Psychological Empowerment and Job Satisfaction in University Teachers: Mediating Role of Workforce Agility

The present study examines the correlation between psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in university teachers. The purpose of the present study was to find correlation between psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in university teachers, to find psychological empowerment and workforce agility as significant predictors of job satisfaction in university teachers and to find out the mediating role of workforce agility between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in university teachers. The total sample consisted of 180 teachers including 91 men and 89 women. Data was collected through non probability purposive sampling. The data was collected directly and it was collected using the psychological empowerment scale by Sprietzer (1995; 1996), Workforce agility scale (Muduli, 2016) And short index of job satisfaction (SIJS), introduced by Judge et al (2000). Pearson Product Moment correlation was computed which revealed that psychological empowerment; workforce agility and job satisfaction was positively correlated to each other in university teachers. Psychological empowerment and workforce agility was found to be positive predictor of job satisfaction in university teachers. Moreover, workforce agility was found to be significant mediator between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in university teachers. This study will be helpful in educational domain; this study has the potential to provide valuable insights into the factors that contribute to job satisfaction and workforce agility among university teachers, which can ultimately lead to improved educational outcomes for students.

Job satisfaction is a construct that describes the positive emotional reactions and attitudes that individuals hold toward their job (Faragher et al., 2005). Understanding this construct is important for both employees and managers, as it can have significant effects on employee productivity (Keles, 2015). Job satisfaction refers to an employee's emotional and cognitive evaluation of their job, indicating their level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with it (Ivancevich & Matteson, 2002; Spector, 2011). This assessment can be influenced by multiple factors, including the degree to which an employee's values and beliefs align with those of their organization (Kim, 2012).  Several significant elements contribute to job satisfaction, including engaging and stimulating work, fair compensation, positive working environments, and supportive colleagues. Furthermore, employees' commitment to their organization and active engagement in their job are critical factors that can affect job satisfaction (Howe, 2003). Among all of them, the factors that most importantly effect job satisfaction are psychological empowerment and workforce agility. In a study conducted by Carless (2004), the relationship between psychological climate and job satisfaction was examined, with psychological empowerment acting as a mediator. According to the results, the factors of empowerment - specifically, a sense of purpose and proficiency - played a significant role in mediating the connection between the psychological environment and job contentment. Dee et al. (2003) discovered that certain elements of empowerment, including meaning, self-determination, and impact, had a positive impact on teachers' levels of commitment to their work. They highlighted the importance of empowering teachers as a means to enhance their commitment and reduce burnout and turnover rates. Thus, promoting teacher empowerment can be a crucial strategy for improving the quality of education and retaining skilled teachers in the workforce.

Moreover, another important factor that influence job satisfaction is workforce agility. It is ability to responding to the threat in the most possible appropriate way also looking toward opportunities with efficiency and proper time management (Paul et al., 2020). Workforce agility enhance job satisfaction because it is considered as stimulator of employee’s ability to solve daily problems, they are facing at workplace. It can be initiated by proactive initiatives and demanding innovation at work (Azmy, 2021). Varshney and Varshney (2020) explore the relationship between workforce performance and emotional intelligence along with mediating role of workforce agility in small firms in India. Workplace performance was divided into three categories; task performance, adaptive performance and contextual performance. The results of the study revealed that workforce agility plays a mediating role between work performance and emotional intelligence. But, only in two context of performance, adaptive and contextual performance; workforce agility have not shown any significant influence on task performance. In a nut shell, university teachers have a critical role in shaping society through their teaching, research, and community engagement. Thus, it is crucial to comprehend the factors that impact their psychological empowerment, workforce agility, and job satisfaction, which significantly impact their job performance, organizational commitment, and overall well-being. The academic field is experiencing rapid changes and challenges, and understanding the factors that contribute to workforce agility can help universities better adapt to the evolving needs and demands of the academic environment (Paul et al., 2020).

Rationale

This study is highly focused on predicting the role of psychological empowerment and workforce agility on job satisfaction in university teachers. Previously research (Sagheer & Qureshi, 2021) has established positive relationship between psychological empowerment and employee engagement in teacher but how psychological empowerment is associated with workforce agility and job satisfaction is still matter of discussion. Comprehending the factors that promote job satisfaction can help teachers, teaching in most effective way which produce good outcome, which ultimately benefits the institution, students, and society as a whole. This research was conducted to fill the gap, although recent studies have examined psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in teachers and employees, also work force agility in organizational settings, but there are limited researches that explored the combined dynamics between psychological empowerment, work force agility and job satisfaction, especially in university teachers. Hence, this study would be beneficial in both academic and research domain. (Amanda et al., 2024; Xiang et al., 2024). Broader objectives of the study were to find out the relationship between psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in university teachers. In addition, to find out psychological empowerment and workforce agility as significant predictor of job satisfaction in university teachers and to find out mediating role of workforce agility between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in university teachers.

