Page 138 - ePaper
P. 138
Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2014
Discretionary Learning forms; Lean Produc- has limitations. For instance, it may be status and the extent to which workers
tion forms; Tayloristic forms; and Traditional sensitive to each individual’s aspirations have autonomy and control over their
Simple forms. See Annex 2 for a brief dis - and expectations. Indeed, workers with low jobs (e.g. Jencks et al., 1988; Goldthorpe
cussion of the methodology used to classify aspirations or expectations often express and Hope, 1974; Prandy, 1990; Stewart et
different types of work organisation. high job satisfaction, even when— on al., 1980). Psychologists often emphasise
the basis of measurable variables such how intrinsically meaningful and challeng -
2.1. Job quality as earnings — they are in low-quality ing work is, and thus analyse a variety of
dimensions jobs. Moreover, factors like one’s cultural psychological measures of job satisfac -
environment and traditions or personality tion such as workers’ discretion and trust
Job quality is a complex and multidimen- (e.g. disposition to pessimism/optimism) in their jobs (Guillen and Dahl, 2009; Kalle -
sional concept that has been extensively can affect subjective job satisfaction. berg and Vaisey, 2005).
analysed and debated by economists, Therefore, subjective job satisfaction is
sociologists, and psychologists. Several prone to bias and can be misleading in Even though different academic fields
factors make its definition and measure- measuring and monitoring job quality. conceptualise and measure job quality in
ment a challenge. different ways, there is some convergence
Objective approaches assume that job in terms of the work features that are seen
There are a variety of perspectives on work quality encompasses job features that to be crucial. Integrated insights from psy -
and jobs depending on each individual’s meet workers’ needs. Objective measures chology, sociology, applied economics and
work role, and the perspectives of workers of job quality are derived from a given other fields are enriched by considering the
and their employers may not necessarily theory of human needs and measure workers’ point of view, notably through the
always coincide. Nevertheless, from an how far jobs meet those needs ( ). Thus, development of surveys on job satisfac -
6
employer’s perspective there are several the objective concept of job quality is not tion and workers’ well-being (e.g. Layard,
factors that should encourage employers assessed by a one-dimensional measure 2005).
to increase the quality of jobs. For exam- (e.g. job satisfaction) but by a set of indica -
ple, there is a direct link between a higher tors measuring various dimensions associ - Therefore, objective approaches to job
7
level of skills and a firm’s productivity, ated with the job ( ). quality are based on a selected set of
which may encourage employers to pro - indicators depending on the researcher’s
vide continuous training. Furthermore, a Different disciplines tend to focus on differ - objectives (see Annex 1 for examples of
physically safe and healthy working envi- ent dimensions. Economists tend to focus objective definitions of job quality). Some
ronment reduces accidents and absences on monetary aspects such as wage levels researchers tend to focus on the charac-
8
from work and improves productivity and or working hours ( ). Sociologists tend to teristics of the job (e.g. Eurofound, Euro -
output. Hence, increased job quality can focus more on such factors as occupational pean Parliament); others include broader
result in better quality goods and services indicators of the economic and labour
together with a positive impact on com - ( ) E.g. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs applied market environment as well as indicators
6
panies’ income and welfare as a whole. to the world of work leads to a number relating to the personal characteristics of
of key job characteristics. Similarly, Green
(2006) adapts Sen’s capability approach and the worker (e.g. ILO ‘decent work concept’,
2.1.1. Job quality: ‘subjective’ develops the idea that a ‘good job’ is one with indicators on child labour, social pro-
that offers workers a high capability to do
and ‘objective’ concepts and be things that they value. tection; UNECE concept).
( ) Some confusion may arise regarding self-
7
It is commonplace in analytical research reported variables in surveys (e.g. in the Most approaches either group the multi -
EWCS), which sometimes are referred to
to distinguish between the subjective and as ‘subjective’. It should be stressed that tude of individual indicators into a system
the variables included in the EWCS refer to
objective concepts of job quality. The sub- ‘objective’ job features; the term ‘subjective’ is of indicators, or aggregate those indicators
jective approach assumes that job quality reserved for reports of feelings, perceptions, into a composite index. Both approaches
attitudes or values. See Eurofound (2012b).
