Models and components
Hackman and Oldham (1976)
Hackman and Oldham (1976) highlighted what they described as psychological growth needs, relevant to a person's assessment of the quality of their employment. Several of these needs were identified:
They suggested that for workers to positively value the quality of their employment, such needs must be addressed.
Taylor (1979)
In contrast to these theoretical models, Cooper and Mumford (1979) more pragmatically identified the essential components of a person's assessment of the quality of their employment:
They considered that other aspects could be added, including:
Cooper and Mumford suggested that these aspects may vary by organization and employee group.
Warr et al (1979)
Warr and his colleagues (1979), in an investigation into a person's assessment of the quality of their employment, considered a series of apparently relevant factors, among which can be mentioned:
They analyzed various correlations, such as those between commitment to work and job satisfaction. In particular, Warr et al. found moderate correlations between job satisfaction and life satisfaction, and between job satisfaction and happiness. They also found a smaller, but significant, correlation between job satisfaction and self-rated anxiety.
Thus, while some authors have highlighted labor aspects in a person's assessment of the quality of their employment, others have identified the relevance of personality factors, psychological well-being and broader concepts of happiness and life satisfaction.
However, the factors that most obviously and directly affect work have been the focus of attention, as researchers have tried to unravel how workplace characteristics influence a person's assessment of the quality of their job.
Mirvis and Lawler (1984)
Mirvis and Lawler (1984) suggested that a person's appraisal of the quality of his or her job was associated with satisfaction with wages, hours, and working conditions, describing the "basic elements of a good appraisal" as:.
Baba and Jamal (1991)
Baba and Jamal (1991) listed the typical factors (some positive and some negative) in a person's assessment of the quality of their employment:.
Baba and Jamal also explored the routinization[8] of job content and suggested that this factor be incorporated into research on a person's assessment of the quality of their job.
Ellis and Pompli (2002)
Some authors have argued that the assessments that different people who perform the same job make of its quality can be very different. For example, Ellis and Pompli (2002) identified several factors that contribute to job dissatisfaction and perceived job quality among nursing staff:
Sirgy et al (2001)
Sirgy et al. (2001) suggested perceived job quality as a second-order factor with 7 first-order dimensions:.
They defined perceived job quality as the satisfaction of these needs through the resources, activities, and outcomes derived from workplace participation. The needs defined by the psychologist Abraham Maslow (basic, security, protection, belonging, recognition and self-realization) were considered relevant to base this model. Non-work aspects are downplayed as the focus is on the perceived quality of employment rather than the broader concept of quality of life.
The measure proposed by Sirgy et al. (2001) suggests that perceived job quality comprises lower order needs (social, esteem, self-actualization, knowledge and aesthetic needs) and higher order needs (health, safety, economic and family needs). This measure has been adapted to more than ten countries, including Portugal and Brazil, and has been shown to be solid due to its internal structure and its relationship with other variables.[9] This means the following: in a survey, a large number of workers (100, 1000) will be asked how they value their work from 1 to 10, and then, how their work satisfies, from 1 to 10, their economic, social, etc. needs. With the data collected, a mathematical model will be developed with which it will be possible to predict, for example, the proportion in which a person's assessment of their work depends on how it satisfies their economic needs. As you can see, it is a construct "Construct (psychology)").
These attempts to define perceived job quality have included theoretical approaches, lists of identified factors, and correlational analyses, with varying opinions on whether such definitions and explanations can be general to all jobs or should be specific to each work environment.
Bearfield
Bearfield (2003) used 16 questions to examine perceived job quality and distinguished between causes of dissatisfaction in professionals, middle management employees, salespeople, and service workers. It seemed to him that different concerns might need to be addressed for different groups.
Herzberg et al (1959)
The distinction between job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in perceived job quality reflects the influence of job satisfaction theories. Herzberg et al. (1959) used the concepts of “hygiene factors” and “motivating factors” to differentiate the causes of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
It has been suggested that motivating factors are intrinsic to the job: the content of the job, the task itself, responsibility and professional development. Hygiene factors, or factors to avoid dissatisfaction, include aspects of the work environment such as interpersonal relationships, salary, working conditions and safety. Of the latter, company policy and administration may be the most common cause of job dissatisfaction, while the employee achieving his or her goals may be the greatest source of satisfaction for him or her.
Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy
Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013) used 9 components to measure the quality of employment perceived by employees of private technical institutions: [10].
Male employees are more satisfied than female employees. The chi-square test (a statistical validation method) confirms that all demographic factors, such as gender, title, salary, department, and experience, are independent of perceived job quality. The study also reveals a significant association between the quality of employment perceived by teaching and non-teaching staff. Resource adequacy has a higher correlation with perceived job quality, while training and development has a lower correlation for teaching staff. For non-teaching staff, compensation (salary and benefits) and rewards have a higher correlation with perceived job quality, while the work environment shows a lower correlation.
Lawler and Porter (1966)
An individual's experience of satisfaction or dissatisfaction may be substantially rooted in his or her subjective perception, rather than responding largely to objective factors. Furthermore, an individual's perception can be affected by relative comparison (am I paid the same as someone else doing the same job?) and by comparisons of ideals, aspirations, and internalized expectations, for example, with the individual's current state (Lawler and Porter, 1966).
Summary of the different visions
Different authors differ in their views on the components of perceived job quality.
However, it has generally been accepted that the perceived quality of employment is conceptually similar to employee well-being (employee well-being, a concept that the English Wikipedia incorrectly redirects to workplace wellness, but which the Gallup pollster company clarifies:[11] employee well-being represents how their life is going). Gallup identifies 5 components. Its objective is for companies concerned about retaining their staff to commission surveys through which they identify employees with low well-being, to try to do something about it and prevent them from leaving.
However, perceived job quality differs from job satisfaction, which exclusively represents the workplace.
Happiness at work (happiness at work), with a page on the English Wikipedia, is another related concept. It would encompass the employee's well-being, but would also include aspects of autonomy at work and acquisition of knowledge.
Perceived job quality is not a unitary concept, but has been considered to incorporate a hierarchy of perspectives that include not only job factors such as job satisfaction, salary satisfaction, and relationships with colleagues, but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and general sense of well-being. More recently, job stress and work-life balance have also been identified as factors that should be conceptually included in perceived job quality.