Page |1

Associations between Quantitative and Qualitative Job Insecurity and Well-being

 Page |2

Abstract:

Job Security is one of the most job stressors for employees. We transfix that job insecurity

relates negative impact to job satisfaction. Although decades of research, Both Quantitative

(i.e., perceived threat of job loss) and qualitative (i.e., perceived threat of losing some job

features) job insecurity and the analysis of their different relationships with well-being at work

have received relatively scarce attention. The overall aim of this study was to investigate the

relative soundness of associations of quantitative and qualitative job insecurity with job-related

and general well-being, and health-related behaviour. Controlling for socio-demographics,

negative affectivity and job characteristics, these association were tested in a sample of 15000

Belgian employees from the banking sector. Contempo researchers found that qualitative job

insecurity had a stronger adverse association with job attitudes than quantitative, whereas

quantitative job insecurity had a stronger positive association with health-related outcomes than

qualitative. Quantitative job insecurity is more threatening than qualitative (as it implies

potential loss of financial, social and societal resources) and leads to stronger adverse

consequences in both job attitudes as well as on well-being. Quantitative job insecurity strongly

relates to strain's warning like psychological distress, de-personalization, decreased personal

accomplishment, and psychosomatic complaints, while qualitative relates to attitudinal

variables that are job related like job satisfaction and emotional well-being. it cannot be

ignored, because previous findings have clearly shown job insecurity to be detrimental for

employee well-being (e.g., De Witte, De Cuyper, Handaja, Sverke, Näswall, & Hellgren, 2010;

De Witte, Vander Elst, & De Cuyper, 2015; Sverke, Hellgren, & Näswall, 2002). The

discussion focus around the prior of personal resources attenuating the adverse associations of

quantitative and quantitative job insecurity, and highlights the different roles employees’ work-

related well-being.
 Page |3

Q1
The sample size for this study is fifteen thousand employees selected from a total of 69,000
bank employees (about 21% of the employees). Is a sample of this size necessary? Give your
reasons.

In this research study, the researcher has preferred the dominant data collection technique to
emphasise the current concern of job insecurity. Job insecurity is now a biggest issue in the
workplace, where employee viewpoint is required to deal with the evaluated result, existing
theorem as well as predictable outcome. In the banking sector total 69000 employees, total
15000 employees have agreed to participate in the survey process. In the current research, the
researcher has tried to identify the managerial issues and the related factor, which leads to the
emerging concern of job insecurity. Therefore, participation of the employees is the best
solution to understand the internal issues in the banking organisation as well as managerial
department. Employees can give better solution to deal with the current issues and they can
display a practical fact, which are practiced in the current banking sector. However, the selected
sample size is not adequate to understand the current issues, which leads to the status if job
insecurity. Through getting adequate data the researcher can get proper view of both
managerial as well as employee attribute.
The size of the sample to be used for the survey is a vital factor of any research work because
the aim is to make inferences one based on the sample and directly relate to whole parameter
of the population based on the formulated sample size. The determination of the Sample size
can view from two either the statistical concept of the test statistic or theoretically from the
factors and principles of the research. In this case, the sample size was approximately a third
of the total population (21%), and thus from the statistical perspective, it was the best sample
size to be used by the researcher. According to Smith (2013), the best sample size for any study
should fall within the given confidence interval of the total population if and only if the total
population is a known constant. Secondly, the sample size was much appropriate for study
since relatively large sample size would make the research work to expensive and costly since
the resources required for both data collection could have been high. To prevent this, a sample
size of fifteen thousand employees was much necessary. Also, the time and complexity of data
collection would be reduced since the total population was huge and hence a sample of fifteen
thousand employees was much better.

