Social Responsibility in a University Hospital: An Application …
631
phenomenon, he emphasizes that the causal factors can be classified into two major
groups: (a) events and conditions of work (work itself, payment, promotion, recognition, working conditions, workplace) and (b) labor agents (colleagues and subordinates, supervisors, company/organization), pointing out that the causal factors must
be analyzed in their interrelationships. The author also states that job satisfaction can
have consequences for both the individual and the organization, affecting behavioral
aspects and the physical and mental health of the worker.
Some of these consequences can be seen in the works of Bauk (1985), O’Driscoll
and Beehr (2000), Wright and Cropanzano (2000), and Rahman and Sem (1987). For
Bauk (1985), factors that contribute to the increase in stress and job dissatisfaction
are the lack of knowledge about opportunities for progress and promotion at work
and the excessive workload.
According to O’Driscoll and Beehr (2000), the causes of job dissatisfaction are
related to factors such as job stability, salary, and benefits, social relationship at
work, relationship with the boss, physical and mental workload, perspective of career,
physical work environment, work routine (variety/monotony), challenges at work,
autonomy and opportunity for professional development.
The study of Wright and Cropanzano (2000) shows that good social relationships
in the workplace and the boss had a statistically significant association with job
satisfaction. The authors Rahman and Sem (1987) address the issue of absenteeism
and state that absenteeism is lower among those who have greater job satisfaction.
According to the above, the factors involved in job satisfaction are diverse,
deserving more studies so that alternatives and solutions can be created. According
to Martinez (2002), one should not ignore individual differences and perceptions as
they determine job satisfaction and are inserted in a historical and cultural context,
which have values and opportunities. There is, therefore, not a single determining
factor for satisfaction; these factors depend on the environment and working conditions, as well as the personal assessment of the worker but identifying them is crucial
for effective job satisfaction improvement programs.
6 Method
6.1 Methodological Procedures
This is an applied macroergonomics research, using Macroergonomic Work Analysis
[MA], which consists of five phases: Phase 0—Launch of the project (explanation
to the workers of the project’s objective, phases, methods and techniques that will be
used); Phase 1—Macroergonomic Appreciation, which is an exploratory phase that
comprises the initial mapping of the company’s macroergonomic problems; Phase
2—Macroergonomic Analysis or Diagnosis (deepening and prioritizing the problems raised in the assessment), consists of mapping the Ergonomic Demand Items
[EDI’s]); Phase 3—Macroergonomic Design; Phase 4—Evaluation or Validation
631
phenomenon, he emphasizes that the causal factors can be classified into two major
groups: (a) events and conditions of work (work itself, payment, promotion, recognition, working conditions, workplace) and (b) labor agents (colleagues and subordinates, supervisors, company/organization), pointing out that the causal factors must
be analyzed in their interrelationships. The author also states that job satisfaction can
have consequences for both the individual and the organization, affecting behavioral
aspects and the physical and mental health of the worker.
Some of these consequences can be seen in the works of Bauk (1985), O’Driscoll
and Beehr (2000), Wright and Cropanzano (2000), and Rahman and Sem (1987). For
Bauk (1985), factors that contribute to the increase in stress and job dissatisfaction
are the lack of knowledge about opportunities for progress and promotion at work
and the excessive workload.
According to O’Driscoll and Beehr (2000), the causes of job dissatisfaction are
related to factors such as job stability, salary, and benefits, social relationship at
work, relationship with the boss, physical and mental workload, perspective of career,
physical work environment, work routine (variety/monotony), challenges at work,
autonomy and opportunity for professional development.
The study of Wright and Cropanzano (2000) shows that good social relationships
in the workplace and the boss had a statistically significant association with job
satisfaction. The authors Rahman and Sem (1987) address the issue of absenteeism
and state that absenteeism is lower among those who have greater job satisfaction.
According to the above, the factors involved in job satisfaction are diverse,
deserving more studies so that alternatives and solutions can be created. According
to Martinez (2002), one should not ignore individual differences and perceptions as
they determine job satisfaction and are inserted in a historical and cultural context,
which have values and opportunities. There is, therefore, not a single determining
factor for satisfaction; these factors depend on the environment and working conditions, as well as the personal assessment of the worker but identifying them is crucial
for effective job satisfaction improvement programs.
6 Method
6.1 Methodological Procedures
This is an applied macroergonomics research, using Macroergonomic Work Analysis
[MA], which consists of five phases: Phase 0—Launch of the project (explanation
to the workers of the project’s objective, phases, methods and techniques that will be
used); Phase 1—Macroergonomic Appreciation, which is an exploratory phase that
comprises the initial mapping of the company’s macroergonomic problems; Phase
2—Macroergonomic Analysis or Diagnosis (deepening and prioritizing the problems raised in the assessment), consists of mapping the Ergonomic Demand Items
[EDI’s]); Phase 3—Macroergonomic Design; Phase 4—Evaluation or Validation