… and the Pursuit of Happiness - Institute of Economic Affairs

… and the pursuit of happiness
wellbeing at work: any lessons?
characteristics) which are strongly associated with indicators of
psychological wellbeing.
Surveys typically use questions based on Likert scales (for
example, respondents may be asked to rate job satisfaction on a
five-point scale ranging from ‘very satisfied’ to ‘very dissatisfied’).
Putting numbers to these answers enables quick comparisons
between average scores for different occupations, genders, age
groups and even (as we shall see later) countries. In more sophisticated
analysis of large-scale data sets, the separate effects of a wide
range of explanatory variables can be estimated.
Studies of this kind have identified a number of work characteristics
which are claimed to have a statistically significant influence
on job satisfaction and broader indicators of wellbeing at work
(European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions, 2007b; Michie et al., 2008). Positives include ‘hedonic’
factors such as above-average pay, the size of the workplace (smaller
workplaces being preferred), having a secure job, individual control
over the pace of work, and the opportunity to work at home; ‘eudaimonic’
factors include the opportunity to use a range of skills and
work which is seen as socially useful. 3 Negatives include tight deadlines,
close monitoring and performance targets.
These findings have led some academics (for example, Cooper
and Dewe, 2009; Robertson and Cooper, 2011) to extol ‘good jobs’
and ‘good work’ 4 embodying the positive characteristics noted
above; by contrast, there are ‘bad jobs’ which are denigrated.
3 It is also notable that self-employment is associated with high levels of job satisfaction
and wellbeing – despite typically lower average pay, longer hours of work
and less security.
4 Is it a coincidence that the list of features of ‘good jobs’ seems to correspond fairly
closely to the characteristics of typical academic posts? Academics are themselves
no fans of tight deadlines, close monitoring and performance targets.
These poor-quality jobs are claimed to create stress (see Box
overleaf) and may damage physical and/or mental health.
Research also shows, however, that after controlling for workplace
characteristics, there are differences in job satisfaction and
wellbeing which are associated with personal characteristics.
Most obviously, in the UK at least, women consistently show
higher levels of job satisfaction than men. Their preferences are
also different: working in the public sector adding to job satisfaction
for women, but not for men, for example. Ethnicity is a
factor, with black employees less satisfied than white employees.
Age is also relevant, with younger workers less satisfied than older
ones (though the relationship is not straightforward). Graduates
are less happy than non-graduates. Non-unionised workers
appear to be happier than unionised workers. Place in the job
hierarchy is also a factor, with managers more satisfied than other
workers. 5
In addition to these broad categories, it is also the case that
people differ in their psychological wellbeing at work as a result
5 This mixture of workplace and personal characteristics as determinants of subjective
job satisfaction has a counterpart in explanations of more objective indicators
such as turnover rates and sickness absences – which may be considered as
manifestations of dissatisfaction with jobs. Low turnover is associated with high
relative pay, unionisation and the availability of training among workplace characteristics.
At a personal level, men are more likely to quit for better-paid jobs
than women, while higher-grade staff are more likely to move than lower-grade
employees. As for sickness absence, analysis of UK Labour Force Survey data
(Leaker, 2008) shows that, controlling for other factors, employees in workplaces
with more than 500 employees are 34 per cent more likely to be absent than those
in workplaces with fewer than 25 employees. Those working in the public sector
are 22 per cent more likely to take sickness leave than those in the private sector.
But personal characteristics – gender, ethnicity and age –have a significant
impact as well. For instance, perhaps surprisingly, employees aged 16 to 24 are 32
per cent more likely to be absent than those aged 50 to 59 (women)/64 (men).
134 135