Revista Venezolana de Gerencia (RVG)
Año 28 No. Especial 9, 2023, 68-84
ENERO-JUNIO
ISSN 1315-9984 / e-ISSN 2477-9423
Cómo citar: Parrales Poveda, M. L., Rodríguez Gutiérrez, K. G., Sornoza Parrales, D. R., y Fienco Parrales, M. J. (2023). Working environment. Considerations for a Higher Education Institution. Revista Venezolana De Gerencia, 28(No. Especial 9), 68-84. https://doi.org/10.52080/rvgluz.28.e9.5
Working environment. Considerations for a Higher Education Institution
Parrales Poveda, María Leonor*
Rodríguez Gutiérrez, Kelly Gabriela**
Sornoza Parrales, Diego Renato***
Fienco Parrales, María José****
Abstract
Teachers’ work is influenced by their perception of their work environment, projecting this into the quality of education and product delivered to society. Therefore, this study analyzes how the work environment manifests itself in a Higher Education Institution, considering affiliation, commitment, communication, motivation, recognition, and other factors that affect the performance of a university teacher. The results show that teachers’ perceptions of their work environment are internally differentiated, with factors such as commitment, internal communication, recognition, empathy, physical integrity at work, remuneration, joint participation between work teams, and authority having negative connotations. A suggestion for improvement is executing plans designed to generate an effective organizational change in the detected weaknesses.
Keywords: organizational culture; organizational performance; teacher; university.
Recibido: 21.11.22 Aceptado: 14.03.23
* Doctor in Pedagogical Sciences, Master in Business Administration, Economist. Research professor at the Faculty of Administrative and Economic Sciences, Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí. (Jipijapa, Ecuador). Email: maria.parrales@unesum.edu.ec. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3994-3711 (Autor de correspondencia)
** Bachelor of Business Administration, Master of Digital Marketing and Big Data, Universidad Internacional Iberoamericana. México. Email: Kelly-rodriguez98@hotmail.com. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1637-9866
*** PhD. candidate at Western University, Canadá. Master in Administration of Information Technologies, Economist, Professor of the Faculty of Technical Sciences, Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí. (Jipijapa – Manabí, Ecuador). Email: diego.sornoza@unesum.edu.ec. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9319-9298
**** General practitioner, Master in Occupational Risk Prevention, Universidad Internacional de la Rioja. (Logroño- La Rioja, España). Email: majo_13@hotmail.com. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7167-3913
Clima Laboral. Factores a considerar en una Institución de Educación Superior
Resumen
El quehacer del docente está influenciado por la percepción del clima en su entorno laboral, proyectándose esto en la calidad de la educación y producto que se entrega a la sociedad. Por ello, se analiza cómo se manifiesta el clima laboral en una Institución de Educación Superior, desde la afiliación y compromiso, la comunicación, motivación, reconocimiento y otros factores que inciden en el desempeño de un docente universitario. Los resultados muestran que las percepciones de los docentes sobre el clima laboral son internamente diferenciadas, con valoraciones negativas sobre factores como compromiso, comunicación interna, reconocimiento, empatía, integridad física laboral, remuneración, participación conjunta entre equipos de trabajo y autoridad. Se sugiere ejecutar planes proyectados a generar un cambio organizacional efectivo en las debilidades detectadas.
Palabras clave: cultura organizacional; desempeño organizacional; docente; Universidad.
1. Introduction
The work environment plays a prominent role in personnel management. In recent years, the work environment has become a valued object of research for organizations due to the competitive, dynamic, and complex environment in which they are immersed. According to Pardo-Enciso & Díaz-Villamar (٢٠١٤), technological changes and globalization have promoted the transformation, adaptation, and permanence of organizations in the market, and human capital management largely determines the how well organizations adapt to changes and gain benefits.
In this sense, in all HEIs and businesses, human capital is considered the cornerstone of institutional success. Human capital management is crucial for organizations to obtain high productivity, quality, and competitiveness. Therefore, maintaining an optimal organizational environment is essential to keep administrative processes controlled and aligned with the corporate strategy. An appropriate organizational environment allows staff to have a high degree of motivation, cooperation, and commitment, which is reflected in achieving individual and corporate performance indicators (Cubillos-Rivera et al, 2014).
The work environment is also important because it links the organization’s objective aspects and workers’ subjective behavior. Dessler (1976) argued that the work environment is the set of permanent characteristics that describe an organization, distinguish it from another, and influence the behavior of the people working inside them. Specifically, in HEIs, a good work environment will lead to improved work, positively impacting teaching, learning, and the construction of new knowledge. Hence, HEIs must focus on the needs of their collaborators and attend to them objectively. HEIs daily activities tend to change incessantly, forcing all teachers and directors inside these institutions to become transforming subjects of the institutional environment and their society (Parrales-Poveda, 2013).
