Personal growth initiative (PGI) is an important characteristic of workplace counsellors. Industrial and organisational (I-O) psychologists often assist employees with counselling for work-related and personal problems, and therefore PGI is an important research topic for this profession.
The purpose of this study was to measure the PGI of I-O psychology students in a higher education institution in South Africa, as well as to explore differences in PGI between demographic groups.
According to the scope of practice for psychologists, growth and development of employees form part of an I-O psychologist’s responsibilities. PGI is an important characteristic of I-O psychologists as it enables them to efficiently assist employees in growth and development processes.
A cross-sectional survey design was used. A purposive non-probability sample (
The results indicated that (1) the PGIS is a valid and reliable measure of PGI, (2) PGI is prevalent amongst I-O psychology students and (3) PGI differs between certain demographic groups.
The findings of this study will assist in the future development of a training programme for I-O psychology students to equip them with the counselling skills they need to function in a counselling role.
This study contributes to knowledge regarding the importance of PGI for I-O psychology students. The study will also assist higher education institutes to adapt their training programmes in order to prepare I-O psychology students for their role as counsellors. More knowledge will also be provided with regard to the functioning of the PGIS.
Empowering employees to manage their stress and problems at work is one of the major domains of industrial and organisational (I-O) psychology practitioners. The tasks of I-O psychologists as workplace counsellors relate to nurturing well-adjusted employees and enabling their optimal growth (Bergh,
Personal growth initiative (PGI) is a promising antecedent of optimal functioning and well-being (Robitschek,
Based on the importance of interpersonal awareness for I-O psychology practitioners, the main objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence of PGI amongst I-O psychology students. The specific objectives of the study included the following: (1) to determine the construct validity of the PGIS within a South African student sample, (2) to determine the prevalence of the different levels of PGI amongst I-O psychology students and (3) to measure whether significant differences exist between demographic groups (gender, age and ethnicity) in terms of their PGI.
There is currently a paucity of research relating to I-O psychology students’ PGI and this study thus contributes to the literature on I-O psychology by providing a better understanding of the PGI of I-O psychology students. It also contributes to the literature in relation to the measurement of PGI. In addition, it contributes to knowledge regarding the importance of personal growth as a characteristic of an effective counsellor. This study also aims to make recommendations concerning the ways in which PGI can be incorporated in the training of I-O psychologists.
The South African Health Professions Act (HPCSA,
In terms of scope of practice, the tasks of I-O psychologists include the following (HPCSA,
According to the South African Department of Health (
According to McLeod and McLeod (
Workplace counselling is an effective way of assisting employees to cope with psychological, emotional and behavioural problems (McLeod & McLeod,
According to Rothmann and Van Aardt (
Possessing effective interpersonal skills often leads to enhanced intrapersonal awareness (see Carkhuff,
PGI refers to the effective and purposeful engagement in the pursuit of personal growth, which includes changing specific aspects of one’s life in order to attain set goals (see Robitschek,
According to Robitschek (
Although PGI shares similarities with constructs such as grit (the continuous effort to reach long-term goals through adversity) (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews & Kelly,
According to Robitschek and Keyes (
The intention to grow as a person is applicable to all kinds of people, regardless of status. According to Allport (
The PGIS was originally developed by Robitschek (
The PGIS has not been validated within the South African context and therefore the following hypothesis was set for this study:
Research studies have identified various levels of PGI amongst students at tertiary institutions (see Meyers
When I-O psychology interns enter the workplace to start their internship, a significant amount (15%) of the internship includes workplace counselling as part of the career psychology and wellness domain stipulated in Form 218 (HPCSA,
Although previous international studies indicate that high levels of PGI can lead to numerous positive outcomes for students, only one study (Prinsloo,
Robitschek
Tertiary education can be described as a period of time in a student’s life where life transition takes place and where the student will forge his or her adult identity; this is often a time of deliberate self-development and self-change (Kiecolt & Mabry,
Senior and Bhopal’s (
The above discussion leads to the following hypothesis:
This research was conducted using a quantitative approach. The principle of quantitative research is to measure and observe a phenomenon and create correlation variables by using statistical measures (Polit & Beck,
In this section, the research participants, measuring instrument, research procedure and statistical analysis are discussed.