Q2

Sampling Method The current method of sampling applied and some of the advantages and the
disadvantages of the current sample size in relation to the case provided

The current sampling methodology that was adopted during the collection of the data from the
sample bank employees was a simple random method of sampling. The fact that from a total
target population of sixty-nine thousand (69000) workers across the banks, a sample of fifteen
thousand (15000) workers/employees participated from which about 21% of employees in each
bank were invited for the survey. Again, from the banks, the employees were randomly selected
to be participants with not a particular quota for gender, age or level of employee. The
advantages and disadvantages of the sapling technique applied in the collection of data from
the employees, however, The advantages are that this sample should represent the target
population and eliminate sampling bias, but the disadvantage is that it is very difficult to
achieve as because you could, by chance, miss out a particular group in the sample. However,
 Page |4

the sampling technique was applied since the target population was huge (About sixty-nine
thousand employees).

Q3

Measures of variables. Give your comments on the reliability and validity of measures of the
variables.

Variables are not estimated at one specific level. It depends on the type of indicators and a
single variable can be measured in numerous ways. Quantitative job security was measured
with four items developed by DE Witte (2000) on a scale from 1 to 4 (Strongly disagree to
agree). Sample items were “I feel insecure about the future of my job”’ and “I am sure that I
will be able to keep my job” (reverse coded). Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) equalled .89. These
levels of reliability are acceptable in limitation in social sciences. From the qualitative job
insecurity scale, the statements of “I'm afraid of losing my job” and “I believe that the
organization where I’m working will need my abilities in the future as well.” were extracted
respectively. From the burnout statements in Burnout Subscale items, when the statement of “I
generally can easily handle with my workload” is removed, the Cronbach Alpha value becomes
0.89 From the sub-scale items of job alienation, when the statements of “I have recently started
to make my job almost automatically and without further thought” and “After work, I'm having
enough energy for leisure activities” are respectively removed, the Cronbach Alpha value is
found as 0.87. Psychological distress was measured with 12- version of general Health
Questionnaire (Goldberg 1978), used previously in job insecurity research (DE Witte 1999:
Roskies, Louis -Guerin frontier 1993). A sample item was “Have you recently lost much sleep
over Worry?” Psychosomatic complaints were measured with a body sensations Questionnaire
(Chambless et al.1984). Reliability was (Cronbach alpha) 0.89. Qualitative job insecurity was
measured with ten items from the 17-item measure that was originally proposed by Ashford,
Lee, and Bobko (1989). These job features concerned four broad dimensions previously
distinguished to describe the various characteristics of a job: job content (autonomy, skill
utilization, and specific tasks), working conditions (workload and quality of working
conditions), employment conditions (wage, working hours, and opportunities for promotion),
and social relations at work (relations with colleagues and supervisors, respectively).
Respondents had to indicate whether each of the job features would likely improve or
deteriorate in the near future (1 = strongly deteriorate; 5 = strongly improve). We recoded the
items so that a high score reflected qualitative job insecurity. Cronbach’s alpha equalled .87.
Control variables. The following social demographics and work-related factors were included:
gender, education, income, children, occupational position. The demographics were used as
control variables in data analysis. Job characteristics as defined in Karasek and Theorell’s Job
– Demand -Control support Model were measured with the job content Questionnaire (Karasek
1985). Single item measures for job satisfaction are reliable (Wanous, Reichers, and Huby
1997). quantitative and qualitative job insecurity added in explain variance in job-related well-
being and psychological distress beyond the variance explained by demographics, negative
affectivity, and job characteristics. How ever the change in the percentage of explained
variance was not significant.
Reliability Meanwhile, the reliability of the measurement used in the research is dependent on
whether its components are consistent with one another and can be reproduced using a similar
methodology and yield similar outcomes (Joppe, 2000). Reliability is also a matter of whatever
technique is used and applied repeatedly to the same object, it will yield the same result each
time (Babbie, 2008). The internal consistency of the 12-item GHQ in the present study was
tested using the Cronbach’s alpha. A coefficient value between 0.50 and 0.70 is typically
 Page |5

reliable (Guilford, 1965). Tung-Xiung (1985) stated that a psychological scale with an alpha
value higher than 0.40 shows a good internal consistency.

Q4

Collection of data on social demographics. The purpose of this research is to find the
associations between quantitative and qualitative job insecurity and well-being. However, data
on variables such as gender, age, education level, extra income were also collected. What is
the purpose of collecting data on variables such as gender, age, educational level etc.?

