JOB QUALITY: HOW TO KEEP YOUR EMPLOYEES WORKING WITHOUT FINANCIAL INCENTIVE

WITHOUT FINANCIAL INCENTIVE

+31634355201

m.j.schreuder.1@student.rug.nl 17/01/2021

JOB QUALITY: HOW TO KEEP YOUR EMPLOYEES WORKING

WITHOUT FINANCIAL INCENTIVE

ABSTRACT

How to keep your employees satisfied has been a hot topic for several years. The ideal situation would be that the employee is committed to the job without any financial incentive, also known as non-financial employment commitment. But how does one achieve this? Job quality is determined by autonomy, competence, relatedness and the purpose of the job. As the purpose of the job increases, the non-financial employment commitment increases as well. Moreover, this relationship is positively mediated by health. The level of psychological stress is determined by the level of autonomy. Hence, the higher the job quality, the better the health of an individual. Moreover, an increased health in turn also increases one’s commitment. This paper will look at the relationship between job quality and non-financial employment

commitment, using health as a mediator. Using the European Social Survey (ESS) 2010 the hypotheses will be tested.

Key words: non-financial employment commitment, job quality, health, Self-Determination

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ... 2

1. INTRODUCTION ... 4

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK... 7

2.1 Non-financial employment commitment ... 7

2.2 Quality of work ... 8

2.3 Health ... 11

3. METHOD ... 14

3.1 Research design ... 14

3.2 Sample and data collection ... 14

3.3 Measurement of variables ... 14

3.4 Data analysis ... 17

4. RESULTS ... 18

4.1 Descriptive Statistics ... 18

4.2 Mediation analysis ... 19

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 23

5.1 Theoretical implications ... 23

5.3 Practical implications ... 25

5.3 Strengths and limitations ... 26

5.4 Future research ... 26

6. REFERENCES ... 28

1. INTRODUCTION

One of the main issues in contemporary enterprises is employee turnover (Wang et al., 2019). How does one keep its employees satisfied? Job satisfaction relates to the cognitive evaluation of the quality of well-being of a person’s job in relation to pay, coworkers or supervisors (Steel et al., 2018). According to Rama-Maceiras et al. (2012) highly satisfied employees that care about the quality of their job will have a higher productivity and are less likely to leave their job. Hence, it is of significant importance for enterprises to satisfy their employees in order to prevent a high degree of turnover. Several factors can be taken into account in order to realize this. This research will focus on the individual level.

‘’If you were to get enough money to live as comfortably as you would like for the rest of your life, would you continue to work?’’ (Quinn & Staines, 1979). An interesting question that brings different answers since one’s motivation to work does not necessarily have to be financial (Cassar and Meier, 2018). A study by Warr (1982) showed that a vast majority of full-time male and female employees would continue working without financial necessity to work. The next question one would ask is why. Harpaz (1988) argues that the answer has to do with job satisfaction. Hence, the higher the satisfaction with the job, the more likely one would be non-financially committed to their work. Moreover, work ethic and work orientation are also of importance (Harpaz, 2002). However, this specific research will look at a different direction not yet researched before.

productive employees? The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan and Deci, 2000) claims that employees value a certain degree of non-monetary job dimensions based on three human psychological needs: the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Cassar and Meier (2018) take these findings together to stress the importance of job mission as a source of meaning. This in turn also leads to intrinsic motivation to work.

It is well known that increasing the level of happiness and health has a positive effect on an employee’s effort, contributions, and productivity (Fisher, 2003). On the other hand, poor health may result in lower productivity, low quality decisions and more absenteeism (Boyd, 1997). Thus, working can have positive effects on people, however work may also lead to illness (Achterhuis, 1984). According to research (Gallie 2007a; Eurofound 2017) social conflict and health issues are the most important reason for absence at work. This is also mainly due to people having low quality jobs. Moreover, absenteeism arises due to problems with the job itself (Johnson et al. 2018). Lastly, according to a study by TNO (2019) work pressure and work stress are more often seen as underlying reasons of absenteeism. Jobs that are of high quality on the other hand, increase the health of people. Moreover, it also increases employee commitment which in turn leads to well-functioning, innovative

corporations (WRR, 2020). Hence why it is of significant importance to corporations to find out whether indeed the quality of the job leads to non-financial employment commitment and what role an employee’s health has in this relationship.

This research will contribute in such a way that it will establish and explore the link between the quality of the job and non-financial job commitment with a mediating

relationship of health. Thus, the following research question can be formed:

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Non-financial employment commitment

Non-financial employment commitment has been introduced in the 1980s with a study by Warr regarding the effect on unemployed workers. Warr (1982) introduces ‘’non-financial employment commitment’’ as the value placed on employment for reasons other than

financial ones. Warr concluded that unemployed individuals that experienced a high level of non-financial employment commitment started looking for a new job earlier than others. Moreover, the highly committed individuals obtained jobs through direct approaches to employers instead of less proactive methods, the lower committed group used.

