Evaluating differences in the Level of Working Conditions between the European Union Member States using TOPSIS method

  • Magdalena Tutak Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
  • Jarosław Brodny Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
Keywords: Working conditions, work-life balance, sustainability, labor market, EU-27, health and safety at work, MCDM method


Work, which is a conscious activity of man, plays an immensely important role in their life and is the basis for the development of civilization. The work process is closely related to the conditions in which work is performed. These conditions include a number of social, technical, environmental as well as economic and organizational factors necessary to perform work safely in accordance with the applicable legal conditions. The role and importance of working conditions is appreciated by all organizations, countries and their groups taking action to improve them, including formal order. Given the importance and topicality of this issue, research has been carried out, the main goal of which was to assess the level of working conditions in the European Union (EU) countries according to the adopted criteria. The research was based on data from the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound). Accordingly, eight main criteria were adopted, which were characterized by 64 sub-indicators. Such a broad approach to describing individual areas related to working conditions made it possible to analyze many factors influencing them. The research covered the 27 EU member states by determining indicators for working conditions criteria and an indicator for general (overall) working conditions. On this basis, their ranking and the level of working conditions in these countries were specified. The TOPSIS method was applied to this part of the research. With the use of partial levels of working conditions evaluation criteria and the k-means method, the authors identified countries similar in terms of the level of studied working conditions criteria. Based on the Spearman's rho and Kendall's Tau correlation coefficients, relationships were examined between the working conditions and the level of economic development and indicators characterizing the area of health and safety at work in the countries under study, which is very important from the point of view of working conditions. The results showed significant differences in working conditions between the EU-27. They were found to be definitely worse in the economically less developed countries (mainly the so-called "new" EU) than in the economically stronger states (the so-called "old" EU countries). The assessment and groups of similar countries in terms of working conditions should be used to develop strategies to improve these conditions in the EU-27. This is particularly significant in the context of dynamic technological, social and geopolitical changes across Europe, which have a significant impact on the labor market. 


Download data is not yet available.


Agbozo, G. K., Owusu, I. S., Hoedoafia, M. A., & Atakorah, Y. B. (2017). The effect of work conditions on job satisfaction: Evidence from the banking sector in Ghana. Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(1), 12–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20170501.12

Amin, M. (2015). Relationship between Job Satisfaction, Working Conditions, Motivation of Teachers to Teach and Job Performance of Teachers in MTs, Serang, Banten. J. Mgmt. & Sustainability, 141, 141-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/jms.v5n3p141

Arenas, A. Giorgi, G. Montani, F. Mancuso, S. Perez, JF, Mucci, N., & Arcangeli, G. (2015). Workplace Bullying in a Sample of Italian and Spanish Employees and Its Relationship with Job Satisfaction, and Psychological Well-Being. Front. Psychol. 6, 1912. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01912

Božanić, D., Tešić, D., Marinković, D., & Milić, A. (2021). Modeling of neuro-fuzzy system as a support in decision-making processes. Reports in Mechanical Engineering, 2(1), 222-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/rme2001021222b

Brodny, J., & Tutak, M. (2021). Assessing the level of digitalization and robotization in the enterprises of the European Union Member States. PLoS ONE, 16, e0254993.

Bygnes, S., & Bivand Erdal, M. (2017). Liquid migration, grounded lives: considerations about future mobility and settlement among Polish and Spanish migrants in Norway, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43, 102-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1211004

Chakraborty, S. (2022). TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis. Decision Analytics Journal, 2, 100021.

Cieslik, A. (2011). Where Do You Prefer to Work? How the Work Environment Influences Return Migration Decisions from the United Kingdom to Poland. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37, 1367-1383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2011.623613

Cirillo, V., Evangelista, R., Guarascio, D., & Sostero, M. (2021). Digitalization, routineness and employment: An exploration on Italian task-based data. Research Policy, 50, 104079.

Clark, A. (2001). What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data. Labor Economics, 8, 223–242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(01)00031-8

Cristea, M., Noja, G. G., Stefea, P., & Sala, A.L. (2020). The Impact of Population Aging and Public Health Support on EU Labor Markets. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 1439.

Davidescu, A. A., Apostu, S.-A., Paul, A., & Casuneanu, I. (2020). Work Flexibility, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance among Romanian Employees—Implications for Sustainable Human Resource Management. Sustainability, 12, 6086.

Diant, I., & Salimi A. (2014).Working conditions of Iranian hand-sewn shoe workers and associations with musculoskeletal symptoms. Ergonomics, 7, 602-611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.891053

Dorenbosch, L. (2014). Striking a Balance Between Work Effort and Resource Regeneration. In: Ehnert, I., Harry, W., Zink, K. (eds) Sustainability and Human Resource Management. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37524-8_7

Emovon, I., & Oghenenyerovwho, O. S. (2020). Application of MCDM method in material selection for optimal design: A review. Results in Materials, 7, 100115.

