Quality of work research: a methodological review

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Barroso, M.
Data de Publicação: 2018
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25055
Resumo: The research on quality of work experienced remarkable resurgence during the noughties, partially as a result of the inclusion of the topic in European and international policy-making agendas. In the second half of the decade, the global economic crisis largely redirected the attention to the quantitative dimensions of labour market policy. Nonetheless, academic production on job quality has maintained its vitality over the years. As in many other relevant research topics, consensus over the conceptualization and measurement of quality of work has been difficult to achieve among academics and policy-makers. Apart from the lack of a commonly agreed definition, measurement also tends to be varied and supported by different methods. In fact, both academics and policy-makers claim the need for a more consensual definition as a way of improving the comparability between countries, sectors of activity or occupations. In this article, we compare the methodological designs of a selected group of quality of work studies to identify the degree to which there are significant discrepancies within the academic community and to assess progress regarding the challenge of conceptualizing and measuring quality of work. The article offers a review of the most-cited articles indexed at the Scopus database between 2000 and 2015, and a comprehensive analysis over the question of conceptualization and measurement.
id RCAP_6f7c3f561dc8be94dfd071a08b2a3dcf
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/25055
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Quality of work research: a methodological reviewAnalytical frameworksJob qualityLiterature reviewMethodological reviewQuality of workQuality of working lifeThe research on quality of work experienced remarkable resurgence during the noughties, partially as a result of the inclusion of the topic in European and international policy-making agendas. In the second half of the decade, the global economic crisis largely redirected the attention to the quantitative dimensions of labour market policy. Nonetheless, academic production on job quality has maintained its vitality over the years. As in many other relevant research topics, consensus over the conceptualization and measurement of quality of work has been difficult to achieve among academics and policy-makers. Apart from the lack of a commonly agreed definition, measurement also tends to be varied and supported by different methods. In fact, both academics and policy-makers claim the need for a more consensual definition as a way of improving the comparability between countries, sectors of activity or occupations. In this article, we compare the methodological designs of a selected group of quality of work studies to identify the degree to which there are significant discrepancies within the academic community and to assess progress regarding the challenge of conceptualizing and measuring quality of work. The article offers a review of the most-cited articles indexed at the Scopus database between 2000 and 2015, and a comprehensive analysis over the question of conceptualization and measurement.Intellect2022-04-05T16:09:56Z2018-01-01T00:00:00Z20182022-04-05T17:09:20Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/25055eng1476-413X10.1386/pjss.17.1.89_1Barroso, M.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T17:39:33Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/25055Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:18:10.610723Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Quality of work research: a methodological review
title Quality of work research: a methodological review
spellingShingle Quality of work research: a methodological review
Barroso, M.
Analytical frameworks
Job quality
Literature review
Methodological review
Quality of work
Quality of working life
title_short Quality of work research: a methodological review
title_full Quality of work research: a methodological review
title_fullStr Quality of work research: a methodological review
title_full_unstemmed Quality of work research: a methodological review
title_sort Quality of work research: a methodological review
author Barroso, M.
author_facet Barroso, M.
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Barroso, M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Analytical frameworks
Job quality
Literature review
Methodological review
Quality of work
Quality of working life
topic Analytical frameworks
Job quality
Literature review
Methodological review
Quality of work
Quality of working life
description The research on quality of work experienced remarkable resurgence during the noughties, partially as a result of the inclusion of the topic in European and international policy-making agendas. In the second half of the decade, the global economic crisis largely redirected the attention to the quantitative dimensions of labour market policy. Nonetheless, academic production on job quality has maintained its vitality over the years. As in many other relevant research topics, consensus over the conceptualization and measurement of quality of work has been difficult to achieve among academics and policy-makers. Apart from the lack of a commonly agreed definition, measurement also tends to be varied and supported by different methods. In fact, both academics and policy-makers claim the need for a more consensual definition as a way of improving the comparability between countries, sectors of activity or occupations. In this article, we compare the methodological designs of a selected group of quality of work studies to identify the degree to which there are significant discrepancies within the academic community and to assess progress regarding the challenge of conceptualizing and measuring quality of work. The article offers a review of the most-cited articles indexed at the Scopus database between 2000 and 2015, and a comprehensive analysis over the question of conceptualization and measurement.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-01-01T00:00:00Z
2018
2022-04-05T16:09:56Z
2022-04-05T17:09:20Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25055
url http://hdl.handle.net/10071/25055
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1476-413X
10.1386/pjss.17.1.89_1
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Intellect
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Intellect
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799134740719075328