Even though Warr (1982) introduced the concept of ‘’non-financial employment commitment’’, Morse and Weiss (1995) actually truly shed light on the concept with their article ‘’The Function and Meaning of Work and the Job’’. In this article the authors introduced the famous lottery question and this can be seen as the beginning of

‘’non-financial employment commitment’’ gaining attention. The famous lottery question by Morse and Weiss (1995) evaluates the function and meaning of work. The lottery question refers to the question whether someone is willing to continue working after having won a grand prize in the lottery. Morse and Weiss (1995) define the function and meaning of work and the job as the reason one has a job and goes to work. For instance, the meaning of work and the job can be that one has a job because it simply is a means to an end of earning a living, or it could also create a feeling of being part of the larger society, or having something to do with their time and creating a purpose in their lives. The latter one describes ‘’non-financial

side of worker-management relations had large impact on literature written after (Bendix & Fisher, 1949). Hence why several researchers previously have looked into Mayo’s (1949) human relations theory. According to Mayo (1949) the human relations theory relates to the social person in the workplace having other psycho-social needs and social relationships at work that influence their productivity (Dingly, 1997; Duncan, 1999, Wren & Greenwood, 1988). Moreover, ‘’Mayoism’’ shows a more efficient working way of exercising power by management via cognition and emotions of the workers (Bruce & Nyland, 1949). An example of this is that Mayo believes that production needs to be organized so that authority is

exercised to a minimum amount and there is a maximum attention to an individual its work-satisfaction (Bendix & Fisher, 1949). To relate this to the concept of non-financial

employment commitment we look at the definition of the meaning of work by Morse and Weiss (1995). The human relation theory actually describes the meaning of the job, and hence the reason one goes to work. According to Mayo (1949), having psycho-social needs and social relationships influences productivity and hence influences the reason to go to work and in turn non-financial employment commitment.

2.2 Quality of work

simplistic like for instance good jobs being well-paid and bad jobs being low-paid

(Acemoglu, 2001). Hence, there is an existing complexity in understanding of the definition of the quality of work.

Hackman & Oldham’s (1976) Job Characteristics Model predicts that there are several factors that influence the quality of work. Jobs higher in skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback will provide greater experience of meaning,

responsibility, and knowledge of results (Wall et al., 1978). Moreover, greater experience of meaning, responsibility, and knowledge of results in turn leads to greater job satisfaction, higher internal work motivation, better work performance and less absenteeism. Task identity in this context can be described as the job feeling meaningful and worthwhile (Coelho and Augusto, 2010). On the other hand, task significance relates more to the impact the job has on the lives or work of other individuals. This could be in the organization itself, as well as in the external environment (Hackman and Oldham, 1974). Moreover, Hackman and Oldham (1974) also describe autonomy as having the freedom to make individual choices and feeling

independent. Lastly, Hackman and Oldham (1974) refer to feedback as information about the effectiveness of the worker’s performance.

Ryan and Deci (2000) elaborate on the work of Hackman and Oldham (1974) and together with Deci and Ryan (1985, 2000) moved to a more modern variant, namely the introduction of the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). SDT stresses the importance of employees valuing a certain degree of non-monetary job dimensions based on three basic psychological needs: the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. These non-monetary job dimensions determine the quality of the job. Autonomy here relates to acting with volition and having the experience of choice (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Workplace examples of this is for instance the ability to decide how to organize your own work.

achieve a certain goals, a feeling of competence arises (Cassar & Meier, 2018). Competence for instance can also be achieved by receiving positive feedback (Deci & Ryan, 2012). Lastly, relatedness can be defined as follows: ‘’(…) the need to be close to, trusting of, caring for, and cared for by others (…)’’ (Deci & Ryan, 2012). Moreover, relatedness also relates to the need to feel connected to significant others (Reis et al., 2000). To translate this into workplace examples, relatedness in the workplace can be related to the need to feel close and connected to fellow colleagues and the social support one gets of their colleagues.

As already mentioned in the introduction, Cassar and Meier (2018) take the SDT a step further. Cassar and Meier (2018) suggest that the design and the mission of the job will create meaning for the ones performing. The researchers take the findings related to SDT together to stress the importance of job mission as a source of meaning. This strongly can be related to the task significance of Hackman and Oldham (1974) mentioned earlier where it relates to the impact the job has on the lives or work of other individuals. The creation of meaning for the ones performing the job in turn also leads to intrinsic motivation to work. Hence, not only do autonomy, competence and relatedness determine the quality of the job, Cassar and Meier (2018) add purpose to the list as well. Taking these four determinants of the quality of work together this will create a meaning of the job and that in turn influences someone’s health. Hence, non-monetary motives are of significant importance in order to manage and govern modern organizations.

