چكيده لاتين :
Background and aims: One of the most important indicators of work life is the quality of work life that indicates to what extent individuals are able to meet their important personal needs (such as the need for independence) while working in an organization. This concept has been of interest to researchers and human scientists in recent years. Quality of work life includes opportunities to solve problems that are mutually beneficial to the employee and the organization and are based on collaboration in management, which can be improved to gradually change the pattern of interaction between people in the organization. Also, proper employee management can be used as a competitive advantage. In addition to affecting many job attitudes, such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job attachment, work life quality affects individualschr('39') personal, family, and social lives. Accordingly, the present study aims to design and development model for improving the quality of work life of faculty members. The definitions of quality of work life emphasize health promotion, well-being, job security, job satisfaction, competence enhancement, and work-life balance. Studies on the quality of work life indicate the importance of this concept by managers, and advocates of quality of work life are looking for new systems to help employees balance their work life and personal lives.
Materials and Methods: The present study is descriptive in nature, applied in terms of its objective, and cross-sectional in terms of time. The statistical population of the study includes all full-time faculty members of Islamic Azad University of Behbahan and Khatam Al-Anbia University of Behbahan (N = 195), who were active in the second semester of the academic year of 2018-2019. Sample size is calculated by Cochran formula (n = 129), selected by simple random sampling. A researcher-made questionnaire is used for data collection. In this regard, factors affecting the quality of work life of faculty members are specified through a comprehensive study of articles on the quality of work life as well as the opinion of experts in the field of quality of life and used as the basis of the conceptual model. Considering the literature and the views of experts on factors affecting the promotion of quality of work life, a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting the quality of work life of professors is obtained. In the first step, 143 components are identified. After sorting these factors in terms of thematic similarity, more comprehensive components are selected and minor components are removed. In the next step, the questionnaire is given to 5 academic experts and management experts. After receiving comments, some questions are corrected, merged, or removed. Finally, 57 influential components are identified and categorized into four categories of individual, organizational, managerial, and occupational factors. In the qualitative section, 5 experts are interviewed to ensure face validity. In this regard, the level of difficulty, appropriateness, and relevance of the items to the main purpose and transparency of the meanings of the components are assessed. To determine the face validity coefficient, a 5-point Likert scale is used for each of the 57 items of the tool and the questionnaire is distributed among 15 professors. The item impact factor is calculated, which indicate that all questions are scored above 1.5. In the quantitative section of the content validity, the index of content validity is used. Three criteria of relevance, clarity and simplicity in a five-point Likert scale are assessed by experts. All items scored above 0.80. The reliability of the questionnaire is calculated by Cronbachchr('39')s alpha test. The total reliability coefficient of the questionnaire is 0.72. It is 0.73 for personal factors, 0.71 for organizational factors, 0.75 for management factors, and 0.76 for occupational factors.
Results: The most important factors affecting the quality of work life of the professors are occupational factors, organizational factors, management factors and individual factors. According to participants, occupational factors affecting the quality of work life of faculty members are workplace mental health (ranked 1), occupational income (ranked 2), occupational security (ranked 3), workplace health and safety (ranked 4), proportion of teaching courses with expertise (ranked 5), required facilities and equipment (ranked 6), professional growth (ranked 7), job independence (ranked 8), teaching (workload) (ranked 9), lack of ambiguity in doing tasks (ranked 10), base (job position) (ranked 11), importance and meaning of work (ranked 12), role clarity (ranked 13), attention to research and innovation (ranked 14), increasing job capabilities and abilities (ranked 15), sharing experiences among colleagues (ranked 16), and job diversity (ranked 17). Organizational factors affecting the quality of work life of faculty members are organizational justice (ranked 1), fair payment and benefits system (ranked 2), on time promotion (ranked 3), intra-organizational communication (ranked 4), clarity of organizational laws and regulations (ranked 5), university development and growth (ranked 6), organizational discipline (ranked 7), interaction and collaboration of professors together (ranked 8), performance evaluation system (ranked 9), payment and benefit stability (ranked 10), organizational trust (ranked 11), organizational facilities (ranked 12), organizational image (ranked 13), flexible organizational structure (ranked 14), and innovative organizational environment (ranked 15). Management factors affecting the quality of work life of faculty members include fair interaction with professors (ranked 1), respect for expertise and professional attitude towards professors (ranked 2), appropriate feedback to professors (ranked 3), peer support of professors (ranked 4) , continuous relationship of managers with professors (ranked 5), integrity of managerschr('39') behavior with professors (ranked 6), delegation of authority to professors (ranked 7), staff participation in decision making (ranked 8), attention to problems and timely resolution (ranked 9), transparent expectation of professors (ranked 10), using professors’ viewpoints in developing organizational goals and policies (ranked 11), supportive supervision (ranked 12), applying system management (ranked 13), and flexibility in decision making (ranked 14). Individual factors affecting the quality of work life include job motivation (ranked 1), adjustment ability (ranked 2), expertise and experience (ranked 3), communication skills (ranked 4), hope and optimism (ranked 5), patience (ranked 6), positive attitude to job (ranked 7), decision making power (ranked 8), self-awareness (ranked 9), self-control (ranked 10), and personal creativity (ranked 11).
Conclusion: Designing a model for enhancing the quality of work life of faculty members, and examining and prioritizing the effective individual, organizational, managerial, and occupational factors can guide authorities to improve the quality of work life and organizational health. According to the results, it can be said that the quality of work life of faculty members is one of the most important and effective concepts in higher education organizations and has an interactive nature in the organization, so that organizational policies can positively or negatively affect the quality of work life. According to the participants, job motivation is the first and foremost individual factor affecting the quality of work life of faculty members. Motivation plays a pivotal role in the field of management, both practically and theoretically. Organizational researchers consider it as a cornerstone in developing useful theories about effective management activities, such as the quality of work life. In line with the results, university officials are suggested to develop variables related to professorschr('39') job motivation, such as respect, participation in decision making, attention to needs, and trust. Organizational justice is ranked first among organizational factors influencing the quality of professorschr('39') work life. In fact, when employees feel that they are working in an organization that does not respect the principles of justice; they are exposed to perceptual and emotional pressures. Therefore, university officials are suggested to consider promoting fair behaviors as a management strategy and more or less promote fair behaviors in the university. Identifying factors that reduce perceptions of organizational justice behaviors among faculty members is one of the main tasks of university managers. In addition, it is suggested to increase the quality of work life by taking into account the sensitivity and complexity of the work and the level of expertise of faculty members, assigning responsibilities based on the level of capability of individuals, and reduce workforce stress by dividing the desired workload, and provide opportunities for growth by evaluating staff performance in terms of expertise, experience, and education. Respondents consider fair interaction to be the first management factors that influence the quality of work life of faculty members. Fair behavior is something that employees are sensitive to and expect its realization when they invest their capabilities in the organization. Therefore, fair dealing with faculty members plays an essential role in promoting and providing mental health and their perception of quality of work life. Also, given that workplace mental health is ranked first in occupational factors and that advocates for quality of work life are looking for new systems to help employees balance their work and personal lives, academic managers need to help their faculty members achieve a quality work life by creating a relaxed and stress-free environment for faculty members. Obviously, promoting the quality of work life of professors requires understanding its concept, functions and benefits by senior management of the university, considering all factors affecting it, and the desire to improve the quality of work life in order to enjoy its valuable benefits for the university.
