Self-Endurance and Wellbeing Among Employees in Public and Private Organizations

Self-Endurance and Wellbeing Among Employees in Public and Private Organizations

Nasina Mat Desa*, Muhammad Hasmi Abu Hassan Asaari

School of Distance Education Universiti Sains Malaysia

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90400520

Received: 05 March 2025; Accepted: 18 March 2025; Published: 26 May 2025

ABSTRACT

The wellbeing of an individual is important for his or her long-term survival. To be in good wellbeing, we must have a positive trait during a normal situation or the pandemic. Self endurance is one of these traits. Individual self endurance is the ability to endure an unpleasant or arduous process or situation without giving way. During the pandemic, most employees in the public and private sectors were facing difficulties on their daily-life and work-life. Thus, this research aims to understand the dimensions and develop the self endurance model among employees in the public and private sectors. This research also aimed to assess the correlations of the dimensions of Self endurance with their wellbeing. The sample of the study is the employee working in the public and private organization in the nation. Self-employed questionnaires were distributed among the employees in the public and private sectors’ organizations through an online survey. The study discovered that employees in the public and private sectors had a positive correlation between their self endurance toward their wellbeing. Unfortunately, the components of self endurance, namely problem solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented had no significant correlation toward wellbeing. The output of this research is useful to employers in the manufacturing industries and relevant government authorities on human resources. The findings also will shed some light on the area of self endurance and wellbeing of employees in the nation’s “Malaysia Madani” specifically in line with the nation’s SDG on the employees’ self endurance and wellbeing.

Keywords: Self endurance, Wellbeing, problem solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, opportunity-oriented.

INTRODUCTION

Manufacturing sectors have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic that swept the entire nation. No one has been spared by the pandemic. The employees in manufacturing organizations are the most impacted by the pandemic. Thus, these employees need to have a strong Self endurance in facing the raging pandemic. Unfortunately, the employees in the manufacturing organizations had been left with no choice but to accept their pay cuts to maintain their jobs. As for them to keep their Wellbeing, it is a better option although not welcomed by employees in the manufacturing organizations. Therefore, employers are beginning to cut salaries as the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic begins to bite their bottom line.

Employers are beginning to cut salaries as the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic begins to bite their bottom line. According to a survey by the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM), more than 50% out of 419 companies revealed that revenue had dropped by more than 50%. This has led to the inability of businesses to sustain their operations beyond three months if the MCO continues to be extended and conditions do not improve. FMM (2021) stated that for companies that have to resort to pay cuts, the likely percentage cuts to be implemented by the different categories of workers are as follows: Top management staff 37.8% of respondents are likely to cut pay in the range of more than 10% to 20%, while 22.7% are likely to cut pay in the range of more than 20% to 30%. Whereby for managerial level staff, 36% of respondents are likely to cut 10% to 20% of the salary, while 28% are likely to cut pay in the range of between 5% and 20%. For executives, 54% of employers surveyed are likely to cut pay in the range of 5% to 10%, while 51.7% of respondents are likely to cut non-executive salaries in the range of 5% to 20%.

Regardless of the pay cut, an employee should be keeping their Wellbeing (Drakopoulos & Grimani, 2015). Numerous studies have correlated self-efficacy with Wellbeing (Singh, Pradhan, Panigrahy & Jena, 2019; Ozer & Bandura, 1990; Lyubomirsky, 2001; Khramtsova, Sarrino, Gordeeva, & Williams, 2007). Besides, very limited studies use the term Self endurance in the context of physiological and organizational behavior. The majority of scholars have used the term Self endurance to associate it with physical endurance. Hence, this research goal is to define the dimensions of Self endurance in the context of physiological and organizational behavior.

During the pandemic, pay cuts happened in the manufacturing industry and this research chose them to be researched because of their significant contribution to our country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia (2020), the manufacturing industry contributes 34 percent of our country’s GDP. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the associated dimensions and further develop the self endurance model among employees who are facing a pay cut in the manufacturing industry. This research also aimed to assess the correlations of the dimensions of self endurance with their wellbeing.