Meier, 2018) and thus according to Morse and Weiss (1995) contributes to one’s non-financial employment commitment. Both SDT (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan and Deci, 2000) and research by Cassar and Meier (2018) focus on non-monetary job dimensions that determine the quality of a job, namely autonomy, relatedness and competence. In addition to that, Cassar and Meier (2018) add another factor to the quality of work, namely purpose. Again, we here can assume that people look for a certain meaning and purpose in their job because it increases their well-being and thus non-financial employment commitment.

Furthermore, as the quality of the job improves, and thus the purpose of the job, the higher the non-financial employment commitment. Hence, here we assume that the higher the quality of the job, the higher the non-financial employment commitment. Based on the previously made conclusions, the following will be hypothesized:

H1: The higher the job quality, the higher the non-financial commitment.

2.3 Health

demands and discretion. They found that the interaction between demands and discretion predicted job satisfaction, and in turn that the three-way interaction between demands, discretion, and social support predicted physical health symptoms.

The SDT (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan and Deci, 2000) determines autonomy and relatedness as two of the indicators of determining the quality of the job. As has been mentioned earlier, the degree of autonomy one experiences is a predictor of psychological strain. Moreover, social support, and thus relatedness, also to some degree influences the prediction of physical health symptoms. Hence, we here assume that high job quality will lead to less psychological strain and physical health. Therefore, the following will be

hypothesized:

H2: The higher the job quality, the better the health of the worker.

It is widely known that paid work brings positive health effects (Butterworth et al., 2011). However, what influence does the health of employees have on the job itself?

work-satisfaction (Bendix & Fisher, 1949). By doing this, employees will feel a greater sense of non-financial employment commitment. Besides that, Harpaz (1988) already argued that the higher the job satisfaction, the higher the non-financial employment commitment. Hence, an increased health will lead to an increase in job satisfaction and performance and in turn to a higher degree of non-financial employment commitment.

Furthermore, we already established two relationships. One positive relationship between the quality of work and non-financial employment commitment, and one positive relationship between the quality of work and health. Thus, as the better the job quality, the higher the non-financial employment commitment and the better the job quality, the higher the health, we here assume also that the better the health, the higher the level of non-financial employment commitment. Based on this, the following will be hypothesized:

H3: The better the health of the worker, the higher the non-financial employment commitment.

Hence, I assume there is a positive relationship between the quality of the job and non-financial employment commitment. Moreover, health mediates the relationship between the quality of the job and non-financial employment commitment. The mediating link between those two is also positive. The following conceptual model can be established:

3. METHOD

3.1 Research design

In order to test the previously mentioned hypotheses, a quantitative analysis will be performed. This is mainly due to the fact of having data in the form of numbers and statistical results. Moreover, secondary data will be used simply because this will be the best possible way considering the limited time frame. The data will be analyzed using Stata.

3.2 Sample and data collection

The data collection will be done using an existing data set, namely the European Social Survey (ESS) of 2010. This specific survey uses 27 different European countries. The survey counts a total of 52.458 respondents. The survey itself includes information about the respondents’ working lives. Topics discussed in this survey refer to working conditions, incentives to work and well-being. Since these topics are useful for this specific study, relevant questions will be used in order to conduct research. The list of the selected questions can be found in Appendix A.

In order to select a specific sample for this research, all currently unemployed respondents were deleted from the dataset. Moreover, only workers from the age of 25 until 65 were used in this study. The reason for this is to filter out student workers. According to the WRR (2020) students often work part-time with temporary or zero-hours contracts. This in turn will lead to them having different working experiences. Lastly, after using listwise deletion to remove all missing observations, 15,458 observations remained.

3.3 Measurement of variables

Moreover, how the variables specifically were formed can be found in Appendix B. Some concepts consisted of multiple variables and or variables that were combined into one variable.

asked to what degree the respondent’s job requires learning new things. This variable, ‘’learningthings’’ uses a 1-4 scale. Relatedness was measured using a single question using a 1-4 scale, namely one that asks about the degree the respondent can get support and help from co-workers when needed. This variable is called ‘’relatedness’’. In order to measure purpose two questions were used that ask about the main and second reason why the respondent puts effort into his/her work. Both questions used the same 1-8 scale that was later recoded so that 0 referred to ‘’other’’ and 1 referred to ‘’work is useful for other people’’. Since both variables measure the same thing, the two variables were added up making one variable, ‘’purpose’’. Lastly, the mediating variable health was measured using a question with a 1-5 scale that asks about the respondent’s general health. The variable is called ‘’health’’.

At last, 9 control variables were included. Firstly, general questions that refer to gender, age, education level and income were added. Moreover, to look at the differences between part-time and full-time workers, the type of employment contract is also taken into account. Variables measuring whether the respondent lives at home with his/her partner and whether the respondent lives with children at home are also of importance. These two topics are of importance because this influences the respondents’ work-life balance. To give an example how this might influence this study is for instance having 3 children living at home might result in the respondent working for the money to provide for his family, instead of doing it out of non-financial employment commitment. Furthermore, instead of using the contract hours the respondent has, the number of actual hours worked was included. This is due to the fact that often the actual hours worked are significantly higher than the contracted hours. This in turn influences the respondent’s work-life balance. Lastly, country was used as a control variable. In all performed analyses country-fixed effects are controlled for.

