quality of work life programmes in small scale …

Volume:01, Number:08, Dec-2011 : RJSSM Page 70 www.theinternationaljournal.org

QUALITY OF WORK LIFE PROGRAMMES IN SMALL SCALE

INDUSTRIAL UNITS: EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES

PERSPECTIVE

Mr. A. Stephen

Associate Professor,

KPR School of Business, Coimbatore – 641 407

Dr. D. Dhanapal

Management Consultant,

PLS Nagar Coimbatore – 641 062.

Abstract:

The Quality of work life programs are the human resources practices adopted by the

company for the upliftment of the Quality of work life of employees. It is the utmost

responsibility of the management to ensure the good quality of work life of employees. The

present study aims at findings out the important QWL programs and the rate of

implementation of QWL programs in Small Scale Industrial Units in the perspectives of

employers and employees. The sample consists of 317 employers and employees of various

Small Scale Industrial units in Chennai, Coimbatore and Madurai cities in Tamilnadu, India.

The list of industrial units was acquired from District Industrial Centre of these cities and

units were chosen at random. The questionnaire was designed based on the attributes and

variables of QWL reviews and questionnaire from previous studies. The constituted variables

of the questionnaire were subjected to construct validity and discriminant validity. The study

reveals that the employers are highly perceiving the implementation of QWL programmes in

their units than their employees. the study concludes by identifying the 5 important QWL

programmes in SSI units, in the perspective of employers and employees.

Keywords: Quality of work life (QWL), Quality of work life programmes (QWLP), Small

Scale Industrial units (SSI), Employer, Employee.


1. Introduction:

A great workplace is the one in which you trust people you work for, have pride in

what you do and enjoy the people you are working with (Levering, 1988). The employees

experience in work place as well as in life encourages creativity and self expression work is a

source of livelihood and gives meaning and purpose to individuals life. (Morrison, 1993).

Work can be a major source of stress and ill health (Duxbury and Higgins, 2001) and also a

major source of satisfaction. (Luthans, 1998). Healthy companies are described as ones that

encourage the physical, mental and spiritual aspects of humans (Topolosky, 2000).

There is a paradigm shift regarding relationship between organisation and employees.

The shift suggests that the employers are the primary source of company‟s competitive

advantage and organisational prosperity. Business leaders have discovered that the employees

are unique source of competitive advantage than any other competitive strategies. (Pfeffer,

1994). The future of successful and healthy companies will be shaped by all member of the

workforce (Wong and Kleiner, 1996). The survival of the organisation rests on the employees

and they should be made committed by means of refined treatment (Lawler, 2005).

Employees have certain expectations from the organisation. They want the organisations to

be loyal and to provide stability to their Jobs (Woods, 1993).

Commitment and responsibility should be mutual among employers and employees.

The management should ensure that committed employees should also experience a high

Quality of work life. (Kotze, 2005). Employees experiencing wellbeing at workplace

experience high quality of work life and vice versa (Riggio, 1990). Improving the employees

Quality of work life may have positive influences on the employees perception of their level

of Job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Brewer, 1996; Bruce and Blackburn,

1992; Werther and Davis, 1996; Yousef, 2001).

2. Need of the Study:

The Small Scale Industrial Units (SSI) in India serve the society by providing

immediate large scale employment opportunities, ensuring equitable distribution of national

income by facilitating effective mobilization of resources, capital and skills which might

otherwise remain unutilized. (Arti Singh, 2010). The Small Scale Industrial Units makes huge

contribution to the growth of our nation. Its total industrial output measures 39.42 percent, 35

percent share in exports, 6.71 percent in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and provides

employment to about 27.14 million percents. (Ministry of SSI, 2004-05). Despite the

importance of SSI units to the country and the significance of QWL to the development of

people and the organisation, there is not much of research, which elucidates the employers

and employees perception on QWL programs. In this background a literature review on the

importance of Quality of work life, and QWL programs was undertaken.

3. Literature Review

The new-born concern for QWL in organisation might be due to the realization of

importance of human assets. Human resource are the most important assets that must be

unleashed and developed. In contrast to the thrust on capital, technology and long-lived

products, today‟s source of competitive advantage are high-quality products that can only be


maintained through high quality personnel (Caudron, 1994). Organisation view QWL

programs as a method of reducing costs and improving productivity (Gordon, 1987). Many

organisations implemented QWL programs as a measure to counteract human relation

problems and to enhance organisational effectiveness. For instance, QWL programs in

Scandinavia and united states in Volvo and General motors plants respectively were

undertaken as a response to extreme organisational problems involving employee alcoholism,

absenteeism, tardiness, turnover and grievances (Pfeffer and Jones, 1980).

