Skip to main content
Download PDF

The intention to leave among academics in Iran: an examination of their work-life quality and satisfaction

BMC Nursing volume 23, Article number: 43 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Despite the importance of faculty retention, there is little understanding of how demographic variables, professional and institutional work-life issues, and satisfaction interact to explain faculty intentions to leave. This study aimed to investigate the intention to leave among academics and their Work-Life Quality and Satisfaction.

Methods

This is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted by 8 faculties affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences located in Urmia, West Azarbaijan province, Iran. The participants in the study were 120 faculty members from Nursing and Midwifery, Medicine, Allied health professions, and Health management and medical information faculties. The Work-Life Quality and Satisfaction scale, and the intension to leave scale were used for data collection. Uni- and multivariable linear regression analyses were employed to determine predictors of the intention to leave (P-values < 0.05).

Results

The mean scores of all dimensions of Work-Life Quality and Satisfaction scale, and intention to leave were in an average level. There is a negative correlation between Work-Life Quality and Satisfaction subscales, along with demographic factors, and the intention to leave (P < 0.05), while multivariate analysis showed that work experience and Discipline were significant independent predictors of intention to leave (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

In order to improve education in universities, it is necessary to pay attention to the conditions of creating job satisfaction in academics. Considering the high intention to leave among Nursing lecturers, without sufficient support of nursing schools in terms of human resources, it may suffer by the lack of academic staff; eventually the quality of education will reduce in undergraduate nursing in the long term.

Peer Review reports

Background

The role of educational institutions in the development of human capital is crucial for the progress of any nation [1]. The academic staff within a university plays a vital role, and the number, quality, and effectiveness of faculty members greatly impact the quality of education provided [2]. It is widely recognized that the success of any organization is closely tied to the abilities and contributions of its employees [3].

The employment landscape in the education sector has become increasingly competitive, with institutions striving to maintain their reputation and gain a strategic advantage [4]. With the rise in job opportunities in higher education, retaining competent faculty members has become essential. Failing to retain employees can have severe repercussions for an organization [5].

Employee turnover has become a chronic issue across different types and sizes of organizations, and numerous studies emphasize the importance of retaining talented individuals [6]. In the field of education, replacing human capital, particularly in universities, is an expensive endeavor. Therefore, universities and governments must promptly and earnestly address talent turnover [7].

While satisfaction is a well-studied concept, colleges continue to face the challenge of motivating and satisfying their faculty members [8, 9]. Career motivation is considered one of the key individual factors impacting the quality of work life. Therefore, it is important to improve the quality of work life by fostering an environment that respects employees, encourages their active participation in decision-making processes, addresses their needs, and seeks to build trust with officials [10]. Fewer studies have focused on faculty members of medical sciences, who often encounter issues such as overcrowded classrooms, time pressure, and increased workload [11, 12].

Academic faculty members are considered national assets and understanding their intention to leave their positions is of utmost importance. The departure of experienced faculty members poses serious problems for universities, particularly regarding the quality of educational and research services they provide [13]. In today's academic landscape, faculty members bear significant responsibilities in education, research, therapeutic services, executive activities, and personal development [14]. Balancing multiple roles within a university, alongside external pressures from both the organization and the community, can significantly influence their perceived work-life balance satisfaction. This, in turn, impacts their job satisfaction and their intention to leave the organization [15].

On one hand, faculty satisfaction relies on the levels of satisfaction experienced by students, colleagues, and administrators [16]. On the other hand, Weale et al. (2019) suggested that faculty satisfaction is influenced by both work and non-work aspects of their lives [17]. Job satisfaction is a critical factor in motivating faculty members, as it reflects their personal contentment and fulfillment within their roles [12].

Building on the previous work of Kalkins et al., (2019) satisfaction levels strongly predict the intention of faculty members to leave academia. Additionally, the intent to leave one's position is a significant predictor of the intent to leave one's institution [18]. Turnover intention refers to an employee's intent to voluntarily leave their job or organization [19, 20]. Voluntary turnover is associated with decreased individual performance and increased costs for organizations [11].

Johnsrud (1996) proposed that faculty work-life can be influenced by their professional priorities, perceived institutional support, and erosion of quality of life over the course of their careers. Addressing these factors can improve the overall climate and culture within academic institutions [21], ultimately impacting faculty morale and their likelihood of leaving their positions or careers [22].

Multiple workplace roles undertaken by university academics, coupled with pressures from the organization and the community, are often considered significant factors that impact their perceived work-life balance satisfaction. This, in turn, influences their overall occupational attitudes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and their intention to leave the organization [23].

