Development and Validation of a Life Satisfaction Instrument in Human Resource Practitioners of Thailand

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I congratulate the authors for selecting such a hot topic, that of life satisfaction in human resources practitioners. I fully support the publication of this research, however, a few improvements are necessary:

 

1. First of all, the authors should explain why did they pick the human resources practitioners as target group of this paper? Is there something particular with this group that they have been chosen out for validating a new life satisfaction instrument?
2. The authors will need to spend time with the Introduction of their manuscript to describe the concept of “life satisfaction” of human resources practitioners and provide references that the readers of JOITMC could use to further explore this concept.
3. There is no solid theoretical framework for life satisfaction in relation to human resources practitioners and most of all, there is no argumentation about why do we need a specific life satisfaction scale for Thailand human resources practitioners. Solid literature argumentation should be provided here, using global reputable databases, thus, the introduction section should be completely revised.
4. In the research objectives and questions there is no references to human resources practitioners, and thus, the whole section becomes irrelevant when taking into consideration the title and introduction provided.
5. In the measurement of LS section there are offered information solely on the scoring mechanisms, not on the theoretical framework or operationalization of the construct. These information should be provided here, for a better understanding.
6. Authors should describe how the target group was selected. There is no such method of “random convenience sampling method”.
7. In the theoretical and practical implications section, there are no solid arguments presented.
8. There are no references to Boundary Management Tactics, a concept that represents an important area within the field of work–life research. It is a set of cognitions and strategies by which people manage the critical boundaries between their multiple life domains, which clearly impacts individuals’ wellbeing and life satisfaction.
9. The conclusions section needs to be refined. It does not present solid argumentation for other researchers to replicate this investigation.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I congratulate the authors for selecting such a hot topic, that of life satisfaction in human resources practitioners. I fully support the publication of this research, however, a few improvements are necessary:

 

1. First of all, the authors should explain why did they pick the human resources practitioners as target group of this paper? Is there something particular with this group that they have been chosen out for validating a new life satisfaction instrument?

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 4 and 5, line 186 to 201 as below:

This study recruited two groups of 270 sampled human resource practitioners each (540 samples). The first group was used to validate the LS instrument questionnaire using EFA and the second group was used to confirm LS construct. The study population comprised 20,907 human resource practitioners working in small and medium enterprises and members of the HR community. The rationale behind selection of HR practitioners as the study population was because these people play important roles in managing and developing human resources in organisations; they also act as mediators between employer and employees and perform repetitive tasks under pressure from various sectors that possibly result in work stress. People operating in human resource departments learn how to work happily since their jobs entail building and enhancing employees’ satisfaction in work and life to realise their full potentials.

 

 

 

1. The authors will need to spend time with the Introduction of their manuscript to describe the concept of “life satisfaction” of human resources practitioners and provide references that the readers of JOITMC could use to further explore this concept.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 1, line 31 to 45 as below:

 

Life satisfaction can be defined as the evaluation of one’s life as a whole. This appraisal can be positive or negative depending on expectations or hope [8]. Perceptions can be evaluated through a cognitive process to determine life value and well-being. Sousa and Lyubomirsky [9] defined life satisfaction as satisfaction or acceptance of life conditions or achievement of all desires or needs for life. Life satisfaction is considered as an important factor in the life quality of human resource (HR) practitioners since levels of satisfaction determine how people adapt to their surrounding environment [10]. Previous studies have confirmed the importance of life satisfaction on HR practitioners as a positive benefit with regard to work performance. If people possess life satisfaction, they will build relationships with others effectively and be able to adapt to work well with colleagues and other working units. Life satisfaction also promotes enhanced mental health of HR practitioners. Freire and Ferreira [11] found that life satisfaction was a protective factor of students’ mental sickness such as depressive disorder and suicide. Life satisfaction also reduced the incidence of drug addiction. Therefore, the systematic study concerning the life satisfaction of HR practitioners is important. Information gained can be used for planning and ameliorating mental health problems of HR practitioners such as tension, tiredness, conflict, depression, drug addiction and even suicide. 

