Abstract
Background:
The role of lecturers in research, training, and mentoring of students has long been established. Despite these, there is an increasing migration of lecturers from developing countries to developed countries. Some of the factors responsible for this migration may be related to poor job satisfaction and quality of life (QoL). Hence, this study aimed at assessing the prevalence and factors associated with job satisfaction and QoL among the lecturers in the public university.
Methods:
The study design was a cross-sectional analytical study carried out in 2023 among 392 lecturers selected from two public universities in Enugu state, Nigeria. The tools used for data collection were the Job Satisfaction Index and WHOQOL-BREF.
Results:
Showed that 129 (32.9%) had low job satisfaction; however, many more were dissatisfied with their pay (338; 86.2%). In terms of QoL, this was poor in the physical health (278; 70.9%), psychological (135; 34.4), social relationship (189; 48.2%), and environmental health (332; 84.7%) domains. Most sociodemographic variables were not significantly associated with facets of job satisfaction and QoL. There is a positive relationship between job satisfaction and QoL.
Conclusion/Recommendation:
The prevalence of low job satisfaction and poor QoL among lecturers is high. The most common facets of job satisfaction affecting the lecturers are pay, conditions in the present job, and promotion opportunities, while in the QoL domains, the physical, social relationships, and environmental domains are most prominent. Furthermore, there is a positive association between job satisfaction and QoL. Policy makers should target these factors to improve job satisfaction and QoL.
Keywords: Job satisfaction, lecturers, Nigeria, prevalence, quality of life, university
Résumé
Contexte:
Le rôle des enseignants-chercheurs dans la recherche, la formation et le mentorat des étudiants est établi depuis longtemps. Malgré cela, il y a une migration croissante de conférenciers des pays en développement vers les pays développés. Certains des facteurs responsables de cette migration peuvent être liés à une mauvaise satisfaction au travail et à la qualité de vie (QoL). Par conséquent, cette étude visait à évaluer la prévalence et les facteurs associés à la satisfaction au travail et à la qualité de vie (QoL) parmi les enseignants-chercheurs de l’université publique.
Méthode:
La conception de l’étude était une étude analytique transversale réalisée en 2023 auprès de 392 enseignants sélectionnés dans deux universités publiques de l’État d’Enugu, au Nigeria. Les outils utilisés pour la collecte des données étaient l’Indice de Satisfaction au Travail et le WHOQOL-BREF.Les résultats ont montré que 129 (32,9%) avaient une faible satisfaction au travail; cependant, beaucoup plus étaient insatisfaits de leur salaire (338; 86,2%). En termes de qualité de vie (QoL), celle-ci était médiocre dans les domaines de la santé physique (278; 70,9%), psychologique (135; 34,4%), des relations sociales (189; 48,2%) et de la santé environnementale (332; 84,7%). La plupart des variables sociodémographiques n’étaient pas significativement associées aux facettes de la satisfaction au travail et de la qualité de vie. Il existe une relation positive entre la satisfaction au travail et la qualité de vie.
Conclusion/Recommandation:
La prévalence de la faible satisfaction au travail et de la mauvaise qualité de vie parmi les enseignants est élevée. Les facettes les plus courantes de la satisfaction au travail affectant les enseignants sont le salaire, les conditions de travail actuelles et les opportunités de promotion, tandis que dans les domaines de la qualité de vie, les domaines physique, des relations sociales et environnemental sont les plus marquants. De plus, il existe une association positive entre la satisfaction au travail et la qualité de vie. Les décideurs politiques devraient cibler ces facteurs pour améliorer la satisfaction au travail et la qualité de vie.
Mots-clés: Prévalence, satisfaction au travail, qualité de vie, enseignants, université, Nigéria
INTRODUCTION
Globally, countries depend on a motivated workforce that is satisfied with their jobs. Job satisfaction has been defined as the positive feeling a worker has about his/her job resulting from an evaluation of the job’s characteristics.[1,2] Job satisfaction has been explained by some theories, two of which include the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs[3] and Frederick Herzberg two-factor theory of job satisfaction (also known as the Motivator-hygiene theory).[4]
Job satisfaction is important in all occupations for both the worker’s mental health and as a motivator. Lecturers’ work is very tasking but critical to the development of the human resource of any nation. Some of their major activities include teaching, administrative responsibilities, assessment of students, research activities, mentoring, and counseling activities. They are also required to cope with difficult conditions and challenges in their workplace and in their interpersonal work relations with colleagues, students, and management.[5] A study carried out in Ogun State, Nigeria opined that salary, promotion opportunities and sense of belonging were significant contributors to job satisfaction among lecturers[6] In another study, workplace factors that may affect job satisfaction include workload, level of autonomy,[7] compensation, support from colleagues and administration,[8] and the extent to which they feel their work is valued and meaningful. Lecturers who have the freedom to design their courses, choose their teaching methodologies, and pursue their research interests tend to be more satisfied with their jobs.
Benefits of a satisfied workforce are numerous and include increased motivation. Motivated staff are more likely to have higher productivity.[9,10] When there is job dissatisfaction, workers’ morale will be low, productivity reduces, and staff attrition increases. Other negative effects of job dissatisfaction include lack of loyalty, increased absenteeism, and increase in number of workplace accidents.[11] The level of job satisfaction also significantly affects the perceived quality of life (QoL) of the lecturer.
