There are currently two main theoretical perspectives that explain how employees engage in job crafting, namely Wrzesniewski and Dutton's (2001) original theory and the Job Demands-Resources model framework by Tims et al. (2012). The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare these two perspectives on job crafting and operationalizations based thereon using a person-centered methodology. We also examined whether the use of different job crafting strategy combinations manifests in differences in work engagement and person-job fit. Study participants were Finnish managers (n = 419) who completed both the Job Crafting Questionnaire (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2013) and the Job Crafting Scale (Tims, Bakker, & Derks, 2012). Latent Profile Analysis yielded four job crafting profiles: 1) Average crafters (47%), 2) Avoidance-oriented crafters (30%), 3) Approach-oriented crafters (19%) and 4) Self-oriented task crafters (4%). Approach-oriented crafters were significantly more engaged and fitted better to their job than those in the other profiles. Furthermore, those in the Average crafters profile were more engaged and had higher person-job fit than Avoidance-oriented crafters or Self-oriented task crafters. Overall, our findings provide new implications for the theoretical categorization of job crafting and knowledge on how the use of different combinations of job crafting strategies is related to work engagement and person-job fit.

目前有两种主要的理论观点来解释员工如何参与工作塑造，即 Wrzesniewski 和 Dutton (2001) 的原始理论和 Tims 等人的工作需求-资源模型框架。(2012)。本研究的目的是使用以人为中心的方法来调查和比较这两种基于工作塑造和操作化的观点。我们还研究了不同工作塑造策略组合的使用是否体现在工作投入和人与工作契合度的差异上。研究参与者是芬兰经理 ( n = 419) 完成了工作制作问卷（Slemp & Vella-Brodrick，2013 年）和工作制作量表（Tims、Bakker 和 Derks，2012 年）。潜在配置文件分析产生了四种工作工艺配置文件：1) 普通工匠 (47%)，2) 回避型工匠 (30%)，3) 方法导向型工匠 (19%) 和 4) 自我导向型任务工匠 (4%) ）。与其他配置文件中的工匠相比，以方法为导向的工匠的参与度更高，更适合他们的工作。此外，与回避型工匠或以自我为导向的任务型工匠相比，平均工匠配置文件中的人参与度更高，个人工作适合度更高. 总体而言，我们的研究结果为工作塑造的理论分类和关于工作塑造策略的不同组合的使用如何与工作投入和人与工作匹配相关的知识提供了新的启示。