1. The Influence of Leadership Behaviors on Employee Quality of Work-Life
JASON O MANAOIS, RPm
Psychology Department
Xavier University – Ateneo de Cagayan

2. INTRODUCTION
Mushtaq Ahmad (2012).Impact of Quality of Work life on Business Process Re-engineering.
Nazem & Entezari (2014). Prediction of Employee Quality of Workl-ife based on the Leadership Styles.
Usha Devi (2015). Spiritual Leadership and its Relationship with Quality of Work Life and Organizational Performance – An Exploratory Study.
Mortazavi, et al (2012). The Role of the Psychological Capital on Quality of Work Life And organization performance.
Research has demonstrated how leadership in organizations propels organizational success, with strong links established between leadership, employee satisfaction, and commitment, among other related factors. Thus, it is imperative to further examine how leadership behaviors affect the total quality of work-life of employees. This study explored the predictive influence of leadership behaviors on employees’ quality of work-life. 678 Filipino employees from 48 purposively-selected small-medium enterprises within Cagayan de Oro City participated in this study. Confirmatory factory analysis and normality tests were done to verify the reliability and validity of the instruments used to measure leadership behavior and quality of work-life. Results showed that the relationship between leaders and constituents plays a crucial role in the life of employees and the organization. Identifying specific areas that connect the two variables is helpful for administrators and human resources practitioners in coaching leaders to develop behaviors that foster positive quality of work-life. This is essential in creating good organizational culture and dynamics. Furthermore, the result is a reflection of Filipino employees being collectivist; they put a premium on the relational aspect of work in organizations, and value how leaders manage and respect them as an important unit of the organization.
Helmiatin (2014). The Implementation of Transformational Leadership and Quality of Worklife toward Organizational Citizenship Behavior .
Shefali Srivastava, Rooma Kanpur (2014). A Study On Quality Of Work Life: Key Elements & It’s Implications .