Organizations (both for-profit and educational) must generate value by creating knowledge. HEIs need to analyze how the components of the work environment, such as affiliation, commitment, communication, motivation, and recognition, influence university professors’ performance because their performance depends on the effectiveness of management processes, which affects the quality of the services delivered to society.
The diagnosis of the work environment in companies provides feedback on processes that affect organizational behavior. It also allows them to develop improvement plans to change the attitudes and behaviors of human talent by improving the diagnosed factors to increase motivation and professional performance (Segredo-Pérez, 2013). This diagnosis is constructed from the professors’ experience and aims to improve the work culture and performance within the institution through effective decision-making.
2. Organizational culture
Culture is a way of life for each organization. It represents the set of values, beliefs, traditions, and methods of consciously or unconsciously developing tasks shared with others at work (Tinoco-Gómez et al, 2014). In this sense, it represents continuous learning. In this learning, the organizational culture is enriched with the contributions of individuals (perpetuating it), and in turn, people enhance their environments.
Over time, each organization intensely conditions the thinking and behavior of its members through values, principles, traditions, and ways of doing things. Each organization must be aware of its culture (Tinoco-Gómez et al, 2014) because it constitutes its personality trait, differentiating it from other organizations. It can be argued that each HEI has its original and unique way of planning and executing its vision and mission, including habits, norms, traditions, beliefs, and values that are perceived by their context.
In Ecuadorian Universities, faculty defines teaching content and methods. This claim is supported by the Higher Education Act (LOES [Ley Orgánica de Educación Superior]), which states that professors have the right to teach and research under the broadest freedom, without any religious, political, partisan imposition, or restriction. This freedom makes the university community different for each institution. However, the fundamental task is the same in all HEIs. The student’s training must be done under interests, values, sensitivity, cultural level, and skills development that respond to the prevailing needs of today’s society (Parrales-Poveda et al, 2017).
Hence, the societal demands for HEIs in Ecuador put a great responsibility on them and request those in charge of their administration to develop a new culture. Here, institutional administrators must ensure that everyone, especially teachers, is coordinated, coherent, and cohesive in their work. Contradictory and antagonistic actions hardly make it possible to achieve any practical purpose. The only way to achieve a coherent behavior is for everyone to agree on developing knowledge, skills, abilities, values , and a new organizational culture where the commitment and sense of belonging are reflected in the team’s day-to-day actions.
In short, the work climate is related to the perceptions of what happens in the work environment, and the culture helps define why these things happen (Riveros-Paredes & Grimaldo-Muchotrigo, 2017).
3. Working environmen
A brief retrospective review of the theoretical definitions from an educational perspective shows that Dessler (1976) stated that the concept of work environment is a feature that links the objective aspects of the organization and the subjective aspects of the workers. In his definition, work climate is the set of permanent characteristics that describe an organization, distinguish it from another, and influence the behavior of the people who is part of it. Torres-Pacheco & Zegarra-Ugarte (2015) pointed out that the work environment is not an absolute and homogeneous configuration since employees do not operate in a vacuum.
Dessler (1976) suggested that instead, employees begin to work with preconceived ideas about themselves, who they are, what they deserve, and what they can achieve. These ideas are dependent on factors related to work, such as leadership style, organizational structure, the opinions of the work team, etc. They evaluate what their job and the environment are like, and from these different dimensions perceived and valued by the organization’s collaborators, the work environment is conceived.
According to Xiaofu & Qiwen (2007), the perception of the work environment affects not only teaching but also the quality of education, the emotional stability in the teacher-student relationship, their moral experience, and mental health.
In the words of Quiñonez-Tapia et al, (2015), the purpose of the work environment is to unify and shape individual behaviors to the behavioral patterns determined by organizational needs. This author highlights eight dimensions that must be studied: autonomy, cohesion, trust, pressure, support, equity, innovation, and recognition. The aspects mentioned above are central to the evaluation of the work environment.
Professors inside the HEIs are responsible for creating and disseminating knowledge. Parrales-Poveda (2020) argued that professors need to become transforming and dynamic agents of ‘education for life’; otherwise, societies will inevitably be condemned to under development, failing to progress in the new reality of the 21st century.
The factors of analysis of the labor climate constitute the raw material for the development of labor relations in the performance of the fulfillment of university functions; The analysis of the work environment allows these institutions to formulate strategies to resolve the discomforts perceived in university teachers. Therefore, it is essential to highlight that a professional who finds alternative solutions to the problems of his work does not arise spontaneously (Parrales-Poveda, 2013). Instead, it is necessary to train him with determination from the first years of his university career. This way, the educational institution would respond efficiently to society’s demands and needs.
