Quality of Work Life and Commitment Levels among Senior Staff of University of Cape Coast

Quality of Work Life and Commitment Levels among Senior Staff of University of Cape Coast

¹Naomi Arthur Fynn, ²Hayford Lartey, ³John Kojo Sam

¹Faculty of Arts, University of Cape Coast

²Office of the Provost, College of Humanities and Legal Studies, University of Cape Coast

³University Halls Housing Medical Students (UHMS) University of Cape Coast

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.11120083

Received: 10 December 2024; Accepted: 14 December 2024; Published: 23 January 2025

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to assess the levels of Quality of Work Life (QWL) and Organisational Commitment (OC) among senior staff at the University of Cape Coast (UCC). The study aimed to explore how these factors influence the work attitudes of senior staff members in a higher education setting. A cross-sectional survey design was employed, with data collected through a structured questionnaire administered to senior staff at UCC. The study examined dimensions of QWL, including compensation, working conditions, and human capacity development, as well as the levels of OC. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used to analyse the data, including frequency counts, percentages, and mean scores to assess the levels of QWL and OC. The results indicated that while senior staff expressed moderate satisfaction with various QWL factors, including salary and working conditions, there were areas of concern such as perceived inadequacy in compensation and safety measures. In terms of OC, the study revealed a strong emotional attachment to the institution but a lower commitment towards long-term tenure. The study highlights the importance of improving QWL factors, such as compensation and safety, to enhance employee engagement and retention at UCC. The study recommends that the university’s management prioritise initiatives that address these concerns and enhance overall employee well-being and organisational loyalty.

Keywords: Quality of Work Life; Organisational Commitment; Senior Staff

INTRODUCTION

Quality of work life (QWL) is seen as an essential element for organisations survival since organisations now need to provide a high QWL in order to draw in and keep skilled and productive employees as well as make sure that they perform their jobs with passion and effectiveness. Organisational Commitment (OC), job satisfaction, participation, motivation, productivity, health, job security, career advancement, and work-life balance are all interconnected components of the multifaceted concept of quality of work life (Farid et al., 2015). Subbarayalu and Al Kuwaiti (2019) defines the QWL “as a goal and process.” The goal is to create more effective and fulfilling jobs and environments for individuals at all levels of the organisation, with the process involving the active participation of everyone in achieving this objective. The key concepts captured in QWL include job security, better reward systems, higher pay, an opportunity for growth and participative groups, among others (Abebe & Assemie, 2023).

QWL plays a crucial role in employee engagement and retention. Research has demonstrated that it can enhance employee productivity, reduce absenteeism, lower turnover rates, minimise sick leave usage, and decrease workplace stress levels (Dharshini & Kaarthiekheyan, 2024). An organisation cannot survive if the commitment of its employees is not taken into consideration. OC is defined as a psychological state that reflects the employee’s relationship with the organisation, influencing their choice to either remain with or leave the organisation (Meyer & Allen, 2001). This is supported by Sehunoe et al. (2015), who argue that OC in the workplace is perceived as the bond employees form with their organisation. Employees who are committed typically feel a strong connection to the organisation, believe they fit in, and understand its goals. This sense of connection not only fosters a positive relationship between employees and the organisation but also enhances performance, as committed employees tend to be more productive and dedicated to their work, ultimately helping the organisation achieve its objectives (Meyer et al., 2002).

Meyer and Allen (2001) conceptualised OC as comprising three distinct dimensions: affective, continuance, and normative. Affective commitment refers to an emotional attachment to the organisation, where the committed individual identifies with, is involved in, and enjoys being part of the organisation. Employees with high affective commitment stay with the organisation because they want to, driven by a genuine sense of belonging and personal connection (Meyer & Allen, 2001). The continuance dimension of OC refers to the recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organisation. Employees whose commitment is driven by continuance remain with the organisation because they feel they need to, often due to the perceived costs or consequences of leaving (Meyer & Allen, 2001). The normative dimension of OC centres on feelings of loyalty to an organisation, which arise from the internalisation of normative pressures placed on the individual (Hackett et al., 1994). Meyer and Allen (2001) also suggested that individuals demonstrate committed behaviours because they believe it is the right thing to do.