QoL is an individual’s perception of their position in life, in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live, and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards, and concerns.[12] It is subjective, and perception cannot be equated to health status, life satisfaction, mental state, or well-being. It is different from quality of work life (QWL), because QWL is the existence of a certain set of organizational conditions or practices[13] while QoL goes beyond this to include aspects that may relate to physical health, psychological health, social relationships, and environment.[14] One of the commonest QoL theories is that developed by Maslow. It is based on his theory for development towards happiness and true being.[15] Another theory of QoL L is the integrative theory of the QoL. This explains that QoL is a spectrum ranging from subjective QoL to objective QoL.[16]
A study on factors associated with the various domains of the WHOQOL tool showed that types of job, exercise activity, working schedule, and conflict between work and social life were significantly associated with the physical health domain.[17] In the psychological domain, the associated factors were work schedule, marital status, work demand, and conflict between work and individual life. The factors significantly associated with the social domain were: satisfaction with sex life, personal relationship, and support from friends. However, working demand, working schedule, job satisfaction, marital status, and exercise activity were significantly associated with the environmental health domain.
There is a relationship between job satisfaction and perceived QoL: the higher the level of job satisfaction, the higher the perceived level of QoL and vice versa. Another study among employees also observed that there is a positive correlation between job satisfaction and QoL of employees.[18] Similar findings were obtained in a study on teachers.[19]
Despite the critical role played by the lecturers and increasing migration of these lecturers to other developed countries, there is a paucity of information on job satisfaction and QoL among these professionals. Without this information, it is difficult for policymakers to identify areas that effective intervention will be made to prevent job dissatisfaction and migration of lecturers to other countries. This study was, therefore, aimed at assessing the prevalence and factors associated with job satisfaction and QoL among the lecturers in public universities in Enugu State, Nigeria.
Hypothesis: Null Hypothesis (HO): Job satisfaction is not associated with QoL of lecturers in public universities in Enugu, Nigeria.
Alternate Hypothesis (HA): Job satisfaction is associated with QoL of lecturers in public universities in Enugu, Nigeria.
METHODS
This study was a cross-sectional analytical study conducted between June and November 2023. The study areas are the two main public universities in Enugu State: one is a federal-owned university, whereas the other is a state-owned university. The federal university is one of the oldest universities in Nigeria and has 18 faculties, three campuses, and an academic staff strength of 3123 as at 2023. The state university has 12 faculties, two campuses, and an academic staff strength of 1530 as at 2023. Both universities are located in semi-urban/urban areas of the state, and they train both undergraduate and postgraduate students. There are four privately owned universities also located within the state. Since they are located in the southeastern part of Nigeria, most staff are Igbos and Christians. Most of the lecturers have either their PhD or a fellowship (for the clinical lecturers). Some lecturers work as adjunct lecturers in other universities, and most live off-campus and have to commute to the universities for their activities.
Inclusion criteria
Lecturers who were employed before June 2022
Lecturers who were full-time staff
Lecturers who gave informed consent
Lecturers who were available at the time of study.
Exclusion criteria
Lecturers too sick to participate in the study.
Study instrument
A pretested, self-administered, semi-structured questionnaire that contained three sections: socio-demographic and work-related section; job satisfaction section, and QoL section was used for data collection. The Abridged Job Descriptive Index (JDI) was used for assessment of job satisfaction in this study. It is the most frequently used tool to assess job satisfaction and has been used by several researchers in different occupations and countries, including Nigeria. JDI has the following five facets: satisfaction with coworkers, the work itself, pay, opportunities for promotion, and supervision. Each item in JDI consists of a short response format (“Yes,” “No,” or “?”). The scores given for the responses are 3, 0, and 1, respectively. The interpretation of the scores of the main version is as follows: 18–30 is low job satisfaction, 31–42 is moderate job satisfaction, and 43–54 is high job satisfaction.[20] However, using the abridged version with six items in each facet, the range of scores is 0–18. To interpret these, the final score in each facet was multiplied by 3 to make it comparable to the main version.
WHOQOL-BREF was used to assess the QoL of the lecturers. It is an abridged version of WHOQOL-100 and has four domains: physical health, psychological, social relationships, and environment.[14] These four domains contain a total of 26 questions. To make it broad and comprehensive, one question is selected from each of the 24 facets of the WHOQOL-100, and then one question each from Overall QoL and the General Health facet. Each variable of the WHOQOL-BREF is a five-point Likert scale with responses scored from 1 to 5. The scores are then transformed linearly to a 0-100 scale. Good QoL was determined by scores of 78 and above, whereas scores <78 were regarded as poor QoL.[21]
The sample size was obtained using the formula for estimating the sample size in a prevalence study.[22]
where
z = z statistic for a level of confidence (1.96 for 95% confidence level)
p = Prevalence of job satisfaction among university academic staff in a previous study was = 40%[23]
q = 1–P = 60%.
d = level of precision = 0.05.
The value n = 369
The final sample was rounded up to 400.
Sampling technique and data collection: multistage sampling was used to select the study participants from the two universities:
Stage 1: By stratified sampling, the study areas were divided into faculties (18 for the federal university and 12 for the state university)
Stage 2: Using a simple random method (balloting), five and four faculties were proportionately selected from federal and state universities, respectively
Stage 3: A list of lecturers in selected faculties was obtained from the Dean’s offices, and then by simple random sampling, a proportionate number of lecturers (240 and 160 from the federal and state universities, respectively) were selected to obtain the sample size of 400.
The questionnaires were pretested in a public university in another neighboring state with similar demographic characteristics to Enugu State. The Cronbach alpha obtained for JDI was 0.91, and that of WHOQOL was 0.82. It was semi-structured and was self-administered to the selected lecturers.