In this order of ideas, León-Serrano et al. (2018) point out that the climate in the educational environment is a factor that enables measuring the satisfaction of teachers, students, and managers, as well as the quality of education concerning the conditions provided by the institution.
3.1. Factors influencing the work environment
Professors Litwin and Stinger 1968 (cited in Fiallo-Moncayo et al, 2015) establish nine factors that explain the work environment in a company. Among them: structure, responsibilities, reward, challenge, relationships, cooperation, standards, conflict, and identity. The evaluating the factors described above within the organization produces different perceptions by the organization’s members that constitute the work environment.
Guzmán-Reyes et al, (2021) added that several authors suggest other dimensions to diagnose the work environment in organizations. The detail is shown in chart 1.
Chart 1
Dimensions of the work environment
|
Year |
Author |
Dimensions |
|
1977 |
Jhon Sudarsky |
Responsibility, reward, conformity, norms, security, remuneration, warmth, and institutional clarity. |
|
1986 |
Rensis Likert |
Methods of command, motivation, communication, planning, influence, decision making and control, and performance. |
|
1987 |
Octavio García |
Recognition, objectives of the organization, growth within it, and the environment in which they perform their work. |
|
1989 |
Rudolf Moss y Edison Trikett |
Relationships (involvement, cohesion, and support), self-realization (autonomy, organization, and pressure), and stability (clarity, control, innovation, and comfort). |
|
1998 |
Fernando Toro |
Support for the boss and the organization, reward, comfort with their physical environment, control and pressure, and interpersonal relationships. |
|
2006 |
Carlos Méndez |
Objectives, decision making, leadership, cooperation, interpersonal relationships, motivation, control, attitudes, beliefs, and satisfaction. |
|
2017 |
Juan Ortega |
Objectives, relations between members, structure and management support mechanisms, support mechanism, rewards, and leadership. |
Source: own elaboration based on Guzmán-Reyes el al, (2021). Diagnosis of the organizational climate in a private educational institution in Guayaquil.
The work environment positively or negatively affects the operation of the company. Among the benefits of a good climate are: satisfaction, adaptation, affiliation, positive work attitudes, constructive behaviors, creative ideas for improvement, high productivity, achievement of results, and low turnover. On the contrary, a poor work environment brings with it the following negative consequences: maladjustment, high turnover, absenteeism, low level of innovation, poor productivity, fraud and theft, sabotage, lateness, negative work attitudes, and undesirable behaviors (Fiallo-Moncayo et al, 2015).
4. Materials and methods
The methodological model assumed in this research is based on a non-experimental design. It intends to explore and observe the phenomenon under natural conditions, where the researcher cannot directly control or influence what is being studied. This work is developed under a quantitative approach since its purpose is to establish patterns of behavior in a population accurately (Hernández-Sampieri et al, 2010: 10).
This investigation is defined as a cross-sectional descriptive study. The data was collected at a single moment and time to describe the factors of the work environment that (in the opinion of the teachers) affect the work environment of the higher education institution using statistical data processing (Arias, 2012).
The technique used was the survey. The purpose of using surveys is to obtain information from a sample about themselves (Arias, 2012). The questionnaire was of a closed polytomous type with an ordinal Likert scale, which allows the questions to be answered directly (Hernández-Sampieri et al, 2014). The Likert scale ranged from 1 to 4 (4 strongly agree; 3 agree; 2 disagree, and 1 strongly disagree). This scale was used because there are occasions when the number of categories is intentionally decreased or increased or the intermediate and neutral category is eliminated (neither agree, nor disagree, neutral, undecided) to motivate the participants to pronounce in a way favorable or unfavorable way.
The study sample comprises 76% of collaborators of the participant university: 237 teachers from a population of 310. The sample was defined using non-probabilistic consecutive sampling, which implies assuming the totality of individuals in the population to be surveyed (Otzen & Manterola, 2017). For the data analysis, teachers who provided incomplete information were excluded, which explains why the sample size is smaller than that of the population. The application of the instrument was carried out through institutional email using the Google Forms application. Table 1 shows the sample composition according to the sociodemographic variables: gender, age, and level of education.
Table 1
Sociodemographic characteristics of the sample
|
Variables |
No. |
% |
|
Gender |
||
|
Female |
132 |
56% |
|
Male |
105 |
44% |
|
Total |
237 |
100% |
|
Age |
||
|
21-19 years |
12 |
5% |
|
30-39 years |
66 |
28% |
|
40-49 years |
96 |
41% |
|
More than 50 years |
63 |
26% |
|
Total |
237 |
100% |
|
Scholarship |
||
|
Academic |
78 |
33% |
|
Specialized |
159 |
67% |
|
Total |
237 |
100% |
Source: own elaboration based on data processed using SPSS statistical software, which provided security during the data evaluation process, including frequency and percentage and the relationship between the different study variables (Ventura-León & Caycho-Rodríguez, 2017).