The research objectives of the study are to understand the dimensions of self endurance that affect the employees and to assess the correlations of the dimensions of self endurance with the effect of the employees in the public and private sectors on their wellbeing. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the associated dimensions and further develop the self endurance model among employees. This research also aimed to understand the relationship and assess the correlations of the dimensions of self endurance with their wellbeing.

The research hopes to understand the self endurance dimensions of manufacturing employees that relate to their wellbeing. Moreover, the outcome of this research hopes to shed new knowledge to the relevant agencies and ministries in the country toward the employees’ self endurance and wellbeing. The self endurance model also expects to contribute to the policymakers in their focus on the nation’s employees’ wellbeing. The research is in line with the nation’s talent development agenda in producing a potential postgraduate student in understanding the research area. Moreover, the research outputs are expected to benefit the nations in terms of the information and understanding of the self endurance model and social wellbeing and social unity among employees in “malaysia madani”. Moreover, the research is highly relevant to the nation’s SDG Good Health and Wellbeing among employees in the “Malaysia Madani”.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Self Endurance

Research on self endurance from a management perspective is extremely limited. From the literature readings, the closest word that was found is self-efficacy. Many studies have correlated self-efficacy with wellbeing (Singh, Pradhan, Panigrahy & Jena, 2019; Ozer & Bandura, 1990; Lyubomirsky, 2001; Khramtsova, Sarrino, Gordeeva, & Williams, 2007). Due to this reason and due to a limited definition of self endurance among organizational employees, therefore this research would like to understand the term “self endurance’ by defining the dimensions of self endurance in the context of management and organizational behavior. Also, this research hopes to contribute significantly to getting new knowledge in the area of management. Moreover, this research also intends to understand the self endurance dimensions among the manufacturing employees whose pay has been cut during the pandemic in Malaysia. Heslin and Klehe (2006) stated that self-efficacy is one on the most powerful motivational predictors of how well a person will perform at almost any endeavour. A person’s self-efficacy is a strong determinant of their effort, persistence, strategizing, as well as their subsequent training and job performance. This can be interpreted that a person will work their way toward self endurance. Moreover, self endurance will be stronger predictor on how employees would perform a given task.

The word endurance means the ability to endure an unpleasant or difficult process or situation without giving way (Oxford Dictionary, 2021). Thus, self endurance relates to individuals and how they uplift themselves toward situations of unpleasantness and difficulties. However, there is limited research that associates the word endurance from the management and organizational behavior perspective. Most researchers relate the word endurance with physical endurance (Beattie, Kenny, Lyons, & Carson, 2014; Tarnopolsky, 2004; Hoff, Wisløff, Engen, Kemi, & Helgerud, 2002). Physical endurance is a condition that is popular in the area of physical fitness and sports management. There is a need to examine further the Self endurance from a different perspective in the management and individual employees per se. Kepoğlu, Yanar, and Gunel (2017) stated in their study on sports employees on their psychological endurance. They discovered no significantdifference between the demographic data on their psychological endurance. On the other hand, they discovered a significant difference between wages and social resources toward psychological endurance.

Wellbeing

Bradburn (1969, in Dodge, Daly, Huyton & Sanders, 2012) in his classic research defined Wellbeing as psychological wellbeing. The interest in how individuals coped with the daily difficulties that they faced. Interestingly, many studies have correlated self-efficacy with wellbeing. Meanwhile, Diener and Suh (1997) referred to wellbeing as pleasant and unpleasant moods and emotions. Drakopoulos and Grimani (2015) interpreted wellbeing as pleasure and arousal. Meanwhile, a study investigated the impact of organizational practices, work demands, and individual factors on workability, organizational commitment, and mental wellbeing of employees in the metal industry and retail trade (Tuomi, Vanhala, Nykyri & Janhonen, 2004). Kalliath & Kalliath (2012) examined in their special issue provide insights into six specific work-environmental issues influencing employee wellbeing. As for this study, the interest in wellbeing is on the individual employees’ wellbeing at the workplace rather than the wellbeing per se of previous psychological scholars.

