FACTORS AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF SUPPORT PERSONNEL IN CHULALONGKORN UNIVERSITY
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose
This study aimed to examine the overall and domain-specific quality of life of support personnel at Chulalongkorn University, classified by gender, age, income, educational attainment, length of service at the university, and affiliated departments.
Methods
The sample consisted of 400 support personnel members currently employed at Chulalongkorn University in the Pathumwan district, including both male and female participants aged between 18 and 60 years, holding positions at levels P3 to P8. The research instruments included a general demographic questionnaire and the WHOQOL-BREF–THAI, a standardized instrument for assessing quality of life. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics namely percentage, mean, and standard deviation and inferential statistics. Independent sample t-tests were conducted to compare quality of life by gender, while one-way ANOVA was used to assess differences by age, income, educational attainment, length of service, and department affiliation.
Results
The overall quality of life and its four domains—physical health, mental health, social relationships, and environmental factors—among support personnel were at a moderate level. When classified by gender, age, income, length of service, and department, significant differences in quality of life were found. However, no significant difference was observed with educational attainment.
Conclusion
The study concluded that the overall and domain-specific quality of life of support personnel at Chulalongkorn University was moderate. Variations in quality of life were significantly associated with gender, age, income, length of service, and department affiliation, whereas educational attainment was not found to be a determining factor.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Ahmad, S. (2013). Paradigms of quality of work life. Journal of Human Values, 19(1), 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971685812470345
Becker, G. S. (1993). Human capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Bruno, A., Buono, C., Falco, A., Brondino, M., Capone, V., Dell’Aversana, G., Giancaspro, M. L., Gilardi, S., Girardi, D., Guglielmi, D., Ingusci, E., Miglioretti, M., Pace, F., Platania, S., Signore, F., & Spagnoli, P. (2024). First validation of the technical and administrative staff quality of life at work tool (TASQ@work) in academia. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1346556-1346574. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1346556
Chulalongkorn University Human Resources Management Office. (2024). Data and statistics on personnel at Chulalongkorn University. https://www.chula.ac.th/about/overview/facts-and-stats/
Chulalongkorn University Human Resources Management Office. (2024). Operational staff personnel. https://www.hrm.chula.ac.th/newhrm/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/v6
Department of Mental Health. (2022). How to improve quality of life by Dr. Surachai Panyapritphong. https://dmh.go.th/news/view.asp?id=2486
Department of Mental Health. (2022). Quality of life and mental health. https://www.dmh.go.th
Gayathiri, R., & Ramakrishnan, L. (2013). Quality of work life-Linkage with job satisfaction and performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(1), 1-8.
Gholami, A., Jahromi, L. M., Zarei, E., & Dehghan, A. (2013). Application of WHOQOL-BREF in measuring quality of life in health-care staff. International Journal of Preventive Medicine, 4(7), 809-817.
Kamawatana, U., & Sukonthasab, S. (2023). The effects of the intergenerational generation program for elderly. Journal of Sports Science and Health, 24(1), 89-101.
Mahatnirunkul, S. (1997). Comparative quality of life measurement of the World Health Organization's 100 indicators and 26 indicators at Suan Prung Hospital, Chiang Mai. https://dmh.go.th/test/whoqol/
National Innovation Agency. (2020). Quality of life of Thai population. https://www.nia.or.th/article/blog.html
National Statistical Office. (2024). Statistical yearbook Thailand 2024. https://www.nso.go.th/public/e-book/Statistical-Yearbook/SYB-2024/557/
Norreenee, T., & Hathairat, T. (2023). Factors associated with quality of life among the working-age population in Pak Phun Municipality, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province. Journal of Public Health Academic, 32(1), 31-42.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). How’s life? 2020: measuring well-being. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Publishing.
Singh, A., & Maini, J. J. (2020). Quality of work life and job performance: a study of faculty working in the technical institutions. Higher Education Quarterly, 74(4), 444-460. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12292
Social Progress Imperative. (2024). Social progress index. https://www.socialprogress.org/social-progress-index
Somlak, D. (2019). Quality of work life among civil servants in higher education institutions. Journal of Political Science and Public Administration, Chiang Mai University, 10(1), 45-62.
Waranonwanich, W, & Kongpua, W. (2024). Balance of quality of life and work of the population in Bangkok. Academic Journal of North Bangkok University, 13(1), 110-120.
World Health Organization. (1995). The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science & Medicine, 41(10), 1403-1409. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-k
World Health Organization. (1998). Programme on mental health. World Health Organization.
World Health Organization. (2025). World health statistics 2025. World Health Organization.
WorldData.info. (2024). Comparison of quality of life worldwide. https://www.worlddata.info/quality-of-life.php
