Gender, work and wellbeing in the third sector TSRC seminar 2014-01-15 by Dr Daiga Kamerade and Prof Steve McCay

1. A good place to be a man?
Gender, work and wellbeing in
the third sector
Funded by:
Hosted by:
Dr. Daiga Kamerāde, Prof. Steve McKay

2. Research questions:
• What are the differences in subjective wellbeing* (SWB) between people employed in
the third, public and private sectors? Are third
sector employees happier, more satisfied with
their lives, less anxious and more likely to
think the things they do in life are worthwhile
than the people employed in other sectors?
* Subjective well-being is ‘a person’s cognitive and affective evaluation of his
or her life’ , i.e. What a person thinks and feels about his/her life in general
(Diener, 2009)

3. Context and previous research
• Increasing importance of the third sector as a
service provider and an employer
• Concerns about decline in quality of jobs
(e.g. Cunningham, 2008; Cunningham & James, 2009; Eurofound, 2013; Grimshaw &
Rubery, 2012)
• Sector exceptionality, job satisfaction
premium and ‘warm glow’ debates
(e.g.Hansmann , 1980; Rose-Ackerman, 1996, Besley & Ghatak, 2005; Preston, 1989; Benz,
2005; Borzaga & Tortia, 2006; Donegani et al., 2012 ; Lee & Wilkins, 2011)

4. Our contribution
• More holistic approach to work –life relationships
(spillover theory - Kabanoff, 1980; Near, Rice, &
Hunt, 1980; Wilensky, 1960)
• Higher job satisfaction= higher life satisfaction
(Bowling, Eschleman, & Wang, 2010; Tait, Padgett, & Baldwin,
1989; Thoresen, Kaplan, Barsky, Warren, & de Chermont,
2003)
• Intrinsic motivation=higher subjective well-being
(Malka & Chatman, 2003; Ryan et al., 1999; Schmuck, Kasser,
& Ryan, 2000).

5. Causality issue
• Self-selection effect?
• Work effect?
It does not matter for monitoring purposes - to
make judgments on how the third sector
organisations as employers are doing in terms
of contributing to the wellbeing of their
employees and thus to the wellbeing of the
nation

6. Methods
Data: the Annual Population Survey (APS) 2012/2013
Sample: 113, 690 employed adults aged 16 and over;
3,491 (3%) of them employed in the third sector
Measurements:
•
•
•
Overall, how anxious did you feel yesterday? (measuring the negative affect)
Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday? (measuring the positive affect )
Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays? (measuring life
satisfaction)
• Overall, to what extent do you feel the things you do in your life are worthwhile?
(measuring life fulfilment).
Scale 0-10 (not at all – completely)
Regression model (All, men, women): sector+ socio-demographic
variables+working conditions

7. Results: Bivariate association between employment
sector and subjective well-being, UK, 2011/2012
All employees
Men
Women
Voluntary Private Public Voluntary Private Public Voluntary Private Public
Subjective wellbeing (Mean)
Mean (Happiness)a
7.34
7.31
7.37
7.31
7.29
7.36
7.40
7.30
7.40
Mean (Anxiety)b
3.15
2.93
3.04
2.90
2.84
2.91
3.28
3.06
3.11
Mean (Fulfilment)***
8.02
7.69
8.01
7.98
7.62
7.87
8.05
7.80
8.08
Mean (Life satisfaction)c
7.48
7.56
7.61
7.56
7.54
7.58
7.43
7.59
7.63
N=
3,491
76,445
33,756 1,104
42,746
10,999 2,387
33,699
22,755
Notes
a Differences across sectors statistically significant at p<0.05 only for all employees
•
b Differences across sectors statistically significant at p<0.05 only for all employees
•
c Difference statistically significant at p<0.001 for all employees and women
•
•
*** Differences across sectors statistically significant at p<0.001 for all employees, men and women

8. Main findings

9. Sectors and subjective well-being, adjusted mean (Men)
9.00
8.00
7.00
Adjusted mean
6.00
5.00
Voluntary sector
Private sector
4.00
Public sector
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Happiness
Anxiety
Fulfilment
Life satisfaction

11. Selected findings
Working conditions:
• Employees, both men and women, working in public
administration, educational and health services were more
likely to report fulfilment with their lives than workers in
other industries;
• Part-time work (choice) has a positive effect on well-being;
part-time (lack of choice) – a negative effect on women’s life
satisfaction, fulfilment and happiness but affects negatively
only men’s life satisfaction
• Working at home positive for all dimensions of women’s wellbeing and but only for men’s anxiety
• Permanency of contract postive for men’s well-being (no
effect for women)

12. Conclusions
• Third sector employees have higher levels of
SWB which suggest that third sector
employment is associated with SWB premium.
However, this premium is not equally
distributed between male and female
employees
• Working conditions also affect subjective wellbeing; how- it varies by gender

13. Why?
• Opportunities for intrinsically motivated
individuals
• Why men? Benefits from relative minority
status? (e.g. Williams, 1991).
• Lower life satisfaction puzzle for women

14. Limitations
• Causality issues
• Single wave

15. Implications
• Well-being measures can be used in three ways: monitoring
progress informing policy design, and policy appraisal (Ed
Diener, 2009b; Dolan et al., 2011; Dolan & Metcalfe, 2012; Dolan &
Peasgood, 2008; Dolan & White, 2007)
• Data on wellbeing of the third sector workforce can be used
to make judgments on how the third sector organisations as
employers are doing in terms of
maintaining, increasing, contributing to the wellbeing of their
employees, the wellbeing of the nation.

16. Implications
• Practical: subjective well-being of employees is likely to affect
the functioning of organizations (for example see an overview
by Robertson & Cooper, 2011), therefore managers in
voluntary sector organisations can benefit from knowledge
how subjective well-being levels of their employees compare
to employees in other sectors and what working conditions
are related to employees’ subjective well-being.
• Policy: debates on leveling down the quality of employment
in public and third sectors (Cunningham, 2008; Cunningham &
James, 2009; Eurofound, 2013; Grimshaw & Rubery, 2012) – quality of
women’s jobs in third sector?
• Research: SWB could be used to estimate the value of
voluntary sector, (similar to Fujimara et al. (2013) on
volunteering)