Introduction

In recent decades, GDP has come under increasing criticism as a measure of social well-being (Moulton, 2018; Stiglitz, 2019, 2020; Jokipii et al., 2021). Most of these criticisms have pointed out that many of the factors that qualify human well-being cannot be described by GDP indicators (Clark, 2018; Pilling, 2018). As both the importance and the application of wellbeing in the life of organisations have become more pronounced in recent years, academic researchers and subsequently practitioners have had to respond to this challenge. This situation has prompted research focusing on how to better capture the so-called ‘soft’ elements in addition to the ‘hard’ quantifiable factors. Néhány, ezen soft tényezők közül: elégedettség, érzelmi intelligencia, stressz kezelés, elkötelezettség, konfliktusok kezelése, munka-magánélet összhangja, stb.. (Fan et al, 2018; Fraumeni, 2022; Wiedenhofer et al, 2020). Kiemelt jelentőséget kapnak még ma is a vizsgálatokban a Covid helyzet hozta home-office következményei. Ez elsősorban azokat a munkaköröket érinti, ahol a technikai feltételek lehetővé teszik a távmunkát. Így az irodai munkák és az oktatás (hallgatói és oktatói oldalról egyaránt) fókuszba került (Barbieri et al., 2019; Haque & Oino, 2019; Han et al., 2020; Pavitraa et al., 2023).

Measuring the soft elements of individual happiness, satisfaction and wellbeing is becoming increasingly important for people. Pay or financial reward is no longer the most important attraction (Hascher & Waber, 2021; Mehta, 2021; Stiglitz et al, 2019). Young people in particular are looking for jobs where the organisation provides them with opportunities (in addition to attractive, challenging work) to make their work and leisure activities more enjoyable. It is important to recognise that the needs of the generations currently in the labour market have changed considerably. Their demands include good mental health, a high degree of life satisfaction, a sense of purpose or purposefulness and the ability to manage stress. They also include sustainability, social sensitivity and cultural traditions. It is therefore necessary to find a way of rating organisations in terms of employee satisfaction, well-being parameters and the conditions provided by the organisation (Arnau-Sabatés, & Gilligan, 2020; Jetha et al, 2022; Shields et al, 2021).

Research has resulted in the development of indicators that more or less regularly measure the happiness and satisfaction of societies in different parts of the world (Astor, 2018; OHPI, 2018; Seligman, 2014; Weigel, 2015). A positive consequence of addressing these problems is that these factors are being considered alongside economic performance indicators. At the same time all of these indicators have also come in for a lot of criticism, mainly because they tend to focus on psychological states and almost completely ignore people's physical conditions and needs. Another problem is that most of these indicators are not suitable for assessing organisational-level characteristics (Alba, 2019; Jaswal et al, 2020; Nagwanshi et al, 2021). It is only natural that any new solution, method or theory will provoke criticism. At the same time, the very existence of these indicators, notwithstanding all their shortcomings, can be seen as a success. These criticisms have led to a focus on the need to identify a set of parameters that holistically measure and express the quality of human well-being at both individual and organisational levels.

In addition to indicators of social well-being, there is a method of measurement developed in Bhutan based on the Buddhist religion, known as GNH (Gross National Happiness). The method is well known in alternative economics, but its widespread use has been rejected because of the Buddhist context. The logic of GNH was originally developed at the societal level, but in recent years a version has been developed that allows for the rating of organisations. It takes a holistic approach to measuring people's happiness and well-being (Sebastian, 2018; Thinley & Hartz-Karp, 2019). The computational method is very new (Zangmo et al., 2017; 2018) and due to the supposed limitations of Buddhist culture, we could not find any research in the literature that applied the methodology in other religious or cultural contexts. Studies to test the methodology have been conducted primarily in Bhutan. Bhutan Power Corporation Limited (BPC), Bank of Bhutan Limited (BoBL) and Bhutan Telecom Limited (BTL), three state-owned enterprises, were awarded the GNH of Business certificate in December 2021. The organisations were judged to be operating in line with the nine areas of the GNH of Business and to have incorporated the values represented by the methodology into their organisational operations. The Board of Directors responsible for GNH certification, the Centre for Bhutanese and GNH Studies (using the methodology they themselves developed) certified the organisations that volunteered for the assessment after a one-month assessment exercise. Among the organisations that were previously assessed in June 2021, BPC received four out of a possible five stars. BoB and BTL, who were assessed in 2019, received three stars as their operations were found to be moderately aligned with the GNH of Business desired values. (Rinzin, 2021).

Thus, the present research is the first to apply the GNH of Business calculation methodology in a Christian cultural context. The research aims to demonstrate that the logic and computational methodology is independent of religious or cultural conditions and is capable of qualifying organisational level preparedness to ensure human happiness, well-being and at the same time sustainability through a holistic approach.

In the first phase of the research, we tested higher education in economics by interviewing employees and managers of all higher education institutions involved in economic education. In the next phase, business organisations were tested. This paper presents the results of the first phase. The original questionnaires developed by Bhutanese (employees and managers) and translated into the language of the country under study were used. All other survey conditions were followed according to the original specifications. Our research questions were formulated as follows:

  • Q1: Can the original method developed to measure the ‘GNH of Business’ be adapted without changes to other religious/cultural conditions?

  • Q2: What conclusions can be drawn from the results of the areas studied regarding the strengths and weaknesses of business higher education?

