{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035324341682723186, 'fraction_numerical': 0.019267822736030827, 'mean_word_length': 5.546218487394958, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of non-standard work arrangements on organisational and team identification and work-related outcomes in Chile and the UK

Previous research has found inconsistent results about the impact of work-status (permanent vs fixed term vs causal work) on attitudinal and behavioural outcomes. This study explored this topic from a social identity perspective and examines the effect of organisational and team identification on job-affective well-being, organisational commitment and intentions to recommend. In Study 1, 631 professionals working in Chile completed our survey. In Study 2, which was pre-registered, 520 professionals from the UK completed the same survey. In both studies we conducted multi-group path analyses comparing among employees with three work-statuses: permanent (n1=369, n2=438), fixed-term (n1=129, n2=53), and casual workers (n1=131, n2=34). We found work-status influenced the relationship between organisational and team identification with job-affective well-being, but not with organisational citizenship behaviour or intentions to recommend. Across all groups, communication climate was an important predictor for identification measures, job-affective well-being and intention to recommend. These findings offer an understanding of the dynamics of social identification in the workplace that are related to work-status in the context of two different countries; Chile, a country that is characterised by high rates of fixed-term and casual job agreement and the UK with comparatively less non-standard work-arrangements.