The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 3/2024.  Economics and Management.

Irina V. Soboleva

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Senior Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0002-3049-7789

EMPLOYMENT QUALITY AND WORK-RELATED WELL-BEING: APPROACHES TO MEASUREMENT

7-25

324.89 KB

Full text

Abstract

The article discusses advantages and disadvantages of various methodological approaches to analyzing socio-economic situation of the working population. The expedience of relying on the concept of work-related well-being is substantiated. While encompassing the crucial indicator of earnings sufficiency it pays special attention to non-monetary aspects of individual situation in the world of work. It is shown that the concept lies at intersection of several approaches that characterize the world of work from different sides and comprehensively reflects the social aspect of employment quality, focusing upon the needs of the employee as the most vulnerable side of labor relations.

Keywords: world of work, employment quality, decent work, quality of working life, work-related well-being.

JEL: J81, 017, J28

EDN: ADMPER

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_3_7_25

References

1. Avtonomov V.S., Avtonomov Yu.V. General theory of “disputes about methods” in economic science // Social sciences and modernity. 2016. No. 4. Pp. 5–20. (In Russ.).
2. Akhapkin N.Yu. Formation of labor resources and prospects for economic growth // Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2022. No. 6. 79–95. (In Russ.).
3. Bakeev M.B., Lola I.S. The use of self-report surveys in economic science: methodological barriers and their overcoming // Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2023. No. 9. 103–120. (In Russ.).
4. Bobkov V.N., Odintsova E.V. Low level and quality of life of the economically active population: identification criteria and assessment of prevalence // Economic and social changes: facts, trends, forecast. 2020. Vol. 13. No. 5. Pp. 168–181. (In Russ.).
5. Bobkov V.N., Chernykh E.A. Relationship between employment quality and quality of working life: a review of research and contours of development // Living standards of the population in the regions of Russia. 2023. Vol. 19. No. 3. Рp. 361–384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/1999-9836_2023_19_3_5_361_384; EDN KWVKLG. (In Russ.).
6. Veredyuk O. V., Chernykh E. A. Employment quality of workers in Russia: measurement based on the index approach // Monitoring of public opinion: economic and social changes. 2024. No. 2. Pp. 258–276. https:// doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2024.2.2421. (In Russ.).
7. Zonova O.V. Quality of working life: definition and evaluation criteria // Problems of modern economics. 2010. No. 3 (35). Рp. 79–81. EDN NBLGLR. (In Russ).
8. Ivanova K.A. Qualitative characteristics of employment: differentiation of related concepts // Bulletin of the Altai Academy of Economics and Law. 2019. No. 3–1. Рp. 56–62 (In Russ.).
9. Kubishin E.S. Working conditions and new forms of non-standard employment in the context of Russian human potential development. Moscow: IE RAS, 2023. (In Russ.).
10. Soboleva I.V. Reproductive function of wages and labor motivation in modern Russia // Issues of political economy. 2019. No. 3. Pp. 95–104. (In Russ.)
11. Soboleva I.V. Challenges to socio-economic security in the sphere of labor and their features in modern Russia // Economic security. 2023. Vol. 6. No. 2. DOI: 10.18334/ecsec.6.2.117846. (In Russ.).
12. Soboleva I.V. Employment in unfavorable conditions and social well-being of workers // Society and Economics. 2023. No. 10. P. 41–54 DOI: 10.31857/S020736760028112-2. (In Russ.).
13. Strebkov D., Shevchuk A. What do we know about freelancers? Sociology of free employment. M.: HSE Publishing House. 2022. (In Russ.).
14. Chernykh E.A. Quality of working life and employment satisfaction in the Russian labor market // Living standards of the population in the regions of Russia. 2022. Vol. 18. No. 2. Рp. 214–226. DOI https://doi.org/10.19181/lsprr.2022.18.2.6; EDN (In Russ.).
15. Anker R., Chernyshev I, Egger P., Mehran F, Ritter J. Measuring decent work with statistical indicators. Policy Integration Working Paper No. 2 International Labour Office, 2002.
16. Berten J. Producing decent work indicators: contested numbers at the ILO // Policy and Society. 2002. Vol. 41. No 4. Pp. 458–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puac017
17. Burchell B., Sehnbruch K., Piasna A., Agloni N. The quality of employment and decent work: definitions, methodologies, and ongoing debates // Cambridge Journal of Economics. 2014. Vol. 38. No. 2. Pp. 459–477.
18. Cannas M., Sergi B. S., Sironi E., Mentel U. Job satisfaction and subjective well-being in Europe. Economics and Sociology. 2019. Vol. 12. No. 4. Pp. 183–196. DOI: 10.14254/2071-789X.2019/12-4/11.
19. De Simone S. Conceptualizing wellbeing in the workplace // International Journal of Business and Social Science. 2014. Vol. 5. No. 12. Pp. 118–122.
20. Trends in job quality in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012.
21. Economic Security for a Better World. Geneva: ILO, 2004.
22. Decent work and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. ILO, 2017.
23. Kun Á., Balogh P., Krasz K.G. Development of the work-related well-being questionnaire based on Seligman’s PERMA model // Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences. 2017. Vol. 25. No. 1. Pp. 56–63. DOI: 10.3311/PPso.9326.
24. Leschke J., Watt A., Finn M. Putting a number on job quality? Constructing a European job quality index. European Trade Union Institute for Research, Education and Health and Safety. Brussels, 2008.
25. Loretto W, Popham F, Platt S, Pavis S, Hardy G, Macleod L, et al. Assessing psychological well-being: a holistic investigation of NHS employees // International Review of Psychiatry. 2005. No. 17 (5). Pp. 329–336.
26. Employee well-being report (Pilot). OECD, 2023.
27. Pagán-Castaño, E. & Maseda-Moreno, A. & Santos-Rojo, C. Wellbeing in work environments // Journal of Business Research. 2020. Vol. 115. Pp. 469–474.
28. Soh M., Zarola A., Palaiou K., Furnham A. Work-related well-being // Health Psychology Open. 2016. No. 3 (1). Pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055102916628380
29. Siegerink V., Shinwell M., Žarnic Ž. // Measuring the non-financial performance of firms through the lens of the OECD well-being framework: a common measurement framework for “Scope 1” Social performance. OECD Paper on Well-being and Inequalities No 3. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1787/28850c7f-en
30. Standing G. The ILO: an agency for globalization? // Development and Change. 2008. Vol. 3. No. 39. Pp. 355–384. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2008.00484.x.
31. Global Gender Gap Report 2023. World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2023-08-17.
32. Xanthopoulou D, Bakker AB, Demerouti E, Schaufeli W.B. Reciprocal relationships between job resources, personal resources and work engagement // Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2009. No. 74. Pp. 235–244.

Manuscript submission date: 01.06.2024

For citation:

Soboleva I.V. Employment quality and work-related well-being: approaches to measurement // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 3. Pp. 7-25. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_3_7_25 EDN: ADMPER

  Creative Commons 4.0