Composite Indicators to Measure Quality of Working Life in Europe: A Systematic Review

Social Indicators Research, Apr 2021

In the last two decades, Quality of Working Life (QWL) has become a core element of the European social model and the European Employment Strategy. “More and better jobs” is a strategic goal promoted within Europe for emphasising the attention in QWL. However, there is a large debate in the literature on the definition of QWL, its dimensions, and consequently on the methods to use for its measurement. To the best of our knowledge, the systematic reviews currently available in the literature on QWL measurement in European organisations investigate only a particular industry and/or working population. Moreover, they do not focus specifically on composite indicators, although they appear promising in facilitating QWL understanding and comparisons for supporting decision-makers and policy makers. To overcome these gaps, we conducted a systematic review to identify composite indicators for measuring QWL in European organisations. The review returned 19 studies that are analysed based on a set of factors related to QWL locutions, index name, geographical area, industry or population, level of analysis, dimensions, type of data, inputs, outputs, and test and/or validation. The results highlight a significant heterogeneity among the indicators, confirming the lack of an agreed upon QWL composite indicator for Europe. Such heterogeneity concerns also QWL dimensions. A critical comparison of the different composite indicators is provided, along with a unifying proposal of QWL macro-dimensions. Several gaps in the literature are pointed out suggesting directions for future research.

Article PDF cannot be displayed. You can download it here:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11205-021-02688-6.pdf

Composite Indicators to Measure Quality of Working Life in Europe: A Systematic Review

Social Indicators Research https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02688-6 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Composite Indicators to Measure Quality of Working Life in Europe: A Systematic Review Elena Stefana1 · Filippo Marciano1 Giuseppe Tomasoni1 · Diana Rossi1 · Paola Cocca1 · Accepted: 15 April 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract In the last two decades, Quality of Working Life (QWL) has become a core element of the European social model and the European Employment Strategy. “More and better jobs” is a strategic goal promoted within Europe for emphasising the attention in QWL. However, there is a large debate in the literature on the definition of QWL, its dimensions, and consequently on the methods to use for its measurement. To the best of our knowledge, the systematic reviews currently available in the literature on QWL measurement in European organisations investigate only a particular industry and/or working population. Moreover, they do not focus specifically on composite indicators, although they appear promising in facilitating QWL understanding and comparisons for supporting decision-makers and policy makers. To overcome these gaps, we conducted a systematic review to identify composite indicators for measuring QWL in European organisations. The review returned 19 studies that are analysed based on a set of factors related to QWL locutions, index name, geographical area, industry or population, level of analysis, dimensions, type of data, inputs, outputs, and test and/or validation. The results highlight a significant heterogeneity among the indicators, confirming the lack of an agreed upon QWL composite indicator for Europe. Such heterogeneity concerns also QWL dimensions. A critical comparison of the different composite indicators is provided, along with a unifying proposal of QWL macrodimensions. Several gaps in the literature are pointed out suggesting directions for future research. Keywords Job quality · Good job · Decent work · Employment · European Union · Composite indicator 1 Introduction Quality of Working Life (QWL) has become subject of growing interest within the economic, social, sociological, and psychological research (Boccuzzo & Gianecchini, 2015; Díaz-Chao et al., 2016; Simões et al., 2015). An enhancement in QWL can bring benefits * Elena Stefana Extended author information available on the last page of the article 13 Vol.:(0123456789) E. Stefana et al. to workers and companies, improving working conditions, fostering workers’ health and well-being, increasing work motivation, developing workers’ skills, promoting sustainable work, growing productivity and competitiveness, and reducing unemployment (e.g. DíazChao et al., 2017; Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2009, 2011a; Santero-Sanchez et al., 2015; Šverko & Galić, 2014). The literature has not reached a general agreement neither on a comprehensive QWL definition, nor on its measurement (e.g. Bäck-Wiklund et al., 2011; Barroso, 2018; Hurley et al., 2012; Jones et al., 2017; Leschke & Watt, 2014; Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2011b; Schokkaert et al., 2011). QWL measurement is currently performed through a wide variety of indicators and methods (e.g. Boccuzzo & Gianecchini, 2015; Crespo et al., 2017; Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2009). Some reviews investigating QWL measurements in a specific work sector or geographical area and/or focusing on a particular scientific database are available in the literature. For example, Muñoz de Bustillo et al. (2011b) provide a critical survey of 19 job quality indicators or systems of indicators developed for different scopes or contexts (e.g. European Union, developed and developing countries, USA). Phan and Vo (2016) analyse studies about specific tools and scales to assess QWL in medical organisations. Barroso (2018) has recently performed a methodological review of the most-cited articles indexed in the Scopus database to assess progress in the harmonisation of QWL concepts and measurement. However, these reviews do not focus specifically on composite indicators as a possible methodology for QWL measurement, although such approach appears particularly effective. A composite indicator for QWL measurement is “a single aggregate measure synthesizing the information of all the different attributes of job quality” (Muñoz de Bustillo et al., 2011b), and “the mathematical combination of individual indicators, each of which is related to a particular dimension of the phenomena to be analysed” (Santero-Sanchez et al., 2015). A composite indicator allows a univocal and unidirectional understanding of what QWL is, positioning and ranking the studied subjects or groups within a one-dimensional axis going from bad to good, as underlined by Muñoz de Bustillo et al. (2011b). The interest in composite indicators is largely acknowledged, since they are useful to: summarise complex or multi-dimensional issues for supporting decision-makers; enable users to compare complex dimensions effectively; reduce the size of a list of indicators; plan targets and control their achievement; attract public interest; and provide a transparent way for policy makers and public opinion (e.g. OECD and JRC European Commission, 2008; Saltelli, 2006; Tangian, 2005). Composite indicators have gained astounding popularity in all research areas, and can reflect a complex system consisting of numerous components, making it easier to understand in full rather than reducing it back to its spare parts (Greco et al., 2019). Based on these arguments, the aim of this article is to carry out a systematic review to identify the composite indicators available in the literature for measuring QWL at the individual worker, job, or company level. We decided to narrow the scope of our analysis to European organisations. Although the sense of a good job, working conditions, and rights could be slightly different across countries (Burgess & Connell, 2008; Sojka, 2014), through the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers adopted in 1989 all the European Member States have committed to establish a shared social policy and shape the development of the European social model, thus fostering a common understanding also of QWL concept. In the last two decades, QWL has become a core element of the European social model and the European Employment Strategy (e.g. Bothfeld & Leschke, 2012; Dahl et al., 2009; PenaCasas, 2009; Smith et al., 2008). Indeed, a strategic pillar of the European Employment Strategy and the Lisbon Strategy has been to promote more and better jobs within Europe 13 Composite Indicators to Measure Quality of Working Life in Europe:… (European Commission 2001b), and the improvement of working conditions and job quality continues to be a significant goal in European policies, underpinning Europe’s capacity to compete (Eurofound, 2017). The results of our review will allow: (1) summarising the state of the art of the scientific literature concerning the various composite indicators for meas (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11205-021-02688-6.pdf
Article home page: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-021-02688-6

Elena Stefana, Filippo Marciano, Diana Rossi, Paola Cocca, Giuseppe Tomasoni. Composite Indicators to Measure Quality of Working Life in Europe: A Systematic Review, Social Indicators Research, 2021, pp. 1-32, DOI: 10.1007/s11205-021-02688-6