Relatively few studies have examined the intent or inclination of faculty members in the field of Medical Sciences to leave their current positions [24, 25]. Some studies indirectly address this issue by exploring the faculty's intent to stay, either at their current institution or within public colleges in general [25, 26].

Despite the fundamental importance of faculty retention, there is limited understanding of the factors related to satisfaction, professional work life, and institutional work life that can explain faculty members' intentions to leave at a national level. As a result, this study aimed to investigate the intention to leave among academics and their work-life quality and satisfaction to response the following questions:

  1. 1.

    What are the academic members' perceptions of work- life quality and satisfaction?

  2. 2.

    What is the role of various individual, social, and occupational characteristics on academic members' perceptions of work- life quality and satisfaction?

  3. 3.

    What is the role of various individual, social, and occupational characteristics; and work- life quality and satisfaction in shaping faculty members' intentions to leave.

Methods

Design and participants

The current study is a cross-sectional descriptive study. All faculties affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences, including Nursing and Midwifery, Health, Medicine, Dentistry, Pharmacy, and Health Management & Medical Information were included in the study. From these faculties, faculty members who had at least one years of teaching experience at the university; at least a master's degree; and were willing to complete the study instruments were enrolled. Those who worked part-time, or hourly were not included in the study. From March to June 2022, eligible faculty members were approached to participate in the study. The sample size (n = 115) was calculated in G power based on point biserial correlations between main outcomes satisfaction and intention to leave, considering a power = 0.80, an α = 0.05 based on the amount of correlation reported in a similar study [27]. Considering 20% attrition rate, the sample size increased to at least 138 participants.

The participants were selected through stratified random sampling considering a sample size in strata proportionate to the number of faculty members in the colleges.

Data collection

Survey instruments

The data collection instruments included three main parts: first part with socio-demographic characteristics including age, sex, degree, grade, full timing, discipline, and teaching hours in Undergraduate, Master's, and PhD's teaching. Questionnaires that were incomplete by 10% or more were excluded from the study. Among the 145 questionnaires that were distributed and after discarding the distorted or incomplete questionnaires, 120 questionnaires were valid and the response rate in this study was 82.75%.

Work-life quality and satisfaction scale

Work-life quality and satisfaction scale used in this study was developed by Rosser in an institutional climate study [27, 28]. The Rosser used the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF) database related to a survey sponsored by the National Center for Educational Statistics and the National Science Foundation to measure the various issues and topics concerning the quality of faculty members’ professional and institutional work-life in higher education institutions. He conceptualized the individual-level perceptions of faculty members’ work-life quality and satisfaction on their intent to leave [27]. Work-life quality and satisfaction scale is designed with 23 items in two sections and measures two related constructs including work-life quality and satisfaction. The items are measured on a 6-point scale (1 – Strongly Disagree, 2 – Disagree, 3 – Slightly Disagree, 4 – Slightly Agree, 5 – Agree, and 6 – Strongly Agree). The work-life quality section was measured by three dimensions including the professional development (alpha = 0.87), administrative support (alpha = 0.91), and technology support (alpha = 0.88). Respondents were asked to indicate from 1–6 score, indicating poor to excellent, statements regarding the quality of their professional and institutional work-life [27].

The satisfaction section in this scale was measured by three interrelated dimensions including the advising and course workload, benefits and security, and overall satisfaction. The first dimension with five statements was satisfaction with advising and course workload (alpha = 0.97). The second dimension with six items focused on their benefits and security (alpha = 0.76). Faculty members were also asked to self-report their overall level of satisfaction on a scale of 1–6, with 1 indicating very dissatisfied and 6 indicating very satisfied [27].

Intention to leave

The intention to leave scale used in this study was designed by Rosser and Johnsrud in a study that aimed to conceptualize the effect of work environment variables and morale on the intention to leave [22]. The scale consists of four items, which ask faculty the likelihood to which they will leave their current position, their current institution, the teaching profession, and higher education. Items were measured on a 6-point scale (1–Highly Unlikely, 2–Unlikely, 3–Somewhat unlikely, 4–Somewhat likely, 5–Likely, and 6–Highly likely), where higher scores reflect individuals who possess a greater intent to leave.

