Kick-off Meeting of the Advisory Group for the OECD Guidelines for Measuring the Quality of Working Environment, OECD HQ, Paris, 8-9 December 2015

1. OECD’S STATISTICAL
WORK ON THE QWE
Hande Inanc (OECD Statistics Directorate)

2. Section 1: Data availability and gaps
–OECD inventory on survey questions on the
Quality of the Working Environment
Section 2: Measuring the Quality of the Working
Environment:
–Combined Job Strain indicator using two
data sources (EmO 2014)
OUTLINE

3. 1. OECD INVENTORY OF
INTERNATIONAL SURVEY
QUESTIONS ON THE QWE

4. OECD members, accession countries
and key members

5. OECD members, accession countries
and key members

6. OECD members, accession countries
and key members

7. 1. concentrate on outcomes (e.g. actual working hours) as
opposed to drivers (e.g. working hour regulations) of job quality
2. focus on individual workers in the sense that all indicators
are defined at the individual level and based on self-reports
3. favour objective features of job quality (job attributes that
can be observed by a third party) in order to ensure better
comparability across countries and over time
• Self reports of workers (not employers, not shadow workers)
Data at on OECD countries and key
partners to meet 3 principles

8. Some examples…
• L’enquête Conditions de Travail of the French Ministry of Labour
• The British Skills and Employment Surveys co-funded by the UK Commission for
Employment and Skills
• Spanish National Working Conditions Survey (ENCT)
• National Working Condition Survey (NEA) in the Netherlands
• Finnish National Work and Health survey (FNWHS) and Quality of Work Life Surveys
• Norwegian Survey of living conditions - Working environment (LKU)
• Danish Work Environment Cohort Study (DWECS)
• Chilean National Survey of Employment, Work and Health and Quality of Life of
Workers (ENETS).
• Mexican National Survey of Occupation and Employment
• Quebec Survey on Working and Employment Conditions
Country specific surveys
While these national surveys cover a wide range of job attributes related to the
working environment, they differ substantially with respect to questions, questionnaire
design, sampling strategy etc.

9. Criteria: Workers’ self report on job characteristics,
minimum 10 countries
• European Working Conditions Survey (EU28+CH, TR, etc)
• European Social Survey (EU 28 + IS, UA, RU etc)
• Eurobarameter Flash module (EU-28)
• EU-LFS Ad Hoc Modules (EU28)
• European Quality of Life Surveys
• International Social Survey Program (European countries + US,
JP, KR, AU, NZ, CA, MX, IS etc.)
• Gallup World Poll (Global)
International surveys with questions on
QWE

10. 10
Number of countries
covered
(all surveys and years
pooled)
Number of surveys
(all years pooled)
Number of years
covered
(all surveys pooled)
Time period covered
(all surveys pooled)
Physical risk factors 70 7 16 1989-2014
Physical demands 51 4 15 1989-2014
Work intensity 115 7 16 1989-2014
Intimidation and discrimination at workplace 70 3 9 1996-2014
Emotional demands and work stress 70 6 13 1989-2014
Subjective job insecurity 90 5 12 1989-2014
Task discretion and autonomy 52 5 12 1989-2014
Training and learning opportunities 51 5 8 1996-2010
Opportunity for career advancement 133 5 9 1989-2010
Opportunity for self-realisation 139 2 8 2005-2013
Organisational participation and workplace voice 133 4 10 1996-2014
Intrinsic rewards 51 5 7 1989-2014
Good managerial practices 124 3 8 2005-2014
Task clarity and performance feedback 98 2 3 1996-2010
Social support and good relationships at work 134 5 12 1989-2014
Work-life balance 52 6 11 1989-2014
Unsocial work schedule 40 4 8 1991-2014
Flexibility of working hours 55 6 10 1989-2014
OECD Inventory of survey questions on
the QWE
Inventory Coverage Summary
Source: Information extracted from the OECD Inventory for the Quality of the Working Environment, as available at
http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=JOBQ. The Inventory consists of OECD’s classifications based on
questionnaire sheets obtained from survey websites

11. 11
• Comprehensiveness
• Comparability
• Timeliness
• Sample size
QWE and data challenges

12. Comprehensiveness:
• For example all seven international surveys reviewed
covered physical risk factors and work intensity but only
two of them (i.e. the EWCS; and the GWP) include
questions on the opportunities for self realisation and on
the quality of management practices.
• Some sub-dimensions only available for European
countries, i.e. physical demands, task discretion and
autonomy, training and learning opportunities at work,
intrinsic rewards of one’s job, work-life balance,
unsociable work hours and flexibility of working.
QWE and data challenges:
Comprehensiveness