3. Independent Variable: Leader-Member Exchange Theory
FRAMEWORK
Independent Variable:
Leadership Behavior
Dependent Variable:
Quality of Work Life
The leader–member exchange (LMX) theory is a relationship-based approach to leadership that focuses on the two-way (dyadic) relationship between leaders and followers.[1]It suggests that leaders develop an exchange with each of their subordinates, and that the quality of these leader–member exchange relationships influences subordinates' responsibility, decisions, and access to resources and performance.[2] Relationships are based on trust and respect and are often emotional relationships that extend beyond the scope of employment.[3] Leader–member exchange may promote positive employment experiences and augment organizational effectiveness.[4] It is widely used by many managers and is replacing many of its predecessors.
The latest version (2016) of leader–member exchange theory of leadership development explains the growth of vertical dyadic workplace influence and team performance in terms of selection and self-selection of informal apprenticeships in leadership.[5] It suggests that leaders select the best and make offers and members of team accept or not. Apprentices who complete the program develop strong emotional attachments with their mentor-teacher. This is reflected in their descriptions by both of their relationship as one of mutual respect for competence, trust in character and benevolence toward each other.[6] Those who complete the apprenticeship training are more collaborative, helpful to all team members, more deeply engaged in team activities and contribute more to team health and prosperity. This is seen as a win-win relationship by both parties, their team, network and overall organization.[7]
Trait Theory (1930's 's)
The trait leadership theory believes that people are either born or are made with certain qualities that will make them excel in leadership roles. That is, certain qualities such as intelligence, sense of responsibility, creativity and other values puts anyone in the shoes of a good leader. In fact, Gordon Allport, an American psychologist,"...identified almost 18,000 English personality-relevant terms" (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003, p. 3).
The trait theory of leadership focused on analyzing mental, physical and social characteristic in order to gain more understanding of what is the characteristic or the combination of characteristics that are common among leaders.
There were many shortfalls with the trait leadership theory. However, from a psychology of personalities approach, Gordon Allport's studies are among the first ones and have brought, for the study of leadership, the behavioural approach.
In the 1930s the field of Psychometrics was in its early years.
Personality traits measurement weren't reliable across studies.
Study samples were of low level managers
Explanations weren't offered as to the relation between each characteristic and its impact on leadership.
The context of the leader wasn't considered.
Many studies have analyzed the traits among existing leaders in the hope of uncovering those responsible for ones leadership abilities! In vain, the only characteristics that were identified among these individuals were those that were slightly taller and slightly more intelligent!
Read more: 
Behavioural Theories (1940's 's)
In reaction to the trait leadership theory, the behavioural theories are offering a new perspective, one that focuses on the behaviours of the leaders as opposed to their mental, physical or social characteristics. Thus, with the evolutions in psychometrics, notably the factor analysis, researchers were able to measure the cause an effects relationship of specific human behaviours from leaders. From this point forward anyone with the right conditioning could have access to the once before elite club of naturally gifted leaders. In other words, leaders are made not born.
The behavioural theories first divided leaders in two categories. Those that were concerned with the tasks and those concerned with the people. Throughout the literature these are referred to as different names, but the essence are identica
Read more: 
Transactional leadership Theories (1970's)
Transactional theories, also known as exchange theories of leadership, are characterized by a transaction made between the leader and the followers. In fact, the theory values a positive and mutually beneficial relationship.
For the transactional theories to be effective and as a result have motivational value, the leader must find a means to align to adequately reward (or punish) his follower, for performing leader-assigned task. In other words, transactional leaders are most efficient when they develop a mutual reinforcing environment, for which the individual and the organizational goals are in sync.
The transactional theorists state that humans in general are seeking to maximize pleasurable experiences and to diminish un-pleasurable experiences. Thus, we are more likely to associate ourselves with individuals that add to our strengths.
Associated Theories
Leader-member Exchange (LMX)
Read more: 
Leader-Member Exchange Theory - LMX
Technical Details
Name: Leader-member Exchange (LMX)  Author: Dansereau, Graen, and Haga  Classification: Transactional Theories Year: 1975
Leader-member Exchange (LMX) flows from literature on transformational leadership, extant in the 1970s. A number of fundamental concepts are quite old, such as rewards for supporting leadership being as old as political philosophies from Classical Greek days. The formalization of LMX stems from the term "Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL), a concept developed by Dansereau, Graen, and Haga in 1975, with their paper, "A Vertical Dyad approach to leadership within formal organizations".
Pro's
LMX is intuitive. It is what can be expected from a leader-group structure.
The theory points to what people could do to strengthen or weaken the leadership dynamics.
The theory explains the dynamic of age-old problems of cronyism, the mechanics of loyalty to a leader and corruption and provides a structure for not only modeling specific situations but solutions to problems.
Con's
The LMX theory does not account for leadership personalities very well.
LMX is so intuitive that it appears to be obvious. One asks, "What really is new and what is left out?" It leaves the reader with a sense of emptiness.
How values affect the group dynamics is left out.
Overview
How a leader maintains leadership through working with her or his supporters, those entrusted with responsibility and advisers defines the Leader-member Exchange theory as a method for exerting and maintaining leadership.
Discussion