Statistical analyses

IBM SPSS Statistics software (version 20) (IBM SPSS Statistics, IBM Corp, Armonk, USA) was used to analyze the data at an alpha level of 0.05. Socio-demographic characteristics were summarized using frequency (percentage) and mean (standard deviation) for categorical and numeric variables, respectively. Independent t-test, one-way ANOVA analysis followed by Tukey post hoc tests, and Pearson's correlation were used to investigate the difference across the demographic characteristics for intension to leave scores. Uni- and multivariable linear regression analyses were employed to determine predictors of the intention to leave, with variables found to be significant in the univariable model (P-values < 0.05) included as independent variables in the multivariate model. Categorical variables were coded into dummy variables prior to regression analysis. Assessment of skewness (within ± 1.5) and kurtosis (within ± 2) indicated that the intention to leave data adhered to a normal distribution. The validity of the regression analysis was ensured by verifying assumptions, including the normality of residuals, homoscedasticity, and linearity of the variable relationships, which were confirmed [29].

Ethical considerations

The present study was approved by the National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (code: 990,295). The study followed accepted ethical standards, as outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Participants were given detailed explanation on the study purpose, voluntary participation, and offered a written informed consent to obtain signature before presenting the study self-reporting questionnaires to be completed.

Results

Table 1 presents the categorical socio-demographic characteristics and their association with work-life quality and satisfaction, and intention to leave. The results indicated that married faculties (M = 3.70, SD = 0.50) had a slightly higher work-life quality and satisfaction than single faculties (M = 3.47, SD = 0.43). There was no significant difference between subjects according to their gender, degree, or involvement in education. However, faculties who more involved in clinical teaching (M = 3.56, SD = 0.42) were significantly less satisfied with work-life quality than those who were less involved (M = 3.83, SD = 0.58).

Table 1 Work-related characteristics of the faculty members and their relationship with the work-life quality and satisfaction, and intention to leave (n = 120)
Full size table

There was no significant relationship between being full time and having an administrative position with the work-life quality and satisfaction of faculty members. Regarding the discipline, there was no difference between different disciplines in terms of work-life quality and satisfaction. However, faculties from Midwifery (M = 3.59, SD = 0.21), Medicine (M = 3.66, SD = 0.61), and Nursing (M = 3.66, SD = 0.36) disciplines had lower work-life quality and satisfaction compared to Allied health professions (M = 3.67, SD = 0.55) and Health management and medical information (M = 3.71, SD = 0.46) disciplines. Table 1 also shows that nursing faculty members (M = 3.44, SD = 1.55) had a relatively higher intention to leave than faculty members of other disciplines. The rest of the categorical socio-demographic variables did not show a significant relationship with the intention to leave.

Besides, the results indicated that there was an inverse relationship between research hours per week (r = -0.21, p < 0.05) and teaching at undergraduate level (r = -0.19, p < 0.05) with work-life quality and satisfaction. Also, the variables of age (r = -0.31, p < 0.05), fulltime duration (r = -0.20, p < 0.05), and work experience (r = -0.31, p < 0.05), correlated inversely with intention to leave. While hours spent on research per week (r = 0.18, p < 0.05) has a direct and significant correlation with intention to leave.

As shown in Table 2, the mean scores of all dimensions of work-life quality and satisfaction and intention to leave were higher than 2.73 (out of 6). At the dimension level, faculties were most satisfied of their “technology support” in work-life quality scale (3.99, SD = 0.86) and average score for overall satisfaction (4.90, SD = 0.89) was higher than the satisfaction for the “advising and course workload” and “benefits and security”.

Table 2 The mean score of work-life quality, satisfaction, and intention to leave among study subjects (n = 120)
Full size table

The least satisfaction among faculties was in the “benefits and security” dimension (3.27 ± 0.54). Also, in the scale of intention to leave the highest score among faculties was in statement of “what likely are you leave their current position?” (2.86 ± 1.46).

There was a statistically significant inverse relationship between the mean scores in all work-life quality and satisfaction dimensions and intention to leave, except for “advising and course workload” dimension (p < 0.05). Also, there was a statistically significant direct relationship between total scores of work life quality and satisfaction (p < 0.001) (Table 3).

Table 3 Correlations among subscales of work-life quality, satisfaction, and intention to leave among academics
Full size table

The results of the univariable linear regression analysis indicate that all subscale scores of Work Life Quality, as well as the total score, exhibited a negative correlation with the intention to leave (all P-values < 0.05). Likewise, within the Satisfaction subscales, Benefits and Security, Overall Satisfaction, and their total scores displayed an inverse relationship with the intention to leave (all P-values < 0.05). Examining demographic and background variables, age, work experience, and full-time years demonstrated a negative association with the intention to leave (all P-values < 0.05). Conversely, the number of hours spent by faculty members on research exhibited a positive correlation with the intention to leave (P-value < 0.05). Additionally, when compared to nursing faculty members as the reference category, Medicine, Midwifery, and Allied Health Professions exhibited lower intention to leave (all P-values < 0.05) (Table 4).

