Consequent variables of organizational well-being/disease: some new measurement scales in relation to organizational values in the italian cultural context.

In order to monitor organizational health and promote well-being, some new measurement scales have been recently devised in relation to organizational values in the Italian cultural context. They aim to assess intangible organizational dimensions such as work satisfaction, strain, and harassment. Such constructs, within the adopted model of organizational well-being (also including indicators of organizational commitment and citizenship, altruistic behaviors, absenteeism, turnover, and burnout), are, as is well-known, consequent variables, deriving from organizational culture, climate and conflict, as well as collective efficacy, perception of organizational support, and stress sources (De Carlo, 2007). By administering it to a large sample of Italian workers, the scale factor structure was verified and validated through structural equation models. As regards work satisfaction, the five first-order factor theoretical model – satisfaction with content of work, with compensation, with interpersonal relationships, with organizational processes, with professional growth – fits the data well, while the second order factor, work satisfaction, explains well the five first order factors (χ2(72)=539.6, p<.01, SRMR=.05, CFI=.97, RMSEA=.05). As for strain, the fit of the three first-order factor model – emotional stability, uncommitment, and leisure – and a higher order factor (strain itself) is very good (χ2(32)=222.03, p<.01, SRMR=.04, CFI=.97, RMSEA=.05). Concerning harassment, a final three factor model – attacks on the person, on professional life quality, and economic attacks – fits the data well (χ2(37)=272.06, p<.01, SRMR=.03, CFI=.96, RMSEA=.06). Nowadays, given the changes in the market and work systems, the variables mentioned in this study are the key asset in creating value in the organization (Low & Cohen Kalafut, 2002; Rebora, 2003; Kaplan & Norton, 2004) and in achieving the best economic results (Aarons & Sawitzky, 2006; Katz-Navon & Erez, 2005; Parker et al., 2003; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; Shortell et al., 2000).