Quality of Work Life: Comparative Analysis Between two Public Workers Groups

Q4 Psychology

Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa Pub Date : 2023-06-05 DOI:10.1590/0102.3772e39502.en

Carla Antloga, M. Sarmet, Marina Maia do Carmo, Veruska Albuquerque, Polyanna Andrade, P. Cottone

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The general objective of the study was to compare the analysis of the perception of Quality of Work Life of workers from two federal entities in the infrastructure area based on the Activity-centered Ergonomics Applied to QWL. A total of 3.136 workers participated in this research. As an instrument it was used an electronic version of the QWL Valuating Inventory. The result presents no significant differences in perception of the two groups of works in relation to the quality of life at work. The element work organization was the worst evaluated indicating alertness and risk of illness. The research indicates issues that deserve attention during the elaboration of QWL Policy and Program in the evaluated organizations.

查看原文本刊更多论文

工作生活质量:两个公务员群体的比较分析

摘要:本研究的总体目的是比较两个联邦实体在基础设施领域的工人对工作生活质量的感知分析，该分析基于应用于QWL的以活动为中心的工效学。共有3.136名工人参与了这项研究。作为一种工具，它被用作QWL评估清单的电子版本。结果显示，两组工作对工作生活质量的感知没有显著差异。工作组织这一要素在警觉性和患病风险方面的评价最差。研究指出了被评估组织在制定QWL政策和程序时应注意的问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa Psychology-Psychology (all)

CiteScore

0.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

48 weeks

期刊介绍： Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa is a journal published every three months by Instituto de Psicologia da Universidade de Brasília [Institute of Psychology - University of Brasília]. It aims at publishing original papers related to Psychology that fit into the following categories: research report, theoretical study, report of professional experience, critical literature review, short communication, letter to editor, technical note, review. News may also be published at the editor"s discretion. The authors assume responsibility for the articles signed; opinions and considerations included in the articles do not necessarily express the standing point of the Editorial Board.