Table 4 Uni- and multi-variable linear regression results of factors affecting intention to leave in faculty members
Full size table

In the multivariable analysis, the relationship between work life quality, satisfaction subscales, and their total score with the intention to leave was found to be statistically non-significant (all P-values > 0.05). However, work experience and Discipline emerged as independent predictors of the intention to leave (both with P-value < 0.05). Specifically, work experience was negatively associated with the intention to leave, and each year of experience was linked to a 10% decrease in the intention to leave score points. Furthermore, faculty members in the midwifery discipline displayed approximately 1.3 points lower intention to leave scores compared to nursing faculty members (Table 4).

Discussion

This study was conducted with the aim of investigating the work-life quality and satisfaction of faculty members of Urmia University of Medical Sciences and their relationship with intention to leave. The results revealed that the overall quality of work life was in an average level, with the highest scores observed in the "Technology Support" dimension. It must be acknowledged, in today's digital era, the Internet has emerged as a crucial tool for research development and enhancing the efficiency of academic staff members in universities [30]. Without utilizing the internet for various tasks, including education, research, and consultation responsibilities, academic staff members can encounter numerous challenges. Meanwhile, with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent shift to virtual classes, the necessary technological support has been provided to professors, ensuring their active participation in online teaching [31]. Previous studies have also reported similar findings, indicating an average level of work-life quality [32,33,34,35]. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of domestic articles conducted by Shakibaei (2015) showed that the average score of the quality of work life among academic staff members in higher education institutions is considered to be on a medium level [36]. However, studies conducted by Farrukhnejad (2012), Mirkamali and Thani (2011), and Noorshahi and Samiei (2023) reported an unfavorable level of quality of work life [37,38,39]. Another studies highlighted that faculty members experienced a lower quality of work life compared to other university employees, often citing unfavorable working conditions, lack of control and participation in decision-making, and low organizational commitment as contributing factors [40, 41]. Additionally, Bakhshi et al. found a direct relationship between the academic staff members' educational level and their perception of quality of work life [33]. It is important to note that the inconsistencies observed across different studies could potentially be attributed to variations in populations studied [40, 42] and the instruments utilized for assessment [43,44,45].

Based on the findings of this study, the average job satisfaction scores fell within the moderate range. Notably, the highest satisfaction scores were reported in the 'Overall satisfaction' dimension, while the lowest scores were observed in the 'Benefits and security' dimension. In terms of marital status and involvement in clinical teaching, married faculty members without clinical education responsibilities exhibited higher levels of satisfaction compared to their unmarried peers involved in clinical education. These findings align with previous studies which have also reported medium ranges of job satisfaction [32, 34, 37, 38], thereby corroborating the results of our present study. Noorshahi and Farastkhah's (2012) study identified various factors that contribute to faculty members' job satisfaction, including satisfaction with salaries and wages, the work environment, job security, job prestige and dignity, and facilities and resources. The study revealed that faculty members reported moderate to high satisfaction in terms of job prestige and dignity, whereas satisfaction with salaries and wages, the work environment, and job security were reported as moderate to low [30].

A positive work environment characterized by independence, role clarity, and community impact fosters higher job satisfaction, whereas dissatisfaction with salaries, weak leadership, and excessive pressure to produce scientific articles can lead to decreased job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is significantly linked to traditional academic values such as a focus on quality, inclusion in decision-making processes, unwavering commitment to work, and recognition of faculty members [40]. Additionally, faculty members' perception of organizational support enhanced job satisfaction [46]. In Moloantoa's study, it was observed that salary did not significantly impact job satisfaction, but dissatisfaction stemmed from insufficient benefits, inadequate support for teaching, learning, and research, lack of resources, and subpar university management [47]. In a study conducted by Ferron (2017) found that when nursing department managers actively supported academic professionals, recognized their efforts, and ensured fair work procedures, nurses' job satisfaction increased [48].

There is a statistically significant relationship between job satisfaction and the quality of work life [34, 49]. One of crucial aspect of the quality of work life is work-life balance [50]. Numerous studies worldwide have reported a positive association between job satisfaction, the quality of work life, and work-life Balance [51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58]. A study by Kim (2023) revealed that the high stress experienced by faculty members in Thailand mediates the relationship between high workload and job satisfaction [59].

