Safety and Health at Work

Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (산업안전보건연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Changing Factors of Employee Satisfaction with Working Conditions: An Analysis of the Korean Working Conditions Survey

  • Lee, Changhun (Policy Research Department, Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency) ;
  • Park, Sunyoung (Policy Research Department, Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency)
  • Received : 2019.11.21
  • Accepted : 2021.04.10
  • Published : 2021.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: We hypothesized that the growing demand of Korean workers for work-life balance would change the factors influencing job satisfaction. We sought to verify our hypothesis by conducting a conjoint analysis based on the Korean Working Conditions Survey (KWCS). Methods: We analyzed the raw data of the KWCS, conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute from 2006 to 2017. To complete the analysis, we counted on a conjoint model of analysis, typically used in the analysis of customer satisfaction. The dependent variable was the satisfaction of workers with their working conditions, and the independent variables were the job quality indicators identified by Eurofound. Results: The factors that have the greatest impact on working conditions satisfaction are summarized as follows: "physical environment" for the first wave, "adverse social behavior" for the second wave, "occupational status" for the third and fourth waves, and "management quality" for the fifth wave. "Earnings" were not a major factor in determining employee job satisfaction, and the relative importance index is decreasing. Conclusion: According to the results of the analysis of the tendencies of Korean workers, the factors that affect the satisfaction with the working conditions have changed over time. It is crucial to identify factors that affect working conditions to assure the health and productivity of workers. The results of this study demonstrate that policymakers and employers are required to attentively consider human relations and social environment at work to improve working conditions in the future.

