İş Yaşam Kalitesi ve İnovatif İş Davranışı İlişkisinde Psikolojik İyi Oluşun Aracı Rolü

Öz

Bu çalışma, iş yaşam kalitesinin inovatif iş davranışı üzerindeki etkisini incelemek ve bu ilişkide psikolojik iyi oluşun aracılık rolünü ortaya koymak amacıyla yürütülmüştür. Kesitsel tasarımın benimsendiği araştırmada, teknoloji temelli işletmelerde görev yapan 517 çalışandan kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle veri toplanmıştır. Veri toplama sürecinde WRQoL ölçeği, PERMA Profiler ve İnovatif İş Davranışı ölçeklerinden yararlanılmış; elde edilen veriler SPSS 26.0 ve Hayes PROCESS Macro kullanılarak güvenirlik, geçerlik, korelasyon ve regresyon analizlerine tabi tutulmuştur. Analizlerde bootstrap yöntemi tercih edilmiştir. Aracılık etkisinin bootstrap yöntemiyle test edildiği analizler sonucunda, iş yaşam kalitesinin hem psikolojik iyi oluşu hem de inovatif iş davranışını pozitif ve anlamlı bir şekilde etkilediği görülmüştür. Ayrıca psikolojik iyi oluşun bu ilişkide kısmi aracılık rolü üstlendiği tespit edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar; Sosyal Değişim Teorisi, İş Talepleri-Kaynakları (JD-R) Modeli ve Genişlet ve İnşa Et Kuramı ile teorik bir uyum sergilemektedir. İş yaşam kalitesi ile inovatif iş davranışı arasındaki ilişkiyi psikolojik bir mekanizma üzerinden açıklayarak literatüre katkı sunan bu çalışma, çalışan refahının artırılmasının inovatif davranışları desteklediğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İş yaşam kalitesi
• İnovatif iş davranışı
• Psikolojik iyi oluş

The Mediating Role of Psychological Well-being in the Relationship between Quality of Work Life and Innovative Work Behavior

Öz

This study aims to examine the effect of quality of work life on innovative work behavior and to reveal the mediating role of psychological well-being in this relationship. Adopting a cross-sectional design, the research involved 517 employees from technology-based organizations, with data collected through convenience sampling. The Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) scale, PERMA Profiler, and Innovative Work Behavior scales were utilized as measurement instruments. The gathered data were subjected to reliability, validity, correlation, and regression analyses using SPSS 26.0 and Hayes PROCESS Macro, while the mediating effect was tested via the bootstrapping method. The findings indicate that quality of work life has a significant and positive impact on both psychological well-being and innovative work behavior. Furthermore, it was determined that psychological well-being plays a partial mediating role in this relationship. These results are consistent with Social Exchange Theory, the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model, and the Broaden-and-Build Theory. By explaining the relationship between quality of work life and innovative work behavior through a psychological mechanism, this study contributes to the literature and suggests that enhancing employee well-being fosters innovative behaviors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Quality of work life
• Innovative work behavior
• Psychological well-being

Kaynakça

1. Abstein, A., Heidenreich, S., ve Spieth, P. (2014). Innovative work behaviour: The impact of comprehensive HR system perceptions and the role of work-life conflict. Industry and Innovation, 21(2), 91-116.
2. Agarwal, S., Mewarfarosh, R., ve Solanki, V. K. (2024). The role of various forms of subjective well being with quality of work life in the aviation industry. Journal of Economics and Management, 46, 353-386.
3. Ahmad, S. (2013). Paradigms of quality of work life. Journal of Human Values, 19(1), 73-82.
4. Akar, H., ve Üstüner, M. (2017). İş yaşam kalitesi ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(2), 159-176.
5. Alimoğlu Özkan, S., Ardıç, K., ve Özsoy, E. (2022). Mütevazı liderliğin yenilikçi iş davranışına etkisinde psikolojik iyi oluşun rolü. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 11(3), 1179-1191.
6. Al-shami, S. A., Al Mamun, A., Rashid, N., ve Cheong, C. B. (2023). Happiness at workplace on innovative work behaviour and organisation citizenship behaviour through moderating effect of innovative behaviour. Heliyon, 9(5), e15614.
7. Anderson, N., Potocnik, K., ve Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.
8. Avcı, N. (2017). The relationship between coworker supports, quality of work life and wellbeing: An empirical study of hotel employees. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 13(3), 577-589.