The average score for the intention to leave was in the medium range. The item 'How likely are you to leave your current position?' scored the highest. Nursing faculty members exhibited a relatively higher tendency to consider leaving. The intention to leave was directly correlated with the number of research hours and inversely with work experience, full-time employment and age. Aboudahab's study on private universities in Egypt revealed that common factors contributing to the intention to leave included low talent management, high workload and anxiety, poor communication between faculty members and managers, lack of recognition and appreciation, and work-family imbalance [60]. Ferron (2017) found that intention to leave increased with aging among nursing faculty, as well as part-time employment. On the other hand, more work experience decreased the intention to leave and increased the desire to remain in nursing schools [48]. The low level of job satisfaction among faculty members is considered a warning sign, as it increases the likelihood of leaving a job if greater satisfaction is found elsewhere [60].

There was a statistically significant inverse relationship between the mean scores in all dimensions of satisfaction with work-life quality and the intention to leave, except for the "Advising and course workload" dimension. In the same line, other studies have also demonstrated a decrease in the quality of work life and job satisfaction leading to an intention to leave [24, 46, 57, 58, 60,61,62,63,64,65,66]. Job satisfaction plays a pivotal role in the retention of faculty members in universities [67]. In Rezaee’s study (2019) among Iranian doctors, a significant inverse relationship was found between the quality of work life and the intention to leave. When the quality of work life improves, it reduces the intention to leave and increases employee satisfaction [68]. Therefore, organizations can provide personal and social support to make employees feel valued and proud [66].

Conclusion, implications, and recommendations

The findings of this study highlighted that the faculty members’ work-life quality and satisfaction, and the intention to leave were in an average level. There is a negative correlation between Work-Life Quality and Satisfaction subscales, along with demographic factors, and the intention to leave, while work experience and Discipline were significant independent predictors of intention to leave.

These results emphasize the need to prioritize and improve the conditions that foster job satisfaction in academia, as it plays a vital role in training the next generation and advancing education in universities. Of particular concern is the high intention to leave among nursing lecturers, which signifies the immense work pressure they face. Without proper support from nursing schools in terms of human resources, there is a risk of a decline in the nursing workforce due to an increasing number of faculty members leaving their positions. This could ultimately lead to a reduction in the quality of undergraduate nursing education in the long run. These findings offer valuable insights for academic institutions, highlighting the importance of fostering a supportive work environment and retaining faculty members. By addressing the factors influencing job satisfaction and intention to leave, institutions can enhance the overall satisfaction of their faculty members and promote longevity in their academic careers. Considering these results, it is recommended that future research delve into additional variables and interventions to further augment faculty satisfaction and mitigate the intention to leave within the academic setting. These efforts can contribute to the overall improvement of the academic environment, ensuring quality education and sustained academic excellence in the years to come. Considering the high rate of intention to leave among nursing faculty members, it is advisable to conduct qualitative studies to explore the nature of the quality of work life, job satisfaction, and the underlying causes of the intention to leave within this group. Additionally, experimental studies can be conducted to investigate the effects of organization-oriented interventions aimed at enhancing the quality of work life, job satisfaction, and reducing the intention to leave."

Limitations

This study was conducted among the faculty members of Urmia University of Medical Sciences, and its results cannot be generalized to other universities. It is recommended to conduct similar studies in other medical science universities. Due to the relatively small sample size and the study being limited to one university, the generalizability of the current study is restricted. Thus, future studies with a larger and more diverse population are suggested.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

SD:

Standard deviation

M:

Mean

SPSS:

Statistical Package for Social Sciences

References

  1. Trinh NTH: Higher Education and Its Role for National Development. A Research Agenda with Bibliometric Analysis. Interchange 2023:1–19.