 

1. There is no solid theoretical framework for life satisfaction in relation to human resources practitioners and most of all, there is no argumentation about why do we need a specific life satisfaction scale for Thailand human resources practitioners. Solid literature argumentation should be provided here, using global reputable databases, thus, the introduction section should be completely revised.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 2, line 57 to 72 as below:

 

In Thailand, no studies detailing and addressing the life satisfaction of HR practitioners were found in the main databases, even though HR departments and practitioners are very important in the administration and management of personnel [13]. The available literature covering scales to measure the life satisfaction of HR practitioners in Thailand was searched from the main databases; however, no scales were found. Life satisfaction scales used in Thailand have been adapted and improved from foreign scales. These improved scales have been tested for use with other variables but they lack rigidity in construct validity and reliability according to the principles of behavioural scale development. DeVellis [14] stated that scale development can be applied to many different uses in diverse and specific contexts. Two different purposes of scale development can be identified. The first is for problem-solving applications and this type of scale is generally neutral, while the second is used in specific contexts to accurately predict results. Because of the lack of studies concerning the life satisfaction parameters of HR practitioners in Thailand, the body of knowledge is limited. This research developed and validated a scale of life satisfaction to fill this knowledge gap. Our developed scale can be applied in the Thai context to provide important information for effectively testing levels of life satisfaction and other factors. Furthermore, this scale developed in the Thai context can also be applied to other occupations in both Asian and Western environments.

 

1. In the research objectives and questions there is no references to human resources practitioners, and thus, the whole section becomes irrelevant when taking into consideration the title and introduction provided.

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 2, line 74 to 85 as below:

 

Research to increase the body of knowledge of LS in human resource practitioner is essential and urgent in Thailand where numbers of LS in human resource practitioner research papers are significantly less than for studies in other fields. Furthermore, accurate, valid and reliable measures are required for each study of LS in human resource practitioner to facilitate the availability of measuring tools for people interested in this field and to provide background information to improve the instruments according to the context of the study. Thus, based on the significances and problems of LS in human resource practitioner, the current study aimed to develop a valid and reliable instrument for LS in human resource practitioner measurement. The two main research questions are (a) “What are the constructs of LS in human resource practitioner?” and (b) “How is the instrument consisting of such constructs confirmed for their effectiveness in measuring LS in human resource practitioner?”  This instrument will be useful for researchers, educators, students and the general public who are interested in further studies concerning LS in human resource practitioner.

 

1. In the measurement of LS section there are offered information solely on the scoring mechanisms, not on the theoretical framework or operationalization of the construct. These information should be provided here, for a better understanding.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 7 and 8, line 253 to 258, 304 to 312 as below:

 

Eighteen items were developed and these passed the basic assumptions of confirmatory factor analysis. These items were grouped into 4 types as relationships with family and other people, personal life, life and society, and working life and self-development. All items had factor weights from 0.601-0.847 at the significance level of <0.05, indicating that the developed items were congruent with the theory of life satisfaction. Each developed item was based on the occupation of human resources in the Thai context to enable accurate and valid study measurement.

 

 

From the confirmatory factor analysis, the items were groups into relationships with family and other people, personal life, life and society, and working life and self-development. The developed items showed congruence between empirical data and concepts and theories, indicating that they were reliable and consistent with the existing concepts and theories. Regarding the predictive value, every factor was able to predict at more than 50%, indicating the accuracy of scale prediction. When considering the second-order factor analysis, personal life had the most factor weight (0.807), followed by life and society (0.783), relationships with family and other people (0.711) and working life and self-development (0.710), all at the significance level of 0.001. This indicated that the analysed item factors had construct validity according to the theories and concepts of life satisfaction.

 

 

 

 

1. Authors should describe how the target group was selected. There is no such method of “random convenience sampling method”.

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 4 and 5, line 186 to 201 as below:

This study recruited two groups of 270 sampled human resource practitioners each (540 samples). The first group was used to validate the LS instrument questionnaire using EFA and the second group was used to confirm LS construct. The study population comprised 20,907 human resource practitioners working in small and medium enterprises and members of the HR community. The rationale behind selection of HR practitioners as the study population was because these people play important roles in managing and developing human resources in organisations; they also act as mediators between employer and employees and perform repetitive tasks under pressure from various sectors that possibly result in work stress. People operating in human resource departments learn how to work happily since their jobs entail building and enhancing employees’ satisfaction in work and life to realise their full potentials.

Regarding sample size, Steven [21] indicated that the ratio of sample units and number of items should be 15:1. Here, 18 items were regarded as proportional for 270 sample units using a random convenience sampling method to recruit the samples. The questionnaire was presented in an online format with permission requested from admin departments to post details and directions. All respondents voluntarily completed the questionnaire without the requirement to specify their identities.

 

 

1. In the theoretical and practical implications section, there are no solid arguments presented.

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 12, line 448 to 458 as below:

This scale of life satisfaction was developed based on the existing concepts and theories for forming the measuring items. Then, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to classify the new items, followed by confirmatory factor analysis to make the life satisfaction scale more reliable. Moreover, this scale was more compact than previous scales. The developed factors were grouped into 4 types with only 18 items, compared with 5 types from previous research classifications consisting of 20 items for measuring life satisfaction [6,32]. This scale was developed on the basis of Thai contexts with samples of HR practitioners to enable more effective measurement and application than scales developed in Western contexts. This scale can be easily applied to other occupations or in closed contexts and is more appropriate than previous scales. Furthermore, this scale is updated and modern since it was developed in the current context of rapid changes in administrative environments compared to previous slow transitions. 