Krekel, Ward, and Neve (2019) stated that employees perceived their wellbeing in relation to any objective benefits that make the employees wellbeing as their priority. Kossek, Kalliath, and Kalliath (2012) stated that wellbeing among employees related to a healthy work environment, and they were engaged in their job. Thus, it is important for organizations to design their workplace that provide a belief among employees that they will benefit financially and psychologically in tandem with the organizations’ success.

Relationship between Self Endurance and Wellbeing

This study sees the importance of understanding the individual’s self endurance about wellbeing, specifically among manufacturing employees in the manufacturing industry. Moreover, the wage cuts would have the opposite effects on individuals’ Wellbeing (Drakopoulos & Grimani, 2015). Headey and Wearing (1992, 1991, 1989) and Headey, Holmstrom, and Wearing (1984a, 1984b) associated very stable personality traits toward wellbeing.

Unfortunately, there was almost none of the previous studies that relates self endurance and wellbeing to individual employees in organizations. Thus, this study proposes that a positive relationship exists between the self endurance of the manufacturing employees who faced the pay cut and their wellbeing. This also allows the study to understand the dimensions that affect the self endurance due to the above situation. This study contributes significantly to the management and organizational behavior field.

Theory

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs has been the underpinning theory between self endurance and wellbeing among employees in the manufacturing. They foresee that their wellbeing will be fulfilled as they move up in the concept of their needs. Thus, employees will ensure that their self endurance is always positive in facing all the challenges that being elaborated by Maslow.

Hypothesis

The study developed the following hypothesis:

H₁: Self endurance dimensions positively correlate with the wellbeing among employees in the public and private sectors.

Research Framework

Figure 1 depicts the development of a self endurance model among employees toward positive wellbeing.

Figure 1: Self endurance Model

METHODOLOGY

The research will be conducted on the employees in the public and private sectors in the nation. The research samples will employ a simple random sampling method to obtain respondents among employees in those sectors. Furthermore, self-administered questionnaires will be employed as the research instrument for this quantitative approach to capture the respondents’ feedback on the questions given. The questionnaires will ask the respondents to rate their responses to the questions about their self endurance in relation to their wellbeing. A total of 1,000 employees in the public and private sectors will be targeted in the distribution of the questionnaires.

Research Tools

The study’s research tools are adapted and adopted from previous studies. In the context of self endurance, the work of Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995) questions on the General Self-Efficacy Scale consisted of 10 items, Wehmyer (1995) questions on the Self-Determination Scale consisted of 32 items, and Gavaro, Jakesova, and Kalenda (2015) questions on the Self-Regulation Questionnaire consisted of 27 were used. Subsequently, the wellbeing scale will be based on the work of Rasool, Wang, Tang, Saeed, and Iqbal (2021) and consisted of 5 items. The questionnaires will be constructed and divided into three sections. Firstly, in Section One, respondents will be asked about their demographic information such as gender, ethnicity, age, marital status, number of years working, and position. Secondly, in Section Two, respondents will be asked to rate using the Likert Scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) on their self endurance on the 69 items. Finally, in Section Three, respondents will be asked to rate using the Likert Scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) on their positive wellbeing on 5 items.

Data Analysis

Demographic Analysis

Demographic analysis is depicted in Table 1. The respondents who responded to the questionnaire were almost equal in percentage where female respondents were 147 (49.2%) as compared to male respondents (n=152; 50.8%). Majority of the respondents were Malay (n=232; 78.4%). These are followed by Indian (n=43; 14.5%), ethnic from Sabah and Sarawak (n=12; 4.1%), and finally, Chinese (n=9; 3%). Subsequently, the majority of the respondents were married (n=197; 66.3%) as compared to single (n=93; 31.3%), and divorcee (n=7; 2.4%). Ninety-three respondents indicated their age between 25 to 30 years old (31.1%). These are followed by respondents aged between 31 to 35 years old (n=80; 26.8%), 36 to 40 years old (n=72; 24.1%), 40 to 45 years old (n=33; 11%), and finally, below 25 and above 45 were 8 respondents (2.7%).

