You are on page 1of 18

Models and components[edit

Various authors and researchers have proposed models of
quality of working life which include a wide range of factors.
Selected models are reviewed below.
Hackman and Oldham (1976)[1] drew attention to what they
described as psychological growth needs as relevant to the
consideration of Quality of working life. Several such needs
were identified :

Skill variety,

Task Identity,

Quality of Wor Quality of Working Life" (QWL) is a term that had been used to describe the broader job-related experience an individual has. Contents [hide]  1 Models and components 2 Measurement  3 Applications  .

In contrast to such theory based models. Several such needs were identified :  Skill variety. Hackman and Oldham (1976)[1] drew attention to what they described as psychological growth needs as relevant to the consideration of Quality of working life. 4 See also  5 [20] References Models and components[edit] Various authors and researchers have proposed models of quality of working life which include a wide range of factors.  Task Identity. Taylor (1979) [2] more pragmatically identified the essential components of .  Task significance. They suggested that such needs have to be addressed if employees are to experience high quality of working life. Selected models are reviewed below.  Autonomy  Feedback.

quality of working life as basic extrinsic job factors of wages.  effect on extra work activities. and the intrinsic job notions of the nature of the work itself. . Taylor suggested that relevant quality of working life concepts may vary according to organisation and employee group.  a meaningful future at work. He suggested that a number of other aspects could be added.  employee participation in the management.  fairness and equity.  social support. including :  individual power.  social relevance of the work or product.  self-development.  use of one’s present skills. hours and working conditions.

and  self-rated anxiety. .  intrinsic job motivation.  perceived intrinsic job characteristics. found evidence for a moderate association between total job satisfaction and total life satisfaction and happiness.  job satisfaction.Warr and colleagues (1979). including :  work involvement. In particular. They discussed a range of correlations derived from their work. intrinsic job motivation and job satisfaction.  happiness. such as those between work involvement and job satisfaction.[3] in an investigation of quality of working life. considered a range of apparently relevant factors. with a less strong.  higher order need strength. Warr et al. but significant association with self-rated anxiety. and perceived intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction.  life satisfaction.

whilst some authors have emphasised the workplace aspects in quality of working life. hours and working conditions. however.  equitable wages. Factors more obviously and directly affecting work have.  equal employment opportunities  opportunities for advancement. describing the “basic elements of a good quality of work life” as :  safe work environment. Mirvis and Lawler (1984)[4] suggested that quality of working life was associated with satisfaction with wages. as researchers have tried to tease out the important influences on quality of working life in the workplace.  opportunities to learn and grow  protection of individual rights . and broader concepts of happiness and life satisfaction. psychological well being.Thus. served as the main focus of attention. others have identified the relevance of personality factors.

Baba and Jamal (1991)[5] listed what they described as typical indicators of quality of working life. including:  job satisfaction.  job involvement.  organisational commitment and  turn-over intentions. suggesting that this facet should be investigated as part of the concept of quality of working life.  work role ambiguity. Some have argued that quality of working life might vary between groups of workers.  job stress. For example. Ellis and Pompli (2002)[6] identified a number of factors contributing to job dissatisfaction and quality of working life in nurses.  work role overload. Baba and Jamal also explored routinisation of job content. including: .  work role conflict.

 need satisfaction based on supervisory behaviour. innability to deliver quality of care preferred. Sirgy et al. poor working environments.  role conflict.  resident aggression.  poor relationships with supervisor/peers.  balance of work and family.  need satisfaction based on work environment. . (2001)[7] suggested that the key factors in quality of working life are:  need satisfaction based on job requirements.  lack of recognition.  professional isolation.  shiftwork.  lack of involvement in decision making.  workload.  lack of opportunity to learn new skills.