Ethical considerations
Ethical permit was obtained from the Institution Review Board on July 12, 2023, reference number UNN/COMHREC/2023/07/001. Each participant signed a written informed consent. The principles of the Declaration of Helsinki were maintained throughout the study. Confidentiality of the data was maintained throughout and after the study.
Data analysis
The data were entered and analyzed in SPSS version 22 (IBM Corporation, Amonk, New York, United States). Frequencies were obtained for the socio-demographic and work-related variables. The prevalence of facets of job satisfaction and QoL domains was derived by obtaining the presence of the variable of interest and dividing it by the total population studied. Chi-square was used to obtain the association between the variables.
RESULTS
Out of a total sample size of 400, 392 lecturers responded to the study, giving a response rate of 98.0%. Table 1 shows sociodemographic and work-related variables of the lecturers. More males, 221 (56.4%), were enrolled in the study, and most (65.1%) were more than 40 years. Most (77.3%) of the respondents were married, and almost all (93.4%) were of the Igbo tribe. The commonest religion practiced was Christianity (98.0%). In terms of educational affiliation, 238 (60.7%) and 134 (39.3%) were of the University of Nigeria and Enugu State University, respectively. The number of years worked as a lecturer in the university ranged from 1 to 34 years. Furthermore, majority 258 (65.8%) had worked for 10 years or less. More of the lecturers (64.5%) work in nonmedical faculties. Apart from their primary places of employment, 107 (27.3%) worked in one or more organizations, such as hospitals or other universities.
Table 1.
Sociodemographic and work-related variables of lecturers (n=392)
| Variables | Frequency (%) |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Male | 221 (56.4) |
| Female | 171 (43.6) |
| Age group (years) | |
| ≤40 | 137 (34.9) |
| >40 | 255 (65.1) |
| Marital status | |
| Single | 73 (18.6) |
| Married | 303 (77.3) |
| Others | 16 (4.1) |
| Tribe | |
| Igbo | 366 (93.4) |
| Others | 26 (6.6) |
| Religion | |
| Christian | 384 (98.0) |
| Others | 8 (2.0) |
| University | |
| Federal | 238 (60.7) |
| State | 154 (39.3) |
| Faculty | |
| Medical | 139 (35.5) |
| Nonmedical | 253 (64.5) |
| Years worked in university | |
| ≤10 | 258 (65.8) |
| >10 | 134 (34.2) |
| Respondents who work elsewhere beside place of primary employment | 107 (27.3) |
In general, 129 (32.9%) had low job satisfaction. In the facets of satisfaction with coworker, present work, pay, opportunity for promotion and level of supervision, 79 (20.2%), 145 (37.0%), 338 (86.2%), 120 (30.6%), and 128 (32.7%), respectively, had low level of job satisfaction [Table 2]. In terms of QoL, the physical health domain 278 (70.9); psychological domain 135 (34.4); social relationships domain 189 (48.2%), and environmental health domain 332 (84.7%) had poor overall QoL [Table 2].
Table 2.
Summary of lecturers’ job satisfaction and World Health Organization quality of life scales
| JDI | Job satisfaction | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Low job satisfaction (18–30), frequency (%) | Moderate to high job satisfaction (31–54), frequency (%) | |
| Job in general | 129 (32.9) | 263 (67.1) |
| Subscales | ||
| Coworker | 79 (20.2) | 313 (79.8) |
| Work in present job | 145 (37.0) | 247 (63.0) |
| Pay | 338 (86.2) | 54 (13.8) |
| Opportunities for promotion | 120 (30.6) | 272 (69.4) |
| Supervision | 128 (32.7) | 264 (67.3) |
|
| ||
| WHO domains | WHOQOL scales in various facets | |
|
| ||
| Poor QoL (score <78) | Good QoL (score ≥78) | |
|
| ||
| Domain 1 (physical health) | 278 (70.9) | 114 (29.1) |
| Domain 2 (psychological health) | 135 (34.4) | 257 (65.6) |
| Domain 3 (social relations) | 189 (48.2) | 203 (51.8) |
| Domain 4 (environmental health) | 332 (84.7) | 60 (15.3) |
JDI=Job descriptive index, WHOQOL=World Health Organization Quality of Life
None of the sociodemographic variables was significantly associated with facets of job satisfaction [Table 3]. However, the type of faculty was significantly associated with satisfaction with the relationship with coworkers (0.009) and workplace salary/payment (P = 0.001). The number of years worked in the university as a lecturer was also significantly associated with satisfaction with the level of supervision (P = 0.036) [Table 3].
Table 3.