The population (
In this study, the following measuring instruments were used.
The research proposal underwent a rigorous ethical clearance evaluation at the tertiary education institution before data collection commenced with students. After the clearance was granted, students studying I-O psychology were approached during class each year from 2012 to 2014 and invited to participate in the study. Hard copies of questionnaires were given to the students with an accompanying letter explaining the objectives, motivation and importance of the study, informed consent and ethical aspects. The students had 1 week time to complete the questionnaire and were then asked to submit the document during their class session. The confidentiality of the participants was emphasised and participation in the study was voluntary.
The original unidimensional PGIS was utilised in this study because the assessment of the participants commenced in 2012, prior to the development of the PGIS-II by Robitschek
The statistical analysis of the study was carried out using the SPSS software package (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows,
a non-significant chi-square statistics with the CMIN/DF < 5
the comparative fit index (CFI) and the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) should have values close to and greater than 0.95 to indicate a good fit
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value should ideally be 0.06 or less than that to indicate a good fit.
The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated to determine the PGIS’ inter-item correlation. Descriptive statistics (e.g. mean scores, standard deviations, skewness and kurtosis) were used to determine the normality of the items. The mean values and standard deviations of the nine PGI items, as well as the PGI total score, were used to investigate the prevalence of PGI amongst students. An independent-samples
CFA results supported a unidimensional factor structure within the current sample (χ2 = 118.00,
The descriptive statistics of the nine PGIS items and the total scores are presented in
Descriptive statistics of the nine-Item PGIS among I-O Psychology students (
Item | Mean | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis |
---|---|---|---|---|
PGI1 | 4.14 | 1.08 | -0.55 | 0.26 |
PGI2 | 4.25 | 1.06 | -0.65 | 0.36 |
PGI3 | 4.03 | 1.07 | -0.29 | 0.02 |
PGI4 | 4.06 | 1.10 | -0.25 | -0.10 |
PGI5 | 4.34 | 1.04 | -0.65 | 0.63 |
PGI6 | 4.02 | 1.12 | -0.42 | -0.01 |
PGI7 | 4.35 | 1.09 | -0.81 | 0.83 |
PGI8 | 3.98 | 1.14 | -0.48 | 0.15 |
PGI9 |
4.17 |
1.08 |
-0.63 |
0.28 |
Total PGIS | 37.34 | 7.42 | -0.34 | 0.28 |
PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; SD, standard deviation.
According to
The independent
Independent
Item | M | SD | Mean difference | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | - | 0.00 | -1.92 | 565 | 0.06 | -0.18 | |
Males | 4.03 | 1.12 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.21 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 0.09 | -1.64 | 565 | 0.10 | -0.15 | |
Males | 4.15 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.30 | 1.07 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 1.29 | -2.10 | 565 | 0.04 | -0.19 | |
Males | 3.91 | 1.10 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.10 | 1.04 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 2.20 | -1.01 | 565 | 0.31 | -0.10 | |
Males | 4.00 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.10 | 1.13 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 0.11 | -2.31 | 565 | 0.02 | -0.21 | |
Males | 4.21 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.42 | 1.03 | - | - | - | - | - |
0.00 | -1.88 | 565 | 0.06 | -0.18 | |||
Males | 3.91 | 1.11 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.09 | 1.12 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 0.17 | -2.63 | 565 | 0.01 | -0.25 | |
Males | 4.19 | 1.14 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.44 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
0.00 | -0.24 | 565 | 0.81 | -0.02 | |||
Males | 3.97 | 1.13 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 3.99 | 1.15 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 0.78 | -1.22 | 565 | 0.22 | -0.11 | |
Males | 4.10 | 1.05 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 4.21 | 1.10 | - | - | - | - | - |
- | - | 0.01 | -2.17 | 565 | 0.03 | -1.39 | |
Males | 36.47 | 7.36 | - | - | - | - | - |
Females | 37.86 | 7.43 | - | - | - | - | - |
PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; M, mean; SD, standard deviation.