3.4 Data analysis

4. RESULTS

4.1 Descriptive Statistics

In this section descriptive statistics and correlations will be analyzed. All findings for the main variables can be found in table 1. The findings for the control variables are depicted in Appendix C. The correlation analysis will give a good indication about the degree that variables are related or not, and in what way.

A few things can be noticed from table 1. First of all, one thing noticeable by just looking at the means is that relatively more respondents believe that if someone else would have applied to their job, they would need any education or vocational schooling beyond compulsory education. Moreover, looking at the mean of purpose we can conclude that significantly more respondents put effort into their work for reasons other than that their work is useful for other people. Looking at the correlations, firstly we can conclude that

TABLE 1

Descriptive Statistics of Main Variables

Variable Mean S.D. Correlation

Organize work Decidework time Schooling Learning things Schooling years Related ness Purpose N.F Health Organizework 3.746 1.550 1 Decideworktime 1.811 1.043 0.400* 1 Schooling 0.285 0.451 -0.216* -0.121* 1 Learningthings 2.782 1.003 0.260* 0.162* -0.355* 1 Schoolingyears 2.051 1.522 0.274* 0.170* -0.850* 0.396* 1 Relatedness 3.111 0.851 0.159* 0.079* -0.124* 0.253* 0.138* 1 Purpose 0.165 0.372 0.062* 0.020* -0.067* 0.081* 0.086* 0.031* 1 Nonfinancial commitment 3.206 1.057 0.220* 0.129* -0.139* 0.227* 0.184* 0.155* 0.058* 1 Health 3.983 0.783 0.062* 0.055* -0.076* 0.109* 0.098* 0.103* 0.031* 0.144* 1 N = 15,458 *p < 0.05 4.2 Mediation analysis

This section will discuss regression analyses being performed in order to test the previously mentioned hypotheses. The regression analyses are done to describe the effects of quality of work and health on non-financial employment commitment. Moreover, the analyses also show possible mediation effects. In order to further look into this, structural equation models were used in order to calculate the direct, indirect and total effects of the mediation.

commitment. Furthermore, looking at the variables ‘’learningthings’’ and ‘’purpose’’ it can be concluded that both variables relatively have strong positive effects on the dependent variable ‘’nonfinancialcommitment’’, in comparison to the other ones. Thus, even though it cannot fully be concluded that the quality of work influences non-financial employment

commitment, the analysis did show that there are significant positive effects between the two. Hypothesis 1 cannot fully be supported.

Looking at Model 2 we can conclude that only ‘’schoolingyears’’ and ‘’relatedness’’ are positive significant predictors for the variable ‘’health’’. This leads us to believe that it cannot fully be concluded that an increased quality of work leads to an increased health and thus hypothesis 2 cannot fully be supported. Lastly, Model 3 shows again that all variables expect for ‘’schooling’’ are showing a significant positive effect and also show the strong effects of ‘’learningthings’’ and ‘’purpose’’. However, since health is a significant predictor for non-financial employment commitment, hypothesis 3 can be supported. Comparing Model 1 and Model 3 we can see that in both models ‘’schooling’’ is not statistically significant. In Model 3 it can be concluded that when adding the mediating variable ‘’health’’ the effects of the quality of work variable on non-financial employment commitment do not change. Hence, there are hardly mediation effects. To conclude, all variables did show the expected positive relationship. Furthermore, even though not all hypotheses can fully be supported, there are in fact significant positive effects of all the independent variables. The reason why no mediation effect was found is due to the fact that the relationship between quality of work and non-financial employment commitment (hypothesis 1) and the quality of work and health (hypothesis 2) cannot fully be supported.

non-financial employment commitment and the quality of work. Moreover, this is in line with the regression analyses.

TABLE 2

Regression Analysis of the Quality of Work on Non-Financial Employment Commitment1

*p < 0.001 **p < 0.05

1 _{Country fixed effects and variances clustered by countries} Dependent

variable

NFEC Health NFEC

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

Step and variables B S.E. B S.E. B S.E.