Abraham Maslow. actualisation. (2003)[8] used 16 questions to examine quality of working life. activities. although the relevance of nonwork aspects is play down as attention is focussed on quality of work life rather than the broader concept of quality of life. and outcomes stemming from participation in the workplace. They defined quality of working life as satisfaction of these key needs through resources. social. correlational analyses. These attempts at defining quality of working life have included theoretical approaches. or need to be specific to each work setting. economic and family. with opinions varying as to whether such definitions and explanations can be both global. need satisfaction based on ancillary programmes. knowledge and aesthetics. sales . lists of identified factors. and distinguished between causes of dissatisfaction in professionals. covering health & safety.  organizational commitment. Bearfield. intermediate clerical. were seen as relevant in underpinning this model. Needs as defined by the psychologist. esteem.

T S Nanjundeswaraswamy. working conditions and security. responsibility and advancement. It has been suggested that Motivator factors are intrinsic to the job. Herzberg at al. The Hygiene factors or dissatisfaction-avoidance factors include aspects of the job environment such as interpersonal relationships.. whilst achievement can be the greatest source of extreme satisfaction. (1959) [9] used “Hygiene factors” and “Motivator factors” to distinguish between the separate causes of job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. that is. the work itself.and service workers. The distinction made between job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in quality of working life reflects the influence of job satisfaction theories. the most common cause of job dissatisfaction can be company policy and administration. salary. Swamy D R (2013)[20] Used 9 components to mesaure quality of worklife of employees in Technical institution they are Work environment Organization culture and climate Relation and co-operation . indicating that different concerns might have to be addressed for different groups. Of these latter. job content.

An individual’s experience of satisfaction or dissatisfaction can be substantially rooted in their perception.Training and development Compensation and Rewards Facilities Job satisfaction and Job security Autonomy of work Adequacy of resources in summary Male employees are more satisfied than female employees the chi square test confirms that all the demographic factors like gender. designation. department. From the correlation analysis it is find that Adequacy of Resources are more correlated and Training & Development are less correlated with teaching staffs perception towards quality of worklife and in case of non teaching staffs Compensation & Rewards are more correlated and Work Environment are less correlated with QWL. experience are independent of quality of worklife of employees in private technical institution. Study also reveals that there is a significant association between QWL of Teaching and Non teaching staffs. salary. rather than .

Efraty.[10] In summary.and comparisons of internalised ideals. 1982). 1979). an individual’s perception can be affected by relative comparison – am I paid as much as that person . Siegel & Lee. but has been seen as incorporating a hierarchy of perspectives that not only include work-based factors such as job satisfaction. work-related stress and the relationship between work and non-work life domains (Loscocco & .[3] It has generally been agreed however that Quality of Working Life is conceptually similar to well-being of employees but differs from job satisfaction which solely represents the workplace domain (Lawler. 1999). with the individual’s current state (Lawler and Porter. Cook & Wall.simply reflecting their “real world”. [11] Quality of Working Life is not a unitary concept.g. aspirations. Further. 2001[7] and Warr. [12] More recently. 1966). authors differ in their views on the core constituents of Quality of Working Life (e. where it has been considered. and expectations. but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and general feelings of well-being (Danna & Griffin. Sirgy. satisfaction with pay and relationships with work colleagues. for example.

The WRQoWL measure [16] uses six core factors to explain most of the variation in an individuals quality of working life: Job and Career Satisfaction. Stress at Work and Control at Work. temporal stability. although the Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction has been systematically developed to be reliable and is rigorously psychometrically validated. 1991)[13] have also been identified as factors that should conceptually be included in Quality of Working Life.Roschelle.[15] provides support for the psychometric structure of this instrument. convergent . The Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction (BIAFJS) is a 4-item. purely affective as opposed to cognitive. the WorkRelated Quality of Life scale (WRQoL). The BIAJS differs from other job satisfaction measures in being comprehensively validated not just for internal consistency reliability. General WellBeing. Working Conditions. and of those that exist few have evidence of validity and reliability. Home-Work Interface. Measurement[edit] There are few recognised measures of quality of working life and jobs. measure of overall affective job satisfaction that reflects quality of working life. [14] A recent statistical analysis of a new measure.