Sociodemographic and work-related variables versus job satisfaction in general and facets of coworker, present job, pay, opportunity for progress, and supervision
| Variables | Job in general | Coworker | Present job | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
||||
| Low job satisfaction (18–30) | Moderate to high job satisfaction (31–54) | Low job satisfaction (18–30) | Moderate to high job satisfaction (31–54) | Low job satisfaction (18–30) | Moderate to high job satisfaction (31–54) | |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 69 (31.2) | 152 (68.8) | 44 (19.9) | 177 (80.1) | 77 (34.8) | 144 (65.2) |
| Female | 60 (35.1) | 111 (64.9) | 35 (20.5) | 136 (79.5) | 68 (39.8) | 103 (60.2) |
| χ2=0.653; P=0.419 | χ2=0.019; P=0.891 | χ2=1.003; P=0.317 | ||||
| Age group (years): | ||||||
| ≤40 | 44 (32.1) | 93 (67.9) | 24 (17.5) | 113 (82.5) | 57 (41.6) | 80 (58.4) |
| >40 | 85 (33.3) | 170 (69.7) | 55 (21.6) | 200 (78.4) | 88 (34.5) | 167 (65.5) |
| χ2=0.60; P=0.807 | χ2=0.909; P=0.340 | χ2=1.925; P=0.165 | ||||
| Marital status | ||||||
| Single | 16 (21.9) | 57 (78.1) | 15 (20.5) | 58 (79.5) | 24 (32.9) | 49 (67.1) |
| Married | 109 (40.0) | 194 (60.0) | 62 (20.5) | 241 (79.5) | 115 (38.0) | 188 (62.0) |
| Others | 4 (25.0) | 12 (75.0) | 2 (12.5) | 14 (87.5) | 6 (32.5) | 10 (67.5) |
| χ2=5.736; P=0.057 | χ2=0.607; P=<0.738 | χ2=0.652; P=0.722 | ||||
| Faculty | ||||||
| Medical | 48 (34.5) | 91 (65.5) | 38 (28.7) | 101 (71.3) | 48 (34.5) | 91 (65.5) |
| Nonmedical | 81 (32.0) | 172 (68.0) | 41 (16.2) | 212 (83.8) | 97 (38.3) | 156 (61.7) |
| χ2=0.257; P=0.0.612 | χ2=6.909; P=0.0.009* | χ2=0.558; P=0.4555 | ||||
| Years worked in university | ||||||
| ≤10 | 80 (31.0) | 178 (69.0) | 55 (21.3) | 203 (79.7) | 101 (39.1) | 157 (60.9) |
| >10 | 49 (36.6) | 85 (63.4) | 28 (20.9) | 106 (79.1) | 44 (32.8) | 90 (67.2) |
| χ2=1.235; P=0.267 | χ2=0.009; P=0.923 | χ2=1.507; P=0.220 | ||||
| Work more than one job | ||||||
| Yes | 30 (28.0) | 77 (72.0) | 25 (23.4) | 82 (76.6) | 37 (34.6) | 70 (65.4) |
| No | 99 (34.7) | 186 (65.3) | 54 (18.9) | 231 (81.1) | 108 (37.9) | 177 (62.1) |
| χ2=1.581; P=0.209 | χ2=0.943; P=0.331 | χ2=0.367; P=0.545 | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Pay | Opportunity for Progress | Supervision | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 195 (88.2) | 26 (11.8) | 69 (31.2) | 152 (68.8) | 74 (33.5) | 147 (66.5) |
| Female | 143 (83.6) | 28 (16.4) | 51 (29.8) | 120 (70.2) | 54 (31.6) | 117 (68.4) |
| χ2=1.725; P=0.189 | χ2=0.089; P=0.766 | χ2=0.159; P=0.690 | ||||
| Age group (years) | ||||||
| ≤40 | 122 (89.1) | 15 (10.9) | 34 (24.8) | 103 (75.2) | 39 (28.5) | 98 (71.5) |
| >40 | 216 (84.7) | 39 (15.3) | 86 (33.7) | 169 (66.3) | 89 (34.9) | 166 (65.1) |
| χ2=1.417; P=0.234 | χ2=3.329; P=0.068 | χ2=1.678; P=0.195 | ||||
| Marital status | ||||||
| Single | 56 (76.7) | 17 (23.3) | 21 (28.8) | 52 (71.2) | 21 (28.8) | 52 (71.2) |
| Married | 267 (88.1) | 36 (11.9) | 96 (31.7) | 207 (68.3) | 103 (34.0) | 200 (66.0) |
| Others | 15 (93.8) | 1 (6.2) | 3 (18.8) | 13 (81.2) | 4 (25.0) | 12 (75.0) |
| χ2=7.239; P=0.027 | χ2=1.341; P=0.512 | χ2=1.175; P=0.556 | ||||
| Faculty | ||||||
| Medical | 104 (74.8) | 35 (25.2) | 48 (34.0) | 93 (66.0) | 48 (34.5) | 91 (65.5) |
| Nonmedical | 234 (92.5) | 19 (7.5) | 74 (29.2) | 179 (70.8) | 80 (31.6) | 173 (68.4) |
| χ2=23.582; P<0.001* | χ2=0.973; P=0.324 | χ2=0.346; P=0.556 | ||||
| Years worked in university | ||||||
| ≤10 | 223 (86.4) | 35 (13.6) | 75 (29.1) | 183 (70.1) | 75 (29.1) | 183 (70.9) |
| >10 | 115 (85.8) | 19 (14.2) | 45 (33.6) | 89 (66.4) | 53 (39.6) | 81 (60.4) |
| χ2=0.028; P=0.867 | χ2=0.845; P=0.358 | χ2=4.406; P=0.036* | ||||
| Work more than one job | ||||||
| Yes | 88 (82.2) | 19 (17.8) | 38 (35.5) | 69 (64.5) | 38 (35.5) | 69 (64.5) |
| No | 250 (87.7) | 35 (12.3) | 82 (28.8) | 203 (71.2) | 90 (31.6) | 195 (68.4) |
| χ2=1.964; P=0.161 | χ2=1.661; P=0.197 | χ2=0.547; P=0.459 | ||||
*Significant
In Table 4, mixed results were obtained when each domain of QOL was cross-tabulated with sociodemographic variables. Most of the sociodemographic variables did not show any significant relationship in the various domains of QoL. However, for marital status, those who are divorced/widowed had significantly poor QoL in the environmental health domain (P = 0.048). Compared to the medical faculties, those in the nonmedical faculties had significantly poor QoL in the environmental health domain (P < 0.001).
Table 4.
Sociodemographic and work-related variables versus the four domains of quality of life
| Variables | The four domains of QOL | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| Physical health | Psychological health | Social health | Environmental health | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Poor QoL | Good QoL | Poor QoL | Good QoL | Poor QoL | Good QoL | Poor QoL | Good QoL | |
| Gender | ||||||||
| Male | 209 (94.6) | 12 (5.4) | 174 (78.7) | 47 (21.3) | 110 (49.8) | 111 (50.2) | 190 (86.0) | 31 (14.0) |
| Female | 165 (96.5) | 6 (3.5) | 131 (76.6) | 40 (23.4) | 79 (46.2) | 92 (53.8) | 142 (83.0) | 29 (17.0) |
| χ2=0.812; P=0.367 | χ2=0.252; P=0.616 | χ2=0.494; P=0.482 | χ2=0.639; P=0.424 | |||||
| Age group (years) | ||||||||
| ≤40 | 128 (93.4) | 9 (6.6) | 102 (74.5) | 35 (25.5) | 57 (41.6) | 80 (58.4) | 118 (86.1) | 19 (13.9) |
| >40 | 246 (96.5) | 9 (3.5) | 203 (79.6) | 52 (20.4) | 132 (51.8) | 123 (48.2) | 214 (83.9) | 41 (16.1) |
| χ2=1.880; P=0.170 | χ2=1.372; P=9.342 | χ2=3.684; P=0.055 | χ2=0.336; P=0.562 | |||||
| Marital status | ||||||||
| Single | 70 (95.9) | 3 (4.1) | 51 (69.9) | 22 (30.1) | 33 (45.2) | 40 (54.8) | 55 (75.3) | 18 (24.7) |
| Married | 288 (95.0) | 15 (5.0) | 240 (79.2) | 63 (20.8) | 144 (47.5) | 159 (52.5) | 263 (86.8) | 40 (13.2) |
| Divorced/widow | 16 (100.0) | 0 | 14 (87.5) | 2 (12.5) | 12 (75.0) | 4 (25) | 14 (87.5) | 2 (12.5) |
| χ2=0.898; P=0.638 | χ2=3.883; P=0.144 | χ2=4.920; P=0.085 | χ2=6.057; P=0.048* | |||||
| Faculty | ||||||||
| Medical | 136 (97.8) | 3 (2.2) | 108 (77.7) | 31 (22.3) | 73 (52.5) | 66 (47.5) | 105 (75.5) | 34 (24.5) |
| Nonmedical | 238 (94.1) | 15 (5.9) | 197 (77.7) | 56 (22.3) | 116 (45.8) | 137 (54.2) | 227 (89.7) | 26 (10.3) |
| χ2=2.911; P=0.088 | χ2=0.002; P=0.969 | χ2=1.597; P=0.206 | χ2=13.922; P=<0.001* | |||||
| Years worked in the university | ||||||||
| 1–17 | 325 (95.6) | 15 (4.4) | 263 (77.4) | 77 (22.6) | 167 (92.8) | 173 (7.2) | 289 (85.0) | 51 (15.0) |
| 18–34 | 49 (94.2) | 3 (5.8) | 42 (80.8) | 10 (19.2) | 22 (42.3) | 30 (57.7) | 43 (82.7) | 9 (17.3) |
| χ2=0.190; P=0.663 | χ2=0.305; P=0.581 | χ2=0.838; P=0.360) | χ2=0.185; P=0.667 | |||||
| Working elsewhere besides present employment | ||||||||
| Yes | 105 (98.1) | 2 (1.9) | 87 (81.3) | 20 (18.7) | 53 (49.5) | 54 (50.5) | 86 (80.4) | 21 (19.6) |
| No | 269 (94.4) | 16 (5.6) | 218 (76.5) | 67 (23.5) | 136 (47.7) | 149 (52.3) | 246 (86.3) | 39 (13.7) |
| χ2=2.490; P=0.115) | χ2=1.045; P=0.307) | χ2=0.103; P=0.749) | χ2=2.119; P=0.146) | |||||
*Significant. QoL=Quality of life
In the relationship between Job satisfaction and QoL, most of the facets of job satisfaction showed a significant association with psychological health, social relationship, and environmental health domains of QoL. However, almost all the facets of job satisfaction, except the present job facet, did not show any significant association with the physical domain of QoL [Table 5].
Table 5.
Bivariate analysis showing relationship between facets of job satisfaction and domains of quality of life
| Facets of job satisfaction | The four domains of QOL | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| Physical health | Psychological health | Social health | Environmental health | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Poor QOL | Good QOL | Poor QOL | Good QOL | Poor QOL | Good QOL | Poor QOL | Good QOL | |
| Job in general | ||||||||
| Low | 126 (97.7) | 3 (2.7) | 111 (86.0) | 18 (14.0) | 81 (62.8) | 48 (37.2) | 124 (96.1) | 5 (3.9) |
| Moderate | 108 (95.6) | 5 (4.4) | 96 (85.0) | 17 (15.0) | 61 (54.0) | 52 (46.0) | 102 (90.3) | 11 (9.7) |
| High | 140 (93.3) | 10 (6.7) | 98 (65.3) | 52 (34.7) | 47 (31.3) | 103 (68.7) | 106 (70.7) | 44 (29.3) |
| χ2=2.993; P=0.224 | χ2=21.931; P=<0.001* | χ2=29.603; P=<0.001* | χ2=38.475; P=<0.001* | |||||
| Coworker | ||||||||
| Low | 77 (97.5) | 2 (2.5) | 66 (83.5) | 13 (16.5) | 49 (62.0) | 30 (38.0) | 73 (92.4) | 6 (7.6) |
| Moderate | 87 (93.5) | 6 (6.5) | 77 (82.8) | 16 (17.2) | 56 (60.2) | 37 (39.8) | 85 (91.4) | 8 (8.6) |
| High | 219 (95.6) | 10 (4.4) | 162 (73.6) | 58 (26.4) | 84 (38.2) | 136 (61.8) | 174 (79.1) | 46 (20.9) |
| χ2=1.549; P=0.461 | χ2=5.062; P=0.080 | χ2=20.268; P=<0.001* | χ2=12.176; P=0.002* | |||||
| Present Job | ||||||||
| Low | 143 (98.6) | 2 (1.4) | 131 (90.3) | 14 (9.7) | 91 (62.8) | 54 (37.2) | 140 (96.6) | 5 (3.4) |
| Moderate | 85 (95.5) | 4 (4.5) | 74 (83.1) | 15 (16.9) | 47 (52.8) | 42 (47.2) | 81 (91.0) | 8 (9.0) |
| High | 146 (92.4) | 12 (7.6) | 100 (63.3) | 58 (36.7) | 51 (32.3) | 107 (67.7) | 8 (14.5) | 47 (85.5) |
| χ2=6.670; P=0.036* | χ2=33.948; P=<0.001* | χ2=29.108; P=<0.001* | χ2=173.840; P=<0.001* | |||||
| Pay | ||||||||
| Low | 320 (94.7) | 18 (5.3) | 275 (81.4) | 63 (18.6) | 175 (51.8) | 163 (48.2) | 309 (91.4) | 29 (8.6) |
| Moderate | 19 (100.0) | 0 | 14 (73.7) | 5 (26.3) | 8 (42.1) | 11 (57.9) | 13 (68.4) | 6 (31.6) |
| High | 35 (100.0) | 0 | 16 (45.7) | 19 (54.3) | 6 (17.1) | 29 (82.9) | 10 (28.6) | 25 (71.4) |
| χ2=3.014; P=0.222 | χ2=23.535; P=<0.001* | χ2=15.534; P=<0.001* | χ2=100.718; P=<0.001* | |||||
| Opportunities | ||||||||
| Low | 117 (97.5) | 3 (2.5) | 108 (90.0) | 12 (10.0) | 72 (60.0) | 48 (40.0) | 113 (51.4) | 7 (48.6) |
| Moderate | 96 (91.4) | 9 (8.6) | 77 (73.3) | 28 (26.7) | 50 (47.6) | 55 (52.4) | 93 (88.6) | 12 (11.4) |
| High | 161 (96.4) | 6 (3.6) | 120 (71.9) | 47 (28.1) | 67 (40.1) | 100 (59.1) | 126 (75.4) | 41 (24.6) |
| χ2=5.375; P=0.068 | χ2=14.973; P=<0.001* | χ2=11.073; P=0.004* | χ2=20.534; P=<0.001* | |||||
| Supervision | ||||||||
| Low | 122 (95.3) | 6 (4.7) | 112 (87.5) | 16 (12.5) | 75 (58.6) | 53 (41.4) | 120 (93.8) | 8 (6.2) |
| Moderate | 83 (95.4) | 4 (4.6) | 70 (80.5) | 17 (19.5) | 50 (57.5) | 37 (42.5) | 77 (88.5) | 10 (11.5) |
| High | 169 (95.5) | 8 (4.5) | 123 (69.5) | 54 (30.5) | 64 (36.2) | 113 (63.8) | 135 (43.3) | 177 (56.7) |
| χ2=0.005; P=0.998 | χ2=16.648; P=<0.001* | χ2=18.813; P=<0.001* | χ2=128.308; P=<0.001* | |||||
*Significant. QoL=Quality of life
DISCUSSION
The present study was carried out to assess job satisfaction and QoL among lecturers in public universities in Enugu State, Nigeria. As part of the assessment, the sociodemographic and work-related factors were obtained. Relationships between these sociodemographic and work-related factors versus job satisfaction and QoL were also identified. Finally, the relationship between job satisfaction and QoL was addressed.
The study observed that most of the respondents were males, married, and above 40 years of age. Nigerian record of staff distribution showed that in 2018/2019, there were more male staff (51,671) compared to females (16,009).[24] Similar to the present study, most previous studies done among lecturers in other countries had shown that there were more male than female lecturers in universities.[25] Hence, it may not be surprising that there is a higher probability of selecting more males in a study among lecturers.
A high proportion of lecturers were observed to have low job satisfaction. Many other studies have similarly shown low job satisfaction among lecturers.[26,27,28] One of these studies[28] observed that 72% of the lecturers were not satisfied with their current job. Such low job satisfaction leads to low morale, increased absenteeism and presenteeism, high labor turnover, and poor service delivery. Furthermore, commitment to teaching reduces leading to poor quality of students trained. Another study also opined that job satisfaction may influence the QoL, even apart from the workplace.[19] These may be the reasons for the high level of migration of lecturers from Nigeria and other developing countries to developed countries, leading to brain drain. A similar study observed that low job satisfaction from poor salary, an unconducive working environment, poor staff development, inadequate infrastructural facilities, frequent strike actions, a high level of insecurity, and inadequate funding of universities are the main causes of the increase in brain drain in developing countries.[29] Brain drain could result in the following: poor quality of education, high student–teacher ratio, shortage of experienced academic staff, poor research development, and poor program development.[30]
Present findings also revealed a good proportion of the lecturers had poor QoL, especially in the physical and environmental health domains. In another study carried out in private universities in North Central Nigeria, most lecturers (81.6%) were satisfied with their QWL.[31] This difference in result may be because the study in North Central Nigeria used QWL and not QoL data collecting tool. Furthermore, the study in North Central Nigeria was done using a convenience sampling technique and was in private universities, unlike the present study, that was carried out using a probability method in public universities.
Most of the sociodemographic factors were not significantly associated with any of the facets of job satisfaction. However, the type of faculty, i.e., medical and nonmedical, was significantly associated with relationship with coworkers and the pay/salary; whereas the number of years worked as academic staff was significantly associated with satisfaction with the level of supervision. The significantly higher proportions of nonmedical staff who were satisfied with relationship with coworkers may be due to more social interactions among coworkers in non-medical faculties, when compared to those in the medical faculties. Empirical evidence shows that medical staff have little or no time to interact with colleagues; and despite being university staff, most of them also consult in the allied teaching hospital as honorary consultants. In terms of payment, though generally most of the staff are dissatisfied, the proportion who had moderate to high satisfaction with their pay was significantly more among the medical staff. This may be because most of the medical staff receive payment from more than one source (university and hospital) as compared to the nonmedical staff who are only paid by the university. Previous studies have not highlighted any such difference between the medical and nonmedical faculties. Care should, however, be taken in interpreting this finding because many other factors, such as higher perceived pay for the medical staff in developed countries, have increased the likelihood of these staff migrating to greener pastures.
In terms of the number of years worked as lecturers, the staff who had worked for <10 years were significantly more satisfied with their level of supervision. This may be because more attention is given to them since they are relatively new in the faculty and require assistance. However, another study done among secondary school teachers observed the opposite, i.e., years of teaching experience was positively associated with job satisfaction.[32]
With respect to QoL among lecturers, we did not observe any significant relationship between most socio-demographic variables and perceived QoL. However, a significant association was observed between marital status and the environmental health domain of QoL. A similar finding was also observed between the type of faculty and the environmental health domain. Another study observed that female lecturers had a lower perception of their QoL in the physical health, psychological, and social relationships domains when compared to male lecturers.[33] The implication of the findings in this study is that, besides pay, considerations of socio-demographic factors may not affect job satisfaction and QoL among lecturers.
Our study also observed that most facets of job satisfaction were positively associated with the domains of QoL. Similar observations were made in another study on the relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. A study on teachers observed that job satisfaction had a strong positive correlation with life satisfaction.[19] It, therefore, implies that by improving job satisfaction, one is also improving the perceived QoL of the lecturers.
Study limitations
Only a self-reporting method was used to collect data. This is subjective and difficult to verify. Efforts were made to counsel the respondents on the need to be as truthful as possible
Only public universities were studied. Findings should therefore not be generalized to the private universities. In Nigeria, however, the majority of lecturers are in public universities
Being a cross-sectional study, cause–effect relationship between job satisfaction and QoL cannot be established. A prospective study will be necessary to identify cause–effect relationship.
CONCLUSION
Many lecturers had low job satisfaction and perceived low QoL. Most of the sociodemographic variables were not associated with job satisfaction. In the facets of job satisfaction, the type of faculty was significantly associated with coworker relationship and pay, whereas those who had worked for more than 10 years were less satisfied with the level of supervision. In terms of QoL, marital status and type of faculty were significantly associated with the environmental health domain of QoL. In most facets of job satisfaction, an increase in satisfaction showed an increase in QoL. It, therefore, means that the HO, which states that Job satisfaction is not associated with QoL of lecturers in a public university in Enugu, Nigeria, is rejected.
Recommendation
For job retention among lecturers, policymakers should aim at improving the pay and coworker relationship. Efforts should also be made to improve the other facets of job satisfaction, like the nature of the present work done by the lecturer and staff promotion.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
Nil.
REFERENCES
- 1.Eva E, Ekwochi EA, Ugwu F. Job satisfaction and implication for employee's performance in Nigerian public sector. IDOSR J Arts Humanit. 2017;2:46–57. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Thro PD, Prasain GP. Job satisfaction among the college and higher secondary school teachers in Senapati, Manipur. Int J Manage. 2021;12:624–31. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Trivedi AJ, Mehta A. Maslow's hierarchy of needs –Theory of human motivation. [[Last accessed on 2025 Mar 22]];IJRSML. 2019 7:38–41. Available from: https://kalyan-city.blogspot.com/2010/06/maslow-hierarchy-of-needs-theory-of.html . [Google Scholar]
- 4.Alrawahi S, Sellgren SF, Altouby S, Alwahaibi N, Brommels M. The application of Herzberg's two-factor theory of motivation to job satisfaction in clinical laboratories in Omani hospitals. Heliyon. 2020;6:e04829. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04829. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Galanakis M, Alexandri E, Kika K, Lelekanou X, Papantonopoulou M, Stougiannou D, et al. What is the source of occupational stress and burnout? Psychology. 2020;11:647–62. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ogundipe MA, Osawe DE, Oshinyadi PO. Correlates of job satisfaction among lecturers in public universities in Ogun State. J Educ Plann Adm. 2016;1:56–68. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Zychova K, Fejfarova M, Jindrova A. Job autonomy as a driver of job satisfaction. [[Last accessed on 2024 Nov 26]];Cent Eur Bus Rev. 2024 13:1–23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.347 . [Google Scholar]
- 8.Adriyanto AT. Enhancing job satisfaction through colleague support and communication. Adv Eng Res. 2020;201:222–8. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Inayat W, Jahanzeb KM. A study of job satisfaction and its effect on the performance of employees working in private sector organizations, Peshawar. [[Last accessed on 2024 Mar 21]];Educ Res Int. 2021 1:1–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1751495 . [Google Scholar]
- 10.Okolocha CB, Akam GU, Uchehara FO. Effect of job satisfaction on job performance of university lecturers in South-East, Nigeria. IJMSSSR. 2021;3:119–37. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Aziri B. Job satisfaction, a literature review. Manage Res Pract. 2011;3:77–86. [Google Scholar]
- 12.WHO. WHOQOL: Measuring Quality of Life. 2024. [[Last accessed on 2024 Mar 20]]. Available from: https://www.who.int/tools/whoqol/whoqol-bref .