TABLE 3

Direct, Indirect and Total Effects of Quality of Work on Non-Financial Employment Commitment Mediated by Health1

Direct effects Indirect effects Total effects

B S.E. Z B S.E. Z B S.E. Z

Non-Financial Employment Commitment Health 0.141* 0.025 5.77 0 0.141* 0.024 5.77 Decideworktime 0.032* 0.011 -2.87 0.003 0.002 -1.49 0.035* 0.012 -2.91 Organizework 0.091* 0.018 5.20 0.001 0.002 0.34 0.091* 0.018 5.17 Schooling 0.145 0.057 2.55 0.008 0.007 1.07 0.153 0.060 2.55 Learningthings 0.130* 0.019 -7.09 0.007 0.002 -2.84 0.137* 0.020 -7.06 Schoolingyears 0.082* 0.021 3.86 0.006* 0.003 2.13 0.088* 0.022 3.93 Relatedness 0.096* 0.018 5.42 0.010* 0.002 4.07 0.106* 0.019 5.59 Purpose 0.142* 0.029 4.87 -0.001 0.002 -0.33 0.141* 0.029 4.94 N = 15,458 *p < 0.05

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This last section will conclude the results from the analyses presented above. Moreover, the hypotheses will be discussed using the results, along with theoretical and practical implications on these findings. Lastly, reflections and a direction for future research will be presented. The purpose of this paper was to find out whether health mediates the relationship between non-financial employment commitment and the quality of work. Hence, the research question: ‘’To what extent does health mediate the relationship between the quality of the job and non-financial job commitment?’’.

5.1 Theoretical implications

This study attempted to contribute to existing literature on non-financial employment commitment and the quality of work. Moreover, it also attempted to establish a link in this relationship with health. In order to answer the previously mentioned research question, three hypotheses were created in order to do so. Each hypothesis tests one of the relationships in the mediation relationship. The first hypothesis looks at the direct relationship between the

quality of work and non-financial employment commitment. From the regression analysis it became clear that almost all determinants of quality of work influence non-financial

employment commitment. Only one variable measuring competence did not turn up as significant. A reason for this could be that it does not correctly measure competence.

activities at work (Deci & Ryan, 2000) in combination with Cassar and Meier (2018) who add purpose to the list as well. This in turn influences the degree of non-financial employment commitment someone experiences and hence the theory by Morse and Weiss (1995) on the reason one goes to work.

Moreover, the second hypothesis measuring whether a higher job quality would lead to an increased health was poorly supported. It can however be concluded that relatedness is a significant predictor of health. Moreover, to a lesser extent, competence can as well be seen as a significant predictor. Looking at autonomy and purpose, no significant effects are shown. This is partly in line with theory by Karasek (1979) where autonomy and relatedness are seen as predictors of psychological strain. Moreover, according to Niemiec and Ryan (2007) relatedness facilitates the process of internalization. People want to feel that the other person genuinely likes, respects and values him or her. This in turn contributes to a better mental health due experiencing a sense of belonging. Lastly, the third hypothesis measuring whether a better health would lead to a higher non-financial employment commitment can be

supported. This suggests that there is a positive relationship between health and non-financial employment commitment. This is in line with research by Cooper et al. (1989) and Harpaz (1988) that a better health leads to higher job satisfaction and higher job satisfaction leads to a larger degree of non-financial employment commitment.

5.3 Practical implications

As employee turnover is one of the main issues in contemporary enterprises (Wang et al., 2019), it is of great importance to mangers to make sure employees are satisfied. Being satisfied does not only relate to for instance getting paid properly, but also the fact that the job also contributes to someone’s health. Since this research explores the links between the quality of the job, non-financial employment commitment and health, managers should pay more attention to the quality of the job in order to create a sense of non-financial employment commitment. Do my employees experience enough autonomy? Is there a work friendly atmosphere where employees can feel connected to their colleagues, and so on. By increasing the quality of the job, employee commitment increases, which in turn leads to

well-functioning and innovative corporations (WRR, 2002). Moreover, highly committed employees are less likely to suffer from psychological strain (Warr, 1979; Stafford et al., 1980). Thus, contemporary managers should pay attention to the quality of the job, creating non-financial employment commitment and a good general health of their employees.

Furthermore, creating a decent quality of work for all has already become central to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development of the International Labor Organization. This includes creating sustainable work. By creating sustainable jobs, factors are eliminated that hinder and discourage employees from staying in or entering employment. These factors may include living and working conditions. Research by Veldhoven et al. (2007) showed

improving the lifestyle of the employees, and thus increasing their health, will lead to a reduction in absenteeism and furthermore improves individual work performance.

5.3 Strengths and limitations

This section will discuss a reflection of this specific study. A major strength of this study is that is adds to the current research of the SDT by Deci & Ryan (2000) and Cassar and Meier (2018) on determinants of the quality of work and take it a set further to link it to non-financial employment commitment in combination with health. Moreover, since the research included a total of around 15.000 respondents it makes it representative for the population of the countries participating in the ESS survey.

The first limitation is that it is an European based study. Even though some countries in Europe differ in economic and social climates, they are relatively similar. Since

entrepreneurial attitudes differ between countries since it part of their national culture (Bosma and Schutjens, 2011), the results of this specific study may not be generalized in other

contexts. Moreover, since an already existing data base was used (ESS 2010), variables were already established. As a result, specific concepts were difficult to precisely measure. If this was not the case, different results might have occurred. Lastly, even though a positive relationship between health and non-financial employment commitment is found, reversed causality here may be the case where the degree of non-financial employment commitment also is positively influenced with health.