In the employment sector, almost two-thirds of the respondents were in the public sector (n=192; 63.6%) against the private sector (n=105; 35.4%). The majority of the respondents had work experience between 5 to 10 years (n=108; 36.1%); this was followed by 10 to 15 years (n=78; 26.1%), 16 to 20 years (n=54; 18.1%), below 5 years (n=34; 11.4%), and above 20 years (n=25; 8.4%). In the context of work hours, the majority of the respondents said that they had a flexible hour (n=155; 51.8%) as compared to a fixed hour (n=144; 48.2%). Finally, the respondents showed that their superior was male (n=203; 68.4%) against female (n=94: 31.6%).

Table 1: Demographic Analysis

Factor Analysis

The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on the overall questions in the independent variables known as the newly constructed self endurance scale. The independent variables consisted of several components. Firstly, the General Self-Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995) that consisted of 10 items. Secondly, the Arc’s Self-Determination Scale (Wehmyer, 1995) which were constructed by several items: (a) Independence with 2 components; (a1) Routine personal care and family-oriented functions (n=6), and (a2) Interaction with the environment (n=4); (b) the Acting based on preferences, belief, interests, and abilities with 4 components; (b1) Recreational and leisure time (n=6), (b2) Community involvement and interaction (n=5), (b3) Post-school directions (n=6), and (b4) Personal expression (n=5). Thus, the Arc’s Self-Determination Scale consisted of 32 items, overall. Finally, The Self-Regulation Questionnaire (Gavaro, Jakesova & Kalenda, 2015) consisted of 27 items.

Before the EFA, this study had removed 10 items from the newly constructed self endurance scale based on the communalities value of less than 0.3. Thus, the remaining 64 questions were examined with the EFA. Subsequently, the EFA was factored into four varimax-rotated component matrices. Table 2, the new NMD-MH’S self endurance scale, depicted the EFA which was generated; namely, Factor 1 with 19 items was labeled as the Problem Solver-oriented, Factor 2 with 20 items was labeled as the Determination-oriented, Factor 3 with 8 items was labeled as the Action-oriented, and Factor 4 with 17 items was labeled as the Opportunity-oriented. The CFA-constructed questionnaire on the newly constructed and named NH’s self endurance scale is in the attachment. Likewise, the wellbeing items are also depicted in the attachment.

Table 2: The New NMD-MH’s Self endurance Scale

Furthermore, the new research framework is depicted in Figure 2 based on the new NMD-MH’s self endurance scale toward the wellbeing. The above newly NMD-MH’s self endurance scale was analyzed on its reliability, correlation, and regression.

Figure 2: The New Research Framework

Subsequently, the study developed a new list of hypotheses as below:

• H₁: Self endurance positively correlates with the wellbeing among employees in the public and private sectors.
• H_1a: Problem solver-oriented of self-endurance positively correlates with the wellbeing of employees in the public and private sectors.
• H_1b: Determination-oriented of self-endurance positively correlate with the wellbeing of employees in the public and private sectors.
• H_1c: Action-oriented of self-endurance positively correlates with the wellbeing among employees in the public and private sectors.
• H_1d: Opportunity-oriented of self-endurance positively correlates with the wellbeing among employees in the public and private sectors.

Reliability Analysis

The reliability analysis is depicted in Table 3. Firstly, the problem solver-oriented with 19 items shows the Cronbach Alpha’s of 0.88. Secondly, the determination-oriented shows the Cronbach Alpha’s of 0.87. Thirdly, the action-oriented shows the Cronbach Alpha’s of 0.87. Finally, the opportunity-oriented shows the Cronbach Alpha’s of 0.87. On the other hand, the Wellbeing shows the Cronbach Alpha’s of 0.81. This concluded that all variables, namely the independent and the dependent variables, warrant further analysis.