  • Q3: What is the overall picture based on the results of all the institutions surveyed and how consistent is this with the results of each institution individually?

  • Q4: What role do the subjective elements (but at the same time the parameters that allow them to be measured) play in the final result?

  • Q5: Is there a possibility of comparison with other indicators developed previously which prefer to measure values beyond GDP?

Based on the results, a number of additional questions have emerged which generate further research, partly targeting higher education and partly assessing the situation of the profit-oriented sector. In the following chapters of the paper, after the theoretical overview, the practical research is presented in detail, followed by the results and conclusions.

Theoretical background

To ensure that the research is theoretically sound, we draw on two authoritative theories. These are post-positivist psychology and Buddhist economics. Positive psychology, which, according to Seligman and Csíkszentmihályi (2000), is a scientific stream that seeks to understand well-being. In recent decades it has gained worldwide popularity. Thanks mainly to the research of Seligman and his colleagues (Seligman et al, 2005; Seligman et al, 2006; Hassett et al., 2009; Seligman, 2014), it has become a popular yet scientifically sound movement, accepted by the American Psychological Association. Its fundamental ideas and research findings encourage people to focus on the good things, their strengths and abilities, to achieve their goals, experience their successes and thereby maintain and/or improve their mental health. It builds on people-centred, values-focused, future-oriented thinking. Our research is supported (as a complement to this strand) by the teachings of Buddhist economics (Schumacher, 2014). Buddhist economics is an ecological, economical and ethical system. On the one hand, it applies the intellectual, Buddha's teachings to economics, and on the other hand, it uses the different interpretations of practicing Buddhists to answer the questions that arise in economics. This results in an emphasis on moderation, the preservation of nature and culture, and the requirements of sustainability. The two theories are complementary and prepare the ground for further reflections that justify the method we use.

GDP gaps and the Buddhist economic approach

GDP, as a measure of social well-being, has received increasing criticism since the 1950s (Kapoor & Debroy, 2019; Moulton, 2018; Partington, 2019). However, GDP was never intended to capture the well-being of society. It does not distinguish between positive and negative outcomes of production and development. The most commonly cited problems with GDP limits are that they do not take into account non-market transactions, it does not distinguish between sustainable and unsustainable growth, it does not take into account the negative effects of a nation's production or consumption on the environment and human health, it does not capture subjective perceptions of well-being and it does not take into account the social distribution of income (Ilasco, 2021).

In order to overcome the shortcomings of GDP and to measure the soft elements, a number of indicators have emerged to fill the gap that GDP cannot account for. A non-exhaustive list of the indicators developed for measuring soft elements is shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Indices to make up for the shortcomings of GDP (without claiming completeness)
Full size table

Advocates of Gross National Happiness highlight the misconception that higher GDP automatically means higher quality of life (Easterlin, et al., 2010). The GNH index aims to define relevant indicators for each sector to guide development, allocate resources to achieve previously set goals and measure outcomes (people's happiness). These ideas are supported by Schumacher, (2014) in his book ‘Small is beautiful’, contrasts his views on the work of modern and Buddhist economics.

According to the logic of the modern economy, success is nothing but the accumulation of goods. The Buddhist view is the sharp opposite of this, as it considers man important. A Buddhist economy would operate based on simplicity and non-violence (Schumacher, 2014). Payutto (1994) demonstrated the importance of the principles of moderation, satisfaction, and non-harm and Daniels (2007) highlights sustainability. According to Zsolnai, (2011) the strategy of the Buddhist economy is built around the following 5 main components: minimising suffering, simplifying desires, practising non-harm, sincere care, and generosity.

Proposed indicators based on Buddhist thinking that can make up for the shortcomings of GDP prefer sustainability, honesty, trust, and satisfaction, as a social value (Ocsai, 2018). Calculating these indicators is indeed a serious challenge, but with their help and the objective indicators, the characteristics of an economy can be judged more realistically (Ashtankar, 2015; Kovacs & Ocsai, 2015; Monaco, 2017). GNH’s calculation method allows the assessment of both objective and subjective parameters, and its thinking is based on happiness as the result of a set of measurable elements (Bryson et al., 2015; National Statistics Bureau, 2017; Rosengren, 2018; Dendup et al., 2018).

Happiness

Happiness appears in many disciplines, such as psychology, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, health sciences, etc. Researchers and practitioners in these fields use different approaches to understand and measure happiness. Table 2 summarises the most important approaches in each discipline.

Table 2 Understanding happiness by field
Full size table

At an individual level, happiness is a personal experience that depends on many factors in a person's life, such as relationships, work, hobbies, mental health, etc. Different people have different perceptions of what is happy, and the meaning of happiness may vary from person to person. Research into happiness has been going on for a long time, and in addition to the classical researchers (Bentham, 1996; Mill, 1869; Morris, 2004) the main areas of thought of the greatest personalities of recent years are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3 The thinking focus of happiness researchers
Full size table

In addition to happiness, two other concepts that are relevant to our study are contentment and wellbeing. Each of these concepts is difficult to define, and the literature tends to use different terms to describe their essence. In the following chapters of the paper, we will interpret the concepts as follows.