 

 

1. There are no references to Boundary Management Tactics, a concept that represents an important area within the field of work–life research. It is a set of cognitions and strategies by which people manage the critical boundaries between their multiple life domains, which clearly impacts individuals’ wellbeing and life satisfaction.

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on pages 2 and 3, line 88 to 108 as below:

2.1 Boundary management preferences

 Previously established boundaries between work and personal life have blurred, with rapid IT development now creating a continuous work-life environment. This has resulted in psychological behavioural changes in workforces. Specific aspects with different attributes can be defined by the boundary management theory and include permeability, flexibility and boundary management preferences [15-18].

The boundary management theory states that people form boundaries in mental and behavioural aspects to separately organise the domains of work and private lives [19,20]. These boundaries can be analysed continuously for preferences between work and nonwork. Some people prefer to completely separate work and leisure time. For example, they may have different email accounts for work and personal use. They turn off mobile phones after work and only manage their personal activities during break times or free time [21]. On the other hand, some people blend their work and personal lives by merging the two domains. For example, they send messages to friends from their workplace or call to discuss work-related topics in their free time [22,23]. The level of permeability reflects the strength of the boundary between each person’s work and nonwork domains. The boundary between these two domains can be regarded as a place where each person tries to balance desire and expectation. As a result, engagement occurs in the process of “work boundary” [19].

Boundary management preference is a fundamental concept that can be used to explain people’s life satisfaction. This concept explains the characteristics of people in terms of their mental condition as perception and selection to behave according to their desired boundary preferences.

 

 

1. The conclusions section needs to be refined. It does not present solid argumentation for other researchers to replicate this investigation.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 11, line 401 to 408 as below:

Our developed scale of life satisfaction is more compact in terms of factors and items for measurement compared with previous scales. This enables the collation of effective responses, leading to highly accurate, valid and reliable results. Moreover, our scale of life satisfaction is developed on the basis of current environments and modern society; the items reflect the lifestyle of the specific study samples of HR practitioners. Such a body of knowledge is limited, while this scale is capable of accurately measuring HR employees’ performances. HR is regarded as an important department concerning all personnel in organisations. If HR practitioners are happy or satisfied with life, they will deliver happiness or make employees in different units happy with their work and life.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors detected a gap in the body of knowledge regarding the ascertainment of Life Satisfaction and gathered a considerable amount of scientific literature to base the development of a more adequate tool to that end. All the needed data treatment necessary to validate the developed tool was performed and the authors framed their results in the existing body of knowledge. Moreover, the authors are well aware of the intrinsic limitations of their work.

The manuscript is very well written and scientifically sound.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer2

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors detected a gap in the body of knowledge regarding the ascertainment of Life Satisfaction and gathered a considerable amount of scientific literature to base the development of a more adequate tool to that end. All the needed data treatment necessary to validate the developed tool was performed and the authors framed their results in the existing body of knowledge. Moreover, the authors are well aware of the intrinsic limitations of their work.

The manuscript is very well written and scientifically sound.

Action/Answer: It is my great pleasure to have your appreciation. Thank you so much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

MAIN COMMENTS:

1. Abstract: Explain the vaues of X² and others or do not add this information here.
2. I would like to know if really the only novelty of the paper is that an existing study is applied for other countries in Thailand. If this is true, it would be necessary to add what is in common and what is new for Thailand compared to similar studies in other countries. That is, it would try to highlight the constructs that are always found to be valid instruments to measure LS and which ones have only been found in the case of Thai. In otherwise, you should say more about the novelty of your paper (methods, variables, concepts...).
3. In the final of the introduction (line 46),add why it is appropriate for the Thai context and explain the reasons more extensively.
4. In the second point "Research objectives and questions" the importance of getting this measure have to be explained. 
5. In the point four "Measurement of LS" you explain several measures of LS that other papers have used. In the final of this point, it should be cited the approach that this paper follows and the main advantages of this measure.
6. The explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis sample are not the same, is this correct? So can the results of both methods be generalized using different samples?
7. More practical implications are needed.