Hypotheses

• There is likely to be a positive relationship between psychological empowerment (meaning, competence, self-determination and impact), workforce agility and job satisfaction in university teachers.
• Psychological empowerment and workforce agility are likely to positively predict job satisfaction in university teachers.
• Workforce agility is likely to mediate the relationship between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in university teachers.

Method

A cross sectional research design (correlation) was carried out to find the relationship between psychological empowerment, job satisfaction and workforce agility in university teachers.

Sample

The sample size was calculated with g power formula. The study involved 180 participants comprising of 91 men and 89 women. The participants were teaching in the both government and private sector universities. Teachers who were MS/MPhil or PhD with at least one year of teaching experience were included whereas, teachers with any physical disability and teachers from semi-government universities were excluded from the present research.

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Demographic Variables (N = 180)

Measures

The following measures were used to assess the study variables.

Psychological Empowerment Scale

Psychological empowerment was measured by Psychological Empowerment Scale (Spreitzer, 1995; 1996). This scale comprises of total 12 items with 4 sub-dimensions: where 3 items comprise of meaning e.g. The work I do is very important to me, 3 items comprise of competence e.g. I am confident about my ability to do my job, 3 items comprise of self-determination e.g. I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job and 3 items comprise of impact e.g. My impact on what happens in my department is large. The responses were taken on 7-point likert scale ranging from 1-7 where 1 = Very strongly disagree to 7 = Very strongly agree. The Cronbach’s alpha was reported to be .95 (Spreitzer, 1995). For current study, alpha coefficient was also .95.

Workforce Agility Scale

Workforce agility in this study was measured by Workforce Agility Scale (Muduli, 2016). The scale is comprised of 7 items e.g. I am comfortable with change, new ideas, and new technologies in my organization. Responses were taken on 3 levels 1 = low to 3 = high. The scoring was done by assigning highest score to the extreme positive statement and low score to the extreme negative statement. The Cronbach’s alpha was reported to be .73 (Muduli, 2016). For the current study, .70 alpha coefficient was achieved.

Short Index of Job Satisfaction

To measure job satisfaction, Short Index of Job Satisfaction (SIJS) was used, developed by Judge et al., (2000) which has only 5 questions. It is an abridged version of the Job Satisfaction Index (JSI), introduced by Brayfield and Rothe (1951). This scale was used by suggestion of Yanchovska (2022). The responses were collected on 5-point Likert scale where 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree. The total score of job satisfaction is the average value of 5 questions. In the original study, the SIJS demonstrated Cronbach’s alpha of .77, which may be attributed to the conciseness of the instrument, as shorter scales tend to yield lower internal consistency estimates (Judge et al., 2000). For the current study, .52 alpha coefficient was achieved.

Demographic Questionnaire

A demographic self-report form was created for the purpose of gathering information about the participants' gender, age, education, marital status, and type of university they are teaching in (private or public). This data is used in further analyses for the present study.

Procedure

A pilot study was conducted prior to data collection for the study. The main purpose of the piloting was to test research protocols or any barriers that may possibly affect data collection, usage of scale, sample size, average time, and data management in order to improve any aspect of the study design so that the researcher would know how to utilize available resources effectively.  The data was collected by giving questionnaires to participants in hard form. Ethical administration of the study was ensured throughout the study. Informed consent was taken from each participant, which briefed them about their right to participate in the study and to ensure them confidentiality of their information. All demographics and data gathered from the scale was entered and analyzed in SPSS.

Following ethical considerations were taken into account that is the study was initiated after obtaining prior approval from the department head and supervisor. In addition, permission was also obtained from the original authors of the scales used in the study and participants were given a consent form explaining their right to withdraw, and their privacy and confidentiality were guaranteed; while, participants of the study were assured that the information they provide would be kept confidential.

Results

To tabulate relationship among the variables, Pearson Product Moment correlation was conducted.