QWL programmes can lead to a greater self esteem and improved job satisfaction.

(Suttle, 1997). Satisfied employees work harder and provide better services. (Yoon and Suh,

2003). Implementation of QWL programs result in improved worker satisfaction,

commitment and performance (Nadler and Lawler, 1983). High level of QWL has been found

to be associated with high level of Job satisfaction on many aspects of working life. (Wilcock

and Wright, 1991). QWL is a significant predictor of organisational commitment among

managers (Anuradha and Pandey, 1995). There is a reduction in minor accident, grievance,

absentee and turnover rates with the installation and institutionalization of QWL process

(Havlovic, 1991).

QWL programs tend to increase employee participation and also reduce worker stress.

(Janet, L.Della – Guistina and Daniel, E. Della-Giustina, 1989). QWL programmes have two

objectives. One is to increase productivity and second to increase satisfaction of employees.

It requires certain amount of investment in human resources, for its successful

implementation. QWL depends on the factor affecting on it. (Sarang Shankar Bhola, 2006).

QWL initiatives facilitates the release of human energy. Improving the employees Quality of

work life may have a number of positive effects on the organisations ultimate performance

(Elizur and Shye, 1990; Greenberg and Baron, 1997 and Nykodym et al 1991). As QWL is a

response to environmental pressures, the efforts to cope with the pressures and what QWL

represents will continue. The labels might change but the momentum of change will not.

(Herman Gadon, 1984).

The above said reviews reveal the dimensions and benefits of QWL programs to the

individual and the organisation. But there is no exclusive study on QWL programs at Small

Scale Industrial units with regard to employer and employee prospectives. So the present

study has made an attempt to fill up the research gap with the help of proposed research

model.

4. Proposed Research Model

The Proposed Research model attempts to bring out the employers and employees

view on the existence of QWL programs at their industrial units.

Figure 1. Employers and Employees views on QWL programmes at SSI units.

Employers

View

Employees

View QWL

Programmes


5. Objective of the Study

Based on the proposed research model, the objectives of the study are confined to:

1. To Identify important QWL programs.

2. To measure the Employers and Employees perception on the rate of implementation

of QWL programs in SSI Units.

7. Conceptual Framework

There are various meanings and definitions attributed to QWL by theorists,

academicians and practioners. (Davis and Cherns, 1975). Yet, there is a lack of universally

accepted definition and a clear out understanding of the QWL concept and what it entails.

(Krueger et al, 2002). QWL is defined as an approach or method in which specific techniques

and approaches are used for improving work (Ford, 1973). It is defined as the quality of

relationship between employees and the total working environment, with human dimensions

added to the usual technical and economic considerations (Davis, 1983).

It is evident that the definition of QWL varies and encompasses different perspectives

(Loscocco and Roschelle, 1991). Hence QWL is defined as the workplace strategies,

operations and environment that promote and maintain employee satisfaction aimed at

improving working conditions for employees and organisational effectiveness (Lau and

Bruce 1998). Majority of authors state that QWL issues are centred on worker related topics

such as job redesign, joint labor-management committees, flexible working hours, conflict

resolution techniques and gain sharing plans. (Janet, L. Guistina and Daniel, E. Della

Guistina, 1989). Variety of Job factors and organisational factors contribute to QWL

(Carayon and Smith 2000) and individual characteristics and circumstances can have an

impact on the QWL experiences of employees. (Hannif, Burgess and Connel 2008).

8. Research Methodology

Research Design is the blue print of the various methods for conducting the research

projects. It includes the procedures for obtaining the information needed, the way in which

they are processed and the method of presentation of the result to solve the research

problems. Even though the research designs are too many, the present study followed the

„Descriptive‟ research Design. Since the present study has made an attempt to measure the

implementation of QWL programmes in SSI units with regard to employers and employees

perspective and also finds out the important QWL programmes in SSI units, it is descriptive

in nature.