MINOR COMMENTS:

1. Line 14 and 124: This is the first time you use the abbreviation HR and EFA. Write Human resources (HR) and Explanatory Factor Analysis.
2. Line 34, 67, 107,116, and throughout the text: Use the same citation method. When there are three authors, write the name of the first and et al. Sometimes the three authors appear and other times et al. Always follow the same form of citation. Put special attention in the section of discussion. 
3. Line 65 and 109: between quality and based, and between A and as, drop doble spaced.
4. Line 157: Error in the ages. I understand that it is 36-40 and 31-35. Delete 36-431.
5. Line 161. Add % in 47.80
6. Line 162. Nearly (cappitl letters).

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3

1. Abstract: Explain the vaues of X² and others or do not add this information here.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 1 as below:

The purpose of this paper was to develop and validate an instrument to measure life satisfaction (LS). Eighteen items were selected to assess the LS questionnaire developed from concepts and theory. The questionnaire was applied as a cross-sectional study and data were collected as establishing factors to confirm and ascertain construct validity. Reliability was tested by measuring internal consistency. Relationships with family and other people, personal life, life and society, and working life and self-development factors were identified. Findings confirmed the constructs between theoretical concepts and empirical evidence. The validity of this LS questionnaire will facilitate future studies to test the boundaries of LS assessment in the context of Human resource (HR) practitioners. This instrument can support and assist researchers to develop a comprehensive and intuitive understanding of LS and promote further investigation of its potential in future studies.

 

1. I would like to know if really the only novelty of the paper is that an existing study is applied for other countries in Thailand. If this is true, it would be necessary to add what is in common and what is new for Thailand compared to similar studies in other countries. That is, it would try to highlight the constructs that are always found to be valid instruments to measure LS and which ones have only been found in the case of Thai. In otherwise, you should say more about the novelty of your paper (methods, variables, concepts...).

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 12, line 448 to 458 as below:

This scale of life satisfaction was developed based on the existing concepts and theories for forming the measuring items. Then, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to classify the new items, followed by confirmatory factor analysis to make the life satisfaction scale more reliable. Moreover, this scale was more compact than previous scales. The developed factors were grouped into 4 types with only 18 items, compared with 5 types from previous research classifications consisting of 20 items for measuring life satisfaction [6,32]. This scale was developed on the basis of Thai contexts with samples of HR practitioners to enable more effective measurement and application than scales developed in Western contexts. This scale can be easily applied to other occupations or in closed contexts and is more appropriate than previous scales. Furthermore, this scale is updated and modern since it was developed in the current context of rapid changes in administrative environments compared to previous slow transitions. 

 

Page 11 line 401 to 408 as below:

Our developed scale of life satisfaction is more compact in terms of factors and items for measurement compared with previous scales. This enables the collation of effective responses, leading to highly accurate, valid and reliable results. Moreover, our scale of life satisfaction is developed on the basis of current environments and modern society; the items reflect the lifestyle of the specific study samples of HR practitioners. Such a body of knowledge is limited, while this scale is capable of accurately measuring HR employees’ performances. HR is regarded as an important department concerning all personnel in organisations. If HR practitioners are happy or satisfied with life, they will deliver happiness or make employees in different units happy with their work and life.

 

 

 

 

 

1. In the final of the introduction (line 46), add why it is appropriate for the Thai context and explain the reasons more extensively.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 2, line 56 to 72 as below:

In Thailand, no studies detailing and addressing the life satisfaction of HR practitioners were found in the main databases, even though HR departments and practitioners are very important in the administration and management of personnel [13]. The available literature covering scales to measure the life satisfaction of HR practitioners in Thailand was searched from the main databases; however, no scales were found. Life satisfaction scales used in Thailand have been adapted and improved from foreign scales. These improved scales have been tested for use with other variables but they lack rigidity in construct validity and reliability according to the principles of behavioural scale development. DeVellis [14] stated that scale development can be applied to many different uses in diverse and specific contexts. Two different purposes of scale development can be identified. The first is for problem-solving applications and this type of scale is generally neutral, while the second is used in specific contexts to accurately predict results. Because of the lack of studies concerning the life satisfaction parameters of HR practitioners in Thailand, the body of knowledge is limited. This research developed and validated a scale of life satisfaction to fill this knowledge gap. Our developed scale can be applied in the Thai context to provide important information for effectively testing levels of life satisfaction and other factors. Furthermore, this scale developed in the Thai context can also be applied to other occupations in both Asian and Western environments. 