13. Comparability:
• Multiple sources for European countries but fewer for
non-OECD countries
• Heterogeneity in terms of data collectors
– national statistical offices (through ad hoc modules of the
EU LFSs);
– Foundations and agencies outside the official statistical
system (i.e., Eurofound through the EWCS and the EQLS),
– academic researchers (ESS and ISSP)
– commercial providers such as Gallup through the GWP.
QWE and data challenges:
Comparability

14. Timeliness:
• Gallup World Survey yearly but not all countries
do the same module, so gaps in coverage
• EWCS, every 5 years
• Special modules of academic surveys (ESS: 2004
& 2010, ISSP: 1989 ,1997, 2005 and 2015)
• LFS AHMs: rotating modules, now every 8 years
QWE and data challenges:
Timeliness

15. Sample size:
• Most international surveys have small sample sizes, even
smaller sample size when selecting working individuals
• The EWCS interviews only individuals who are employed in
the reference week, but in most countries the sample size
is limited to 500 to 1000 respondents.
• While LFSs are the only source based on large sample, most
LFS ad hoc modules focus on one sub-dimension of working
conditions at a time, lacking comprehensiveness.
QWE and data challenges:
Sample size

16. 16
OECD Inventory of survey questions on
the QWE

17. 17
OECD INVENTORY ON THE QUALITY OF WORKING ENVIRONMENT
QUESTION ITEMS ON:
TASK DISCRETION AND AUTONOMY
* Slight change in the question format between years. Refer to the questionnaire for details.
EWCS European Working Conditions Survey
• Are you able to choose or change your order of tasks?
• Are you able to choose or change your methods of work?
• Are you able to choose or change your speed or rate of
work?
• You can influence your working hours
• You have influence over the choice of your working partners
2010 (Q50A)
2005 (q24a),
2000 (q25_1),
1996 (q22a)
1991 (Q13A)
2010 (Q50B)
2005 (q24b),
2000 (q25_2),
1996 (q22B)
2010 (Q50C)
2005 (q24c),
2000 (q25_3),
1996 (q22C)
1991 (Q13b)
2000 (q26_4)
2010 (Q51E)
2005 (q25d)
1-2 (Yes-No)
1-2 (Yes-No)
1-2 (Yes-No)
1-2 (Yes-No)
1-5 (Almost always -
Almost never)
ESS European Social Survey
• How much the management at your work allows you to
decide how daily work is organised?
• How much the management at your work allows you to
choose/change pace of work
2004, 2010
(wkdcorga)
2004, 2010
(wkdcpce)
1-10 (No influence -
Complete influence)
1-10 (No influence -
Complete influence)
ISSP International Social Survey Programme
• Agree or not: I can work independently
• Which of the following statements best describes how your
daily work is organised?* (1) I am free to decide how my daily
work is organised (2) I can decide how my daily work is
organised, within certain limits (3) I am not free to decide how
my daily work is organised.
2005 (V33)
1997 (V14e)
1989 (V16f)
2005 (V42)
1989 (V18)
1-5 (Strongly agree -
Strongly disagree)
[Choose one]
EQLS European Quality of Life Survey
• How much do you agree or disagree: I have a great deal of
influence in deciding how to do my work
2007 (q10_3)
2003 (Q12c)
1-5 (Strongly agree -
Strongly disagree)
Eurobarameter – Flash Euromodule 398
• More specifically, how satisfied are you with the autonomy
you have?
2014 (Q5AB4) 1-4 (Very satisfied - Not at
all satisfied)
OECD Inventory of survey questions on
the QWE

18. 2. MEASURING THE QWE
USING INTERNATIONAL SURVEYS

19. 19
Job Demands-Resources model
Measuring the Quality of Working
Environment – Job Strain
Job strain, as the result of…
… too many job demands … and too few job resources
Time pressure
Work autonomy and learning
opportunities
Physical health risk factors Good workplace relationships
Workplace intimidation Good management practices
OECD Employment Outlook 2014

20. • European Working Conditions Survey (2005)
• International Social Survey Programme (2005)
Commonalities:
• Have 19 countries in common, covering 32 OECD countries
together
• Include questions on the job demands and job resources
Differences:
• EWCS Employed individuals only, ISSP general population
• Different question wording
• Different questionnaire structure
May cause differences in response style
Measuring the QWE using international
surveys

21. If different questions measure an underlying concept properly, the country
rankings from different survey should be high
• Sample: 20-65 years, employees
• Population weights
2 steps:
• Aggregate level summary statistics for relevant questions and correlation
coefficients (retain highly correlated questions)
• Explore different cut-off points that produce highest pairwise correlation
coefficients (both Pierson and Rank correlations)
– For Job Demands: 4 cut-off points in EWCS and 2 cut-off points in ISSP
– For Job Resources: 2 cut-off points in EWCS and 4 cut-off points in ISSP
– Combination of these = 8x8 Job Strain indices
Comparability of the two sources

