The purpose of this study was to find out the factors determining quality of work life for employees in private security business organizations in Uganda. Factor Analysis was employed to appropriately identify variables for inclusion in subsequent analytical procedures. The use of an eigenvalue cut-off point of 1.0, as suggested by Kaiser, resulted in eight factors which were then rotated using varimax rotation before the use of correlation and regression analyses to determine their significance. This analytical process revealed that there are eight significant factors that determine quality of work life for employees in private security business organizations in Uganda. It was further indicated that of these factors, only four influence service delivery in private security business organisations which are: 1) Training & Capacity Building [β = 0.237, t = 2.763, p < 0.005]; 2) Work Environment [β = 0.226, t = 2.384, p < 0.002]; 3) Performance Appraisal & Supervision [β = 0.172, t = 3.114, p < 0.002]; and 4) Wages & Allowances [β = 0.581, t = 9.600, p < 0.0001]. This study therefore points to the urgent need by the different stakeholders to provide and strengthen the training and capacity building of security personnel in this business, provide a congenial work environment, focus on routine performance appraisal and supervision, and above all else, review and timely pay their wages and allowances as the most significant requirement for a congenial QWL. The findings here recommend key pragmatic strategies that can be adopted to mitigate the challenges that have been experienced in this sector both in Uganda and beyond.
The pathetic working conditions that are experienced by the different employees in different organizations remain a human resource challenge not only for human resource practitioners but also for the professionals in the health, security and other entities (Grazio, 2019) . This condition which mirrors itself comprehensively in the quality of work life (QWL) in which the employees offer their services has not only compromised service delivery but also threatened the life of the supervisors and organizational top managers when it comes to private security organizations (Noreen & Dominic, 2017) . According to Abdullah, Zakaria and Zahoor (2021) , QWL refers to a worker’s contentment with the working life which is determined by the nature of work itself and the relationship quality that is experienced by the worker in a given working environment. Gogoleva et al. (2017) notes that the construct covers a broad spectrum of factors comprising employee’s satisfaction towards the physical work environment, compensation, promotion, team work, and work-life balance, among others. To support this view, Mazlan et al. (2018) asserted that QWL is a composition of all those factors which are crucial to the attraction (Mosadeghrad, 2013) and retention (Sulaiman et al., 2015) of qualified employees.
Investigating Quality of work life for private security business organization employees is therefore significant, because any miserable nature in which such employees are exposed can lead to the accumulation of other unnecessary symptoms of burnout, stress, and depression conditions that can easily lead to the employee misuse of the security gadgets that are provided to them on a daily basis (Yadav & Kiran, 2015) . The conservation of resource theory suggests that such conditions occur when certain valued resources such as salary are lost, are inadequate to meet demands or do not yield the anticipated returns (Farkash et al., 2022) .
Globally, quality of work life is among the constructs that has been given a wide coverage and according to Kang and Depaak (2013) , it is an old concept found in the humanistic literature that highlights employees’ need for meaningful, satisfying and routine appreciation in keeping the life and property of others. This view is supported by Leitão, Pereira, & Gonçalves (2019) who observed that the entire quality of work life in an organization is aimed at improving the employee’s wellbeing and productivity as they pursue excellence. Therefore, the requirement to entrench QWL in any system can not only enhance employee wellbeing but also provide the required humanistic value relation, trust and cohesion (Yolandi & Martins, 2013) .
While the debate on which factors determine the quality of work life still continues, what is apparently clear is that these factors depend on the characteristics of the organization and hence organizational-led in most cases. They depend on the type of organization, the nature of work, the attitude and latitude of command and the economic ability or size of the organizations in question, among others. Similarly, the bibliometric analysis and bibliographic data extract by Abdullah et al. (2021) shows that while there are various terminologies of QWL including “quality of work life”, “quality of working life”, “work life quality” and “working life quality”, their bottom line investigates how well the employees feel at the work place and the level at which they demonstrate professionalism and productivity at work. It has been reported that at employee level, higher quality of work life is a major determinant of the employee’s quality of life (Klein, Pereira, & Lemos, 2019) . It is also reported to be a precursor to high employee commitment and efficacy (Adikoeswanto et al., 2020) . At the organizational level, it is an important tool that the employee can use to identify not only with the organization but also a basis for job satisfaction and job involvement (Afsar, 2014) . At a personal level, it supports job effort, job performance and lower personal alienation (Diana et al., 2020) .