5.4 Future research

As mentioned above, for the positive relationship between health and non-financial employment commitment reversed causality may be present. Hence, it may be the case that the opposite relationship is actually true. Meaning that when experiencing a high non-financial employment commitment, this would increase someone’s health. A study by Warr (1978) and Stafford et al. (1980) has shown that people who are more committed to

strain. This would be a direction future research could look into, in combination with what kind of role the quality of the job plays in this relationship.

Continuing with the topic of sustainable work and the importance of health in

6. REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D. 2001. Good jobs versus bad jobs. Journal of Labour Economics. 19(1): 1–21.

Achterhuis, H. 1984. Arbeid, een eigenaardig medicijn. Baarn: Ambo.

Adamson, M. & Roper, I. 2019. ‘Good’ Jobs and ‘Bad’ Jobs: Contemplating Job Quality in Different Contexts. Work, Employment and Society. 33(4): 551-559.

Bendix, R., & Fisher, L. H. 1949. The Perspectives of Elton Mayo. The Review of Economics

and Statistics. 31(4): 312.

Bosma, N. & Schutjens, V. 2011. Understanding regional variation in entrepreneurial activity and entrepreneurial attitude in Europe. The Annals of regional science. 47(3): 711-742.

Boyd, A. 1997. Employee traps - corruption in the workplace. Management Review. 86(9).

Bruce, K. & Nyland, C. 2011. Elton Mayo and the Deification of Human Relations.

Organization Studies. 32(3): 383-405.

Butterworth, P., Leach, L. S., Strazdins, L., Olesen, S. C., Rodgers, B., & Broom, D. H. 2011. The psychosocial quality of work determines whether employment has benefits for mental health: results from a longitudinal national household panel survey. Occupational and

Environmental Medicine. 68(11): 806–812.

Cassar, L. & Meier, S. 2018. Nonmonetary Incentives and the Implications of Work as a Source of Meaning. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 32(3): 215–238.

Coelho, F. & Augusto, M. 2010. Job Characteristics and the Creativity of Frontline Service Employees. Journal of Service Research. 13(4): 426-437.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation And Self-Determination In Human

Behavior. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. 2000. The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 11(4): 227-268.

Dingley, J. C. 1997. Durkheim, Mayo, morality and management. Journal of Business

Ethics. 16: 1117-1129.

Duncan, W. J. 1999. Management: Ideas and actions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Eurofound 2017. Sixth European Working Conditions Survey – Overview Report. Luxemburg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Findlay, P., Kalleberg, A. L. & Warhust, C. 2013. The challenge of job quality. Human

Relations. 66(4): 441-451.

Fisher, C. D. 2003. Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated? possible sources of a commonsense theory. Journal of Organizational

Behavior. 24(6): 753–777.

Fryer, D. 1986. Employment deprivation and personal agency during unemployment: A critical discussion of Jahoda’s explanation of the psychological effects of unemployment.

Social Behaviour. 1(1): 3-23.

Gallie, D. 2007a. Employment Regimes and Quality of Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. 1974. The job diagnostic survey: An instrument for the

diagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects. Department of Administrative

Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior Human Performance. 16: 250-279.

Harpaz, I. 1988. Variables Affecting Non-financial Employment Commitment. Applied

Psychology. 37(3): 235–247.

Harpaz, I. 1989. Non-financial employment commitment: A cross-national comparison.

Journal of Occupational Psychology. 62(2): 147-150.

Harpaz, I. 2002. Expressing a wish to continue or stop working as related to the meaning of work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 11(2): 177–198.

ILO. 2007. Director-General’s introduction to the International Labour Conference.

Decent work for sustainable development. Report I (A).

ILO. 2018. Decent work and the sustainable development goals: a guidebook on SDG

labour market indicators.

Johnson, S., Robertson, I., Cooper, C. 2018. Well-Being: Productivity and Happiness at

Work, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

Masten, A. S. & Reed, M. J. 2002. Resilience in development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mayo, E. 1949. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Reprint, London: Routledge, 1975.

Mead, G. E., Morley, W., Campbell, P., Greig, C. A., Mcmurdo, M. & Lawlor, D. A. 2008. Exercise for depression. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Morse, N. C. & Weiss, R. S. 1955. The function and meaning of work and the job. American

Niemiec, C. P. & Ryan, R. M. 2009. Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom. Theory and Research in Education. 7(2): 133-144.

Parkes, K. R., Mendham, C. A. & von Rabenau, C. 1994. Social support and the demand-discretion model of job stress: tests of additive and interactive effects in two samples. Journal

of Vocational Behavior. 44: 91-113.

Paulsen, R. 2008. Economically forced to work. A critical reconsideration of the lottery question. Basic Income Studies. 3(2).

