2019
DOI: 10.1111/irj.12241
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conceiving, designing and trailing a short‐form measure of job quality: a proof‐of‐concept study

Abstract: The government has accepted the Taylor Review's recommendation that it should report annually on job quality in the UK. This article argues that three principles need to be followed in choosing the right measures and shows how these principles have been used to create a short job quality quiz (http://www.howgoodismyjob.com).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0
3

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
(32 reference statements)
1
27
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…While there is increasing consensus on many of the constituents of the quality of work, debates continue regarding the usefulness of certain measures, in particular with respect to objective, for example pay, versus subjective, for example satisfaction with job, indicators. Felstead et al (2019), for example, state the limitations of subjective measures in that they can be affected by individual differences in aspirations and availability of information. However, subjective measures when combined with objective indicators do enable considerable insight into the perceptions of workers regarding their job, and are widely employed in other studies, including Connell and Burgess (2016), Gifford (2018) and Green (2009), and have been recommended, in the case of overall job satisfaction, by the UK Government (see HM Government, 2018: 22).…”
Section: The Quality Of Work and Its Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While there is increasing consensus on many of the constituents of the quality of work, debates continue regarding the usefulness of certain measures, in particular with respect to objective, for example pay, versus subjective, for example satisfaction with job, indicators. Felstead et al (2019), for example, state the limitations of subjective measures in that they can be affected by individual differences in aspirations and availability of information. However, subjective measures when combined with objective indicators do enable considerable insight into the perceptions of workers regarding their job, and are widely employed in other studies, including Connell and Burgess (2016), Gifford (2018) and Green (2009), and have been recommended, in the case of overall job satisfaction, by the UK Government (see HM Government, 2018: 22).…”
Section: The Quality Of Work and Its Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the UK, the Government commissioned the Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices in 2017 (Taylor et al, 2017), which focused on a number of aspects of 'fair ' and 'good' work. In addition, Thriving at Work: The Stevenson/Farmer Review of Mental Health and Employers (Stevenson and Farmer, 2017) has raised the profile of workplace well-being. Existing research has generated a number of taxonomies of job quality and 'good work', including Bartling (2012), Connell and Burgess (2016), Eurofound (2013), Felstead et al (2019), Gallie et al (2014), Holman (2013), Overell et al (2010), Vidal (2013) and Warhurst et al (2017). However, debates remain over measures of job quality and how they are operationalised in research.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Job quality is ‘the extent to which a job has work and employment-related factors that foster beneficial outcomes for the employee, particularly psychological wellbeing, physical wellbeing and positive attitudes’ [18]. Good-quality jobs also benefit employers, increasing average tenure and productivity [19]. Work organisation (including demands and resources), wages and payment systems, security and flexibility (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…consultation and voice) have been identified as five main dimensions affecting job quality [18]. Jobs are typically classified as being of good, moderate or poor quality, although job characteristics may vary across employers, and the same job may be good in some respects but not others [19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The LFS, on the other hand, provides more scope for secondary analysis given the number of questions asked, its regularity and accessibility. Even so, many non-pay characteristics of jobs, which have a proven link to well-being, are absent (Felstead et al, 2019). These include the intensity of work, the threat of dismissal, the level of managerial support, the ability to take time off for emergencies and the probability of job loss.…”
Section: Existing Evidencementioning
confidence: 99%