Table 3: The Reliability Analysis

Correlation Analysis

Table 4 depicts the correlation analysis of the study. Initially, the correlation at 0.01 level, the problem solver-oriented (r=0.40), the determination-oriented (r=0.42), and the opportunity-oriented (r=0.30) had a medium positive relationship toward wellbeing. Conversely, the action-oriented (r=-0.15) indicated a small negative relationship toward wellbeing at a 0.05 level of significance. Overall correlation analysis, the self endurance (r=0.28) indicated a medium positive relationship with wellbeing at a 0.01 level of significance.

Table 4: The Correlation Analysis

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Regression Analysis: Table 5 depicts the multiple regression analysis between the self endurance variables, namely the problem solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented toward wellbeing. The employees in the public and private sectors indicated that their R² was 22.8% on the wellbeing which was explained by the problem solver-oriented (β=0.32, p=not sig.), determination-oriented (β=0.28, p<0.5), action-oriented (β=0.28, p<0.1), and opportunity-oriented (β=0.31, p<0.5). Furthermore, the multiple regression model (F=11.82, p<0.001) was proven to be a significant model due to the F ratio being significant in predicting self endurance among employees in the public and private sectors. In conclusion, self endurance, namely problem-solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented were significant in predicting the wellbeing of employees in the public and private sectors. Unfortunately, all hypotheses, H_1a, H_1b, H_1c, and H_1d, namely the problem solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented were not supported in explaining the employees in the public and private sectors on their self endurance toward their wellbeing.

Table 5: The Multiple Regression Analysis

Table 6 depicts the simple regression analysis on the main hypothesis between self endurance toward wellbeing. The employees in the public and private sectors indicated that their R² was 0.8% on wellbeing which was explained by the self endurance (β=0.61, p<0.001). Furthermore, the simple regression model (F=21.74, p<0.001) was proven to be a significant model due to the F ratio being significant in predicting self endurance among employees in the public and private sectors. In conclusion, the self endurance was significant in predicting the wellbeing of employees in the public and private sectors. Thus, hypothesis H₁ was supported in explaining to the employees in the public and private sectors their self endurance toward their wellbeing.

Table 6: The Simple Regression Analysis

Thus, Table 7 depicts the summary of the study’s hypotheses.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

The study has well covered the employees in the public and private sectors in terms of the distribution of the questionnaires. The employees are equally represented in the study. The majority of the employees are married which explains their maturity as employees in the public and private sectors. Most employees are considered at their young age as employees. Interestingly, there is a handful of experienced employees that potentially help disseminate their work knowledge, especially their tacit knowledge to the younger employees. Moreover, this is supported by the work experience of senior employees with their junior colleagues. Most employees in the public and private sectors have equal work hours namely fixed and flexible hours. Lastly, the employees indicate that most of them are reporting to a male superior rather than a female superior. This can be concluded that the nation’s distribution of the workforce is equal in the public and private organizations. Thus, the nation’s nationals have the liberty to choose their potential employers based on their judgments and the benefits given to them.

Furthermore, employees in the public and private sectors show their self endurance, namely problem-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented, as a whole components have a positive relationship with their wellbeing. These explain that employees are independent and mature in handling their daily and routine tasks at work regardless they are in public or private organizations. In the context of hypothesizing, the study discovers that employees in the public and private sectors indicate none of the components of self endurance, namely problem-solver-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented, has supported the impact on their wellbeing. Positively, the overall of the employees’ self endurance has a positive impact on their wellbeing. Thus, this concludes that the components of self endurance per se cannot contribute to the employee’s wellbeing but rather be considered the whole of self endurance. Conversely, the individual components of self endurance, namely problem-oriented, determination-oriented, action-oriented, and opportunity-oriented, were not supported with the wellbeing. Thus, this could be considered that employees need to have all the mentioned components that relate to their self endurance. The combination of the components will ensure that employees will endure themselves in pursuit of their wellbeing.