is the ‘utility’ a worker derives from the ( ) In the standard neo-classical model, for example, have advantages and disadvantages. An
8
job. That utility depends on job features work is disutility and wages are the sole aggregate index typically trades off the
over which each worker has personal pref - motivation of workers. At market equilibrium ease of presentation for strong assump-
the wage level fully reflects the job quality,
erences. Each worker values one feature and it equals the level of productivity and tions on the weighting attributed to each
against another in a different way. Some compensates for the disutility of work. In the indicator, i.e. assumptions about people’s
framework of compensating wage differentials
academics argue that measures of well- some displeasures that arise from work are preferences for one job feature over
being or job satisfaction can be used as explicitly taken into account in the utility another ( ). Several examples of such
9
function (e.g. injury and occupational diseases,
subjective indicators of job quality ( 4 ). Such commuting costs, working hours); they are fully aggregation and the use of composite
measures take the individual differences compensated by a wage premium because indices are available (Annex 1).
(by assumption) workers trade off working
into account as it is workers who evaluate conditions and benefits for pay (see e.g. Rosen,
the positive and negative aspects of a job 1986). In other words, ceteris paribus, workers 2.1.2. A set of job quality
with similar qualifications who work under bad
5
and rank them ( ). working conditions are paid more by employers indicators for policy-making
to compensate for the unpleasantness of the at EU level
job. In a perfectly competitive labour market
However, the use of job satisfaction as with perfect information, as assumed in the
a one-dimensional measure of job quality framework, the wage level reflects job quality. Job quality issues were first explicitly intro -
Bustillo et al. (2012), part 5, provide an overview
of the empirical literature testing the link duced into the European policy agenda at
( ) For a discussion, see Eurofound (2012b). between working conditions and differences in the Lisbon Council in March 2000, which
4
( ) Some questions in the semi-structured pay. By contrast, dual labour market theorists
5
interviews of the NEUJOBS project reflect (e.g. Piore, 1971; Edwards, 1979) have 9
this focus on preferences by asking ‘Which contended that bad job characteristics tend to ( ) The pros and cons of composite indices
of the following features (attributes) of your cluster so that a job that is bad in one dimension against a system of indicators are discussed
job are more/less important to you?’. tends to be bad in others. in more detail in Annex 1.
136
Discretionary Learning forms; Lean Produc- has limitations. For instance, it may be status and the extent to which workers
tion forms; Tayloristic forms; and Traditional sensitive to each individual’s aspirations have autonomy and control over their
Simple forms. See Annex 2 for a brief dis - and expectations. Indeed, workers with low jobs (e.g. Jencks et al., 1988; Goldthorpe
cussion of the methodology used to classify aspirations or expectations often express and Hope, 1974; Prandy, 1990; Stewart et
different types of work organisation. high job satisfaction, even when— on al., 1980). Psychologists often emphasise
the basis of measurable variables such how intrinsically meaningful and challeng -
2.1. Job quality as earnings — they are in low-quality ing work is, and thus analyse a variety of
dimensions jobs. Moreover, factors like one’s cultural psychological measures of job satisfac -
environment and traditions or personality tion such as workers’ discretion and trust
Job quality is a complex and multidimen- (e.g. disposition to pessimism/optimism) in their jobs (Guillen and Dahl, 2009; Kalle -
sional concept that has been extensively can affect subjective job satisfaction. berg and Vaisey, 2005).
analysed and debated by economists, Therefore, subjective job satisfaction is
sociologists, and psychologists. Several prone to bias and can be misleading in Even though different academic fields
factors make its definition and measure- measuring and monitoring job quality. conceptualise and measure job quality in
ment a challenge. different ways, there is some convergence
Objective approaches assume that job in terms of the work features that are seen
There are a variety of perspectives on work quality encompasses job features that to be crucial. Integrated insights from psy -
and jobs depending on each individual’s meet workers’ needs. Objective measures chology, sociology, applied economics and
work role, and the perspectives of workers of job quality are derived from a given other fields are enriched by considering the
and their employers may not necessarily theory of human needs and measure workers’ point of view, notably through the
always coincide. Nevertheless, from an how far jobs meet those needs ( ). Thus, development of surveys on job satisfac -
6
employer’s perspective there are several the objective concept of job quality is not tion and workers’ well-being (e.g. Layard,
factors that should encourage employers assessed by a one-dimensional measure 2005).