According to Meyer and Allen (2001), employees who are normatively committed feel a sense of obligation to remain with the organisation. Given that work holds significant importance in many individuals’ lives, organisational commitment (OC) is likely to influence not only their physical well-being but also their social, psychological, and spiritual well-being (Jebel, 2013). It is well-established that employees with high levels of psychological well-being tend to be more committed, engaged, and productive than those with lower levels of well-being (Wright & Hobfoll, 2004). Moreover, since an employee’s experience in the workplace and the quality of their work directly impact their health and psychological well-being, employees are more likely to experience higher well-being if they are satisfied with their work and organisation and perceive their QWL positively (Sinha, 2012).

OC is influenced by a number of variables, however, the one most single important factor that influences it is the QWL of its employees (Agus & Selvaraj, 2020). Scholarly works have been done to show a link between the QWL and OC (Birjandi et al., 2013; Jebel, 2013; Afsar, 2014; Damirchi et al., 2014; Khan, 2015; Ashok & Yatin, 2017). Abebe and Assemie (2023) stated that QWL has a statistically significant and positive association with OC. Nayak et al. (2015) stated that quality of work factors, such as equitable remuneration, favourable and safe working conditions, opportunities for personal and professional growth, job security, and work-life balance, are positively related to employees’ OC. Additionally, Normala (2010) found that among Malaysian academic personnel, OC, growth and development, participation, physical environment, supervision, salary and perks, and the social importance of the work were all positively correlated. Additionally, Hashempour et al. (2018) claimed that OC is influenced by the quality of work-life balance. Thus, the aforementioned discussion concludes that QWL is positively associated with employees’ OC and that enhancing work-life balance contributes to higher employee productivity, lower levels of stress and absenteeism, increased intrinsic motivation, and a sense of belonging to their companies.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that OC is a problem in Ghanaian public sector institutions (Adei & Boachie-Danquah, 2003; Abdul-Nasiru et al., 2014; Oluyinka et al., 2015). As noted by Abdul-Nasiru et al. (2014), instead of being dedicated to their jobs, the majority of public sector workers frequently do nothing except, “working lotto numbers, reading newspapers at times that they are expected to be working towards achieving organisational goals, showing apathy or coming late to work without permission”. The issue still exists despite the Ghanaian government’s repeated attempts to address the low commitment level among public sector workers via numerous forums, including the Ministry of Public Sector Reform in 2007, the Public Sector Re-Invention and Modernisation Strategy in 1997, the Civil Service Reform Program from 1987 to 1994, and the Civil Service Performance Improvement Program in 1994 (Obese, 2010; Oluyinka et al., 2015). Owusu (2004) states that the state of OC among Ghanaian public sector workers is higher than that of private sector organisations. This raises questions among Ghanaians about whether the public sector workplace prioritises workers’ QWL.

Employees in Ghana now want more from their jobs than merely compensation (Oluyinka et al., 2015; Owusu, 2004). By meeting their basic requirements, building mutual trust, and developing a suitable organisational culture, organisations can increase employee engagement (Owusu, 2004). Commitment can lead to numerous positive results as dedicated employees are more organised in their tasks, devote more time to the organisation, and exhibit greater productivity. An increase in quality of employees work life can also have a significant impact on the level of interest, job satisfaction, willingness to stay and organisation performance.

As a result of a major structural shift at the University of Cape Coast (UCC), senior academic, administrative, and other similar staff members now handle a greater number of duties, adding to their workload and creating additional stressors. The majority of these workers must perform additional labour without receiving additional compensation in order to fulfil employment requirements (Obese, 2010; Banji & Fombad, 2019). According to senior employees who worked in the different departments, units, and sections that handle raw chemicals, they are subjected to dangerous compounds that might have a negative impact on their health (Banji & Fombad, 2019). Because they lack adequate protective gear, the employees at all technical and engineering shops also lament about being vulnerable to health hazards. Altbach (2003) also notes that senior staff members’ liberty to advance their academic pursuits seems to be limited, and their participation in institutional governance is minimal. These all demonstrate how concerning the work-life balance of UCC workers is. Obese (2010) points out that the type of employment and the workplace environment are to blame for the majority of work-related illnesses at the university, depriving it of a considerable number of working days annually. In light of these worries, the aim of this study was to investigate the QWL and OC levels of senior UCC employees.