The software helped define the validity and reliability based on Cronbach’s α coefficient, which determines the degree of consistency between each item from the beginning, increasing the degree of reliability of the questionnaire.
3. Work environment in a Higher Education Institution: Results and discussion
Below is a description of the results according to the work environment factors. Ten work environment dimensions (Table 2) were analyzed for this study.
Table 2
Reliability tests of the scales - Instruments
|
Reliability statistics |
Cronbach’s Alpha |
No. of elements |
|
Affiliation and Commitment |
0,95 |
3 |
|
Communication |
0,96 |
4 |
|
Recognition |
0,98 |
5 |
|
Motivation |
0,93 |
3 |
|
Remuneration |
0,97 |
5 |
|
Occupational health |
0,98 |
5 |
|
Teamwork |
0,95 |
3 |
|
Supervision and leadership |
0,98 |
8 |
|
Training and development |
0,95 |
5 |
|
Organization and human resources. |
0,98 |
7 |
|
full scale |
0,99 |
48 |
Source: own elaboration based on Guzmán-Reyes el al, (2021). Diagnosis of the organizational climate in a private educational institution in Guayaquil.
Cronbach’s α coefficient was used to estimate the reliability of the data collection instrument’s dimensions by analyzing the items’ set. The closer this value is to 1, the greater the instrument’s reliability. The minimum acceptable value for Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is 0.70; below that value, the internal consistency of the scale used is low. The value of the instrument used in this research is 0.99, which shows very high reliability (table 3).
Table 3
Dimensions of the work environment-Percentages
|
Dimensions |
items |
strongly disagreeo |
In disagreemento |
Agreeo |
Strongly Agreeo |
|
Affiliation and Commitment |
a. I am proud to belong to the company. |
12% |
0% |
20% |
68% |
|
b. I feel an integral part of the company. |
6% |
4% |
16% |
74% |
|
|
c. Making a balance and considering all the factors, I think it is an excellent company to work. |
5% |
0% |
23% |
72% |
|
|
Communication |
a. There is good and permanent communication in my area and with other people working with me. |
6% |
36% |
33% |
25% |
|
b. I find it easy to communicate with my superiors as there is a receptive attitude to my ideas. |
7% |
3% |
42% |
48% |
|
|
c. There is good communication from management about the company’s policies, plans, and programs. |
6% |
6% |
32% |
56% |
|
|
d. I find it easy to come up with new ideas and great ways to do my job better, given the trust my immediate boss gives me. |
6% |
3% |
43% |
48% |
|
|
Recognition |
a. The staff’s ideas, suggestions, and concerns are taken into account by the heads of the area. |
10% |
20% |
38% |
32% |
|
b. They congratulate me when I have successes and achievements in my work. |
13% |
12% |
39% |
36% |
|
|
c. The company appreciates initiatives and suggestions at work. |
13% |
20% |
34% |
33% |
|
|
d. Promotions and promotions are made to the best workers in the company. |
10% |
13% |
34% |
43% |
|
|
e. When I achieve excellent performance, I receive recognition for it. |
10% |
17% |
32% |
41% |
|
|
Motivation |
a. I feel comfortable with the work I have done. |
3% |
0% |
27% |
70% |
|
b. I like to learn about other functions or areas of the company, as this allows me to move up to different positions within the same company. |
6% |
10% |
36% |
48% |
|
|
c. I like the work I do. |
6% |
10% |
26% |
58% |
|
|
Remuneration |
a. Conventional benefits are appropriate and related to the cost of living. |
6% |
10% |
35% |
49% |
|
b. The company shows concern for maintaining a fair policy to determine the salaries of its personnel. |
10% |
20% |
33% |
37% |
|
|
c. I would go to the new company if another company offered me a similar position with a slightly higher salary. |
26% |
33% |
15% |
26% |
|
|
d. I think my salary is at the level of the labor market. |
6% |
10% |
33% |
51% |
|
|
e. I receive adequate remuneration for my work in the company. |
6% |
13% |
30% |
51% |
|
|
Occupational health |
a. I feel good and don’t have major disability problems at work. |
6% |
6% |
26% |
62% |
|
b. Healthcare services are timely and efficient. |
10% |
15% |
33% |
42% |
|
|
c. I have the appropriate elements, equipment, and tools to carry out my work. |
10% |
15% |
35% |
40% |
|
|
d. There are medicine, hygiene, safety, and occupational health programs. |
6% |
15% |
19% |
60% |
|
|
e. I believe there is a permanent concern for workplace safety and health. |
10% |
17% |
36% |
37% |
|
|
Teamwork |
a. When there are “peaks” of work, the need to work overtime, etc, it is easy to count on the collaboration of other colleagues |
3% |
10% |
30% |
57% |
|
b. I feel well disposed to the changes that occur in my work. |
3% |
2% |
42% |
53% |
|
|
c. There is a real team feeling among my co-workers |
3% |
15% |
38% |
44% |
|
|
Supervision and leadership |
a. In my area, whoever does a lousy job is held responsible and punished for it. |
10% |
27% |
33% |
30% |
|
b. When there are conflicts, my superior intervenes positively for the |
6% |
10% |
42% |
42% |
|
|
c. My boss tells me if I’m doing my job right or wrong. |
10% |
18% |
45% |
27% |
|
|
d. My boss has more qualities than defects in his position. |
6% |
12% |
36% |
46% |
|
|
e. When decisions are made regarding my work, my opinion is consulted. |
13% |
18% |
38% |
31% |
|
|
f. There is evident participation in the decision-making process. |
10% |
15% |
38% |
37% |
|
|
g. Decisions are made and maintained in the company, providing the necessary support. |
12% |
15% |
35% |
38% |
|
|
h. The goals set in my work are consulted and established rationally. |
12% |
13% |
36% |
39% |
|
|
Training and development |
a. The company is concerned with the training and development of its staff so they can do their job better. |
6% |
5% |
35% |
54% |
|
b. I have clear objectives, functions, and tasks for my position. |
3% |
0% |
13% |
84% |
|
|
c. I received the appropriate information and instructions to do my job well. |
3% |
2% |
42% |
53% |
|
|
d. Before taking up my position, I received a complete training program. |
6% |
10% |
45% |
39% |
|
|
e. They have given me the means of training to learn about innovations and changes in the company on time. |
6% |
18% |
36% |
40% |
|
|
Organization and Human Capital |
a. The organization of work in my area allows me to carry out my work within the established deadlines. |
3% |
6% |
40% |
51% |
|
b. I usually finish my work within the allotted time. |
6% |
20% |
35% |
39% |
|
|
c. I am given due advance notice of changes in work methods and procedures. |
6% |
13% |
38% |
43% |
|
|
d. I consider that in my area, the work is well organized. |
3% |
10% |
36% |
51% |
|
|
e. I feel the company treats me with dignity and respect in my work. |
6% |
10% |
28% |
56% |
|
|
f. My colleagues actively participate in the company’s various recreational, social, and cultural events. |
10% |
12% |
28% |
50% |
|
|
g. There is a good work environment in my area. |
6% |
6% |
42% |
46% |
Source: own elaboration
In the participant HEI, it is observed that 20% of the teaching staff responded they agreed, and 68% responded strongly agreed to feel proud to work in the participant university. These results show that they feel comfortable in the company and their work. Their personal commitment to achieving the organizational objectives is manifested by adopting a deep responsibility for fulfilling their work, increasing their performance, and improving the work environment. As Harter et al, (2002) argued, work commitment makes it possible for the individual to involve personal commitment, satisfaction, and enthusiasm at work.
Likewise, 16% agree, and 74% strongly agree that they feel like they are an integral part of the company. In other words, they identify with the organizational values and the team they are part of. In this sense, commitment is recognized in institutions or companies as a bond of loyalty accompanied by the desire to remain in the organization due to the personnel’s implicit motivation. Schaubroeck & Jones’s (2000) study about the analysis of the impact of organizational identity on well-being showed that organizational identity could attenuate organizational stressors, which influence the work environment.
On the other hand, 23% agreed, and 73% strongly agreed that they believe this is an excellent company to work for when evaluating their affiliation and commitment. A percentage does not feel proud to belong to the institution nor feel an integral part of it and consider that the HEI of study is not a good company to work for. It can be argued that the reduced commitment in these collaborators is marked by causes such as poor perception of authority and poor internal communication.
According to what was expressed in the survey applied to the HEI teaching staff, a significant number of respondents (36% disagree and 6% strongly disagree) considered internal communication weak. Another group mentioned that it is not easy for them to communicate adequately with their supervisors. They think their immediate superior’s attitude is inadequate, management is not easily reachable, and they feel their immediate superior does not generate the confidence to communicate openly. Weak internal communication negatively influences the work environment (Ancín-Adell & Espinosa-Tello, 2017). When this happens, Párraga et al, (2008) claimed that efforts are not oriented toward achieving the pre-defined objectives, with little commitment from workers thanks to the weak interaction between the members of a company. This lack of commitment means they do not contribute their effort to organizational development.