to increase the quality of jobs. For exam- (e.g. job satisfaction) but by a set of indica -
ple, there is a direct link between a higher tors measuring various dimensions associ - Therefore, objective approaches to job
7
level of skills and a firm’s productivity, ated with the job ( ). quality are based on a selected set of
which may encourage employers to pro - indicators depending on the researcher’s
vide continuous training. Furthermore, a Different disciplines tend to focus on differ - objectives (see Annex 1 for examples of
physically safe and healthy working envi- ent dimensions. Economists tend to focus objective definitions of job quality). Some
ronment reduces accidents and absences on monetary aspects such as wage levels researchers tend to focus on the charac-
8
from work and improves productivity and or working hours ( ). Sociologists tend to teristics of the job (e.g. Eurofound, Euro -
output. Hence, increased job quality can focus more on such factors as occupational pean Parliament); others include broader
result in better quality goods and services indicators of the economic and labour
together with a positive impact on com - ( ) E.g. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs applied market environment as well as indicators
6
panies’ income and welfare as a whole. to the world of work leads to a number relating to the personal characteristics of
of key job characteristics. Similarly, Green
(2006) adapts Sen’s capability approach and the worker (e.g. ILO ‘decent work concept’,
2.1.1. Job quality: ‘subjective’ develops the idea that a ‘good job’ is one with indicators on child labour, social pro-
that offers workers a high capability to do
and ‘objective’ concepts and be things that they value. tection; UNECE concept).
( ) Some confusion may arise regarding self-
7
It is commonplace in analytical research reported variables in surveys (e.g. in the Most approaches either group the multi -
EWCS), which sometimes are referred to
to distinguish between the subjective and as ‘subjective’. It should be stressed that tude of individual indicators into a system
the variables included in the EWCS refer to
objective concepts of job quality. The sub- ‘objective’ job features; the term ‘subjective’ is of indicators, or aggregate those indicators
jective approach assumes that job quality reserved for reports of feelings, perceptions, into a composite index. Both approaches
attitudes or values. See Eurofound (2012b).
is the ‘utility’ a worker derives from the ( ) In the standard neo-classical model, for example, have advantages and disadvantages. An
8
job. That utility depends on job features work is disutility and wages are the sole aggregate index typically trades off the
over which each worker has personal pref - motivation of workers. At market equilibrium ease of presentation for strong assump-
the wage level fully reflects the job quality,
erences. Each worker values one feature and it equals the level of productivity and tions on the weighting attributed to each
against another in a different way. Some compensates for the disutility of work. In the indicator, i.e. assumptions about people’s
framework of compensating wage differentials
academics argue that measures of well- some displeasures that arise from work are preferences for one job feature over
being or job satisfaction can be used as explicitly taken into account in the utility another ( ). Several examples of such
9
function (e.g. injury and occupational diseases,
subjective indicators of job quality ( 4 ). Such commuting costs, working hours); they are fully aggregation and the use of composite
measures take the individual differences compensated by a wage premium because indices are available (Annex 1).
(by assumption) workers trade off working
into account as it is workers who evaluate conditions and benefits for pay (see e.g. Rosen,
the positive and negative aspects of a job 1986). In other words, ceteris paribus, workers 2.1.2. A set of job quality
with similar qualifications who work under bad
5
and rank them ( ). working conditions are paid more by employers indicators for policy-making
to compensate for the unpleasantness of the at EU level
job. In a perfectly competitive labour market
However, the use of job satisfaction as with perfect information, as assumed in the
a one-dimensional measure of job quality framework, the wage level reflects job quality. Job quality issues were first explicitly intro -
Bustillo et al. (2012), part 5, provide an overview
of the empirical literature testing the link duced into the European policy agenda at
( ) For a discussion, see Eurofound (2012b). between working conditions and differences in the Lisbon Council in March 2000, which
4
( ) Some questions in the semi-structured pay. By contrast, dual labour market theorists
5
interviews of the NEUJOBS project reflect (e.g. Piore, 1971; Edwards, 1979) have 9
this focus on preferences by asking ‘Which contended that bad job characteristics tend to ( ) The pros and cons of composite indices
of the following features (attributes) of your cluster so that a job that is bad in one dimension against a system of indicators are discussed
job are more/less important to you?’. tends to be bad in others. in more detail in Annex 1.
136