The results showed significant differences between males and females with regard to PGIS3, PGIS5, PGIS7 and the PGIS total score. It was noticeable that the female students consistently scored higher in terms of PGI than their male counterparts.
Then, the one-way between-groups ANOVA was conducted to investigate the impact of age on PGI, on both item and the total score level (
One-way between-groups ANOVA results for the PGI items and the different age Groups for the I-O Psychology students (
Item | Variable | 18 years | 19 years | 20 years | 21 years | 22 years | 23 years | 24 years | 25 years | 26 years | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | 8 | 292 | 105 | 72 | 52 | 23 | 6 | 4 | 3 | - | - | |
PGIS1 | M | 4.00 | 4.15 | 3.99 | 3.99 | 4.38 | 4.13 | 5.17 | 4.75 | 5.00 | 1.92 | 0.06 |
SD | 0.76 | 1.03 | 1.08 | 1.20 | 1.07 | 1.01 | 1.17 | 0.96 | 1.00 | |||
PGIS2 | M | 3.75 | 4.25 | 4.08 | 4.14 | 4.50 | 4.35 | 5.17 | 5.25 | 5.00 | 2.28 | 0.02 |
SD | 1.67 | 0.97 | 1.11 | 1.14 | 1.15 | 1.03 | 1.17 | 0.96 | 1.00 | |||
PGIS3 |
M | 3.97 | 3.91 | 3.93 | 4.54 | 4.13 | 5.17 | 4.50 | 4.33 | 4.03 | 2.19 | 0.07 |
SD | 0.95 | 1.12 | 1.19 | 1.20 | 1.06 | 1.17 | 0.58 | 1.53 | 1.07 | |||
PGIS4 | M | 4.50 | 4.03 | 3.91 | 3.85 | 4.37 | 4.44 | 5.33 | 4.25 | 4.67 | 2.80 | 0.01 |
SD | 1.14 | 1.05 | 1.08 | 1.21 | 1.07 | 0.99 | 0.82 | 1.50 | 1.15 | |||
PGIS5 | M | 4.63 | 4.32 | 4.10 | 4.22 | 4.75 | 4.48 | 5.33 | 4.75 | 4.67 | 2.86 | 0.00 |
SD | 1.06 | 0.96 | 1.11 | 1.14 | 1.03 | 1.04 | 0.82 | 0.96 | 1.15 | |||
PGIS6 |
M | 4.13 | 4.07 | 3.91 | 3.81 | 4.39 | 3.96 | 4.67 | 4.00 | 2.33 | 1.74 | 0.15 |
SD | 1.25 | 1.02 | 1.08 | 1.30 | 1.22 | 1.15 | 1.03 | 1.41 | 1.15 | |||
PGIS7 | M | 4.38 | 4.37 | 4.12 | 4.19 | 4.69 | 4.39 | 5.33 | 4.75 | 4.67 | 2.15 | 0.03 |
SD | 0.52 | 1.00 | 1.18 | 1.23 | 1.20 | 0.89 | 0.82 | 1.26 | 1.15 | |||
PGIS8 | M | 3.88 | 3.96 | 3.95 | 3.83 | 4.31 | 3.96 | 4.83 | 3.50 | 4.33 | 1.27 | 0.26 |
SD | 1.25 | 1.09 | 1.15 | 1.20 | 1.11 | 1.46 | 1.17 | 1.00 | 1.53 | |||
PGIS9 |
M | 4.25 | 4.29 | 4.00 | 3.39 | 4.21 | 3.91 | 5.00 | 3.25 | 4.33 | 2.40 | 0.05 |
SD | 1.28 | 0.97 | 1.10 | 1.23 | 1.30 | 1.00 | 0.63 | 1.26 | 1.53 | |||
ANOVA, analysis of variance; M, mean; PGI, personal growth initiative; PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; SD, standard deviation.