22. EWCS 2005 questions ISSP 2005 questions
1. Time pressure at work
Long working
hours (d1)
How many hours do you usually work per week in
your main paid job?
How many hours, on average, do you usually
work for pay in a normal week?
Work
pressure (d2)
Does your job involve working at very high speed?
Does your job involve working to tight deadlines?
Do you come home from work exhausted?
Do you find your work stressful?
Working time
inflexibility
(d3)
You can take a break when you wish. How difficult would it be for you to take an hour
or two off during working hours, to take care of
personal or family matters?
Time constrain = 1 if (d1 + d2 + d3) >= 1; 0 otherwise
2. Physical health risk factors
Dangerous
work (d4)
Are you exposed at work to noise so loud that you
would have to raise your voice to talk to people?
Are you exposed at work to vibrations from hand
tools, machinery, etc.?
Are you exposed at work to high temperatures which
make you perspire even when not working
Are you exposed at work to low temperatures
whether indoors or outdoors?
Do you work in dangerous conditions?
Hard physical
work (d5)
Does your job involve carrying or moving heavy
loads?
Does your job involve tiring or painful positions?
Do you have to do hard physical work?
EWCS: Physical health risk factors = 1 if (d4a + d4b + d4c + d4d +d5a +d5b) ≥ 1; 0 otherwise
ISSP: Physical health risk factors = 1 if (d4 + d5) ≥ 1; 0 otherwise.
Identifying survey questions: Job demands

23. Identifying survey questions: Job resources
EWCS 2005 question and coding ISSP 2005 question and coding
1. Work autonomy and learning opportunities
Work
autonomy (r1)
Are you able to choose or change your order of
tasks?
Are you able to choose or change your methods of
work?
Which of the following statements best
describes how your working hours are decided?
Which of the following statements best
describes how your daily work is organised?
Learning
opportunities
(r2)
Generally, does your main paid job involve learning
new things?
Over the past 12 months, have undergone (…):
training paid for or provided by your employer OR
on the job training?
My job gives me a chance to improve my skills
Over the past 12 months, have you had any
training to improve your job skills?
ISSP: Autonomy and learning opportunities = 1 if (r1 + r2) >= 1; 0 otherwise
EWCS: Autonomy and learning opportunities = 1 if (r1 + r2) >= 2; 0 otherwise
2. Workplace relationships
Social
support at
work (r3)
I feel “at home” in this organisation.
I have very good friends at work
In general, how would you describe relations at
your workplace: Between workmates/
colleagues?
EWCS: Good workplace relationships = 1 if (r3) = 1; 0 otherwise.
ISSP: Good workplace relationships = 1 if (r3) = 1; 0 otherwise.

24. Correlation coefficients across countries (n=19)
Comparability of the two sources
Time pressure 0.75***
Work autonomy and learning
opportunities
0.87***
Physical health risk factors 0.79*** Good workplace relationships 0.67***
High job demands (2 demands) 0.79*** Low job resources (0 resources) 0.77***

25. 25
Quality of Working Environment in the OECD
Job strain: one job demands with no job resources, or two
demands with only one job resource or none.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
SWE
NOR
NZL
IRL
FIN
CHE
DNK
AUS
GBR
NLD
CAN
BEL
USA
ISR
MEX
EST
ALL
LUX
AUT
DEU
JPN
ITA
CZE
FRA
SVK
KOR
PRT
HUN
SVN
ESP
POL
GRC
TUR
Combined EWCS and ISSP data EWCS data ISSP data
Correlation between EWCS and ISSP = 0.89
Note: ISSP values rescaled according to EWCS values.

26. Example 1: Emotional demands and work stress
• EWCS 05“You find your job emotionally demanding” 1-5 (Almost
always- Almost never)
• ESS 04“How often do you keep worrying about work problems when you
are not working? 1-5 (Never - Always)
• ISSP 05“ How often do you find your work stressful?” 1-5 (Never -
Always)
EWCS & ISSP: -0.33
ESS & EWCS: -0.26
ESS & ISSP: 0.59
• EWCS 10 “You experience stress in your work” 1-5 (Almost always- Almost
never)
• ESS 10 “How often do you keep worrying about work problems when you
are not working? 1-5 (Never - Always)
EWCS & ESS: -0.38
But it is not always easy to combine
different sources…

27. • There are various data sources on QWE at the national but
differ from each other remarkably
• International surveys are rich in content but there are some
gaps (thematic comprehensiveness, geographical
comparability, timeliness and sample size)
• Cross-country measurement of QWE: It is possible to combine
different data sources, but with limitations
To sum up…