[14] The Job & Career Satisfaction (JCS) scale of the WorkRelated Quality of Life scale (WRQoL) is said to reflect an employee’s feelings about. or evaluation of. job level. Reported internal consistency reliabilities range between .and criterion-related validities. It is suggested that general well-being both influences.81 and . but also for cross-population invariance by nationality. It has been proposed that this Positive Job Satisfaction factor is influenced by various issues including clarity of goals and role ambiguity. and may . are common. recognition and reward. in a way which may be independent of their work situation. predominantly depression and anxiety disorders. and job type. The General well-being (GWB) scale of the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL). appraisal.87. Mental health problems. personal development career benefits and enhancement and training needs.[15] aims to assess the extent to which an individual feels good or content in themselves. JCS is reflected by questions asking how satisfied people feel about their work. Within the WRQoL measure. and is influenced by work. their satisfaction or contentment with their job and career and the training they receive to do it.

behaviour and health. The WRQoL SAW factor is assessed through items dealing with demand and perception of stress and actual demand overload. in general. Control at work. optimism and happiness. high stress is associated with high pressure. and feel stressed at work. life satisfaction. general quality of life. The WRQoL GWB factor assesses issues of mood. Perceived control at work as measureed by the Work-Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)[15] is recognized as a central concept in the understanding of relationships between stressful experiences. within the theoretical model underpinning the WRQoL. The Control at Work (CAW) subscale of the WRQoL scale addresses how much employees feel they can control their work through the freedom to express their opinions and being involved in decisions at work. is . The WRQoL Stress at Work sub-scale (SAW) reflects the extent to which an individual perceives they have excessive pressures.have a major impact on the general well-being of the population. depression and anxiety. Whilst it is possible to be pressured at work and not be stressed at work.

working conditions and security necessary to do their job effectively. general well-being. This factor explores the interrelationship between home and work life domains. Issues that appear to influence employee HWI include adequate facilities at work. work-related stress and the . Applications[edit] Regular assessment of Quality of Working Life can potentially provide organisations with important information about the welfare of their employees. flexible working hours and the understanding of managers. decision making and decision control. such as job satisfaction. The WRQoL Home-Work Interface scale (HWI) measures the extent to which an employer is perceived to support the family and home life of employees. This scale also taps into satisfaction with the resources provided to help people do their jobs. The Working Conditions scale of the WRQoL assesses the extent to which the employee is satisfied with the fundamental resources.influenced by issues of communication at work. Physical working conditions influence employee health and safety and thus employee Quality of working life.

people tend to see work as something they just have to put up with. yet Quality of Working Life as a theoretical construct remains relatively unexplored and unexplained within the organisational psychology research literature. or even something they don’t even expect to enjoy. For example. Most people recognise the importance of sleeping well. they might get frequent headaches. and actively try to enjoy the leisure time that they can snatch. A large chunk of most peoples’ lives will be spent at work.home-work interface. or find they cannot concentrate. Some of the factors used to measure quality of working life pick up on things that don’t actually make people feel good. But all too often. but which seem to make people feel bad about work if those things are absent. Worrall and Cooper (2006)[18] recently reported that a low level of well-being at work is estimated to cost about 5-10% of Gross National Product per annum. and so feel . Studies in the UK University sector have shown a valid measure of Quality of Working Life exists[17] and can be used as a basis for effective interventions. noise – if the place where someone works is too noisy.

Similarly. A recent publication of the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE)[19] emphasises the core role of assessment and understanding of the way working environments pose risks for psychological wellbeing through lack of control and excessive demand.they just don’t feel bad. opportunities for career progression and using their abilities can contribute to someone's quality of working life. See also[edit] . This can apply to a range of factors that affect someone's working conditions. not too much) can make them feel good. The emphasis placed by NICE on assessment and monitoring wellbeing springs from the fact that these processes are the key first step in identifying areas for improving quality of working life and addressing risks at work.dissatisfied. But when it is quiet enough they don’t feel pleased or happy . Challenging work (not too little. Other things seem to be more likely to make people feel good about work and themselves once the basics are OK at work.