An approach to the design of a scale for measuring happiness at work of Iberian companies

ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 1 Athens Institute for Education and Research ATINER ATINER's Conference Paper Series SME2013-0855 Julio García Del Junco Full Professor University of Seville Spain Francisco Espasandin Bustelo Associate Professor University of Seville Spain Georg Michael Jeremias Dutschke Associate Professor Universidade Atlântica Portugal Beatriz Palacios Florencio Assistant Profesor Pablo de Olavide University Spain An Approach to the Design of a Scale for Measuring Happiness at Work of Iberian Companies ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 2 Athens Institute for Education and Research 8 Valaoritou Street, Kolonaki, 10671 Athens, Greece Tel: + 30 210 3634210 Fax: + 30 210 3634209 Email: in[email protected]r URL: www.atiner.gr URL Conference Papers Series: www.atiner.gr/papers.htm Printed in Athens, Greece by the Athens Institute for Education and Research. All rights reserved. Reproduction is allowed for non-commercial purposes if the source is fully acknowledged. ISSN 2241-2891 23/1/2014 ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 3 An Introduction to ATINER's Conference Paper Series ATINER started to publish this conference papers series in 2012. It includes only the papers submitted for publication after they were presented at one of the conferences organized by our Institute every year. The papers published in the series have not been refereed and are published as they were submitted by the author. The series serves two purposes. First, we want to disseminate the information as fast as possible. Second, by doing so, the authors can receive comments useful to revise their papers before they are considered for publication in one of ATINER's books, following our standard procedures of a blind review. Dr. Gregory T. Papanikos President Athens Institute for Education and Research ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 4 This paper should be cited as follows: Del Junco, J.G., Espasandin Bustelo, F., Dutschke G.M.J. and Palacios Florencio, B. (2013) "An Approach to the Design of a Scale for Measuring Happiness at Work of Iberian Companies" Athens: ATINER'S Conference Paper Series, No: SME2013-0855. ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 5 An Approach to the Design of a Scale for Measuring Happiness at Work of Iberian Companies Julio García Del Junco Full Professor University of Seville Spain Francisco Espasandin Bustelo Associate Professor University of Seville Spain Georg Michael Jeremias Dutschke Associate Professor Universidade Atlântica Portugal Beatriz Palacios Florencio Assistant Profesor Pablo de Olavide University Spain Abstract By reviewing bibliography on happiness at work, we may say that from a management perspective, this subject is yet poorly explained. So, main reason to conduct this research was he few number of references on organizational happiness in the field of Business and Economics, despite it increasing importance. More specifically, the non-existence of scales to measure happiness at work in Iberia. In this article we aim to propose an exploratory scale to measure happiness at work in Portuguese and Spanish organizations. To do that, we look for primary data collection by using a questionnaire with open questions. The research is qualitative and was conducted applying complementary phases: (1) data collection, (2) storage, (3) coding, (4) indexing system refinement, (5) relational code and (6) identify categories (key concepts). In phases 3, 4, 5, and 6 a content analysis was applied. To analyze the scale robustness in two cultures we have applied Hofstede's model. This model confirms that cultural and social values of Portuguese and Spanish individuals are very similar, allowing homogenizing the scale without significant bias. The scale proposed is based on: (1) total happiness at work, (2) happiness in the organization, and (3) happiness in the function. At the end, happiness at work was measured by 20 items. We consider this research as a significant first step to develop a consistent tool to measure happiness at work. Key Words: Happiness at work, Qualitative, Hofstede's model ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 6 Introduction Organizational Happiness is a complex concept that must be considered in the management strategy. Authors like Baker et al. (2006) report that happiness is based on organizational behavior (not in emotions) and is the result of a strategic reflection. Same authors define a happy organization as the one where every individual in all hierarchical levels has a number of strengths, work together toward a common objective, get satisfaction from developing new products and / or services and, through these, provide a positive difference in the life of other