Research Questions

1. What is the level of the QWL among senior staff of the UCC?
2. What is the level of OC among senior staff of the UCC?

THEORETICAL REVIEW

The Social Exchange Theory

Homans, a sociologist, developed the social exchange theory (Homans, 1961). According to Homans (1961), social exchange is the sharing of activities, whether material or immaterial, more or less profitable or less profitable, between two or more individuals. The system of social exchange theory was distilled by Homans into three propositions: (a) the success proposition, which states that when an individual receives a reward for their actions, they are more likely to repeat them; (b) the stimulus proposition, which asserts that the more times a given stimulus has previously produced a reward, the more likely an individual is to respond to it; and (c) deprivation, which also holds that the more often in the recent past a person has received a particular reward, the less valuable any further unit of that reward becomes (Homans, 1974; Homans, 1961; Homans, 1958).

According to the Social Exchange Theory, human actions are based on logical calculations intended to maximise individual gain. Since most people enjoy approval, loyalty, financial support, love, and company, we may find it fulfilling to be in a relationship with someone who raises our social standing. This falls under the reward category. A negative value for a person, however, always results in expenses. The connection that costs us money, time, and effort, or the changes we have to do to work with someone else, is one example. The net result is equal to the sum of the expenses and rewards. Redmond (2015) reiterated in his study that Homans essentially envisions any social interaction between people involving costs and rewards.

The social exchange theory has faced several critiques from scholars. Miller (2005) argues that the theory oversimplifies human interaction by reducing it to a purely rational process rooted in economic theory, and that it assumes intimacy as the ultimate goal of relationships, which may not always be the case. She also highlights the theory’s linear structure, which fails to account for relationships that may skip steps or regress in intimacy. Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) critique the theory for its limited exploration of exchange rules beyond reciprocity, suggesting that a broader understanding would emerge from studying additional rules like altruism, group gain, and competition, which vary across cultures and organisational contexts. Zafirovski (2005) further criticises the theory for likening social interactions to economic transactions driven by self-interest and material rewards, a view that portrays individuals as primarily self-serving. Keenoy (2009) adds that the theory assumes individuals make rational decisions in social exchanges, which may not always reflect reality, and neglects the agency of employees who actively shape their work and organisational environments. Additionally, the theory overlooks the complexity of simultaneous, multifaceted exchanges in social networks, where varying social values and exchange rules may coexist, as noted by Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005).

The Social Exchange Theory offers a valuable lens through which to understand the dynamics of QWL and OC among senior staff at the UCC. According to the theory, relationships within organisations are based on the exchange of resources, where employees weigh the costs and benefits of their interactions with the organisation. In the context of this study, senior staff’s perception of their QWL, including factors like compensation, working conditions, and opportunities for development, can be viewed as the “rewards” they receive from their employer. In return, their level of OC reflects the “reciprocity” they feel toward UCC based on the benefits they perceive. The theory suggests that when employees feel they receive sufficient rewards, such as fair compensation and opportunities for growth, they are more likely to exhibit high levels of OC. Conversely, perceived imbalances or insufficient rewards could lead to decreased commitment.

METHODS

Procedures

This study employed a cross-sectional survey design to assess the state of QWL and determine the level of OC among senior staff of the UCC. The study population comprised all 1,518 senior staff members of the UCC. These employees were selected as the unit of analysis due to their relevance in exploring the levels of QWL and OC. A sample size of 306 was determined using the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) table of sample size determination, which considers population size, proportion, and a degree of accuracy set at 0.05.

The simple random sampling technique, specifically the lottery method, was employed to select 301 senior staff members for the study. Each member of the population was assigned a unique number, which was randomly drawn to ensure every individual had an equal chance of being selected. This approach not only improved the reliability and validity of the study but also ensured the representativeness of the sample.

