IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i22p14783-d968591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychosocial Context of OSH-Remote Work of Academic Teachers in the Perspective of Sustainable Development

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Sadłowska-Wrzesińska

    (Institute of Safety and Quality Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, 2 Prof. Rychlewskiego Str., 60-965 Poznan, Poland)

  • Kamila Piosik

    (OHS Sobczak—Training and Consulting Enterprise, 72 Bługarska STR., 60-321 Poznan, Poland)

  • Żaneta Nejman

    (Institute of Safety and Quality Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, 2 Prof. Rychlewskiego Str., 60-965 Poznan, Poland)

Abstract

The purpose of the research paper is to analyse the factors affecting remote work in terms of the selected socio-economic criteria and to determine which elements contribute the most to the development of sustainable work. In addition, the study describes the issues of remote education at the academic level and the challenges faced by academic teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The whole is embedded in the issues of occupational health and safety, with particular emphasis on the psychosocial aspects of the occupational safety of academic teachers in Poland. In the research process, the TOPSIS multi-criteria analysis tool (technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution) was used, as well as AHP (analytical hierarchy process), as an auxiliary method. The use of these methods made it possible to select the most important variable and to determine the ranking of factors affecting the analysed problem. Findings: According to the conducted research, the most important factor affecting the safety of remote work—in relation to the selected sustainability criteria—is overwork/workload. An equally important element was stress during remote work, as well as the organization of time, with consideration to the balance between work and home duties. The research has shown that the selected aspects of remote work can have a significant impact on the achievement of sustainable development goals by a given organization, and in relation to individuals, on the quality of life and the sense of safety and health at work.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Sadłowska-Wrzesińska & Kamila Piosik & Żaneta Nejman, 2022. "Psychosocial Context of OSH-Remote Work of Academic Teachers in the Perspective of Sustainable Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-16, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:14783-:d:968591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/14783/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/14783/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wei, Chun-Chin & Chien, Chen-Fu & Wang, Mao-Jiun J., 2005. "An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 47-62, April.
    2. T C Lirn & H A Thanopoulou & M J Beynon & A K C Beresford, 2004. "An Application of AHP on Transhipment Port Selection: A Global Perspective," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 6(1), pages 70-91, March.
    3. Małgorzata Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek & Katarzyna Antosz & Ryszard Wyczółkowski & Dariusz Mazurkiewicz & Bo Sun & Cheng Qian & Yi Ren, 2021. "Application of MICMAC, Fuzzy AHP, and Fuzzy TOPSIS for Evaluation of the Maintenance Factors Affecting Sustainable Manufacturing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-30, March.
    4. Tam, Maggie C. Y. & Tummala, V. M. Rao, 2001. "An application of the AHP in vendor selection of a telecommunications system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 171-182, April.
    5. Vlastimil Chytrý & Milan Kubiatko & Romana Šindelářová & Janka Medová, 2022. "Socioeconomic Status of University Students as a Limiting Factor for Various Forms of Distance Education during COVID-19 Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-12, May.
    6. Rosa María Brito & Columba Rodríguez & José Luis Aparicio, 2018. "Sustainability in Teaching: An Evaluation of University Teachers and Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Pilar Colás-Bravo & Jesús Conde-Jiménez & Salvador Reyes-de-Cózar, 2021. "Sustainability and Digital Teaching Competence in Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Nathalie Billaudeau & Stephanie Alexander & Louise Magnard & Sofia Temam & Marie-Noël Vercambre, 2022. "What Levers to Promote Teachers’ Wellbeing during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Lessons Learned from a 2021 Online Study in Six Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Ligang Song & Yixiao Zhou, 2020. "The COVID‐19 Pandemic and Its Impact on the Global Economy: What Does It Take to Turn Crisis into Opportunity?," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 28(4), pages 1-25, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diego García-Álvarez & María José Soler & Rubia Cobo-Rendón & Juan Hernández-Lalinde, 2023. "Teacher Professional Development, Character Education, and Well-Being: Multicomponent Intervention Based on Positive Psychology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Cheng-Hsien Hsieh, 2014. "Disaster risk assessment of ports based on the perspective of vulnerability," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(2), pages 851-864, November.
    3. Sung-Shun Weng & Yang Liu & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2019. "Reform of Chinese Universities in the Context of Sustainable Development: Teacher Evaluation and Improvement Based on Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Eleonora Bottani & Piera Centobelli & Teresa Murino & Ehsan Shekarian, 2018. "A QFD-ANP Method for Supplier Selection with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks Considerations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 911-939, May.
    5. Huang, Samuel H. & Keskar, Harshal, 2007. "Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 510-523, February.
    6. Ge, Liping & Voß, Stefan, 2009. "ERP application in China: An overview," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 501-507, November.
    7. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Ruan, Da, 2008. "Evaluation of software development projects using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 464-475.
    8. Yongmin Kim & Youngdeuk Park, 2022. "International Health Cooperation in the Post-Pandemic Era: Possibilities for and Limitations of Middle Powers in International Cooperation," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, June.
    9. Molnár Bálint & Benczúr András & Szabó Gyula, 2013. "Selection Process of ERP Systems," Business Systems Research, Sciendo, vol. 4(1), pages 36-48, March.
    10. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Yuen, Chi-lok Andrew & Zhang, Anming & Cheung, Waiman, 2012. "Port competitiveness from the users' perspective: An analysis of major container ports in China and its neighboring countries," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 34-40.
    12. Steven, Adams B. & Corsi, Thomas M., 2012. "Choosing a port: An analysis of containerized imports into the US," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 881-895.
    13. S H Choi & S M Bae, 2009. "Strategic information systems selection with incomplete preferences: a case of a Korean electronics company," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 180-190, February.
    14. Larranaga, Ana Margarita & Arellana, Julian & Senna, Luiz Afonso, 2017. "Encouraging intermodality: A stated preference analysis of freight mode choice in Rio Grande do Sul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 202-211.
    15. Lin, Rong-Ho, 2012. "An integrated model for supplier selection under a fuzzy situation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 55-61.
    16. Zesen Qian & Lingran Yuan & Shuo Wang & Qizheng Zhang & Binlei Gong, 2021. "Epidemics, Convergence, and Common Prosperity: Evidence from China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 29(6), pages 117-138, November.
    17. Pınar Kaya Samut, 2017. "Integrated FANP-f-MIGP model for supplier selection in the renewable energy sector," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 427-450, May.
    18. Min Ju Bae & Ek Peng Chew & Loo Hay Lee & Anming Zhang, 2013. "Container transshipment and port competition," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 479-494, September.
    19. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-41, August.
    20. Wanke, Peter & Falcão, Bernardo Bastos, 2017. "Cargo allocation in Brazilian ports: An analysis through fuzzy logic and social networks," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 33-46.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:14783-:d:968591. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.