Leaders must garner and maintain their leadership position and the Leader-member Exchange theory states that such persons work with associates, supporters, trusted persons with responsibility, advisers and other "inner circle" to maintain her or his position. Another name for the theory is the "Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory". The word "dyad" means "two", and the two refers to the leader and the others with whom she or he works. "Linkage" defines the type of relationship; it is a connection that is maintained in the dyad. Leaders assume their role by getting adherents. "VDL" refers specifically to a leader regarding followers differently according to the degree of support they give. The more support a person gives to a leader, the more she or he will become part of the leader's "inner circle". These adherents, of course, support the leader, and it is this loyalty that the leader seeks to cultivate further. To reward this support, the leader dispenses favors in the form of jobs, recognition, money, and access to opportunities.
Over time, roles may become formalized and the supporter may be brought into a formal role with more power. However, the leader-subordinate relationship is preserved. At some point, there may be a conflict of power, if the subordinate reaches a level of equal power. There may be conflicts concerning power distribution and philosophies of leadership that can lead to a challenge to the leader. If there is disaffection with the leader, often the subordinate is relegated to a lower status and in extreme cases is ousted from the leadership circle. The strength of the relationship between the leader and members of the "inner circle" varies with the nature of tasks faced, qualities of the members, integrity of the organization, support for the organization, and so forth. The more those of the leadership circle work to support the leader, often the more support, rank and responsibility they get. Each case has to be evaluated on its own merit.
The range of leaders can be from a person leading a small discussion group or a supervisor of a work crew, to heads of countries or empires. The more complex the task and organization, the more factors enter into the organizational dynamics.
3 Stages of Development
Formally, one can identify at least three stages of development in the Leader-member Exchange relationship. First, there is theorganizational stage, where a person rises from a group for various reasons. There usually is a task that needs to be performed and the approaches of doing it range from anarchy to a single person directing everything. This person rising from the rest of the crowd may have charisma, intelligence or some quality that others recognize and see as desirable or essential for accomplishing the task. There may be, of course, situations where there is no real task but persons are attracted to another and are desirous to follow. In this case, the will to socialize for a sense of belonging or companionship are prime motivators. Whatever the case, the leader-rest of the group forms.
A second stage of LMX occurs with role development. There are many origins, depending upon why the group was formed. Group members may simply be mimicking other groups. Tasks usually define the types of roles. Roles can be invented as rewards for favors done for the leader. The need for a division of labor creates the need for roles, as a leader cannot do every aspect of a task. Here, a balance has to be achieved between a leader's direct involvement in decision making and delegating work to others. An excess in either direction can result in the micro management or dispersal of authority to the extent that a leader can lose his or her leadership role. For the former, group members will chafe at being told what to do in the minutiae of everyday life. If authority is delegated too much in quantity or too widely, challenges to authority will arise, leadership will be diluted, and authority vaporizes.
Once a leader-led relationship is established, it becomes settled, and this is deemed the third stage of development of the LMX. A number of factors can affix this relationship, as the expression "good old boy network" adequately describes. Culture, social mores, economy, charisma, enormity of tasks an average individual cannot handle are just some of the factors that can solidify leader-led relationship and maintain them over time. Familiarity breeds contempt, and the more egregious routinized systems get challenged. In extreme situations at the nation-state level, there are revolutions.
Critique
Absent from the Leader-member Exchange theory is a consideration of leadership personalities. We are entreated with a general list of qualities that are helpful in maintaining a relationship with the group, such as trust, integrity, and willingness to delegate power, openness, and so forth. Would LMX break down, let's say, if a particularly charismatic leader were to assume power? How would this affect delegation of authority and attendant loyalty? Another fault with LMX theory is values clarification. How do values affect the relationship between the leader and group? What of conflicting values or a change of values as roles are assumed? How does the philosophy of leadership influence various situations? What philosophies shape what relationships? LMX seems to describe what nature occurs between a leader and a group, and one must ask what really is new about the theory. Have not the contents of the theory been known for a long time?
Future of theory
Game theory, such as that of John von Neumann can be coupled with Leader-member Exchange theory. What is the optimum way of achieving objectives? Cooperation has been found to be the most efficacious way of obtaining an objective. Various political philosophies can be coupled with LMX theory. First, however, there needs to be studies that correlate those philosophies with results. For example, does a philosophy that is more democratically-oriented and entrusting that people are good and competent result in a stronger leader-led bond? Further work might address systems analysis models, such as those presented by David Easton (A Systems Analysis of Political Life) and Walter Buckley. It is not farfetched to think of research in the field modeling and simulation that addresses Leader-member Exchange theory. However, the concepts in the theory would have to be quantified.
While there are three stages of the LMX theory, one can perceive of others. In the routinization stage, what if the relationships become so ossified and non-responsive to a population. One of the necessary factors for a participatory society to survive is participation. In reputed democracies, power relationships are routine, but in many cases people have not participated to the extent that there are good old boy networks, corruption sets in, and authority becomes oppressive. Here, we can point to a terminal stage in some cases, where is challenge to the routine. In systems theory, either a system adapts or it can fail, and for a theory to be more complete, it should at least acknowledge that Leader-member Exchange theory can transform, if not end.
Want to expand on the discussion?
We encourage you to expand on the discussion, add to the critique or even share your vision with regards to the future applications of the theory.
Read more: 
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
George B. Graen and Mary Uhl-Bien1976, 1995