Keywords

References

  1. Gerber PD, Nel PS, Van Dyk PS. Human resource management. 4th ed. Johannesburg (South Africa): Oxford University Press; 1998645p.
  2. Yesufu TM. The dynamics of industrial relations: the Nigeria experience. Ibadan (Nigeria): Oxford University Press; 1984234p.
  3. Ahmed S, Al Haderi SMS, Ahmad FB, Jaaffar AR, Walter J, Al Douis GAA. Employee job security and performance relationship in developing economy through employee engagement: critical analysis with PLS-SEM. Int J Econ Res 2017;14(19):133-47.
  4. Lamm F, Massey C, Perry M. Is there a link between workplace health and safety and firm performance and productivity? N Zeal J Empl Relat 2007;32(1):72-86.
  5. Laine H, Saastamoinen P, Lahti J, Rahkonen O, Lahelma E. The associations between psychosocial working conditions and changes in common mental disorders: a follow-up study. BMC Publ Health 2014;14(1):588. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-588
  6. Min HJ, Sim MG. Find the agenda for Gwangju and South Jeolla Province in response to the demographic cliff (2) go beyond the compatibility of a work and family to work and life balance. Naju (Korea): Gwangju Jeonnam Research Institute; 2018. Report No.:2018-07. 19p. [in Korean].
  7. Easterlin RA. Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In: David PA, Reder MW, editors. Nations and households in economic growth: essays in honor of Moses Abramowitz. USA (NY): Academic Press; 1974 p. 89-125p.
  8. Easterlin RA. Income and happiness: towards a unified theory. Econ J 2001 july;111:465-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00646
  9. Eurofound. Fifth European working conditions survey: overview report. Dublin (Ireland): Eurofound; 2012. 151 p.
  10. Green F, Felstead A, Gallie D. Job quality and inequality: the unequal world of work in the UK, 1986-2012. Juncture 2016;22(4):329-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2050-5876.2016.00883.x
  11. Green F, Mostafa T. Trends in job quality in Europe. Dublin (Ireland): Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg; 2012. 94 p.
  12. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Handbook on measuring quality of employment: a statistical framework. UNECE Report; 2015. 320 p.
  13. Burchell BM, Gollac M, Illessy E, Lorenz C, Mako C, O'Brien, Valeyre A. Working conditions in the European Union: working time and work intensity. Dublin (IE): Eurofound; 2009. Report No.:2009-VIII. 69p.
  14. Seol MJ, Lee MS, Lee SK. Effects of labor intensity and fatigue on sleep quality of clinical nurses. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm 2018 Sep;24(4):276-87 [In Korean]. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2018.24.4.276
  15. Karasek R, Theorell T. Healthy work: stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York(US): Basic Books; 1990. 402 p.
  16. Pfeifer C. Unfair wage perceptions and sleep: evidence from German survey data. J Appl Soc Sci 2015;135:413-28.
  17. Sung JM. The effect of reducing legal working hours. Mon Labor Rev 2005;5:66-75 [in Korean].
  18. Spurgeon A, Harrington JM, Cooper CL. Health and safety problems associated with long working hours: a review of current position. Occup Environ Med 1997;54(6):367-75. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.54.6.367
  19. Kim ST, Park WS, Ahn JY, Jeon BY, Jeon JH. The effects of reducing working hours on the national economy and society. Sejong (Korea): Korean Labor Institute; 2001. 77 p [in Korean].
  20. Shin IY, Lee GY. Antecedents and consequences of work self-determined motivation: work contexts and commitment to change. Korean J Bus Adm 2015;28(11):2909-29. In Korean.
  21. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. NY (US): Plenum press; 1985. 372 p.
  22. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 2000;11(4):227-68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01
  23. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory: basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. NY(US): Guilford; 2017. 756 p.
  24. Fernet C, Litalien D, Morin AJS, Austin S, Gagne M, Lavoie-Tremblay M, Forest J. On the temporal stability of self-determined work motivation profiles: a latent transition analysis. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 2020;29(1):49-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2019.1688301
  25. Kim H. A study on the management performance of public institutions and financial compensation of the head of the institution. Korean Public Adm Rev 2015;49(1):24-272 [In Korean].
  26. Eurofound., International Labour Organization(ILO). Working conditions in a global perspective. Dublin (Ireland): Eurofound and Geneva(Switzerland):ILO; 2019. 178 p.
  27. Clark AE, Kristensen N, Westergard-Nielsen N. Job satisfaction and co-worker wages: status or signal? Econ J 2009;119:430-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02236.x
  28. Siegrist J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. J Occup Health Psychol 1996;1(1):27-41. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.27
  29. Chang YH, Kook KH. A study on the influence of employee job environment on the job satisfaction. J Korean Soc Railway 2008:1943-54 [in Korean].
  30. Shin JO. Multiple mediator of job environment and work sustainability on the relation of job satisfaction and life satisfaction. J Crit Soc Welfare 2015;49:202-26 [in Korean].
  31. Rhee GY, Park WY. Emotional worker's satisfaction about work environment and work autonomy. Korean J Soc Iss 2017;32(2):9-32 [in Korean].
  32. Kim YS, Park JS, Rhee GY, Kim HM. A comparison between the second Korean working conditions survey (KWCS) and the first KWCS. Saf Health Work 2015;6(2):85-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.02.005
  33. Rhee GY, Kim YS, Cho YH. The type of payment and working conditions. Saf Health Work 2015;6(4):289-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.07.001
  34. Ministry of Employment and Labor (Korea). Report on labor force survey at establishments. Ministry of Employment and Labor; 2018. Report No.: 11-1492000-000034-06.[In Korean].
  35. Luce D, Tukey J. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol 1964;1:1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(64)90015-X
  36. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis with readings. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall; 1995. 745 p.
  37. Wittink DR, Philippe C. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: an update. J Mark 1989;53(3):91-6. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251345
  38. Green PE, Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issue and outlook. J Consum Res 1978;5(2):103-23. https://doi.org/10.1086/208721
  39. Carroll JD, Green PE. Psychometric methods in marketing research: Part 1, conjoint analysis. J Mark Res 1995;32(4):385-91. https://doi.org/10.2307/3152174
  40. Gustafsson A, Herrmann A, Huber H. Conjoint measurement: methods and applications. 4th ed. Springer; 2000. 380 p.
  41. Marshall P, Bradlow ET. A unified approach to conjoint analysis methods. J Am Stat Assoc 2002;97(459):674-82. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214502388618410
  42. Aizaki H. Basic functions for supporting an implementation of choice experiments in R. J Stat Softw 2012;50(2):1-24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v050.c02
  43. Aizaki H. Support.CEs: basic functions for supporting an implementation of choice experiments. Comprehensive R Archive Network. 2013. Available from: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/support.CEs/%20support.CEs.pdf.
  44. OECD. Pensions at a glance 2017: OECD and G20 indicators. Paris (FR): OECD Publishing; 05-Dec. 164 p.
  45. OECD. Education at a glance 2016: OECD indicators. Paris (FR): OECD Publishing; 15-Sep. 508 p.
  46. Martin L. Do innovative work practices and use of information and communication technologies motivate employees? Ind Relat 2017;56(2):263-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/irel.12173