren, Sverke & Isaksson (1999) | 3 | Likert 5-point | Quantitative insecurity, 3 items. |
| Qualitative Job Insecurity (QLJI) Job insecurity scale | Hellgren, Sverke & Isaksson (1999) | 4 | Likert 5-point | Qualitative insecurity, 4 items; all 4 are worded positively, so they must be reverse coded. |
Items of each scale
Original English wording from the published source. Replace placeholders such as [system] or
[brand] with what your study is about, and pilot the questionnaire with 20 to 30 respondents first.
Quantitative Job Insecurity (QNJI) · Job insecurity scale
| Code | Item |
|---|---|
| QNJI1 | I am worried about having to leave my job before I would like to |
| QNJI2 | There is a risk that I will have to leave my present job in the year to come |
| QNJI3 | I feel uneasy about losing my job in the near future |
Source: Hellgren, Sverke & Isaksson (1999). Response scale, licence and APA reference: Job insecurity scale.
Qualitative Job Insecurity (QLJI) · Job insecurity scale
| Code | Item |
|---|---|
| QLJI1 (R) | My future career opportunities in [the organization] are favourable |
| QLJI2 (R) | I feel that [the organization] can provide me with a stimulating job content in the near future |
| QLJI3 (R) | I believe that [the organization] will need my competence also in the future |
| QLJI4 (R) | My pay development in this organization is promising |
Source: Hellgren, Sverke & Isaksson (1999). Response scale, licence and APA reference: Job insecurity scale.
(R): reverse-coded item; recode before analysis. Job insecurity scale: 1–5 scale: new score = 1 + 5 − score = 6 − score; 1–7 scale: new score = 1 + 7 − score = 8 − score.
Tips
- All 4 qualitative insecurity items (QLJI1 to QLJI4) must be reverse coded before computing scores and Cronbach's alpha.
- Keep the two dimensions separate if your hypotheses differ for each; combine them only if your theory treats job insecurity as a single general concept.
- Quantitative insecurity has only 3 items; if you drop one, the construct is left with 2 items and you need to justify it.
- Suitable for working respondents; do not use with students who have not worked.
Once you have a scale, put the concept in the research model drawer to state your hypotheses, work out the minimum sample size, and after data collection check reliability with the Cronbach's alpha calculator.
Frequently asked questions
How many components does job insecurity have?
Two: quantitative insecurity (fear of job loss) and qualitative insecurity (fear that the job will get worse), following Hellgren, Sverke and Isaksson (1999).
Which variables does job insecurity usually affect?
Commonly job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, stress, and employees' mental health.
Why is the alpha of qualitative insecurity so low?
Almost always because the 4 QLJI items were not reverse coded. Reverse the scores and recompute.
References
- Hellgren, J., Sverke, M., & Isaksson, K. (1999). A two-dimensional approach to job insecurity: Consequences for employee attitudes and well-being. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/135943299398311