8.1. Sampling Procedure

The total sample size of the present study is arbitrarily assigned as one percent of the

population. The sampled units are selected at random. Hence, the sampled SSI units in

Chennai, Coimbatore and Madurai came to 321, 504 and 202 units respectively. The address

of the above said units had been collected from the respective District Industrial Centres. The

employer of SSI units was selected at non random whereas the employee in the same unit was


selected at random. The questionnaire had been sent to all SSI units which consists of one

each questionnaire to the employer and employee in the SSI units. The response from the SSI

units at Chennai, Coimbatore and Madurai were 176,136 and 124 units respectively. Since

the study focuses on the employers‟ and employees‟ perspective on QWL programmes at SSI

units, the SSI units who had completed both questionnaire (employer and employee) had

been included for further analysis. Hence, the included sampled SSI units in Chennai,

Coimbatore and Madurai came to 107, 100 and 110 SSI units respectively.

8.2. Construct Development

The required data to fulfil the objectives of the study was collected with the help of

two different Questionnaire. One is meant for the employers and the another is meant for

employees of the SSI units. The relevant details about the various concepts and terms used in

the questionnaire have been identified with the help of review of previous studies and also

with the help of experts in relevant fields. In the present study the QWL programs are

confined to certain programs drawn from Beers (2000), Clark (2000), Edwards and Rothbard

(2000) and Sullivan and Lussier (1995). Based on the pilot study conducted among 30

employers and employees in SSI units and opinion from experts, industrialists and

academicians, the irrelevant QWL programs which was not suitable to the regional context

and environment, were deleted, from the existing questionnaire. The final draft of the

questionnaire was prepared to collect the relevant data. In the present study 21 QWL

programmes in SSI units were considered.

9. Results and Discussion

9.1. Qwl Programmes in SSI units.

The Quality of work life programmes are human resource practices, adopted by the

company for their upliftment of the quality of work life. The QWL programmes may be

related with work enrichment, personal enrichment, work life balance and the career

development. The quality of work life programs may include union – management

cooperation, work reorganization and employer Involvement. In particular, many early

employee involvement programs (from the mid 1970s to the early 1980s) were called QWL

programmes and were characterized by small group of workers and low – level managers

meeting periodically to discuss primarily “comfort issues”. Some programmes were beyond

these issues.

The implementation of QWL programmes at SSI units have been measured by the

employers and employees views on the rate of implementation of 21 QWL programmes at

their units. These QWL programmes are drawn from the review of previous studies and also

the views of experts. The employers and employees are asked to rate these 21 QWL

programmes at five point scale on the basis of rate of implementation at their SSI units. The

assigned scores are from 5 to 1 respectively. The mean score of each programmes among the

employers and employees have been computed separately in order to exhibit the level of

perception on the implementation of QWL programmes at SSI units. In order to find out the

significant difference among the employers and employees regarding their perception on the

implementation of QWL programmes in SSI units, the t test has been administered. The mean

score of QWL programmes among the employers and employees and their respective „T‟

statistics are shown in table 1.


Table 1 Rate of Implementation of Quality of Work Life Programmes(QWLP) at the

Units

S.

No.

QWLP Mean Score Among t statistics

Employer Employee

1 Job Rotation 3.8634 3.1708 2.6517*

2 Job Enlargement 3.7309 3.0911 2.7028*

3 Job Enrichment 3.9662 3.1024 3.1445*

4 Autonomous work groups 3.8114 2.7086 3.3089*

5 Quality Circles 3.7655 2.8119 3.2446*

6 Project Team 3.8665 2.9094 3.1029*

7 Elder care referral and resources 3.5193 2.5145 3.2969*

8 Family counseling 3.0564 2.7345 0.9773

9 Career Counseling 2.9917 2.3865 2.0885*

10 Problem Solving sessions 3.6973 2.7086 3.2117*

11 Health Insurance 3.7314 2.8684 3.0896*

12 Flexible working hours 3.9028 2.9194 3.3919*

13 Job sharing 3.8183 3.2446 2.1773*

14 Maternity benefits 3.6817 3.0896 1.8644

15 Paternity benefits 3.2445 2.6545 1.4508

16 Flexible work sites 3.8141 3.0617 2.7339*

17 Leave with pay 3.6148 2.9091 2.5496*

18 Onsite child care 3.7696 3.0941 2.8441*

19 Relocation assistance 3.5889 2.8661 2.9969*

20 Employee workshop on child care 3.7081 2.8085 3.0143*

21 Employees sick leave for children‟s

illness

3.6889 2.9969 3.1039*

* Significant at five percent level.

