Affective events theory as a theoretical lens for improving the working environment of academics in developing economies

Abstract

PurposeThe rapid pace of progress in academic institutions in developing economies has created stressful and relatively toxic workplaces, resulting in different negative organizational outcomes indicating the need to transform universities into healthier academic workplaces. However, a review of the higher education literature in both developed and developing countries shows that the antecedents and consequences of academics' affective states has been a relatively unexplored area. Hence, our study aims at testing basic tenets of Affective Events Theory (AET) in a higher education context to address this issue.Design/methodology/approachThis is a quantitative study which applies CB-SEM methodology in analyzing the collected data from 2,324 academics in Malaysian higher education sector. We analyzed the data using EQS software package.FindingsOur results provided substantial support for the applicability and relevancy of AET in higher education domain. Specifically, welfare and supervisory support were identified as the two work environment features which significantly and equally contribute to academics' job satisfaction. In addition, the results showed that positive affect, in comparison with negative affect, was three times stronger in influencing academics' job satisfaction.Practical implicationsGiven the considerable role of positive affect in our study, higher education policy makers are urged to make relevant policies to transform universities into more emotionally safe workplaces. In addition, policies should be formulated in a way that encourages supervisory support and decreases workloads to ensure that the conflicts in general are reduced among academics.Originality/valueThis work is the first large-scale study testing the main tenets of AET in the higher education context. In addition, it addresses the problem of multivariate normality and solves this problem based on the robust methodology which corrects standard errors and fit indices, thereby providing more precise and unbiased results.

The Roles of Supervisory Support and Involvement in Influencing Scientists’ Job Satisfaction to Ensure the Achievement of SDGs in Academic Organizations

“…Our findings are generally in alignment with previous research works guided by AET. For instance, with regard to the work environment feature and attitude linkages, our findings were consistent with the findings of Wegge et al (2006), Ghasemy et al (2019), andGhasemy, Erfanian, andGaskin (2020). With respect to the relationships between work environment features and work events, our findings were in line with the results of studies such as Matthews et al (2010); Lam and Chen (2012); Ghasemy, Morshidi, et al (2021); and Ashkanasy et al (2014).…”

“…In addition, Ghasemy et al (2019), in a study in the HE context, provided evidence for the impacts of involvement, workload, and welfare, as work environment features, on role conflict, as a negative work event. Moreover, the findings in the study by Ghasemy, Erfanian, and Gaskin (2020) revealed that three work environment features, namely, supervisory support, involvement, and welfare are significant predictors of both role conflict and interpersonal conflict in academic institutions.…”

“…In another study, Taylor et al (2013) found empirical evidence for the negative relationship between the everyday discrimination at work and job satisfaction among the workers, albeit with the effect being stronger for the older workers. Last, in the academic context, empirical support was provided for the impact of welfare and supervisory support on academics' job satisfaction (Ghasemy, Erfanian, & Gaskin, 2020).…”

Satisfaction and Performance of the International Faculty: To What Extent Emotional Reactions and Conflict Matter?

“…Moreover, Rezvani et al (2016), in the context of Australian defense industry, found empirical evidence for the positive relationship between emotional intelligence of project managers and their job satisfaction, trust and project success. Finally, in the context of HE, Ghasemy, Erfanian, and Gaskin (2020) and Ghasemy, Mohajer, et al (2020) found empirical evidence for the contribution of affective states to faculty’s job satisfaction. In line with these research findings, we developed the following two hypotheses:…”

“…While the review of the literature shows that the issues related to the internationalization and globalization in HE have gained the attention of the researchers (see Bourn, 2011; Hamann & Zimmer, 2017; Larbi & Fu, 2017; Lau & Lin, 2017; McAllum, 2017), the area of the daily affective experiences of the faculty has remained as a relatively unexplored area within the literature. More specifically, only limited studies (e.g., Ghasemy, Erfanian, & Gaskin, 2020; Ghasemy et al, 2019; Ouweneel et al, 2012) were found in HE context focusing on the antecedents and consequences of academics’ emotions.…”