Instrumentation and Data Collection

The study utilised a structured questionnaire comprising 31 items divided into three sections. Section A featured five items capturing respondents’ demographic information. Section B, adapted from Walton’s (1974) QWL questionnaire, included three subsections: BI measured adequate and fair compensation, BII assessed healthy working conditions, and BIII evaluated opportunities to use and develop human capacities. Section C adapted an 8-item scale developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) to measure OC. All variables were measured using a 5-point Likert scale. The reliability of the data collected was assessed, with the results presented in Table 1. Following Nunnally and Bernstein’s (2008) guideline, all constructs demonstrated acceptable to excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients exceeding the recommended threshold of .7. Specifically, the development of human capacities exhibited excellent reliability (.867), while compensation (.784), working condition (.741), and OC (.774) demonstrated good reliability. These results indicate a high level of internal consistency across all constructs, ensuring the reliability of the questionnaire.

Table 1: Reliability Test

Constructs	Cronbach’s Alpha	No. of items
Compensation	0.784	6
Working condition	0.741	6
Development of human capacities	0.867	6
Organisational commitment (OC)	0.774	8

Source: Fieldwork (2018)

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis of the acquired data. The demographic information pertaining to gender, age, marital status, education level, and duration of service was analysed using frequency counts and percentages. In the meanwhile, the degree of QWL, encompassing pay, working circumstances, and the growth of human capacities, was evaluated using means and standard deviations. Additionally, OC among senior UCC personnel was assessed using frequency counts, percentages, averages, and standard deviations.

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

The results on the background characteristics of the respondents are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Background Characteristics of the Respondents

Demography	Subscale	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	174	57.80%
	Female	127	42.20%
Age	20-30 years	73	24.30%
	31-40 years	163	54.2
	41-50 years	48	15.9
	51 and above years	17	5.6
Marital status	Single	102	33.9
	Married	199	66.1
Education level	Below First Degree	63	20.9
	First Degree	146	48.5
	Master’s Degree	69	22.9
	Professional Certificate	23	7.6
Working experience	Less than 1year	33	11
	1-5years	51	16.9
	6-10years	128	42.5
	11-15years	59	19.6
	16-20years	23	7.6
	21 or above years	7	2.3

Source: Fieldwork (2018)

From Table 2, the majority of respondents were male (174; 57.8%), with females (127; 42.2%) forming a smaller proportion, indicating a gender imbalance favouring male participants. In terms of age, over half of the respondents (163; 54.2%) were between 31 and 40 years, followed by 20-30 years (73; 24.3%), 41-50 years (48; 15.9%), and 51 years and above (17; 5.6%). This suggests that the majority of participants were in their early to mid-career stages. Regarding marital status, most respondents were married (199; 66.1%), with single participants comprising a smaller proportion (102; 33.9%). Educationally, almost half of the respondents (146; 48.5%) held a first degree, followed by those with a master’s degree (69; 22.9%), below a first degree (63; 20.9%), and a professional certificate (23; 7.6%). In terms of working experience, the largest group had 6-10 years of experience (128; 42.5%), followed by 11-15 years (59; 19.6%), 1-5 years (51; 16.9%), and less than 1 year (33; 11.0%). A smaller percentage had 16-20 years (23; 7.6%) and 21 or more years (7; 2.3%) of experience. This distribution indicates a workforce predominantly in the mid-range of their career journey.

What is the Level of QWL among Senior Staff?

Research question 1 aimed to determine the level of QWL among senior staff of UCC. Table 3 presents the results.