4. Factor Analysis Regression Analysis
Research Objectives
Validate Leadership Behavior and Quality of Work-Life measures to Filipino Context
Examine the predictive influence of Leadership Behavior on Employees Quality of Work-Life.
Factor Analysis
Regression Analysis

5. Methods Participants: 663 employees (48 SME; purposive sampling)
Instrument: Survey-Questionnaire. Validity and Reliability indicates High Acceptability with Cronbach’s Alpha of .903 [LB] & .883 [QWL].
Procedure: Letter of intent, informed consent, data collection, cleaning, and analysis.
Data Analysis: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (EFA/CFA - Stastica). Multiple Regression Analysis (IBM SPSS).

6. LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS Measures LB measurement tool
(1) Personal Characteristics and Leadership Style;
(2) Treating Subordinates with Trust and Respect,
(3) Promoting and Establishing Organizational Values,
(4) Supportive Supervision,
(5) Motivating Employees, and
(6) Clarifying Visions and Expectations
(7) Personalized Recognition
LB measurement tool
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MQL-5X)
Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ)
Supervisory Behavior Description
Afzal et al (2012). Relationship between Leadership Behavior, Quality of Work Life and Human Resources Productivity. International Journal of Hospital Research 2012, 1(1):1-14
The LB measurement tool was developed by reviewing literature [37-40] and consulting several popular LB inventories such as the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MQL-5X) [41], the Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) [42], and Supervisory Behavior Description [43]. The QWL assessment tool was built based on literature review [5, 33, 44-51] the NIOSH quality of work-life questionnaire [52], Hospital Consultants’ Job Stress & Satisfaction Questionnaire (HCJSSQ) [53], Job Diagnosis Survey [54], and Work- Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL) [55]. To avoid a low response rate due to the coverage of large number of variables, the dimensions of HRP were evaluated by single-item questions. The initial LB questionnaire consisted of 35 items belonging to seven dimensions that included: (1) Leader’s Personal Characteristics and Leadership Style; (2) Personalized Recognition; (3) Treating Subordinates with Trust and Respect, (4) Promoting and Establishing Organizational Values, (5) Supportive Supervision, (6) Motivating Employees, and (7) Clarifying Visions and Expectations.

7. QUALITY OF WORK LIFE Measures QWL assessment tool
(1) Job Recognition and Significance;
(2) Feedback,
(3) Interpersonal Relationships;
(4) Task Clearance;
(5) Autonomy and Control at Work;
(6) Skill Development and Use in Work;
(7) Carrier Growth Opportunity;
(8) Work-family Balance; and
(9) Work Stress.
QWL assessment tool
NIOSH quality of work-life questionnaire
Hospital Consultants’ Job Stress & Satisfaction Questionnaire (HCJSSQ)
Job Diagnosis Survey
Work- Related Quality of Life scale (WRQoL)
Afzal et al (2012). Relationship between Leadership Behavior, Quality of Work Life and Human Resources Productivity. International Journal of Hospital Research 2012, 1(1):1-14
The initial QWL questionnaire contained 35 items related to nine dimensions including, (1) Job Recognition and Significance; (2) Feedback, (3) Interpersonal Relationships; (4) Task Clearance; (5) Autonomy and Control at Work; (6) Skill Development and Use in Work; (7) Carrier Growth Opportunity; (8) Work-family Balance; and (9) Work Stress. The human resources productivity questionnaire comprised three single-item dimensions, including Job Satisfaction (‘I am satisfied with my job’), Job Involvement (‘I am completely involved in my work’), and Organizational Commitment (‘For me this is the best of all possible organizations for which to work’). All items were scored on a five-point Likert type scale (1 = “very week” to 5 = “very strong”). The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by expert opinion method.