Quinn, R., & Staines, G. 1984. Quality of Employment Survey, 1977: Cross-Section. ICPSR

Data Holdings.

Rama-Maceiras, P., Parente, S., & Kranke, P. 2012. Job satisfaction, stress and burnout in anaesthesia: Relevant topics for anaesthesiologists and healthcare managers? European

Journal of Anaesthesiology. 29(7): 311–319.

Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, J., & Ryan, R. M. 2018. Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Relationships, Well-Being and

Behavior. 317-349.

Rupert, P. A., Morgan, D. J. 2005. Work setting and burnout among professional psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 36(5): 544-550.

Ryan, R. & Deci, E. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist. 55(1): 68-78.

Stafford. E. M., Jackson, P. R. & Banks, M. H. 1980. Employment, work involvement and mental health in less qualified young people. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 3(29): 1-304.

Steel, P., Schmidt, J., Bosco, F., & Uggerslev, K. 2018. The effects of personality on job satisfaction and life satisfaction: A meta-analytic investigation accounting for bandwidth– fidelity and commensurability. Human Relations. 72(2): 217–247.

TNO 2019. Arbobalans 2018. Kwaliteit van de arbeid, effecten en maatregelen in

Nederland. Leiden: TNO.

van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., Koenders, P. G. & Dijkstra, L. 2009. Een betere energiebalans leidt tot een betere ardbeidsprestatie. TBV - Tijdschrift voor Bedrijfs-en

Verzekeringsgeneeskunde. 17: 393-399.

Wall, T., Clegg, C. & Jackson, P. 1978. An evaluation of the Job Characteristics Model.

Journal of Occupational Psychology. 51(2): 183-196.

Wang, C. Y., Gu Y. f., & Yuan, Q. H. 2019. Impact of Collective Turnover Characters on Departure Direction from the Perspective of Knowledge-Based View. Chinese Journal of

Management. 16(2): 159-167.

Warhurst, C., Carré, F., Findlay, P. & Tilly, C., n.d. 2012. Are Bad Jobs Inevitable? Trends,

Determinants and Responses to Job Quality in the Twenty-Frist Century. Palgrave

Macmillian.

Warr, P. 1982. A national study of non-financial employment commitment. Journal of

Occupational Psychology. 55(4): 297–312.

Warr, P., & Jackson, P. 1985. Factors influencing the psychological impact of prolonged unemployment and of re-employment. Psychological Medicine. 15(4): 795-807.

Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. 2020. Het betere werk. De nieuwe

maatschappelijke opdracht. WRR-Rapport 102, Den Haag: wrr.

Wren, D. & Greenwood, R. 1998. Management innovators: The people and ideas that have

7. APPENDIX

APPENDIX A: Survey Questions

Dependent variable

Non-financial employment commitment

Question G55: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? ‘I would enjoy working in my current job even if I did not need the money’.

1. Agree strongly 2. Agree

3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Disagree

5. Disagree strongly 8. (Don’t know)

Question G70: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement. ‘I would enjoy having a paid job even if I did not need the money?’

1. Agree strongly 2. Agree

3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Disagree

Independent variable

Autonomy

Question F27: Please say how much the management at your work allows/allowed you to decide how your own daily work is/was organized?

Question F28a: Please say how much the management at your work allows/allowed you to choose or change your pace of work?

Question G31: Please tell me how true each of the following statements is about your current job. I can decide the time I start and finish work.

Competence

Question G23: If someone was applying nowadays for the job you do now, would they need any education or vocational schooling beyond compulsory education?

1. Yes 2. No

8. (Don’t know)

Question G24: ASK IF YES AT G23. About how many years of education or vocational schooling beyond compulsory education would they need?

1. Less than 1 year (beyond compulsory school) 2. About 1 year 3. About 2 years 4. About 3 years 5. About 4-5 years 6. About 6-7 years 7. About 8-9 years

8. 10 years or more (beyond compulsory school) 88. (Don’t know)

Question G27: Please tell me how true each of the following statements is about your current job. My job requires that I keep learning new things.

Relatedness

Question G29: Please tell me how true each of the following statements is about your current job. I can get support and help from my co-workers when needed.

1. Not at all true 2. A little true 3. Quite true 4. Very true 8. (Don’t know)

Purpose

Question G21: People put effort into their work for many different reasons. Which of the reasons shown is the main reason why you put effort into your work?

1. To be satisfied with what I accomplish 2. To keep my job

3. Because my work is useful for other people 4. To get higher wage or a promotion

5. Because my work tasks are interesting

6. Because it is everyone’s duty to always do their best 7. (Other)

Question G22: And what is the second most important reason?