Table 3: Level of QWL among Senior Staff

Statements	Mean	SD
Employee Compensation	2.76	0.92
I enjoy additional benefit	2.84	1.32
Employee salaries at the University are at or close to the highest in their industry.	2.84	1.13
There is a contributing provident fund facility.	2.82	1.2
When compared to my colleague’s pay, I am satisfied with mine.	2.7	1.3
I get compensated based on my unique skills, expertise, and experience.	2.7	1.18
Considering the state of the labour market, my pay is appropriate for my position.	2.63	1.28
Safe and Healthy Working Condition	3.26	0.86
My work environment enables me to be as productive as possible.	3.35	1.13
There is the presence of a normal workload.	3.33	1.08
I feel protected at work from verbal, emotional, or physical harm.	3.32	1.15
The workplace I work at has good health and safety conditions.	3.26	1.16
A safe workplace is guaranteed by the security division.	3.2	1.22
Where I work, management places a great premium on employee safety.	3.13	1.19
Human Capacity Development	3.57	0.71
To help me perform my work, I have a clear set of objectives.	3.87	0.94
My job gives me the chance to put my skills to use.	3.81	1
I am urged to acquire new skills.	3.67	1.07
Employees have access to self-improvement opportunities.	3.66	0.99
The supervisor has a fair approach and treats everyone equally.	3.29	1.09
Employee engagement in technical planning is encouraged by the university.	3.11	1.15

Source: Fieldwork (2018)

*Scale (Mean): 0 – 2.5 = Low; 2.51 – 3.50 = Average; and 3.51 and above = High

From Table 3, the results show that the overall level of QWL among senior staff is within the average range across all dimensions assessed. Employee compensation scored an average mean of 2.76 (SD = .92), indicating moderate satisfaction with salary and benefits. For instance, the items “I enjoy extra benefit” (M = 2.84, SD = 1.32) and “The University pays its employees a salary that is at or near the top of its industry” (M = 2.84, SD = 1.13) had the highest means within this dimension, while “My salary is adequate for my job, given the current job market conditions” scored the lowest (M = 2.63, SD = 1.28), reflecting relative dissatisfaction with salary adequacy.

Safe and healthy working conditions received a mean score of 3.26 (SD = .86), also falling within the average range. Respondents rated “Conditions on my job allow me to be about as productive as I could be” (M = 3.35, SD = 1.13) and “There is an existence of normal workload” (M = 3.33, SD = 1.08) highest, indicating a perception of productive and manageable working conditions. However, “The safety of the worker is a high priority with management where I work” scored the lowest (M = 3.13, SD = 1.19), suggesting room for improvement in management’s prioritisation of worker safety.

Human capacity development was rated the highest among the QWL dimensions, with a mean score of 3.57 (SD = .71), categorised as high. The highest-rated item was “I have a clear set of goals and aims to enable me to do my job” (M = 3.87, SD = .94), followed closely by “I have the opportunity to use my abilities at work” (M = 3.81, SD = 1.00). However, “The University encourages employees’ participation in technical planning” scored the lowest within this dimension (M = 3.11, SD = 1.15), highlighting a potential area for enhanced involvement in strategic planning. Overall, the findings suggest that while employees perceive moderate satisfaction with compensation and working conditions, their experiences in human capacity development are relatively more positive, reflecting stronger alignment with their professional growth and job clarity.

What is the Level of OC among Senior Staff?

Research question 2 aimed to determine the level of OC among senior staff of UCC. Table 4 presents the results.

Table 4: Level of OC among Senior Staff

S/N	Statements	SD F (%)	Disagree F (%)	Uncertain F (%)	Agree F (%)	SA F (%)	Mean	SD
1	The readiness of employees to remain at the University of Cape Coast for the remainder of their careers	30(10.0)	44(14.6)	93(30.9)	97(32.2)	37(12.3)	3.22	1.15
2	Employees’ organisations are discussed with those outside of them.	19(6.3)	80(26.6)	50(16.6)	124(41.6)	28(9.3)	3.21	1.12
3	Feel as if the organisation’s problems are mine.	23(7.6)	36(12.0)	48(15.9)	153(50.8)	41(13.6)	3.51	1.11
4	I have more devotion to this organisation than any other.	7(2.3)	58(19.3)	92(30.6)	110(36.5)	34(11.3)	3.35	0.99
5	Feel like ‘part of the family’ in my organisation.	16(5.3)	55(18.3)	54(17.9)	135(44.9)	41(13.6)	3.43	1.1
6	I am ‘emotionally attached’ to this organisation.	17(5.6)	40(13.3)	61(20.6)	147(48.8)	36(12.0)	3.48	1.05
7	The organisation has a great deal of personal meaning for me.	16(5.3)	43(14.3)	61(20.3)	145(48.2)	36(12.0)	3.47	1.05
8	Have a strong sense of belongingness to my organisation.	15(5.0)	40(13.3)	52(17.3)	135(44.9)	59(19.6)	3.61	1.1
Overall Mean/SD							3.41	0.7126