Levene’s test for homogeneity of variances for this item is > 0.05 and the assumption of homogeneity of variance has therefore been violated. The
There were statistically significant differences at the
Significant mean differences between age groups in terms of PGI for the I-O Psychology students (
Item | Age 1 | M | SD | Age 2 | M | SD | Mean difference | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGIS3 | 19 | 3.97 | 0.95 | 22 | 4.54 | 1.20 | -0.57 | 0.01 |
20 | 3.91 | 1.12 | 22 | 4.54 | 1.20 | -0.62 | 0.02 | |
21 | 3.93 | 1.19 | 22 | 4.54 | 1.20 | -0.61 | 0.04 | |
PGIS4 | 21 | 9.85 | 1.21 | 24 | 5.33 | 0.82 | -1.49 | 0.04 |
PGIS5 | 20 | 4.10 | 1.11 | 22 | 4.75 | 1.03 | -0.65 | 0.01 |
PGIS6 | 22 | 4.39 | 1.22 | 26 | 2.33 | 1.15 | 2.05 | 0.05 |
M, mean; PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; SD, standard deviation.
According to
Finally, the one-way between-groups ANOVA results for the PGIS items and the PGIS total score are presented in
One-way between groups ANOVA results for the PGIS items and the different languages for the I-O Psychology students (
Item | Variable | Afrikaans | English | Sepedi | Sesotho | Setswana | isiXhosa | isiZulu | Other | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | 449 | 53 | 5 | 16 | 29 | 9 | 2 | 2 | - | - | |
PGIS1 | M | 4.14 | 4.25 | 3.40 | 4.38 | 4.35 | 3.22 | 3.00 | 2.50 | 2.63 | 0.01 |
SD | 1.08 | 0.92 | 0.55 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.39 | 1.14 | 2.12 | |||
PGIS2 | M | 4.24 | 4.26 | 4.20 | 4.56 | 4.21 | 4.00 | 3.00 | 4.00 | 0.68 | 0.69 |
SD | 1.08 | 1.02 | 0.45 | 0.96 | 1.08 | 1.32 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
PGIS3 | M | 4.04 | 4.09 | 4.20 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.56 | 3.50 | 3.00 | 0.65 | 0.72 |
SD | 1.07 | 1.08 | 0.45 | 1.10 | 1.10 | 1.13 | 0.71 | 1.41 | |||
PGIS4 | M | 4.09 | 4.00 | 3.80 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.56 | 3.00 | 4.00 | 0.66 | 0.71 |
SD | 1.09 | 1.14 | 0.45 | 1.14 | 1.07 | 1.33 | 1.14 | 1.14 | |||
PGIS5 | M | 4.35 | 4.30 | 3.60 | 4.94 | 4.28 | 4.22 | 2.50 | 3.50 | 2.28 | 0.03 |
SD | 1.04 | 0.91 | 0.55 | 0.93 | 1.16 | 1.09 | 2.12 | 0.71 | |||
PGIS6 | M | 4.01 | 3.94 | 3.80 | 4.50 | 4.17 | 4.00 | 3.50 | 3.00 | 0.86 | 0.54 |
SD | 1.12 | 1.06 | 0.45 | 1.21 | 1.17 | 1.50 | 0.71 | 0.00 | |||
PGIS7 | M | 4.35 | 4.25 | 4.20 | 4.69 | 4.41 | 4.67 | 3.50 | 2.00 | 1.94 | 0.06 |
SD | 1.11 | 0.92 | 0.84 | 1.14 | 1.09 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 1.41 | |||
PGIS8 | M | 3.10 | 3.91 | 3.60 | 4.25 | 4.17 | 3.67 | 2.00 | 2.50 | 1.84 | 0.08 |
SD | 1.14 | 1.13 | 0.55 | 0.68 | 1.23 | 1.12 | 1.41 | 0.71 | |||
PGIS9 | M | 4.19 | 3.91 | 4.00 | 4.63 | 4.35 | 4.11 | 3.50 | 2.00 | 2.29 | 0.03 |
SD | 1.08 | 1.11 | 1.00 | 0.96 | 1.04 | 0.60 | 0.71 | 1.41 | |||
ANOVA, analysis of variance; M, mean; PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; SD, standard deviation.