The relationship between satisfaction, happiness and wellbeing is close, but their meanings are not the same. Contentment refers to a feeling about our current state, circumstances and situation. If we are satisfied with our work, our friends, our family, we are content. Satisfaction is temporary and depends on changes in circumstances (Graham et al., 2014). Happiness is a long-term state that focuses on quality of life, relationships and personal values. People generally feel happy when their lives are in alignment with their values and life goals, and when they have good relationships with others. Happiness is usually more stable than contentment and less dependent on circumstances. Because happiness is generally understood in the literature as a broad concept, the term ‘subjective well-being’ is used (Ahmadiani et al, 2022; Nordenfelt, 1995). Well-being is the sum of physical, mental and social well-being. The purpose of this concept is to determine how well we feel in our bodies, minds and relationships. Well-being is a constantly changing state, influenced by a variety of factors including circumstances, mindset, habits, relationships and goals.

Our study distinguishes three levels of well-being based on these concepts. The first level is the level of satisfaction and includes pleasure, ‘hedonic happiness’. The second level is well-being, which at a sufficiently high level refers to the engagement and release of emotions during the completion of a task or goal. This is what Csíkszentmihályi (2000) calls ‘flow’. The third level is characterised by the Aristotelian ‘eudemonia’ (Irwin, 2019; Li et al, 2022). This level is characterised by the individual's inner harmony, the goal of personal growth, the building of constructive relationships, independence, and a sense of mental, physical and natural balance (Kopp & Pikó, 2006). Information on the development of the GNH of Business used in this research and the application of the methodology will be provided in the next section.

GNH

The GNH (Gross National Happiness) index, developed and applied in the Kingdom of Bhutan, is suitable for responding to the criticisms of the thinking focuses presented in Table 3 and for making up for their shortcomings. The index was first mentioned in the 1970s by the fourth king of Bhutan, Jigme Singye Wangchuck. In his view, the government’s goal cannot be to increase the value of GDP, but to increase the country’s happiness. GNH has a holistic approach to measuring people’s happiness and well-being. It consists of four pillars (Good Governance, Preservation and Promotion of Culture, Environmental Conservation, Sustainable and Equitable Socio-Economic Development), which can be further divided into 9 domains (Ura, 2005).

Psychological well-being measures how people feel about their quality of life. It includes, among other things, the degree of their satisfaction with life, and spirituality. Health describes people’s physical and mental health. Thanks to a healthy lifestyle, unnecessary fatigue and unnecessary stress from daily activities. Time use describes the importance of work-life balance to live a harmonious life. It includes working time, time spent sleeping, and leisure time. Education assesses the knowledge, values and skills acquired informally, alongside the knowledge acquired through formal education. Cultural diversity and resilience examines the diversity resilience of cultural heritage. Community vitality shows strengths and weaknesses of community relationships and social interactions. It gathers information about the cohesive power of society and the topic of voluntary activity. Good governance rates how people value different government functions. It examines the existence of individual rights and freedom. Ecological diversity and resilience shows how people value their immediate environment, their attitude towards environmentally friendly activities. Living standards focus on financial security that is measured through income, financial security and housing, among others.

The 9 areas of GNH are divided into a further 33 parameters, which are qualified through standard questionnaire questions. Using this method, the contribution to gross national happiness can be identified at three levels, political/governmental, municipal, business, and at the individual levels.

The original logic was developed at the societal level, but, in recent years, the possibility of calculating at the organisational/business levels has been completed, (GNH of Business) also targeted by the authors’ research. In both cases, one arrives at the calculation of the happiness index through the measurement of individual happiness (Cooper & Bedford, 2017; Schroeder, 2018).

Of course, like GDP, the GNH method has its critics. These most often claim that happiness is a transient state of mind, heavily influenced by an individual's mood swings, and that it is problematic to measure the happiness of people such as sadists or psychopaths (Daga, 2014). Happiness is too subjective to be accurately measured and that no cross-cultural or global comparisons can be made (McCloskey, 2012). (This finding, however, holds for all other happiness index calculations). Further critical analyses can be found in the literature arguing for/against the applicability of the GNH philosophy.

GNH of Business

The integration of GNH into business was initiated by the Prime Minister of Bhutan, Dasho Tshering Tobgay. He first presented the idea at the Sixth International Conference on GNH in 2015. CBS developed and then released a blueprint for GNH’s business integration in 2017 (Zangmo et al., 2017). The business application was developed based on the 9 domains of GNH, which were divided into two groups according to the assessment areas (see Fig. 1): employee happiness and organisational conditions of happiness (Zangmo et al., 2017).

Fig. 1
figure 1

GNH’s business framework. Source: (Zangmo et al., 2017)

Full size image

As illustrated in Fig. 1, employee happiness means the employees’ satisfaction and happiness in some areas of GNH. Through the organisational conditions of happiness, one can get information about organisational behaviour, and how all this contributes to the well-being and happiness of employees (Zangmo et al., 2017). Each area presented here can be divided into additional indicators, the measurement of which will be evaluated in a questionnaire survey.

GNH’s research at a societal level has been attempted by several nations with their own cultural and religious values in mind. Using the Bhutanese logic and calculation method, Thailand, Brazil, Japan, Taiwan, UK, Netherland, Sweden, etc. have also conducted studies, the results of which can be read in the literature (Alessandrini & Suhraiya, 2017; Ribeiro & Marinho, 2017; Santos, 2014; Sebastian, 2018; van Norren, 2020). Studies in a university setting were conducted by Applasamy et al., (2014). The Bhutanese index provided the inspiration for the development of their index, called the Gross Institutional Happiness Index, and measures the happiness levels of both students and teachers. The authors consider the research important because they believe that happy educators are more willing to accept changes, are more motivated in their goals, and they can teach and support their students more effectively. The GIHI index was developed based on a holistic approach and measures the same nine domains as the original GNH. The authors conducted their first pilot research in a unit of Taylor’s University School of Engineering in Malaysia. The studies do not have international repercussions yet; the index has not been adopted in any other country.