Table 2: Correlation Among Study Variables (N = 180)

**p<.000

The results of the analysis revealed that psychological empowerment is positively correlated with job satisfaction in university teachers. Furthermore, workforce agility is also positively correlated with job satisfaction in university teachers. Additionally, correlational analysis on two demographic variables age and experience revealed the age and experience has non-significant relationship with job satisfaction as shown in Table 2.

Table 3: Multiple Hierarchal Regression for Predictors of Job Satisfaction (N = 180)

*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.000

In first block variable of age and experience were added, the overall model revealed no variance in job satisfaction. In second block of regression analysis variable psychological empowerment was added, the overall model explained 15.8% variance on job satisfaction. The results of analysis revealed that psychological empowerment is a positive predictor of job satisfaction in university teachers.  In third block variable workforce agility was added, the overall model explained 19.5% variance on job satisfaction. The results of the regression analysis revealed that workforce agility is a positive predictor of job satisfaction in university teachers.

Table 4: Mediation Analysis Between Psychological Empowerment and Job Satisfaction Through Workforce Agility

The results indicated that the indirect effect of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction through workforce agility was significant, β = 0.30, 95% CI [0.03, 0.09]. Therefore, workforce agility partially mediated the relationship between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction, as the direct effect of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction remained significant after including the mediator.

Discussion

The present research was conducted in order to explore the relationship between psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in private and public university teachers. The results of this study indicate that there is positive relationship between psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction. One important psychological resource that improves employee motivation, flexibility and productive job outcome is psychological empowerment. For instance, psychological empowerment is a strong predictor of jo satisfaction and organizational performance, according to recent studies on teachers and employees in higher education setting (Al-Harbi et al., 2022; Kim 2012). Similarly, workforce agility has been identified as a key determinant of employee effectiveness and satisfaction in rapidly changing educational and organizational settings (Jafari & Bidarian, 2023). Therefore, teachers who score high in psychological empowerment also score high in workforce agility and job satisfaction.

To determine the predictors of job satisfaction, regression analysis was carried out, results of the analysis revealed that psychological empowerment and workforce agility are positive predictors of job satisfaction. This result is in line with recent research that indicates empowerment-based workplaces improve workers intrinsic motivation and satisfaction by boosting their competence, autonomy, and meaningful involvement in decision making (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2020; Zhang et al., 2023). Additionally, workforce agility helps employees manage workload demands, respond to difficulties, and adjust to altering institutional requirements, all of which contribute to job satisfaction. According to recent organizational behavior research, agile workers are better able to handle unpredictability and role demands, which make them more resilient, motivated and content (Sharma & Singh, 2022; Vial, 2021).

The research findings are consistent with recent studies showing that psychological empowerment promotes adaptive work practices, which in turn improve job satisfaction in academic and organizational contexts.

Limitations and Recommendations

There are few potential limitations of the study. For instance, the present study was conducted only in Lahore, therefore, it is suggested to broaden the scope of future research by including participants from other cities, in order to increase the generalizability of the findings to the overall population of Pakistan. The participants of the study were busy, which may have affected the quality of their responses as they may not have been able to focus completely while filling out the questionnaires. Therefore, in future research, the population should be selected when they are on break or not working, to minimize any such impact. Due to time constraints, the study may not have been able to thoroughly explore all relevant variables. Therefore, in future research, a different sampling strategy could be used to allow for a more comprehensive examination of the variables. The study found limited research on variables such as psychological empowerment and workforce agility in the Pakistani context. Therefore, it is recommended that more research be conducted on these variables to expand our understanding of their impact in the Pakistani population.

Implications

The results of current study have vast application in domain of educational psychology and organizational psychology. Institutions should strive to create a culture of empowerment, where employees feel a sense of control and influence over their work. This can be achieved through strategies such as delegation of decision-making authority, recognition of employee contributions, and opportunities for skill development. This study emphasizes on influence of workforce agility on job satisfaction. Organizations should prioritize workforce agility by investing in training and development programs that promote flexibility, adaptability, and innovation. This may include cross-training employees in multiple roles, encouraging experimentation and risk-taking, and promoting a culture of continuous improvement. Clear guidelines should be provided to ensure that faculty members understand their roles and responsibilities without any ambiguity. This information can be utilized by higher education administrators and policymakers to improve the efficiency and performance of academic staff. Teachers who are satisfied with their jobs and have the skills to be agile can provide better instruction and support to students, leading to improved educational outcomes.