The study by Saklani (2004) identifies the basic factor as monetary consideration. However, an employee can also accord a high value to other factors that satisfy self-esteem and self-actualization needs of the job (Idrus et al., 2022) . Based on these arguments therefore, this study recognizes that apparently there is no one-fit-all definition of quality of work life (Adikoeswanto et al., 2020) . This condition has therefore prompted the use of a combination of different approaches according to different contexts (Gogoleva et al., 2017) . Researchers have come up with work balance factors that motivate individuals and strengthen their wellbeing (Adhikari & Gautam, 2010) . The above demonstrate that quality of work life is a comprehensive term that can be measured at organizational and individual level, the combination of which can determine the QWL model for specific organizations (Diana et al., 2020) .
The main purpose of the study therefore was to find out and analyze the factors determining quality of work life for employees in private security business organizations in Uganda. The two specific objectives were:
1) To determine the factors that comprise quality of work life for employees in private security business organizations in Uganda.
2) To examine the correlation between the different factors of quality of work life and service delivery for security guards in private security business organizations in Uganda.
3) To identify the effect of the different factors of quality of work life on service delivery for security guards in private security business organizations.
Consequently, the developed null hypotheses include:
1) There are no significant factors that determine quality of work life in private security business organizations.
2) There is no correlation between different factors of quality of work life and service delivery for security guards in private security business organizations.
3) There is no significant effect of different factors of quality of work life on service delivery by security guards in private security business organizations.
The study here was motivated by the increasing poor service delivery of security guards attached to different private security companies in the major cities of Kampala, Jinja and Mbale (Tumusiime, 2022) . While statistics indicate an increasing trend in the number of private security companies in the country, it is undisputable that there is also an equally growing low morale, unprofessionalism and incompetence in the security business (Bwire, 2018) . Moreover, reports on the misuse of tools of protection by private security companies has not only been documented in Uganda alone but elsewhere as well (Suchi, 2018) . Albeit, one of the fundamental functions of private security companies is to supplement government security agencies in protecting business premises, residential houses and infrastructure of the different categories such as schools and hospitals (Bashir, 2019) .
Theoretical Basis for the StudyThe study considers the theories of Herzberg (2003) , Maslow (1943) and Vroom (1964) that contributed to the expectancy theory of motivation.
Herzberg’s (2003) theory is also known as the two-factor theory or the motivation-hygiene theory. It proposes that there are two types of factors that affect the quality of work life: motivators and hygiene factors. Motivators are intrinsic factors that increase job satisfaction, such as achievement, recognition, the work itself, advancement, and growth. Hygiene factors are extrinsic factors that prevent job dissatisfaction, such as salary, working conditions, company policy, supervision, and interpersonal relations. According to Herzberg, both types of factors are necessary to create a high quality of work life, but they have different effects. Motivators can enhance the quality of work life by fulfilling the employee basic needs including salary and allowances before moving to self-actualization and self-growth. On the other hand, hygiene factors are supposed to maintain the quality of work life by avoiding employee dissatisfaction and frustration at work (Siqueira Jr. et al., 2017) .
Historically, organizational theory has reported Maslow (1943) to have developed the theory of human needs (Sabonete et al., 2021) , It is reported that Maslow’s pyramid has five levels that are relevant to security companies as well i.e., physiological needs (e.g., food, rest), security (i.e., protection against physical and emotional damage) occasional social needs (e.g., attention, acceptance, friendship), and needs linked to esteem (e.g., self-respect, achievement, autonomy) and self-fulfillment (e.g., growth, self-development) (Maslow, 1943) . Within private security business organizations, Maslow’s (1943) pyramid scheme can be applied, dividing it into two levels: extrinsic, low-level needs (remuneration, adequate workplace, and job security) and intrinsic, high-level needs that refer to the need for self-realization.
Victor Vroom developed the expectancy theory in 1964. The focus of Vroom's expectancy theory is on human motivation. The expectancy theory was developed on the idea that how hard someone works is based on how that person perceives the outcome of the work. Simply stated, a person will work harder if the outcome or reward is something that is valued. In other words, the better the reward the harder a person will work. This study adopts the Expectancy Theory to the concept of Quality of Work Life because creating a work environment where employees perceive a clear connection between their efforts, performance, and valued outcomes has to increase motivation and overall service delivery (Ogunola, 2022) .
