Knight and Parker (2021) conducted a meta-analysis to test the effectiveness of work redesign interventions to improve performance. According to their findings, which of the following conclusions is correct? Choose the best answer.

Source: How work redesign interventions affect performance: An evidence-based model from a systematic review (Knight and Parker, 2021).

Question

Knight and Parker (2021) conducted a meta-analysis to test the effectiveness of work redesign interventions to improve performance. According to their findings, which of the following conclusions is correct? Choose the best answer.

Source: How work redesign interventions affect performance: An evidence-based model from a systematic review (Knight and Parker, 2021).

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

We begin by restating the question and the available options to ensure clarity about what is being evaluated. The core inquiry asks which conclusion Knight and Parker (2021) reached in their meta-analysis on work redesign interventions and performance.
Option A: "All the other options are correct." This is a composite choice. To assess it, we must evaluate the accuracy of each of the other statements. If any one of B, C, or D is false, then A cannot be correct. In meta-analytic syntheses, it is not a given that all related claims hold simultaneously; different facets (teamwork, high-uncertainty contexts, and individual work characteristics) may show varying levels of evidence or applicability. Therefore, without confirming that every other option is true, A is unlikely to be correct.
Option B: "There is strong empirical evidence that changes in teamwork characteristics lead to changes in team performance." This statement would require robust evidence that altering how teams work together causally translates into team-level performance gains. Knight and Parker’s model emphasizes mechanisms through individual work characteristics and job design, and while teamwork processes can matter, this option asserts a direct and strong linkage at the team level as a primary conclusion. If the meta-analysis emphasized individual work characteristics as the mediating pathway rather than team-level dynamics, B would overstate the evidence for a team-performance link, making it questionable.
Option C: "There is strong evidence that job enrichment/enlargement and relational interventions are more effective in high-uncertainty situations." This claims a conditional effectiveness advantage under high-uncertainty. Unless the study specifically tested interaction effects with context like uncertainty and found stronger effects in such settings, this is a nuanced claim that may not be supported as a general conclusion. If Knight and Parker emphasized that effects operate through work characteristics rather than asserting context-specific superiority, C would be less likely to be the consolidated conclusion.
Option D: "There is strong evidence that job enrichment/enlargement and relational interventions influence individual performance through individuals' work characteristics." This aligns with a common interpretation of work redesign literature: interventions that modify job content and relational aspects influence the individual’s work characteristics (e.g., autonomy, task variety, feedback), which in turn affect performance. If the meta-analysis explicitly identified work characteristics as the mediating mechanism linking redesigns to performance at the individual level, this option would reflect the central, evidence-based conclusion. It also avoids overclaiming team-level effects or context-specific moderation unless those were directly tested and supported.
In terms of distinguishing these options, the key issues are (1) whether the dominant mechanism highlighted by Knight and Parker is through individual work characteristics, (2) whether the evidence is framed as robust for job enrichment/enlargement and relational interventions, and (3) whether team-level effects or context moderation are claimed as stronger or primary conclusions. Given typical syntheses in this domain, a statement pinpointing the causal pathway from redesigns to individual performance via work characteristics is the most consistent with a focused, evidence-based conclusion of such a meta-analysis. The other statements either overgeneralize to team performance (B), assert niche context effects (C), or make an all-encompassing claim (A) that is unlikely if there are caveats or partial support.
Therefore, Option D is the most plausible, best-supported conclusion among the choices, with distinctions explained for the other options to illustrate why they are less consistent with the cited findings.

1JM11 Performance enhancement Short practice exam 1JM11

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

Choose one option. 30. The kind of company that would most easily adopt SMART work design is a

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

The CVP and break-even analysis are supported by a range of important assumptions. Which of the following is not an assumption of the CVP:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler