Chapter 4

Chapter 1

1.1 Introduction

Education is one of the greatest services provided by the teachers. They

are the pillars of the society, who help students to grow to shoulder the

responsibility of taking their nation ahead of others. A good teacher in fact

becomes a role model for students & they tend to follow their teacher in

almost every way. Success of an educational institution depends upon

availability of quality teacher. So it becomes quite essential to attain &

retain the best teachers. They will be attracted to, and stay in, the

profession if they have belongingness for the profession and their stay can

be cemented by providing motivation, good social environment, working

conditions, and professional autonomy as these are crucial for the

emotional well-being of the teachers (Hargreaves, 2000).

Teachers desire security, recognition, new experience and independence.

When these needs are not fulfilled they become tense. A dissatisfied teacher

does not make any positive contribution towards growth of students and

becomes a source of great tension for the nation. Dissatisfaction of an

individual, whatever may be the occupation, results in professional

76
 Chapter 4

stagnation. A dissatisfied teacher is lost not only to himself but to the entire

society also. Dissatisfaction among workers is undesirable and dangerous in

any profession; it is suicidal if it occurs in teaching profession (Education

Commission, 1966).So we have to find out the factors which affects there

stay in this profession and QWL is one of the most important factor affecting

the satisfaction of teachers as they are motivated to perform at high levels

and are more willing to stay with an organization if they are experiencing a

high quality of work life (Darling, 2003). It covers almost all aspects of

employees’ organizational life and significantly affects their level of

satisfaction. Quality of work life programmes are desirable for human and

performance needs and satisfy the higher order needs as well as basic needs

of the employees (Newstrom and Davis, 1993). Quality of work life as the

extent to which employees can enhance their personal life through their

work and their environment.

1.2 QWL - Conceptual analysis

There are divergent views about what really is QWL? Glaser (1976) viewed

QWL more than job security, good working conditions, adequate and fair

compensation even more than equal employment opportunities (Mirvis and

Lawler, 1984). It is as enriching the nature of work experience, grappling

with issues of efficiency and satisfaction (Wilson, 1978) by providing,

77
 Chapter 4

intrinsic job motivation, higher order need strength, perceived intrinsic job

characteristics to bring about increased labor management co operation to

jointly solve the problems of improving performance (Cohen and Rosenthal,

1980). QWL is a comprehensive construct which includes an individual’s

job related well-being and the extent to which work experiences are

rewarding, fulfilling and devoid of stress and other negative personal

consequences. It consists of a parcel of terms and notions that include

industrial effectiveness, human resource development, organizational

effectiveness, work restructure, job enrichment, socio technical systems,

working humanization, group-work concepts, labor-management, co-

operation working together, workers involvement, workers participation and

co-operative work structures (Jain, 1991). It is further concerned with work

place strategies, operations and environment that promote and maintain

employee satisfaction and organizational effectiveness (Lau and Bruce,

1998). Quality of Work Life is not a unitary concept (Danna & Griffin,

1999), it is also concerned with a part of life it helps to balance personal life

with his or her job and reduces the stress level and increase job satisfaction

which mutually benefits the individual and the organisation but has been

seen as incorporating a hierarchy of perspectives that not only include work-

based factors such as, satisfaction with pay and relationships with work

78
 Chapter 4

colleagues, but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and general

feelings of well-being (Morin and Morin, 2000).

Programs of QWL usually deal with the work itself- its design and its

requirements, the working environment, the decision making processes and

supervisory behaviour, and the working conditions, including the work and

non-work balance. Sirgy et al (2001) suggested that the key factors in quality

of working life are: on job requirements, Work environment, Supervisory

Behaviour, Ancillary programmes & Organizational commitment. They

viewed quality of work life as satisfaction of these key needs through

resources, activities, and outcomes stemming from participation in the

workplace. Moreover Quality of work life is all about the conducive and

congenial environment created at the work place as it is one of the main

reasons for better performance and productivity. Only when the right

ambience is provided to the employees they will be able to deliver their

goods effectively and efficiently (Rao, 2010).

From the above discussion it has been concluded that Quality of work life is

a multidimensional phenomenon that includes the task, the physical work

environment, social environment within the organisation, administrative

system and work-life satisfaction (Cunningham and Eberte, 1990). It also

tends to include job security, reward system, pay and opportunity for growth

79
 Chapter 4

(Rossi et al., 2006) and active involvement in group working arrangements

or problem solving that are of mutual benefit to employees or employers,

autonomy, job enrichment, high-involvement aimed at boosting the

satisfaction and productivity of employees (Feuer, 1989).

1.3 Dimensions of Quality of Work Life

QWL being a multi-faceted phenomenon, there is dire need to identify its

factors/dimensions. Following dimensions have been identified from the

existing literature:-

Environment: The work environment should be free from hazards, which is

determinant to health and safety of the employees. Sound work environment

makes the work place comfortable. Physical work environment includes

noise, working conditions, illumination etc. Infrastructure like properly

lighted and ventilated rooms contributes to the satisfaction of employees

(Saiyadin, 1988 and Rao, 1996). Work condition are also associated with

individual health related life style and its significant effect on health and

well being (Watanabe et al., 2008) and environmental factors such as

physical environment, safety and other working conditions are important

with regard to quality of work life (Mehta, 1982; Kalra and Ghosh, 1984).

Adequate and fair compensation: This refers to just and fair balance

between effort and reward. It includes such things as fair job evaluation-

80
 Chapter 4

training to perform the job reasonably, ability of the organization to pay and

profit-sharing. Equitable and fair pay is important determinants of

motivation and job satisfaction. People who are treated inequitably are

generally dissatisfied with their jobs and experience low quality of work life.

(Saiyadin, 1988 & Khani et al., 2008). Monetary compensation is one of the

most important factor that influences and motivates employees to have

positive attitude towards work (Dargahi, 2007). It is the hygiene factor

(Herzberg, 1959) absence of which can create dissatisfaction.

Social orientation: The nature of interpersonal and group relationships is

quite important. People need to belong, to fulfill their social needs. An

organization offers the opportunity to form support social relationships and

friendships. It offers the potential for a sense of community. Harmonious

worker-manager relationship makes the worker feel a sense of association

and belongingness. Moreover friendly and cooperative coworkers are good

source for enhancing quality of work life which in turn affects employee

satisfaction at the work place (Saad et al., 2008).

Participation in decision making: Introduction of participative

management is the symbolization of a new style of management.

Participation in decision making, particularly regarding the matters directly

concerned with an individual working has an important bearing on his

81
 Chapter 4

satisfaction and performance. Workers participation can instill the in trust

and promote psychological satisfaction as well as improve organisational

efficiency (Benerajee and Rani, 2004). High participation in decision-

making makes the jobs more interesting and meaningful (Benerajee and

Rani, 2004).

Growth and recognition: Now a day’s workers are concerned not only with

their pay prospects, but also with the scope for improving their technical and

academic skills. People want to be able to use valued skills and abilities and

learn new ones. Recognizing the employees as a human being rather than as

a labourer increases quality of work life. Awarding the rewarding systems,

congratulating the employees for their achievement, offering prestigious

designations, offering memberships in clubs or association, offering vacation

trips are some means to recognize the employees. It helps to retain the

talented employee and find new talent with experience and skill (Saiyadin,

1988).

Stress: Stress is the body reaction to a change that requires a physical,

mental or emotional adjustment or response. It can come from any situation

or thought that makes you feel frustrated, angry, nervous, or anxious. It is

creating a noxious situation in the work environment (Benerajee and Rani,

2004). Moreover stress arising at work has a detrimental effect on the

82
 Chapter 4

behaviour of employees, which ultimately results in personal and

organisational inefficiency (Ganapathi et al., 2010).

Job security: Job security is a prerequisite for having a motivated satisfied,

committed and productive work place. Although in today business an

employment scenario, job security is fast disappearing, but it is a still very

compelling reason for effective employee performance and devotion to the

job and eventually the organization.

Grievance handling procedure: A grievance is any dissatisfaction or

feeling of injustice having connection with one’s employment situation

which is brought to the attention of management. The grievance procedure is

the method by which a grievance is filed and carried through different steps

to an ultimate saturation. It should be simple and fair. Effective grievance

handling is an essential part of cultivating good employee relations and

running a fair, successful, and productive work place. In the absence of

sound grievance handling mechanism, it gives rise to the malaise of

favoritism and nepotism in organization at wider scale. Some authors

(Eaton, 1992) have also considered it as a strong determinant/predictor of

quality of work life.

Work-life balance: Work-life balance is a broad concept including proper

prioritisation between “work” (career and ambition) on the one hand and

83
 Chapter 4

“life” (pleasure, leisure, family, social obligations and spiritual development)

on the other hand. It is necessary for enhancing the productivity and

creativity of the employees. It is the balance between individual’s work and

personal life (Saiyadin, 1988 and Beasley et al., 2005). Therefore

employees, who do not spend time with their family, are less satisfied with

their work place (Saraji, 2006).

Job characteristics/factor: It is a framework for analysing and designing a

job that identifies five primary job characteristics, their interrelationships,

and their impact on outcomes (Hackman and Oldham, 1976).These are:

Skill variety: The degree to which a job requires a variety of activities so

that an employee can use a number of different skills and talent.

Task identify: The degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and

identifiable piece of work.

Task significance: The degree to which a job has a substantial effect on the

lives or work of other people.

Autonomy: The degree to which a job provides substantial freedom,

independence and discretion to the individual in scheduling work and

determining the procedure to be used in carrying it out.

84
 Chapter 4

Feedback: The degree to which carrying out activities require by a job

results in the individuals obtaining direct and clear information about his or

her performance effectiveness .

1.4 Importance of quality of work life

In the early Nineties human resources were considered as mere instruments

of production as they were ready to work from dawn to dusk, under

whatever conditions and were motivated by the lure of money (Monappa and

Saiyadin, 1997). The psychological pressure on them was tremendous and

their lives were characterized by a pronounced conflict between professional

and private lives. All this left the employees with very less time for the

family in particular and leisure in general (Raju, 2004), but in the present

dynamic era, where most professionals have a vertical mobility plan in mind

before they pick their employers, it is very important to synergize their

expectations with what you have to offer (Bahl, 2003). In this new era,

people are the primary source for a company’s competitive advantage and

Organisational prosperity and survival depends on how employees are

treated. Further, it is critical for companies to treat employees in such a way

that make them feel committed. The employees expect their job to provide a

certain amount of stability and loyalty from the organization (Conlon, 2003;

85
 Chapter 4

McDonald and Hite, 2005) and when these expectations are not met, quality

of work life is likely to decline and turnover is the likely consequence.

High performance and productivity of the organization can not be realized

without employee support and contribution as they are responsible for the

achievement of organisational goals and objectives. The concentration on

quality of work life has increased because high quality of work life is one of

the best ways to attract and keep talented staff as well as to achieve better

organisational performance. QWL comprises with various aspects and all the

aspects play an important role in improving the efficiency, performance,

productivity and satisfaction level of employees. Among all the aspects

Remuneration is one of the important aspects of QWL such as salary, salary

increment, bonuses, allowances, pension and medical benefits that can

motivate employee to give their best for their employer (Wan, 2007;

Martzler and Renzl, 2007 and Davies et al., 2001) and its importance cannot

be underestimated if the organization wants to see its employees to perform

their best. It can also be seen as a form of recognition from the employer to

their employee (Okpara, 2004; and Sloane and Williams, 1996) Besides the

remuneration aspect, it can be noted in the literature, interpersonal

communication aspect such as respecting others, working together, believing

86
 Chapter 4

others and information sharing if emphasized by the organization, will bring

benefit to both sides, the employees and the employer.

Herzberg (1959) and Mastura et al (2006) viewed that work satisfaction and

work performance depend on hygiene and motivation factors. The important

hygiene factors are working conditions, pay and interpersonal

communication while the important motivation aspects are responsibility,

job promotion, more recognition from the management, and appreciation,

Work environment has been identified as one of the important determinants

for employee satisfaction. Harmonious and safe work will bring comfort to

employees, which in turn will improve their performance level.

Job security and safety aspects such as retirement scheme, workers

association and accident free work place for example, can produce higher

motivation among the employees and reduces turnover possibilities (Kim et

al., 1999).

Organization support and management policy are also an important tool to

strengthen employee performance. Employer should be reminded that if

their employees are left working alone without any support or supervision,

their performance will decline because Weak employment relationships are

linked to turnover, absenteeism, low workplace morale, and lack of skill

development (Lowe, 2001).Moreover, Policies related to growth and

87
 Chapter 4

development, workers participation also helps to retain the talented

employees.

Individual and family life is another important aspect of QWL that can effect

employee satisfaction (Mazerolle et al., 2008 and Ezra and Deckman, 1996).

It has been noted that stable individual and family life will produce higher

work performance among employee whereas unstable individual and family

life were found to cause unstable emotions thus bring negative impact to the

work performance. So work-life balance mutually benefits the individual,

business and society when a person’s personal life is balanced with his or her

own job.

Personal health and well being have significant relationship with employee

work performance. It cannot be denied that aspects such as personal health,

stress, personal problems, physical fitness and personal happiness are

important for employee (Piqueras, 2006). Vanhala and Tuomi (2006) in their

study have found association between work performance and personal well

being, human resource management and work satisfaction.

Quality of work life leads to more positive feelings towards oneself (greater

self esteem), towards one’s job (improved job satisfaction and involvement)

and toward the organization (stronger commitment the organization’s goals).

Increased Quality of work life might also result in building up of physically

88
 Chapter 4

and psychologically healthier, productive, adaptable and motivated

employees. The society as a whole might gain from Quality of work life.

Enhancement in Quality of work life might help in reducing grievances,

absenteeism and industrial accidents (Saklani, 2003) and help government to

combat certain social problems, such as unrest in society, mental health

problems, drug and alcohol abuse and inequitable distribution of national

income (Hackman and Suttle, 1977; p.1-29). High level of Quality of work

life has been found to be associated with high level of job satisfaction on

many aspects of working life (Wilcock and Wright, 1991). It has also been

identified as a significant predictor of Organisational commitment of

employees.

Conclusion

Overall it can be summed up that QWL has direct impact on human

outcomes and it significantly decreases disputes, accidents and work conflict

(Havlovic, 1991). Enhanced QWL leads to improved employee satisfaction

and fulfillment, increased mutual trust, job security enhanced superior-

colleagues relationships, better utilization of human resources, deeper sense

of worker responsibility, reduce stress and strengthened position of

organization (Steers and Porter, 1983). It provides a wide range of benefits

and social security which makes improvement in efficiency, reduction in

89
 Chapter 4

turnover, sick leave, alienation, etc. QWL benefits also include financial

services, consumer services, career counseling, employee information

reports, retirement benefits, recreational services and health safety measures

which influences higher quality and quantity of output of services

(Dewivedi, 1995) Organizations are enjoying the fruits of implementing

QWL programs in the form of increased productivity, and an efficient,

satisfied, and committed workforce which aims to achieve the organizational

objectives.

90
 Chapter 4

References:
 Bahl, T. (2003). Quality of work life “The work place bullies”

www.iupindia.in/303/hrm.asp.

 Benerjee, D. B. R. N. K. & Rani, E. (2004). New Perspectives of

Quality of Work Life. The Indian Journal of Commerce, 57(1), 73-82.

 Cohen, R. & Rosenthal, E. (1980). Should Unions Participate in Quality

of Working Life? The Canadian Scene, 1(4), 7-12.

 Conlon, T. J. (2003). Development of an Operational Definition of

career development for the 21st Century Workplace. In S. A. Lynham &

T. M. Egan (Eds.), Academy of Human Resource Development

Conference Proceedings (489-493). Bowling Green, OH: Academy of

human resource development.

 Connell, J. & Harvey, H. (2003). Call Centres & Labour Turnover: Do

HRM Practices Make a Difference? International Employment

Relations Review, 10(2), 49-66.

 Cunningham, J. B. & Eberle, T. (1990). A Guide to Job Enrichment and

redesign. Personnel, 67, 56-61.

91
 Chapter 4

 Danna, K. & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and Well-Being in the

Workplace: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of

Management, 25, 357-384.

 Darling. H. L. & McLaughlin, M. W. (2003). Investing in teaching as a

learning profession: Policy problems and prospects. Teaching as the

learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. 376-411. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 Davies, D., Taylor, R., & Savery, L. (2001). The Role of Appraisal,

Remuneration and Training in Improving Staff Relation in Western

Australian Accommodation Industry: A comparative study. Journal of

European Industrial Training, 25, 366-373.

 Dwivedi, R. S. (1995). Human Relations and Organisational

Behaviour: A Global Perspective. New Delhi: Macmillan India.

 Eaton, A. E., Gordon, M. E., & Keefe, J. H. (1992). The Impact of

QWL Programs and Grievance System Effectiveness on Union

Commitment. Industrial and labor relations review, 45(3), 591-604.

 Education Commission (1966). The Report of Education Commission

(1964-66). Ministry Of Education.

92
 Chapter 4

 Ezra, M. & Deckman, M. (1996). Balancing Work and Family

Responsibilities: Flextime and Child Care in the Federal Government.

Journal of Public Administration Review. 56, 174-179.

 Feuer, D., (1989). Quality of Work Life: A Cure for All Ills? Training:

The Magazine of Human Resources Development, 26, 65-66.

 Ganapathi, R., Hema, S., Nalini, A.V. (2010). Impact of Stress on IT

and ITES Employees in Coimbatore City. Saaranch R K G Journal of

Management, 2(1), 48-54.

 Glaser, E. M. (1976). State Of the Art, Questions about QWL.

Personnel, Nov-Dec. 39-47.

 Hackman, H. R. & Suttle, J. L (1977). Improving Life at Work:

Behavioural Science approaches to organizational change. Santa

Barbara, CA: Goodyear.

 Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job

Diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.

 Hargreaves, A. (2000). Four Stages of Professionalism and Professional

Learning. Teachers and Teaching: History and Practice. 6(2), 811-826.

 Havlovic, S. J. (1991). Quality of Work Life and Human Resource

Outcomes. Industrial Relations, 30(3), 469-479.

93
 Chapter 4

 Herzberg, F. (1959). Two-factor theory. From Wikipedia, the free

encyclopedia available at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Herzberg retrieved on 23 May

2008; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation retrieved on 25 May

2010

 Jain, S. (1991). Quality of Work Life. Deep and Deep Publications. New

delhi.

 Kalra, S. K. & Ghosh, S. (1984). Quality of Work Life: A Study of

Associated Factors. The Indian Journal of Social Work, 25(3), 341-349.

 Khani, A. Jaafarpour, M. & Dyrekvandmogadam, A. (2008). Quality

of Nursing Work Life. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research,

2(3), 1169-1174.

 Kim, C. W., McInerney, M. L. & Alexander, R. P. (1999).Job

Satisfaction Related to Safety Performance: A Case from

Manufacturing Firm. Journal of Coastal Business, 1(11), 63-71.

 Lau, R. S. M. & Bruce, E. (1998). A Win-Win Paradigm for Quality of

Work Life and Business Performance. Human Resource Development,

9(3), 211-226.

94
 Chapter 4

 Martzler, K. & Renzl, B. (2007). Assessing Asymmetric Effects in the

Formation of Employee Satisfaction. Journal of Tourism Management,

28, 321-330

 Mastura, J., Ramayah, T. & Zainurin, Z. (2006). Work Satisfaction and

Work Performance: How Project Managers in Malaysia perceived it?

Marketing and Management Development, 1305-1313.

 Mazerolle, S. M., Bruening, J. E., Casa, D. J. & Burton, L. J. (2008).

Work-Family Conflict, Part 2nd: Job and Life Satisfaction in National

Collegiate Athletic Association Division I-A Certified Athletic Trainers.

Journal of Athletic Training, 43: 513-522.

 McDonald, K. S., & Hite, L. M. (2005). Reviving the relevance of

career development in human resource development. Human Resource

Development Review, 4(4), 418-439.

 Mehta, P. (1982). Rising Aspirations, Quality Of Life and Work

Organization. Productivity, 22(4), 85-88.

 Mirvis, P. H. & Lawler, E. E. (1984). Accounting for the Quality of

Work Life. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 5, 197-212.

 Monappa, A. & Saiyadin, M. (1997). Personnel Management (2nd ed),

Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd, New Delhi.

95
 Chapter 4

 Morin, E. M & Morin, W. (2000). QWL and Firm Performance at

Canada. ICFAI. 13(2),30-34

 Newstorm, J. W., & Davis, K. (11th ed.) (2004). Organizational

Behaviour- Human behaviour at work. New Delhi: Tata McGraw

Hill Publishing Company limited.

 Okpara, J. O., (2004). The Impact of Salary Differential on Managerial

Job Satisfaction: A Study on Gender Gap and Its Implication for

Management Education and Practices in a Developing Economy.

Journal of Business Development Nations, 8, 66-92.

 Piqueras, C., (2006). Improving Employee Satisfaction and Well Being

Using Emotional

Intelligence.http://www.coachingvalencia.es/catalogo/archivos/9_archiv

os/emotional%20intelligence%20and%20well-being.pdf

 Raju, P. V. L. (2004). Quality of work life-The Human Implications.

HRM Review, ICFAI University Press, 9-13.

 Rao, P. S. (1996). Essentials of Human Resource Management and

Industrial Relation. (1st ed.) Himalaya Publishing House. 473-475.

 Rossi, A. M., Perrewee, P. L. & Sauter, S. L. (2006). Stress and Quality

of Working Life, Greenwich, Information Age Publishing.

96
 Chapter 4

 Saad, H. S., Samah, A. J. A. & Juhdi, N. (2008). Employee’s Perception

on Quality of Work Life and Job Satisfaction in Private Higher

Learning Institutions. International Review of Business Research

Papers, 4(3) 23-34.

 Saiyadain, M. S. (1988). Human Resource Management. Tata McGraw

Hills Publishing Company Ltd. New Delhi.

 Saklani D. R. (1999). Quality of Work Life: Instrument design. Indian

journal of industrial relations, 38(4), 480-503.

 Saraji, G. N. & Dargahi, H. (2006). Study of Quality of Work Life,

Iranian journal of public health, 35(4) 63-71.

 Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P. & Lee, D. (2001). A New Measure of

Quality of Work Life (QoWL) Based On Need Satisfaction and

Spillover Theories. Social Indicators Research, 55, 241-302

 Sloane, P. & Williams, H. (1996). Are Overpaid Workers Really

Unhappy? A Test of the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Journal of

Labor, 10, 3-15.

 Steers, R. M. & Porter, L.W. (1983). Motivation and Work Behaviour

(3rd edition), New Delhi: McGraw Hill.

97
 Chapter 4

 Vanhala, S. & Tuomi, K. (2006). HRM, Company Performance and

Employee Well Being. Journal of Management Review, 17, 241-255.

 Wan, H. L., (2007). Remuneration Practices in Chemical Industry in

Malaysia: The Impact on Employee Satisfaction. Journal of

Compensation Benefit Review, 39, 56-67.

 Wilson, N. (1973). On the Quality of Working Life. Manpower Paper

No.7, London.

 Wright, T., Cropanzano, R. & Bonett, D. (2007). The Moderating Role

of Employee Positive Well Being on the Relation between Job

Satisfaction and Job Performance. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 12, 93-104.

98
 Chapter 4

Chapter 2

2.1 Review of Literature

The existing literature gives needed direction for the kind of contribution the

proposed research is going to make. Thus, the research gap attempted to be

bridged up originated from the literature reviewed as under: -

Larsen (2008) examined the effect of quality of work life on male and

female workers in their retirement planning in Denmark. The data was

collected from the 5834 workers who were born in 1940 and 1945 and

retired in 1997 and 2002. About 70% workers gave proper responses. They

were contacted by telephone and the data drawn from the Danish panel

surveys. This study focused on the following measures of the quality of

work life like earnings, wage satisfaction, work hours, working hour

satisfaction, job security, job demands, job control, use of skills, and

relationship with colleagues. The results revealed that the impact of

retirement planning differs significantly for men and women, particularly,

for earnings, job security and job control. Further results suggested that

wage satisfaction is not an important consideration when workers plan their

99
 Chapter 4

retirement. Further, men were more influenced than women by the quality of

job dimensions in their retirement planning. The employer initiated efforts

directed towards retaining old workers and their work place will not

necessarily be as effective for female as for male. Lastly, the study suggested

that the efforts directed towards gradual retirement through a lessened work

load is an easier task than coming up with new ideas for giving older

workers more work challenges.

Research gap: The study is gender oriented only and did not consider some

of the important dimensions of quality of work life viz. work-life balance,

participation in decision making, growth and recognition, grievance

handling procedure, stress, physical environment which are the important

predictors of quality of work life.

Dhar (2008) in his study aimed to explore the experiences of bus drivers

with respect to the quality of their work life and they addressed the

following research questions i.e. (i) how do staff member experience their

work environment in terms of stress, work load, time pressure and work life

balance. (ii) What is the experience of staff relating to quality of work life

initiatives? From the four different Pune municipal corporation. Twenty-five

drivers who were employed in the Pune municipal corporation were

approached to collect the data through randomized quota sampling but only

100
 Chapter 4

fifteen employees participated voluntarily. The data was collected through

the individual interviews and naturalistic observation and it was be analysed

through the coding process. In this study, the results indicated that the work

environment was time consumptive and stress inducing. The bus driver’s

were going through heavy amount of stress causing deterioration in their

quality of work life at work. Acute shortage of staff, deteriorating conditions

of the buses and bad roads were found to be the prominent factors

responsible for this. Further results revealed that though quality of work life

initiatives can provide staff with much needed opportunities for humor and

balance during their work day but not many efforts have been taken by the

organisation to improve the quality of work life of the drivers. This study

also suggested that the bus operators to improve work place practices to

reduce job stressors and improve the work environment of bus drivers.

Operators need to work with researchers, trade unions, policymakers and bus

drivers themselves to formulate initiatives that safeguard drivers against

work stress so that the quality of their work life could be improved.

Research gap: The study measured quality of work life on the basis of work

environment only and ignored other variables. Further the sample size is too

small to generalize the findings.

101
 Chapter 4

Watanabe et al (2008) investigated the impact of effort-reward imbalance

on HRQL (Health related quality of life) among Japanese employees

working in a manufacturing plant in Japan. The data was collected from

1096 employees, out of which 1057 responded properly. The participants

consisted of administrative, clerical, technical, professional and other staff.

The questionnaire was used to collect the data. HRQL was assessed using

the Japanese version of the short form 8 health survey (SF8). It included

health based questions on physical functioning, role limitations due to

physical and emotional health problems, freedom from physical pain,

general health perception, vitality, social functioning, and mental health

and for measurement of effort-reward imbalance. Six items, related to

effort were used to check the psychology of respondents and aspects of the

work environment. Items related to rewards included rewords received at

work and offered to the workers in the form of monetary remuneration,

social approval and esteem, job security and career opportunities. The data

was analysed through chi square test and multinominal logistic regression.

The results revealed a negative association between high effort to reward

ratio and physical and mental functioning among Japanese employees after

adjusting for age, educational history, marital status, job environment (shift

work, work related social support, job control), life style (smoking and

102
 Chapter 4

exercise habits, alcohol consumption, sleep time) and commitment. In

addition the study adjusted the different variables of work including job

control, work related social support, which is reported to be related to

HRQL and personality traits and adverse effects on health. The findings

suggest that work condition are associated with individual health life style

and its significant effect on health management programs in organisation

decrease the work related stress, such as effort reward imbalance, may

prove to be effective in improving HRQL.

Research gap: The study emphasized only on impact of effort-reward

imbalance on quality of work life.

Saad et al., (2008) examined the employees’ perception towards QWL and

its impact on their job satisfaction. Their objective was (I) to see whether

the current organisation climate influences employees’ perception of job

satisfaction and (ii) to find out the different sources of stress among

employees in a higher learning institution environment and (iii) to find out

employees level of satisfaction with regard to various job related aspects in

a private university in Malaysia. Out of 416 employees only 251

employees participated from all levels in the university. The five point

likert scale questionnaire was used to collect the data. Mean, standard

deviation, correlation, multiple linear regression and factor analysis were

103
 Chapter 4

used to analyse the data. Ten QWL variables viz: work-family interference,

quality of relationships, meaningfulness, pessimism about organisational

change, self competence, impact, self determination, access to resources,

time control, and support were used to examine the relationships with job

satisfaction. The results revealed that all the individual quality of work life

variables are significantly related to job satisfaction. But multiple linear

regressions indicated that only three QWL variables (meaningfulness,

pessimism about organisational change and self determination)

significantly influence job satisfaction. The respondents are not satisfied

with most of the job related aspects. They are moderately satisfied with

health care benefits, working environment, flexible work hours,

relationship with co-workers and superiors as well as opportunity to work

independently. The respondents were not stressed at the work place.

Research gap: Participation in decision making, Remuneration, Grievance

handling procedure, stress, Physical environment and Stress were not taken

while measuring quality of work life.

Khani et al., (2008) studied that how nurses in an Iranian state rate the

quality of their work life in ISFAHAN hospitals IR, university of medical

sciences during the year 2007. A sample of 120 registered nurses was

enrolled into the study, using a simple random sample method. The

104
 Chapter 4

research instrument used the Brooks and Anderson scale. Four subscales

were used in quality of nursing work life tool viz: work life/home; work

design, work context; work world. The results of the study indicated that

nurses were dissatisfied with salaries, the nursing work load was too heavy,

and there was not enough time for the job. Respondents had little energy

left after work; they were unable to balance their work and family lives and

stated that rotating schedules negatively affected their lives. They also felt

that society does not have an accurate image of nurses and their work

setting did not provide career advancement.

Research gap: The study ignored social orientation, physical environment,

grievance handling procedure, participation in decision making process

while measuring quality of work life.

Lee et al., (2008) conducted study to assess the external validity by testing

the measures in the context of marketing professionals. This study used the

measure developed by the Sirgy et al (2001) and assessed its predictive

validity by examining the effect of QWL as employee satisfaction of seven

major needs with each major need divided into several dimensions of needs

(a) health and safety needs (b) economic and family needs (c) social needs

(d) esteem needs (e) actualization needs (f) knowledge needs (g) aesthetic

needs. Then they combined these dimensions into two major sets: lower and

105
 Chapter 4

higher order needs. Lower order needs comprised health/safety needs and

economic/family needs. Higher-order needs involved social needs, esteem

needs, self actualization needs, knowledge needs, and aesthetic needs. Thus

the entire QWL measures consisted of 16 items relating to the 16 need

satisfaction dimensions of the seven needs. Pre-tested scales viz. job

satisfaction (Dubinsky et al., 1986); organisation commitment (Jaworski and

Kohli, 1993) and Espirit de Corps (Jaworski and Kohli, 1993) were used to

check the nomological validity. The conceptual model of their study posits

that QWL has positive influence on job satisfaction, organisation

commitment, and espirit de corps. This research used a web base survey for

data collection by using membership directory of the American marketing

association (AMA) as the sampling frame. Letters were mailed to a 2820

randomly select US practitioner members of AMA, inviting them to access

the survey questionnaire via web-site of a major university in the south

eastern region of the United States. 2792 sets of letters were delivered out of

which 230 persons responded properly. The response rate was eight percent.

The construct, nomological, discriminant and convergent validity was

successfully proved. The results indicated that higher and lower order need

satisfaction of marketing professionals has a positive influence on job

satisfaction. The results further indicated that higher order need satisfaction

106
 Chapter 4

has a stronger positive and predictive influence on organisational

commitment than lower order need satisfaction. Further it has been noted

that higher order need satisfaction of marketing professionals has a

significant influence on espirit de corps than lower order need satisfaction.

Hence over all the results revealed that the QWL measure has good construct

validity based on empirical support for convergent and discriminant validity.

Further the QWL measure has good nomological (predictive) validity based

on the fact the QWL measure predicted (as hypothesized) marketing

professionals’ Job satisfaction, Organizational commitment and Espirit de

corps. The results collectively add validation support to the QWL measure.

Research gap: Participation in decision making, Grievance handling

procedure and stress were not taken while studying quality of work life.

Response rate was also very poor (8% only).

Argentero et al., (2007) investigated the quality of work life indicators in

health care workers. The data was collected from 112 health workers. All of

them belonged to the National Health Service in the northern Italy.

Structured interview were carried out to collect the data to assess the quality

of work life through the identification of the most important indicators and

to evaluate the degree of satisfaction and the importance of each indicator. It

was divided into three phases. The first phase consisted of collection of

107
 Chapter 4

personal data: sex, age, education, profession, place of work, weekly

working hours, years of work in health service, number of patients visited

per week. The second phase was related to the identification of the five most

important aspects in one’s present work life. The third phase implies the

evaluation of a visual analogue on a vertical scale and therefore the

satisfaction rate referred to each label. Answers were audio taped and then

analysed to identify common indicators of work life quality. Descriptive

statistics and variance analysis were used for data investigation. The five

quality of work life indicators were professional relationship, work

organization, taking care of patients, professional ability and professional

growth. The professional relationship entailed all aspects involving common

work dynamics, both formal and informal: relationship with colleagues or

with managers, teamwork and information flow between different workers.

The taking care of patients indicator refers to emotional and relationship

dynamics which may originate between workers, patients and patients

relatives. The work organization indicator refers to those technical and

managerial aspects which form part of health workers or those practical

aspects which make work more comfortable. The professional ability

indicator referred to the importance of roles inside the organization structure,

the level of autonomy and one’s personal professional esteem. Finally, the

108
 Chapter 4

professional growth indicator referred to the understanding how to build

one’s job know how, salary and career improvement. It has been noted that

QWL was not influenced by sex, role, age, number of working years in a

specific department; only the amount of weekly work affected the QWL.

The health workers with a greater amount of weekly work, in a term of

number of patients reported to significantly lower quality of work life. They

also revealed they were dissatisfied with professional relationship and

organization category.

Research gap: This study put more focus on professional relationship,

professional ability, professional growth, taking care of patients and work

organization and ignored the important aspects of quality of work life like

Participation in decision making, Grievance handling procedure, physical

environment.

Dargahi and Yazdi (2007) in their study aimed at providing positive and

negative attitudes of Tehran University of medical sciences hospitals clinical

laboratories from their quality of work life. A cross-sectional, descriptive

and analytical study was conducted among 65 TUMS hospitals clinical

laboratories employees by questionnaire. A pilot study was conducted to

check the reliability and validity of questionnaire. The questionnaire

consisting of 30 items was used to collect the data. Correlation and

109
 Chapter 4

percentage were used to analyze the data. The results revealed that

employees had a poor quality of work life and they were not satisfied with

most aspects of their quality of work life. viz: career prospects, monetary

compensation, and desired job environment, balance between work and

family and on the job services training. They felt that four factors that had

made works a positive experience were monetary compensation, job welfare,

and career prospect and job environmental health. Further, employees with

executive position were more satisfied with their quality of work life. It had

also been noted that employee’s quality of work life was not correlated with

their years of experience, pay, marriage status, sex, educational degrees, age,

and place of birth, size and types of hospitals.

Research gap: The study ignored the Grievance handling procedure and

stress while measuring quality of work life among employees.

Sadique (2007) examined the impact of designation, experience and age of

sugar mill employees on existing and expected quality of work life in

Bangladesh. It was hypothesized in the study that the designation,

experience and age of the employees do not alter their rating of the existing

and expected quality of work life in sugar industry. The data was collected

from 150 employees working in the selected four leading sugar mills in

Bangladesh. A stratified random sampling technique was used to select the

110
 Chapter 4

respondents. A structured questionnaire was framed to collect data from the

respondents, which included 10 major determinants of QWL viz.

participation in decision making, career advancement, interpersonal

relations, recognition & praise, job stress, pay & allowance, working

condition, job safety & security, achievement and compensation. Mean,

standard deviation and z-test were used to analyze the data. There was no

significant difference in QWL when analyzed according to designation,

experience and age of the employees don’t. Further, it showed that in sugar

industry four major determinant of quality of work life were participation in

decision making, career advancement, compensation and pay & allowance

are largely missing and the employees would like to see an environment that

includes these also.

Research gap: The above mentioned review of literature has examined the

impact of three demographic variables i.e. designation, age and experience

on quality of work life while ignored the impact of income, gender, marital

status, nature of job on quality of work life.

Saraji and Dargahi (2006) studied positive and negative attitude of Tehran

University of medical sciences (TUMS) hospitals employees from their

quality of work life in Iran. A cross sectional, descriptive and analytical

study was conducted among 908 TUMS hospitals and the response rate was

111
 Chapter 4

seventy percent. A stratified random sampling technique was used to select

the respondents as nursing, supportive and Para medical groups. A pilot

study was also performed with 50 randomly selected respondents to check

the reliability and validity of questionnaire instrument. Fourteen factors were

used to measure employee’s attitude towards their quality of work life viz.

fair & reasonable pay compared to others doing similar work, sexual

harassment or discriminant at the work place, concern over losing one’s job

in the next months, interesting and satisfying work, trust in senior

management, people at the work place, wish to get together, recognition of

efforts by intermediate manager/supervisor, career prospects, amount of

control over the way in which work is done, health & safety at work, balance

between the time spent at work and the time spent with family & friends,

intermediate managers/supervisor’s treatment of staff; amount of work to be

done, level of stress experienced at work. The results indicated that TUMS

hospitals employees had a poor quality of work life. They were dissatisfied

with most aspects of work life such as occupational health & safety,

intermediate & senior managers, their income, balance between the time

spent in work &with their family, their stress level, career prospects also

indicating their work was not interesting and satisfying. The results showed

that high income & interesting as well as satisfying work are the most

112
 Chapter 4

important issues for a high quality of work life. Moreover, significant

difference was found when the data was analyzed age-wise workers

dissatisfaction increased with age like distrust of senior management

increased significantly with age. Older workers were more likely to have

higher level of dissatisfaction with the amount of work they had to do, their

career prospects and their level of pay relative to other employees doing

similar work, level of stress with their ability to balance work & family time

and the work they did. Low income and long hours also meant

dissatisfaction among employees. Further employees in small hospitals had

higher quality of work life than employees in large hospitals.

Research gap: The study ignored Participation in decision making and

Grievance handling procedures which are important indicators of quality of

work life.

Rose et al., (2006) researched Quality of work life in relation to career

related dimensions. The data was collected from 475 respondents from the

free trade zones’ in Malaysia from both the multinational companies (MNC)

and small medium industries (SMI) by using stratified random sampling

technique. The study employed the survey method and participation was

regarded through prior appointments and consent via phone calls from the

organization. The researcher visited organization thrice to collect the data.

113
 Chapter 4

Mean, standard deviation, step wise regression, ANOVA was used to analyze

the data. The result indicated that the most important determinant of QWL is

career achievement, followed by career satisfaction and career balance. It

has been found that marital status, age, income, education; years of

employment and tenure with current employer are positively correlated with

QWL. The individual’s family life also correlates significantly with his/her

level of QWL. The respondents who worked in MNC’s reported a slightly

higher level of quality of work life as compared to those in small medium

industries.

Research gap: This study did not considered some of the important

dimensions of quality of work life i.e. grievance handling procedure,

participation in decision-making, stress and physical environment.

Beasley et al., (2005) compared the quality of work life of family physicians

employed by health care organization (HCOs) with independent

practitioners in Wisconsin academy of family physicians. A sample of 628

respondents out of 1482 was enrolled into the study through cross section

survey of active members of the Wisconsin academy of family physicians.

The questionnaire was used to collect the data. Thirteen questions were

selected related to work satisfaction issues, practice issues and outcomes.

Mean, correlation, standard deviation, chi square test, t-test and multivariate

114
 Chapter 4

analysis of covariance were used to analyze the data. The results of the study

indicated that gender wise there were insignificant differences in perception

of quality of work life and significant differences in numbers of hours

worked per week. The independent physicians worked more hours per week

in smaller work group. They reported better working relationships, more

satisfaction with family time, more influence over management decisions,

better satisfaction with being a physician, better perceived quality of the care

they provided, greater ability to achieve professional goals, and lesser

intention to leave the practice. It has been also noted that independent

physicians have significantly more positive ratings of several aspects of the

quality of their work life compared with physicians employed by health care

organizations.

Research gap: This study ignored physical environment and grievance

handling procedure in work satisfaction issues.

Elias and Saha (2005) examined the Environmental pollution and

quality of working life of the workers employed in different tobacco

industries, located in Rangpur region in Bangladesh. The data was

collected from 17 industries selected randomly out of 37 industries. A

total of 540 workers were included in the sample (340 tobacco polluted

industries and 200 non-polluted industries). Two sets of questionnaire

115
 Chapter 4

i.e. (i) inventory for measuring quality of work life (Syed and Sinha,

1980) (ii) the interview schedule- personal and health related

questionnaire (Khaleque, 1998) were used to collect the data. Mean,

standard deviation, t-test, and ANOVA were used to analyze the data.

The results of the study indicated significant difference between the

workers of polluted and non-polluted industries in terms of quality of

working life. Older age group workers were found to have perceived

significantly better quality of working life than those of the younger age

groups. Female workers QWL was found significantly lower than that

of their male counterparts. Quality of working life was found to be

influenced by age, sex, income, experience and other dimensions.

Research gap: The study measure only demographic variables i.e. age, sex,

income and experience and did not showed the results of variables studied

while measuring quality of work life.

Littlefield (2004) aimed to investigate how supportive members of dual

career families perceive eighteen personnel practices in alleviating work-life

conflict in northern Lower Michigan in America. The data was collected

from 278 members of 14 organisations out of total 83 organisations. All of

these organisations are representatives of health care, education, banking,

insurance, manufacturing and tourism. The questionnaire was used to collect

116
 Chapter 4

the data. The data was analysed through mean and ranking method. The

results revealed that the members of dual-career families perceive health

insurance and dental insurance as most supportive in alleviating work life

conflict and non-traditional benefits such as employee sick leave for child’s

illness, flexible work hours, leave without pay position assured, are

perceived as more supportive than traditional benefits such as maternity

benefits. Human resource managers also want to revaluate their existing

personnel practices to incorporate practices relating to flexible hours and

time off a child illness as part of their practices and the possibility of flexible

work hours. They also felt that monetary support of community child-care

facilities better than on-site child care and also found that increased

satisfaction of workers due to implementation of quality of work life

programs that helps them balance the stress of work-life conflict may

increase productivity, employee morale, and overall corporate productivity.

Research gap: The study considered only work related issues and ignored

social orientation, physical environment, participation in decision making,

grievance handling procedure and stress.

Benarjee and Rojarani (2004) examined the perception of the employees

regarding QWL in a public sector undertaking in Vishakhapatnam. The total

117
 Chapter 4

number of employees in the organisation were 6072, out of which 305

employees (i.e. skilled, semi skilled and un skilled workers) selected on the

basis of random sampling were contacted for data collection. The data has

been analysed on the basis of means and percentages. This study was based

on 11 dimensions i.e. working conditions, autonomy, relation with

organisation, pay structure, work complexity, welfare complexity, welfare

facilities, personal growth, group cohesiveness, workers participation, job

stress and job design. The schedule method was used to collect the data that

was divided into two parts i.e. first part consisted of the questions related to

understanding the perceptions of employees and second part was regarding

the worker involvement. The results revealed that employees satisfied with

QWL in their organisations had job involvement. It has been found that less

menial work causes high satisfaction from all factors of QWL. The level of

autonomy and participative decision making was high, which made the jobs

more interesting and meaningful and lead to higher job satisfaction.

Research gap: Work-life balance and grievance handling procedure were

not considered in this study.

Gifford et al., (2004) investigated the relationships between unit

organizational culture and several important job-related variables for nurse

retention in the labor and delivery units of seven hospitals located in five

118
 Chapter 4

western U.S. cities. The data was collected from 276 respondents. Response

rate was 33% across all hospitals. The questionnaire was distributed through

mail system. The questionnaire consisted of standardised multi-item

measures that had been validated and shown to be reliable by other

researchers (Zammuto and Krakower1991; Shortell et al., 1995). They used

competing values framework (CVF) measures and quality of work life

measures. The CVF survey contained five questions that addressed various

components of an organization culture including the organization general

culture characteristics, leadership style, institutional bonding and strategic

emphasis and reward system. QWL measures included job satisfaction,

organization commitment, empowerment, job involvement and intent to

turnover. This study used competing value framework four models that

describe different valued outcomes that defined effective organizational

performance. These models were Internal process model, Rational goal

model, Human relation model, Open system model. Internal process model

focused on the stability and control of outcome. Human relation model

focused on human relations. Rational goal model put focus on efficiency and

productivity and open system model put focused on value outcomes of

growth and resource acquisition and external support through means such as

adoptability and readiness. The data was analyzed through mean and

119
 Chapter 4

correlation. The results indicated that human relation model has the strongest

statistical relationship with the QWL measures and is positively related with

commitment, job involvement, empowerment and job satisfaction. Also, the

human relation model has a statistically negative relationship with intent to

turnover and showed the relationship between the human relation model and

the QWL measures at each hospital. In terms of human relation model

significant differences existed for organization commitment, intent to

turnover, empowerment and job satisfaction and no differences were found

for job involvement.

Research gap: The variables used in this study for measuring quality of

work are infact the consequence of quality of work life (Sirgy et al., 2007).

Trau and Hartel (2002) conducted research for understanding and

awareness of sexual identity, and the career and work experiences of gay

men from the perspectives of HR professionals and career counselors in

Australian organizations. The data was collected from two perspectives i.e.

working gay men and Organisational practitioners. Online survey study was

conducted to capture the perspectives of working gay men across Australia.

In depth interviews were used to obtain the views of Organisational

practitioners. A total of 582 questionnaires were returned out of 1500

members. From Organisational practitioners only four individuals agreed to

120
 Chapter 4

be interviewed: two diversity consultants, one diversity officer and one co

coordinator of a gay men and lesbian social network in a multinational

organization. The various measures were used in this study viz. career

identity salience’s (Lobel and St. Clairs scale, 1992); fair treatment of gays

(Buttons scale, 2001); difficulty/confusion experienced in sexual identity

and development (New Man et al 1993); gay diversity in organization

(Tharenou, Latimer and Conroy 1994); quality of work life (two items were

used), Organisational commitment (Mowday, Steers and Porters, 1979 &

Blauand Tatum, 2000) field commitment (Mowday, Steers and Porters

1979), career satisfaction (Greenhaus et al., 1990), negative career effects

(Irwin’s, 1998), career encouragement (Tharenou, Latimer and Conroy,

1994) and career pursuit (a single item was used). Correlation, content

analysis and regression were used to analyse the data. Reliability was also

checked. The results revealed that gay men with identity difficulty have low

career satisfaction. Quality of work life was positively correlated with

organization commitment, field commitment, career satisfaction and career

pursuits where as it had no significant relationship with negative career

effects. Self confidence was positively correlated with organizational

commitment, field commitment, career satisfaction, career encouragement,

career pursuits and negatively correlated with negative career effects. Career

121
 Chapter 4

identity salience was positively related with organizational commitment,

field commitment, career satisfaction and career encouragement. No

significant relationship between career identity salience, negative career

effects and career pursuit was found. Higher quality of work life in the

organization led to higher organizational commitment through the higher

level of disclosure. The interviews with the practitioners revealed that one’s

sexual orientation may lead to job dissatisfaction, and even threat of legal

action. Those who were in the closet at work may fear that sexual disclosure

will lead to career restrictions or other negative consequences. As a result,

many of these sexual minorities resign from their work to resolve their inner

conflicts. A lack of initiative by top management due to limited

understanding of sexual orientation issues was still a barrier and sexual

orientation issues related to the sexual affairs were not relevant and

discussable in the work place. Hence, overall results indicated that identity

difficulty play a role in the quality of gay men’s career outcomes and

attitudes towards their job and employees.

Research gap: This study put more focused on organisational commitment

and career related aspects and measure quality of work life with two

statements.

122
 Chapter 4

Hossain and Islam (1999) investigated the overall quality of working life,

job satisfaction and performance of the small and large government hospital

nurses in Bangladesh, to understand the influence of QWL on job

satisfaction & examined the inter-correlations among some variables such as

age, experience, education, income, QWL, job satisfaction and performance.

The data was collected from the 63 nurses, which were taken from three

government general hospitals from two divisions of Bangladesh. Systematic

random sampling was used for data collection. F-Test, inter correlations, step

wise regression and descriptive statistics used to analyze the data. The

results revealed that the perception of QWL scores of the nurses of small

hospitals were significantly higher than those of the nurses of large hospitals

and the perception of QWL was significantly higher among the nurses of

morning shift than the nurses of night shift. The study suffered from some

limitation like small sample size and limited area of investigation.

Research gap: The sample size is small to generalize the findings and did

not consider the important aspects of quality of work life.

Hoque and Rahman (1999) measured the level of QWL in textile mills

situated at Tongi near Dhaka, Bangladesh and to find out differences in

QWL among workers of private and public sector organizations. The data

was collected from 100 workers, selected randomly using systematic random

123
 Chapter 4

sampling methods. T-test, correlation and descriptive statistical tools were

used to analyze the data. The results indicated that workers of private mills

have significantly higher level of QWL than the workers of public sector.

Further they have positive correlation with performance and negatively

related with absenteeism and accidents. The results also revealed that there

is significant positive correlation between accidents and absence of workers.

It has also been noted that there were no significant difference in QWL

according to age, education, work, experience and wages.

Research gap: The study focused only on the job behaviour like

performance, accident and absenteeism and ignored the important

dimensions of quality of work life.

Ghosh (1993) assessed mechanism for evaluation of QWL, through

construct development and the methods for improving QWL in an

organization in India. The primary data have been collected on the basis of

the stratified random sample was conducted among manufacturing, mining,

power generation and service sectors covering both public and private

enterprises. Only 13 organizations (i.e. 7 public and 6 private) responded.

Two case studies (1 privately owned manufacturing organization and 1

public sector bank) were also conducted out of the responding organization

for the purpose of additional in depth analysis of the data received. The

124
 Chapter 4

questionnaire was mailed to respondents. The categories covered such as

small group participative activities, joint consultation forum and other joint

committees at plant level, the work environment including safety, pay and

wage incentives, human resource development system including training,

career development and development promotion system, employee welfare

schemes, the constitutionalism in the work place as reflected in the

disciplinary procedure and grievance mechanism, determination of terms

and conditions of work by collective agreements, the level of job satisfaction

and disciplinary level of the employees. For assessing the QWL level, scores

were assigned to the factor reflecting QWL and then compared it to the

maximum marks for each. The results also revealed that management

perception was the core determinant of QWL, Affecting the organization’s

effectiveness and the participative activities. Work culture, motivation and

the environment of the work improved the QWL. It was concluded

management’s perception being the core category of QWL; major emphasis

should be placed on this category, through remodeling the organizational

structure and the corporate strategy emphasis and also through greater

investment in management development to improve this perception. Human

resource development and management steps should be undertaken to

improve the work culture & motivation for improving the participative

125
 Chapter 4

group activities and job environment measures. Management active interest

and involvement in various forms viz; the job enrichment activities, socio-

cultural activities also improve quality of work life. The finding of the case

studied showed that the work culture affects the QWL. In Canara bank &

Telco both had good management and good managerial perception but there

work culture differed, which affected the QWL. The work culture of TELCO

was more impressive due to involvement of employees in suggestion

schemes as compared to Canara bank.

Research gap: The study ignored the important dimensions like work-life

balance, stress; social orientation .They also ignored demographic variables

in their study.

Eaton et al., (1992) examined the relationship between QWL participation

and member commitment to the union efficacy of the grievance procedure

and QWL. The data was collected from 400 respondents out of 630

employees. Questionnaire was used to collect the data. Respondents were

member of private sector, industrial union that had represented both

technicians and clerical workers employed by four companies. The

questionnaire contained four attitudinal measures viz. attitudes about QWL

& union commitment (Gordon et al., 1980, Ladd et al., 1982). Union loyalty

included 17 items and responsibility to the union included 4 items,

126
 Chapter 4

satisfaction with the union was a single item measure. Perception of

grievance system effectiveness included 18 items that measured attitudes

towards a grievance system (Frywell and Gordon, 1989) and job satisfaction

included five items. The results revealed that attitude about QWL was used

as the criterion and all of the predictors except having filed a grievance were

statistically significant. The greater the confidence of respondents in the

grievance system the smaller threat they perceived to the union from its

participation in the QWL program less concern about threat was indicated by

participants in QWL committees and respondents who were satisfied with

their jobs than non-participants and respondents were dissatisfied with their

jobs. Union representatives perceived a greater threat to the union than did

other respondents. Further respondents confidence in the grievance systems

ability to provide justice was strongly related to their loyalty to the union.

Greater loyalty to the union was also related to the participation on a QWL

committee and to getting older. None of other variables were significant

predictors of satisfaction with the union criterion; only the attitudinal

variables were significant predictors of higher job satisfaction. Hence, it has

been concluded that union members who participated in QWL program were

less likely than non participants to view QWL as a threat to the union and

127
 Chapter 4

also more loyal to the union. They perceived effectiveness of the grievance

procedure was a stronger determinant of attitudes toward the union.

Research gap: The study concentrated on evaluating the grievance system

effectiveness and measured quality of work life with the help of 4 statements

only.

Islam and Siengthai (2009) conducted research to identify the relationship

between quality of work life, employees’ satisfactions and organisational

performance. The data was collected from 216 respondents working in 53

enterprises in Dhaka export processing zone by using simple random

sampling method. Questionnaire was used to collect the data which included

33 items. The various measures used in this study were organisational

performance (Lau and May, 1998); employee job satisfaction (Hackman

and Oldham, 1980); quality of work life (Hackman and lawler, 1971); wage

policy, company policy and union. Descriptive analysis, correlation,

regression and chi-square test were used to analyse the data. Reliability was

also checked. The results revealed that except quality of work life, job

satisfaction, company policy, wage policy, union was positively associated

with organisational performance. It was also found that quality of work life,

company policy, wage policy, organisational performance was positively and

significantly related to employees’ job satisfaction. Further it was noted that

128
 Chapter 4

workers wages were not determined by market rates. Housing

accommodations allowances was very low which created dissatisfaction

among employees. They were also dissatisfied with profit bonus, production

bonus, job security, job opportunities, office transport facility and family life

as well as free working lunch.

Research gap: Social orientation, Growth and Recognition, Participation in

decision making, stress, Grievance handling procedure were ignored for

studying quality of work life.

Cheung and Tang (2009) investigated the association between emotional

labor and work family interference as well as the potential mediating role of

the quality of work life. The data was collected from 442 respondents out of

1100 working in five different Hongkong organisations. Respondents were

nurses, retail shop supervisors, call center representatives and administrative

staff. Questionnaire was used to collect the data. The various measures used

in this study were work-family interference (Netemeyer et al, 1996);

emotional labor for surface acting, deep acting, expression of naturally felt

emotions (Diefendorff et al., 2005); quality of work life (Sirgy et al., 2001);

display rules (Diefendorff et al., 2005). Correlation, chi-square, means, St.

Deviation, range, confirmatory factor analysis, MANOVA was used to

analysed the data. The results revealed that surface acting was significantly

129
 Chapter 4

associated with work-to-family. Interference while deep acting and

expression of naturally felt emotions were not related to work-to-family

interference (demographic variables and display rules were controlled). It

was found that QWL was negatively related with surface acting but

positively with deep acting and expressions of natural felt emotions at work.

The hierarchical regression analysis revealed that QWL had partially

mediated the relationship between surface acting and work-to-family

interference. Family-to-work interference was significantly related to surface

acting but not other emotional labor strategies.

Research gap: The study’s main scope was to examine work-to-family and

family-to-work interference. Moreover quality of work life has been

measured with the help of only few statements out of 26 of Sirgy et al.,

(2007).

Harrington and Santiago (2006) examined the relationship of rational and

hierarchical values to telecommuting implementation and to telecommuters’

quality of work life and professional isolation. The data collected from 78

participants comprised management and non-management employees from a

federal government agency. The questionnaire was used for data collection.

The various measures used in this study were telecommuter’s professional

isolation (Teo et al., 1998); quality of work life; corporate culture

130
 Chapter 4

(Greenwood and Hinings, 1993; Zammuto and Krakower, 1991). Mean, St.

Deviation, correlation, Z-test and rank-sum test were used to analyse the

data. The results revealed that telecommuting tend to occur in a less

hierarchical culture and there was no significant difference in the rational

culture between telecommuters and non- telecommuters. Quality of work

life and professional isolation were significant higher for telecommuters than

for non-telecommuters. Further higher levels of hierarchical and rational

values were associated with higher levels of quality of work life and less

professional isolation among telecommuters. It was found that

telecommuters in general reported lower levels of hierarchical values than

their non-telecommuting peers, and higher levels of hierarchical values were

associated with quality of work life and less professional isolation with in

telecommuters themselves.

Research gap: This study measured quality of work life on the basis of

three statements only and their reliability/validity was also not checked.

Yang et al., (2009) explored the relationship between perceived leadership

behaviour and quality of work life among teachers in an industrial vocational

high school in Taiwan. The data was collected from forty two teachers out of

one hundred four. Questionnaire were used to collect the data which was

divided into three parts viz. demographic, leadership behaviour (chang’s

131
 Chapter 4

1998), quality of work life (yang’s2002). The data was analysed by Mean,

St. Deviation, T-test, one way ANOVA, Pearson product moment correlation

and step wise regression. The results revealed that task oriented leadership

Behaviour was significantly related with all components of quality of work

life while relationship oriented leadership behaviour and personal example

leaded leadership Behaviour was significantly correlated with every

component except informal/material QWL. It was also found that

formal/material QWL and informal/mental QWL was the strongest predictor

of person’s example leaded leadership behaviour, and formal/mental QWL

was the strongest predictor of relationship- oriented leadership behaviour.

Informal/ material QWL and informal/mental QWL was the strongest

predictor of task- oriented leaded leadership behaviour. Further female

respondents satisfaction was significantly higher than male respondents in

informal/material and informal/mental quality of work life. Respondents

with different teaching experience were significantly different in relationship

oriented leadership behaviour. Respondents, who served administrative staff

concurrently were significantly different in formal/material and

informal/mental QWL. It has been concluded that the perspective of teachers

were positive in leadership Behaviour of the principal and QWL themselves.

132
 Chapter 4

The relationship between leadership Behaviour of the principal and QWL of

teachers was strong and positive in substance.

Research gap: The study ignored important aspects like work-life balance,

social orientation, growth & recognition, remuneration and physical

environment.

Sabarirajan et al., (2010) examined the various welfare measures provided

by the textile industry and its impact on quality of work life among the

employees in Salem district, Tamil Nadu. The data was collected from 250

respondents, selected from 10 textile mills (25 participants from each mill).

The statistical tools like chi-square, ANOVA and percentage analyses were

used to analyze the data. The results revealed that the employees were highly

satisfied with the welfare measures provided by the textiles mills and they

showed positive attitude towards the provision of the welfare measure.

Further they reported that there was significant and positive relationship

between welfare measures and medical facilities and employees having

experience between 5-10 years were highly satisfied with the safety

measures, working conditions, etc.

Research gap: This study put main focus on welfare measures and ignored

work-life balance, social orientation etc.

133
 Chapter 4

Edwards et al., (2009) conducted a first and second order confirmatory

factor analysis to test the multi and unidimensional factor structure of the

work related quality of life scale (WRQoL) scale and determined which

Wrqol model provides the best results. They also examined the level of

WRQoL for university employees in U.K.7530 employees were approached

to collect the data through questionnaire but 2136 employees responded

from four U.K Universities. Twenty-three item WRQoL scale (Van Laar et

al, 2007) was used to measure the six factors namely, Job& career

satisfaction, General well being, Home-work interference, Stress at work,

control at work and working conditions. The data was analysed through

Mean, St. Deviation and confirmatory factor analysis. The results reported

that the work-related quality of life is a multidimensional construct. First

order (multidimensional) produced a good fitting model while the second

order (unidimensional) produced an acceptable-to-good fitting model.

Further, results revealed that employees were dissatisfied with their jobs &

career aspects, work-life balance, general well-being. Working conditions

and level of control were also unsatisfactory. Moreover they felt stressed at

work place.

134
 Chapter 4

Research gap: Student behaviour, Participation in decision making,

Grievance handling procedure and Social orientation were not taken while

measuring QWL.

Kaur (2010) studied the satisfaction level of employees regarding training,

working conditions, performance appraisal etc of ICICI bank Ltd in

Chandigarh Region. The data was collected from Employees at various

levels working in the Branches of ICICI bank were interviewed and

Questionnaire was filled up. The data was analysed through mean and

percentage. The results revealed that employees of ICICI bank Ltd were

happy with the working conditions like Drinking water and Safety facilities

having fair and cordial relations with their supervisor and colleagues in the

Bank. They feel that they were safe and secure in Bank. But on the other

hand, they dissatisfied with less growth opportunities and are not provided

with extra care like health camps etc. Moreover they were not happy with

the way performance appraisal was done and feel that there management

was not flexible with their social responsibilities and hence they were less

satisfied with their jobs.

Research gap: This study measured quality of work life on the basis of few

dimensions only and their reliability/validity was also not checked

135
 Chapter 4

Azril et al., (2010) in his study discovered whether quality of work life

affects work performance of agriculture extension employee in Malaysia or

not. The data was collected from 180 employees (out of 200). Stratified

Random Sampling was used to collect the data. The nine independent

variables of quality of work life viz. Remunerations, Job satisfaction,

Interpersonal relationship, work environment, work environment,

Organizational support, Organizational policies & management style, Safety

& security, Individual & family life and Personnel health & well being. And

one dependent variable viz. work Performance was taken in this study.

Percentage, mean, St. Deviation, correlation and multiple linear regression

were used to analysed the data. The results revealed that all nine QOWL

aspects have positive and significant relationship with work performance.

Individual & family life portrays a positive and high relationship while job

related satisfaction, Personnel health & well being, Interpersonal

relationship, work environment, work environment in the organization have

positive and moderate relationship with work performance. On the other

hand Remunerations, Organizational support, Organizational policies &

management style have positive and low relationship. Further the results of

Multiple linear regression depict five variables i.e. Individual and family

life, Job satisfaction, Organizational policy and Management style, Work

136
 Chapter 4

environment and Remuneration were significantly contributing in explaining

the work performance of the government Agriculture Extension Officers.

Research gap: This study did not consider the some of the important aspects

of quality of work life like growth & recognition, stress, quality of job itself.

2.2 Overall Research gap

Many studies have been conducted to find the quality of work life among

employees in different sectors i.e. Hospitals, Industries etc. But there are

very few validated scales (Lee et al. 2007) that too with limited dimensions

of QWL (Edward et al 2009). This study proposes to study all the

dimensions of QWL and scale will be validated with the help of Exploratory

Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Interrelationships

between different dimensions will also be explored. Further the earlier

studies have not explored the perception of contractual teachers about the

QWL in higher education institutions, which will be undertaken in this

study.

2.3 Objective of the study

1 To study quality of work life in education sector.

2. To study the difference between contractual and permanent teachers.

3. To validate the quality of work life scale.

137
 Chapter 4

2.4 Hypothesis of the study

The perusal of the relevant literature facilitates the formulation of following

hypothesis:

Quality of work life is not a unitary concept; it is also concerned with a part

life as helps to balance personal life with job and reduces the stress level,

satisfaction with pay and relationships with colleagues and superiors (Morin

and Morin, 2000). Further Lau and Bruce(1998) also found that quality of

work life is a dynamic multidimensional construct that includes such

concepts as job security, reward systems, training and career advancements

opportunities, participation in decision making and safe and healthy working

conditions (Lau et al 2007).So the first hypothesis is:-

Hypo. 1 Quality of work life is a Multidimensional construct.

Obj. 1 To find out whether Quality of work life is a Unidimensional or

Multidimensional construct.

Higher education employee’s demands have accelerated in recent years. The

level of job control and support had declined due to some aspects of work

considered to be stressful like lack of respect and esteem, too much

138
 Chapter 4

administrative paper work, inadequate administrative and technical support,

lack of opportunity for promotion and in effective communication (Kinman

et al., 2006). Further Edwards et al (2009) indicated that higher education

employees are dissatisfied with the quality of work life. They are generally

dissatisfied with working conditions, jobs, career and control at work and

also reported they were stressed at home. This literature led to the

formulation of second hypothesis:-

Hypo.2 Teachers are dissatisfied with quality of work life in their

institutions.

Obj .2 To study the level of quality of work life among college teachers

Virtanen et al (2005) indicated that employees with a permanent contract

perceived a high level of employment security than contractual employees.

Wilson et al. (2008) researched that the employees in casual jobs perceived

that they had lower job quality than employees in permanent work. Further

Kompier et al (2009) in their study found differences between contract types

in quality of working life, generally permanent employees had better jobs;

where as temporary workers had more work characteristics. Temporary

workers had lower autonomy and more work load than permanent work

group. Hence the third hypothesis is:-

139
 Chapter 4

Hypo.3 There is difference in perception of quality of work life between

permanent and contractual teachers.

Obj (3) To find out the perceptual gap between permanent and contractual

teachers regarding quality of work life.

Sadique (2007) revealed that pay, allowance and compensation are the major

determinant of the quality of work life. While Dargahi and Yazdi (2007) felt

monetary compensation is one of the most important factor that added to

positive experience. High income is also one of the most important issues

for a high quality of work life and low income creates dissatisfaction among

employees (Saraji and Dargahi, 2006). All this facilitates the formulation of

fourth hypothesis:-

Hypo. 4 Higher the pay better is the perception about quality of work life.

Obj (4) To study the influence of pay on quality of work life of college

teachers.

Environment at the work place improves quality of work life (Ghosh, 1993)

as it was found one of the most important factor of quality of work life

(Dargahi and Yazdi, 2007). Further Gupta and Gupta (2009) found a positive

relationship between physical environment and quality of work life and also

explored the influence of physical environment on quality of work life. Lath

(2010) felt that environment of the working place had great impact on the

140
 Chapter 4

level of stress. Large classes, crowded staff areas, inadequate furniture &

poorly lit rooms’ increase the stress level. Further satisfactory working

condition decreases the level of occupational stress (Subramanian and

Nithyanandan, 2010). Hence the next hypothesis is:-

Hypo. 5. There is inverse relationship between physical environment and

stress.

Obj (5) To study the relationship between physical environment and stress.

Hypo. 5(a) Better the physical environment higher is quality of work life.

Obj5 (a) To study the impact of physical environment on quality of work life

among college

Workers who have experienced difficulties in balancing work and personal

life are likely to report chronic job stress, compared with those

experiencing no change or a reduction in work life balance difficulties

(Lowe, 2006). Further Allen et al (2000) indicated that the demands of

managing higher responsibility at work and home are also a potential

source of stress because it allows a spillover to family life. Social support

has a significant influence on the level of stress. Higher stress was found in

people with poorer social support (Feijoo, 2004). Further support from

friends, colleagues, and family can help to reduce stress and psychological

141
 Chapter 4

strains (Glowinkowski and Cooper, 1985). All this led to the formulation of

following Hypothesis:-

Hypo. 6 Work-Life balance and Quality of Social Relationships affects

Stress level.

Obj (6) To examine the effect of Work-life balance and quality of Social

relationships on the stress level of college teachers.

Charlie (2001) noted that there is gender based differences in teacher’s stress

(Mishra, 1996). Females are more exposed to stress than their male

counterparts (Ravichandran and Rajendran, 2009; Ahlberg et al., 2003)

because they have to make a balance between professional and home

responsibilities (Abosede, 2004). Further, the work and family

responsibilities becomes complicated and the unshared workload of women

by their spouses results in stress (Pina et al., 1993 and Nock and Kingston,

1984). Hence the next hypothesis is:-

Hypo. 7 Female teachers are more stressed than male teacher.

Obj 7 To find the degree of stress among Male and Female.

142
 Chapter 4

References

 Abosede, S. C. (2004). Stress Management among Female Academics

in Some Selected Nigerian Tertiary Institutions. Babcock Journal of

Management and Social Sciences, 2, 115-123.

 Ahlberg, J., Kononen, M., Rantala, M., Sarna, S., Lindholm, K. &

Nissinen, M. (2003). Self-Reported Stress among Multi Professional

Media Personnel. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 53, 403-405.

 Allen T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, C. S. & Sutton. M. (2000).

Consequence associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and

agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 5, 278-308.

 Argentero, P., Miglioretti, M. & Angilletta, C. (2007). Quality of Work

Life in a Cohort of Italian Health Workers. Supplemento A Psicologia,

29(1), 50-54.

 Azril, M. S. H., Jegak. U., Asiah, M., Azman, A. N., Bahaman, A. S.,

Jamilah, O. & Thomas, K. (2010). Can Quality of Work Life Affect

Work Performance among Government Agriculture Extension

Officers. Journal of social sciences, 6(1), 64-73.

143
 Chapter 4

 Beasley, J. W., Karsh, B. T., Hagenauer, M. E., Marchand, L. &

Sainfort, F. (2005). Quality of Work Life of Impendent Vs Employed

Family. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 500-506.

 Benarjee, D. B. R. N. K. & Rojarani, E. (2004). New Perspectives of

Quality of Work Life. The Indian Journal of Commerce, 57(1), 73-81.

 Charlie, N. (2001). Teacher Workload and Stress: An International

Perspective on Human Costs and Systemic Failure. BCTF Research

Report. From http:/ /www.bctf.ca (Retrieved September 30, 2010).

 Cheung, F. Y. L., & Tang, C. S. K. (2009). Quality of Work Life as a

Mediator between Emotional Labour and Work Family Interference.

Journal of Business Psychology, 24, 245-255.

 Dargahi, H. & Yazdi, M. K. S. (2007). Quality of Work Life in Tehran

University of Medical Sciences Hospitals’ Clinical Laboratories

Employees. Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(4), 630-633.

 Dhar, R. L. (2008). Quality of Work Life: A Study of Municipal

Corporation Bus Drivers. The Journal of International Social

Research, 1(5), 251-272.

 Eaton, A. E., Gordon, M. E., & Keefe, J. H. (1992). The Impact of

QWL Programs and Grievance System Effectiveness on Union

Commitment. Industrial and Labour Relations, 45(3), 591-604.

144
 Chapter 4

 Edwards, J. A., Laar, D. V., Easton, S. & Kinman, G. (2009). The

Work Related Quality of Life Scale for Higher Education Employees.

Quality in Higher Education, 15(3), 207-219.

 Elias, M. S. & Saha, N. K. (2005). Environmental Pollution and

Quality of Working Life in Tobacco Industries. Journal of Life Earth

Science, 1(1), 21-24.

 Feijoo, N. R. (2004). Job Insecurity And Stress Level,

Interdisciplinaria. Numero Especial.1, 249-257.

 Ghosh, S. (1993). Improvement of Quality of Work at Micro Level.

Productivity, 34(3), 463-472.

 Gifford, A. E., Gordon, M. E. & Keefe, J. H. (2004). The Relationship

between Hospital Unit Culture and Nurses Quality of Work Life.

Journal of Health Care Management, 47(1) 13-26.

 Glowinkowski, S. P. & Cooper, C. L. (1985).Current Issues in

Organisational Stress Research. Bulllentein of the British

Psychological Society, 38, 212-216.

 Gupta, J. J. & Gupta, P. (2009). Quality of Work Life among

Employees– A Study of Non-Teaching Employees of University Of

Jammu. Arth Anvesan, 4(1&2), 19-28.

145
 Chapter 4

 Harrington, S. J. & Santiago, J. (2006). Organisational Culture and

Telecommuters’ Quality of Work Life and Professional Isolation.

Communications of the IIMA, 6(3), 1-9.

 Hoque, M. E. & Rahman, A. (1999). Quality of Working Life and Job

Behavior of Workers in Bangladesh: A Comparative Study of Private

and Public Sectors. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 35 (2),

175-184.

 Hossain, M. M. & Islam, M. D. (1999). Quality of Working Life and

Job Satisfaction of Government Hospital Nurses in Bangladesh. IJIR

34(3) 292-302.

 Islam, M. Z. & Siengthai, S. (2009). Quality of Work Life and

Organizational Performance: Empirical Evidence from Dhaka Export

Processing Zone.http://www.ilo.org/pub.1-19.

 Kaur, D. (2010). Quality of Work Life in ICICI Bank Ltd,

Chandigarh. International Research Journal, 1(11), 28-29.

 Khani, A., Jaaforpour, M., Dyrekvandmogadam, A. (2008). Quality of

Nursing Work Life. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research,

2(6), 1169-1174.

146
 Chapter 4

 Kinman, G., Jones, F. & Kinman, R. (2006).The Well-Being of the

UK academy. Quality in Higher Education 12 :( 1), pp. 15-27.

 Kompier, M., Ybema, J. F., JANSEEN, J. & TARIS, T.

(2009).Employment Contracts: A Cross - Sectional and Longitudinal

Relations with Quality of Work Life, Health and Well Being. Journal

of Occupational Health. 51, 193-203

 Larsen, M. (2008). Does Quality of Work Life Affect Men and

Women’s Retirement Planning Differently? The International Society

for Quality of Life Studies, 3, 23-42.

 Lath, S. K. (2010). Study of the Occupational Stress among Teachers.

International Journal of Educational Administration, 2(2), 421-432.

 Lau, R. S. M. & Bruce, E. (1998). A Win-Win Paradigm for Quality of

Work Life and Business Performance. Human Resource Development,

9(3), 211-226.

 Lau, H., While, A. E. & Barriball, K. L. (2007). A Model of Job

Satisfaction of Nurses: A Reflection of Nurses' Working Lives in

Mainland China. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(2), 468-479.

 Lawler, E. E., (1982). Strategies for Improving the Quality of Work

Life’ cited in American Psychologist (2005), 37, 486-493.

147
 Chapter 4

 Lee D. J., Singhapakdi, A. & Sirgy, M. J. (2008). Further Validation of

a Need–Based Quality of Work Life. Applied Research Quality Life, 2,

273-287.

 Littlefield, K. L. (2004). Quality of Work Life Issues- The Needs of

the Dual Career Couple Employee Perceptions of Personnel Practices:

A Study of Rural America; A Barometer For Human Resource

Managers. Proceedings of the Academy of Organisational Culture,

Communications and Conflict, 8 (1), 27-34.

 Lowe, G. (2006). Under pressure. Implications of Work Life Balance

and Job Stress. Human solutions report.

 Morin, E. M & Morin, W. (2000). QWL and Firm Performance at

Canada. ICFAI. VOL. NO.

 Mishra, P. K. (1996). Quoted in Pestonjee, D.M. (1999) Stress and

Coping. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

 Nock, S. L. & Kingston, P. W. (1984). The Family Work Day. Journal

of Marriage and Family, 46, 333-343.

 Pina, D. L. & Bengtson, V. L. (1993). The Division of Household

Labor and Wives’ Happiness: Ideology, Employment and Perceptions

of Support. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55, 901-912.

148
 Chapter 4

 Ravichandran, R. & Rajendran, R. (2007). Perceived Sources of Stress

among the Teachers. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied

Psychology, 33(1), 133-136.

 Rose, R. C., Beh, L. S., Uli, J., & Idris, K. (2006). Quality of Work

Life: Implications of Career Dimensions. Journal of Social Sciences,

2(2), 61-67.

 Saad, H. S., Samah, A. J. A. & Juhdi, N. (2008). Employee’s

Perception on Quality of Work Life and Job Satisfaction in Private

Higher Learning Institutions. International Review of Business

Research Papers, 4(3) 23-34.

 Sabarirajan, A., Meharajan, T. & Arun, P. (2010). A Study on the

Various Welfare Measures and their Impact on QWL Provided by the

Textile Mills with Reference to Salem District, Tamil Nadu, India.

Asian Journal of Management Research, 1(1), 15-24.

 Sadique, M. Z. (2007). The Impact of Designation, Experience and

Age on Existing and Expected Quality of Work Life: A Case Study of

Four Sugar Mills in Bangladesh. Daffodil International University

Journal of Business and Economics, 2(1), 155-169.

 Saraji, G. N. & Dargahi, H. (2006). Study of Quality of Work Life.

Iranian Journal of Public Health, 35(4), 8-14.

149
 Chapter 4

 Subramanian, S. & Nithyanandan, D.V. (2010). Occupational Stress

and Mental Health of Cardiac and Non Cardiac Patients.

www.industrialpsychiatry.org.on.

 Trau, R. N. C. & Hartel, C. E. J. (2002) Individual and Contextual

Factors Affecting Quality of Work Life and Work Attitudes of

Gaymen. Working Paper Series, 23(03), 1-16.

 Virtanen M., Kivimaki M., Joensuu M., Virtanen P., Elovainio M. &

Vahtera J. (2005). Temporary employment and health: a review.

International Journal of Epidemiology, 34, 610-622.

 Watanabe, M., Tanaka, K., Aratake, Y., Kato, N. & Sakata, Y. (2008).

The Impact of Effort Reward Imbalance on Quality of Life among

Japanese Working Men. Industrial Health, 46, 217-222.

 Wilson, K., Brown, M, Cregan, C., (2008). Job Quality and Flexible

Practices: An Investigation of Employees’ Perceptions. The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(3), 473-

486.

 Yang, C. C., Li, Y. H. & Wei, L .C. (2009). The Relationship between

Leadership Behaviour of a Principal and Quality of Work Life of

Teachers in an Industrial Vocational High School in Taiwan.

http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper. retrieved on Jan 21, 2009.

150
 Chapter 4

Chapter 3

The previous chapter was based on review of literature, which helped in

extracting the research gap for this study. In order to bridge research gap

hypotheses were framed and to check those hypotheses following steps were

taken to make the study objective and accurate:

3.1 Generation of scale items

151
 Chapter 4

The generation of the questionnaire was finalised after reviewing the

existing literature and detailed discussion with the subject experts. The

questionnaire comprised two sections the first section was concerned about

the demographic profile of the college teachers where they were asked about

their age, gender, name of the college, qualification, working status of the

life partner, designation, work experience, marital status, monthly salary and

nature of job.

The second section comprised 70 statements related to Quality of Work Life

(QWL). The Quality of Work Life of teachers has been measured with the

help of Quality of Work Life Scale (QWLS) which comprised 10 dimensions

viz. Physical environment (8 statements), Remuneration (9statements),

Social orientation (10 statements), Work life balance (6 statements), Growth

and Recognition (6 statements), Quality of Job itself (10 statements),

Participation in Decision making (9 statements), Stress (7 statements),

Grievance Handling (8 statements) and Student behaviour (7 statements).

One overall master statement of Quality of Work Life “I am satisfied with

Quality of Work Life in the organization” as well as one master statement for

each dimension has been included. The items for this construct were

generated from the research work of Lee et al (2007), Saklani (2003), Eaton

152
 Chapter 4

et al (1992), Islam and Siengthai (2009), Ghosh (1993), Sadique (2007),

Beasley et al (2005) and Edwards et al (2009).

3.2 Nature and sources of information

Both the primary and secondary sources relevant for gathering requisite

information have been used in the study. Primary data based on first hand

information has been generated from the college teachers through self

developed questionnaire. Secondary information has been collected from

various books, reputed Journals viz. The Indian Journal of Commerce, The

Journal of Human Resource Management, Productivity, Journal of Industrial

Relations, Journal of Business Research, Applied Research Quality Life,

International Review of Business Research, The International Journal of

Social Research, The International Society For Quality of Life Studies,

Journal of Social Sciences, Annals of Family Medicines, Indian Journal of

Industrial Relations, Industrial and Labour Relations and so on. Unpublished

source viz. internet was also used to substantiate primary information.

3.3 Sample and Sampling Technique

Teachers working in various Govt. Degree colleges in Jammu district have

been selected for data collection. There are nine colleges in Jammu district

out of which three colleges are newly established and they do not have their

own infrastructure/college building so the teachers from these three colleges

153
 Chapter 4

were not contacted. The lists of college teachers were obtained individually

from all the six colleges. The population for the study comprised 608 college

teachers. To determine the sample size, a pilot survey of fifty respondents

selected conveniently was conducted to work out the mean and standard

deviation in the population with the help of following two formulas

(Mukhopadhya, 1998, 21-32)

(I) 1.96*S.D √ N-n/n*N= 0.05* mean

Key- S.D= Standard Deviation, N= Total population, n= Sample population,

Mean= sample mean.

Burns and Bush (2005) (p.378-379)

(ii) S2*z2/e2

Key- n= Sample Size, Z= Standard error (1.96) associated with the

chosen level of confidence, S= Variability indicated by an estimated

standard deviation, e= amount of precision or allowable error in the

sample estimate of the population.

After determining the mean and standard deviation in the population

608, the sample size was worked out at 47 and 20 respectively when the

above two formulas were applied. This sample was very small for

application of multivariate techniques like, Exploratory factor analysis,

Confirmatory factor analysis, which we have proposed to use in our

154
 Chapter 4

study. These techniques require at five to ten respondents per variable

(Hair et al, 2006). So it was decided to find out the sample size

according to number of items to be used to study quality of work life. In

this case the number of respondents were 608 i.e. 399 permanent and

209 contractual. So it was decided to collect data with census method

(Taylor and Sarros, 2000) after discussion with the subject expert.

3.4 Data Collection

The primary data has been collected through the personal visits paid to each

college between April-June 2010 and questionnaires were distributed to all

college teachers. Four visits were paid to each college teacher for the

collection of questionnaires.

Name of college Questionnaires Distributed Response Rate

M.A.M College 99 58 (59%)

G.C.W. Parade 155 84 (55%)

G.C.W. Gandhi Nagar 130 56 (43%)

G.G.M. Science College 160 51(32%)

S.P.M.R. College of Commerce 49 46 (94%)

Govt. College of Education 15 10 (67%)

Total 608 305

The response rate was 50.1%

3.5 Demographic Profile

155
 Chapter 4

The demographic profile of the teachers was identified according to Name of

the college Age, Marital status, Gender, Qualification, Designation, Nature

of Job, Work Experience Monthly Gross Salary and Working Status of the

Life Partner. Brief profile of the college teachers for the year 2009-2010,

who were contacted to gather primary information pertaining to their quality

of work life, is described in Table 3.1.

3.6 Statistical Tools Applied

The information obtained through self developed questionnaires has been

processed and suitably analysed in order to bring out precise results with the

help of appropriate statistical tools. The analysis of quality of work life has

been carried out with the help of mean, standard deviation and frequency

distribution. Mean has been used in order to know the value of each

observation. Further, standard deviation has been analysed to work out the

amount of variations in the respondents views (Beri, 2005). The, frequency

distribution provides much more concise portrayal of the data (Tull and

Hawkin, 1993). Coefficient of correlations have been computed to know the

nature of associations between quality of work life (dependent variable) and

other variables like Physical environment, Remuneration, Social orientation,

Work life balance, Growth and Recognition, Quality of Job itself,

Participation in Decision making, Stress, Grievance Handling and Student

156
 Chapter 4

behaviour. ANOVA has been used to see the mean difference between

variables. The degree of variation between dependent and independent

variables has been calculated through coefficient of determination (Boyd,

Westfall and Stasch, 1988). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used for

scale purification. After applying EFA, Confirmatory factor analysis was

applied to assess the proposed measurement model fit and scale validation.

For testing the hypothesis‘t’-test, has been applied. The reliability and the

internal consistency of the data collected have been judged through tests like

the split half and Cronbach’s alpha.

3.7 Reliability

3.7.1 Internal consistency reliability: It refers to the extent to which items

intercorrelate with one another. Internal consistency implies that multiple items

measure the same construct, and intercorrelate with one another. In contrast, low

inter-item correlations indicate that some items are not drawn from the

appropriate domain and produce unreliability (Churchill, 1979). The commonly

accepted measure of internal consistency reliability is Cronbach’s coefficient

alpha. The value of an alpha of 0.70 is the minimum acceptable standard for

demonstrating internal consistency (Kennedy et al. 2002).

3.7.2 Construct reliability: It is the measure of reliability and internal

consistency of the measured variables represent latent construct. It is easily

157
 Chapter 4

computed from the squared sum of factor loadings for constructs and the sum of

the error terms for a construct (Hair et al. 2006)

CR= (Sum of standardized loadings)/ (Sum of standardized loading) + Sum

of error terms.

The rule of thumb for CR is .70 or higher (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).

3.7.3 Split-Half reliability: A measure of consistency where data is split in two

and the scores for each half of the test is compared with one another.

3.8 Validity

3.8.1 Face/Content validity: It is the extent to which the content of the items is

consistent with the construct definition (Hinkin, 1995). It can be established

through existing literature on the subject or discussions with subject experts.

3.8.2 Construct validity: It is the extent to which a set of measured items

actually reflects the theoretical latent construct. It deals with the accuracy of

measurement. Evidence of construct validity provides confidence that the items

measured taken from a sample represent the actual true score that exists in the

population. It deals with the accuracy of measurement. Basically it is made up of

different components:

3.8.2.1 Convergent Validity: Convergent validity tests the extent to which the

covariance between the two measures is uniquely explained by the trait factor

158
 Chapter 4

. Thus, items that are indicators of a specific construct should converge or share a

high proportion of variance in common. It can be established in following ways:

3.8.2a. Factor Loadings: High factor loadings, i.e., above .50 or ideally .70 or

higher, indicate level of convergence.

3.8.2b. Variance Extracted: In CFA, the average percentage of variance

extracted (VE) is a summary indicator of convergence. VE has been calculated by

using standardised loadings, which is as under:

VE= Sum of Squared Standardised Factor Loadings/ Number of Items

If VE comes above .50, convergent validity gets established

3.8.3 Discriminant validity: Discriminant validity refers to the extent to which

the measures differs from other similar measures designed to measure different

concepts. It can be examined through the evaluation of the variance extracted

(VE) (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). They suggested that the VE for each construct

should be greater than squared correlation between constructs.

3.9 Exploratory Factor Analysis (Scale Purification)

The multivariate data reduction technique of factor analysis has been used for the

study. It involves examination of interrelationships (correlations) among

variables and reduction of large number of variables into few manageable and

meaningful sets. Factor analysis was carried out through the Statistical Package

for Social Sciences (SPSS, 15.0 version) to simplify and reduce the data. It was

159
 Chapter 4

carried with Principal Component Analysis method along with orthogonal

rotation procedure of varimax for summarizing the original information with

minimum factors and optimal coverage. The statements with factor loading and

communalities less than 0.5 and Eigen value less than 1.0 were ignored for the

subsequent analysis (Hair et al., 2006). The data reduction was performed in three

steps- Ist in the anti-image correlation matrix the items with value less than 0.5

on the diagonal axis were deleted. In the second step the extracted communalities

were checked (amount of variance in each variable) and items with values less

than 0.5 were ignored for the subsequent analysis. In the third step in rotated

component matrix statements with multiple loadings and values less than 0.5

were ignored.

3.10 Confirmatory factor analysis (Scale validation)

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is a statistical technique used to verify the

factor structure of a set of observed variables. CFA allows the researcher to test

the hypothesis that a relationship between observed variables and their

underlying latent constructs exists. After purifying the scale items using EFA and

reliability analysis, the final factor that emerged from EFA were confirmed

through CFA. To further refine all measures for CFA analysis, measurement

models were estimated using maximum likelihood estimation (AMOS). It is a

way of testing how well measured variables represent a smaller number of

160
 Chapter 4

constructs. In CFA no distinction is made between exogenous and endogenous

constructs, hence it is an interdependence technique like, EFA. CFA is different

from exploratory factor analysis, as in EFA all measured variables are related to

every factor by a factor loading estimate. However in CFA, researcher has to

assign variables to each factor on the basis of preconceived theory. CFA, using

the maximum-likelihood method and the following measures to assess the fit

between the obtained solution and the assumed model: Root Mean Square Error

of Approximation (RMSEA), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), Goodness

of Fit Index (GFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Normed fit index (NFI), and

Chi-Square (χ2)/degrees of freedom (df). A small RMSEA value corresponds to a

good fit. RMSEA values less than 0.08 were used to indicate good fit of the data

(Joreskog and Sorbom, 1993). CFI ranges from 0 to 1 with a larger value

indicating better model fit. Acceptable model fit is indicated by a CFI value of

0.90 or greater (Hu & Bentler, 1999). GFI, NFI and AGFI values close to 1

indicate a good fit (Kline,1998 and DeVellis, 2003).GFI, NFI and AGFI values

between 0.90-0.95 (MacCallum et al.,1996and Joreskog and Sorbom, 1993) and

RMSEA values between 0.05 and 0.08 are also acceptable for the model

(Byrne,1998). According to Marsh et al (2004), it is also acceptable for the model

if the GFI value is 0.85 and AGFI value is over 0.80. Chi-square was also

referred as ‘badness of fit’ (Kline, 2005) or a ‘lack of fit’ (Mulaik et al.,1989).

161
 Chapter 4

The χ2/df ratios of less than 5 are used to indicate acceptable fit to the data and of

less than 3 a good fit to the data (Kline, 1998).

3.11 Limitation of the study

All feasible efforts were made to maintain objectivity, reliability and validity of

the study, yet certain limitations could not be ignored and are required to be kept

in mind whenever its findings are considered for implementation. These

limitations are discussed as under:

1. The study has measured teachers’ quality of work life on the basis of the

teachers’ responses which might have been guided by their likes and dislikes.

2. The scope of the study was limited to Government Degree Colleges of Jammu

city only.

3. The data was collected only from the government college teachers.

4. The information obtained about their quality of work life is not fully free from

subjectivity.

The elements of subjectivity might not have been checked completely as teachers

have responded on the basis of their own experience and perception regarding the

quality of work life statements in the scale.

To certain extent the aforesaid limitations have affected the findings of the study.

In spite of these unmanageable lacunae at individual level, an effort has been

made to maintain the validity and reliability of the research work, and as such

162
 Chapter 4

research in future ought to be initiated carefully in the light of the aforesaid

limitation

Table 3.1 Demographic profile of respondents of Govt. Degree

colleges in Jammu city
Variables N %
M.A.M 58 19
G.C.W parade 84 26
G.C.W. Gandhi 56 18
College Nagar
G.G.M 51 17
S.P.M.R 46 15
Govt. Education 10 3
20-25 10 3

163
 Chapter 4

26-30 80 26
Age 31-35 61 20
36-40 49 16
41-45 46 15
46-50 35 11
51-55 24 8
Married 56 18
Marital
Unmarried 249 82
Male 99 32
Sex
Female 206 68
P.G. 194 64
Qualification M.Phil/Net. 41 13
Phd 70 23
Lecturer 176 58
Sr. Lecturer 61 20
Designation
Selection Grade 68 22
Lecturer
Nature of job Permanent 204 67
Contractual 101 33
Work 1-10 190 62
experience 11-20 68 23
21-30 41 13
31-40 6 2
Working working 222 73
status of life Non-working 83 27
partner
Below20000 101 33
Income 21000-40000 80 26
41000-60000 45 15
61000-80000 79 26
N stands for Number, % stands for percentage of the teachers

164
 Chapter 4

REFERENCES

 DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Factor Analysis, Scale Development Theory

and Applications SAGE publications. Applied Social Research

Method Series, 2, 26, 10-137.

 Joreskog, K. G. & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equating

Modeling with Simples Command Language Scientific Software

International, IL, USA.

165
 Chapter 4

 Bentler, P. M. & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and

goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structure. Psychological

Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.

 Boyd, H. W., Westfall, R. & Stasch, S. (6th ed.) (1985). Marketing

research text and cases. Illinois: Homewood.

 Burns, A. C. & Bush, R. F. (5th ed.) (2005). Marketing Research,

Dorling Kndersley (India) Pvt. Ltd., Licensees of Pearson Education

in South Asia.

 Churchill, G. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of

marketing constructs,” Journal of marketing research, 16 (1), 64-73.

 Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation

Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal

of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.

 Hair, J. J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. B. (2006).

Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

 Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the

study of organisations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967-988.

166
 Chapter 4

 Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indices in

covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new

alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.

 Kline R. B. (1998). Principles and Practices of Structural Equation

Modeling the Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA.

 Kennedy, K. N., Felicia, G. I. and Jerry, R. G. (2002), “Customer

mind-set of employees throughout the organisation,” Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 30(2), 159-171.

 MacCallum, R. C., Brawne, M. W. & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power

Analysis and Determination of Sample Sizes for Covariance Structure

Modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149.

 Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van, A. J., Bennett, N., Lind, S. &

Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of Goodness-Of-Fit Indices for

Structural Equation Models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430-445.

 Sarros, J. C. (2000). Values-based leadership: A new challenge for

business executives. In R. Edwards, C. Nyland and M. Coulthard

(eds.), Readings in International Business: An Asia Pacific

Perspective. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Prentice Hall.

 Spector, P. E. (1996), “Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment,

Causes and Consequences”, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

167
 Chapter 4

 Taylor, T., Gough, J., Bundrock, V., & Winter, R. P. (1998). A Bleak

Outlook: Academic Staff Perceptions of Changes in Core Activities in

Australian Higher Education, 1991-Studies in Higher Education,

23(3), 255-268.

 Tull, D. S. & Hawkin, D. I. (9th ed.) (1993). Marketing Research:

Measurement and Methods., New York: McMillan Publishing

Company.

 Winter, R., Tony T. & James, S. (2000). Trouble at Mill: Quality of

Academic Work Life Issues within a Comprehensive Australian

University. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 255-268.

 Lee D. J., Singhapakdi, A. & Sirgy, M. J. (2008). Further Validation of

a Need–Based Quality of Work Life. Applied Research Quality Life, 2,

273-287.

 Eaton, A. E., Gordon, M. E., & Keefe, J. H. (1992). The Impact of

QWL Programs and Grievance System Effectiveness on Union

Commitment. Industrial and Labour Relations, 45(3), 591-604.

 Islam, M. Z. & Siengthai, S. (2009). Quality of Work Life and

Organizational Performance: Empirical Evidence from Dhaka Export

Processing Zone.http://www.ilo.org/pub.1-19.

168
 Chapter 4

 Ghosh, S. (1993). Improvement of Quality of Work at Micro Level.

Productivity, 34(3), 463-472.

 Sadique, M. Z. (2007). The Impact of Designation, Experience and

Age on Existing and Expected Quality of Work Life: A Case Study of

Four Sugar Mills in Bangladesh. Daffodil International University

Journal of Business and Economics, 2(1), 155-169.

 Beasley, J. W., Karsh, B. T., Hagenauer, M. E., Marchand, L. &

Sainfort, F. (2005). Quality of Work Life of Impendent Vs Employed

Family. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 500-506.

 Edwards, J. A., Laar, D. V., Easton, S. & Kinman, G. (2009). The

Work Related Quality Of Life Scale for Higher Education Employees.

Quality in Higher Education, 15(3), 207-219.

 Saklani D. R. (2003). Quality of Work Life: Instrument design. Indian

journal of industrial relations, 38(4), 480-503.

 Beri, G. C. (3rd ed.) (2005). Marketing Research. New Delhi: Tata

McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

 Mukhophadhya, P. (2nd ed.) (1998). Theory and Methods of Survey

Sampling. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

169
 Chapter 4

Chapter 4

The data has been duly purified before analysing it with the help of factor

anaysis. The detail of which are as under:

4.1 Scale Purification- EFA

Quality of work life scale consisted of 70 statements and 11 master

statements. The master statements were excluded from the purification

process. Initially in the 1st round there is no deletion of items in the Anti

image and communalities but in rotated component matrix 7 items got

dropped due to factor loading below 0.5. In second round after deleting the 7

items there was no deletion in Anti image but in communalities 1 item got

170
 Chapter 4

deleted. Again in third round, in rotated component matrix 3 items got

dropped. In fourth round 2 items got deleted in rotated component matrix. In

fifth round 1 item was deleted in rotated component matrix. Finally in the

sixth round no item was deleted Anti image, communalities and rotated

component matrix. Finally, 70 statements were reduced to, which 57 got

grouped under 10 factors viz. Remuneration (F1), Grievance Handling (F2),

Quality of Job itself (F3), Student behaviour (F4), Stress (F5), Work-life

balance (F6), Participation in Decision making (F7), Physical environment

(F8), Social orientation (F9) and Growth and Recognition (F10) with

positive factor loadings and extracted communalities (greater than 0.5), good

Eigen value (>1). High KMO value (0.925) gave the required adequacy for

factor analysis. The total variance explained by the 10 factors has arrived at

75 percent. The outcome of factor analysis is presented in table 4.1. The

detailed analysis of scale purification is as under:

4.1.1Remuneration (F1): It consisted of 8 statements with positive factor

loading values viz. 0.86, 0.851, 0.829, 0.824, 0.793, 0.785, 0.785, 0.757 and

communalities were above 0.5. The variance explained has arrived at 12

percent.

4.1.2 Grievance Handling (F2): It comprised 7 statements with positive

factor loading values viz. 0.78, 0.771, 0.767, 0.752, 0.725, 0.699, 0.595 and

171
 Chapter 4

communalities were above 0.5. The total variance explained by this factor

has arrived at 9 percent.

4.1.3 Quality of Job itself (F3): After purifying the scale, 7 statements

emerged under this factor with positive factor loading values viz. 0.725,

0.715, 0.687, 0.679, 0.667, 0.608 and 0.554. About nine percent variance is

being explained by this factor.

4.1.4 Student behaviour (F4): Six statements have converged under this

factor after applying factor analysis. All statements have factor loadings and

extracted communalities between 0.5-0.9 (Table 1). This factor is explaining

Eight percent of the total variation.

4.1.5 Stress (F5): All the six statements in this factor have positive factor

loadings (0.891, 0.885, 0.872, 0.837, 0.821 and 0.754), and extracted

communalities (>.5), very good Eigen values (> 1). This factor is responsible

for 7.95 percent variation.

4.1.6 Work life balance (F6): It consisted of 5 statements with positive

factor loading values viz. 0.851, 0.813, 0.797, 0.778, 0.744 and

communalities were above 0.5. The total variance explained by this factor is

7 percent.

4.1.7 Participation in Decision making (F7) After purification 6

statements were emerged under this factor with positive factor loading

172
 Chapter 4

values viz. 0.727, 0.715, 0712, 0.711, 0.691, 0.644. This factor has explained

seven percent of the total variation.

4.1.8 Physical environment (F8): It comprised four statements with

positive factor loading values viz. 0.772, 0.743, 0.718, 0.583 and

communalities were above 0.5. The total variance explained by this factor

has arrived at five percent.

4.1.9 Social orientation (F9): All the four statements in this factor have

positive factor loadings (0.801, 0.769, 0.767 and 0.657), and extracted

communalities (> .5), very good Eigen values (> 1). This factor is

responsible for five percent variation.

4.1.10Growth and Recognition (F10): It consisted of four statements with

positive factor loading values (0.622, 0.612, 0.599, 0.580) and

communalities were above 0.5. This factor is responsible for 4 percent

variations.

4.2 Scale validation

CFA was performed to assess fitness, reliability and validity of measurement

models for ten measured sub-scales of quality of work life viz.

Remuneration (F1), Grievance Handling (F2), Quality of Job itself (F3),

Student behaviour (F4), Stress (F5), Work-life balance (F6), Participation in

Decision making (F7), Physical environment (F8), Social orientation (F9)

173
 Chapter 4

and Growth and Recognition (F10). In the present study before running

CFA, EFA was carried out to restrict the number of indicators. In, CFA items

with standardised regression weights (factor loading) less than .70 were

deleted (Hair et al., 2009).

4.2.1 Measurement Models

Review of literature guides us towards two concepts of QWL, one being First

order (Multidimensional) and other being Second order (Unidimensional)

Confirmatory factor analysis (Edwards et al.,2009). So to arrive at best model,

both type of model were fitted through AMOS (15 version). Quality of work

life comprised ten subscales/factors that emerged after Exploratory Factor

Analysis (EFA), which were subjected to CFA for scale validation. All the

measurement models have been found to qualify Goodness of Fit (GOF),

Average Variance Explained (AVE) and Construct Reliability (CR) as all values

of various fit indices came to be within the prescribed limits (Table4.2). The

CFA has been applied on sub-scale (Ist order CFA), the results are as under:-
4.2.1.1 Remuneration: It consist of 8 manifest variables (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,

R6, R7 and R8), that were derived after EFA. All the manifest variables are

highly loaded on their latent construct i.e. remuneration. The goodness of fit

indices have yield excellent results (GFI=0.984, CFI=0.996, RMSEA=0.53).

The standard regression weight of two items R8 and R3 are excellent (>0.9),

four items R1, R5, R6 and R7 are good (>0.8) and two items R2 and R3 were

174
 Chapter 4

average (>0.7) which reflects the unidimensionality of these items with their

latent construct. Moreover, the model has been proved excellent due to high

AVE (.70); high construct reliability (.982) and high cronbach’s alpha value

(above 0.70).
.32
-.15
-.20 -.20
.50 .39 -.15
.56 .22
1.16 1.55 .82 1.45 .95 1.44 1.03 .64

er1 er2 er3 er4 er5 er6 er7 er8

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8
.66.78
1.00 .82 .98 .84 .79 .93
3.84

remenurate

4.2.1.2 Grievance Handling: EFA resulted into seven items under this factor,

which were (GH1, GH2, GH3, GH4, GH5, GH6, GH7) used for CFA. CFA

resulted into deletion of two items due to low standardized regression weights viz.

GH7 and GH6 (below 0.5). The Goodness of Fit Indices proved excellent

(GFI=0.990, CFI=0.997, RMSEA=0.55, CMIN/DF=1.919). Average variance

explained (0.937) and construct reliability (0.987) further proved the excellence of

the model.

175
 Chapter 4

.37

er1 er2 er3 er4 er5

.53 .63 .80 .80 .77

GH4 GH5 GH2 GH3 GH1

.73 .80 .89 .88

Grievance

4.2.1.3 Quality of Job Itself: It comprised with seven manifest variables after

applying CFA two manifest variables J8 and J9, were deleted due to low

standardised regression weights. After deleting the two items the value of Fit

indices proved very good (GFI=0.987, CFI=0.993, RMSEA=0.67). All the items

are highly loaded with the latent construct which reflects convergent validity as

well as unidimensionality of the sub scale. As the AVE (0.947), CR (0.98) has

yielded excellent result.

-.07

-.13
.42 .27 .21 .31 .60
er1 er2 er3 er5 er7
1 1 1 1 1

J3 J2 J1 J4 J5

1.00 .72 .91

.95 .92

.96

job qualty

176
 Chapter 4

4.1.2.4 Stress: After purifying the items with EFA, six items emerged. Application

of CFA gave very good regression weights (>0.7). This also helped in ensuring the

unidimensionality of the scale. All other indices (GFI, CFI, and AGFI) are also

nearer to 1 that further supports the acceptance of model (Table 4.2 ). The value

of AVE and CR proved that the model valid. .

.53 .56
.36
1.53 .83 .47 .85 1.43 1.32
er1 er2 er3 er4 er5 er6
1 1 1 1 1 1

ST1 ST2 ST3 ST4 ST5 ST6

1.00 1.20 1.211.07 .89 .95
1.91

stres1

4.1.2.5 Participation in Decision Making: EFA resulted into six items under this

factor, which were used for CFA. While applying CFA, no items were removed as

all items were significant and positively loaded i.e. SRW of two items were

excellent (>0.9), three items were good (>0.8) and one item is above 0.7. Chi

Square value also supported the result (chi square/df<0.5). The RMSEA, GFI, CFI

177
 Chapter 4

values were recorded at 0.08, 0.975, 0.991 respectively indicating the best fit of the

model. Moreover, the model has been proved to be valid through high values of

AVE (0.951) and CR (0.991).

-.15
.21
.63 .53 .25 .35 .21 .36
er11 er21 er31 er41 er51 er61

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6
1.00 1.28 1.37
1.28 .69
1.32 1.33

participation

4.2.1.6 Student Behaviour: It consisted of 6 manifest variables that were emerged

after EFA. While running CFA no item got deleted. All the items are significantly

and positively loaded with their latent construct, AVE (0.935) and CR (0.988) also

proved valid. The Goodness of Fit Indices are also above the acceptable criteria

(GFI=0.977, CFI=0.991, RMSEA=0.81, AGFI=0.921).

.16

-.20 .03
.30 .25 .16 .39 1.12 .83

er1 er2 er3 er4 er5 er6

1 1 1 1 1 1

SB2 SB4 SB3 SB5 SB1 SB6

1.00 .99 1.18
1.05 1.01 .84
1.02

student

4.2.1.7 Physical Environment: Application of EFA resulted into four items under

this construct and after CFA the value of Fit Indices proved excellent (GFI=1,

CFI=1, RMSEA=0.00). They supported the acceptance of model. High loading of

178
 Chapter 4

all the manifest variables proved the convergent validity as well as

unidimensionality. Further the high CR (0.953) and AVR (0.836) supported the

model.
.22

er1 er2 er3 er4

.44 .24 .74 .66
E2 E3 E4 E5
.66 .49.86 .81

PhyEnv

4.2.1.8 Work Life Balance: This factor comprised with five items after

exploratory factor analysis. CFA revealed that all the manifest variables are highly

loaded on their latent construct i.e. SRW of three items is good (>0.08) and two

item is average (>0.07). Chi Square value (chi square =6.66, df=2) also supported

the result. RMSEA, GFI, CFI values are at 0.081, 0.991, 0.996 respectively

indicating the best fitness of the model. Moreover, the model has been proved to be

valid through high AVE (0.922) and high CR (0.981) values.

-.27
.34 .55

er1 er2 er3 er4 er5

.63 .70 .76 .61 .65
W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
.79 .84 .87
.78 .81

worklife

179
 Chapter 4

4.2.1.9 Social Orientation: It comprised four items after EFA. After conducting

CFA all manifest variables carried good standard regression weights, AVE (0.614)

and CR (0.861) were also good. All fit indices (GFI=0.997, CFI=1, AGFI=0.987,

RMSEA=0.00) are found to be nearer to 1 that further supports the acceptance of

the model. Bad fitness indices (RMSEA=0) and good incremental indices (CFI=1)

itself explained the perfectness of the model.

.28 .31 .33 .68

se1 se2 se3 se4

1 1 1 1

s6 s7 s8 s9
1.08
1.00 1.04 .59
1.07

Social orintion

4.2.1.10 Growth and recognition: It consists of 4 manifest variables that have

been derived after EFA. All the manifest variables are highly loaded on their latent

construct. Chi Square value (chi square =0.708, df =2) also supported the result.

The values of RMSEA (0.00), GFI (0.999), CFI (1), AVE (0.907), and CR (0.974)

are excellent.
er1 er2 er3 er4
.68 .80 .72 .34
G3 G4 G5 G1
.82 .89 .85 .58

GROWTH

4.3 First-order model of QWL

180
 Chapter 4

All the constructs have put together to test the multidimensionality of the model by

giving the interrelationships. In this model the doubled headed arrows shows the

relationship between the latent variables. The QWL Multidimensional model

comprised 10 latent variables viz. Remuneration, Grievance Handling, Quality of

Job itself, Student behaviour, Stress, Work life balance, Participation in Decision

making, Physical environment, Social orientation, Growth and Recognition are

related with each other. This model is deemed appropriate as all the criteria’s of

goodness of fit are within the acceptable limit (Table 4.3). In this high value of

GFI, CFI, NFI (values nearer to 1) and lower value for the RMSEA (nearer to 0)

are reflective of better fitting of the model.

181
 Chapter 4

.81
er1 R3.83
.90
-.19
.50
er2 R8.69.91
er3 R5 .78.83
.88
.47 er4 R1
.73 .54 REM
-.15 .82
-.07 er5 R4
.81
.67

.21
.20
er6 R7.81.66
.25 er7 R6.65
er8 R2 .44
.66

.34
eg1 GH5.55
.81
eg2 GH4.75 .74 .57
.86
eg3 GH2.82
.91
.23eg4 .86
GH3.73 GRIVHANDL
eg5 GH1 .26
.62 .40
ej1 J2.68 .79
.82 -.09
.22 ej3 J3 .76
.87
-.16.19 ej4 J1
.81
.66
JOB1
-.24 .78 .45
ej6 J4 .61 .40
.09
ej7 J5.81
et1 SB2 .83 .48 -.19
.90 .55
et2 SB4 .83 .91
.68 .91
.04
-.27
et3
-.17 et4
SB3
SB5
.83
.58
.76 STNTBEH
182 -.32 .37 .33

et5 SB1.69 .33

es1 ST4.88 .61 .74
.83 -.23
.56
es2 ST3.77 .94 .56
.48 .87 .50
 Chapter 4

First-order confirmatory factor analysis

Key: R1 to R8 (REM) Remuneration Items; GH1 to GH5(GRIVHANDL) Grievance Handling Items; J1 to J5 (JOB1)

Quality Of Job Itself Items; SB1 to SB5 (STNTBEH) Student Behaviour Items; ST1 to ST6 (STRESS1) Stress Items;

W1 to W5 (WORKLIFE) Work Life Balance Items; P1 to P6 (PARTICPTON) Participation In Decision Making Items;

E3 to E5 (PHYENV) Physical Environment Items ;S6 to S8 (SOCIAL) Social Orientation Items; G3 to G5

(GROWTH) Growth &Recognition Items and varied e-items Error variance for model items.

4.4 Second-order model of QWL

QWL model consisted of 10 latent variables viz. Remuneration, Grievance

Handling, Quality of Job itself, Student behaviour, Stress, Work life balance,

participation in Decision making, Physical environment, Social orientation,

growth and Recognition. In this model the direction of arrows are from the

latent construct to the measured items. Each construct has a series of

indicators that move together.

During CFA, the one manifest variable i.e. stress was deleted due to low

standard regression weights (below 0.7) and two items from Grievance

Handling, one from Student behaviour and one item from Physical

environment got deleted as the SRW are less than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2007).

After deleting one manifest variable and four items from the model. The

overall output or fit model summary is provided in the (Table 4.4). All the

goodness of fit indices have yielded results between good to excellent

(GFI=0.802, CFI=0.938, RMSEA=0.052).

183
 Chapter 4

.67
er8 R2 .68
er7 R6 .75 .82
.23 .83 re
er6 R7 .54 .87 .43
.73
er5 R4 .74
.86
-.15 remunert
.51 er4 R1
.81
.66
-.28 .89
.16 er3 R5.90
.80
.51
er2 R8 .82
er1 R3
.77
ge
.52
eg5 GH1.80 .88
.90
eg4 GH3.78
.88 grievance
.73
eg3 GH2.53
.80
eg2 GH4.64
.37
eg1 GH5.61
ej7 J5 .56
.21
ej6 J4 .44
.78 je .66
.75
.57
ej5 J9 .78 .66
.30 .88
-.32 ej4 J1 .81
.65 jobit
.37 .72
.63
ej3 J3 .40
.83
ej2 J8 .70
ej1 J2
.49 ste .75
et5 SB1.77 .70 .32
.88
et4 SB5.89
-.76 .94 student
.25 et3 SB3
.90
.80 .57
.88
et2 SB4.78
-.01 Quality of work life
et1 SB2 .56
we .63
ew5 W 1.72 .75 .40
ew4 W 4.74 .85
.38 .86
.46 ew3 W 5.81
.65 worklife .79
ew2 .78
W 3.61
.02 .27
ew1 W 2.54 .59
ep6 P1 .77 pe
.73
ep5 P4 .84 .88 .62
.64
.91
ep4 P3 .83
.91
.19 .34 -.56
.88 particpt
ep3 P5 .77
.83 .79
ep2 P6 .69
ep1 P2 ere
.68 .35
.82
ee3 E5.68
.46
ee2 E2.84 envirnment
.71
ee1 E4
soe
.82
.41
eo3 S6 .77 .90
.88
eo2 S8.89
.79 social
eo1 S7
.80 gre
.63
egr3 G4 .68 .89
.83
egr2 G3.84
.71 growth
egr1 G5

Second -order (Unidimensional) confirmatory factor analysis

Key: R1 to R8 (REMUNERT) Remuneration Items; GH1 to GH5(GRIVHANDL) Grievance Handling Items; J1 to J9 (JOB1T)

Quality Of Job Itself Items; SB1 to SB5 (STUDENT) Student Behaviour Items; W1 to W5 (WORKLIFE) Work Life Balance Items; P1

to P6 (PARTICPT) Participation In Decision Making Items; E2 to E5 (ENVIRNMENT) Physical Environment Items ;S6 to S8

(SOCIAL) Social Orientation Items; G3 to G5 (GROWTH) Growth &Recognition Items and varied e-items Error variance for model

items.

184
 Chapter 4

4.5 Comparison Between first order and second order confirmatory

factor anaysis

Fitness criteria has been used to find out the better fitting of quality of work

life model i.e. First-order (Multidimensional) or Second-order

(Unidimensional).The results of both model revealed that First-order

(Multidimensional) model was significantly better fitting which is confirmed

by the lower value of RMSEA and Higher value of CFI. Moreover better

CMIN/DF ratio indicates good-to-fit statistics (Edwards et al, 2009) (Table

4.2).

4.6 Reliability

4.6.1 Cronbach’s alpha value, which is related in part to the total number of

items in the scale, for all of the 57 items of the scale as arrived 0.944 which

is excellent. The alpha values of subscales reliabilities for each of the 10

QWL subscales is also high (above 0.80) indicating that the 10 QWL sub

scales have good internal consistency (Table 4.5)

4.6.2 Split half reliability the difference between the mean values of two

halves is insignificant which represents the data is valid through (Table 4.6).

4.6.2 Construct reliability (CR) was also checked through CFA. All values

of each subscale is greater than 0.8 that indicate very good CR. (Table 4.5).

4.7 Validity

185
 Chapter 4

4.7.1Content/Face validity has been established by discussion with the

subject experts and discussion with college teachers.

4.7.2Construct Validity was judged through convergent validity and

discriminant validity.

4.7.2.1Convergent validity has been established by examining high factor

loadings & variance explained. All the factor loadings are above 0.7 which

shows high partial correlation with the factor. Moreover scale with Bentler-

Bonett coefficient values of 0.90 or above implies strong convergent validity

(Bentler and Bonnet, 1980). Since the Bentler Bonnet coefficient for all

scales is above 0.90 (Table 4.7), indicating strong convergent validity.

Further the variance explained which indicates higher level of construct

validity (Table 4.1).

4.7.2.2 Discriminant validity has been established by comparing the

variance explained with squared correlation. The variance explained by each

factor is greater than the squared correlation between different factors which

indicates strong discriminant validity (Table 4.8).

186
 Chapter 4

4.8 Measurement and Analysis

Quality of work life, being a multi-dimensional phenomenon, was calculated

on the basis of mean values from various dimensions. Mean values of all

dimensions are below 6 at 7 point likert scale. However teachers are

moderately satisfied with their quality of work life. The detailed analysis of

each dimension is as under:-

4.8.1 Remuneration (Factor 1)

Remuneration is wages or salary, typically money that is paid for services

rendered as a teacher. Salary plays a significant role in affecting Quality of

work life as it is an important mean for satisfying one’s need and employees

usually take it as a reflection of management’s concern for them. The

factorial mean derived from this factor of Quality of work life has arrived at

4.11. CFA resulted into eight items. Two items “my job provides steady

employment” and “I am paid fairly for the job” are highly related with

remuneration (SRW=0.915 and 0.904). Most of the college teachers (67%)

are satisfied with the salary they receive (M=4.58) and they avail earned

leave (M=4.15). Despite of these facts nearly half of the respondents

reported that reward system is not adequate (M=3.86) and they are also

187
 Chapter 4

dissatisfied with medical (M=3.43) and housing allowances (M=3.62).

About fifty four percent Teachers expressed that resources are not

appropriate for participation in academic activities (M=4.27). The coefficient

of correlation (r), and the coefficient of determination (r2) for this factor of

Quality of work life have arrived at 0.454 (sig. < 0.01), and 0.206

respectively indicating a significant association between the two. The

probable error of correlation (0.031) is very much less than the value of (r)

indicating a significant relationship.

4.8.2 Grievance handling (Factor 2)

Effective grievance handling is an essential part of cultivating good

employee relations and running a fair, successful, and productive workplace.

The total mean derived from different items of grievance handling came at

4.65. CFA of grievance handling resulted in 5 items. The item “every

teacher’s problem is handled equally” is highly related with the grievance

handling (SRW=0.893). About sixty five percent College teachers were

satisfied with the grievance handling procedure (M=4.73) and agreed that

flexible (M=4.59) grievance redressal procedure is adopted in their

institution (M=4.64) (r=0.782 at 0.01 sig. level). They (70%) indicated that

complaints and problems are handled fairly (M=4.70), and accepted wholly

(M=4.55) in the college. The relationship between grievance handling and

188
 Chapter 4

Quality of work life was figured out at 0.593 (sig. < 0.01) while the

coefficient of determination (r2) has arrived at 0.352. The detailed analysis of

this factor revealed that handling of problems and complaints of every

teacher is necessary component of grievance handling.

4.8.3 Quality of Job itself (Factor 3)

The mean satisfaction derived from this factor has arrived at 5.60 which

is highest among all the dimensions. CFA of quality of Job itself resulted

in 5 items. Most of the college teachers (90%) are satisfied with their job

as they find their job appropriate (M=5.56) (r=0.600, p< 0.01).It is much

better than others (M=5.65) due to creativity in their job (r=0.671 at 0.01

sig. level). It is opined that interesting and appropriate job makes them

happy. The item “My job is interesting” is highly reflected by the

construct (SRW=0.898). About ninety percent teachers agreed that they

know their working hours (M=5.73) and they are able to conduct the

classes properly throughout the period (M=5.68). The association

between this factor and Quality of work life is 0.412 (p< 0.01) and

seventeen percent variation (r2) in the QWL is being caused by this

factor. Further correlation value 0.412 is quite higher than the probable

error (0.031) there by proving significant correlation.

4.8.4 Student behaviour (Factor 4)

189
 Chapter 4

Students’ behavior is associated with teachers’ quality of work life as

they are the integral part of their profession. The mean from this factor

has arrived at 5.42. CFA revealed that the item “student interact with

faculty members” highly reflects the latent constructs (SRW=0.938).

Teachers (88%) are highly satisfied with the behaviour of their students

(M=5.54) as they neither disturb the class (r=0.736 p<0.01) nor insult

their teachers (r=0.598 p< 0.01 sig. level). About eighty nine per cent

teachers revealed that students actively respond to their lecture (M=5.52)

and they are cheerful in the classroom (M=5.56). Further, they (77%)

revealed that students visit the library/laboratory (M=5.20) regularly.

The coefficient of correlation (r) and the coefficient of determination (r 2)

for this factor and Quality of work life have arrived at 0.569 (sig. < 0.01)

and 0.324 respectively, indicating a significant association between the

two. The detailed analysis indicated that teachers are satisfied with the

behaviour of their students.

4.8.5 Stress (Factor 5)

Stress implies the subjection of a person to force or compulsion, especially

mental pressure or by overwork, which leads to strain or mental fatigue.

Teachers’ stress is the experience by teachers of unpleasant, negative

emotions, such as anger, anxiety, tension, frustration, depression, resulting

190
 Chapter 4

from some aspect of their work as a teacher. CFA of stress came out with

six items. The factorial mean of this factor has arrived at 2.96 which shows

that the teachers’ are not stressed. The item “I feel tired after the class”

highly reflects the construct (SRW=0.924). They (75 %) never feel under

pressure at work (M=2.92) as they have adequate knowledge of subject

matter (r=0.673 p< 0.01), and there is no complexity in their job (M=3.01).

Moreover they (71%) are not overloaded (M=3.25) and perceived time

schedule is also not hectic (M=3.06). There is absence of chaos in the class

(M=2.69). Hence it can be concluded that absence of complexity and hectic

work schedule reduces the stress level. The correlation (r) between stress

and Quality of work life has arrived at -0.195 (sig. < 0.01),indicating an

inversrelationship.

4.8.6Work-life balance (Factor 6)

Work-life balance is a broad concept including proper prioritizing between

"work" (career and ambition) on one hand and "life" (pleasure, leisure,

family and spiritual development) on the other. The mean satisfaction

derived from the factor Work life balance has arrived at to 5.18. The item

“Enough time away from work to enjoy other things in life is highly related

with the construct (SRW=0.872). Majority of the college teachers (93%)

have balanced work life relationship (M=5.52). They (87%) felt that their

191
 Chapter 4

current working hours suits their personal life (M=5.20) and they have

enough time to pursuing their hobbies (r=0.674 at 0.01 sig. level). Further

the results revealed that they have enough time for social obligations

(M=5.28) and opportunities to attend their family (M=5.27). There is

significant association between work life balance and Quality of work life

(r= 0.401, p< 0.01) and the coefficient of determination (r 2) for this factor is

0.161. The value of probable error (0.030) of correlation also supports the

result. The overall analysis of this factor indicated that teachers have

balanced work-life relationship.

4.8.7 Participation in decision making (Factor 7)

Teachers can take a greater role in the overall success of the college when

they commit to being active participants in the decision-making process. The

mean score of Participation in decision making has arrived at 4.67. Two

items of this factor “suggestions are given due thought by the college

management” and “management makes a great deal of effort to involve

teachers” highly reflect the construct (SRW=0.922 and 0.913). The college

teachers are satisfied with the process of Participation in decision making

(M=4.86), they (61%) are able to impress upon the process of decision

making (M=4.66) due to delegation of decision making authority (r=0.777

p<0.01) to them by management. Besides this teachers are always consulted

192
 Chapter 4

about change at work. (M=4.73). The administration provides opportunity

for participation in the decision making (M=4.58). There is significant

relationship between this factor and QWL (r=0.542; sig. <0.01) and twenty

nine percent variation (r2 =0.294) in the QWL is being caused by the

participation in the decision making. The detailed analysis revealed that

participation in decision making by the teachers is essential contributor of

quality of work life. Extensive study of factor reveals that teachers are being

involved in decision making process of college activities and they are able to

get their suggestions incorporated.

4.8.8 Physical environment (Factor 8)

Working conditions that are compatible with an employee’s physical

comfort and facilitate doing a good job contribute to quality of work life.

Temperature, humidity, ventilation, lighting and noise, hours of work,

cleanliness of the work place and adequate tools and equipment are the

features which affect quality of work life. The factorial mean for Physical

environment has figured at 4.50. Majority of the respondents (76%) revealed

that the rooms are properly illuminated and ventilated (M=4.60) and the

furniture is also adequate and comfortable for them (M=4.70). The item

“Working conditions are satisfactory” highly represents the construct

(SRW=0.861). They further reported that there is provision for recreational

193
 Chapter 4

facilities (M=4.22). The association between Quality of work life and this

factor arrived at (r= 0.451, sig. < 0.01) and the variation caused by this

factor is twenty percent. Further the value of r= 0.451 is more than six times

of the probable error (0.032) so it proves the significant relation between the

two.

4.8.9 Social orientation (Factor 9) Superiors establish a supportive

personal relationship with subordinates and take a personal interest in

them which contribute to their teachers’ quality of work life. Friendly,

cooperative co-workers are also good source for enhancing quality of

work life. The mean of this factor has arrived at 5.43. The item “HOD

encourages the teacher at work” is highly related with the construct

(SRW=0.894). Majority of the college teachers (90%) are happy with

their colleagues and superiors (M=5.52). They (93%) indicated that their

colleagues are friendly (M=5.57), helpful and supporting (5.56). It is

inferred that good qualities of colleagues enhance the quality of work

life (r= 0.307 sig. <0.01). About eighty eight percent college teachers are

satisfied with their H.O.D due to his guiding approach (r=0.506,

p<0.01). The H.O.D believes in team work (M=5.42). Relationship

between this factor and QWL (r=0.473, p<0.01) and twenty nine percent

variation (r2 =0.294) in the QWL is being caused by the social

194
 Chapter 4

orientation.

4.8.10 Growth and recognition (Factor 10)

The desire for growth and recognition is generally strong among teachers as

it involves change in job content, pay, responsibility, independence and

status. The mean satisfaction derived from this factor was figured at 4.89.

The item “career opportunities are available for me” is significantly reflects

the phenomenon (SRW=0.892). Most of the college teachers (82%)

indicated that the job allows them to sharpen their professional skills

(M=5.02) as skills and abilities are fully explored here (M=4.76). They

(75%) are also appreciated for good work (M=4.95). Overall teachers are

satisfied with all aspects of growth and recognition (M=5.01). The

association between growth & recognition and Quality of work life has

arrived at 0.527 (sig. < 0.01) and the coefficient of determination (r 2) has

arrived at 0.278.

4.9 Demographic wise analysis of Quality of Work Life

Data analysis has been done with respect to different dimensions of QWL as

well as from the prospects of personal factors viz. college wise, age, marital,

sex, qualification, nature of job, designation, years and working status of life

partner. The detailed analysis of each demographic aspect is as under:-

4.9.1 Age-wise analysis of Quality of Work Life

195
 Chapter 4

Age wise class intervals were created and the mean QWL obtained for

teachers in each group was calculated, which revealed difference in mean

perception of QWL. The results revealed significant difference in mean

QWL of various age groups (F=17.492, P<0.05) (Table). Further post-hoc

analysis revealed that there is significant difference between Group I, Group

II and Group III with other Groups because majority of teachers in these

groups are contractual. The detailed analysis of QWL of different age groups

(Table 10) of teachers is as under:-

Group I (20-25 years): Teachers under this age group secured minimum

satisfaction (4.11) from different dimensions of QWL in comparison to other

groups. All of them are contractual, having less salary but high workload as

compared to permanent faculty. Majority of the respondents (85%) in this

age group are highly satisfied with the positive attributes of the students

(M=4.98), colleagues & superiors (M=5.15) and quality of job itself

(M=4.81) but on the other hand they are dissatisfied with the participation in

decision making process (M=3.74) and economic aspect of the job

(M=2.39).

Group II (26-30 years): The total mean derived by this group has come to

4.31. Eighty seven percent teachers in this group are satisfied with their

superiors & colleagues (M=5.28), and with job (M=5.27). About ninety

196
 Chapter 4

percent teachers viewed that they have time and opportunity to attend family

& social obligations (M=4.81) but they are dissatisfied with their pay

(M=2.95).

Group III (31-35 years): The factorial mean of this group has arrived at

4.48. The positive attributes of job (M=5.41), colleagues & superiors

(M=5.31) are adding up to the QWL. About sixty six percent are satisfied

with work-life balance (M=5.07), grievance handling procedure (M=4.74)

and they are not stressed at their work place (M=2.00). They are dissatisfied

with the remuneration (M=3.39).

Group IV (36-40 years): The mean score of this age group is 4.88. Majority

of the respondents (98%) find their job creative and appropriate (M=5.66).

they (83%) can also participate in decision making (M=4.91). They (78%)

indicated that the working conditions are also satisfactory in the college

(M=4.77).

Group V (41-45 years): The factorial mean derived by this group has came

to 5.12. Most of the teachers (95%) are satisfied with their job (M=6.00),

colleagues & superiors (M=5.74) as well as the behaviour of students

(M=5.72). Further, they (90%) have enough time for pursuing hobbies and

other life interests (M=5.62). They (85%) are also satisfied with their salary

(M=5.18).

197
 Chapter 4

Group VI (46-50 years): The mean of this age group has arrived at 5.04.

Majority of the teachers (98%) are highly satisfied with their job as they find

their job appropriate, creative & much better than others (M=5.98). About

eighty percent teachers are able to impress upon the process of decision

making because management makes effort to involve teachers and moreover

due thought is given to their suggestions (M=5.06). These teachers are little

stressed at work place (M=3.42).

Group VII (51-55 years): Teachers under this age group are most satisfied

with their QWL (M=5.27) in comparison to other groups as all of them are

permanent teachers, having high salary, full participation in decision making

process and cordial relations with their colleagues & superiors and not felt

stressed. About eighty eight percent teachers are satisfied with the salary

they received (M=5.49), and with the career opportunities available to them

to sharpen their professional skills (M=5.61). Moreover teachers opined that

there is lot of creativity in their job (M=6.09), balanced work life

relationships (M=5.70), good behaviour of the students (M=5.90), better

physical environment of the college (M=5.01) and helpful nature of their

superiors & colleagues (M=5.78).

Overall age-wise analysis of QWL reveals that the teachers in initial age

group are least satisfied and level of QWL increases continuously till 41-45

198
 Chapter 4

years. Afterwards it declines in 46-50 years. It again limps in the next age

group (51-55 years) and starts rising subsequent.

Gender wise analysis

Gender wise analysis of quality of work life revealed that both male (N=99)

and female (N=206) teachers are satisfied with their quality of work life.

Male respondents are little more satisfied (M=4.80) then the female

respondents (M=4.67) but the difference in attitude of both the genders are

insignificant (F=2.340, sig. >0.05). The Gender wise detailed analysis of

male and female teachers is as follows:-

Male teachers: Male teachers are satisfied with all the aspects of QWL viz;

the behaviour of the students (M=5.48), colleagues and superiors (M=5.49)

and quality of job itself (M=5.67). They (73%) are satisfied with the

working conditions (M=4.69) like adequate furniture is available in colleges.

Their (75%) work is appreciated (M=4.97) which gives them recognition.

Most of the male teachers (70%) are also satisfied with their salaries

(M=4.26) and medical allowances. Moreover they are comparatively not

stressed at their work place (M=2.71) which helps to maintain balanced

work-life relationships (r=-0.388 p< 0.01). The analysis shows that there is

inverse relationship between the level of stress and work-life balance.

199
 Chapter 4

Female teachers: Female teachers are satisfied with all the aspects of QWL.

They (60%) revealed that reward system is adequate (M=4.03) and they are

paid fairly. About eighty four viewed that they have time and opportunity to

attend family and social obligations (M=5.11). They are moderately satisfied

with the growth and recognition (M=4.86), grievance handling procedure

(M=4.53), participation in decision making (M=4.58). Further the positive

attributes of job (M=5.57), colleagues and superior (M=5.40) are adding up

to their quality of work life.

The overall analysis shows that male teachers are more satisfied with all

aspects of quality of work life then female teachers because majority (81%)

of the female teachers are married and they have dual responsibility

(Ravichandran and Rajendran, 2009).

4.9.3 College wise analysis

College wise teachers have been divided into six groups i.e. group 1 (MAM

college), group 2 (GCW Gandhi Nagar.), group 3 (GCW Parade college),

group 4 (GGM Science College), group 5 (Commerce College), group 6

(Govt. Degree College of Education). Application of ANOVA revealed

significant difference in mean perception of QWL (F=5.013, p<0.001). The

results of post hoc analysis revealed that there was significant difference in

mean scores of group 5 (Commerce College) with all colleges except Group

200
 Chapter 4

1 (MAM College). Majority of teachers (60%) in this college are contractual

and are least satisfied with their QWL as compared to other groups. Group 6

(Govt. Degree College for Education) also revealed insignificant difference

with all colleges except group 1 (MAM College), and, group 5 (Commerce

College) because teachers of both the colleges are less satisfied with their

remuneration and reward system. The detailed analyses are as under:

Group I: The total mean derived for this group is 4.52. Most of them (88%)

find their job appropriate (M=5.42) and have balanced work life relationship

(M=5.11) and they have enough time to enjoy other things in life. They have

cooperative & friendly superiors and colleagues (M=5.03). They are

satisfied with the behavior of students (M=5.05), growth and recognition

(M=4.58) and moderately satisfied with the infrastructure (M=4.22) like

working conditions in their college but dissatisfied with remuneration they

received (M=3.91).

Group II: The factorial mean of this group has arrived at 4.83. Ninety one

percent teachers are satisfied with their job (M=5.73), as they find their job

as much better then others. The infrastructure like adequate and comfortable

furniture in college is also satisfactory (M= 4.94). Moreover their work is

appreciated (M=4.97), which gives them recognition. They are provided

201
 Chapter 4

opportunity to participate in decision making process (M=4.68) and have

balanced work life relationships (M=5.43).

Group III: The mean of this group is 4.80. Most of the teachers (92%) are

highly satisfied with the positive attributes of job (M=5.64), colleagues &

superiors (M=5.67), students (M=5.48) and growth and recognition

(M=5.13) in their profession. They (77%) are also satisfied with grievance

handling procedure (M=4.70) and decision making process (M=4.80) of the

college. Infrastructure is also satisfactory (M=4.81).

Group IV: The total mean derived for this group is 4.84. Majority of them

(93%) find their job appropriate (M=5.78). They are satisfied with the

superiors and colleagues (M=5.47) and physical environment (M=4.42) in

college. The grievance handling procedure (M=4.75) is also appropriate as

teachers’ problems are handled equally and they have opportunity to

participate in decision making process (M=4.70).

Group V: The perception about QWL among the teachers under this group is

minimum 4.38, as compared to other groups. Majority of respondents (60%)

reported high level of dissatisfaction with remuneration (M=3.18) as, most

of them (60%) are contractual and not paid fairly. They (83%) reported high

perceptions about social orientation (M=5.10), quality of job itself (M=5.37)

and with behaviour of students (M=5.21). They are moderately satisfied with

202
 Chapter 4

the physical environment (M=4.02), work-life relationships (M=4.72),

grievance handling procedure (M=4.41) and participation in decision

making process (M=4.43).

Group VI: Teachers under this group secured high perception about quality

of work life 5.21, as compared to other groups as all of them are permanent

and satisfied with all aspects of QWL viz. students behaviour (M=5.95),

social orientation (M=5.70), quality of job itself (M=5.71), remuneration

(M=5.08), growth and recognition (M=5.15), participation in decision

making process (M=5.27), physical environment (M=5.07), balanced work

life relationships (M=5.62) in college.

Thorough analysis of this section shows that group 6 (Govt. degree college

for education) teachers are satisfied with maximum aspects of QWL and

group 5 (SPMR Commerce College) is on the lowest ladder.

4.9.4 Qualification-wise analysis

Qualification-wise respondents have been divided into three groups i.e.

Group I (Post graduate teachers), Group II (Mphil/Net) and Group III

(Ph.D.). One way ANOVA test revealed significant difference among three

groups (F=10.827, P< 0.001). The detailed analysis is as under:-

Group I– The total mean derived for this group has come to 4.69. Eighty

seven percent teachers are satisfied with their superiors & colleagues

203
 Chapter 4

(M=5.39), job quality (M=5.56), work life balance (M=5.10) and students

behaviour (M=5.41). Further eighty one percent teachers are also satisfied

with growth & recognition (M=4.95) in their profession. There is a big

chunk of teachers (37%) who are dissatisfied with their income (M=4.03).

These dissatisfied teachers are contractual teachers.

Group II- Teachers under this group secured minimum satisfaction (4.33) in

comparison to other groups. As majority of them are contractual, having less

salary but high work load as comparison to permanent faculty. Most of them

(82%) have balanced work-life relationship (M=5.13), they have co-

operative and friendly superiors & colleagues (M=5.35) and are satisfied

with the behaviour of students (M=5.17). But they are dissatisfied with the

economic aspects of their job (M=2.98) like pay.

Group III- Teachers under this group are most satisfied with their quality of

work life comparison to other groups (4.96). As majority of them (97%) are

permanent teachers. Having high salary (M=4.97), participation in decision

making (M=4.84) and cordial relations with their colleagues & superiors

(M=5.59). Majority of teachers (86%) have balanced work life relationships

(M=5.43) because they have enough time for family and social obligations.

They are not stressed (M=2.82).

204
 Chapter 4

Thus it can be concluded that Group II teachers are least satisfied and Group

III are more satisfied.

4.9.5 Working/non-working life partner wise analysis

The analysis of the degree of quality of work life of the working and non

working life partner revealed that the mean level of QWL secured by the

working life partner (M=4.76) is little more than the non-working life

partner (M=4.57). But the difference in attitude of both the group is

significant (F=4.512, sig <0.05). The detailed analysis is as follows:--

Working life partner teachers- Teachers whose life partner is working are

satisfied with all the factors of quality of work life. Most of teachers (94%)

are satisfied with their job (M=5.62), cooperative superiors & colleagues

(M=5.43) as well as with the behaviour of students (M=5.42). About sixty

one per cent are impressed with the process of decision making (M=4.72).

Further they (74%) are satisfied with the career opportunities available to

them (M=4.96) which sharpen their professional skills. They are little

stressed at their work place (M=3.06).

Non-Working life partner teachers: Teachers whose life partner is not

working perceived less degree of quality of work life due to remuneration

due to single income source and more than fifty per cent teachers are

contractual. About 88% teachers have balanced work life relationship, due to

205
 Chapter 4

proper time and opportunities to attend family (M=5.23). Moreover they

(79%) are satisfied with the helpful nature of their superiors & colleagues

(M=5.43), student behaviour (M=5.41) and the appropriate job (M=5.55).

Overall analysis reported that teachers with working life partners are more

satisfied than non working life partner because majority of them are

permanent, having high salary, greater opportunity to participate in decision

making.

4.9.6 Designation wise analysis

Designation wise teachers have been divided into three groups i.e. Group I

(lecturer), Group II (Senior lecturer), Group III (Senior selection grade

lecturer) The Mean differences among these groups is significant (F=37.63,

p<0.001). The results of post-hoc analysis reported that there was significant

difference in mean score of lecturer with other two groups as these teachers

are least satisfied with their QWL i.e. economic aspects compared to other

groups. There is no significant difference in mean score of II & III group.

The detailed analysis is as under:

Lecturer: The perception about QWL among the teachers under this group is

minimum 4.45, as compared to other groups. Majority of the teachers (52%)

are contractual. Teachers are dissatisfied with remuneration (M=3.34) as

they are not paid fairly and a big chunk of teachers (24%) are dissatisfied

206
 Chapter 4

with physical environment due to improper lightening and ventilation in

class rooms. They (21%) opined that career opportunities are not satisfactory

and twenty five percent teachers revealed they have no participation in

decision making process. These teachers (85%) are satisfied with their job

(M=5.38), social orientation (M=5.32) and behaviour of students (M=5.28).

Senior Lecturer: The total mean derived for this group has come to 4.96.

Majority of teachers (93%) find their job appropriate (M=5.83), as it is better

than others and have balanced work life relationship (r=0.407, p<0.01).

Eighty eight per cent teachers are satisfied with their co-operative superiors

& colleagues (M=5.34), and students behaviour (M=5.49) as they do not

insult them. Further the grievance handling procedure is also appropriate

(M=4.70). And teachers have the opportunities to participate in decision

making process (M=4.78). But a big chunk of teachers (23%) are dissatisfied

with the physical environment due to inadequate and uncomfortable

furniture in colleges.

Senior selection Scale Lecturer: College teachers reported high perception

about QWL is 5.17. All of them are permanent, with high pay and have more

job experience. They (94%) are satisfied with all aspects of QWL viz.,

quality of job itself (M=5.97), social orientation (M=5.79), participation in

207
 Chapter 4

decision making (M=5.24), grievance handling procedure (M=5.15), growth

& recognition (M=5.46) and with balance work life relationships (M=5.44).

Thus, it can be concluded that Group I (lecturer) have least satisfaction

towards QWL than the other two groups.

4.9.7 Length of service/ work experience wise analysis

The teachers have been divided into four groups. There are significant

difference in mean perception of QWL of four groups (F=24.62, p <0.01).

Further, the results of post hoc analysis revealed that there is significant

difference in mean score of group I teachers with other three groups because

more than fifty percent teachers in this group are contractual. There is no

significant difference in mean score of II, III & IV group.

The detailed analyses are as follows:

Group I (1-10 yr): The perception about QWL among the teachers under

this group is minimum 4.66, as compared to other groups. Majority of them

(89%) find their job interesting (M=5.40). They are satisfied with their

superiors, colleagues (M=5.30) and students (M=5.30). Moreover (55%)

Teachers are satisfied with flexible procedures for handling grievances

(M=5.40). About 25% teachers are dissatisfied with participation in decision

making process and growth & recognition in their profession.

208
 Chapter 4

Group II (11-20 yr): The mean of this group has arrived at 5.09. Most of

the teachers (95%) are highly satisfied with the positive attributes of job

(M=5.90), social orientation (M=5.67), and students behaviour (M=5.60).

Most of them are satisfied with remuneration (M=5.16), growth and

recognition (M=5.25) aspect. They (91%) have balanced work-life

relationship (M=5.53). Working conditions like proper lightening &

ventilation in class rooms are also satisfactory (M=4.82).

Group III (21-30 yr): The total mean derived for this group is 5.14. All of

them are permanent & have high income (M=5.32). About ninety five per

cent teachers reported high perception about Quality of job itself (M=5.98),

social orientation (M=5.75), students behaviour (M=5.59), grievance

handling procedure (M=5.17) and participation in decision making process

(M=5.21). But they (61%) are moderately satisfied with the physical

environment (M=4.68) like adequate and comfortable furniture in colleges.

Group IV (31-40 yr): Teachers reported high perception about QWL 5.15 in

this group. Majority of teachers (95%) are highly satisfied with students’

behaviour (M=6.17) as they interact and actively respond. About ninety

three per cent teachers find their job interesting & appropriate (M=6.05)

which helps in maintaining balanced work life relationships (r=0.872,

p<0.001). Further, they (88%) are satisfied with friendly superiors,

209
 Chapter 4

colleagues (M=5.67), growth & recognition (M=5.63), participation in

decision making process (M=5.06) because management of colleges makes

effort to involve teachers in all aspects of decisions.

Thus, it can be concluded that group I teachers are less satisfied with all

aspects of QWL compared to other groups. Further all teachers have low

satisfaction about the physical environment and infrastructure in the

colleges.

4.9.8 Marital status wise analysis

The analysis of the degree of the quality of work life of married and

unmarried teachers revealed that the mean level of QWL secured by married

and unmarried teachers is 4.79 and 4.36 respectively. Although married

teachers secured high satisfaction as compared to unmarried but this

difference has been found to be significant (F=18.045,sig 0.00) The detail

analysis of married and unmarried teachers is as follows:

Married teachers: Married teachers secured maximum satisfaction. As

majority of them (76%) are permanent, high salaries and balanced work life

relationships. About ninety one percent are satisfied with their job as they

find their job appropriate & much better than others (M=5.66). They are

satisfied with their colleagues and superiors as they (88%) believes in team

work and are friendly in nature (M=5.46). Majority of teachers (76%) are

210
 Chapter 4

satisfied with the working conditions like proper lightning & ventilation

(M=4.56). They are appreciated (M=4.97), which gives them recognition.

The current working hours also suits their personal life which help to

maintain the work-life balance (M=5.17). Further, they (75%) are not

stressed at their work place (M=3.02).

Unmarried teachers: Unmarried teachers are also satisfied with all aspects

of quality of work life except remuneration because majority (73%) of them

are contractual teachers and their salary is less than permanent teachers.

They reported that reward system is not adequate (M=2.91). They (85%) are

satisfied with social orientation (M=5.33), students’ behaviour (M=5.17).

They (62%) opined that complaints and problems are handled fairly due to

presence of sound grievance redressal procedure (r=0.523, p<0.01 level).

They are moderately satisfied with decision making process (M=4.32).

Further eighty five per cent teachers revealed that they have enough time to

maintain work-life balance (M=5.22) and they are not stressed at the work

place (M=2.69).

Overall analysis reported that the married teachers are satisfied with all the

aspects of the QWL and unmarried teachers are also satisfied with all the all

aspects of QWL except Remuneration because majority of them are

contractual and their salary is less compared to permanent teachers.

211
 Chapter 4

4.9.9 Income wise analysis:

There is positive and significant association between QWL and Income

(r=0.302, p<0.01). Class intervals were created and the mean QWL obtained

for teachers in each group was calculated, which revealed difference in mean

QWL and these difference are significant (F= 49.053, p<.001 sig. level). The

detailed analysis is as under:-

Below 20000: The perception about QWL among the teachers under this

income group is minimum (M=4.15) as compared to other groups as all of

them are contractual, having less salary. Majority of teachers (90%) reported

high level of dissatisfaction with respect to remuneration (M=2.23). They

(85%) have high perception about social orientation (M=5.22), quality of job

itself (M=5.11) and students behaviour (M=5.19). They (74%) are

moderately satisfied with growth & recognition (M=4.31) in their

profession.

21000-40000: The total mean derived for this group has come to 4.89.

Majority of the teachers (94%) find their job appropriate, creative and much

better than others (M=5.80) and have balanced work life relationship

(M=5.22). Further they (76%) are moderately satisfied with physical

environment (M=4.64) in the college.

212
 Chapter 4

41000-60000: The mean of this income group has arrived at 4.88. Most of

the teachers (91%) are satisfied with their job (M=5.66), colleagues,

superiors (M=5.19) as well as with students’ behaviour (M=5.33). They

(84%) are also satisfied with their salary (M=5.04) and growth &

recognition (M=4.93) in their profession. Further, they (88%) are also

satisfied with work-life relationships (M=5.38) because they have enough

time away from work to enjoy other things in life (r=0.544, p<0.01).

61000-80000: Teachers under this income group are most satisfied with their

QWL (M=5.15). As all of them are permanent having high salary (M=5.17)

and growth & recognition (M=5.44) in their profession. Moreover they

(97%) opined that there is a lot of creativity in their job (M=6.00). They are

able to lead balanced work-life (M=5.48). They participate in decision

making process (M=5.15) and there is flexible grievance handling procedure

(M=5.07).

Overall analysis of income wise QWL reveals that the teachers belonging to

income group below 20000 are least satisfied as all of them is contractual.

While level of QWL increases in second, third and fourth group as all of

them are permanent teachers.

4.9.10 Nature of job wise analysis: Nature of job wise analysis of QWL

reveals that the mean level secured by permanent and contractual teacher is

213
 Chapter 4

4.99 and 4.15 respectively. Independent t- Test revealed significant

difference in mean perception of QWL of two groups (F=1.798, t=5.32 at

0.000 sig. level). The detailed analysis of permanent and contractual teachers

is as under:-

Permanent teachers: They (90%) are satisfied with all aspects of QWL viz.

interesting& appropriate job (M=5.85), social orientation (M=5.54), students

behaviour (M=5.54), remuneration (M=5.04) and growth & recognition

(M=5.11). About eighty nine teachers viewed that they have enough time for

family and social obligations (M=5.35). Majority of them (77%) opined that

they have opportunity to participate in decision making process (M=4.97)

and are not stressed at their work place (M=2.89).

Contractual teachers: Contractual teachers are less satisfied with their

QWL. About eighty five percent teachers reported that they are dissatisfied

with the income (M=2.23) and twenty one percent teachers reported that

teachers’ problem is not handled equally. They (26%) also opined that career

opportunities are not satisfactory. They (83%) are satisfied with the quality

of their job (M=5.11), colleagues and superiors (M=5.22) and with students’

behaviour (M=5.19.).

Overall analysis reported that the perception towards the QWL of permanent

teachers are stronger then the contractual teachers as they have greater

214
 Chapter 4

opportunity to participate in decision making, better remuneration, high

quality of job itself and higher chances of growth and recognition.

4.10 Hypothesis Testing

Analysis of data lead to the final stage of research i.e. hypothesis testing for

achieving the purpose of the study and to make inferences.

Hypo.1:- Quality of work life is a Multidimensional construct.

In order to test whether quality of work life is a multidimensional construct,

First-order & second order confirmatory factor analysis was applied which

revealed very good results (GFI=0.803, NFI=0.874, CFI=0.939). Lower

value of RMSEA (0.53) reflected better fitting of model (Table 4.2). Hence

hypothesis stands accepted.

Hypo.2:- Teachers are dissatisfied with quality of work life in their

institutions.

In order to test the level of satisfaction among college teachers one sample t-

test has been applied at 0.05 level of significance. The sample mean was

4.71 and the test value was 3.00 (Table 4.11). The results revealed a

significant difference between observed and test values (t= 42.087, sig.

<0.05). Hence the hypothesis that college teachers are dissatisfied stands

rejected.

215
 Chapter 4

Hypo.3:- There is difference in perception regarding quality of work life

among permanent and contractual teachers.

Independent t-test has been applied to test this hypothesis. The results

revealed significant difference (Table 4.12). Hence this hypothesis is

accepted.

Hypo.4:- Higher the pay better is the perception about quality of work life.

Regression analysis has been conducted that revealed R at 0.454 and

adjusted R2 is 0.203 (Table 4.13) revealing that twenty percent of variation in

quality of work life is explained by remuneration. Moreover significance of

beta coefficient is less than 0.05 (Beta=0.350, t= 8.868, p<0.05) which

indicates that pay does exert influence on quality of work life, hence

hypothesis is accepted. The regression equation is as under:

QWL=a (constant) + b1 (remuneration)

QWL= 3.86 +0.350

The above equation indicates that pay is one of the influencing factors.

The value of standardized beta has arrived at 0.454 indicating 0.45 unit of

change in dependent variable for every unit change in independent variable.

Hypo.5:- Better the physical environment higher is quality of work life

Regression analysis has been used to examine the influence of physical

environment on quality of work life of teachers. The results indicated that R

216
 Chapter 4

at 0.451 and adjusted R2 at 0.201. The aforesaid hypothesis is also accepted

as the beta value is good (Beta=0.544, t=8.793, p<0.01). It implies that

physical environment also influences quality of work life of teachers. The

regression equation is as under:

QWL=a (constant) + b1 (physical environment)

QWL= 2.826 + 0.544

The value of standardized beta has arrived at 0.451 indicating 0.45 unit of

change in dependent variable for every unit change in independent variable.

Hypo.5 (a):- There is inverse relationship between physical environment

and stress.

Correlation has been applied to test this hypothesis. The results revealed a

negative and significant relationship between physical environment and

stress(r= -0.238 at 0.01 sig level). Hence hypothesis stands accepted.

217
 Chapter 4

Hypo.6:- Work-Life balance and Quality of Social Relationships affects

Stress level.

Correlation and regression analysis have been conducted to test the proposed

hypothesis. Correlation analysis revealed a negative and significant

relationship between stress level, work-life balance (r=-0.185) and social

relationships(r=-0.223). In order to find out the degree of influence exerted

Work-Life balance and Social Relationships on Stress level. Regression

analysis was applied. The results revealed R at 0.249 and adjusted R2 at

0.056 indicating that the model explains percent variations in

stress level among teachers. The beta value is (-0.177, -0.179)

indicates that work life balance and social relationships affects stress level.

Hence, hypothesis stands accepted (Table 4.15). The regression equation

comprising stress level (overall mean) as dependent variable and work-life

balance and social relationship (overall mean) as independent variable is as

under:

Stress = a (constant) + b1 (work-life balance) + b2 (social relationship)

Stress= 5.436 + (-0.178) + (-0.284)

Hypo.7:- Women teachers are more stressed than male teacher as they have

to manage at work as well as home.

218
 Chapter 4

In order to test this hypothesis Independent t-test has been applied. The

result revealed significant difference between the mean of two groups

(F=4.32,t=-2.06 at <0.05).The mean values showed that both male and

female are not stressed but the females stress level is higher than male

(M=2.71, F=3.09). Hence the hypothesis stands accepted (Table 4.16).

219
 Chapter 4

Reference

 Edwards, J. A., Laar, D. V., Easton, S. & Kinman, G. (2009). The

Work Related Quality Of Life Scale for Higher Education Employees.

Quality in Higher Education, 15(3), 207-219.

 Hair, J. J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. B. (2006).

Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.7

 Lowe, S. G. (2001). The quality of work: why it matters for workers,

employers and society-second international conference on researching

work and learning- available on www.cprn.org.

 Ravichandran, R. & Rajendran, R. (2007). Perceived Sources of Stress

among the Teachers. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied

Psychology, 33(1), 133-136.

220
 Chapter 4

221
 Table 4.1: Summary of Results From Scale Purification of Quality of work life Data: Factor

Loadings, Variance Explained, Mean, S.D., KMO Values and Eigen Values
Factors Mean S.D F.L V.E KMO E.V 4
Chapter
F1 Remuneration & related factors 4.11 0.66
Paid fairly 4.49 2.12 0.86
Steady employment 4.42 1.98 0.85
Housing allowance 3.62 1.81 0.83
Satisfied with pay 4.58 2.24 0.82 12.195 7.07
Medical allowance 3.43 1.77 0.79
Resources are appropriate 4.27 1.85 0.78
Avail earned leave 4.15 2.04 0.78
Adequate reward system 3.86 2.04 0.75
F2 grievance handling 4.65 0.47
Redressal procedure 4.64 1.30 0.78
Flexible procedure 4.59 1.24 0.77
Problems are handled equally 4.55 1.26 0.76
Acceptance of Complaint 4.55 1.19 0.75
Fairly handles Complaints &
4.70 1.25 0.72 9.933 5.41
problems
Principal Directly handles 4.79 1.22 0.69
Teacher union role 4.78 1.25 0.60
F3 Quality of job itself 5.60 0.47
Know working hours 5.73 0.88 0.73
Able to conduct the class 5.68 1.05 0.72
Appropriate job 5.56 1.77 0.68
Job is interesting 5.56 1.04 0.68 9.006 5.22
Services are must for college 5.61 1.05 0.67
Job is better than others 5.64 1.05 0.61
Creativity in job 5.42 1.87 0.55
F4 Student behaviour 5.42 0.50
Actively respond 5.52 1.14 0.86
Cheerful faces 5.56 1.11 0.83
Interact with faculty 5.48 1.13 0.83 8.37 4.85
Do not disturb the class 5.45 1.34 0.82
Do not insult the teacher 5.30 1.46 0.73
Visit laboratory/library 5.20 1.24 0.70
F5 Stress 2.96 0.68
Hectic time schedule 3.06 1.74 0.89
Feel tired 2.95 1.81 0.88
Lack of knowledge 2.85 1.89 0.87 7.95 4.61
Workload in job 4.64 1.30 0.83
Difficult and complex job 3.00 1.75 0.82
Chaos in class 2.69 1.85 0.75
F6 Work life balance 5.18 0.45
Time for hobbies 5.13 1.15 0.85
Enjoy other things 5.03 1.24 0.81
7.46 4.32
Time for family & social obligations 5.28 1.14 0.80
Suitability of Working hours 5.19 1.18 0.78
0.925
Job provides time 5.26 1.13 0.74
F7 participation in decision making 4.67 0.41
Opportunity 4.58 1.29 0.72
Impress upon process of D-M 4.66 1.25 0.71
Due thought given 4.69 1.19 0.71 7.09 4.11
Involvement of teachers 4.67 1.25 0.71
Delegation of D-M authority 4.69 1.22 0.70
Teachers are consulted 4.73 1.15 0.64
F8 Physical Environment 4.50 0.66
Working conditions are satisfactory 4.68 1.29 0.772
Lighting & ventilation 4.60 1.46 0.74 4.91 2.84
Adequate furniture 4.70 2221.26 0.71
Recreational facilities 4.21 1.51 0.58
F9 Social orientation 5.44 0.54
HOD encourages 5.36 1.21 0.81
 Chapter 4

223
 Chapter 4

Table: 4.2 Result of various CFA Fit Indices

Constructs CMIN P CMIN/DF NFI GFI AGFI CFI TLI IFI RMSEA

Chi-

square
Rem. 20.31 0.41 1.846 0.992 0.994 0.947 0.996 0.990 0.996 0.053
Grievance 7.68 0.10 1.919 0.994 0.990 0.961 0.997 0.992 0.997 0.055
Job quality 9.83 0.02 3.27 0.990 0.987 0.937 0.993 0.977 0.993 0.081
Student behaviour 20.43 0.00 3.40 0.987 0.977 0.921 0.991 0.976 0.991 0.081
Stress 13.97 0.32 2.30 0.991 0.986 0.995 0.995 0.987 0.995 0.065
Work life 6.66 0.04 3.332 0.994 0.991 0.936 0.996 0.980 0.996 0.081
Decision making 22.63 0.00 3.233 0.987 0.975 0.925 0.991 0.980 0.991 0.080
Physical environment 0.12 0.73 0.119 1 1 0.998 1 1 1 0.00
Social orientation 1.52 0.47 0.763 0.998 0.997 0.987 1 1 1 0.00
Growth & recognition 0.71 0.70 0.354 0.999 0.999 0.994 1 1 1 0.00
Multidimensional 1883.24 0.00 1.782 0.874 0.803 0.770 0.939 0.933 0.940 0.051
Unidimensional 1684.57 0.00 1.845 0.872 0.801 0.776 0.937 0.932 0.938 0.053

224
 Chapter 4

Table 4.3 Results of First -Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Latent variable Manifest variable SRW CR P R2

Paid fairly (R3) 0.901 Ref 0.811
Steady employment (R8) 0.913 24.805 0.001 0.811
Housing allowance (R5) 0.833 20.117 0.001 0.693
Satisfied with pay (R1) 0.883 33.305 0.001 0.780
Medical allowance (R4) 0.734 16.116 0.001 0.539
Resources are appropriate (R7) 0.821 19.833 0.001 0.674
Remuneration Avail earned leave (R6) 0.812 19.484 0.001 0.660
Adequate reward system (R2) 0.806 18.892 0.001 0.650
Redressal procedure (GH5) 0.811 Ref 0.658

Flexible procedure (GH4) 0.744 17.660 0.001 0.554

Problems are handled equally (GH2) 0.864 17.533 0.001 0.746
Grievance Acceptance of Complaint (GH3) 0.906 18.884 0.001 0.820
Fairly handles Complaints & problems (GH1) 0.855 17.273 0.001 0.731
Know working hours (J2) 0.788 Ref 0.621

Appropriate job (J3) 0.823 16.511 0.001 0.678

Job is interesting ( JI) 0.872 18.573 0.001 0.760
Job is better than others (J4) 0.810 14.737 0.001 0.659
Job quality Creativity in job (J5) 0.780 13.742 0.001 0.613
Actively respond (SB2) 0.898 Ref 0.807

Student Cheerful faces (SB4) 0.910 23.043 0.001 0.829

Interact with faculty (SB3) 0.913 26.505 0.001 0.833
behaviour Do not disturb the class ( SB5) 0.826 18.117 0.001 0.682
Do not insult the teacher (SB1) 0.765 16.329 0.001 0.585

Hectic time schedule (ST1) 0.831 Ref 0.690

Feel tired (ST3) 0.936 20.504 0.001 0.876
Lack of knowledge (ST2) 0.875 18.953 0.001 0.765
Workload in job (ST5) 0.691 19.150 0.001 0.478
Stress Difficult and complex job (ST6) 0.735 16.286 0.001 0.540
Chaos in class (ST1) 0.758 14.947 0.001 0.574
Time for hobbies (W2) 0.747 Ref 0.558
Enjoy other things (W3) 0.799 16.631 0.001 0.639
Time for family & social obligations (W5) 0.903 16.611 0.001 0.816
Suitability of Working hours (W4) 0.914 16.410 0.001 0.835
Work life 0.724 17.804 0.001 0.525
Job provides time (W1)
Opportunity (P2) 0.840 19.660 0.001 0.705

Impress upon process of D-M (P6) 0.858 22.347 0.001 0.736

Due thought given (P5) 0.888 23.549 0.001 0.789
Involvement of teachers (P3) 0.911 23.161 0.001 0.830
Delegation of D-M authority (P4) 0.886 Ref 0.786

225
 Chapter 4

0.726 15.687 0.001 0.556

Teachers are consulted (P1)

Physical Working conditions are satisfactory (E4) 0.798 Ref 0.636
Lighting & ventilation (E2) 0.715 11.841 0.001 0.512
environment Adequate furniture (E5) 0.842 14.330 0.001 0.710
Social HOD encourages (S7) 0.881 Ref 0.775

orientation Teamwork (S8) 0.883 21.169 0.001 0.780

Guiding approach (S6) 0.901 22.258 0.001 0.811
Growth & Sharpen profession (G5) 0.838 Ref 0.703

recognition Skills & abilities are explored (G3) 0.826 17.036 0.001 0.682
Satisfied with career opportunities (G4) 0.896 18.941 0.001 0.803

226
 Chapter 4

Table 4.4 Results of Second-Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Latent Manifest variable Item SRW CR P R2

variable No.
Paid fairly R3 0.905 Ref 0.819
Steady employment R8 0.894 23.986 0.001 0.799
Housing allowance R5 0.810 19.381 0.001 0.656
Satisfied with pay R1 0.863 31.087 0.001 0.745
Remuneration Medical allowance R4 0.732 16.109 0.001 0.536
Resources are appropriate R7 0.867 19.892 0.001 0.752
Avail earned leave R6 0.827 20.223 0.001 0.685
Adequate reward system R2 0.817 19.703 0.001 0.667
Redressal procedure GH5 0.801 Ref 0.641
Flexible procedure GH4 0.703 17.453 0.001 0.533
Grievance Problems are handled equally GH2 0.885 18.056 0.001 0.783
Acceptance of Complaint GH3 0.897 18.358 0.001 0.804
Fairly handles Complaints & problems GH1 0.878 17.877 0.001 0.772
Quality of Know working hours J2 0.833 Ref 0.697
Appropriate job J3 0.815 16.511 0.001 0.664
Work life Job is interesting J1 0.886 18.488 0.001 0.785
Job quality Job is better than others J4 0.746 14.431 0.001 0.557
Creativity in job J5 0.775 13.602 0.001 0.601
Services are must for college J9 0.731 12.502 0.001 0.536
Able to conduct the class J8 0.712 11.968 0.001 0.516
Actively respond SB2 0.908 Ref 0.824
Student Cheerful faces SB4 0.910 23.583 0.001 0.829
Interact with faculty SB3 0.921 24.520 0.001 0.849
behaviour Do not disturb the class SB5 0.854 20.668 0.001 0.729
Do not insult the teacher SB1 0.724 15.982 0.001 0.524
Time for hobbies W2 0.783 Ref 0.613
Enjoy other things W3 0.806 17.106 0.001 0.649
Work-life Time for family & social obligations W5 0.861 14.477 0.001 0.741
Suitability of Working hours W4 0.847 14.211 0.001 0.718
Job provides time W1 0.752 18.189 0.001 0.565
Opportunity P2 0.832 Ref 0.692
Impress upon process of D-M P6 0.879 20.140 0.001 0.773
Due thought given P5 0.914 21.096 0.001 0.835
Decision Involvement of teachers P3 0.914 21.094 0.001 0.835
Delegation of D-M authority P4 0.878 20.067 0.001 0.770
making Teachers are consulted P1 0.731 18.284 0.001 0.535
Physical Working conditions are satisfactory E4 0.843 Ref 0.710
Lighting & ventilation E2 0.687 11.870 0.001 0.558
environment Adequate furniture E5 0.824 14.046 0.001 0.679
Social HOD encourages S7 0.889 Ref 0.791
teamwork S8 0.877 21.146 0.001 0.768
orientation Guiding approach S6 0.903 22.194 0.001 0.816
Sharpen profession G5 0.841 Ref 0.707
Skills & abilities are explored G3 0.825 16.987 0.001 0.681

227
 Chapter 4

Growth & Satisfied with career opportunities G4 0.895 18.787 0.001 0.800

recognition

Table: 4.5 Reliability and Validity of Latent Constructs

Constructs AVE Construct Cronbach’s
reliability alpha
Remuneration 0.875 0.982 0.952
Grievance 0.937 0.987 0.925
Job quality 0.947 0.988 0.910
Student behaviour 0.935 0.988 0.924
Stress 0.862 0.973 0.929
Work life 0.922 0.998 0.918
Decision making 0.951 0.991 0.943
Physical environment 0.836 0.953 0.803
Social orientation 0.614 0.863 0.918
Growth & recognition 0.836 0.974 0.884

228
 Chapter 4

Table 4.6 Reliability through Split half

QWL F Sig. level
Mean Part1 4.68
1.86 0.535
Part2 4.73

229
 Chapter 4

Table 4.7
convergent validity
Scale title Bentler- Bonett coefficient
Remuneration 0.992
Grievance Handling 0.994
Quality of Job itself 0.990
Student behaviour 0.987
Stress 0.991
Work life balance 0.994
participation in Decision making 0.987
Physical environment 1.00
Social orientation 0.998
Growth and Recognition 0.999
Multidimensional 0.874
Unidimensional 0.874

Table 4.7 Discriminant validity and squared correlation

230
 Chapter 4

Remuneration Grievance Quality of Student Stress Work life Partiipati Physical Social Growth &
Sub-scale Handling Job itself behaviou balance on envirnment orientation Recognition
r in DM
Remuneration
0.875
Grievance
0.937
0.305**
Handling
Quality of Job
0.471 ** 0.947
0.271**
itself
Student
0.201** 0.180 ** 0.935
0.068**
behaviour
Stress 0.031** 0. 078** 0.050 ** 0.862
0.007
Work life
0.246** 0.300 ** 0. 080** 0.034** 0.922
0.136**
balance
participation
0. 223** 0.191** 0.033** 0.184** 0.951
0.299** 0.390**
in DM
Physical
0.224** 0.141** 0.090** 0.056** 0.103** 0.199 0.836
0.135**
environment
Social
0.120** 0.263** 0.255** 0.259** 0.049** 0.140** 0.229** 0.219** 0.614
orientation
Growth &
0.976** 0.422** 0.174** 0.026** 0.236** 0.385 0.209** 0.246** 0.907
0.300**
Recognition
Diagonal wise shows Values on diagonal axis show the average variance extracted by the each sub-scale and values below the diagonal axis shows the squared correlation between the
constructs.

231
 Chapter 4

Table4.8 Demographic Wise Analysis Of Quality Of Work Life

Variable F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 G.M
20-25 M 2.39 3.83 4.81 4.98 3.97 4.96 3.75 4.33 5.15 4.00 4.11

*10 S.D. 0.98 0.89 0.60 0.87 1.68 0.84 0.84 1.03 0.98 1.48 0.39
26-30 M 2.95 4.22 5.28 5.17 3.18 4.81 4.19 4.26 5.28 4.54 4.31

*80 S.D. 1.62 1.12 0.80 1.11 1.51 1.05 0.98 1.08 0.78 0.97 0.61
31-35 M 3.39 4.74 5.41 5.46 2.47 5.07 4.53 4.40 5.31 4.60 4.48

*61 S.D. 1.78 0.90 0.96 1.11 1.28 0.95 1.12 1.24 0.99 1.24 0.71
36-40 M 4.88 4.63 5.67 5.36 3.01 5.21 4.91 4.78 5.43 5.06 4.88

*49 S.D. 1.09 0.81 0.73 1.00 1.50 0.88 0.89 0.90 0.96 0.75 0.54
Age
41-45 M 5.18 5.00 6.00 5.72 2.82 5.63 5.10 4.89 5.74 5.24 5.12

*46 S.D. 0.91 0.85 0.67 1.02 1.83 0.83 0.84 1.02 1.03 0.96 0.51
46-50 M 5.05 4.82 5.98 5.45 3.42 5.31 5.07 4.49 5.46 5.32 5.04

*35 S.D. 1.26 1.20 0.85 1.03 1.61 1.29 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.10 0.78
51-55 M 5.49 5.33 6.09 5.90 2.63 5.70 5.18 5.01 5.78 5.61 5.27

*24 S.D. 1.00 0.92 0.71 0.91 1.28 0.80 1.00 0.79 0.96 0.68 0.49
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
Marital M M 4.37 4.71 5.66 5.48 3.03 5.17 4.75 4.56 5.46 4.97 4.79

*249 S.D. 1.63 1.03 0.86 1.03 1.54 1.07 1.08 1.15 1.01 1.07 0.72
UM M 2.92 4.38 5.35 5.17 2.69 5.23 4.32 4.51 5.33 4.58 4.36

232
 Chapter 4

*56 S.D. 1.66 1.04 0.84 1.19 1.56 0.73 1.03 0.87 0.83 1.07 0.54
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
M M 4.26 4.89 5.67 5.49 2.71 5.32 4.85 4.70 5.49 4.98 4.80

*99 S.D. 1.63 0.88 0.87 0.95 1.54 1.00 0.94 0.99 1.00 1.06 0.63
F M 4.03 4.54 5.57 5.39 3.09 5.12 4.59 4.48 5.41 4.86 4.67
Sex
*206 S.D. 1.77 1.09 0.86 1.12 1.54 1.02 1.14 1.15 0.97 1.10 0.74
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

3*05 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
MA M 4.03 4.63 5.57 5.41 3.02 5.11 4.71 4.57 5.40 4.95 4.70

N=194 S.D. 1.76 1.05 0.82 1.08 1.48 1.07 1.05 1.11 1.04 0.99 0.71
MphlNe M 2.98 4.39 5.28 5.18 2.94 5.13 4.20 4.27 5.35 4.38 4.34

Qualificatio t

n *41 S.D. 1.61 1.18 1.04 1.29 1.47 0.85 1.15 1.22 0.81 1.28 0.67
Ph.D. M 4.97 4.86 5.89 5.60 2.82 5.43 4.84 4.68 5.59 5.05 4.96
*70 S.D. 1.21 0.90 0.79 0.84 1.77 0.93 1.08 1.00 0.87 1.12 0.64
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71

233
 Chapter 4

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 G.M
1 M 3.34 4.44 5.38 5.29 2.85 4.99 4.42 4.43 5.33 4.65 4.45

*176 S.D. 1.70 1.01 0.85 1.10 1.37 1.02 1.01 1.10 0.95 1.07 0.65
2 M 5.04 4.70 5.84 5.50 3.25 5.45 4.79 4.65 5.35 5.00 4.96

*61 S.D. 1.05 1.06 0.81 1.01 2.00 0.81 1.03 1.25 0.99 1.06 0.57
Designation
3 M 5.24 5.16 5.97 5.71 3.01 5.44 5.24 4.77 5.79 5.46 5.17

*68 S.D. 1.14 0.92 0.77 0.98 1.51 1.09 1.09 0.94 0.97 0.90 0.65
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
PRMN M 5.04 4.87 5.85 5.54 2.89 5.35 4.97 4.70 5.54 5.19 4.99

Nature *204 S.D. 1.03 0.95 0.78 1.02 1.60 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.02 0.92 0.60
Contractul M 2.23 4.21 5.11 5.19 3.12 4.84 4.08 4.26 5.22 4.31 4.15
Of
*101 S.D. 1.26 1.08 0.81 1.12 1.43 1.00 1.01 1.19 0.84 1.15 0.58
Job Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
No. 1-10 M 3.44 4.44 5.40 5.30 2.94 4.99 4.39 4.41 5.30 4.64 4.47

of *190 S.D. 1.71 1.03 0.84 1.09 1.51 1.00 1.02 1.09 0.93 1.08 0.65
11-20 M 5.17 4.91 5.91 5.61 3.09 5.54 5.10 4.82 5.60 5.25 5.09

234
 Chapter 4

*68 S.D. 1.00 0.94 0.80 0.98 1.70 0.82 0.99 1.10 1.03 0.90 0.58
21-30 M 5.32 5.17 5.98 5.59 2.92 5.41 5.21 4.68 5.75 5.39 5.14

*41 S.D. 1.21 0.98 0.78 1.04 1.53 1.17 1.17 1.12 1.01 1.04 0.70
31-40 M 4.85 5.00 6.05 6.17 2.61 5.70 5.06 5.21 5.67 5.63 5.15
Years
*6 S.D. 0.87 1.25 0.88 0.80 1.41 1.24 0.44 0.49 0.89 0.65 0.53
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
WRKG M 4.33 4.68 5.62 5.43 3.06 5.16 4.72 4.53 5.44 4.96 4.76

*222 S.D. 1.64 1.06 0.87 1.05 1.51 1.08 1.11 1.17 0.98 1.06 0.73
Life Nonwrkg M 3.50 4.59 5.55 5.41 2.72 5.24 4.55 4.62 5.43 4.75 4.57

Partner *83 S.D. 1.82 1.00 0.86 1.12 1.61 0.83 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.14 0.63
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 G.M
Incom below20 M 2.23 4.21 5.11 5.19 3.12 4.84 4.08 4.26 5.22 4.31 4.15

e *101 S.D. 1.26 1.08 0.81 1.12 1.43 1.00 1.01 1.19 0.84 1.15 0.58
21-40 M 4.90 4.83 5.80 5.48 2.63 5.22 4.91 4.64 5.53 5.09 4.89

*80 S.D. 0.92 0.83 0.75 1.02 1.41 0.97 0.76 0.95 1.04 0.86 0.53
41-60 M 5.04 4.58 5.66 5.33 3.14 5.38 4.74 4.65 5.19 4.93 4.86

*45 S.D. 1.08 1.08 0.87 1.09 1.76 0.91 1.23 1.18 1.10 0.98 0.65
61-80 M 5.17 5.07 6.00 5.72 3.02 5.48 5.15 4.78 5.76 5.44 5.15

235
 Chapter 4

*79 S.D. 1.09 0.94 0.74 0.96 1.66 1.05 1.05 1.03 0.90 0.89 0.61
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
MAM M 3.91 4.48 5.42 5.05 3.21 5.01 4.55 4.23 5.04 4.58 4.53

*58 S.D. 1.51 1.13 0.88 1.04 1.50 1.05 0.89 1.28 1.19 1.18 0.66
G.ngr M 4.20 4.73 5.73 5.58 2.93 5.44 4.68 4.95 5.67 4.98 4.83

*56 S.D. 1.75 0.89 0.95 1.04 1.42 0.86 1.26 0.99 0.93 1.04 0.70
parade M 4.38 4.70 5.65 5.48 2.60 5.24 4.80 4.82 5.68 5.14 4.80

*84 S.D. 1.70 1.04 0.85 1.02 1.38 1.00 1.04 0.81 0.76 0.93 0.71
Colleg science M 4.41 4.75 5.79 5.67 3.05 5.34 4.70 4.42 5.48 5.01 4.84

e *51 S.D. 1.68 1.08 0.82 0.96 1.96 1.04 1.13 1.05 0.95 1.19 0.66
comrce M 3.19 4.42 5.38 5.21 3.22 4.73 4.43 4.03 5.11 4.59 4.38

*46 S.D. 1.86 1.08 0.76 1.23 1.53 1.09 1.14 1.23 0.94 1.08 0.71
B ed M 5.09 5.36 5.71 5.95 3.30 5.62 5.27 5.08 5.70 5.15 5.21

*10 S.D. 0.87 0.45 0.75 0.80 1.29 0.66 0.68 0.94 0.80 0.66 0.65
Total M 4.11 4.65 5.60 5.42 2.97 5.18 4.67 4.55 5.44 4.90 4.71

*305 S.D. 1.72 1.04 0.86 1.07 1.55 1.02 1.08 1.10 0.98 1.08 0.71
* Number of respondents . Key: F1 Remuneration ,F2 Grievance Handling ,F3 Quality Of Job Itself,

F4 Student Behaviour, F5 Stress, F6 Work -Life Balance, F7 Participation In Decision Making, F8

Physical Environment ,F9 Social Orientation, F10 Growth &Recognition and G.M Grand mean .

236
 Chapter 1

Table 4.10 One Way ANOVA For Demographic-Wise Quality of work life
Sum of df Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Mean QWL*Age Between Groups 39.886 6 6.648 17.492
Within Groups 113.253 298 0.38 0
Total
153.139 304
Mean QWL* Between Groups
0
Qualification 10.246 2 5.123 10.827
Within Groups 142.893 302 0.473
Total 153.139 304
Mean QWL* Designation Between Groups 0
30.551 2 15.275 37.631
Within Groups 122.588 302 0.406
Total 153.139 304
Mean QWL* Year Between Groups 30.182 3 10.061 24.629
Within Groups 122.956 301 0.408 0
Total 153.139 304
Mean QWL* Working Between Groups 2.247 1 2.247 4.512
Within Groups 150.892 303 0.498 0.034
Total 153.139 304
Mean QWL* Income Between Groups 50.285 3 16.762 49.053
Within Groups 0
102.854 301 0.342
Total 153.139 304
Mean QWL* College Between Groups 11.845 5 2.369 5.013
Within Groups 141.294 299 0.473 0
Total 153.139 304
Table4.11 One-Sample t-Test
Test Value = 3
95% Confidence

Interval of the
Sig. (2- Mean Difference
t df tailed) Difference Lower Upper
QWL 30.241 304 .000 2.3049 2.1549 2.4549
Envirnmnt 24.595 304 .000 1.5525 1.4283 1.6767
Remunertion 11.203 304 .000 1.1061 .9118 1.3004
Wrk-life 37.421 304 .000 2.1836 2.0688 2.2984
Socal orient 43.570 304 .000 2.4352 2.3253 2.5452

237
 Chapter 1

Grth&Reco 30.657 304 .000 1.8992 1.7773 2.0211

Job itself 52.702 304 .000 2.6037 2.5065 2.7010
Particpation 26.956 304 .000 1.6743 1.5521 1.7965
Stress -.370 304 .712 -.0328 -.2071 .1415
Grievance 27.732 304 .000 1.6515 1.5343 1.7687
Student 39.736 304 .000 2.4240 2.3040 2.5441

238
 Chapter 1

Table 4.12 Independent t-test

s.no variables group number mean t-test df sig

1 QWL Perm. 204 5.59 5.64 303 .000
contrac 101 4.72
2 Envirnmnt Perm. 204 4.46 3.28 303 .001
contrac 101 4.26

3 Remunertion Perm. 204 5.03 20.82 303 .000

contrac 101 2.22

4 Wrk-life Perm. 204 5.35 4.29 303 .000

contrac 101 4.83

5 Socal orient Perm. 204 5.54 2.79 303 .005

contrac 101 5.21

6 Grth&Reco Perm. 204 5.19 7.24 303 .000

contrac 101 4.30

7 Job itself Perm. 204 5.84 7.69 303 .009

contrac 101 5.10

8 Particpation Perm. 204 4.96 7.25 303 .000

contrac 101 4.08

9 Stress Perm. 204 2.89 -1.23 303 .219

contrac 101 3.12
10 Grievance Perm. 204 4.87 5.48 303 .000
contrac 101 4.20
11 Student Perm. 204 5.54 2.73 303 .007
contrac 101 5.18

239
 Chapter 1

Table 4.13 Regression Coefficients Showing The Effect Of Remuneration On QWL

Unstandardised Standardised

Table 4.15 Regression Coefficients Showing The Effect

Coefficient Of Wrk-life &
Coefficients t social Sig.
relationship
On QWL

Model b Unstandardised
Std. Error Beta Standardised
(Constant) 3.866 Coefficient
.176 Coefficients
21.975 t .000 Sig.
Remuneration .350 .040 .454 8.868 .000
*Dependent Variable: QWL
Model b Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 5.436 .562 9.675 .000
Wrk life -.284 .095 -.179 -2.983 .003
Social orienttion -.178 .091 -.117 -1.953 .052
Table 4.14 Regression Coefficients Showing The Effect Of Physical environment On QWL
*Dependent Variable: Stress Unstandardised Standardised

Coefficient Coefficients t Sig.

Model b Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 2.826 .290 9.746 .000
Physical environment .544 .062 .451 8.793 .000
*Dependent Variable: QWL

Table 4.16 Independent t-test

s.no variables group number mean t-test df sig

240
1 stress male 99 2.70 -2.06 303 .000
female 206 3.09
 Chapter 1

Chapter 5

5.1 Major findings of the study

Measurement of quality of work life has resulted into some valuable

findings. The major findings of this research are as under:-

Remuneration: College Teachers are satisfied with the salary they received

which is inconsistent with the previous research conducted by Edwards et al.

(2009) and they can avail earned leave. But on the other hand they are

dissatisfied with the reward system, medical and housing allowances which

241
 Chapter 1

are in line with the studies of Saraji and Dargahi, 2006; Islam and Siengthai,

2009; Sadique, 2007; Dargahi and Yazdi, 2007.

Grievance handling: College Teachers are satisfied with the grievance

handling procedure as complaints and problems are handled fairly by

adopting the grievance redressal procedure, which is essential for

maintaining good employee’s relations and smooth running of the

productive work place. The results are similar with the studies of Eaton et

al., 1992; Considine and Callus, 2009.

Quality of job itself: Teachers are satisfied with their quality of job like

creativity and interesting which enhances their satisfaction level. The results

are inline with Considine and Callus, 2009; but against the previous

studyconducted by Saad et al (2008).

Student Behaviour: The college teachers are satisfied with the behaviour

of students as they are the integral part of their profession. Students neither

disturb nor insult the teachers and actively responded to their lecture. They

act as a source of persuasion and motivation.

Stress: Teachers of Govt. degree Colleges are not stressed as they never feel

under pressure at work place. Moreover time schedule is not hectic which is

opposite to the research conducted by Saraji and Dargahi (2006).

242
 Chapter 1

Work-life balance: Teachers are satisfied with the work-life balance which

is consistent with the previous research by Raju, 2004; Beasley et al. 2005.

They have enough time for family and social obligations. But on the other

hand results are inconsistent with the previous research conducted by

Edwards et al., 2009; Haden et al., 2008; Dargahi and Yazdi, 2007.

Participation in decision-making: College teachers are impressed with the

process of decision making as they have opportunity to participate in

decision making process and management makes effort to involve all

teachers. Moreover their views and opinions are considered. The result is in

line with Subramanian and Anjani, 2010.

Physical environment: Good working conditions are compatible with an

employee’s comfort and doing a good job. Teachers are moderately satisfied

with the working conditions as they revealed that furniture is adequate &

comfortable and ventilated rooms are also available. This finding is

consistent with Considine and Callus (2009) but against the studies of

Dargahi and Yazdi (2007).

Social orientation: College teachers are enjoying good relations with their

superiors and colleagues as friendly, helpful and supporting behaviour helps

in enhancing the quality of work life. The finding is matched with Considine

and callus (2009); Beasley et al (2005).

243
 Chapter 1

Growth and recognition: Teachers are satisfied with the growth and

recognition in their colleges as they indicated that availability of career

opportunity which helps in sharpen their professional skills and also

appreciated for good work. The results are consistent with the previous study

conducted by Subrahmanian and Anjani (2010)

College wise analysis: There is significant difference in mean perception of

QWL among all colleges. The teachers of govt. Degree College of education

are more satisfied with maximum aspects of QWL as comparison to other

colleges.

Qualification wise analysis: There is a significant difference among all the

three groups. Group II (Mphil/Net) college teachers are least satisfied.

Highly qualified teachers are more satisfied (consistent with Sharma & Jyoti,

2008; Mettle, 2001).

Gender wise analysis: Both male and female college teachers are satisfied

with their QWL and there is insignificant difference between their

perceptions about QWL. The results are in line with the study conducted by

Crossman & Harris (2006).

Designation Wise Analysis: There is significant difference between all three

groups. Group I (Lecturer) teachers are least satisfied with their QWL.

244
 Chapter 1

Higher rank teachers are more satisfied with their quality of work life

consistent with (Sharma & Jyoti, 2008; Oshagbemi, 2000).

Length of service Wise Analysis: There is significant difference among all

groups. Group I (1-10 yr) teachers are least satisfied with their QWL

because more than fifty percent teachers are contractual and have low

quality of work life as compared to other three groups. Moreover

experienced teachers are more satisfied. The results are in line with Lewis

(1982), Sharma & Jyoti (2008).

Working/non working life partner Wise Analysis: The teachers with

working life partners are more satisfied with their quality of work life than

non working life partner teachers and the difference in attitude of both is

significant because the working life partner have the dual income and

majority of them are permanent in their job.

Marital status Wise Analysis: Both married and unmarried teachers are

satisfied with all aspects of quality of work life but unmarried teachers are

less satisfied with their remuneration. The results are similar with previous

studies like Knerr (2006); Knoop, 1995.

Income Wise Analysis: There is significant difference among all groups.

Income Group I (below 20000) teachers are least satisfied with their QWL as

all of them are contractual and having less participation, lesser chances for

245
 Chapter 1

growth and recognition as compared to other three groups (consistent with

Considine and Callus, 2009).

Age Wise Analysis: There is significant difference among all groups. But

the teachers belonging to age group 20-25, 26-30and 31-35 are least satisfied

with their QWL as all of

Majority of them are contractual. Older teachers are more satisfied

(consistent with Spector, 1996).

Nature of job wise Analysis: There is significant difference among

permanent and contractual college teachers’ perception about quality of

work life. Permanent teachers are more satisfied with all aspects of quality

of work life as compared to the contractual counterparts. The results are in

line with previous study conducted by Arkison, 2010.

5.2 Conclusion

The above discussion revealed that quality of work life is a

multidimensional phenomenon and the teachers working in the govt. degree

colleges in Jammu district are satisfied with their quality of work life though

the level of quality of work life is not very high. Teachers have high

perception about quality of job itself, social orientation and the students’

behaviour. Teachers are satisfied with the growth and recognition in their

profession in the form of due praise and provide them career opportunities

246
 Chapter 1

which increases their ability to perform better. They are also satisfied with

the participation in decision making process and grievance handling

procedure in colleges because their problems are fairly handled and solved

moreover provides opportunity to give valuable suggestions. Teachers are

moderately satisfied with the physical environment because working

conditions are not highly satisfied like adequate & comfortable furniture,

lighting & ventilation in rooms etc. moreover teachers are satisfied with the

work-life balance as they have enough time away from work to attend their

family and social obligations. Teachers are least satisfied with remuneration

and related factors. They found that their salary is inadequate as it is less

than what they deserve. Housing, Medical allowances are also not sufficient.

The dissatisfaction level regarding remuneration & related factors is very

high among contractual teachers than the permanent teachers.

5.3 Suggestions

Although the college teachers have average perception about all the aspects

of quality of work life. In order but we want to optimally explore their talent

we shall provide them such quality of work life which makes them highly

contended with their work environment. Following suggestions have been

extended for this purpose:

247
 Chapter 1

Contractual teachers are highly dissatisfied with their salary so in order to

increase their satisfaction level the foremost requirement is to enhance their

pay, allowances etc.

Grievance handling mechanism should be strengthened. It should be

properly adopted in all the educational institutions by providing equitable

rights, impartial solution of conflicts and timely redressal of complaints.

To make teachers fully satisfied with their quality of job itself more and

more initiatives should be taken to enhance their satisfaction level. College’s

administration should enrich their job by providing them more autonomy,

exciting and challenging work.

Teachers stress must be reduce by allotment of subjects to their own choice,

provides recreational facilities like magazines, novels which will

subsequently make enjoyable.

Contractual teachers should also be given the opportunity to participate in

decision making. Moreover administration should give importance to

teachers’ opinion, suggestions etc, which can make them feel important for

the organisation.

Flexible work hours in the college help to maintain a balanced work-life

relationship which increases their satisfaction level.

248
 Chapter 1

Appropriate physical environment makes the work place comfortable. So

better working conditions such as increase size of staff rooms, facility of

clean drinking water, comfortable furniture, clean toilets with in staff rooms

etc should be provided to them.

The positive attitude of the superiors and colleagues helps a lot in

improving the quality of work life of teachers. So, HoD should adopt a

guiding approach; always consult faculty members regarding any change in

the subject matter or time schedule etc which makes them feel as member of

one group.

College’s principals should decide to make use of reward system to

recognize those teachers who perform their job well in the form of merit

certificate.

Continuous growth of teachers through seminars, lectures delivered by

experts, work shops, refresher courses should be stressed to enhance

teachers abilities.

Inculcation of moral and ethical values among the students so that they

understand the value of teaching profession and join it.

To remove the monotony or boredom of the day-to-day work teachers

should be provided health club, yoga centers and separate canteens for staff

members where they refresh their mind and teach well.

249
 Chapter 1

Equal opportunities should be provided to contractual and permanent

teachers.

5.4 Strategic Implications

The findings of the study have several important implications for teachers’ in

order to improve their quality of work life.

5.4.1 Managerial/Administrative Implications: Management should

realize that their true wealth lies in their employees so in order to increase

their satisfaction level institutions should work for the development of

conducive working environment for the teachers like open communication,

provide better working conditions such as comfortable furniture, large class

rooms, proper heating & lighting, clean drinking water, separate canteens for

staff, indoor plantation to generate an amicable atmosphere in the colleges.

Holding periodic meetings of the teachers included contractual should be

conducted with HOD’s/Principal to discuss various problems like achieving

the objectives, grievances, suggestions and other concern of students,

teachers etc and find their solution. Suggestion/complaint box should be

placed in the institution so that the problems of teachers as well as students

could be known and necessarily action could be taken. Reward system in the

issuing merit-certificates to those teachers who perform their job well.

Proper grievance redressal procedure must be adopted by management so

250
 Chapter 1

that the problems can be handled and equitable solution of conflicts can be

arrived at. Teachers must be consulted about change at work like change in

time table, subject allotment, purchases new books, which can make them

feel important part of the organisation/institutions. Flexible work hours

should be implemented which helps teachers to spend their time in fulfilling

their personal as well as maintaining work-life balance.

5.4.2 Theoretical Implications: In this study we validate the scale of quality

of work life. So this scale will be used to explore the further relationships.