Source: Field work (2018) Note: Scale: SD=1, Disagree=2, Neutral=3, Agree=4, SA=5 F = frequency N (Sample) = 301

*Scale (Mean): 0 – 2.5 = Low; 2.51 – 3.50 = Average; and 3.51 and above = High

Table 4 evaluates OC among employees of the UCC based on several indicators. Overall, the respondents demonstrated moderate OC, with an overall mean of 3.41 (SD = .71). The highest-rated indicator was “Having a strong sense of belongingness to my organisation” (Mean = 3.61, SD = 1.10), where 44.9% agreed and 19.6% strongly agreed, indicating that a significant proportion of employees feel connected to the institution. Similarly, 50.8% agreed and 13.6% strongly agreed with the statement, “I feel as if the organisation’s problems are mine” (Mean = 3.5083, SD = 1.1064), reflecting a sense of ownership and identification with organisational issues. Regarding emotional attachment, 48.8% agreed and 12.0% strongly agreed, resulting in a mean of 3.48 (SD = 1.05). However, indicators such as “Willingness to spend the rest of the career with the University” had a lower mean of 3.22 (SD = 1.15), with only 32.2% agreeing and 12.3% strongly agreeing, while 30.9% were uncertain, and 24.6% either disagreed or strongly disagreed. Similarly, “Discussing the organisation with outsiders” (Mean = 3.21, SD = 1.12) saw a notable proportion of respondents either disagreeing (26.6%) or being uncertain (16.6%), with 41.6% agreeing and 9.3% strongly agreeing. The standard deviation suggests that the responses were relatively consistent, with most respondents expressing similar levels of commitment towards the organisation. These findings indicate that whilst employees generally feel a sense of connection and loyalty to the organisation, there is notable variation in their willingness to remain with the institution or to promote it externally, as evidenced by the substantial percentages of disagreement and uncertainty for some indicators.

DISCUSSION

The study assessed the levels of QWL and OC among senior staff members of the UCC. The findings revealed that, overall, the senior staff had moderate satisfaction with various dimensions of QWL. While respondents expressed some satisfaction with extra benefits and the university’s competitive salary offerings, dissatisfaction was noted regarding the adequacy of their salaries, particularly when compared to current job market conditions. This reflects previous research indicating that employees’ perceptions of fair compensation are crucial for job satisfaction and overall work-life quality (Abebe & Assemie, 2023). In terms of safe and healthy working conditions, senior staff felt productive and found the workload manageable. However, there was a perceived gap in how management prioritizes worker safety, indicating a potential area for improvement. This finding aligns with research suggesting that workplace safety is essential for employees’ psychological and physical well-being (Dharshini & Kaarthiekheyan, 2024). Human capacity development emerged as the strongest dimension of QWL among senior staff. Respondents felt they had clear job goals and opportunities to apply their abilities at work. However, the university’s encouragement of staff participation in strategic planning was identified as a potential area for improvement. This highlights the importance of involving employees in decision-making and planning to further enhance their professional development and sense of value.

Regarding OC, the study revealed a moderate level of commitment among senior staff. Senior staff reported feeling emotionally attached to the university and a strong sense of belonging. However, a relatively lower commitment was observed in terms of staff willingness to spend the rest of their career with the institution. This suggests that while staff are committed to the university, their long-term career plans may not necessarily align with staying at the institution. This finding supports Meyer and Allen’s (2001) conceptualization of OC, which indicates that emotional attachment can exist even in the absence of a desire for long-term tenure. Overall, the results of this study suggest that while senior staff at UCC are moderately satisfied with their QWL, they exhibit a strong sense of OC, particularly in terms of emotional attachment and a sense of belonging. These findings highlight the importance of improving certain aspects of QWL, such as compensation and safety, to further enhance employee engagement and retention.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