  2. Trigueros R, Padilla A, Aguilar-Parra JM, Lirola MJ, García-Luengo AV, Rocamora-Pérez P, López-Liria R. The influence of teachers on motivation and academic stress and their effect on the learning strategies of university students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23):9089.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. De-la-Calle-Durán M-C, Rodríguez-Sánchez J-L. Employee engagement and wellbeing in times of COVID-19: a proposal of the 5Cs model. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(10):5470.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Thibault GE. The future of health professions education: emerging trends in the United States. FASEB BioAdvances. 2020;2(12):685.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Gast I, Neelen M, Delnoij L, Menten M, Mihai A, Grohnert T. Supporting the well-being of new university teachers through teacher professional development. Front Psychol. 2022;13:866000.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Frenk J, Chen LC, Chandran L, Groff EO, King R, Meleis A, Fineberg HV. Challenges and opportunities for educating health professionals after the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet. 2022;400(10362):1539–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Shah IA, Yadav A, Afzal F, Shah SMZA, Junaid D, Azam S, Jonkman M, De Boer F, Ahammad R, Shanmugam B. Factors affecting staff turnover of young academics: Job embeddedness and creative work performance in higher academic institutions. Front Psychol. 2020;11:570345.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Houston D, Meyer LH, Paewai S. Academic staff workloads and job satisfaction: expectations and values in academe. J High Educ Policy Manag. 2006;28(1):17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Akafo V, Boateng PA. Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and motivation. Eur J Bus Manag. 2015;7(24):112–24.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ghashghaeizadeh N. Designing and development model for improving the quality of work life of faculty members. Iran Occupational Health. 2020;17:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kobza J, Syrkiewicz-Świtała M. Job satisfaction and its related factors among dentists: a cross-sectional study. Work. 2018;60(3):357–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hesampour M, Akbari M, KHANJANI N, Naghibzadeh-Tahami A, Dehghan A, Nabipour AR, MAGHSOUDI A, ALIPOUR H. Job satisfaction among academic staff: a cross-sectional study. Int J Occup Hyg. 2016;8(3):129–35.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Albaqami A: Determinants of turnover intention among faculty members in Saudi public universities: University of Salford (United Kingdom); 2016.

  14. Alemu DS, Pyktina O. To leave or to stay: faculty mobility in the Middle East. Int J Educ Policy Leadersh. 2020;16(1): n1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee Y-M, Aquino E, Bishop-Royse J, Spawn N, Webber-Ritchey KJ. Predictors associated with new nursing faculty’s intent to leave nursing academia: teaching preparation in doctoral program, institutional supports, and job satisfaction. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2022;19(1):20210148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hagedorn LS. Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. New Dir Inst Res. 2000;2000(105):5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Weale VP, Wells YD, Oakman J. The work-life interface: a critical factor between work stressors and job satisfaction. Pers Rev. 2019;48(4):880–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Calkins CM, Chavez MM, Rosser VJ. Preventing extra costs: the impact of faculty satisfaction and morale. Int J Educ Res. 2019;97:77–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Li N, Zhang L, Xiao G, Chen J, Lu Q. The relationship between workplace violence, job satisfaction and turnover intention in emergency nurses. Int Emerg Nurs. 2019;45:50–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Shafique I, N Kalyar M, Ahmad B.  The nexus of ethical leadership, job performance, and turnover intention: the mediating role of job satisfaction. Interdiscip Descr Complex Syst INDECS. 2018;16(1):71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnsrud LK. Measuring the quality of faculty and administrative worklife: implications for college and university campuses. Res High Educ. 2002;43:379–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnsrud LK, Rosser VJ. Faculty members’ morale and their intention to leave: a multilevel explanation. J Higher Educ. 2002;73(4):518–42.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Abebe A, Assemie A. Quality of work life and organizational commitment of the academic staff in Ethiopian universities. Heliyon. 2023;9(4):e15139.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Lindfelt T, Ip EJ, Gómez A, Barnett MJ. The impact of work-life balance on intention to stay in academia: results from a national survey of pharmacy faculty. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2018;14(4):387–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Moyer SM. Work-life balance of nursing faculty: a scoping review. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2022;43(4):211–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Barnett MJ, Lindfelt T, Doroudgar S, Chan E, Ip EJ. Pharmacy-faculty work-life balance and career satisfaction: comparison of national survey results from 2012 and 2018. Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm. 2022;5:100112.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosser VJ. Faculty members’ intentions to leave: a national study on their worklife and satisfaction. Res High Educ. 2004;45:285–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosser VJ, Slife N: Worklife Climate Survey Executive Summary Spring, 2012 To: Dean Tom Carew, FAS Members of the FAS Dean’s Advisory Committee on Policy and Planning From: FAS Gender Equity Committee 11/12 AY. 2012.

  29. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R, James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R: Linear model selection and regularization. An introduction to statistical learning: with applications in R 2021:225–288.

  30. Norshahi N, Ferasatkhah M. Quality of faculty members’ working lives and the factors that affect it based on real life experiences. Iran Higher Educ. 2012;4(2):37–64.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Busuttil L, Camilleri R: Teachers’ response to the sudden shift to online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for policy and practice. 2020.

