In a previous post I argued that meaning is about comprehension:
“At its simplest level, meaning (or comprehension) indicates that the individual knows how to respond in terms of both emotion and goal-directed action… (it) is a process of sense-making which connects an individual’s existence to a wider understanding of the world. The adaptability of humans can be explained by the need to understand ourselves in context, because that has always been essential to our survival”.
My subsequent research, which proposed a model of meaning in work, gave empirical support to this definition.
The beauty of this definition is that it allows meaning and purpose to be seen as related, but distinct.
Purposes have been defined as a type of high-level, unifying goal, which help to organise lower-order goals in terms of day-to-day activity (e.g. Damon, Menon & Bronk, 2003). When applied to work, having a strong and clear purpose is likely to involve high intrinsic motivation and persistence of effort.
As Klinger argues, purpose is innate. No one is without purpose – and it is purpose that leads us to encounter a mass of different stimuli in pursuit of goals. Comprehension may or may not always ensue from these encounters, but the process of evaluation (i.e. cognition) is ongoing (e.g. Ryff & Singer, 1989a). Where comprehension is not achieved, unease follows, because we don’t know how to respond in terms of action. But where comprehension is achieved, it is usually rewarded affectively. Comprehension is an outcome of purpose based on our experiences and crucially, learning to understand them.
How Purpose Can Increase Meaning
Purposes bring us into contact with lots of people, events, activities and other stimuli on a daily basis. Over time, this activity will increase an individual’s understanding of themselves, their organisation, and how they fit within the world around them (Steger & Dik, in press). In effect, we learn meaning.
However, whilst everyone has purpose, the strength of purpose can vary. For example, Emmons (2005) found that unifying and deeply held goals lead to greater meaning than smaller, more tactical goals.
In my research, I hypothesised that strength of purpose increases levels of activity, exposure to a wider range of stimuli which over time will increase understanding of self in context (my definition of meaning in work).
Geeky Stats Warning
In a sample of over 400 people, this was indeed what I found, with strength of purpose being a key predictor of meaning in work, and a conceptual model that explained (for all you stats fans) a whopping 73% of the variance in meaning in work:
I also proposed that type of purpose would affect meaning. This led to some very interesting results which have implications for all of us, but that is for another post…