In analyzing this work environment dimension, it was sought to contrast and validate the answers with the results of affiliation and commitment. The result was consistent between those dimensions, which reflected a high degree of motivation for their work and liking for their functions (27% agree and 70% strongly agree). On the other hand, 16% of the teaching staff do not show interest in performing other functions of a higher hierarchical rank in the institution and do not like their work either.
Motivation is the engine of individuals within the company (García & Forero, 2014). In other words, it is the force that encourages people to initiate, maintain and improve their work, thus becoming the psychological energy of the company.
Regarding recognition, the highest percentage of those surveyed (32% agree and 41% strongly agree) consider that their institution recognizes their performance. Others feel comfortable with the institution when they see that their ideas or opinions are taken into account by senior managers (38% agree and 32% strongly agree), as well as being pleased to be congratulated for their achievements within their work area (39% agree and 36% strongly agree). The fact that they value initiatives and suggestions creates a feeling that incentives workers to do things well within the organization (34% agree and 33% strongly agree). Performance appraisal is conceived as a reward for standing out among other workers (34% agree and 43% strongly agree).
On the other hand, it was observed that a significant percentage questions the existence of incentives. Filial perception or empathy with superiors is weak and emotional communication is unclear. One factor to consider is that they perceive incentives such as unfair promotions or preferences for personal interests. Luthans & Stajkavic (2001) stated that incentives have different effects depending on their usefulness. Still, they are essential because they allow employees to act in a regulatory mechanism that generates social comparisons about the worker’s position.
A significant percentage of the participants (15% agree, and 26% strongly agree) perceived salary issues as poorly managed or unfair. They think that if offered a higher salary in another institution for the same responsibilities, they would leave for the new institution. According to Geleto et al, (2015), a dissatisfied workforce harms organizational productivity, reducing the work environment’s quality. An appropriate salary policy makes it possible to attract and retain talent, preventing employees from leaving the company due to salary dissatisfaction.
Surprisingly, the most influential remuneration component in the work environment is not the absolute amount paid. Instead, participants expect fairness with impartial promotion policies and methods that allow them to achieve personal growth. In the participant HEI, 33% agreed, and 37% strongly agreed that they believe the company cares about maintaining a fair policy to determine staff salaries. If promotion decisions are made correctly, wages are considered adequate.
The teachers from the study HEIs stated that they felt good and did not have any major problems while performing their duties (26% agree, 62% strongly agree). Nevertheless, within other aspects studied, a significant percentage explained they do not have a program that provides safety or monitoring of their occupational health. They consider that they lack adequate elements or tools and do not perceive a relevant concern for their physical integrity at work, affecting the work environment of the institution. Sparks et al, (2010) discussed working conditions and their impact on the well-being and health of employees. They consider that job insecurity, work shifts, and work overload affect workers’ well-being and health status. Therefore, Tetrick & Quick (2003) see the need to have a good occupational health and safety promotion program that helps to care for and maintain the health of employees and their families.
According to the results of the survey within the HEI, there is a permanent collaboration between the members of the institution in the development of activities that need to be solved as soon as possible (30% agree; 57% strongly agree), and they feel willing to face the changes that arise at work (42% agree; 53% strongly agree). However, a significant percentage considers there is no true feeling of collaboration between co-workers.
According to Ayoví-Caicedo (2019), teamwork is the key to organizational success. It encompasses the cohesion, union, and transformation of an organization. Teamwork is based on continuous improvement through support, feedback, and the perception of pursuing a common goal and fulfilling the mission and vision of the organization. Successful teams work in environments where good treatment and respect prevail among colleagues.
A significant percentage of respondents perceive the decisions and performance of the immediate bosses negatively. A large part of those surveyed considers that their bosses do not have apparent authority over the team that does a poor job. An average of 16% think their bosses are not assertive in handling conflicts or communication. Consequently, the sense of teamwork is affected, creating a possibility for internal conflict.
Leadership directly impacts people’s well-being, so it is crucial to have good leaders within organizations to establish work environments that allow employees to grow and develop (Thompson, 2012).
The institution is concerned with training staff to perform their work efficiently, as expressed by most respondents (35% agree; 54% strongly agree). They are also clear about the responsibilities they must comply with; however, an average of 24% consider that the institution does not constantly provide timely training to learn about innovations and changes. What is described above can influence employees to feel that they are not growing personally or as a part of the organization. According to Barzola-Zambrano et al, (2017), training employees from different areas and hierarchical levels are of great interest in the work environment. Training motivates and stimulates employees to face new globalization-caused challenges by modifying behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, and soft skills. This combination of components makes it possible to form a new culture and establish new values inside the organization.
An average of 26% of those surveyed answered that the organization does not allow them to complete their work on time, requires them to work extra hours, and the processes are not clearly defined. An average of 19% say that changes are made without sufficient information. On the other hand, they (22%) consider there is not enough co-participation in integration activities, and there is no closeness with the areas. Lastly, a percentage believes there is not a good work environment, and an average of 16% do not feel treated with dignity and respect at work.