  32. Akram M, Amir M. Comparing the quality of work life among University Teachers in Punjab. Bull Educ Res. 2020;42(2):219–34.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bakhshi E, Gharagozlou F, Moradi A, Naderi MR. Quality of work life and its association with job burnout and job performance among Iranian healthcare employees in Islamabad-e Gharb, 2016. J Occup Health Epidemiol. 2019;8(2):94–101.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kermansaravi F, Navidian A, Rigi SN, Yaghoubinia F. The relationship between quality of work life and job satisfaction of faculty members in Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. Global J Health Sci. 2015;7(2):228.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Maghaminejad F, Adib-Hajbaghery M. Faculty members quality of work life in Kashan University of Medical Sciences in 2012. Nurs Midwifery Stud. 2016;5(4):e35921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Shakibayi Z. Meta-analysis of researches on work life quality of higher education institutions faculty members. J Mod Thoughts  Educ. 2015;10(4):115–99.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Farrukhnejad K, Admi A, Ghiashi Nadoshan S, S. A: Survey and comparison of quality of work life and job satisfaction of faculty members: a case study of bushehr persian gulf university of medical sciences. J Educ Syst 2012, 5(15):109–127.

  38. Norshahi N, Samiei H. Examining the quality of work life among public universities faculty members in iran and presenting strategies for its improvement. Res Plan Higher Educ. 2023;17(1):91–114.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mirkamali SM, Thani FN. A study on the quality of work life (QWL) among faculty members of University of Tehran (UT) and Sharif University of Technology (SUT). Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2011;29:179–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zabrodska K, Mudrak J, Kveton P, Blatný M, Machovcova K, Solcova I. Keeping marketisation at bay: the quality of academic worklife in Czech universities. Sociologicky Casopis. 2016;52(3):347.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Fontinha R, Easton S, Van Laar D. Overtime and quality of working life in academics and nonacademics: the role of perceived work-life balance. Int J Stress Manag. 2019;26(2):173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Almalki MJ, FitzGerald G, Clark M. The relationship between quality of work life and turnover intention of primary health care nurses in Saudi Arabia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fontinha R, Van Laar D, Easton S. Quality of working life of academics and researchers in the UK: the roles of contract type, tenure and university ranking. Stud High Educ. 2018;43(4):786–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Bakhshi E, Kalantari R, Salimi N, Ezati F. Assessment of quality of work life and factors related to it based on the walton’s model: a cross-sectional study in employment of health and treatment sectors in Islamabad City. J Health Field. 2019;6(4):12–9.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sulaiman NS, Choo WY, Mat Yassim AR, Van Laar D, Chinna K, Majid HA. Assessing quality of working life among Malaysian workers. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2015;27(8_suppl):94S-100S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Orpina S, Abdul Jalil NIB. Job satisfaction and turnover intention among Malaysian private university academics: Perceived organisational support as a moderator. South East Asian J Manag. 2022;16(1):2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Moloantoa ME, Dorasamy N: Job satisfaction among academic employees in institutions of higher learning. Problems and Perspectives in Management 2017(15, Iss. 3 (contin. 1)):193–200.

  48. Ferron EM, Tourangeau AE. Part-time nurse faculty intent to remain employed in academia: a cross-sectional study. Open Journal of Nursing. 2017;7(2):202–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Hamad L: The Impact of Quality of Work Life on EmployeesJob Performance. UKH; 2018.

  50. Senthilkumar K, Chandrakumaramangalam S, Umasankar M: Factors related to quality of work life of faculty members: indian perspective.

  51. Tavassoli T, Sunyer Torrents A. Employee work-life balance, satisfaction and burnout in Iran and Spain. Humanit Soc Sci Rev. 2020;8(3):779–91.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Saeed K, Farooqi YA. Examining the relationship between work life balance, job stress and job satisfaction among university teachers (A case of University of Gujrat). Int J Multidiscip Sci Eng. 2014;5(6):9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Nadhiya A, Sareena Umma M: Work-life balance and job satisfaction: study among the academics of South Eastern University of Sri Lanka. 2022.

  54. Javanmardnejad S, Bandari R, Heravi-Karimooi M, Rejeh N, Sharif Nia H, Montazeri A. Happiness, quality of working life, and job satisfaction among nurses working in emergency departments in Iran. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021;19(1):1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Harini S, Hamidah H, Luddin MR, Ali H: Analysis supply chain management factors of lecturer’s turnover phenomenon. Int J Supp Chain Manag 2020.