individuals. Happy employees are so involved with the organization that considers their work as "a happy occupation". The organizational happiness concept is broader than the concept of job satisfaction. Fisher (2010) refers that organizational happiness considers dimensions such as participation in the organization, job satisfaction, and positive engagement with the organization. Hosie et al. (2007) refer that organizational happiness is the sum of affective commitment to the organization, organization welfare, and job satisfaction. Baker et al. (2006), based on case studies, refer that on happy organizations: (1) employees are more creative and able to induce change, (2) are oriented to the "best possible" and not just problem solving, (3) leaders create an environment promoting collaboration, cooperation and responsibility to innovate, (4) teamwork and positive vision is encouraged, and (5) employees look to transform 'possibilities' in real solutions that may contribute to organization sustainability. The concept of organizational happiness is being studied by several researchers worldwide. In the Iberian Peninsula, even being a current topic, is still poorly treated by researcher. It is important to clearly define the concept, identify factors that most contribute to organizational happiness, and look for relationships between organizational happiness and performance. Proposals to measure happiness are numerous. Among others, Seligman (: www.authentichappiness.com); specific cases are proposed by Janson & Martin (1982) that also recommends additional items to measure happiness in the workplace; Linz (2003) in addition to direct questions like: For you, what is happiness? propose new questions such as: "Do you recommend your workplace to a friend?", "Would you change your company for a slightly higher salary?”. Wright & Largood, (2002) consider direct questions to support research in this field: “What is happiness to you?”, “What is happiness to you in the organization?”, “What is happiness for you in your workplace?”. Factors defining happiness at work does not vary substantially from other studies. Suh & Koo (2008) propose for happiness "enjoy", "family", "health", "love", "internal stability" and "welfare goal"; to evaluate happiness in business "job security", "rewards", "organizational climate" and "administration"; for happiness in the job: "do a good job”, “business unit organizational climate ", "internal motivation" and "task design." In this research, as result of bibliography reviewing, we propose an ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 7 exploratory scale aiming to validate and measure the construct "Happiness at work". A Likert scale 1-8 is used. To develop this exploratory scale a qualitative methodology was applied. We consider that before proceeding to a quantitative analysis, including hypothesis testing, it is fundamental to first identify and define, using a systematic process, the variables and factors contributing for organizational happiness in Iberia. This is more important since no exploratory studies for Portugal and Spain are available. A content analysis methodology was applied, using the statistical program ATLAS / TI V6.0. Literature Review Happiness is been studied in different areas of knowledge: among others, organizational psychology, clinical psychology, psychiatry, philosophy. But, the study of happiness in management is quite recent and not much research papers are available. Being a happy professional is very important, more, when for most individuals, being happy is the most valuable of their existence. Being happy is essential for humans. Different authors have different visions: Fineman, (2006) proposes important questions, as “What does it mean exactly for the individuals”, “What the areas of life affected”, “How can be measured to be useful at a predictive level”; Lyubomirsky (2008) and Boehm & Lyubomirski (2008) consider that 50% of happiness is genetics, 10% depends on the environment and 40% changed according to individual activities. Arvey et al. (1989) refer that is only genetics. Numerous studies refers the origin of happiness in individual personality (Diener & Lucas, 1999; Furham et al. 2002; Heller et al. 2002; Judge et al., 2002; Christofer et al. 2009). Conclusion is that is very difficult to find a consensus. Finding a definition for happiness is not easy, depends on the approach. Kiesebir & Diener (2008) refers that philosophers and social scientists have defined happiness in different ways. Happiness is definitely an imprecise term (Veenhoven, 1991). This issue arises mainly due to the difference between the Eudaimonicos and Hedonist approaches (Ryam & Deci, 2001; Ryff & Singer, 2008). Hedonistic approach has its origin in the Epicurus school where happiness is the result of pleasure and the avoidance of what is unpleasant. Eudaimonic approach has its origin in the Aristotle school. Consider that happiness depends on the development of activities being consistent with most intimate personal values, promoting personal growth and self-realization. At this stage we may say that scientific approaches of happiness seem to converge on three phenomena (Wright & Larwood, 2002):  Happiness is a subjective experience.  