Subjective Well-Being at Work:
Research Practices of Sociological Measurement


Tatarova G.G.

Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof., Chief Researcher, Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow, Russia. tatarova-gg@rambler.ru

Bessokirnaya G.P.

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Assoc. Prof., Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow, Russia. gala@isras.ru

Kuchenkova A.V.

Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow, Russia. a.v.kuchenkova@gmail.com

DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015546-3
ID of the Article:


For citation:

Tatarova G.G., Bessokirnaya G.P. , Kuchenkova A.V. Subjective Well-Being at Work: Research Practices of Sociological Measurement. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2021. No 10. P. 37-49




Abstract

The article discusses existing research practices in the studies of work-related subjective well-being. Authors actualize the problems of the sociological measurement of “subjective wellbeing at work” as a generic concept for fixing attitudes to work, including both social perceptions of the “good” working situation and the assessment of its various aspects in the situation “here” and “now”. The “sociological measurement” is understood as an approach that focuses on the goal of finding controlled factors related to the preservation and development of the human potential of an organization (enterprise). The “axiomatic statements” are formulated; they are based on theoretical and methodological generalizations of research practices for studying work-related subjective well-being abroad and in our country, as well as on the authors’ studies. Among the research practices, special attention is paid to those in which typological models are applied, based on the ideas of reconstruction of social types among employees and interpretation of the typological structure of employees as an object of functional management.


Keywords
work-related subjective well-being; subjective well-being at work; sociological measurement; research situation; typological model; typological structure of employees; employee identification with organization; balance between job evaluations and claims to it; controlled factors
Content No 10, 2021