5.4.3 Government Implications: Contractual teachers are fully dissatisfied

with their salary because the workload of contractual teachers’ are more and

they are not even on the lowest ladder of the basic pay i.e. Rs 15600 due to

which they are fully dissatisfied. So in order to fill this gap and to increase

the satisfaction level the government should be given the basic pay and add

dearness allowance which enhances the loyalty, confidence and efficiency of

the teachers. Moreover duty leaves should be given for attending seminars,

conferences & workshops for career development and timely payment of

their salary.

5.4.4 Financial Implications: In order to meet the raise in teachers pay the

tuition fee should be charged from students except those who belong to

below poverty line. By doing so the government would get an additional

251
 Chapter 1

source of income to finance its education department more accurately and

adequately.

5.5 Future research

This study was exploratory in nature so there is need to conduct the

evaluative study by stressing on consequences of quality of work life:

 Comparative study between different private Vs public degree

colleges can be undertaken.

 Interrelationship among all the variables with other related constructs

viz. organisation culture, organisation climate, job satisfaction,

organizational commitment and intention to leave to be measured.

References

 Arkison, B. (2010). The Experience of Substitute Teaching in Alberta

Schools. Available at: www.teachers.ab.ca.

252
 Chapter 1

 Beasley, J. W., Karsh, B. T., Hagenauer, M. E., Marchand, L. &

Sainfort, F. (2005). Quality of Work Life of Impendent Vs Employed

Family. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 500-506.

 Brunetti, G. J. (2001). Why Do They Teach? A Study of Job

Satisfaction among Long-Term High School Teachers. Teacher

Education Quarterly, Available at:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200107/ai_n8974684 /

pg_16 (Last accessed on September 15, 2009).

 Considine, G. & Callus, R. (2002). The Quality of Work Life of

Australian Employees- The Development of an Index. HRM Review,

ICFAI University Press, 145-167.

 Crossman, A. & Harris, P. (2006). Job Satisfaction of Secondary

School Teachers. Educational Management Administration &

Leadership, 34 (1), 29-46.

 Dargahi, H. & Yazdi, M. K. S. (2007). Quality of Work Life in Tehran

University of Medical Sciences Hospitals’ Clinical Laboratories

Employees. Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(4), 630-633.

 Dargahi, H. & Yazdi, M. K. S. (2007). Quality of Work Life in Tehran

University of Medical Sciences Hospitals’ Clinical Laboratories

Employees. Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(4), 630-633.

253
 Chapter 1

 Eaton, A. E., Gordon, M. E., & Keefe, J. H. (1992). The Impact of

QWL Programs and Grievance System Effectiveness on Union

Commitment. Industrial and Labour Relations, 45(3), 591-604.

 Edwards, J. A., Laar, D. V., Easton, S. & Kinman, G. (2009). The

Work Related Quality Of Life Scale for Higher Education Employees.

Quality in Higher Education, 15(3), 207-219.

 Gupta, J. J. & Gupta, P. (2009). Quality of Work Life among

Employees– A Study of Non-Teaching Employees of University Of

Jammu. Arth Anvesan, 4(1&2), 19-28.

 Islam, M. Z. & Siengthai, S. (2009). Quality of Work Life and

Organizational Performance: Empirical Evidence from Dhaka Export

Processing Zone.http://www.ilo.org/pub.1-19.

 Knerr, M. J. (2006). An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship

between Marital Status & Job Satisfaction. Under Graduate Journal

for the Human Science. Available at:

http://medicina.kmu.lt/0410/0410-14e.pdf and

http://www.ikon.org./index.html. (Last accessed on 18th Nov 2010).

 Knoop, R, 1995, ‘Relationship among Job Involvement, Job

Satisfaction And Organisational Commitment For Nurses’, Journal of

Psychology, 126,(6), 643-649.

254
 Chapter 1

 Lewis, A. L. F. (1982). Job satisfaction, Decisional Discrepancy,

Academic Social Climate and Academic Achievement in Selected

Title1 Elementary Schools”, Dissertation Abstracts International,

43(1), 35-A.

 Metle, M. K. (2001). Education, Job Satisfaction and Gender in

Kuwait. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12

(2), 311–332.

 Oshabegmi, T. (2000).Gender Differences in the Job Satisfaction of

University Teachers. Women in Management Review, 15(7), 331-343.

 Raju, P. V. L. (2004). Quality of work life-The Human Implications.

HRM Review, ICFAI University Press, 9-13.

 Saad, H. S., Samah, A. J. A. & Juhdi, N. (2008). Employee’s

Perception on Quality of Work Life and Job Satisfaction in Private

Higher Learning Institutions. International Review of Business

Research Papers, 4(3) 23-34.

 Sadique, M. Z. (2007). The Impact of Designation, Experience and

Age on Existing and Expected Quality of Work Life: A Case Study of

Four Sugar Mills in Bangladesh. Daffodil International University

Journal of Business and Economics, 2(1), 155-169.

255
 Chapter 1

 Saraji, G. N. & Dargahi, H. (2006). Study of Quality of Work Life,

Iranian journal of public health, 35(4) 63-71.

 Sharma, R. D. & Jyoti, J. (2008). Job Satisfaction among

Academicians: Effect of Gender, Status and Age. Optimization

Journal of Research in Management, 1(2), 3-16.

 Spector, P. E. (1996). Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment,

Causes and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 Subrahmanian, I. & Anjani, N. (2010). Constructs of Quality of Work

Life- A Perspective of Textile and Engineering Employees. Asian

Journal of Management Research.299-307.

256
 Chapter 1

Bibliography

 Abosede, S. C. (2004). Stress Management among Female Academics

in Some Selected Nigerian Tertiary Institutions. Babcock Journal of

Management and Social Sciences, 2, 115-123.

 Ahlberg, J., Kononen, M., Rantala, M., Sarna, S., Lindholm, K. &

Nissinen, M. (2003). Self-Reported Stress among Multi Professional

Media Personnel. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 53, 403-405.

 Allen T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, C. S. & Sutton. M. (2000).

Consequence associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and

agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 5, 278-308.

257
 Chapter 1

 Argentero, P., Miglioretti, M. & Angilletta, C. (2007). Quality of Work

Life in a Cohort of Italian Health Workers. Supplemento A Psicologia,

29(1), 50-54.

 Arkison, B. (2010). The Experience of Substitute Teaching in Alberta

Schools. Available at: www.teachers.ab.ca.

 Azril, M. S. H., Jegak. U., Asiah, M., Azman, A. N., Bahaman, A. S.,

Jamilah, O. & Thomas, K. (2010). Can Quality of Work Life Affect

Work Performance among Government Agriculture Extension

Officers. Journal of social sciences, 6(1), 64-73.

 Bahl, T. (2003). Quality of work life “The work place bullies”

www.iupindia.in/303/hrm.asp.

 Beasley, J. W., Karsh, B. T., Hagenauer, M. E., Marchand, L. &

Sainfort, F. (2005). Quality of Work Life of Impendent Vs Employed

Family. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(6), 500-506.

 Benarjee, D. B. R. N. K. & Rojarani, E. (2004). New Perspectives of

Quality of Work Life. The Indian Journal of Commerce, 57(1), 73-81.

 Bentler, P. M. & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and

goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structure. Psychological

Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.

258
 Chapter 1

 Beri, G. C. (3rd ed.) (2005). Marketing Research. New Delhi: Tata

McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

 Boyd, H. W., Westfall, R. & Stasch, S. (6th ed.) (1985). Marketing

research text and cases. Illinois: Homewood.

 Brunetti, G. J. (2001). Why Do They Teach? A Study of Job

Satisfaction among Long-Term High School Teachers. Teacher

Education Quarterly, Available at:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200107/ai_n8974684 /

pg_16 (Last accessed on September 15, 2009).

 Burns, A. C. & Bush, R. F. (5th ed.) (2005). Marketing Research, ,

Dorling Kndersley (India) Pvt. Ltd., Licensees of Pearson Education

in South Asia.

 Charlie, N. (2001). Teacher Workload and Stress: An International

Perspective on Human Costs and Systemic Failure. BCTF Research

Report. From http:/ /www.bctf.ca (Retrieved September 30, 2010).

 Cheung, F. Y. L., & Tang, C. S. K. (2009). Quality of Work Life as a

Mediator between Emotional Labour and Work Family Interference.

Journal of Business Psychology, 24, 245-255.

 Churchill, G. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of

marketing constructs,” Journal of marketing research, 16 (1), 64-73.

259
 Chapter 1

 Cohen, R. & Rosenthal, E. (1980). Should Unions Participate in

Quality of Working Life? The Canadian Scene, 1(4), 7-12.

 Conlon, T. J. (2003). Development of an Operational Definition of

career development for the 21st Century Workplace. In S. A. Lynham

& T. M. Egan (Eds.), Academy of Human Resource Development

Conference Proceedings (489-493). Bowling Green, OH: Academy of

human resource development.

 Connell, J. & Harvey, H. (2003). Call Centres & Labour Turnover: Do

HRM Practices Make a Difference? International Employment

Relations Review, 10(2), 49-66.

 Considine, G. & Callus, R. (2002). The Quality of Work Life of

Australian Employees- The Development of an Index. HRM Review,

ICFAI University Press, 145-167.

 Crossman, A. & Harris, P. (2006). Job Satisfaction of Secondary

School Teachers. Educational Management Administration &

Leadership, 34 (1), 29-46.

 Cunningham, J. B. & Eberle, T. (1990). A Guide to Job Enrichment

and redesign. Personnel, 67, 56-61.

260
 Chapter 1

 Danna, K. & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and Well-Being in the

Workplace: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of

Management, 25, 357-384.

 Dargahi, H. & Yazdi, M. K. S. (2007). Quality of Work Life in Tehran

University of Medical Sciences Hospitals’ Clinical Laboratories

Employees. Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(4), 630-633.

 Darling. H. L. & McLaughlin, M. W. (2003). Investing in teaching as

a learning profession: Policy problems and prospects. Teaching as the

learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. 376-411. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 Davies, D., Taylor, R., & Savery, L. (2001). The Role of Appraisal,

Remuneration and Training in Improving Staff Relation in Western

Australian Accommodation Industry: A comparative study. Journal of

European Industrial Training, 25, 366-373.

 DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Factor Analysis, Scale Development Theory

and Applications SAGE publications. Applied Social Research

Method Series, 2, 26, 10-137.

261
 Chapter 1

 Dhar, R. L. (2008). Quality of Work Life: A Study of Municipal

Corporation Bus Drivers. The Journal of International Social

Research, 1(5), 251-272.

 Dwivedi, R. S. (1995). Human Relations and Organisational

Behaviour: A Global Perspective. New Delhi: Macmillan India.

 Eaton, A. E., Gordon, M. E., & Keefe, J. H. (1992). The Impact of

QWL Programs and Grievance System Effectiveness on Union

Commitment. Industrial and Labour Relations, 45(3), 591-604.

 Education Commission (1966). The Report of Education Commission

(1964-66). Ministry Of Education.

 Edwards, J. A., Laar, D. V., Easton, S. & Kinman, G. (2009). The

Work Related Quality Of Life Scale for Higher Education Employees.

Quality in Higher Education, 15(3), 207-219.

 Elias, M. S. & Saha, N. K. (2005). Environmental Pollution and

Quality of Working Life in Tobacco Industries. Journal of Life Earth

Science, 1(1), 21-24.

 Ezra, M. & Deckman, M. (1996). Balancing Work and Family

Responsibilities: Flextime and Child Care in the Federal Government.

Journal of Public Administration Review. 56, 174-179.

262
 Chapter 1

 Feijoo, N. R. (2004). Job Insecurity And Stress Level,

Interdisciplinaria. Numero Especial.1, 249-257.

 Feuer, D., (1989). Quality of Work Life: A Cure for All Ills? Training:

The Magazine of Human Resources Development, 26, 65-66.

 Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation

Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal

of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.

 Ganapathi, R., Hema, S., Nalini, A.V. (2010). Impact of Stress on IT

and ITES Employees in Coimbatore City. Saaranch R K G Journal of

Management, 2(1), 48-54

 Ghosh, S. (1993). Improvement of Quality of Work at Micro Level.

Productivity, 34(3), 463-472.

 Gifford, A. E., Gordon, M. E. & Keefe, J. H. (2004). The Relationship

between Hospital Unit Culture and Nurses Quality of Work Life.

Journal of Health Care Management, 47(1) 13-26.

 Glaser, E. M. (1976). State Of the Art, Questions about QWL.

Personnel, Nov-Dec. 39-47

263
 Chapter 1

 Glowinkowski, S. P. & Cooper, C. L. (1985).Current Issues in

Organisational Stress Research. Bulletin of the British Psychological

Society, 38, 212-216.

 Gupta, J. J. & Gupta, P. (2009). Quality of Work Life among

Employees– A Study of Non-Teaching Employees of University Of

Jammu. Arth Anvesan, 4(1&2), 19-28.

 Hackman, H. R. & Suttle, J. L (1977). Improving Life at Work:

Behavioural Science approaches to organizational change. Santa

Barbara, CA: Goodyear.

 Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job

Diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170.

 Hair, J. J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. B. (2006).

Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

 Hargreaves, A. (2000). Four Stages of Professionalism and

Professional Learning. Teachers and Teaching: History and Practice.

6(2), 811-826.

 Harrington, S. J. & Santiago, J. (2006). Organisational Culture and

Telecommuters’ Quality of Work Life and Professional Isolation.

Communications of the IIMA, 6(3), 1-9.

264
 Chapter 1

 Havlovic, S. J. (1991). Quality of Work Life and Human Resource

Outcomes. Industrial Relations, 30(3), 469-479.

 Herzberg, F. (1959). Two-factor theory. From Wikipedia, the free

encyclopedia available at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Herzberg retrieved on 23 May

2008; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation retrieved on 25 May

2010

 Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the

study of organisations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967-988.

 Hoque, M. E. & Rahman, A. (1999). Quality of Working Life and Job

Behavior of Workers in Bangladesh: A Comparative Study of Private

and Public Sectors. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 35 (2),

175-184.

 Hossain, M. M. & Islam, M. D. (1999). Quality of Working Life and

Job Satisfaction of Government Hospital Nurses in Bangladesh. IJIR

34(3) 292-302.

 Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indices in

covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new

alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.

265
 Chapter 1

 Islam, M. Z. & Siengthai, S. (2009). Quality of Work Life and

Organizational Performance: Empirical Evidence from Dhaka Export

Processing Zone.http://www.ilo.org/pub.1-19.

 Jain, S. (1991). Quality of Work Life. Deep and Deep Publications.

New delhi.

 Joreskog, K. G. & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equating

Modeling with Simples Command Language Scientific Software

International, IL, USA.

 Kalra, S. K. & Ghosh, S. (1984). Quality of Work Life: A Study of

Associated Factors. The Indian Journal of Social Work, 25(3), 341-

349.

 Kaur, D. (2010). Quality of Work Life in ICICI Bank Ltd,

Chandigarh. International Research Journal, 1(11), 28-29.

 Khani, A. Jaafarpour, M. & Dyrekvandmogadam, A. (2008). Quality

of Nursing Work Life. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research,

2(3), 1169-1174.

 Kim, C. W., McInerney, M. L. & Alexander, R. P. (1999).Job

Satisfaction Related to Safety Performance: A Case from

Manufacturing Firm. Journal of Coastal Business, 1(11), 63-71.

266
 Chapter 1

 Kinman, G., Jones, F. & Kinman, R. (2006).The Well-Being of the

UK academy. Quality in Higher Education 12 :( 1), pp. 15-27.

 Kline R. B. (1998). Principles and Practices of Structural Equation

Modeling the Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA.

 Knerr, M. J. (2006). An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship

between Marital Status & Job Satisfaction. Under Graduate Journal

for the Human Science. Available at:

http://medicina.kmu.lt/0410/0410-14e.pdf and

http://www.ikon.org./index.html. (Last accessed on 18th Nov 2010).

 Kennedy, K. N., Felicia, G. I. and Jerry, R. G. (2002), “Customer

mind-set of employees throughout the organisation,” Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 159-171.

 Knoop, R, 1995, ‘Relationship among Job Involvement, Job

Satisfaction And Organisational Commitment For Nurses’, Journal of

Psychology, 126,(6), 643-649.

 Kompier, M., Ybema, J. F., JANSEEN, J. & TARIS, T.

(2009).Employment Contracts: A Cross - Sectional and Longitudinal

Relations with Quality of Work Life, Health and Well Being. Journal

of Occupational Health. 51, 193-203

267
 Chapter 1

 Larsen, M. (2008). Does Quality of Work Life Affect Men and

Women’s Retirement Planning Differently? The International Society

for Quality of Life Studies, 3, 23-42.

 Lath, S. K. (2010). Study of the Occupational Stress among Teachers.

International Journal of Educational Administration, 2(2), 421-432.

 Lau, H., While, A. E. & Barriball, K. L. (2007). A Model of Job

Satisfaction of Nurses: A Reflection of Nurses' Working Lives in

Mainland China. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(2), 468-479.

 Lau, R. S. M. & Bruce, E. (1998). A Win-Win Paradigm for Quality of

Work Life and Business Performance. Human Resource Development,

9(3), 211-226.

 Lawler, E. E., (1982). Strategies for Improving the Quality of Work

Life’ cited in American Psychologist (2005), 37, 486-493.

 Lee D. J., Singhapakdi, A. & Sirgy, M. J. (2008). Further Validation of

a Need–Based Quality of Work Life. Applied Research Quality Life, 2,

273-287.

 Lewis, A. L. F. (1982). Job satisfaction, Decisional Discrepancy,

Academic Social Climate and Academic Achievement in Selected

Title1 Elementary Schools”, Dissertation Abstracts International,

43(1), 35-A.

268
 Chapter 1

 Littlefield, K. L. (2004). Quality of Work Life Issues- The Needs of

the Dual Career Couple Employee Perceptions of Personnel Practices:

A Study of Rural America; A Barometer For Human Resource

Managers. Proceedings of the Academy of Organisational Culture,

Communications and Conflict, 8 (1), 27-34.

 Lowe, G. (2006). Under pressure. Implications of Work Life Balance

and Job Stress. Human solutions report.

 Lowe, S. G. (2001). The quality of work: why it matters for workers,

employers and society-second international conference on researching

work and learning- available on www.cprn.org.

 MacCallum, R. C., Brawne, M. W. & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power

Analysis and Determination of Sample Sizes for Covariance Structure

Modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149.

 Martzler, K. & Renzl, B. (2007). Assessing Asymmetric Effects in the

Formation of Employee Satisfaction. Journal of Tourism

Management, 28, 321-330

 Mastura, J., Ramayah, T. & Zainurin, Z. (2006). Work Satisfaction

and Work Performance: How Project Managers in Malaysia perceived

it? Marketing and Management Development, 1305-1313.

269
 Chapter 1

 Mazerolle, S. M., Bruening, J. E., Casa, D. J. & Burton, L. J. (2008).

Work-Family Conflict, Part 2nd: Job and Life Satisfaction in National

Collegiate Athletic Association Division I-A Certified Athletic

Trainers. Journal of Athletic Training, 43: 513-522.

 McDonald, K. S., & Hite, L. M. (2005). Reviving the relevance of

career development in human resource development. Human

Resource Development Review, 4(4), 418-439.

 Mehta, P. (1982). Rising Aspirations, Quality Of Life and Work

Organization. Productivity, 22(4), 85-88.

 Metle, M. K. (2001). Education, Job Satisfaction and Gender in

Kuwait. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12

(2), 311–332.

 Mirvis, P. H. & Lawler, E. E. (1984). Accounting for the Quality of

Work Life. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 5, 197-212.

 Mishra, P. K. (1996). Quoted in Pestonjee, D.M. (1999) Stress and

Coping. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

 Monappa, A. & Saiyadin, M. (1997). Personnel Management (2nd ed),

Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd, New Delhi.

270
 Chapter 1

 Morin, E. M & Morin, W. (2000). QWL and Firm Performance at

Canada. ICFAI. 13(2),30-34

 Mukhophadhya, P. (2nd ed.) (1998). Theory and Methods of Survey

Sampling. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

 Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van, A. J., Bennett, N., Lind, S. &

Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of Goodness-Of-Fit Indices for

Structural Equation Models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430-445.

 Newstorm, J. W., & Davis, K. (11th ed.) (2004). Organizational

Behaviour- Human behaviour at work. New Delhi: Tata McGraw

Hill Publishing Company limited.

 Nock, S. L. & Kingston, P. W. (1984). The Family Work Day. Journal

of Marriage and Family, 46, 333-343.

 Okpara, J. O., (2004). The Impact of Salary Differential on

Managerial Job Satisfaction: A Study on Gender Gap and Its

Implication for Management Education and Practices in a Developing

Economy. Journal of Business Development Nations, 8, 66-92.

 Oshabegmi, T. (2000).Gender Differences in the Job Satisfaction of

University Teachers. Women in Management Review, 15(7), 331-343.

271
 Chapter 1

 Pina, D. L. & Bengtson, V. L. (1993). The Division of Household

Labor and Wives’ Happiness: Ideology, Employment and Perceptions

of Support. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55, 901-912.

 Piqueras, C., (2006). Improving Employee Satisfaction and Well

Being Using Emotional

Intelligence.http://www.coachingvalencia.es/catalogo/archivos/9_arch

ivos/emotional%20intelligence%20and%20well-being.pdf

 Raju, P. V. L. (2004). Quality of work life-The Human Implications.

HRM Review, ICFAI University Press, 9-13.

 Rao, P. S. (1996). Essentials of Human Resource Management and

Industrial Relation. (1st ed.) Himalaya Publishing House. 473-475.

 Ravichandran, R. & Rajendran, R. (2007). Perceived Sources of

Stress among the Teachers. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied

Psychology, 33(1), 133-136.

 Rose, R. C., Beh, L. S., Uli, J., & Idris, K. (2006). Quality of Work

Life: Implications of Career Dimensions. Journal of Social Sciences,

2(2), 61-67.

 Rossi, A. M., Perrewee, P. L. & Sauter, S. L. (2006). Stress and

Quality of Working Life, Greenwich, Information Age Publishing.

272
 Chapter 1

 Saad, H. S., Samah, A. J. A. & Juhdi, N. (2008). Employee’s

Perception on Quality of Work Life and Job Satisfaction in Private

Higher Learning Institutions. International Review of Business

Research Papers, 4(3) 23-34.

 Sabarirajan, A., Meharajan, T. & Arun, P. (2010). A Study on the

Various Welfare Measures and their Impact on QWL Provided by the

Textile Mills with Reference to Salem District, Tamil Nadu, India.

Asian Journal of Management Research, 1(1), 15-24.

 Sadique, M. Z. (2007). The Impact of Designation, Experience and

Age on Existing and Expected Quality of Work Life: A Case Study of

Four Sugar Mills in Bangladesh. Daffodil International University

Journal of Business and Economics, 2(1), 155-169.

 Saiyadain, M. S. (1988). Human Resource Management. Tata

McGraw Hills Publishing Company Ltd. New Delhi.

 Saklani D. R. (1999). Quality of Work Life: Instrument design. Indian

journal of industrial relations, 38(4), 480-503.

 Saraji, G. N. & Dargahi, H. (2006). Study of Quality of Work Life.

Iranian Journal of Public Health, 35(4), 8-14.

273
 Chapter 1

 Saraji, G. N. & Dargahi, H. (2006). Study of Quality of Work Life,

Iranian journal of public health, 35(4) 63-71.

 Sarros, J. C. (2000). Values-based leadership: A new challenge for

business executives. In R. Edwards, C. Nyland and M. Coulthard

(eds.), Readings in International Business: An Asia Pacific

Perspective. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Prentice Hall.

 Sharma, R. D. & Jyoti, J. (2008). Job Satisfaction among

Academicians: Effect of Gender, Status and Age. Optimization

Journal of Research in Management, 1(2), 3-16.

 Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P. & Lee, D. (2001). A New Measure

of Quality of Work Life (QoWL) Based On Need Satisfaction and

Spillover Theories. Social Indicators Research, 55, 241-302

 Sloane, P. & Williams, H. (1996). Are Overpaid Workers Really

Unhappy? A Test of the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Journal of

Labor, 10, 3-15.

 Spector, P. E. (1996), “Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment,

Causes and Consequences”, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 Steers, R. M. & Porter, L.W. (1983). Motivation and Work Behaviour

(3rd edition), New Delhi: McGraw Hill.

274
 Chapter 1

 Subrahmanian, I. & Anjani, N. (2010). Constructs of Quality of Work

Life- A Perspective of Textile and Engineering Employees. Asian

Journal of Management Research.299-307.

 Subramanian, S. & Nithyanandan, D.V. (2010). Occupational Stress

and Mental Health of Cardiac and Non Cardiac Patients.

www.industrialpsychiatry.org.on.

 Taylor, T., Gough, J., Bundrock, V., & Winter, R. P. (1998). A Bleak

Outlook: Academic Staff Perceptions of Changes in Core Activities in

Australian Higher Education, 1991-Studies in Higher Education,

23(3), 255-268.

 Trau, R. N. C. & Hartel, C. E. J. (2002) Individual and Contextual

Factors Affecting Quality of Work Life and Work Attitudes of

Gaymen. Working Paper Series, 23(03), 1-16.

 Tull, D. S. & Hawkin, D. I. (9th ed.) (1993). Marketing Research:

Measurement and Methods., New York: McMillan Publishing

Company.

 Vanhala, S. & Tuomi, K. (2006). HRM, Company Performance and

Employee Well Being. Journal of Management Review, 17, 241-255.

275
 Chapter 1

 Virtanen M., Kivimaki M., Joensuu M., Virtanen P., Elovainio M. &

Vahtera J. (2005). Temporary employment and health: a review.

International Journal of Epidemiology, 34, 610-622.

 Wan, H. L., (2007). Remuneration Practices in Chemical Industry in

Malaysia: The Impact on Employee Satisfaction. Journal of

Compensation Benefit Review, 39, 56-67.

 Watanabe, M., Tanaka, K., Aratake, Y., Kato, N. & Sakata, Y. (2008).

The Impact of Effort Reward Imbalance on Quality of Life among

Japanese Working Men. Industrial Health, 46, 217-222.

 Wilson, K., Brown, M, Cregan, C., (2008). Job Quality and Flexible

Practices: An Investigation of Employees’ Perceptions. The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(3), 473-

486.

 Wilson, N. (1973). On the Quality of Working Life. Manpower Paper

No.7, London.

 Winter, R., Tony T. & James, S. (2000). Trouble at Mill: Quality of

Academic Work Life Issues within a Comprehensive Australian

University. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 255-268.

276
 Chapter 1

 Wright, T., Cropanzano, R. & Bonett, D. (2007). The Moderating Role

of Employee Positive Well Being on the Relation between Job

Satisfaction and Job Performance. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 12, 93-104.

 Yang, C. C., Li, Y. H. & Wei, L .C. (2009). The Relationship between

Leadership Behaviour of a Principal and Quality of Work Life of

Teachers in an Industrial Vocational High School in Taiwan.

http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper. retrieved on Jan 21, 2009.

277