We did not find any international research results on the application of GNH of Business (given its novelty and experimental methodology). To test the method (after its development), 540 employees and managers of 41 companies in Bhutan completed questionnaires. (The measurement method (logic and calculation scheme and questionnaire) was developed by The Centre for Bhutan Studies Research Institute. As mentioned above, the questionnaire is a version of the original method developed for the social level, adapted for the organisational level. It has been validated by The British Psychological Society and, having been tested repeatedly on a sample of countries, the validity of its application and results is not in doubt.) Late last year, the Bhutanese government announced that, beyond the test phase, 3 of the organisations that participated in the real-world competition were awarded certificates of achievement of the highest level. The results were used to validate the method. As a study conducted in a different cultural context, our research can be considered as a pilot study, the experiences and results of which will be used in further research (Zangmo et al., 2017).

Research methodology

In the course of the research, we used the original questionnaires (GNH of Business), preserving all areas, indicators and questions for professional loyalty. In some cases, it was necessary to use Western vocabulary, and make some corrections for clarity and professional consideration (working hours, pay, spirituality, scholarships). The results of the questionnaire survey were calculated at the organisational level as a whole, and can be interpreted as an indicator of organisational happiness. As individuals were asked, the calculations are valid for the individuals in the first step (employee happiness index), and then, based on the calculation method, the results can be interpreted at the organisational level using the date of the questionnaires filled in by managers (qualifying the provision of organisational conditions).

Calculation of GNH of Business

The GNH analysis methodology consists of three phases:

  1. (1)

    Determination and application of thresholds of acceptability (Employee happiness was measured by 29 indicators in five domains, with 114 variables. Organisational conditions is assessed by measuring 20 indicators in 4 domains with 102 variables. In this phase, we distinguish between unhappy and happy employees based on the threshold of acceptability. The threshold of acceptability is determined for all 49 indicators on the basis of pre-testing and statistical calculations, taking into account national and international standards. Domestic characteristics required modification for one or two indicators. For the workers, the acceptability thresholds for the 29 indicators were assessed according to the original logic, i.e. ‘1’ if the worker meets the acceptability criteria and ‘0’ if the threshold is not met. From this we can tell how many employees meet the threshold of acceptability. In this way, we can compare the threshold for each person for all 29 indicators with the total number of employees tested, or we can compare their performance in different areas. Compliance thresholds are also set in the area of organisational conditions for all 20 indicators. The aggregation of the two domains (employee and organisational conditions) (based on the acceptability thresholds) is necessary to rate the happiness of the organisation as a whole.

  2. (2)

    Application of weighting (this means multiplying the number of employees rated 0–1 on the acceptability threshold by the weights). Two weights are applied, the domain weight and the indicator weight. The weight of the domain is derived from the distribution of the total score (100). The 5 domain weights for the assessment of employees are 20 (100/5). For the assessment of organisational conditions, each of the 4 categories is given a weight of 25 (100/4). The calculation of indicators follows a similar logic, where the weight of the domain is divided by the number of indicators measured in it.

  3. (3)

    Summary and evaluation. The results of the 2 parts obtained above (employees and organisational conditions) are calculated by a simple mathematical summation. The final value of the organisational happiness index is the sum of the two parts with equal weights.

As can be seen from the model (Fig. 1), employee happiness is assessed according to a wide range of logics based on mental and physical experiences in the workplace. The aim is to achieve and maintain employee well-being. A higher value of employee happiness is associated with better productivity. Investors consider well-being and happiness as one of the most important productivity indicators.

Employee happiness is the score of each employee relative to the ith indicator and can be calculated as follows:

$${W}_{hap}={\sum }_{i=1}^{n}{w}_{i}{x_{i}}$$
(1)

where,

Whap—is the happiness score of a worker

n—is the number of indicators

i—is the ith indicator

wi—is the weight of an ith indicator

xi—is the value of an ith indicator

The overall employee happiness score is obtained by summing the weighted scores for all employees and dividing by the total number of employees (n) participating in the survey. A similar logic is used to calculate the organisational conditions. The difference is that the calculation of average scores is not required (as it is sufficient to have a manager evaluate the indicators). As the survey is not carried out for one organisation in this case, it is necessary to average the scores obtained from the managers' opinions. The scores for the organisational conditions can be calculated as follows:

$${O}_{hap}={\sum }_{i=1}^{n}{w}_{i}{x}_{i}$$
(2)

where,

Ohap—is the organisational conditions for happiness score

n—is the number of indicators

i—is the ith indicator

wi—is the weight of an ith indicator

xi—is the value of an ith indicator

The value of the happiness index for the organisation as a whole is calculated by weighted summation of the two parts calculated above (employee happiness and organisational conditions score). The score is calculated in a 50:50% ratio. The correlation used to evaluate the organisation as a whole:

$$H=0.5\times {W}_{hap}+\left(0.5\times {O}_{hap}\right)$$
(3)

where,

Whap – is the worker happiness score

Ohap – is the organisational conditions for happiness score

Authentication/Certification

Based on the calculated values, the classification of the business enterprise is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Categories and indicators of organisational happiness
Full size table

Two conditions are required to obtain a certificate. Achieved score above 80%, and 60% of both parts (employee, organisational) has to be achieved. In this case, this means reaching the average score according to the table.