9. Baker, R., Brick, J. M., Bates, N. A., Battaglia, M., Couper, M. P., Dever, J. A., Gile, K. J., ve Tourangeau, R. (2013). Summary report of the AAPOR task force on non-probability sampling. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 1(2), 90-143.
10. Bakker, A. B., ve Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands‐resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
11. Balkar, O. E., ve Çildir, Ç. (2022). COVID-19 hastalığı kaygısı ile inovatif davranış ilişkisi: psikolojik iyi oluşun aracılık etkisi. İçinde O. E. Balkar (Ed.), COVID-19 Pandemisi Sürecinde Türkiye: Eğitim ve Finans Alanlarında İncelemeler (pp. 112-137). Çizgi Kitabevi Yayınları.
12. Baron, R. M., ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. Broughel, J., ve Thierer, A. D. (2019). Technological innovation and economic growth: a brief report on the evidence. Mercatus Research Paper.
13. Butler, J. C., ve Kern, M. L. (2016). The PERMA-Profiler: A brief multidimensional measure of flourishing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 6(3), 1-48.
14. Chan, K. W., ve Wyatt, T. A. (2007). Quality of work life: A study of employees in Shanghai, China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 13(4), 501-517.
15. Chen, H., ve Zeng, Z. (2021). When do hedonic and eudaimonic orientations lead to happiness? Moderating effects of orientation priority. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 1-12.
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Çalışkan, A., Akkoç, İ., ve Turunç, Ö. (2019). Yenilikçi davranış: Bir ölçek uyarlama çalışması. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 94-111.
18. Çınar Altıntaş, F., Altıntaş, M. H., ve Işın, F. B. (2022). Örgütsel yaratıcılık kavramının bibliyometrik analiz yöntemi ile incelenmesi. Journal of Academic Value Studies, 8(4), 348-361.
19. Demirci, İ., Ekşi, H., Dinçer, D., ve Kardaş, S. (2017). Beş boyutlu iyi oluş modeli: PERMA ölçeği türkçe formunun geçerlilik ve güvenilirliği. The Journal of Happiness and Well-Being, 5(1), 60-77.
20. Demircioglu, M. A., Hameduddin, T., ve Knox, C. (2023). Innovative work behaviors and networking across government. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(1), 145-164.
21. Duanguppama, S., Jadesadalug, V., ve Ponchaitiwat, K. (2025). Influence of employee well-being and work flexibility on innovative work behavior and job performance: A comparative study of full-time and gig workers in digital business. Tourism and Hospitality, 6(4), 166.
22. Elkholy, S. M., ve Sorour, M. S. (2022). Human resource management practices in relation to nurses’ innovative work behavior: Moderating role of eudaimonic well-being. International Egyptian Journal of Nursing Sciences and Research, 2(2), 1-12.
23. Fornell, C., ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
24. Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American Scientist, 91(4), 330-335.
25. Goodman, F. R., Disabato, D. J., Kashdan, T. B., ve Kauffman, S. B. (2018). Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(4), 321-332.
26. Gürbüz, S. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde aracı, düzenleyici ve durumsal etki analizleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
27. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., ve Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
28. Hammond, M. M., Neff, N. L., Farr, J. L., Schwall, A. R., ve Zhao, X. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90-105.
29. Hasan, I., ve Tucci, C. L. (2010). The innovation-economic growth nexus: Global evidence. Research Policy, 39(10), 1264-1276.
30. Hasanati, N., Karima, A. K., ve Surahman, S. (2025). Is the influence of quality of work life on innovative work behavior mediated by happiness at work in teachers. Jurnal Ilmiah Psikologi Terapan, 13(1), 41-47.
31. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
32. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4-40.
33. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., ve Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
34. Hu, L., ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
35. Ilgan, A., Özü-Cengiz, Ö., Ata, A., ve Akram, M. (2015). The relationship between teachers’ psychological well-being and their quality of school work life. The Journal of Happiness and Well-Being, 3(2), 159-181.
36. Jabid, A. W., Amarullah, D., Soleman, M. M., Sabuhari, R., ve Zulkifli, Z. (2025). From empowering leaders to innovative work behavior of SME employees: the mediating role of psychological well-being and psychological capital. Cogent Business and Management, 12(1), 1-13.
37. Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., ve McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486-507.