In conclusion, the study on the levels of QWL and OC among senior staff members of the UCC revealed valuable insights. The senior staff expressed moderate satisfaction with various dimensions of their QWL, particularly in terms of extra benefits and salary offerings. However, areas such as salary adequacy and the prioritization of worker safety were identified as needing improvement. The study also highlighted the positive aspect of human capacity development, with senior staff appreciating clear job goals and opportunities for applying their abilities at work. However, the need for greater staff involvement in strategic planning was noted. Regarding OC, the senior staff exhibited strong emotional attachment and a sense of belonging to the university, though a lower commitment was observed in terms of their long-term career plans with the institution. The findings underscore the importance of addressing areas of dissatisfaction in compensation, safety, and staff involvement in decision-making to enhance overall QWL and foster higher OC.

Based on these results, the study recommends that the UCC prioritize improving the QWL of its senior staff by enhancing salary packages to align more closely with market expectations and placing greater emphasis on worker safety. Furthermore, efforts should be made to involve senior staff in strategic planning processes to increase their sense of value and engagement. In terms of OC, it is crucial to strengthen initiatives that enhance the emotional connection between employees and the university, such as team-building activities, career development programs, and recognition initiatives. These improvements will contribute to higher staff morale, better retention rates, and overall organisational success.

Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies

As this study makes valuable contributions to understanding the levels of QWL and OC among senior staff members of the UCC, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. One significant limitation is that the study focused solely on senior staff members of one institution, which may limit the generalisability of the findings to other universities or organisations. Future studies could improve the external validity of the findings by expanding the sample to include senior staff from multiple institutions across various regions. This would provide a broader perspective on QWL and OC in higher education institutions. Another limitation is the study’s reliance on a single methodological approach, namely a quantitative survey. While this approach provided valuable insights into the perceptions and experiences of senior staff, it may not capture the full depth of the complexities surrounding QWL and OC.

Future research could adopt a mixed-methods approach, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques, like interviews or focus groups, to investigate the underlying factors affecting QWL and OC more comprehensively. By including qualitative data, researchers could gain a deeper understanding of staff perceptions, experiences, and suggestions for improving QWL and OC. Additionally, the study did not examine the potential impact of external factors, such as economic conditions or national policies, on QWL and OC. Future studies could explore these external influences to provide a more holistic view of the factors shaping staff well-being and commitment in educational institutions.