 Conclusion

This study explores psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in private and public university teachers. The objective of the study was to enlighten psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction in the public and private sector university teachers and how it influences by workforce agility. The results revealed that psychological empowerment, workforce agility and job satisfaction are positively related to each other. Secondly it was revealed that psychological empowerment and Workforce agility are significant predictors of job satisfaction. Moreover, workforce agility significantly mediated the relationship between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction in university teachers.

References

Amaliah, R., Amin, A. M., Dipoatmodjo, T. S. P., Kurniawan, A. W., & Haeruddin, M. I. M. (2023). The influence of psychological empowerment on workforce agility. Economics and Business Journal, (4). https://doi.org/10.47353/ecbis.v1i4.36

Amanda, E., Wicaksana, S. A., & Hanifah, R. I. (2024). The impact of psychological empowerment on workforce agility in organization X. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2024.9.2.2296

Azmy, A. (2021). The effect of employee engagement and job satisfaction on workforce agility through talent management in public transportation companies. Journal of Economics & Management, 36(2), 212-229. https://doi.org/10.24856/mem.v36i2.2190

Brayfield, A. H., & Rothe, H. F. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35(5), 307-311. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0055617

Carless, S. A. (2004). Does psychological empowerment mediate the relationship between psychological climate and job satisfaction? Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(3), 405-425.

Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Duemer, L. (2003). Structural antecedents and psychological correlates of teacher empowerment. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(3), 257-277.

Faragher, E. B., Cass, M., & Cooper, C. L. (2005). The relationship between job satisfaction and health: A meta-analysis. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 62(2), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.20 02.006734

Howe, T. (2003). Charity village. https://www.charityvillage.com

Ivancevich, J. M., & Matteson, M. T. (2002). Organizational behavior and management (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., & Locke, E. A. (2000). Personality and job satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 237-249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.237

Keles, H. N. (2015). The relationship between learned resourcefulness and job satisfaction: A research on staff of higher education in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 177, 132-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.362

Kim, S. (2012). Does person–organization fit matter in the public sector? Public Administration Review, 72(6), 830-840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02572.x

Mathew, J., & Nair, S. (2022). Psychological empowerment and job satisfaction: A meta-analytic review. Vision, 26(4), 431-440. https://doi. org/10.1177/097226292199

Muduli, A. (2016). Exploring the facilitators and mediators of workforce agility: An empirical study. Management Research Review, 39(12), 1567-1586. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-10-2015-0236

Paul, M., Jena, L. K., & Sahoo, K. (2020). Workplace spirituality and workforce agility: A psychological exploration among teaching professionals. Journal of Religion and Health, 59(1), 135-153.

Sageer, I., & Qureshi, A. (2023). Psychological Empowerment and Employee Engagement in School Teachers. Bulletin of Education and Research, 45(3), 49-63.

>Shams, M. S., Mei, T. S., Adnan, Z., Niazi, M. M., & Khan, K. (2022). The relationship among idiosyncratic deals, psychological empowerment, and internal locus of control: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 923874. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.923874

Sharma, A., & Kohli, A. (2022). Relationship between psychological empowerment and job satisfaction among educrats. Organizational Psychology, 12(4), 41-54.

Shetty, P., Bharath, S., & Nagesh, P. (2023). The mediating role of psychological empowerment amid workforce agility and employee performance among IT professionals. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 16(34), 2740-2745. https://doi.org/10.17485/IJST/v16i34.1579

Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.

Spector, P. E. (2011). Job satisfaction survey (JSS). University of South Florida. http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~spector/scales/jsspag.html

Sule, B. (2023). Employee empowerment and job satisfaction. Journal for Re-Attach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 6(1), 1053-1060. https://doi.org/10.67145/jrtdd.v6i1.2611

Timbuleng, J. A., Tewal, B., Lengkong, V. P. K., Trang, I., & Sendow, G. M. (2023). Employee involvement and workforce agility: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Accounting Research, Organization and Economics, 6(1). https://jurnal.usk.ac.id/JAROE/article/view/32584

Varshney, D., & Varshney, N. K. (2020). Workforce agility and its links to emotional intelligence and workforce performance: A study of small entrepreneurial firms in India. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 39(5), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22069

Xiang, X., Wei, Y., Lei, Y., Li, W., & He, X. (2024). Impact of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction among preschool teachers: Mediating role of professional identity. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 1175. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03706-x

Yanchovska, I. (2022). Scales for measuring employee job satisfaction. Young Forum, Mechanics Transport Communications, 11(1), 31-36.

Received 30 May 2024
Revision received 02 July 2026