Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examines how job security and training and development shape job satisfaction among healthcare employees and paramedics in Pakistan, with work-life balance modeled as the mediating mechanism connecting these organizational resources to satisfaction, and job control modeled as a boundary condition that shapes how strongly those resources translate into work-life balance. The model is developed and tested under the lens of the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory. To fulfil the objective of this study, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in SmartPLS 4 was employed to assess and measure the model, and data were collected from 259 healthcare employees, including paramedics, nurses, administrative staff, medical technicians, and support personnel, working in hospitals across Pakistan, using a convenience sampling technique and a self-administered online questionnaire. The results depict that job security and training and development both significantly and positively predict work-life balance, and that work-life balance in turn significantly predicts job satisfaction. Work-life balance fully mediates the effect of both job security and training and development on job satisfaction. Job control significantly strengthens the relationship between training and development and work-life balance, such that the relationship is considerably stronger among employees with high autonomy than among those with low autonomy, while training and development does not moderate the relationship between job security and work-life balance. Of the seven hypotheses suggested in the study, six were confirmed. This study offers a mechanism-based explanation for how organizational and personal resources interact to influence employee wellbeing in a resource-limited health care system, and provides a real, evidence-based example for hospital administrators and policy makers to enhance employee satisfaction, retention, and ultimately quality of health care services for patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Awais et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: