The relationship among the three empirical studies of workplace wellbeing
The issue of workplace wellbeing has long played a major role in organisational
research. Workplace wellbeing is a board and complicate construct to study, which
covers numerous sub-topics. Within entrepreneurship field, researchers studying on this
topic are rare, and the majority studies are sporadically and independently. It lacks a
holistic and systematic driven to show the whole image. This thesis with a focus on
workplace wellbeing with a combination of three empirical studies aiming to understand
which factors of the self-employment drive workplace wellbeing. The structure and the
interplay among three empirical analyses are displayed in Figure 1. The Negative (work-
related stress) and positive workplace wellbeing (job satisfaction) are the core and
dependent variables in the construct. Around these core concepts, three empirical studies
will be conducted to investigate the factors of self-employment process contribute to
workplace wellbeing, the coping mechanism of reducing negative work wellbeing and
enhancing positive workplace wellbeing, and the relationship between positive wellbeing
and negative wellbeing. The first study (displayed in green part) explores the question as
to whether the universality of the significant impact of job autonomy on workplace
wellbeing can be constrained by poverty, in which both the positive and negative job
wellbeing are dependent variables. The second study (displayed in blue part), based on
JDCS model, which explores the additive and buffering impacts of job demands, job
control and social supports factors during self-employment on negative workplace
wellbeing (work-related stress). The third paper (displayed in red part) investigates the
relationship between negative and positive workplace wellbeing and also test the coping
effect of self-efficacy on reducing negative workplace wellbeing and enhancing positive
workplace wellbeing.
41
Figure 1 Relationships among the three empirical studies within the thesis
42
43
Reference
ACAPS (2012) Qualitative and Quantitative Research Techniques for Humanitarian
Needs Assessment.
file:///C:/Users/JingJing/Downloads/qualitative_and_quantitative_research_technique
s.pdf . Assessed: 20 SEP 2017.
Azarian, R. (2011). Potentials and limitations of comparative method in social science.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(4), 113-125.
Amorós, J. E., Bosma, N., and Levie, J. (2013). Ten years of global entrepreneurship
monitor: Accomplishments and prospects. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Venturing, 5(2), 120-152.
Barron, M., and Torero, M. (2012). Determinants of Time Allocation to Rural Non-
Farm Activities in Central America: The Role of Infrastructure and Education.
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
Baumberg, B., and Meager, N. (2015). Job quality and the self-employed: is it still
better to work for yourself?. Unequal Britain at work: The evolution and distribution
of intrinsic job quality in Britain, 105-129.Oxford, UK：Oxford University Press.
Bedeian, A. G., and Mossholder, K. W. (1994). Simple question, not so simple
answer: Interpreting interaction terms in moderated multiple regression. Journal of
Management, 20(1), 159-165.
Benz, M., and Frey, B. S. (2008). Being independent is a great thing: Subjective
evaluations of self‐employment and hierarchy. Economica, 75(298), 362-
383.
44
Blanchflower, D. G. (2004). Self-employment: More may not be better (No. w10286).
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Broughton, N., and Richards, B. (2016). Tough gig: low-paid self-employment in
London and the UK. London: Social Market Foundation.
Burns, N., and Grove, S. K. (1987). The practice of nursing research: Conduct, critique
and utilisation. Philadelphia, WB Saumder International Edition, 293-300. Carol.D.
(2008) Dame Carol Black's Review of the health of Britain's working age
population: Working for a healthier tomorrow. London Available at
https://www.rnib.org.uk/sites/default/files/Working_for_a_healthier_tomorrow.pdf .
Accessed 18 SEP 2017
Caliendo, M., and Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of
propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31-72.
Cantillon, R. (1755). An Essay on Commerce in General in Medema.S.G and Warran.
J.S(2003), History of Economic Thought Books, 79-95, Hove, UK: Psychology Press
Cassar, G. (2007). Money, money, money? A longitudinal investigation of entrepreneur
career reasons, growth preferences and achieved growth. Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, 19(1), 89-107.