- 13.Mohammed S, Vasantha KS. A study on quality of work life at Anheuser Busch beverages. Int J Res Appl Sci Eng Technol. 2019;7:526–42. [Google Scholar]
- 14.WHO. Programme on Mental Health. WHOQOL User Manual. 2012. [[Last accessed on 2023 Aug 27]]. Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/77932/WHO_HIS_HSI_Rev.201203_eng.pdf?sequence=1 .
- 15.Alborz A. The nature of quality of life: A conceptual model to inform assessment. J Policy Pract Intellect Disabil. 2017;14:15–30. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Barlybaev AA, Barlybaev AA, Ishnazarova ZM, Ishnazarov D, Sitnova I. Measuring quality of life: An integrative approach. E3S Web Conf. 2020;208:03062. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Taghavi SM, Mokarami H, Nazifi M, Choobineh A, Marioryad H, Kujerdi MF. The influence of socio-demographic health and work-related factors on health-related quality of life among Iranian industrial workers. Health. 2014;6:2250–60. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Gupta S, Garg M, Ahuja K. Quality of life as predicted by job satisfaction among employees. Indian J Ment Health. 2022;9:53–7. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Aydintan B, Koc H. The relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction: An empirical study on teachers. Int J Bus Soc Sci. 2016;7:72–80. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Sulaiman WS, Zainal AH, Shafie MA. Analysis of the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) using convergent and discriminant validity. J Psikol Malays. 2010;24:137–49. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Akinyemi OO, Owoaje ET, Popoola OA, Ilesanmi OS. Quality of life and associated factors among adults in a community in South west Nigeria. Ann Ib Postgrad Med. 2012;10:34–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Pourhoseingholi MA, Vahedi M, Rahimzadeh M. Sample size calculation in medical studies. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2013;6:14–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Raduan NJ, Mohamed S, Hashim NA, Nikmat AW, Shuib N, Ali NF. Psychological distress, burnout and job satisfaction among academicians in science and technology faculties in a Malaysian University. ASEAN J Psychiatry. 2022;23:1–8. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Statista. Number of Academic and Non-Academic Personnel in Nigerian Universities in the Academic Year 2018/2019, by Gender. Statista Research Department. 2022. [[Last accessed on 2022 Feb 06]]. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261098/staff-of-nigerian-universities-by-gender/#:~: text=In%20the%20academic%20year%202018,about%2065%20thousand%20in%20total .
- 25.Liu X, Dunlop R, Allavena R, Palmieri C. Women representation and gender equality in different academic levels in veterinary science. Vet Sci. 2021;8:159. doi: 10.3390/vetsci8080159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Aguwa EN, Shu EN, Conable JE. Burnout and job satisfaction among lecturers in public universities in Enugu State, Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract. 2024;27:654–63. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_87_24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Nevins-Bennett C, Turks C. Level of job satisfaction among college lecturers: A look at the association between demographic characteristics, intrinsic, and extrinsic job satisfaction. Int J Educ Res. 2023;11:32–54. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Tichawona E, Kufar T. Determinants of job satisfaction among academic professionals of tertiary institutions in Zimbabwe. Ann Bus Finance Manage. 2016;4:31–40. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Ogunde NJ, Ishaya SA. Effects of brain-drain on higher institutions’ administration in Nigeria. [[Last accessed on 2024 Dec 08]];Pindus J Cult Lit ELT. 2021 8:33–41. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373215941 . [Google Scholar]
- 30.Mallo GD, Eseyin AB, Buba S. Review of the effect of brain drain on tertiary education in Nigeria. Int J Educ Natl Dev. 2023;1:1–10. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Rasak B, Oyekola I, Asamu F, Ben-Caleb E. Quality of Work Life (QWL) of academic staff in private universities in North Central Nigeria. [[Last accessed on 2024 Dec 19]];Int J Civil Eng Technol. 2019 10:177–86. Available from: https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=10&Issue=3 . [Google Scholar]
- 32.Wakkal GT, Danjuma M, Karima B. Relationship between years of teaching experience and job satisfaction among secondary school teachers in Danko-Wasagu local government, Kebbi State, Nigeria. Int J Educ Eval. 2022;8:7–18. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Alves PC, Oliveira AF, Paro HB. Quality of life and burnout among faculty members: How much does the field of knowledge matter? PLoS One. 2019;14:e0214217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]