8. RESULTS

9. Factor Analysis: Quality of Work Life
Problem 1:
Factor Analysis: Quality of Work Life
Exploratory Factor Analysis identified 6 LB domains and 6 QWL factors.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis indicated a marginal acceptability of the new measures.

10. Factor Analysis: Leadership Behavior
Problem 1:
Factor Analysis: Leadership Behavior
Conscientious Supervision
Attentiveness to Employee Needs
Personal Attributes
Engaged Leadership
Enriched Communication
Leader’s Decision-Making
Validity Indices:
RMSEA = 0.081
Joreskog GFI = 0.976
NFI =
Cronbach α = .903
From the original of 7 factors, after factor analysis we had 6 major factors
Virtuous Supervision (How leaders treat (respect and trust) and motivate employees)
Attentiveness to Employees Needs (Leader’s are able to identify employees concern, needs, etc.)
Leader’s Attribute (leaders quality, sense of command, power, confidence friendly, approachable, values)
Engaged Leadership (Leaders that are hands-on, in action)
Enriched Communication (able to channel expectations, org vision mission goals and able to recognized employees)
Decisive Leadership (leaders is able to put his words/decision into action, give clear direction/instructions).

11. Factor Analysis: Quality of Work Life
Problem 1:
Factor Analysis: Quality of Work Life
1. Career and Skills Development
2. Sense of Autonomy and Control
3. Feedback and Decision Making
4. Interpersonal Relationship
5. Job Satisfaction and Security
6. Job Familiarity and Stress
Validity Indices:
RMSEA = 0.089
Joreskog GFI = 0.980
NFI =
Cronbach α = .883
From the original of 9 factors, after factor analysis we had 6 major factors

12. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL

13. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 1: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 1: Career and Skills Development
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.037
.053
.700
.484
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
-.038
-.035
-1.031
.303
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
.010
.031
.013
.332
.740
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
.170
.036
.197
4.739
.001
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.346
.044
.368
7.779
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.151
.042
.125
3.585
R = R Squared = .336

14. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 2: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 2: Sense of Autonomy and Control
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.080
.044
.122
1.838
.067
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
.148
.030
.191
4.900
.001
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
-.005
.026
-.008
-.190
.849
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
-.004
-.006
-.123
.902
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.052
.037
.077
1.421
.156
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.035
.140
3.519
R = R Squared = .126

15. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 3: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 3: Feedback and Decision Making
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.067
.069
.057
.981
.327
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
.035
.047
.027
.734
.463
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
.040
.042
1.002
.316
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
-.002
.046
-.045
.964
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.388
.058
.349
6.743
.001
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.116
.055
.081
2.127
.034
R = R Squared = .209

16. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 4: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 4: Interpersonal Relationship
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.120
.045
.127
2.663
.008
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
-.042
.031
-.041
-1.338
.181
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
.017
.027
.022
.636
.525
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
.152
.030
.186
4.989
.001
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.374
.038
.419
9.888
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.112
.036
.100
3.202
R = R Squared = .467

17. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 5: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 5: Job Satisfaction and Security
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.104
.071
.085
1.457
.146
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
-.029
.049
-.022
-.582
.561
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
-.114
.042
-.113
-2.707
.007
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
.154
.048
.145
3.181
.002
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.309
.060
.268
5.152
.001
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.201
.057
.136
3.541
R = R Squared = .196

18. Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Problem 2:
Regression Analysis: LB and QWL
Table 6: Multiple Regression Analysis of QWL 6: Job Familiarity and Stress
Variables B
SE(B) β t
Sig.(p)
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
.044
.050
.051
.885
.377
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
.322
.034
.347
9.385
.001
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
-.028
.029
-.039
-.946
.344
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
.012
.016
.355
.723
LB 5: Enriched Communication
.124
.042
.152
2.961
.003
LB 6: Leader’s Decision-Making
.078
.040
.074
1.968
.049
R = R Squared = .221