Happiness includes the relative presence of positive moods but excludes the presence of negative moods. ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 8  Happiness is a global mood, stable over time. Except for the basics, seems there is no consensus on the happiness concept. Same with happiness word semantics. The current psychology literature use, often, happiness being synonymous of: subjective well-being, psychological well-being and satisfaction with life (Diener et al. 2003). Alarcon (2006) considers that the English language must be more precautions on applying those synonymous to happiness. The author refers that the word happiness is semantically much more complex and rich in content than “wellbeing”, which alone express the basic components of a happy life. Alarcon (2006) proposes a definition for happiness: "A state of complete satisfaction subjectively experienced by the individual in possession of a coveted". Then, properties of the happy construct would be: a) individual feeling of satisfaction with life b) temporal stability, c) possession of something and d) different type of possessions (material, ethical, aesthetic, psychological, religious, social, others). Happiness at Work Warr (2007) asks: Why some people are happier than others at work? In fact, some individuals are happier than others in the workplace, team, organization and job. Linz & Semykina (2010) conclude that:  Happiness at job is, in part, explained by a combination of job characteristics (salary, working hours, opportunities for promotion, danger at work, monotony, how interesting it can be, others.), workplace characteristics (environment, risk, average wage, company size, others) and worker characteristics (age, gender, education, level of education, marital status, others). However the reality may differ when considering job specifics, the workplace, and the worker. Also, may differ when analyzing specific economy sectors (Clark et al. 2009, Theodossiou & Zangelidis, 2009).  The actual and expected rewards are related to job happiness (Hamermesh, 2001, Origo & Pagani, 2009). This association depends on whether the reward is intrinsic: work-related (learn new skills, have more empowerment) or extrinsic (financial benefits, receive greeting from a superior) (Finkelstien 2009; Fraser & Hedge, 2000; Porfeli & Maortymer, 2010). Most of the studies reviewed do not present unanimous arguments regarding the positive effect of income on happiness (Panos & Theodossiou 2006). Authors like Clark et al. (2009) believe that colleagues’ higher incomes may contribute to individual happiness at work. Sloan & Williams (2000) argue that income influence on job happiness differs depending on gender and ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 9 workers believe to be well rewarded. Grooz & Brink (1999) refer that happiness at work appears to be higher in younger and older professionals. Fargher & Kesting (2008) consider that happiness at work is influenced by the importance given to work and beliefs. Long (2005) suggests that happiness at work is positively affected by formation, being higher when professionals have more training and are more qualified. To Paschoal et al. (2010) current literature on organizations individuals’ positive aspects has led to happiness. Hosie & Sevastos (2009) consider that new concerns on organizational happiness are been discovered within the limits of economy and psychology. The authors’ report that these two "worlds" are coming together on the organizational happiness research since Kahneman, a Princeton psychology professor, award in 2002 the Nobel Prize in Economics. Layard (2005) demonstrates the increasing evidence on the relationship between more wealth and less happiness in the more developed world. States that the "economic growth does not automatically increase social harmony". Hosie & Sevastos (2009) refer the possibility that professionals are not always motivated by increasing financial incentives at work, considering that in some cases that may even reduce motivation, especially when that originates more responsibility or work. For Baker et al. (2006) the bases of professional happiness are emotions and organizational behaviors. Authors refer that on happy organizations both collaborators and directors have a strong emotional involvement with the organization, considering work as a "Happy occupation". They consider that on happy organizations individuals have a positive attitude, the