No abstract

As a result of intensive robotisation over the past decade, employees have been constantly experiencing job insecurity, a term which refers to the perceived threat of job loss and the worries related to this threat. Previous studies have supported the detrimental effect of job insecurity on employees; however, the focus on happiness at work is still missing, despite the notion that a happy employee is essentially contributing to sustainable business performance. Trying to narrow the gap, the paper aims at revealing the linkage between job insecurity and happiness at work and its dimensions, namely job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment, and work engagement. Building on the hindrance stressor dimension of the stress model, and conservation of resources and psychological contract theories, the paper claims that a negative relationship exists between the constructs. Quantitative data were collected in a survey of robotised production line operators working in the furniture sector in Lithuania. As predicted, the results revealed that job insecurity had a negative impact on happiness at work as a higher-order construct and all of its dimensions. This finding should be taken seriously by organisations creating a robotised production environment while striving for sustainability.

There is a widespread consensus in prior literature that innovative work behaviour is a crucial factor in enabling organisations to adapt to rapid changes, to gain a competitive advantage, and create a sustainable organisation. Despite its importance, knowledge about potential drivers of this behaviour is fragmented and inconsistent. As such, organisations may be restricted in their ability to innovate because they do not know how to induce the employees in a way that will encourage them to explore, generate, champion, and finally implement the ideas. Recently, human resource management (HRM) has been explored among potential drivers, considering it as primary means by which organisations can influence and shape the behaviours of employees. Despite the notion that HRM predicts innovative work behaviour, there is a lack in the literature of insights into the ways the organisations can stimulate behaviour by offering sustainability-focused HRM. Sustainable HRM refers to a new approach to people management with the focus on external business environment (openness), respect for the employee (respect), and balanced interests of employer and employee (continuity). Relying on the notion that organisations are gradually introducing sustainable HRM and trying to close the gap in the literature, the paper is designed to link a new approach to people management with innovative work behaviour. The aim of the paper is an initial assessment of whether sustainable HRM is a driver for innovative work behaviour. Disentangling four dimensions of innovative work behaviour makes it possible to determine whether sustainable HRM can stimulate different behaviour types linked to idea exploration, idea generation, idea championing, and idea implementation. The results of a preparatory survey of 306 employees working in Lithuanian companies showed that respect-oriented HRM and continuity-oriented HRM were positively related to innovative work behaviour and the appropriate dimensions (except for idea exploration in case of continuity-oriented HRM); meanwhile, there was no support for the relationship between openness-oriented HRM and innovative work behaviour. Overall, sustainable HRM was found to be a driver for enhancing innovative work behaviour and its dimensions.

Purpose A transition toward sustainable development requires engagement of university students in transformative learning. Therefore, quality frameworks and processes should support deep approaches to sustainable development in higher education. Research and initiatives that connect sustainable development, higher education and quality assurance (QA) are lacking. This study aims to explore to what extent quality assurance agencies in Europe support transformative learning for sustainable development in their frameworks. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a qualitative analysis of national QA frameworks in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) to assess whether they support transformative learning for sustainable development. First, frequency analysis was undertaken; second, a blended coding approach was used to investigate whether and how transformative learning for sustainable development is addressed. Findings Overall, the authors found little support for transformative learning for sustainable development in most QA frameworks. One exception is the framework of the United Kingdom, which includes a specific guide on education for sustainable development wherein transformative learning is prominently mentioned. To a lesser extent, some support exists in the frameworks of Estonia, Holy See, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland and Ukraine. Although the transformative learning for sustainable development approach is not explicitly mentioned in most QA frameworks, many of them contain opportunities to highlight it. France and The Netherlands offer guidelines and criteria for acquiring a sustainable development label, while Andorra suggests including the sustainable development goals in institutional quality assessment. Originality/value The research provides the first map of how countries within the EHEA support transformative learning for sustainable development in national QA systems.

Over the past decade, in the light of intensive robotisation, job insecurity referring to the employees’ overall concern about the continued availability of their jobs in the future has become a hot topic. A general assumption supported by the findings is that job insecurity causes far-reaching negative consequences for the employee well-being and health, attitudes towards the job and organisation, and behaviours at work. However, the focus on behavioural outcomes, especially on employee performance at work, is still scant. Trying to narrow the gap, the paper aims at revealing the linkage between job insecurity and two dimensions of performance, namely task performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. Building on the hindrance stressor dimension of the stress model, the paper claims that a negative relationship exists between the constructs. Quantitative data were collected in a survey of robotised production lines operators working in the furniture sector in Lithuania. As predicted, the results revealed that job insecurity had a negative impact on both the task performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. These findings affirmed that job insecurity was a hindrance stressor, which needed to be considered when managing human resources in a robotised production environment.