The highly rated QWL programmes by the employers are job enrichment and flexible

working hours since their respective mean scores are 3.9662 and 3.9028, where as among the

employees, there two QWL Programmes are job sharing and job rotation since its mean

scores are 3.2446 and 3.1708 respectively. Regarding the perception on implementation of

QWL programmes at SSI units, significant difference among the employers and employees

have been observed in the case of 18 QWL programmes out of 21 QWL programmes namely

job rotation, job enlargement, job enrichment, autonomous work group, quality circles,

project team, elder care referral and resources, career counseling, problem solving sessions,

health insurance, flexible working hours, job sharing, flexible work sites, leave with pay,

onsite child care, relocation assistance, employee workshop on child care and employees sick

leave for children‟s illness, since their respective „T‟ statistics are significant at five percent

level.

9.2. Validity of Data for Exploratory Factor Analysis

The present study has made an attempt to narrate the QWL programmes into

important QWL programmes for further indepth analysis. The exploratory factor analysis has

been administered to narrate the QWL programmes into important QWL programmes. Before

the application of EFA, it is imperative to test the validity of data for EFA. It is tested with

Volume:01, Number:08, Dec-2011 : RJSSM 6 www.theinternationaljournal.org

the help of KMO measure of sampling adequacy and Bartletts test of sphericity. The results

are given in table 2.

Table 2 Validity of data for Exploratory Factor Analysis

S.

No.

Particulars Co-efficient

1 Kaiser–Meyer–Ohlin measure of sampling

adequacy.

0.8142

2 Bartletts test of sphericity: Chi Square 2973.43

3 Degree of Freedom 541.00

4 P-Value 0.00

The KMO measure of sampling adequacy (0.8142) is greater than its minimum

threshold of 0.50. The Chi-Square value (2973.43) is significant at zero percent level which is

within the maximum accepted level of 5 percent level. Both these results indicates the

validity of data for EFA. The KMO and Bartletts test of sphericity shows that there is

adequate number of significant correlation among 21 variables.

9.3. Important QWL Programmes in SSI Units.

The executed EFA resulted in five important QWL programmes. The Eigen value and

percent of variation explained by each important QWL programmes have been computed.

The variables included in each QWL programmes factors have been identified with the help

of its factor loadings in these programmes compared to factor loading with other

programmes. The resulted QWL programmes, its eigen value and percent of variation

explained by each important programmes are presented in table 3

Table 3 Important quality of work life programmes (IQWLP).

S.No. IQWL P Number of

Programmes

in

Eigen

Value

Percent of

variation

explained

Cumulative

percent of

variation

explained

1 Job Related 6 4.9142 18.62 18.62

2 Quality related 5 3.8649 16.08 34.70

3 Welfare related 5 3.0841 15.17 49.87

4 Counseling 2 2.4565 10.73 60.60

5 Childrens Care 3 2.3891 8.94 65.54

The most important QWL programmes is job related since its eigen value and the

percent of variation explained by it are 4.9142 and 18.62 percent respectively. The next two

important QWL programmes are quality related and welfare related since its eigen values are

3.8649 and 3.0841 respectively. The percent of variation explained by these QWL

programmes are 16.08 and 15.17 respectively. The next two QWL programmes identified by

the EFA are counseling and child care since its eigen values are 2.4565 and 2.3891

respectively. The percent of variation explained by these QWL programmes are 10.73 and

8.94 respectively. In total, narrated five QWL programmes explain the important QWL

programmes to the extent of 65.54 percent. The extracted important QWL programmes have


been confirmed with the help of confirmatory factor analysis through its standardised factor

loadings of the variables, its „t‟ statistics, composite reliability and average variance

extracted. The important QWL programmes have been included for further analysis.

9.4. Implementation of QWL Programmes as per the view of employers and employees

The mean score of each QWL programmes among the employers and employees have

been computed separately in order to exhibit the level of perception regarding

implementation of QWL programmes in SSI units. The level of perception regarding

implementation of QWL programmes in SSI units among employer and employee have been

presented in figure 2.

Figure 2 Rate of implementation of QWL programmes as per the view of employers and

employees

In order to find out significant difference among the employers and employees

regarding their perception on the implementation of QWL programmes in SSI units, the „T‟

test has been administered. The mean score of the QWL programmes among employers and

employees and their respective „T‟ statistics are depicted in table 4.

Table 4 Implementation of QWL Programmes as per the view of employers and employees

S.

No.