It should be noted that the calculation of these values is not the ultimate goal, but rather a starting point to initiate the necessary changes. An overview of individual areas, an understanding of their impact on the operation of the business enterprise helps to formulate the development strategy, assess risks and plan the opportunities. If a business obtains the GNH certificate, it is recommended to re-perform the assessment at certain intervals (3 years).

The sample

The research was conducted in 2020–21 at the faculties of economics of higher education institutions, and in institutions teaching economic studies (numbers: 61). Today, higher education is undergoing a transformation, (with institutions being explicitly business-focused). This transformation has been an unconcealed ambition in recent years, so the logic of the GNH of Business process can be applied without doubt.

The questionnaires were sent to the deans (rectors/directors of institutions) of the universities. (The questionnaire survey covered all higher education staff working in economics education.) At the beginning of the letter, we explained the purpose of the research and asked managers to forward the questionnaires attached to the letter to their colleagues and motivate them to complete them. As described above, two questionnaires were to be filled in, one with staff and one with managers (deans/rectors/directors of institutes). Thus, we further asked managers to fill in the questionnaires themselves, both as staff and as managers. The questionnaires were sent out electronically (via emails) several times. We intended to aim for a representative sample, as we addressed all the institutions with the call. Unfortunately, the willingness to complete was low, so 239 employees (about 7%) and 14 managerial questionnaires (about 22%) were collected.

The most important information of the sample is summarised in the Table 5.

Table 5 Characteristics of the sample
Full size table

To ensure anonymity, the calculations based on the questionnaires were treated as if higher education in economics formed a business, and the results of managerial questionnaires were also averaged (this can be done if the responses/respondents in the sample form a homogeneous group. This was tested using a seriation and bi-clustering procedure). Despite the non-representativeness of the sample, we obtained a comprehensive picture of the sense of happiness (positive and negative effects influencing it) and the organisational characteristics (conditions, managerial thinking) of the employees working in the fields of economics in higher education, which are meant to provide the conditions for happiness.

Analysis

Testing the homogeneity of the sample

Since the participants in the study were employees of different institutions, it was necessary to check whether they constituted a homogeneous sample. The aim was to be able to analyse the responses as a sample. To achieve this, we used two complementary methods, a seriation (Liiv, 2010) and a bi-cluster method (Gusenleitner et al., 2012; Kosztyán et al., 2019).

In seriation, we use hierarchical clustering to ensure simultaneous reordering of rows and columns. As a result, we can place individuals' answers to the same question (similar cells) closest to each other. This means that the columns will be closest to each other where respondents gave similar opinions, while the rows will be closest to each other where respondents gave similar answers. A bi-clustering procedure was then used to cluster the columns and rows simultaneously to determine the set of leagues. A bi-cluster/league contains both a set of indicators and a set of respondents. It is a homogeneous submatrix. Using this algorithm requires a binary dataset, which our dataset satisfies for most indicators, so the iBBiG (iterative binary bi-clustering of gene sets) algorithm can be used.

This method can be considered new in the field of business and economics (Dolnicar et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2016; Kosztyán et al., 2019), as it was basically first applied to gene sequencing. In the business domain, a sample can be analysed by breaking it down into subsets of similar elements using this method. In our case, the sample includes responses from employees of several institutions, but the procedure has demonstrated the homogeneity of the sample, making it suitable to evaluate the responses as a single sample.

Assessing employee happiness

The calculation procedure followed the logic of the above demonstrated 3 steps. Then we identified the percentage of compliance with the compliance threshold in individual areas, that is, the extent to which employees involved in the study met the predetermined compliance threshold value. The weighted values can be separately calculated for each area, and the sum of them gives the value of employee happiness in %. The 29 indicators of the questionnaire questions, the weights and calculated values are shown in Table 6 (n = 239).

Table 6 GNH’s areas, indicators and their weight together with the calculated values
Full size table

Based on the results of the table, you can see relatively low, but balanced values in each area, except for the area of Living Standards, where the rating is significantly lower than in other areas.

Measuring organisational conditions

The picture of the conditions of organisational happiness reflects business behaviour and phenomena related to the social well-being of employees. The organisational conditions for happiness were calculated from 20 indicators. Compliance thresholds, like those used to measure employee happiness, are based on the standards previously established in Bhutan. The areas and indicators of organisation conditions, as well as the weights assigned to them, and the results obtained during the survey are summarised in Table 7 (n = 14).

Table 7 Weighted values of organisational conditions
Full size table

The value of the rating obtained during the evaluation of organisational conditions is significantly higher, almost twice (58.37%) of the employee happiness score. The highest scores are in the ‘Good governance’ and the ‘Community vitality’ areas, while there are serious shortcomings in the ‘Cultural and Ecological diversity’ areas.

Based on the aggregated results, taking the 50–50% weighting into account, the happiness index characteristics of the economic training of higher education is:

$$\mathrm{H}=0.5\times 32.68+0.5\times 58.37=16.34+29.19=45.53\%$$
(4)

According to the evaluation table, (Table 3) the value obtained is at a level close to the lower limit of the average category, which means that intervention is needed in certain areas. Critical areas are shown based on aggregated area scores, but a deeper analysis of differences within the areas reveals further shortcomings.