The relationship between quality of work life (QWL) and particular work aspects has been heavily researched over the years (Kuczaj, 2017) .
Since the late 1970s therefore, several studies have been carried out with different definitions, some of which can be summarized as in
It is quite clear from
Moreover, the study by Hamid, Zolfa and Karimi (2012) and Mazlan et al. (2018) also noted that employee quality of work life could be explained by salary,
| Author(s) | Year | QWL Dimensions |
|---|---|---|
| Taylor, Cooper, & Mumford (1979) | 1979 | Rewards and Recognitions, work environment, work life Balance, Superior and Peer relationship, Working Hours, Well-Being and Pay. |
| Werther and Davis (1983) | 1983 | Social integration in the workplace; supervision; positive work environment and supportive management; and good social relationships. |
| Loscocco & Roschelle (1991) | 1991 | Task content, work circumstances, job mobility, learning and improvement, democratic setup, security, equity, and the nature of the job and exciting prospects. |
| Maruyama et al. (2009) | 2009 | Promotion; adequate and fair compensation; career development. |
| Suwandi & Tentama (2020) | 2020 | Quantity and quality of free time generated by employment; well-being; and overall living space. |
health service, insurance, retirement, job security and providing employees with opportunities for growth and career development. Therefore, managers of service organisation like security ought to know that their employees are not only a social but valuable asset. It is therefore impossible to have quality output without quality employees in the process because quality gets quality (Hassan, Mpaata, & Musenze, 2022) . This analysis has been supported by Al Dalayeen (2017) who emphasized the importance of establishing equitable reward systems while focusing on employee job security and the internal aspects of job enrichment, employee skill development and social integration. This has been punctuated by Ogunola (2022) who proposed that QWL care should provide an answer to the basic needs of an employee.
Another philosophical view asserts that QWL is a representation of employees’ beliefs that they work in a safe and healthy environment, get enough compensation, and have the potential to grow as people (Narehan, Hairunnisa, Norfadzillah, & Freziamella, 2014) . This was echoed by Akar (2018) who observed that job contentment, self-respect, effort recognition, and career progression that emanates from employee loyalty play a key role in the employee QWL that benefit both the employee and the organization. This conclusion is in line with Mpaata, Lubogoyi, & Kakumba (2017) who suggested that supervisory support, flexible occupation arrangement, salary and a clear career path are key ingredients in QWL for employees in service organizations. In the same vein, the conclusion by Swarochi, Seema, & Sujatha (2018) holds that responsibility, health and opportunities to learn are also important determinants for QWL among employees in different organizations (Mogaddam & Azad, 2015) .
Consequently, complementary studies like that of Begani et al. (2013) analyzed the importance of shift work for security guards in organizations and recommends that it should be performed within the employment range where employees rotate: making sure that the work is continued for quality service delivery. In this regard, the study by James et al. (2017) warned that working during night disturbs sleeping patterns that lead to disruption of normal circadian rhythms and such characteristics were linked to delayed onset of sleep resulting in fatigue during working hours. This view was supported by Knutsson (2003) who indicated that there is strong evidence in favor of an association between shift work and the coronary heart disease, poor physical health, and sleep problems. It was concluded that accidents and injuries that occur indirectly due to sleep deprivation and chronic fatigue are associated with circadian disturbances. Similarly, the study by Larson and Zemke (2003) warned that such poor QWL has negative social life for the family and is responsible for the reduced social support and disharmony within couples because of the diminished time that the employee spends with family members.
The literature review therefore shows that QWL affects not only the person wellbeing, their families, health and social lives that are important for individual general life satisfaction but also the entire organization quality process outcomes such as productivity, efficiency and effectiveness.
The target population of this study was the security guards employed to manage security by six (6) established private security companies in the cities of Kampala, Jinja, and Mbale.
For selecting the above-mentioned population, the study used purposive sampling in that questionnaires were distributed to only security guards who were employed and on the payroll of the private security organizations that are also registered under the law and by the Uganda Police Force. This approach yielded 330 security guards that were used in the study, out of whom 320 returned completed and usable questionnaires.