6. Conclusions
This study allowed us to analyze how the work environment is manifested in a Higher Education Institution, from affiliation and commitment, communication, motivation, recognition, and other factors that affect the performance of a university teacher. The work environment is a critical aspect within organizations to ensure that collaborators act efficiently, thus achieving high individual and collective results and performance.
The analysis of the ten work environment dimensions within the participant HEI showed significant differences between the dimensions from the teachers’ perspective. This study identified the factors that affect the work environment positively or negatively. The HEI studied is a company with primarily mature young collaborators. A performance with discipline, low rotation, and emotional stability would be expected, leading to fluid communication and a low level of distortion. The leadership model of the bosses or middle managers should be evaluated. In addition, it is necessary to review whether there are incentive strategies for performance and training that maintain empowerment and continuous learning.
Based on the results, it can be suggested that human capital administrators consider implementing an incentive program that seeks to make good performance visible without this being related to monetary prizes. On the other hand, the incentive program must also be aligned with the leadership model. The leadership model should be evaluated and restructured to ensure it is operational. A training program in soft and transversal skills should be executed because they improve communication, empathy, and the sense of belonging, as well as technical and administrative training processes.
It is suggested to check if the occupational health, medicine, or social work programs are active and well communicated and if middle managers have been trained in transversal skills. In addition, administrators should corroborate if managers’ performance is being assessed regularly. Training on these topics should be encouraged, so the officials see genuine concern for improving labor interrelation and internal quality.
The importance of this study lies in the fact that the diagnosis provides information to the institution and its administrators about the perceptions and attitudes of the people who compose it and enables the development of improvement plans aimed at changing human behavior through the improvement of the diagnosed factors. This study also shows that analyzing the work environment in institutions becomes essential to study, understand and attend to benefit workers and the entire organization.
References
Ancín Adell, I, & Espinosa Tello, J. E. (2017). La Relación entre la Comunicación Interna y el Clima Laboral: Estudio de Caso en PYMES de la Ciudad de Guayaquil. PODIUM, 65–77. https://revistas.uees.edu.ec/index.php/Podium/article/view/79
Arias, F.G. (2012). The research project. Introduction to scientific methodology. (6th ed). Editorial Episteme, C.A. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxlZHVjYXB1bnRlc3xneDo3NmExZjhkOTliZjk4ZjVm
Ayovi-Caicedo, J. (2019). Teamwork: the key to the success of organizations. Training, Research and Publication Pole (POCAIP), 4(10), 58-76. https://doi.org/10.23857/fipcaec.v4i10.39
Barzola-Zambrano, I. I, Barzola-Véliz, V. M. & Barzola-Flores, W. J. (2017). Work environment factors that influence the performance of public sector workers in Ecuador. Domain of the Sciences, 3(3), 917-937. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6244054
Cubillos-Rivera, B, Velásquez-Muriel, F, & Reyes-Nova, M. (2014). Plan to improve organizational climate variables that affect job performance in a State entity. Sum of businesses, 5(10), 69-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-910X(14)70012-6
Dessler, G. (1976). Organization and Administration Situational Approach. Editorial Prentice / International Hall. https://endeporte.metabiblioteca.org/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=2631
Durán, I. M., Gallegos, M. E. & Cabezas, D. E. (2019). Leadership styles and their influence on the work environment. Case study of a food exporting company. Espacios Magazine, 40(40). https://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n40/19404003.html
Fiallo-Moncayo, D, Alvarado-Andino, P. & Soto-Medina, S. (2015). The organizational climate within a company. Contributions to the Economy, 3. https://www.eumed.net/ce/2015/1/clima-organizacional.html
García, M. & Forero, C. (2014). Motivation and job satisfaction as determinants associated with organizational change. Johnny Javier Orejuela Gomez. Psychology of organizations and work: research proposals. Cali: Editorial Bonaventuriana, 2014. 518 p. http://104.207.147.154:8080/bitstream/54000/1304/1/Orejuela-psicolog%C3%ADa%20organizacional.pdf#page=329
Geleto, A, Baraki, N, Atomsa, G. E. & Dessie, Y. (2015). Job satisfaction and associated factors among health care providers at public health institutions in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. BMC research notes, 8(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1368-5
Guzmán-Reyes, M., Ancín-Adell, I. & Prieto-Coello, S. (2021). Diagnosis of the organizational climate in a private educational institution in the city of Guayaquil. Scientific Journal Ecociencia, 8(2), 22-44. https://doi.org/10.21855/ecoscience.82.474
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L. & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 268. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C. & Baptista-Lucio, M. (2010). Research Methodology (5th ed). McGRAW-HILL / INTERAMERICANA EDITORS, S.A. DE C.V.
Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, C. & Baptista-Lucio, M. (2014). Research Methodology (6th ed). McGRAW-HILL / INTERAMERICANA EDITORS, S.A. DE C.V. https://www.uca.ac.cr/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Investigacion.pdf
León-Serrano, L., Noriega-Tito, E. & Murillo-Guevara, M. (2018). Impact of the organizational climate on the teacher’s job performance. Fides et Ratio-Journal of Cultural and Scientific Dissemination of La Salle University in Bolivia, 16(16), 15-32. http://www.scielo.org.bo/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2071-081X2018000200003
Luthans, F., & Stajkavic, A. (2001). Differential effects of incentive motivators on work performance. Academy of management journal, 4, 580-582. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069372
Otzen, T., & Manterola, C. (2017). Sampling Techniques on a Study Population. International Journal of morphology, 35(1), 227-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022017000100037
Pardo-Enciso, C. E., & Díaz-Villamar, O. L. (٢٠١٤). Development of human talent as a key factor for organizational development, a vision from the leaders of human management in companies in Bogotá DC. Sum of businesses, 5(11), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-910X(14)70018-7
Párraga, E., Rojas, L., & Arapé, E. (2008). Communication and Conflict: The art of negotiation. Negotium, 4(10), 2. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/782/78241003.pdf
Parrales-Poveda, M. L. (2013). Solve Professional Problems SPP, an essential skill in working and professional life. Ecuador: UNESUM-Jipijapa.
Parrales-Poveda, M. L. (2020). Permanent training strategy for the didactic management of competencies in higher education. Mario Alberto Secchi... [et al.]. Teacher training in higher education and social commitment. 1st revised ed. - Rosario: Italian University Institute of Rosario, 2020. 484 p. https://www.iunir.edu.ar/publicaciones/libros/formacion%20docente.pdf
Parrales-Poveda, M., Gracia-Panta, E., Miller-Zavala, J. & Ponce-Cedeño, O. (2017). Strategic Guidelines and Digital Communication. Mawil Publications of Ecuador. https://web.unesum.edu.ec/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Lineamientos-estrategicos-y-comunicacion-digital.pdf
Quiñonez-Tapia, F., Pérez-Avalos, Y., Campos-Sánchez, R. & Cuellar-Hernández, H. (2015). Organizational climate in a Mexican higher education institution. Colombian Journal of Occupational Health, 5(3), 11-17. https://doi.org/10.18041/2322-634X/rcso.3.2015.4905
Riveros-Paredes, P. N., & Grimaldo-Muchotrigo, M. P. (2017). Values and organizational climate in teachers of a higher education institute in Lima. Psychological Sciences, 11(2), 179-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.22235/cp.v11i2.1489
Schaubroeck, J. & Jones, J.R. (2000). Antecedents of workplace emotional labor dimensions and moderators of their effects on physical symptoms. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 21(2), 163-183. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(200003)21:2<163::AID-JOB37>3.0.CO;2-L
Segredo-Perez, A.M. (2013). The work environment in change management for the development of the organization. Cuban Journal of Public Health, 39(2), 385-393. http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/rcsp/v39n2/spu17213.pdf
Sparks, K., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C.L. (2010). Well‐being and occupational health in the 21st-century workplace. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 74(4), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317901167497
Tetrick, L.E. & Quick, J.C. (2003). Prevention at work: Public health in occupational settings. Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 3–17). https://doi.org/10.1037/10474-001
Thompson, J. (2012). Transformational leadership can improve workforce competencies. Nursing Management, 18(10). https://doi.org/10.7748/nm2012.03.18.10.21.c8958
Tinoco-Gómez, O., Quispe-Atúncar, C. & Beltrán-Saravia, V. (2014). Organizational culture and job satisfaction in the Faculty of Industrial Engineering within the framework of university accreditation. Industrial Data, 17(2), 56-66. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/816/81640856007.pdf
Torres-Pacheco, E., & Zegarra-Ugarte, S. (2015). Organizational climate and work performance in the Bolivarian educational institutions of the city of Puno-2014-Peru. Communication, 6(2), 5-14. http://www.scielo.org.pe/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2219-71682015000200001
Ventura-León, J. L., & Caycho-Rodríguez, T. (2017). The Omega coefficient: an alternative method for reliability estimation. Latin American Journal of Social Sciences, childhood, and youth, 15(1), 625-627. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/773/77349627039/html/
Xiaofu, P. & Qiwen, Q. (2007). An analysis of the relation between secondary school organizational climate and teacher job satisfaction. Chinese Education and Society, 40(5), 65-77. https://doi.org/10.2753/CED1061-1932400507