In the context of problem solvers oriented toward wellbeing, the work of Nauta, Dreu, and Vaart (2001) purports the notion. They studied over eleven organizations on the planning and sales employees. Their study revealed that problem-solving can be induced by selecting or developing prosocial employees because a prosocial value orientation increases the likelihood of having broad role orientations, in which employees not only care for goals characteristic of their department but also for goals of other departments. Furthermore, the employees’ determination-oriented is supported by Dewa, Loong, Bonato et al. (2015) in the paper reviews the return-to-work (RTW) intervention that incorporates work-related problem-solving for workers with sickness absences related to mental disorders. In their work, they discovered limited evidence that combinations of interventions that include work-related problem-solving skills are effective in RTW outcomes. In this context, the employees need to be determined in their decision to go to work regardless of their health conditions. In the opportunity-oriented, this study concurs with Rasheed, Okumus, Weng, Hameed, and Nawaz (2020) as they examined employee turnover as an important concern for organizations in the hospitality industry. Their study found career adaptability to be negatively related to employee turnover intentions via orientation to happiness. In addition, perceived career opportunity was determined to be an important boundary condition in that the mediated relationship was weaker when lower levels of perceived career opportunity were present. Therefore, in the context of opportunity-oriented, the employees in the public and private sectors need to be vigilant in the arises of an opportunity to them. Thus, they need to capture the opportunity as it is made available to them toward their career progression.

On the other hand, employees state that their action orientation is negatively correlated with their wellbeing. This situation warrants their superiors to act in motivating them to act in their daily and routine tasks. Organizations need to have an effective system that incorporates the motivation of their employees. Moreover, Chlpeková, Večeřa, and Šurinová (2014) work defined critical factors that lead to the demotivation of problem-solving teams. Their study proposed the integration of system effectiveness into the employee’s motivation.

The findings of this research can provide new knowledge in understanding the individuals’ self endurance toward positive wellbeing employees of the public and private sectors in the nation. The development of a self endurance model can provide knowledge to various interested parties, such as individual employees, manufacturers, government agencies and bodies, and the Human Resources Ministry. Moreover, this study is expected to prove an impact as such to society, the economy, and the nation. Firstly, to the society, it will give an input on the identification of the dimensions of self endurance, specifically to the individual employees in the manufacturing industry and generally to the individual employees in the other industries. Secondly, to the economy, especially the organizations of the public and private sectors, the organizations’ top management can benefit from the research outputs in the understanding of the employees’ concerns and their wellbeing rather than focusing on the profits. Finally, to the nation, especially to the relevant labor agency and ministry, the research outputs would be an impetus in drafting a good national policy that relates to the employees’ self endurance about their wellbeing in the context of “Malaysia Madani”. The current government has expressed its high concern for the nation’s employees’ wellbeing as most public sector employees are given a progressive salary raise in the Nation’s Budget 2025.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Acknowledgment to the Universiti Sains Malaysia on the Bridging Grant and for the funding of this research. Ref no. R501-LR-RND003-0000000742-0000.