The validity of the questionnaire has been demonstrated in previous studies, (as it was mentioned above) and the reliability of the responses was checked using a Cronbach's alpha test (Cronbach, 1951). As most of the questions are latent variables that are difficult to measure, the test shows how closely the items are related to each other. The value ranges between 0 and 1, and the closer it is to 1, the more reliable the results are (above 0.7 is considered acceptable). The value calculated for the staff questionnaire is 0.772, and for the organisational conditions questionnaire 0.9762 (Wessa, 2021). Based on these results, the above calculated results can be considered reliable.

Discussion

The main objective of the research was to demonstrate that the ‘GNH of Business’ method developed in Bhutan can be applied in European cultural and religious contexts (contrary to the criticisms and objections in the literature). As shown by the results presented above, the original questionnaires and conditions, the logic of the method can be applied unchanged. As we could not find similar research in the literature, we cannot compare this result with the results of previous research. However, it is the uniqueness and pioneering role of the present research. It also provides an opportunity to answer the research questions.

As can be seen from the above, except for some minimal wording (for the sake of clarity or professional considerations) and measurement level corrections, the indicators used in the questionnaires are applicable for measurement and qualification in domestic conditions. This is one of the most important results of the research. This research is a new result for the international literature and corporate practice. Previous research has not been conducted using this method in different cultural and religious contexts. However, the present findings are strengthened by the fact that the International Institute of Management USA, claims the development of the GNH method as its own (Although international literature almost invariably attributes the method to the King of Bhutan, this is refuted by American colleagues). They list several reasons on their website to support this, but there is no credible evidence or research on the method they have developed (Med, 2018). In any case, the fact that a very similar (or the same?) method has been developed in the context of American culture (which is characterised by the coexistence of people of many different origins, religions and races) supports the conclusion of our research that the method can be applied in the conditions of any other culture or religion.

In addition to the main objective, the so-called ‘by-products’ of the research provide an opportunity to answer further research questions. The results of the research are a starting point for judging the feelings of colleagues in an East-Central European country’s economic higher education, how satisfied and happy they are at the workplace, during work, and to what extent the conditions provided by the workplace, management decisions and measures contribute to this. With the help of the Bhutanese measurement system, (Zangmo et al., 2017, 2018) it was possible to quantify the value that qualifies the examined characteristics as an index of happiness in 9 areas. Based on the results of the areas studied, the following conclusions can be drawn with regard to the strengths and weaknesses of higher education in the field of economics.

The level of values in each area shows which ones are where absolutely and urgently needed to intervene. According to the analysis, each of the employee areas requires rethinking and more attention, since they reach approximately one-third of the 20% weights. With a small difference, but to an almost equal extent, there are shortcomings, except for one area, which qualifies ‘Living Standards’. Here they achieved a very low value, which has long been a neuralgic point in higher education. Previous research has primarily examined the relationship between wellbeing and physical and mental activity and health among university students (Michalos, 2008, 2017; Castelló et al., 2017). Studies have also examined the relationship between education and creativity and happiness and wellbeing (Steptoe et al., 2015; Shushok & Matson, 2021; Walker, 2022). All studies showed a strong and significant relationship, clearly demonstrating the importance of wellbeing and happiness for success and achievement. Although a large proportion of the research targeted young people and university students, some additional research in the adult age group found a similarly strong association with health and job performance (Badiozaman et al., 2023, Lemon, 2021, 2022). In our results, we find indicators of problems that are associated with salary, other benefits and recognition. It is not surprising that the greatest dissatisfaction can be felt here, as it is known that there are significant gaps in higher education compared to the business sector. The findings from the literature research confirm similar problems in many countries, with dissatisfaction with monetary compensation (salary, other benefits) being the most common (Michailidis et al., 2002; Oshagbemi, 2000). Interestingly, in a Macedonian study, respondents were satisfied with salary and promotion opportunities, but dissatisfied with fringe benefits, rewards, nature of work, and communication (Elwick, & Cannizzaro, 2017). In the ‘Psychological wellbeing’ area, problems with job satisfaction and negative emotions arise primarily. The possibility of increasing Psychological wellbeing (PWB) has been investigated by Weiss et al. (2014). Their results show that influencing behaviour leads to results. Joshanloo (2019), examining the relationship between subjective and psychological wellbeing, found that PWB is relevant for future wellbeing. This implies that this area of study is particularly important for the long-term wellbeing of university staff, and therefore requires attention from responsible decision-makers in the university. Overall, job satisfaction shows variable results across the world (Aryanti et al, 2020; Busis et al, 2017; Jarman et al, 2021; LaFaver et al, 2018; Mosley-Johnson et al, 2019). Staff reported higher satisfaction with working conditions and facilities at home (Koos, 2018). Problems related to negative/positive emotions at work (anger, sadness, frustration, disappointment, frustration/forgiveness, pride, joy) are difficult to compare with previous research, as little information on this was found in the literature on higher education. One study has investigated the good and bad aspects of job status in terms of employees' feelings and behaviours (Liu et al, 2020). Their results show that job status is related to knowledge hiding through two opposing mechanisms: the felt obligation to share knowledge and the feeling of envy. This problem is also prevalent in higher education settings.

