The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work

Georges Steffgen, Philipp E. Sischka and Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa
Additional contact information
Georges Steffgen: Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Health and Behavior, University of Luxembourg, L-4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
Philipp E. Sischka: Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Health and Behavior, University of Luxembourg, L-4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa: Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Health and Behavior, University of Luxembourg, L-4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 21, 1-31

Abstract: (1) Background: Job quality is a multidimensional and elusive concept that is back in vogue among social scientists and policymaker. The current study proposes a new job quality approach that is compared with the European Working Conditions Survey framework and structured with the help of the Job Demands-Resources model. Two new measures of job quality, the Quality of Work Index (QoW) and the Quality of Employment Index (QoE) are developed and validated in three different languages (German, French, Luxembourgish). The QoW is composed of 43 items, focusing on four areas of work—work intensity, job design, social conditions, and physical conditions (subdivided in eleven components)—which are particularly important for employees’ well-being. The QoE is composed of 13 items that cover training opportunities, career advancement, job security, employability, work life conflict, and income satisfaction. (2) Methods: Data were collected via computer-assisted telephone interviews in a representative sample of 1522 employees working in Luxembourg (aged 17–67 years; 57.2% male). (3) Results: Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the proposed factors structure and scalar measurement invariance for the three different language versions. Internal consistencies were satisfactory for all subscales (Cronbach’s α between 0.70 and 0.87). Correlations and hierarchical regression analyses with different psychological health measures (i.e., burnout, general well-being, psychosomatic complaints, work satisfaction, vigor) and subjective work performance confirmed the construct validity of the new instruments. (4) Conclusions: The QoW and the QoE are globally and on the level of the sub-categories effective tools to measure job quality, which could be used to compare job quality between organizations and different countries. Furthermore, the current study confirms associations between the different components of the QoW and QoE and employees’ health.

Keywords: quality of work index; quality of employment; well-being; indicators; composite index (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7771/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7771/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7771-:d:433905

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().