The nature and development of the construct “quality of work life”
| dc.contributor.author | Kotzè, Tina | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-09-05T07:20:27Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-09-05T07:20:27Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | |
| dc.description.abstract | English: Major changes have taken place in the nature and composition of organisations in South Africa. The greater importance of knowledge workers, the different ethnic composition of the membership of organisations, and changes in value systems and beliefs may be seen as factors influencing the quality of employees’ work life (QWL). There is a significant lack of clarity regarding QWL as a construct, and no single instrument to promote consistency in its measurement. This article therefore attempts to provide more information on the content of the construct by means of a literature review. The origin and development of the construct, as well as the different approaches taken to define and measure it, are discussed. QWL emerges as a multifaceted and ambiguous construct with no universal identity. How it is defined, how to approach or measure it appear to depend on the goals of the various researchers and management practitioners | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | Afrikaans: Die afgelope dekade is gekenmerk deur grootskaalse veranderinge ten opsigte van die aard en samestelling van die werksmag in Suid-Afikaanse organisasies. Die groter klem op kenniswerknemers, etniese diversiteit binne organisasies, asook veranderinge in die waardestelsels en oortuigings binne die werksmag, word beskou as faktore wat moontlik die kwaliteit van werklewe (KWL) van werknemers kan beïnvloed. Dit is opvallend dat daar ’n gebrek aan eenstemmigheid in die literatuur bestaan oor wat presies die KWL-konstuk behels en hoe dit gemeet behoort te word. In hierdie literatuuroorsig word gepoog om meer inligting te verskaf oor die inhoud en aard van die konstruk. Die oorsprong en ontwikkeling van die KWL-konstruk, asook die verskillende benaderings wat gevolg word in die definiëring en meting daarvan, word bespreek. Die literatuuroorsig toon dat KWL ’n konstruk is wat nie noodwendig op ’n universele wyse gedefinieer kan word nie. Die wyse waarop dit gedefinieer word, die benadering tot, asook die meting daarvan, hang klaarblyklik af van die doelwitte wat navorsers en bestuurspraktisyns daarmee wil bereik. | af |
| dc.description.version | Publisher's version | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.citation | Kotzè, T. (2005).The nature and develpment of the construct "quality of work life". Acta Acadameca, 37(2), 96-122. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0587-2405 (print) | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 2415-0479 (online) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11660/6757 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Employees’ work life | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Quality of employees’ work life | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Organisations in South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.title | The nature and development of the construct “quality of work life” | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Article | en_ZA |