Measuring organisational well-being and happiness based on GNH logic

Abstract

Among the indices used to measure organisational success, soft factors` role has become more important. Among these, well-being and organisational happiness are particularly important and are becoming more prominent in light of the pandemic. Their measurement is a challenge for management, as the available methods/indices developed in previous years, only partially cover the areas to be assessed. The aim of our research is to find an indicator that allows measuring employee satisfaction, well-being and happiness in a holistic approach. The logic of the best-estimated method (GNH of Business) is presented through a survey of an organisation. The results show that the measurement tool, developed in the context of Buddhist culture, can be adapted to European culture successfully. Based on a detailed analysis, gaps (requiring immediate managerial decisions) can be precisely identified as well as the areas for intervention by decision-makers. The balanced development of the organisation can be ensured following the logic provided by the method (based on a clear overview of all areas).

Evaluating dominant “healthy workplace models” from the perspective of positive psychology principles

“…However, a significant number of studies were identified that apply work stress models or investigate employee health in various specific contexts through empirical studies (Hornyák, 2019;Gál-Inges & Németh, 2015). In addition, we found a separate group of studies discussing methods, viability, and measurements of workplace health promotions (Bencsik, 2022;Gorgenyi-Hegyes et al, 2021;Szabó & Juhász, 2019a;Szabó & Juhász, 2019b;Péter et al, 2015), with a significant part of this literature focusing on the impact of physical activity and sport (Ács et al, 2020;Laczkó et al, 2022).…”

“…At the same time, it is interesting to note, that the date of the first publication of the model is identical with the Workplace Psychosocial Safety Climate Model (Dollard & Bakker, 2010), and there is a significant overlap between the central concepts of the two models (Psychosocial Environment/Risk, Resources and Engagement). The WHO model, however, offers an expanded scope and an improved applicability to the development of pragmatic organizational interventions and health promotion programs (Bencsik, 2022;Gorgenyi-Hegyes et al, 2021;Szabó & Juhász, 2019a;Szabó & Juhász, 2019b).…”

Urban and rural disparities: evaluating happiness levels in Indonesian women

“…[10][11][12] Similarly, professionals or students might experience varied happiness sources, warranting diverse measurement tools aligned with specific influencing factors. 3,[13][14][15] To cater to these varied segments, a myriad of happiness measurement instruments have been formulated. These tools, customized for distinct demographics like workers, caregivers, adolescents, or even cultural backgrounds, ensure nuanced assessments.…”