  56. Hafeez U, Akbar W. Impact of work-life balance on job satisfaction among school teachers of 21st century. Aust J Bus Manag Res. 2015;4(11):25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Boamah SA, Hamadi HY, Havaei F, Smith H, Webb F. Striking a balance between work and play: the effects of work–life interference and burnout on faculty turnover intentions and career satisfaction. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(2):809.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Bachechi BA: Job Satisfaction, Work-Life Balance, and Turnover Intention in US Workers. Capella University; 2020.

  59. Kim L, Pongsakornrungsilp P, Pongsakornrungsilp S, Horam N, Kumar V. Key determinants of job satisfaction among university lecturers. Soc Sci. 2023;12(3):153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Aboudahab N, González J, Abdelsalam EM: Investigating the Factors Influencing Turnover Intention: A Case Study Analysis in Private Universities in Egypt. J Hum Resour Manag Res 2022:1–18.

  61. Ampadu EO: Impact of nurse faculty job stress on job satisfaction and intent to remain in academia: Northeastern University; 2015.

  62. Azmi M, Hanafi A, Adam M. Mediating role of job satisfaction in the effect of work-life balance and work passion on turnover intention. Jr Sci Res. 2021;7(1):33–48.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Dousin O, Collins N, Bartram T, Stanton P. The relationship between work-life balance, the need for achievement, and intention to leave: mixed-method study. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(3):1478–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Fayyazi M, Aslani F. The impact of work-life balance on employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intention; the moderating role of continuance commitment. Int Lett Soc Humanit Sci. 2015;51:33–41.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Matsuo M, Suzuki E, Takayama Y, Shibata S, Sato K: Influence of striving for work–life balance and sense of coherence on intention to leave among nurses: A 6-month prospective survey. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing 2021, 58:00469580211005192.

  66. Yusnita N, Gursida H. Antecedents of intention to leave organization: evidence from financial institution. Pol J Manag Stud. 2022;26(1):373–85.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Sadagheyani HE, Ebrahimi M, Tatari F. Investigating policies and factors affecting the faculty members’ retention. J Adv Pharm Educ Res. 2022;12(1):75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Rezaee R, Shoaahaghighi P, Bordbar N, Tavani K, Ravangard R: Factors Affecting the Family Physicians' Intention to Leave the Job: A Case of Iran. The Open Public Health J 2019, 12(1).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (Grant No. 990295). We also appreciate on the all-faculty members participated in study and managers of Urmia University of Medical sciences.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (Grant No. 990295). We appreciate on the funder and all faculty members participated in study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Tehran, Iran

    Akram Ghahramanian

  2. Department of Medical-Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Akram Ghahramanian & Azad Rahmani

  3. Department of Medical-Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran

    Farzaneh Bagheriyeh

  4. Department of Pediatric Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Maragheh University of Medical Sciences, Maragheh, Iran

    Parvaneh Aghajari

  5. Cabrini Research, Cabrini Health, Malvern, VIC, 3144, Australia

    Mohammad Asghari-Jafarabadi

  6. Biostatistics Unit, School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

    Mohammad Asghari-Jafarabadi

  7. Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia

    Mohammad Asghari-Jafarabadi

  8. Road Traffic Injury Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Mohammad Asghari-Jafarabadi

  9. Student Research Committee, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran

    Pedram Abolfathpour

  10. Pediatric Urology and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Children’Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Amirreza Nabighadim

  11. Department of Computer, Bonab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bonab, Iran

    Alireza Hajieskandar

Authors
  1. Akram Ghahramanian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Farzaneh Bagheriyeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Parvaneh Aghajari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad Asghari-Jafarabadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pedram Abolfathpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Azad Rahmani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Amirreza Nabighadim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alireza Hajieskandar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AG, AH, AR, and AN conceived the idea and designed the study. AR, AN, AH and AG performed pilot study for validating data gathering tools. AG and MAJ performed the statistical analysis and interpretation. PA performed data collection. AG, FB and PA drafted the manuscript. MAJ, PA, FB and AG reviewed the manuscript. MAJ critically revised the manuscript. AG reviewed and revised the idea and study design, received the grant. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parvaneh Aghajari.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Tehran, Iran (Ethic code: 990295). The study followed accepted ethical standards, as outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. From March to June 2022, eligible faculty members were approached to participate in the study. Prior to their involvement, the purpose of the study and instructions for completing the questionnaire were explained to them, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. To ensure confidentiality, the survey was conducted anonymously, safeguarding the privacy of the respondents.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghahramanian, A., Bagheriyeh, F., Aghajari, P. et al. The intention to leave among academics in Iran: an examination of their work-life quality and satisfaction. BMC Nurs 23, 43 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01720-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01720-7

Keywords

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

Contact us