The returned questionnaire for the six private security organizations were factor analyzed using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. The procedure yielded eight factors from 43 items. The factor loadings ranged from 0.374 to 0.849. An item was considered to belong to a given factor when it had its highest loading on that factor compared with other factors. The eight (8) factors were named; 1) Career & Life Satisfaction; 2) Training & Capacity Building; 3) Work Engagement; 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision; 5) Work Environment; 6) Teamwork & Trust; 7) Job Security; and 8) Wages & Allowances.
The reliability of the overall questionnaire was also ascertained using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient. The coefficient for this questionnaire was 0.0873 which demonstrated that the questionnaire was reliable for use.
Service delivery was measured by the extent to which the security companies can prevent losses and damages, restrain trespassers, among others. It can therefore be deduced from
| No. | Item | Responses | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SA & A | N | D & SD | ||
| % | % | % | ||
| 1 | Inspecting buildings, equipment, and access points | 56.3 | 5.0 | 38.7 |
| 2 | Obtaining help by sounding alarms | 47.5 | 6.3 | 36.3 |
| 3 | Preventing losses and damage by reporting irregularities | 66.3 | 2.5 | 31.3 |
| 4 | Restraining trespassers | 62.5 | 5.0 | 32.5 |
| 5 | Controlling traffic by directing clients | 62.6 | 3.8 | 33.8 |
| 6 | Compile reports by recording observations, information, occurrences, and surveillance activities | 71.3 | 2.5 | 26.3 |
| 7 | Ensuring operation of security equipment and surveillance cameras | 72.6 | 2.5 | 25.0 |
| 8 | Ensuring the security, safety, and well-being of all personnel, visitors, and the premises | 70.0 | 2.5 | 27.5 |
Factor Analysis was employed in this research to identify two or more questions that result in a set of responses that are highly correlated among the data. The use of an eigenvalue cut-off point of 1.0, as suggested by Kaiser, resulted in four factors. The factors were then rotated using varimax rotation. The results of factor analysis for the 43 items as explained in terms of factors from varimax rotation matrix can be detailed in
The major purpose of this research was to identify the factors that influence quality of work life in private security business organizations in Uganda. The hypotheses were therefore tested as follows;
The first null hypothesis stated that there are no significant factors that determine quality of work life in private security business organizations. The Factor analysis on the determinants of quality of work life items do reveal that there were eight factors identified as follows; 1) Career & Life Satisfaction; 2) Training & Capacity Building; 3) Work Engagement; 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision; 5) Work Environment; 6) Teamwork & Trust; 7) Job Security; and 8) Wages & Allowances. All the eight factors explained a total of 78.4% of the rotation sums of squared loadings.
| Factor 1: Career & Life Satisfaction | ||
|---|---|---|
| Item No. | Item | Loading |
| C4 | Employees receive pension upon exit | 0.611 |
| C6 | Employees have health insurance | 0.511 |
| C3 | There is a well communicated pay policy | 0.692 |
| C4 | The employees have a paid annual leave | 0.584 |
| C2 | Promotions are given to deserving employees | 0.697 |
| C1 | The medical benefits take care of my immediate family members | 0.788 |
| C5 | My medical situation is reviewed periodically by my employers to assess my healthy conditions | 0.593 |
| Factor 2: Training & Capacity Building | ||
| Item No. | Item | Loading |
| B11 | My company facilitates career progress by providing access to leadership positions. | 0.534 |
| B7 | Innovative ideas that are successful are rewarded by management. | 0.840 |
| B8 | This organization’s managers push employees to try new things in order to enhance workflow. | 0.765 |
| B12 | It is recommended for newcomers to the organization to challenge established procedures. | 0.513 |
| B10 | Present organizational policy promotes employees to work together to resolve issues before bringing them up with a superior. | 0.552 |
| B9 | Senior managers here accept change and are not afraid of new ideas. | 0.591 |
| B13 | Our company’s training programs assist staff members in acquiring the necessary skills to carry out their jobs well. | 0.502 |
| Factor 3: Work Engagement | ||
| Item No. | Item | Loading |
| W15 | Taking time off from work to attend to personal or family concerns is difficult. | 0.626 |
| W16 | Because we have similar ideals, aims, and missions, I feel like I am a member of a team. | 0.578 |
| W14 | Assignments that drive, challenge, and inspire me make me feel pushed. | 0.849 |
| W17 | There are concrete ways that my efforts are appreciated and acknowledged. | 0.574 |
| W19 | I get constructive criticism that focuses more on the good than the bad. | 0.468 |
| W18 | I have clear-cut and non-contradictory policies and procedures in my company. | 0.540 |
| Factor 4: Performance Appraisal & Supervision | ||
| No. | Factor | Loading |
| P26 | Feedback on my performance from my supervisor felt like criticism. | 0.476 |
| P21 | I felt able to discuss my concerns with my manager openly. | 0.625 |
| P25 | I learnt a great deal from observing my immediate manager. | 0.374 |
| P22 | My performance appraisal felt like an exchange of ideas. | 0.600 |
| P23 | My manager and I both drew up key performance indicators together. | 0.538 |
| P20 | New work procedures that might benefit the entire company are often communicated to all employees. | 0.668 |
| P24 | I have a really friendly connection with my direct supervisor. | 0.501 |
| Factor 5: Work Environment | ||
| No. | Factor | Loading |
| E31 | The process for rotating jobs is well-executed. | 0.580 |
| E33 | I can put my skills and abilities to use at work. | 0.520 |
| E28 | Within our organization, the resources that are made available and the stated goals are balanced. | 0.691 |
| E32 | There are well defined pathways for the transfer and exchange of information. | 0.530 |
| E29 | I’m prepared to take on more work-related obligations. | 0.664 |
| E27 | Resources are provided by my employer to help me perform. | 0.744 |
| E30 | Good transportation facilities are provided by the employer. | 0.588 |
| E34 | Our employer offers welfare-oriented programs. | 0.518 |
| Factor 6: Teamwork & Trust | ||
| No. | Factor | Loading |
| T38 | Every department works together to accomplish the objectives. | 0.510 |
| T35 | There is a harmonious relationship with my colleagues. | 0.654 |
| T36 | I will get good support from my colleagues. | 0.621 |
| T37 | I participate in making decisions that have an impact on our work. | 0.591 |
| Factor 7: Job Security | ||
| No. | Factor | Loading |
| J38 | I feel quite confident in my work. | 0.845 |
| J39 | Company provides the social security benefits like Medical Reimbursement and so on. | 0.575 |
| Factor 8: Wages & Allowances | ||
| No. | Factor | Loading |
| A42 | I am entitled to wages and other allowances at work place. | 0.611 |
| A40 | There are few rewards for those who work here. | 0.766 |
| A41 | I believe the compensation I receive for my labor is reasonable. | 0.673 |
| A43 | I’m content with my prospects of receiving pay raises. | 0.438 |
The second null hypothesis stated that there is no correlation between different factors of quality of work life and service delivery for security guards in private security business organizations in Uganda.
In order to test this hypothesis, a correlation analysis was performed using eight identified variables as indicated in the correlation matrix in
The analysis in
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Career & Life Satisfaction | |||||||||
| 2) Training & Capacity Building | 0.737** | ||||||||
| 3) Work Engagement | 0.581** | 0.678** | |||||||
| 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision | 0.739** | 0.785** | 0.730** | ||||||
| 5) Work Environment | 0.635** | 0.766** | 0.755** | 0.810** | |||||
| 6) Teamwork & Trust | 0.674** | 0.686** | 0.728** | 0.712** | 0.761** | ||||
| 7) Job Security | 0.525** | 0.455** | 0.357** | 0.396** | 0.455** | 0.497** | |||
| 8) Wages & Allowances | 0.559** | 0.576** | 0.433** | 0.545** | 0.606** | 0.580** | 0.447** | ||
| 9) Service Delivery | 0.718** | 0.740** | 0.559** | 0.687** | 0.757** | 0.674** | 0.615** | 0.886** | - |
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The third null hypothesis stated that the eight (8) factors do not significantly influence service delivery by security guards in private security business organizations in Uganda.