EUROFOUND. Available online: https://www.eurofound.europa.eu (16.05.2022).

Eurostat, 2022. Employment - annual statistics. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Employment_-_annual_statistics (16.05.2022).

Feldman, C. B., Brondolo, E., Dayan, D. B., & Schwartz, J. (2002). Sources of social support and burnout, job satisfaction, and productivity. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7(1), 84–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.7.1.84

Frennert, S. (2019). Lost in digitalization? Municipality employment of welfare technologies. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 14, 635-642.

Giordano, S., & Kostova, D. (2002). The social production of mistrust. In Postsocialism: Ideals, Ideologies and Practices in Eurasia, Edited by: Hann, C.M. 74–92. London and New York: Routledge.

Gragnano, A., Simbula, S., & Miglioretti, M. (2020). Work–Life Balance: Weighing the Importance of Work–Family and Work–Health Balance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 907.

Greubel, J., Arlinghaus, A., Nachreiner, F., & Lombardi, D. A. (2016). Higher risks when working unusual times?. A cross-validation of the effects on safety, health, and work-life balance. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 89, 1205-1214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-016-1157-z

Grigorescu, A., Pelinescu, E., Ion, A. E., & Dutcas, M. F. (2021). Human Capital in Digital Economy: An Empirical Analysis of Central and Eastern European Countries from the European Union. Sustainability, 13, 2020.

Grote, G., & Guest, D. (2017). The case for reinvigorating quality of working life research. Human Relations, 70(2), 149-167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716654746

Guan, X., & Frenkel, S. (2019). How perceptions of training impact employee performance: Evidence from two Chinese manufacturing firms. Personnel Review, 48(1), 163–183.

Haller, M., & Hadler, M. (2006). How social relations and structures can produce happiness and unhappiness: An international comparative analysis. Social Indicators Research, 75, 169–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-6297-y

Isaacs, D. (2016). Work-life balance. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 52, 5-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.13110

Jeong, J. G., Kang, S. W., & Choi, S. B. (2020). Employees’ Weekend Activities and Psychological Well-Being via Job Stress: A Moderated Mediation Role of Recovery Experience. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 1642.

Jimenez, P., Winkler, B., & Dunkl, A. (2017). Creating a healthy working environment with leadership: The concept of health-promoting leadership. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(17), 2430–2448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1137609

Kizielewicz, B., Więckowski, J., Shekhovtsov, A., Wątróbski, J., Depczyński, R., & Sałabun, W. (2021). Study towards the time-based MCDA ranking analysis – A supplier selection case study. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering, 19(3), 381-399.

Kumar, A., Sah, B., Singh, A., Deng, Y., He, X., Kumar, P., & Bansal, R. (2017). A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 596-609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.191

Kundu, P., Kar, S., & Maiti, M. (2014). A fuzzy MCDM method and an application to solid transportation problem with mode preference. Soft Computing, 18, 1853–1864. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-013-1161-0

Lunau, T., Bambra, C., Eikemo, T. A., van der Wel, K A., & Dragano, N. (2014). A balancing act? Work-life balance, health and well-being in European welfare states. European Journal of Public Health, 24, 422-427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cku010

Marenco, M., & Seidl, T. (2021). The discursive construction of digitalization: a comparative analysis of national discourses on the digital future of work. European Political Science Review, 13, 391–409.

Marshall, T., Mottier, E. M., & Lewis, R. A. (2015). Motivational factors and the hospitality industry: A case study examining the effects of changes in the working environment. Journal of Business Case Studies, 11(3), 123–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19030/jbcs.v11i3.9289

Masadeh, R., Obeidat, B. Y., & Tarhini, A. (2016). A Jordanian empirical study of the associations among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, knowledge sharing, job performance, and firm performance: A structural equation modelling approach. Journal of Management Development, 35, 681–705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-09-2015-0134

Matilla-Santander, N., Lidón-Moyano, C., González-Marrón, A., Bunch, K., Martín-Sánchez, J. C., & Martínez-Sánchez, J. M. (2019). Attitudes toward working conditions: are European Union workers satisfied with their working hours and work-life balance? Gaceta Sanitaria, 33, 162-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2017.10.006

Matsuo, M. (2019). Effect of learning goal orientation on work engagement through job crafting: A moderated mediation approach. Personnel Review, 48(1), 220–233.