 

1. In the second point "Research objectives and questions" the importance of getting this measure have to be explained. 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 2, line 74 to 85 as below:

 

Research to increase the body of knowledge of LS in human resource practitioner is essential and urgent in Thailand where numbers of LS in human resource practitioner research papers are significantly less than for studies in other fields. Furthermore, accurate, valid and reliable measures are required for each study of LS in human resource practitioner to facilitate the availability of measuring tools for people interested in this field and to provide background information to improve the instruments according to the context of the study. Thus, based on the significances and problems of LS in human resource practitioner, the current study aimed to develop a valid and reliable instrument for LS in human resource practitioner measurement. The two main research questions are (a) “What are the constructs of LS in human resource practitioner?” and (b) “How is the instrument consisting of such constructs confirmed for their effectiveness in measuring LS in human resource practitioner?”  This instrument will be useful for researchers, educators, students and the general public who are interested in further studies concerning LS in human resource practitioner.

 

1. In the point four "Measurement of LS" you explain several measures of LS that other papers have used. In the final of this point, it should be cited the approach that this paper follows and the main advantages of this measure.

 

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 4, line 171 to 176 as below:

Understanding this concept is fundamental and paramount for developing a life satisfaction scale. Such a body of knowledge was synthesised to find the main common and different points of various scales. Then the existing concepts and theories of life satisfaction were compared to determine whether different points were suitable in the contexts of the sample units to be studied. Finally, experts in organisational behaviours and related fields considered the scale for content validity.

 

1. The explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis sample are not the same, is this correct? So can the results of both methods be generalized using different samples?

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Yes, I used the different sample, but they are all human resource practitioners.

 

It is correct to used different samples if conducting EFA and moving to CFA consist with Worthington and Whittaker (2006) recommended that starting with EFA, and then moving to CFA using a different sample.

 

Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806-838. doi:10.1177/0011000006288127

 

The result can be the specific because sample unit is the characters but divided into two groups.

 

 

1. More practical implications are needed.

Action/Answer: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion. Revision has been made on page 12, line 430 to 458 as below:

 

The findings of this study support the existing concepts and theories of satisfaction and will be helpful for researchers and academics to extend knowledge of LS, particularly in Thai and Asian contexts. Educators can use these findings to clearly explain the characteristics of employees’ LS as four factors: relationship with family and other people, personal life, life and society and working life and self-development. Eighteen items were intensively validated to measure employees’ LS for use in further studies and as a new scale for Thai employees’ LS. Educators and researchers can use this scale of LS as initial variables in their studies to measure the levels of employees’ LS. The new scales can also be used to test against other independent or dependent variables as well as moderators which might influence or be influenced or mediators to transfer the effects to other variables.

All selected items were carefully developed and tested for content validity and reliability. Advanced statistics were used to analyse, classify and confirm the constructs. These procedures render the developed scale highly reliable. Human resource practitioners, organisational behaviourists or managers can use the developed scale to measure satisfaction levels of their employees and then apply the results to supply resources and enhance or support activities helpful for employees to be satisfied with their lives. Moreover, these findings can also be used to explain the characteristics, manifestations and levels of employees’ LS. Human resource personnel or managers who want to enhance and support LS to increase employee engagement, good behaviours and work performance can use this developed scale as an indicator for further LS examination. 

This scale of life satisfaction was developed based on the existing concepts and theories for forming the measuring items. Then, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to classify the new items, followed by confirmatory factor analysis to make the life satisfaction scale more reliable. Moreover, this scale was more compact than previous scales. The developed factors were grouped into 4 types with only 18 items, compared with 5 types from previous research classifications consisting of 20 items for measuring life satisfaction [6,32]. This scale was developed on the basis of Thai contexts with samples of HR practitioners to enable more effective measurement and application than scales developed in Western contexts. This scale can be easily applied to other occupations or in closed contexts and is more appropriate than previous scales. Furthermore, this scale is updated and modern since it was developed in the current context of rapid changes in administrative environments compared to previous slow transitions.

 

MINOR COMMENTS:

1. Line 14 and 124: This is the first time you use the abbreviation HR and EFA. Write Human resources (HR) and Explanatory Factor Analysis.

Human resource (HR), exploratory factor analysis (EFA)

 

 

1. Line 34, 67, 107,116, and throughout the text: Use the same citation method. When there are three authors, write the name of the first and et al. Sometimes the three authors appear and other times et al. Always follow the same form of citation. Put special attention in the section of discussion. 

The references have been revised

 

1. Line 65 and 109: between quality and based, and between A and as, drop doble spaced.

The references have been revised

 

1. Line 157: Error in the ages. I understand that it is 36-40 and 31-35. Delete 36-431.

The references have been revised

 

1. Line 161. Add % in 47.80

The references have been revised (47.80%)

 

1. Line 162. Nearly (cappitl letters).

The references have been revised (Nearly)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Congratulations for updating the scientific content of the manuscript.

I have no further comments.