19. Leadership Behaviors and Quality of Work Life
SUMMARY:
Leadership Behaviors and Quality of Work Life
1. Career and Skills Development
2. Sense of Autonomy and Control
3. Feedback and Decision Making
4. Interpersonal Relationship
5. Job Satisfaction and Security
6. Job Familiarity and Stress
R = R Squared = .336
Leadership Behaviors
R = R Squared = .126
R = R Squared = .209
The LB with most number of predictive influence towards QWL are LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs, LB 5:Enriched Communication, LB 6:Decisive Leadership
R = R Squared = .467
R = R Squared = .196
R = R Squared = .221

20. SUMMARY: Leadership Behaviors and Quality of Work Life
QWL 1: Career and Skills Development
LB 4: Engaged Leadership
LB 5: Enriched Commu-nication
QWL 6: Job Familiarity and Stress
LB 6:
Leader’s Decision-Making
QWL 4: Interpersonal Relationship
QWL 3: Feedback and Decision Making
LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs
LB 1: Conscientious Supervision
The LB with most number of predictive influence towards QWL are LB 2: Attentiveness to Employee Needs, LB 5:Enriched Communication, LB 6:Decisive Leadership
QWL 5: Job Satisfaction and Security
LB 3: Leader’s Attributes
QWL 2: Sense of Autonomy and Control

21. SUMMARY
Leadership behaviors significantly predicts employee quality of work life.
Leaders manner of communication and their attention to employees needs had the most influence to QWL.
Leadership behaviors significantly influences employee satisfaction of their interpersonal relationship, communication, opportunity for career and skills development, and job satisfaction and security.

22. SUMMARY

23. SUMMARY

24. Improve communication and relationship dynamics
HR STRATEGY
Develop Champions
(Leaders that builds genuine relationship)
Improve communication and relationship dynamics
(Employer-employee, Management – Rank & File)
Create Opportunity for interaction
(Huddle time, small groups, teams)
Develop champions in the organization that would create genuine relationship.
Improve strategies of communication and dealings between management and employees.
Foster good connection and interaction. Managers and frontline supervisors must be able to openly channel information and deal with employees with fairness, just and truthful.
Innovative schemes to improve employee morale. Strategies on organizational support must be seen balance or fair among employees. These supports must also be seen as achievable to common employees.

25. TAKE HOME Quality of exchange relationships between employee-employer.
Leaders and their behaviors plays a vital role towards employee quality of work life.

26. TAKE HOME
Leaders of today’s generation must not only take lead but nurture and develop their people as the same time has the management skills to be able to translate and direct organizational goals and values into clear outcomes!

27. REFENCES
Nazem & Entezari (2014). PREDICTION OF EMPLOYEE QUALITY OF WORK LIFE BASED ON THE LEADERSHIP STYLES. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences. Vol. 4 (S4), pp
Usha Devi (2015). Spiritual Leadership and its Relationship with Quality of Work Life and Organizational Performance – An Exploratory Study. Second European Academic Research Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance and Banking (EAR15Swiss Conference)
Mortazavi, et al (2012). The Role of the Psychological Capital on Quality of Work Life And organization performance. INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS. VOL 4, NO 2
Mushtaq Ahmad (2012).Impact of Quality of Work life on Business Process Re-engineering. European Journal of Business and Management. Vol 4, No.18, 2012.
Shefali Srivastava, Rooma Kanpur (2014). A Study On Quality Of Work Life: Key Elements & It’s Implications . IOSR Journal of Business and Management. Volume 16, Issue 3. Ver. I (Mar. 2014), PP 54-59
Helmiatin (2014). The Implementation of Transformational Leadership and Quality of Worklife toward Organizational Citizenship Behavior . International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 5

28. THANK YOU!