1. To be satisfied with what I accomplish 2. To keep my job

3. Because my work is useful for other people 4. To get higher wage or a promotion

5. Because my work tasks are interesting

6. Because it is everyone’s duty to always do their best 7. (Other)

55. (I do not put effort into my work) 88. (Don’t know)

Mediating variable

Question C15: How is your health in general? Would you say it is…

1. …very good, 2. Good, 3. Fair, 4. Bad, 5. Or very bad 8. (Don’t know) Control variables

Question C27: What citizenship do you hold?

(

(2-character))

Question F2: code sex

Question F5: Interviewer refer to household grid and code:

1. Respondent lives with husband/wife/partner 2. All others

Question F15: What is the highest level of education you have successfully completed?

1. ES-ISCED I , less than lower secondary 2. ES-ISCED II, lower secondary

3. ES-ISCED IIIb, lower tier upper secondary 4. ES-ISCED IIIa, upper tier upper secondary 5. ES-ISCED IV, advanced vocational, 6. ES-ISCED V1, lower tertiary education, 7. ES-ISCED V2, higher tertiary education

5555. (Other)

8888. (Don’t Know)

Question F21: Interviewer refer to household grid and code:

1. Respondent has children living at home 2. Does not

Question F23: Do/did you have a work contract of…

1. …unlimited duration, 2. or, limited duration,

Question F30: Regardless of your basic or contracted hours, how many hours do/did you normally work a week (in your main job), including any paid or unpaid overtime.

888. (Don’t know)

Question F42: Which of the descriptions on this card comes closest to how you feel about your household’s income nowadays?

1. Living comfortably on present income 2. Coping on present income

APPENDIX B: Preparation of the Dataset

In order to do analyses in Stata, the dataset used needs to be prepared. This was achieved by deleting variables not relevant for this research, selecting the population, recoding the relevant variables and finally deleting the missing variables. This section will give an overview of all the adjustments made.

Selecting research population

In order to select the right research population besides only selecting those respondents that are currently employed, also respondents below the age of 25 and above the age of 65 were dropped.

Recoding variables

Gender

For the variable gender a dummy variable was created. Here 0 represents male and 1 represents female.

Income

To measure how respondents felt about their current income, question F42 was used. This question was recoded so that 1 represented ‘’finding it very difficult on present income’’, 2 ‘’finding it difficult on present income’’, 3 ‘’coping on present income’’ and 4 represented ‘’living comfortably on present income’’.

Children

Partner

Question F5 was used in order to find out whether the respondent lives with a partner or not. The question was coded so that 0 represented ‘’lives with partner’’ and 1 represented ‘’does not live with partner’’.

Employment contract

In order to find out what type of employment contract the respondent has, question F23 was used and recoded so that 0 represented ‘’no contract’’, 1 ‘’temporary contract’’ and 2 ‘’permanent contract’’.

Working hours

In order to look at the working hours respondents work, question F30 was used. This question was recoded so that three categories were created. Here 1 equals ‘’short parttime’’. This category classifies the respondents that work from 0 to 12 hours a week. Second, 2 equals ‘’parttime’’. This category classifies the respondents that work from 13 up to 32 hours a week. Finally 3 equals ‘’full time’’ and in this category the respondents with more than 33 up to 80 hours are categorized. It was also found out that some respondent filled in that they worked more than 83 hours per week. Those observations were dropped since this does not capture ‘’fulltime’’ anymore.

Autonomy

Cronbach’s alpha here is 0.8218, which exceeds the threshold of 0.7. Hence, one variable was created by adding both variables and dividing it by two. The last question G31 was only renamed.

Competence

Three questions were taken into account, namely question G23, G24 and G27. Question G23 was recoded so that 0 equals ‘’yes’’ and 1 equals ‘’no’’. Moreover, question G24, which is a follow up question of G23, was recoded so that first all the respondents that answered ‘’no’’ on G23 were giving a score of 0. Furthermore, 1 equals ‘’about 1 year’’, 2 ‘’2-3 years’’, 3 ‘’3-5 years’’, 4 ‘’6-9 years’’ and 5 ‘’10 years or more’’. For question G24 the scale was made smaller for convenience purposes. Lastly, question G27 only renamed.

Purpose

Question G21 and G22 were taken into account for measuring purpose. Here both questions used the same scale. In order to make the questions relevant for this specific research the variables were recoded so that 0 referred to ‘’other’’ and 1 referred to ‘’work is useful for other people’’. Lastly, since both variables measure the same thing, the two variables were added up making one variable.

Non-financial employment commitment

Health

Health was measured using question C15. This question was recoded so that 1 equals "very bad", 2 "bad", 3 "fair", 4 "good", 5 "very good".

The variables ‘’relatedness’’, ‘’decideworktime’’, ‘’organizework’’, ‘’country’’, ‘’age’’ and ‘’education level’’ only were renamed accordingly.

Deleting missing values

APPENDIX C: Descriptive Statistics Control Variables

TABLE C1

Summary of Control Variables

Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min Max

TABLE C2

Correlation of Control Variables

Age Gender Educatio

n level

Employment

contract

Income Children Working