QWL P Mean Score among t - Statistics

Employer Employee

1 Job Related 3.8501 3.0983 3.1446*

2 Quality Related 3.7459 2.7814 3.2687*

3 Welfare Related 3.0241 2.5605 1.3661

4 Counseling 3.5583 2.8072 1.8541

5 Children‟s care 3.7222 2.9665 2.0845*

* Significant at give five percent level.


The highly viewed QWL programmes by the employers are job related programmes

and quality related programmes since their respective mean scores are 3.8501 and 3.7459,

where as among the employees, the highly viewed QWL programmes are Job related

programmes and childrens care programmes as their respective mean scores are 3.0983 and

2.9665. Regarding the level of perception on implementation of QWL programmes, the

significant difference among the employers and employees have been noticed in the case of

three QWL programmes out of five QWL programmes namely job related programmes,

quality related programmes, childrens care related programmes, since their respective „T‟

statistics are significant at five percent level.

10. Research Implications:

The findings of the present study regarding employees perception on QWL

programme, that job related and welfare related programmes for the employees in industrial

units will lead to enhance job satisfaction is validated by the findings of Kiely, (1992),

Hornberger et al, (1997), Shamir, (1980), Gartner et al, (1997). The positive and significant

influence of job related programmes on job satisfaction of employees is evident by the

findings of Hackman et al (1975), that claims people of enriched jobs are definitely more

motivated and satisfied.

The employees perception on QWL programmes, reveal that the job related and

welfare related programmes continue to be a great concern for employees and are very

important to QWL. The presence of such measure lead to the enhanced QWL of employees

thereby resulting in improved job satisfaction is consistent with findings of Kalra, (1981),

Mehta (1982), Kalra and Ghosh, (1984), Gani and Ahmad (1995). The result of the present

study that Employees participating in the QWL program will be more satisfied and

committed than non-participating employee is similar to the findings of Verma (1989).

11. Managerial Implication

The result of the present study was intended to assist policy makers and decision

makers in formulating policies and systems that enhances the individual well being leading to

individual performance and organisational performance.

The present study identified 5 important QWL programmes on the rate of

implementation at SSI units among employer and employees. Out of 5 QWL program, there

is a significant difference for 3 programs, among employer and employees. They are job

related, quality related and childrens care programmes. Not with standing the fair rating for

these programs, the point to be noted is relatively low scoring for welfared related

programmes and Quality related programmes.

Management often fail to provide sufficient attention to QWL, in the area of job

security, perks and pay for fear of negative effect on a company‟s financial performance.

Organisation should understand it is worthwhile to invest in welfare related programmes, that

leads to employee satisfaction, especially in an economy that is perpetually increasing in

complexity. Such investments allow organisations to attract and retain quality employees,

develop an intellectual capital base, motivate employees to be more productive and garner

high value for the organisation.


12. Conclusion:

Organisations have started realizing the importance of Human assets for their

existence and prosperity. The days are gone, when the people are viewed as mere machines,

that gives output. In this of context, taking info consideration the contribution of Small Scale

Industrial units to the economy of our country, the present study was undertaken. The study

was unleashed to reveal the view of employers and employees regarding the implementation

of QWL programmes at SSI units. The study also throws light on the importance of QWL

programmes in developing the human resources and enhancing the company‟s performance.

The study concludes by contributing to the understanding of the management and policy

makers on the perspectives exhibited by employers and employees.

13. Scope for future research

The present study was an attempt to reveal the employers and employees perspectives

on QWL programmes. In SSI units. Future studies may be done sector wise encompassing

greater Geographical location. The associations and significance between QWL programmes

and outcomes of job performance and employee behaviour may be undertaken. Such an

attempt would result in indepth study and establish the impact of QWL programmes on

quantitative and qualitative aspect of job performance and human behaviours.

References

1. Anuradha, S. and Pandey, P.N., (1995), “Organizational Commitment and QWL:

Perception of Indian Managers”, Abbigyan, Summer: PP.39-77.

2. Arti Singh, (2010), “Role of Small-Scale Industries in District Level Development: A

Study of Varanasi”. The IUP Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, Vol.7(3), PP.7

3. Beers, T., (2000). “Flexible schedules and shift work: Replacing the 9 to 5 workday”.

Monthly Labour Review, Vol. 123, PP: 33-40.

4. Brewer, A.M., (1996), “Developing commitment between managers and employees”,

Journal of Managerial Psychology. Vol. 11(4), PP:24-35.