Looking at the questions of the indicators examined, it means that, overall, they are not quite satisfied with their workplaces, and feel anger, stress, disappointment, and frustration more often than acceptable. At the same time, it should be mentioned that colleagues trust one another and their superiors, do not feel discrimination too often (at most because of their age or gender), and positive feelings frequently appear in a dominant way (forgiveness, pride, joy). The positive assessment of organisational trust strengthens employee performance, cooperation, the successful operation of the organisation as a whole, it indicates the presence of an ethical environment and employee commitment. These results are confirmed by all trust-related research (Chen et al, 2019; Lu et al, 2020; Jasielska, 2020; Miething et al, 2020; Zhou et al, 2021, Helliwell et al., 2023).

As mentioned in the theoretical chapter, these soft factors are especially important in judging the final result. This is supported by international studies which have found that organisational commitment and increased productivity are associated with happiness (Choudhury et al, 2019, 2022; Dehaghi, 2012; Mohammed, 2019). Mehta and colleagues (2021) complemented their studies by looking beyond engagement to reveal the relationship between satisfaction and burnout. They used the results to create a wellbeing assessment model. Han and colleagues (2020) looked for similar correlations by testing mainly higher education employees. The results showed that challenging job demands were positively related to emotional exhaustion and negatively related to work engagement. These studies support our own findings. In the ‘Health’ domain, stress is the main cause of unhappiness, which is related to the negative emotions reported in the previous domain and is a dominant problem in many international research (Tytherleigh et al., 2005; Michailidis et al., 2002; Petőné, 2014; Mahmoodi et al., 2019; Genç, 2021; Özer et al., 2022). Zakaria and colleagues (2021) conducted research on the impact of workplace challenges in educational institutions. Their results confirm that imbalanced life situations, organisational conflict and excessive stress can lead to low performance, job dissatisfaction, loss of happiness, and a range of other mental health problems. The wellbeing of teachers is greatly influenced by comfortable, healthy and happy conditions. Interestingly, Molero and colleagues (2019) focused their research on the relationship between emotional intelligence and mental wellbeing. Their results show that high levels of stress affect the quality of education. They highlight the importance of developing emotional intelligence to help prevent negative feelings in the workplace. Dissatisfaction appears in the case of work schedule (often due to unpredictable and unusually timed tasks) in the area of ‘Time use’. Flexible working hours received a particularly positive assessment among teachers. Jones and colleagues (2022) studied teacher workload during the Covid period. During this critical period, they found that teachers were able to save time by teaching at home. They therefore volunteered to take on burdens such as paperwork and liaising with parents. It is interesting to compare this finding with our own research, where this flexibility option was found to have a markedly positive effect. In the area of ‘Education’, the opportunities for development and training received very low scores, which can be assessed as positive because the learning needs of colleagues are emphasised, but the lack of opportunities or their funding cause dissatisfaction. At the same time, scholarship opportunities received an outstandingly high evaluation. Nowadays, training is often directed towards digitalisation and practice-oriented training (Diery et al, 2020). Swedish researchers have investigated the need for digital training and the use of the knowledge acquired. Their results show that teachers value the opportunity to participate in training as a motivation (Amhang et al., 2019). Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, and colleagues (2022) based on an extensive literature review, confirmed that, however popular the research topic, it remains necessary to deepen the research and to raise the level of digital competence development for teachers. Doing so can increase staff satisfaction and thus organisational happiness.

In terms of organisational conditions, we found results in one area (Subbaye & Vithal, 2016), which was related to employee retention and the management of generational problems. The fact that the area of ‘Good governance’ received the highest score should be seen as particularly positive. This is the result of the harmonisation of employment, workplace guidelines and regulations, levels of fluctuation and income. Research shows that employee engagement, job satisfaction, compensation, rewards, recognition and transformational leadership are significantly associated with intention to quit (Botha & Potgieter, 2009). The influencing power of leadership thinking, style, behaviour and vision as determinants have been identified by Berke et al. (2021) and Al Danaf and Berke (2021). Our own results confirmed the findings of previous research. Women and the younger generation are more dissatisfied, with less attention paid to them, fewer opportunities for advancement, and fewer chances of gaining leadership positions. They feel under-resourced, which can be a major contributory factor to staff dropping out. Management attitudes can have a major influence in addressing these problems. The area of ‘Community vitality’ also received quite high scores, where community donation was qualified as the weakest indicator. Employees rarely volunteer, except for the activities related to the promotion of education. International research confirms this finding. Volunteering in higher education is most prevalent in education-related activities (Bervell et al, 2022; Shubovich et al, 2019). The two areas that are significantly underestimated are ‘Cultural diversity’ and ‘Ecological diversity’. Shortcomings in both areas are to be found in the indicators of donation, promotion of national and cultural values, and voluntary activities. In addition, there are serious problems in the area of environmental protection; insufficient attention to the emission of treatment of harmful materials, and the shortcomings of donation/support are also highlighted. The results of the research provide a solid basis for decisions, even at government level, on the transparency and prioritisation of what needs to be done. The method thus allows for a detailed analysis and informed decision making through a holistic measurement logic, which is relevant for any other country.