38. Keskes, I., Sallán, J. M., Simó, P., ve Fernández, V. (2018). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of leader-member exchange. Journal of Management Development, 37(3), 271-284.
39. Khalili, A. (2017). Transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior: the moderating role of emotional intelligence. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(7), 1004-1015.
40. Khorakian, A., ve Sharifirad, M. S. (2019). Integrating implicit leadership theories, leader-member exchange, self-efficacy, and attachment theory to predict job performance. Psychological Reports, 122(3), 1117-1144.
41. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
42. Klotz, A. C., Bolino, M. C., Song, H., ve Stornelli, J. (2018). Examining the nature, causes, and consequences of profiles of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(5), 629-647.
43. LeBel, P. (2008). The role of creative innovation in economic growth: Some international comparisons. Journal of Asian Economics, 19(4), 334-347.
44. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., ve Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99-128.
45. Mehmood, K., Jabeen, F., Iftikhar, Y., Yan, M., Khan, A. N., AlNahyan, M. T., Alkindi, H. A., ve Alhammadi, B. A. (2022). Elucidating the effects of organisational practices on innovative work behavior in UAE public sector organisations: The mediating role of employees’ wellbeing. Applied Psychology Health and Well-Being, 14(3), 715-733.
46. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
47. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., ve Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
48. Prakoso, R. A., Murwani, F. D., Soetjipto, B. E., ve Rahayu, W. P. (2025). The influence of job demand and job resources on employee wellbeing through job satisfaction, work-life balance, and quality of work life among MSME employees in Java. TPM - Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 32(R2), 700-709.
49. Rahimi, H., Hejazi, S. Y., Lou, N. M., ve Heidarzadeh, M. (2024). Are teachers with better quality of work life more innovative? The mediating roles of psychological empowerment and teaching mindsets. Acta Psychologica, 247, 104315.
50. Rahman, M. F. W., Kistyanto, A., ve Surjanti, J. (2022). Does cyberloafing and person-organization fit affect employee performance? The mediating role of innovative work behavior. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 41, 44-64.
51. Rasulzada, F., ve Dackert, I. (2009). Organizational creativity and innovation in relation to psychological well-being and organizational factors. Creativity Research Journal, 21(2-3), 191-198.
52. Rathi, N., Rastogi, R., ve Rangnekar, S. (2011). Quality of work life, organisational commitment, and psychological well-being. A study of the Indian employees. International Journal of Contemporary Business Studies, 2(4), 16-28.
53. Salas‐Vallina, A., Pozo-Hidalgo, M., ve Fernández‐Guerrero, R. (2020). New times for HRM? Well-being oriented management (WOM), harmonious work passion and innovative work behavior. Employee Relations the International Journal, 42(3), 561-581.
54. Scott, S. G., ve Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
55. Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Free Press. Shahid, A. U., Danish, R. Q., Humayon, A. A., Shahid, J., ve Munir, I. (2016). The impact of high quality relationship on innovative work behavior of employees through psychological wellbeing. A case of pharmaceutical sector in Pakistan. Journal of Comparative International Management, 19(1), 77-97.
56. Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P., ve Lee, D.-J. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 241-302.
57. Swamy, D. R., Nanjundeswaraswamy, T. S., ve Rashmi, S. (2015). Quality of work life: Scale development and validation. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 8(2), 281-300.
58. Szirmai, A., Naudé, W., ve Goedhuys, M. (2011). Entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic development: An overview. İçinde A. Szirmai, W. Naudé, ve M. Goedhuys (Eds.), Entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic development (pp. 3-32). Oxford University Press.
59. The American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2016). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (9th ed.). AAPOR.
60. Van Laar, D., Edwards, J. A., ve Easton, S. (2007). The work-related quality of life scale for healthcare workers. The Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(3), 325-333.
61. Walton, R. E. (1973). Quality of working life: What is it. Sloan Management Review, 15(1), 11-21.