REFERENCES

1. Bradburn, N. (1969). The Structure of Psychological Wellbeing. Chicago: Aldine.
2. Chlpeková, A., Večeřa, P., and Šurinová, Y. (2014). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Problem-Solving Processes through Employee Motivation and Involvement. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 6:31, 1-9. DOI: 10.5772/59431.
3. Department of Statistics Malaysia (2020). Available online: https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/ctwoByCat&parent_id=89&menu_id=SjgwNXdiM0JlT3Q2TDBlWXdKdUVldz09.
4. Dewa CS, Loong D, Bonato S, et al. (2015). The effectiveness of return-to- work interventions that incorporate work-focused problem-solving skills for workers with sickness absences related to mental disorders: a systematic literature review. BMJ Open, 5:e007122, 1-11. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014- 007122.
5. Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring Quality of Life: Economic, Social, and Subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216.
6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006859511756.
7. Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. (2012). The Challenge of Defining Wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222-235. doi:10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4.
8. Drakopoulos, S. A. & Grimani, K. (2015).  The Effect of Pay Cuts on Psychological Wellbeing and Job Satisfaction. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, MPRA Paper No. 61195. Available online: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/61195/.
9. Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) (2021). Businesses start to cut salaries. Available online: https://www.fmm.org.my/FMM_In_The_News-@-Small_businesses_start_to_cut_salaries_to_survive_Covid-19.aspx.
10. Gavora, P., Jakešová, J., & Kalenda, J. (2015). The Czech Validation of the Self-Regulation Questionnaire. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 222-230.
11. Headey, B. W. (2006). Happiness: Revising set point theory and dynamic equilibrium theory to account for long term change. Berlin: DIW German Institute for Economic Research.
12. Headey, B. W., & Wearing, A. J. (1989). Personality, Life Events and Subjective Wellbeing: Toward a Dynamic Equilibrium Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 731–739. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.731.
13. Headey, B. W., & Wearing, A. J. (1991). Subjective Wellbeing: A Stocks and Flows Framework. In Strack, F., Argyle, M., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.). Subjective Wellbeing – An interdisciplinary perspective. 49–76. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
14. Headey, B. W., & Wearing, A. J. (1992). Understanding happiness: A theory of Subjective Wellbeing. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
15. Headey, B. W., Holmstrom, E., & Wearing, A. J. (1984a). The Impact of Life Events and Changes in Domain Satisfactions on Wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 15, 203–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00668671.
16. Headey, B. W., Holmstrom, E., & Wearing, A. J. (1984b). Wellbeing and Ill-Being: Different Dimensions? Social Indicators Research, 14, 115-139.
17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00293406
18. Heslin, P.A., & Klehe, U.C. (2006). Self-efficacy. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Industrial/Organizational Psychology. 2, 705-708. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
19. Kepoğlu, A., Yanar, S., & Gunel, I. (2017). Determination of Psychological Endurance Perception According to some Variables in Sports Workers, Acta Scientiae et Intellectus, 3(4), 42-55.
20. Kossek, E.E., Kalliath T. & Kalliath, P. (2012). Achieving employee wellbeing in a changing work environment: An expert commentary on current scholarship. International Journal of Manpower, 33(7), 738-753.
21. Krekel, C., Ward, G. & Neve, J-E.D. (2019). Employee Wellbeing, Productivity, and Firm Performance. Saïd Business School WP 2019-04.
22. Nauta, A., Dreu, C. K. W. D., & Vaart, T. V. D. (2001). Social value orientation, organizational goal concerns and interdepartmental problem-solving behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, University of Groningen databased, 1-28.
23. Oxford Dictionary Online (2021). Available online: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/endurance.
24. Rasheed, M.I., Okumus,, Weng, Q., Hameed, Z., and Nawaz, M.S. (2020). Career adaptability and employee turnover intentions: The role of perceived career opportunities and orientation to happiness in the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 98–107.
25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.05.006
26. Rasool, S.F., Wang, M., Tang, M., Saeed, A., & Iqbal, J. (2021). How Toxic Workplace Environment Effects the Employee Engagement: The Mediating Role of Organizational Support and Employee Wellbeing. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18, 2294. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph18052294.
27. Sunil, P. (2021). COVID-19: One-third of Staff Surveyed in Malaysia Faced a Pay Cut of More than 30%. Available online: https://www.humanresourcesonline.net/covid-19-one-third-of-staff-surveyed-in-malaysia-faced-a-pay-cut-of-more-than-30.
28. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs, 35-37.
29. Wehmeyer, M. L. (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Procedural Guidelines. Arc, Arlington, TX. (Ed) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. Washington, DC. Div. of Innovation and Development