5. Bruce, W.M., and Blackburn, J.W., (1992), “Balancing Job Satisfaction & Performance:

A Guide for Human Resource Professional”. USA, Westport: Quorum Books.

6. Carayon, P. Hoonakker, P., Merchand, S., and Schwarz, J., (2003), “Job characteristics

and Quality of workinglife in the IT workforce: The role of Gender”, ACM

SIGCPR/SIGMIS 2003 conference.

7. Caudron, S., (1994). “HR Leaders Brainstorm the Profession's Future”, Personnel

Journal. Vol. 73(8), PP. 54-61.

8. Clark, S.C., (2000). “Work/Family border theory: A new theory of work/ family balance”,

Human Relations, Vol. 53 (6), PP: 747-770.

9. Davis, L.E., (1983), “Design of New organizations, In H. Kolodny and H.V., Beinum

(Eds.), “The Quality of Working Life and the 1980s”, New York; Praeger publisher.

10. Davis., L.E., and Cherns, AB., (1975), The Quality of working life: problem, prospects

and the state of the art, New York: Free Press.

11. Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2001). Work-life balance in the new millennium: Where are

we? Where do we need to go?. Canadian Policy Research Networks Discussion Paper

(W-12). Ottawa. Retrieved on January 20, 2007 from

12. Edwards, J.R., and Rothbard, N.P., (2000). “Mechanisms linking work and family:

clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs”. Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 25 (1), PP: 178-199.


13. Elizur, D., and Shye, S., (1990), “Quality of Work Life and its relation to quality of life”,

Applied Psychology: An International Review. Vol. 39(3), PP.275-291.

14. Ford, R., (1973), “Job enrichment lessons from AT and T”, Harvard Business Review,

Vol.51 (1), PP.96-106.

15. Gani, A. and Ahmed, Riyaz, (1995), “Correlates of Quality of work life: An analytical

study”, The Indian Journal of Labour economics, Vol.36(4), PP.817-823.

16. Gartner, J., Wahl, S. and Horwein, K., (1997), “Experiences with tools for the design of

shift-rotas”, Shift work international newsletter, Vol.14(1), P.9(in abstracts).

17. Gorden, Judith, R. (1987), A Diagnostic Approach to Organizational Behaviour, PP.651-

663, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

18. Greenberg, J., and Baron, R.A., (1977), Behaviour in Organisations. Sixth edition. New

Jersey: Prentice - Hall, Inc.

19. Hannif, Z., Burgess, J., & Connell, J. (2008). “Call centres and the Quality of work life:

Towards a research agenda”. Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol.50(2), PP.271-284.

20. Havlovic, SJ., (1991),” Quality of work life and Human resource outcomes”, Industrial

Relations, Vol.30(3), PP.469-479.

21. Herman Gadon (1984), “Making sense of Quality of work life programs”, Business

Horizons, Vol. 27(1), PP.42-46.

22. Hornberger, S., Gissel, A., Deinzer, H. and Knauth, P., (1997), “Expectation and attitude

of the day and shift workers towards a flexible working time in the metal industry”, Shift

work international newsletter, Vol.14(1), PP.3(in abstracts).

23. Janet, L., Della-Guistina and Daniel, E., Della-Guistina (1989), “Quality of work life

programs through employee motivation”, Professional Safety, Vol. 34(5), PP.24.

24. Kalra, Satish Kr. And Ghosh, Sadhna (1984), “Quality of work life: A study of associated

factors”, The Indian journal of social work, Vol.XIV(3),PP.341-349.

25. Kalra, Satish Kr., (1981), Family life of high achievers: A study in a business

organisation”, The Indian journal of social work, Vol.XIV(3), PP.341-349.

26. Kiely, J., (1992), “Recent achievements in working time arrangements using workplace

reform process : making time – flexibility in the workplace”, Departments of Industrial

Relations, AGPS, Canberra.

27. Kotze, T. (2005). “The nature and development of the construct Quality of work life”.

Acta Academica, Vol.37(3), PP.96-122.

28. Krueger, P., Brazil, K., Lohfeld, L., Edward, H.G., Lewis, D., & Tjam, E. (2002).

Organization specific predictors of job satisfaction: findings from a Canadian multi-site

quality of work life cross-sectional survey. BMC Health services Research, 2(1):6.

Retrieved on February 5, 2005 from www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/2/6

29. Lau, R.S.M., and Bruce, E.M, (1998), “A win-win paradigm for Quality of work life and

business performance”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol.9(3), PP.211-226.