The overall picture based on the institutions studied shows that the results obtained are consistent with those measured for each institution separately. Employee opinions usually show positive and negative ratings in the same areas. Evaluated separately, a closer picture can be obtained of the opinions of the employees of each organisation, which, if the questionnaire is filled in by a sufficient number of employees, provides valuable information to the managers of the institutions. Differences and/or identities between them can also be detected, but in the present study, due to the stochastic distribution of the number of respondents (only a few respondents were sampled from certain institutions, while a significantly higher proportion of respondents came from other institutions), it is not worth making such a comparison. As mentioned above, the sample was so homogeneous that a unified view of respondents is clearly emerging. This indicates that problems were identified at national level, not institution specific, which justifies intervention at government level. The results of other similar research on the problems of higher education have shown that respondents' views are also consistent when comparing nationally run or state or religiously supported institutions (Zakaria et al., 2021; Van der Vyver et al, 2020). There is no significant difference between respondents from the institutions included. The overall picture for these studies indicates that the serious problems in higher education are not primarily institution-specific, but are generally typical problems related to national culture and values, which cannot be solved by local measures.

Indicators based on subjective evaluation, which are primarily qualified in the area of ‘Psychological well-being’, fit into the categories of the areas that rate objective values and are assessed at a comparable level. They do not visibly distort the results and their assessment provides information at the same level as objective indicators. The questions of the validated questionnaire also provide an opportunity to assess responses that give the perception of soft factors, which often cause serious difficulties, a realistic basis. Compared to previous, commonly used methods (Astor, 2018; Marks et al, 2006; OHPI, 2018; Sen, 2000; Weigel, 2015), this measurement method can be seen as a positive step and justifies the possibility of measuring happiness in quantitative terms. The multiplicity and diversity of questions posed here provide an opportunity to review and evaluate characteristics, which cannot be evaluated in other ways, and at the same time, they are especially important information for the management (these analytical results are beyond the present study).

As a brief overview of this was given in the theoretical chapter, the ‘happiness indexes’ based on satisfaction measurement, which are used in Western cultures, cover roughly the first area of the employee happiness index, ‘Psychological well-being’, (Pavot & Diener, 1993, 2008; Sen, 2000; Hektner et al., 2007; Ferrant, 2010; UNDP, 2010; Dyrbyl et al., 2010; OECD, 2011) in some cases, going beyond this framework in the direction of certain parameters of environmental protection and sustainability (Astor, 2018; Marks et al., 2006; OHPI, 2018; Weigel, 2015). Therefore, the solution developed for the business area of GNH provides an opportunity to evaluate employee happiness much more broadly and covering some additional areas (Zangmo et al., 2017) (thanks to the holistic approach that allows for an objective assessment combined with of the areas of organisational conditions). This confirms our answer to the first research question. Not only does the GNH of Business method lend itself to a holistic overview, but it also supports informed managerial decisions that aim to bring about improvement. It replaces earlier measurement methods and indicators that, when combined, can only provide a similarly comprehensive picture of an organisation's performance, the satisfaction of the human resources that contribute to it, and the happiness of the organisation as a whole.

Conclusions

The research objective has been achieved, proving that the Bhutanese logic, a calculation method based on the developed value measurement questionnaire, can be well adapted to the different cultural conditions in the country and provides informative results that can be immediately used in everyday decisions for all interested parties, both professional and non-professional. Answering the research questions demonstrates that the satisfaction and happiness of colleagues working in the faculties of economics in higher education institutions in a Central and Eastern European country, their organisational conditions and, as a result, the quality of education and student satisfaction can be improved through targeted measures. The measurement logic of the ‘GNH of Business’ provides an excellent opportunity for this.

As the overall picture points to a number of opportunities for improvement, the level of happiness of each institution, the problem areas can be identified individually and targeted institutional improvements can be initiated depending on management decisions. In addition, for issues that go beyond the institutional remit, intervention at government level is also required. This will allow the formulation of a national and institutional development strategy, the assessment of risks and a more precise planning of actions to seize opportunities. The reform of higher education is also a topical issue, given that a complete overhaul of higher education in the country under investigation was launched a few years ago. While the government has been trying to improve the situation and bring educational institutions into line with the market, the new situation is creating many new challenges for staff and managers alike. The ‘GNH of Business’ logic offers an excellent method for continuously testing these and taking targeted measures and decisions.

Limitations of the research

Limitations of the research include that in addition to the fact that all institutions in economics launch questionnaire surveys, where they increasingly rely on the answers and supportive behaviour of partner institutions, the helpfulness of the management (forwarding the questionnaires and motivating colleagues) manifested on a wide scale, but in more cases it cannot be explicitly assessed as supportive. Thus the answers fall short of representativeness; however, the obtained results reflect a realistic picture of the examined institutions. This is supported by the almost identical classifications in the examined areas given by the respondents of each institution. The other problem is, we could not find previous investigations which use the GNH of Business logic. In this case, we could not present comparisons with the results of earlier research (some investigations show theoretical-based results (Dendup et al., 2018) or result only of one pillar of the above-mentioned logic (Cooper & Bedford, 2017). As the survey was conducted during the Covid period, it is likely that staff responses were influenced by the situation at the time. However, this does not change the main objective of the results, which is to demonstrate the applicability of the method. It may merely shift the results obtained as a "by-product" of the research slightly, affecting psychological well-being and feelings of well-being.

The future research goal is the application of the method in business areas, which has been achieved in the meantime. The results have been partially evaluated, which will allow us to assess the level of happiness of local businesses and to compare them with each other. A further opportunity is to extend the study to neighbouring countries with similar cultural and religious conditions, thus ensuring further validation of the method and drawing attention to a method that may well outperform all existing evaluation solutions.