In order to test the above hypothesis, a regression analysis was performed using the following as independent variables; 1) Career & Life Satisfaction (CLS); 2) Training & Capacity Building (TCB); 3) Work Engagement (WE); 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision (PAS); 5) Work Environment (WE); 6) Teamwork & Trust (TT); 7) Job Security; 8) Wages & Allowances (WA). Service Delivery was therefore used as the dependent variable. Thus, the regression model was hypothesized as follows:
S .D = β 0 + β 1 CLS + β 2 TCB + β 3 WE + β 4 PAS + β 5 WEN + β 6 TT + β 7 JS + β 8 WA + E
where:
S.D = Service Delivery
β0β1β2β3β4β5β6β7β8 = Constants in the model
CLS = Career & Life Satisfaction
TCB = Training & Capacity Building
WE = Work Engagement
PAS = Performance Appraisal & Supervision
WEN = Work Environment
TT = Teamwork & Trust
JS = Job Security
WA = Wages & Allowances
Results of the regression analysis are indicated as in
The analysis in
| Variable | Predicted sign | β | t-value | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | +− | −0.100 | −0.836 | 0.408 |
| 1) Career & Life Satisfaction | + | −0.012 | −0.130 | 0.897 |
| 2) Training & Capacity Building | + | 0.237 | 2.763 | 0.005 |
| 3) Work Engagement | + | 0.136 | 1.618 | 0.113 |
| 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision | + | 0.172 | 3.114 | 0.003 |
| 5) Work Environment | + | 0.226 | 2.384 | 0.002 |
| 6) Teamwork & Trust | + | −0.072 | −0.894 | 0.376 |
| 7) Job Security | + | −0.035 | −0.461 | 0.647 |
| 8) Wages & Allowances | + | 0.581 | 9.600 | 0.000 |
therefore the null hypothesis is rejected for the four (4) factors and accepted for the rest of the factors which were Career & Life Satisfaction, Work Engagement, Performance Appraisal & Supervision, and Teamwork & Trust. Put another way, service delivery in private security business organizations in Uganda is influenced by four (4) factors which are; 1) Training & Capacity Building [β = 0.237, t = 2.763, p < 0.005]; 2) Work Environment [β = 0.226, t = 2.384, p < 0.002], 3) Performance Appraisal & Supervision [β = 0.172, t = 3.114, p < 0.002]; and Wages &Allowances [β = 0.581, t = 9.600, p < 0.0001]. In other words, service delivery by private security companies is determined by the security organizations’ ability to continuously provide adequate training to its staff, provide an enjoyable working environment, supervise and conduct constructive performance appraisal, and regularly pay wages and allowances. While these have been worked on and influence service delivery, the rest of the four (4) factors have not been significantly worked on by private security business organizations so as to influence service delivery. In other words, private security companies have not significantly built the trust culture and teamwork. Similarly, there is no career progress and aspects that lead to life satisfaction. Moreover, the employees of these private security business organizations have not demonstrated work engagement and have no assurance of their job security. This explains why most of the workers resort to unwelcome behavior in the long run. In other words, while training and capacity building, performance appraisal and supervision, and wages and allowances are provided, there is need for private security business organizations to focus on building the trust culture and teamwork, and also a career progress that ensures job security for employees to perform their work professionally. This finding is supported by the model that reveals an R2 of 0.915 implying that the eight factors contribute more than 91.5% to service delivery and the rest of the contribution may perhaps be from other factors such as employee physical health and demographic aspects of age that have not been part of the investigation in this study. In addition, the Anova in
The study here documents eight (8) determinant factors of quality of work life (QWL) in private security business organizations in Uganda extracted as 1) Career & Life Satisfaction; 2) Training & Capacity Building; 3) Work Engagement; 4) Performance Appraisal & Supervision; 5) Work Environment; 6) Teamwork & Trust; 7) Job Security; 8) Wages & Allowances. However, private security organizations investigated significantly focus on four (4) common aspects that are vital to service delivery which are; a) Training & Capacity Building; b) Performance Appraisal & Supervision; c) Work Environment; and d) Wages & Allowances. The practical implication for this research is the urgent need for private security business organizations to focus on building a trust culture and teamwork, ensure that there is career progression and life satisfaction derived from the job of security guards, work engagement, and job security. The finding here also supports the research by Gangwani et al. (2020) who found that quality of work life has a significant impact on turnover of employees and another research by Tamunomiebi (2018) who noted that there was a significant and positive relationship between quality of work life and job satisfaction of employees in service organizations. To support this view, the research by Dennis & Michelle (2006) had earlier on documented that contractual trust forms the basis of most interactions in the workplace. Employees have a strong need for confidence in the intentions of their superiors and one another, and they need their leaders to be consistent, transparent and reliable (Kleynhans et al., 2022) .
The study also provides empirical support to the findings of Tschannen-Moran (2014) who noted that leaders at all levels must model and maintain trusting relationships with the employees by emphasizing equal dignity and that every human being matters and deserves the basic values of 1) wellbeing, 2) freedom,
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Regression | 27.268 | 8 | 3.409 | 57.638 | 0.000b |
| Residual | 2.543 | 43 | 0.059 | |||
| Total | 29.811 | 51 | ||||
aDependent Variable: Service Delivery; bPredictors: (Constant), CLS, TCB, WE, PAS, WEN, TT, JS, WA.
3) non-alienation, 4) solidarity, 5) esteem and recognition and 6) security. Similarly, security guards are expected to reciprocate in the arena of QWL by providing services within the rule of law, tolerance and commitment (Pavel, 2021) . This view is supported by Martel and Dupuis (2006) who identified 33 domains of QWL in general including the need to perform duties in time, participation in duties assigned, demonstration of skills and work-type fit, autonomy in performing duties, diversity of duties, effectiveness at work, and the like. The research here adds that there is need for security companies to offer meaningful service and meet the higher job expectations and heavier demands at work. On the other hand, the managers in these security service companies need to reciprocate and reward the time and energy that employees expend at the workplace so that they are satisfied with their life at work. The study findings stress the need for such organizations to work within the Expectancy Theory and ensure that employee individual beliefs can easily lead to increased performance by 1) providing the right resources at work; 2) ensure that the employees have the right skills to do the job and 3) the employees have the necessary support to get the job done. This requires the instrumentality of availing trust in the employees and transparency in the process of who gets what outcome such that the valency that the individuals place upon the expected outcome is positive and provides the required motivation to accomplish the demanding daily tasks in which they are engaged.
Whereas the study here focused on private security business organizations, it can portray the general picture in all security organizations such that there is need to enhance the employee QWL and build the required team spirit (Koonmee et al., 2010) , and work engagement (Gillet et al., 2013) . The extracted factors in this study are conformity with the findings of Sabonete et al. (2021) who studied the level of satisfaction with the quality of work life of employees in a security institute. Their findings revealed factors such as 1) fair and adequate compensation, 2) career opportunities and job security, 3) work and total living space, 4) safety and health in working conditions, 5) opportunity to use and develop human capabilities, 6) social relevance of work life; 7) constitutionalism in the organization of work; and 8) social integration in the organization as key factors that influence job satisfaction of employees in the institute. The extracted factors in this study confirm the above factors as revealed by the factor analysis performed and add the factors of team work and trust, work engagement, performance appraisal and supervision that might be rare in the Ugandan setting and elsewhere.
In conclusion, this study provides additional empirical evidence that there are factors that determine quality of work life for service organizations and principally those that are engaged in security. It documents that whereas eight (8) factors are key to determining the quality of work life for employees in such service organizations and correlate significantly with service delivery, only four (4) currently influence service delivery for private security business organizations. Security companies in Uganda should focus more on training and capacity building, wages and allowances, work environment and periodic performance appraisal. In addition, the findings here show that there is need to refocus on the importance of building teamwork and trust culture that is diminishing, engage employees to fully appreciate and love their work, and integrate aspects of job security, adequate pay and benefit opportunities that are important for not only job satisfaction but life satisfaction. It is perhaps such neglected aspects that are responsible for the poor quality of work life, burnout and consequently the erratic behavior demonstrated by some while performing their duties. Therefore, the study contributes to the need for all companies to practically look at the eight (8) factors and find out how they can retrain, build capacity, and create a comprehensive training needs analysis (TNA) manual that can be implemented progressively to integrate what has been neglected to realize service quality for the employees in this sector. This is because even when such employees leave their organizations, they can easily turn into a menace to the communities in which they live. Similarly, the government should use this research as a tool for evaluating the competence of security companies in offering their services to the public.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Mpaata, K. A., Musenze, I. A., & Kakumba, U. (2024). Factors Determining Quality of Work Life for Employees in Private Security Business Organizations in Uganda. Open Journal of Business and Management, 12, 1315-1334. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2024.122070