30. Lawler, E.E. (2005). “Creating high performance organizations”. Asia Pacific Journal of

Human Resources, Vol. 43(1), PP.10-17.

31. Levering, R. (1988). A Great place to work, Newyork: Avon Books.

32. Loscocco, K.A., & Roschelle, A.R. (1991). “Influences on the quality of work and

nonwork life: Two decades in review”. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol.39(2),

PP.182-225.

33. Luthans, F. (1998). Organizational behaviour. (8th

ed.). Chicago: Mosby.

34. Mehta, Prayag (1982), Rising aspirations, Quality of life and work organisation”,

Productivity, Vol.XXII(4), PP.85-88.

35. Morrison, M. (1993). Professional skills for leadership: Foundations of a successful

Career. London: Mosby

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/2/6


36. Nadler, AD, and Lawler III, Edward E., (1983), “Quality of Work Life, Perspectives and

Directions”, Organisation Dynamics, Winter, PP.20-30.

37. Nykodym, N., Longenecker, C.O., and Ruud, W.N., (1991), “Improving quality of work

life with transactional analysis as an intervention change strategy”, Applied Psychology:

An International Review. Vol. 40(4), PP.395-404.

38. Pfeffer, R.L, (1994), Competitive Advantage through people: Unleashing the power of the

workforce, Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

39. Pfeiffer, J. William and Jones, John, E. (1980), “The 1980 Annual Handbook for Group

Facilitators”, P. 258, San Diego, California: University Associates.

40. Riggio, R.E. (1990). Introduction to industrial/ organizational psychology, Glenview,

Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company.

41. Sarang Shankar Bhola (2006), “A Study of Quality of work life in casting and Machine

shop Industry in Kohlapur” An Abstract, Finance India, Vol. 20(1), PP.202-208.

42. Shamir, B., (1980), “A note on individual differences in the subjective evaluation of

lexitime”, Journal of occupational psychology, Vol.53, PP. 215-17.

43. Sharma, B.R. and Sundara, Rajan, P.S., (1983), “Organisational determinants of labor

management relations in India”, Indian journal of industrial relations, Vol.19(1), PP.1-

20.

44. Sullivan, S., and Lussier, R., (1995). “Flexible work arrangements as a management

tool”, Supervision, Vol. 56(8), PP: 14-17.

45. Suttle, J.L., (1977), “Improving life at work: problems and prospects. In Hackman, J.R.,

and Suttle, J.L (Eds.)”, Improving life at work: Behavioural Sciences Approach to

organisational change, California: Good year publishing company.

46. Topolosky, P.S., (2000), “Linking Employee Satisfaction to Business Results”. In,

Bruchey, S., Garland Studies on Industrial Productivity. London: Garland Publishing,

Inc.

47. Verma, Anil, (1987), “Employee involvement programs-Do they alter worker affinity

towards union?” Proceedings of the thirty ninth annual meetings (New orelans,

December 1986). Madison, Wis: Industrial relations research association, PP.306-12.

48. Werther, W.B., and Davis, K., (1996), “Human Resources and Personnel Management.”

Fifth edition. USA: McGraw-Hill.

49. Wilcock, A., and Wright, M., (1991), “Quality of Work Life in the Knitwear sector of the

Canadian Textile Industry”, Public Personnel Management, Vol 20(4), Winter, PP 457-

468.

50. Wong, A., and Kleiner, B.H., (1996), “Empowerment in Today's Business Paradigm is a

competitive Must”, Management Decision. Vol. 34(5), PP.7-8.

51. Woods, R.C. (1993). “Managing to meet employee expectations: Quality improvement

tools narrow the gap between employee expectations and company resource”. Human

Resource Planning, Vol.16(4), PP.13-28.

52. Yoon, M.H., & Suth, J. (2003). “Organizational citizenship behaviors and service quality

as external effectiveness of contact employees”. Journal of Business Research, Vol.56(8),

PP.597-611.

53. Yousef, D.A., (2001), “Islamic work ethic: A moderator between organisational

commitment and job satisfaction in a cross-cultural context”, Personnel review. Vol. 30

(2), PP.152-169.

54. http://Jurionline.in/2009/09 the deregulation - of – industries – reserved – earlier – for –

the – small – scale – sector – and – its – impact – on – economic – development/accessed

27 June, 2011.

***

quality of work life programmes in small scale …

Documents