willingness to go work every day, and the organization is appreciated and respected by the community. Silverblatt (2010) refers that due to the actual economic crisis is complex to quantify the emotional impact of the unhappy workers on the economy. The author states that unhappy employees cost millions of dollars to the United States economy, mainly through loss of productivity. Current research suggests that increase happiness level is not as difficult as it may seem. Experts suggest that the workers themselves may implement small changes originating more professional happiness: find some peace of mind, list the good things that happened, think that work is something attractive rather than just work. Also by setting effective objectives and establish good relationships with colleagues. Methodology and Objectives of the Work The research is qualitative. Methodology was (1) Data collection, (2) Data storage, (3) Coding, (4) Indexing system refinement, (5) Code relationship and (6) Identify Categories (key concepts). For stages 3, 4, 5 and 6 was applied a content analysis, which according to Berelson (1952:18), "is a research technique applied with the objective to systemize on a quantitative way the ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 16 From 1 (totally unhappy) to 8 (totally happy) how do you feel about your job: Table 4. Questionnaire I enjoy my work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The family brings me happiness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I have good health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Remuneration is fair 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 In my life love plays an important role 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I have professional stability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Objectively I am feeling well 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I have professional stability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 At work I get the just rewards 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The company's organizational climate is good 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The type of leadership is adequate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I may be entrepreneur 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I enjoy doing my job 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The organizational climate in my unit is good 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The internal motivation for my job is high 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 My objectives are well designed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I am extrovert 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 This questionnaire is a first and exploratory approach only based on content analysis. Its validity and liability are not confirmed. Next step is to develop a quantitative research, applying the questionnaire in Portugal and Spain, in order to verify its liability through Chronbach Alpha and validate factors by applying Factorial Analysis. References Alarcón, R. (2006). “Development of a scale to measure the happiness factor”, Revista Interamericana de Psicología, (1): 99-106. Arvey, R., Boucharda, T. Segal, N., and Abraham, L. (1989): “Job satisfaction: environmental and genetic components”, Journal of Applied Psychology, nº 74, pp. 187-192. Baker, A. & Demerouti, E. (2008). “Towards a model of work engagement”. Career Development International, 13:209-223 Baker, D.; Greenberg, C.; & Hemingway, C. (2006): “What Happy Companies Know”. Pearson Education. Nova Jérsia. USA Berelson, B. (1952):”Contents analysis in comunication researt”. Free press, Glencoe. Boehm, J. & Lyubomirks, S. (2008). “Does happiness promote career success?” Personality Journal of Career Assessment, 16:101-106. Christofer, P., Park, N., Hall, N. & Seligman, M. (2009). “Zest and work”, Journal Organizational Behaviour, 30:161-172. Clark, A., Kristensen, N. & Westergard-Nielsen, N. (2009). “Job satisfaction and coworker wage: status s signal?” Economic Journal, (119):430-447. ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 17 Diener, E. & Lucas, R. (1999): “Personality and subjective well-being”, en Kahneman, D. & Schmartz (Eds), Well-being: the foundation of hedonic psychological, New York: Rusell Sage Foundation. Diener, E., Oichi, S., & Lucas R. (2003). “Personality, culture, and subjective wellbeing: emotional and cognitive evaluation of live”, Annual Review Psychological, (54): 403-425. Fargher, S. & Kesting, S. (2008). “Culture heritage and job satisfaction in eastern an western Europe. International Journal of Manpower. (29), 630-650. Fineman, S. (2006). “On being positive: concerns and counterpoints”, Academy of Management Review, (31): 270-291. Finkelstien, M. (2009). “Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivational orientation and the volunteer process”, Review Personality and Individual Differences, (46): 153- 158. Fisher, C. (2010). “Happiness at Work“, International Journal of Management Reviews, (12): 384-412, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., UK Fraser, J. & Hedge, M. (2000): “Jog satisfaction in Higher educations: examine gender in professional work settings”, Sociological Inquiry Review, nº 70, pp. 172-187. Furham, A., Jaskson, Ch. & Cotter, T. (2002). “Do personality factors predict job satisfaction and individual differences”, Annual Review of Psychological. (33): 35-42. Grooz, W. & Brink, HM. (1999). “Job satisfaction of older workers”, International Journal of Manpower, (20): 343-360. Hamermesh, D. (2001). “The changing distribution of job satisfaction”, Journal of Human Resources, (36): 1-30. Heller, D., Judge, T. & Watson, D. (2002). “The confounding role of personality and trait affectivity in the relationship between job and life satisfaction”, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, (23): 15-35. Hosie, P. & Sevastos, P. (2009). “Does the “happy-productive worker” thesis apply to managers?” International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 2(2): 131- 160. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Hosie, P.; Sevastos, P. & Cooper, C. (2007). “The “Happy Productive Worker Thesis” and Australian Managers”, Journal of Human Values, 13(2):151-176. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore Judge, T., Heller, D. & Manz, M. (2002). “Five factor model of personality and job satisfaction: a meta-analyses”, Journal of Applied Psychological, (87): 530-541. Kiesebir, P. & Diener, E. (2008). “In pursuit of happiness: empirical answers to phylosotical questions”, Perspective and Psychological Science, (3): 117-125. Layard, R. (2005): Happiness. Lessons from a new science, London: Penguin Books Linz, S. & Semykina, A. (2010). What makes happy? Anticipated rewards and job satisfaction, Electronic copy available at: http//ssrn.com/abstract =1699302.Lyubomirks, S. (2008). “The how of happiness: a scientific approach to getting the life you want”, New York: Penguin Press. Long, A. (2005). “Education match and job match? A study of job satisfaction in Australia”, Economic Record, (81):303-321. Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). The how of happiness: A scientific approach to getting the life you want. New York: Penguin Press. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2a ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: SME2013-0855 18 Origo, F. & Pagani, L. (2009). “Flexicurity and job satisfaction in Europe: the importance of perceived and actual job stability for well-being at work”, Labour economics, 547-555. Panos, G. & Theodossiau, I. (2006). “Earning aspiration and job satisfaction: the effective and cognitive impact of earning comparisons”, Centre for European Labour Market Research Working Paper, University of Aberdeen. Paschoal, T.; Torres, C.; Porto, J. (2010). “Felicidade no Trabalho: Relações com Suporte Organizacional e Suporte Social”, RAC Revista de Administração Comtemporânea, Nov-Dec 2010; 14(6):1054-1072. ANPAD – Associação Nacional de Pós-Gradução e Pesquisa em Administração, Brasil Porfeli, E. & Mortimer, J. (2010). “Intrinsic work value-reward dissonance and work satisfaction during young adulthood”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, (76): 507-519. Ryam, R. & Deci, E. (2001). “On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being”, Annual Review of Psychological, (52): 141-166. Ryff, C. & Singer, B. (2008). “know thyself and become what you are: a eudemonic approach to psychological well-being”, Journal of Happiness Studies, (9): 13-39. Silverblatt, Rob (2010). In Search of Workplace Happiness – U.S. News & World Report, May 2010, 147(5): 32-34. USA Sloan, P. & Williams, H. (2000). “Job satisfaction. Comparison earnings and gender”, Labour Review, (14): 473-502. Suh, e. & Koo, J. (2008). “Comparing subjective wellbeing across cultures and nations. What and why questions”. in Eid, M. and Larsen, R. (eds.): The Science of subjective well-being, New York: the Guilford Press, 414-427. Theodossiou, I. & Zangeledes, A. (2009). “Career prospects and tenure job satisfaction profiles: evidence from panel data”, Journal of Socio-Economics, (38):148-157. Veenhoven, R. (1991). “Is happiness relative?” Social Indicators Research, (24):1-34. Wright, T. & Larwood, L. (2002). “The different “faces” of happiness-unhappiness in organizational research: emotional exhaustion positive affectivity, negative affectivity and Psychological well-being as correlates of job performance”, Journal of business and Management, 8:109-126. Janson, P., & Martin, J. K. (1982). Job satisfaction and age: A test of two views. Social Forces, 60(4): 1089-1102.