Every employee has different viewpoint regarding his or her job, organisation as well as self-
perception. They often do not want to express their felling due to fear or any personal issues.
They think it will hamper their job or could be an issue of workplace conflict. They think such
issues could be raised if the respondent’s data becomes published in external sources.
Therefore, certain factors have also restricted many of the employees to participate in the
survey process. The sample was representative for employees in the banking sector, however,
not for the total working population. he General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) and the PSYDIS
(Psychic Dis-tress) are two such instruments. The GHQ (Goldberg 1972, 1978) was designed
to be a self-administered screening test aimed at detecting minor psychiatric disorders More
men (58.5 percent) than women (41.5 percent) participated. About two in three respondents
were between 35 and 44 years old or between 45 and 54 years old, while about one in four was
between 25 and 34 years old. Only a minority (4 percent) was younger than 24 or older than
55. Most respondents had an education beyond high school (63.9 percent), had partners with
an income and children (72.4 percent), and worked full-time (85 percent). There were about as
many white-collar workers (54.4 percent) as executives (45.6 percent). Work stressors are
demanding aspects of the job with negative consequences for (somatic) health and
(psychological) well-being of individual employees. An over-view of the available literature
provides a long list of the negative outcomes of job insecurity (e.g., De Witte 1999, 2005;
Ferrie 2001; Probst 2008; Sverke and Hellgren 2002).
However, the researcher has selected the first hand data for understanding the practical
scenario, which are the major reason for current concern. Through interpretation of wide
amount data, the evaluation can be effective to understand a critical direction, which should be
recognised from the managerial vision. From this standpoint, the 15000 employees are
appropriate but not adequate to justify the current problem in way that is more realistic.
However, the Researcher has selected proper demographical collecting data on variables such
as gender, age, educational level consideration to get significant response from different kind
of employees such as new and experienced. Through understand their viewpoint the evaluation
can be done in a systematic way. Finally, the socio demographic variables explained much of
variance in well- being possibly because of the strong association between negative affectivity
and well-being.

Q5

Research design

What research design is used for current research? What are the positive and negative side of
the current research design?
 Page |6

The present study aimed at a detailed association of quantitative and qualitative job insecurity
and well-being they were significant after controlling for socio demographics, negative
affectivity and job characteristics. We also analysed a wide range of variables. The negative
side of the research design was that the design is based on cross sectional data which results in
casual interpretation. While causality has been supported in the realm of quantitative job
insecurity research (Dekker and Schaufeli 1995; Ferrie et al. 1998; Hellgren and Sverke 2003).
Research is based on self-reports which may induce Common Method Variance and it can core
on negative relationship between job insecurity and employee attitudes, and particularly
organizational commitment, can be expected. Previous studies have pointed out that under high
levels of uncertainty, employees will be more likely to react in a negative way (Ashford, Lee,
& Bobko, 1989; Davy, Kinicki, & Scheck, 1997; Grunberg, Moore, & Greenberg, 2006)
Conclusion of the study is that job insecurity and loss of job are the features of job, are both
play a vital role in work related stressors. We found that both dimensions of job insecurity,
quantitative and qualitative job insecurity and general well-being are related. While there was
a positive relationship.
 Page |7

References

Ashford, S. J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, cause, and consequences of job insecurity:

a theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management Journal, 32(4), 803-

829.

De Witte, H., De Cuyper, N., Handaja, Y., Sverke, M., Näswall, K., & Hellgren, J. (2010).

Associations between quantitative and qualitative job insecurity and well-being: A test in

Belgian banks. International Studies of Management & Organization, 40(1), 40-56.

doi:10.2753/IMO0020-8825400103

De Witte, H. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the literature and

exploration of some unresolved issues. European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology, 8 (2), 155–177

Goldberg, D. P. (1978) Manual for the general health questionnaire. Windsor: National

Foundation for Educational Research;

Tung-Xiung., W. (1985). Reliability and validity analize of attitude and behavior: theory,

response and meditate. Public Opin Acad J (Taiwan), 29-53.