There were statistically significant differences at the
Significant mean differences between languages in terms of PGIS items for I-O Psychology students (
Item | Language 1 | M | SD | Language 2 | M | SD | Mean difference | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGIS5 | Sesotho | 4.94 | 0.93 | isiZulu | 2.50 | 2.12 | 2.44 | 0.04 |
PGIS9 | Sesotho | 4.63 | 0.96 | Other | 2.00 | 1.41 | 2.63 | 0.03 |
M, mean; PGIS, personal growth initiative scale; SD, standard deviation.
According to
The general objective of the study was to measure PGI amongst I-O psychology students at a higher education institution in South Africa. The results are discussed in relation to the specific hypotheses set out for this study stating that the PGIS consists of a unidimensional factor structure and has acceptable inter-item reliability (see Hypothesis 1).
The unidimensional PGIS has been proved to be valid and reliable in various international studies (see Robitschek
The results confirmed that PGI was prevalent amongst the participants. The finding regarding the prevalence of PGI amongst a student sample is in accordance with findings from various international studies. To cite some examples, a study conducted by Meyers
Robitschek
Significant differences were also found in terms of PGI between specific age groups. The results suggest that older students demonstrated a stronger intention to change and are more actively involved in the change process and more inclined to initiate goal setting. PGI entails setting goals, planning goals and intentionally taking action to reach these goals (Robitschek
Lastly, the findings for PGIS5 (‘I know what I need to do to get started towards reaching my goals’) and PGIS9 (‘I have a plan for making my life more balanced’) suggest that the Sesotho-speaking group has higher levels of PGI than the isiZulu-speaking group and the other language groups. These results have not been replicated in other studies and can therefore be regarded as a unique finding of this study. It is important to note that the different languages represent different cultural groups. A previous study indicated that isiZulu speakers are generally part of the Zulu culture, whilst Sesotho (Southern Sotho) speakers are generally part of the Southern Sotho culture (see Nel
This study had some limitations. A first limitation involves considering equal distribution amongst different genders, ages and language groups. To be able to generalise the data, the research could have included I-O psychology students from different universities. The study used students from different backgrounds and as such a language barrier could have acted as a limitation as the questionnaires were administered in English, which is the second or third language for most of the participants. As the study was conducted over a 2 year period, a longitudinal design could have been considered to ensure that age truly had an effect on increasing PGI levels. However, as the questionnaires were completed anonymously, it was not possible to implement a longitudinal design.
A recommendation for the future training of I-O psychology practitioners with regard to their PGI is to adapt training programmes to focus more on the development of the individual’s growth initiative, self-actualisation and optimal functioning. The development of intrapersonal skills is crucial because it can be seen as the fundamental driver of interpersonal skills (Kubica & LaForest,
This study indicated that PGI is prevalent amongst I-O psychology students. It is clear from the results that PGI is relevant for all gender, age and ethnic groups within the I-O psychology student sample. This information can be used to incorporate PGI in the training programmes of I-O psychology students and monitor their development. Using PGI in the development of I-O psychology training programmes can add value in training I-O psychology students to be better counsellors.
A person’s predisposition to set clear future-oriented goals and strive for and implement these goals is an important outcome of that person’s level of PGI (Shorey
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
A.d.J.v.S. collected and captured the data, and written the manuscript. L.J. supervised the total study, while C.H. conducted the analysis and assisted in the write-up of the results. J.A.N. assisted with the conceptualisation of the study, and co-supervised the write-up of the final manuscript.
Robitschek