REFERENCES

1. Abdul-Nasiru, I., Mensah, R., Amponsah-Tawiah, K., Simpeh, K.N., & Kumasey, A.S. (2014). Organisational Commitment in the Public Service of Ghana: An Empirical Study. Journal of developing country studies, 4(1), 49-55.
2. Abebe, A., & Assemie, A. (2023). Quality of work life and organizational commitment of the academic staff in Ethiopian universities. Heliyon, 9(4).
3. Adei, S. & Boachie-Danquah, Y. (2003). The Civil Service performance improvement programme (CSPIP) in Ghana: Lessons of experience. African Journal of Public Administration and Management, 14(1), 10–23.
4. Afsar, S. T. (2014). Impact of the quality of work life on organisational commitment: A comparative study on academicians working for state and foundation universities in Turkey. International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(4), 124-152.
5. Agus, A., & Selvaraj, R. (2020). The mediating role of employee commitment in the relationship between quality of work life and the intention to stay. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(6), 1231-1248.
6. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
7. Altbach, P. G. (2003). The decline of Guru: the academic profession in developing and middle-income countries. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
8. Ashok, K., & Yatin, T. (2017). Job Satisfaction and Quality of Work Life among Receptionists and Staff of Medical Record Department of a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in North India. JOJ Nurse Health Care. 3(4) 555-619.
9. Banji, G.T., & Fombad, M. C. (2019). Effective Leadership: A panacea to Employees’ Commitment to effective Library and Information Services in the University of Cape Coast (Sam Jonah) Library in Ghana. Library Philosophy and Practice Journal, 1-8.
10. Birjandi, M. A. S. O. U. D., Birjandi, H., & Ataei, M. (2013). The relationship between the quality of work life and organisational commitment of the employees of Darab cement company: A case study In Iran. International Journal of Economics, Business and Finance, 1(7), 154-164.
11. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874-900.
12. Damirchi, Q. V., Hafezian, M., Fattahi, F., Kazemian, M., & Kani, B. K. (2014). Quality of work life and employee’s organisational commitment in Sari City health centre. Journal of Research and Development, 1(9), 12-20.
13. Dharshini, S. P., & Kaarthiekheyan, V. (2024). A study on quality of work life–A theoretical survey. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.15680/IJMRSET.2024.0706128.
14. Farid, H., Izadi, Z., Ismail, I. A., & Alipour, F. (2015). Relationship between quality of work life and organizational commitment among lecturers in a Malaysian public research university. The Social Science Journal, 52, 54-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2014.09.003
15. Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P., & Hausdorf, P. A. (1994). Further assessments of Meyer and Allen’s (1991) three-component model of organisational commitment. Journal of applied psychology, 79(1), 15-23.
16. Hashempour, R., Hosseinpour Ghahremanlou, H., Etemadi, S., & Poursadeghiyan, M. (2018). The relationship between quality of work life and organizational commitment of Iranian emergency nurses. Health in Emergencies and Disasters Quarterly, 4(1), 49-54.
17. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social Behaviour as an exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606.
18. Homans, G.C. (1961). Social Behaviour: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace, New York.
19. Homans, G.C. (1974). Social Behaviour. Revised edition, Harcourt Brace, New York.
20. Jebel, G. E. D. A. (2013). Quality of work life and organizational commitment of employees in commercial bank of Ethiopia. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa.
21. Keenoy, T. (2009). Human Resource Management in the Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (5th ed.). M. Alvesson, T. Bridgman and H. Willmott, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Khan, M. A. (2015). Influence of quality of work life on organisational commitment among clerical-staff. Asia Pacific Journal of Research, 1(35), 106-113.
23. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (2001). Organizational commitment. Personnel psychology and human resource management: A reader for students and practitioners, 289, 342.
24. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the organisation: A meta-analysis of antecedents’ correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 16(1), 20-52.
25. Miller, K. (2005). Communication Theories. New York: McGraw Hill.
26. Nayak, T., Sahoo, C. K., & Mohanty, P. K. (2015). Quality of work life plays the mediating role in between workplace empowerment and employee commitment: A study on healthcare employees of an Indian state.
27. Normala, D. (2010). Investigating the relationship between quality of work life and organisational commitment amongst employees in Malaysian firms. International journal of business and management, 5(10), 75.
28. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (2008). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
29. Obese, E. (2010). Occupational health and safety practices of the University of Cape Coast. Doctoral dissertation, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast.
30. Oluyinka, O., Idemudia, E.S., & Desouza, M. (2015). Quality of working life and commitment amongst employees in public organisations in Ghana: does job involvement matter? Journal of Psychology in Africa, 25 (3), 235-241.
31. Owusu, F. (2004). Organisational Culture and the Performance of Public Organisations in Ghana: Learning from ‘Good Performers’, report submitted to PREM Public Sector Department, Governance Knowledge Sharing Program, The World Bank.
32. Redmond, M. V. (2015).”Social Exchange Theory”. English Technical Reports and White Papers.
33. Sehunoe, N., Viviers, R., & Mayer, C. H. (2015). Job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work engagement in an insurance company. South African Journal of Labour Relations, 39(2), 123-144.
34. Sinha, C. (2012). Factors affecting quality of work life: Empirical evidence from Indian organisations. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(11), 31-40.
35. Subbarayalu, A. V., & Al Kuwaiti, A. (2019). Quality of work life (QoWL) of faculty members in Saudi higher education institutions: A comparison between undergraduate medical and engineering program. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(4), 768-779.
36. Walton, R. E. (1974). Quality of work life indicators: Prospects and Problems. A symposium on social indicators of work life. Ottawa, 19-20.
37. Wright, T. A., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2004). Commitment, psychological well-being and job performance: An examination of conservation of resources (COR) theory and job burnout. Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 389.
38. Zafirovski, M. (2005). Social Exchange Theory under Scrutiny: A Positive Critique of its Economic-Behaviourist Formulations. Electronic Journal of Sociology, 1-41.