Matthews, R. A., Bulger, C. A., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (2010). Work social supports, role stressors, and work–family conflict: The moderating effect of age. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 78-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.06.011

Mosadeghrad, A. M., Ferlie, E., & Rosenberg, D. (2011). A study of relationship between job stress, quality of working life and turnover intention among hospital employees. Health Services Management Research, 24(4), 170-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/hsmr.2011.011009

Mustafa, G., & Ali, N. (2019). Rewards, autonomous motivation and turnover intention: Results from a non-western cultural context. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1), 1676090.

Nagaraj, T. S., Jeyapaul, R., & Mathiyazhagan, K. (2019). Evaluation of ergonomic working conditions among standing sewing machine operators in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 70, 70-83.

Nelson, C. B., Zivin, K., Walters, H., Ganoczy, D., MacDermid, Wadsworth S., & Valenstein, M. (2015). Factors Associated With Civilian Employment, Work Satisfaction, and Performance Among National Guard Members. Psychiatric Services, 66(12), 1318-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201400334

Nica, E. (2015). Labor Market Determinants of Migration Flows in Europe. Sustainability, 7, 634-647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su7010634

OECD.Stat. Average annual hours actually worked per worker. Available online: https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS (16.05.2022)

Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 444-445. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1

Peng, Y., Kou, G., Wang, G., & Shi, Y. (2011). FAMCDM: a fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms. Omega, 39,677-689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2011.01.009

Rich, A., Viney, R., Needleman, S., Griffin, A., & Woolf, K. (2016). You can’t be a person and a doctor’: the work-life balance of doctors in training-a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 6, e013897. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013897

Rossberg, J., & Friss, E. S. (2004). Work conditions and job satisfaction: A psychometric evaluation of the working environment scale-10. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 39(7), 576–580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-004-0791-z

Saurin, T. A., & Ferreira, C. F. (2009). The impacts of lean production on working conditions: A case study of a harvester assembly line in Brazil. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39, 403-412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2008.08.003

Schütte, S., Chastang, J. F., Malard, L., Parent-Thirion, A., Vermeylen, G., & Niedhammer, I. (2014). Psychosocial working conditions and psychological well-being among employees in 34 European countries. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 87, 897–907. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-014-0930-0

Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., Zavadskas, E. K., Karabasevic, D., & Binkyte-Veliene, A. (2020). Assessment of Progress towards Achieving Sustainable Development Goals of the “Agenda 2030” by Using the CoCoSo and the Shannon Entropy Methods: The Case of the EU Countries. Sustainability, 12, 5717

Stojčić, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Mardani, A. (2019). Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018. Symmetry, 11, 350.

Stromberg, C., Aboagye, E., Hagberg, J., Bergstrom, G., Karlsson, & M. L. (2017). Estimating the effect and economic impact of absenteeism, presenteeism, and work conditions– related problems on reductions in productivity from a managerial perspective. Value in Health, 20(8), 1058–1064. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.05.008

Taylor-Gooby, P. (2008). The new welfare state settlement in Europe. European Societies, 10(1), 3-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571260701526964

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Official journal of the European Union, 2012/C 326/01, 47-201.

Tutak, M., & Brodny, J. (2022). Analysis of the level of energy security in the three seas initiative countries. Applied Energy, 311, 118649.

Tutak, M., Brodny, J., & Dobrowolska, M. (2020). Assessment of Work Conditions in a Production Enterprise—A Case Study. Sustainability, 12, 5390.

Wepfer, A.G., Brauchli, R., Jenny, G. J., Hämmig, O., & Bauer, G. F. (2015). The experience of work-life balance across family-life stages in Switzerland: a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study. BMC Public Health, 15, 1290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2584-6

de Wind, A.; van der Pas, S., Blatter, B. M., & van der Beek, A. J. (2016). A life course perspective on working beyond retirement: Results from a longitudinal study in the Netherlands’. BMC Public Health, 16, 499–511. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3174-y

Yorulmaz, Ö., Kuzu Yıldırım, S., & Yıldırım, B. F. (2021). Robust Mahalanobis Distance based TOPSIS to Evaluate the Economic Development of Provinces. Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 4(2), 102-123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta20402102y

Yozgat, U., Yurtkoru, S., & Bilginoglu, E. (2013). Job stress and job performance among employees in public sector in Istanbul: Examining the moderating role of emotional intelligence. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75, 518–524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.056

Yuen, K. F., Loh, H. S., Zhou, Q., & Wong, Y. D. (2018). Determinants of job satisfaction and performance of seafarers. Transportation Research Part A, 110, 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.02.006

Zavadskas, E.K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17, 397-427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2011.593291

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20, 165-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.892037

How to Cite
Tutak, M., & Brodny, J. (2022). Evaluating differences in the Level of Working Conditions between the European Union Member States using TOPSIS method. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 5(2), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame0305102022t