1. SMEU
  2. All Volumes and Issues
  3. Volume 7, Number 2, 2025
  4. Team Interaction as a Component of Company Staff Satisfaction

Team Interaction as a Component of Company Staff Satisfaction

SMEU.
2025;
Volume 7, Number 2
: pp. 106 - 118
https://doi.org/10.23939/smeu2025.02.106
Authors:
  1. Y. S. Sytnyk
1
Lviv Politechnic National University, Department of Human Resource Management and Administration

The main principles of the system of team interaction of enterprise personnel in modern conditions are determined and recommendations for its improvement are provided.
In the article, the author used the following methods: analysis and synthesis – to analyze modern trends and summarize their impact on the formation of the personnel satisfaction system; sociological method (survey) – to understand and structure the main aspects of the level of personnel satisfaction using the employee loyalty index of the enterprise; generalization – when formulating conclusions and recommendations.
The hypothesis that there is a direct relationship between team interaction and satisfaction of employees of enterprises for the implementation of an effective production and economic process is proven and it significantly affects the level of effectiveness of personnel motivation. Taking into account the results of the study, it is proposed to take a number of measures to improve the system of team interaction of enterprise personnel: create and maintain creative and innovative environments; develop among the enterprise personnel the skills to act with courage and perseverance; manage differences between different approaches; unleash the talents of individuals and professionals to implement team interactions and staff satisfaction; encourage a genuine clash of ideas and alternative thoughts.
The results of this study are of interest to business entities of all forms of ownership, in particular industrial enterprises, which seek to improve the system of team interaction of personnel engaged in the development of innovative projects, increase the level of staff satisfaction by implementing fruitful measures to improve working conditions and motivate employees in a competitive environment and martial law. At the same time, the results can help scientists of higher education institutions improve the tools for locating cooperation between employees with different professional skills, knowledge, experience and views on the problem.
This study highlights the specifics of determining the level of satisfaction of employees of an industrial enterprise among a number of structural divisions and provides a point assessment of certain factors that determine the overall level of staff satisfaction. Demonstrates the key task of all enterprises: to ensure the team interaction of a separate collective genius, formed from different parts of the genius of each individual employee working on a project or in the divisions of the enterprise. Provide recommendations to owners and managers of enterprises on achieving the appropriate level of staff satisfaction and team interaction through areas of improvement of organizational processes.

personnel
personnel management
loyalty
team interaction
staff satisfaction
evaluation
flexibility
safety
motivation
environment
cognition
  1. Bazaliysʹka N.P., Huk A.V. (2016). Formuvannya spryyatlyvoho sotsialʹno-psykholohichnoho klimatu v kolektyvi pidpryyemstva [Formation of a favorable socio-psychological climate in the enterprise team]. Visnyk ONU im. I.I. Mechnykova. Vol. 21, issue. 2. p. 56–60.
  2. Barkova K.O. (2023). Komandoutvorennya yak skladova formuvannya uspishnoho korporatyvnoho seredovyshcha [Team building as a component of forming a successful corporate environment]. Ukraïnsʹkyy̆ zhurnal prykladnoï ekonomiky ta tekhniky. Vol. 8. No. 4. p. 194–199.
  3. Holentovsʹka O.S. (2014). Ohlyad zarubizhnykh ta vitchyznyanykh pidkhodiv do problemy komandotvorennya [Review of foreign and domestic approaches to the problem of team building]. Nauka i osvita. 15. p. 24–30.
  4. Dashko I. (2021). Motyvatsiya personalu v systemi upravlinnya ekonomichnoyu efektyvnistyu trudovykh resursiv pidpryyemstva [Personnel motivation in the system of management of economic efficiency of labor resources of the enterprise]. Tavriysʹkyy naukovyy visnyk. № 10. p. 22–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32851/2708-0366/2021.10.3
  5. Zhyhaylo N.I. (2012). Rolʹ kerivnyka u formuvanni sotsialʹno-psykholohichnoho klimatu v kolektyvi [The role of the leader in the formation of the socio-psychological climate in the team]. URL: https://www.lvduvs.edu.ua/ documents_pdf/visnyky/nvsp/02_2012_1/12zhnikvk.pdf
  6. Karpyuk YU.YA. (2018). Spivvidnoshennya potreb, stymuliv, motyviv ta motyvuvannya u povedintsi lyudyny: aksiolohichnyy aspect [The relationship between needs, incentives, motives and motivation in human behavior: an axiological aspect]. Naukovyy visnyk MNU imeni V. O. Sukhomlynsʹkoho. Vol. 1 (19). p. 59–66.
  7. Kozhushko S.P. (2013). Sotsiolohichni aspekty problemy vzayemodiyi [Sociological aspects of the problem of interaction]. Pedahohichni nauky: teoriya, istoriya, innovatsiyni tekhnolohiyi. Vol. 1 (27). p. 372–379.
  8. Tymoshenko V. (2025). Otsinyuvannya modeley motyvatsiyi personalu ta yikhniy vplyv na produktyvnistʹ komandnoyi vzayemodiyi [Evaluation of personnel motivation models and their impact on the productivity of team interaction]. Zbirnyk naukovykh pratsʹ Derzhavnoho podatkovoho universytetu, Vol. (1), p. 72–78. https://doi.org/10. 32782/2617-5940.1.2025.11
  9. Fedoryshyna L., Hladun R., Fedoryshyn YU. (2024). Motyvatsiyne seredovyshche pidpryyemstva: sutnistʹ, vydy ta faktory formuvannya [Motivational environment of the enterprise: essence, types and factors of formation]. Stalyy rozvytok ekonomiky, Vol. (1(48), p. 47–55. https://doi.org/10.32782/2308-1988/2024-48-6
  10. Cherkasʹkyy A. (2024). Psykholohichni osoblyvosti komandnoyi vzayemodiyi v ekstremalʹnykh sytuatsiyakh [Psychological features of team interaction in extreme situations]. Visnyk Natsionalʹnoho universytetu oborony Ukrayiny, Vol. 77(1), p. 181–187. https://doi.org/10.33099/2617-6858-2024-77-1-181-187
  11. Yastrub O. (2014). Sutnisnyy analiz ponyattya “kulʹtura mizhosobystisnoyi vzayemodiyi” [Essential analysis of the concept of “culture of interpersonal interaction”]. Naukovyy visnyk Skhidnoyevropeysʹkoho natsionalʹno- ho universytetu imeni Lesi Ukrayinky. Vol. 8. p. 81–86.
  12. Baxi B., Atre D. (2024). Job Satisfaction: Understanding the Meaning, Importance, and Dimensions. Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research. Vol. 18, No. 2. p. 34–40
  13. Employee Net Promoter Score (eNPS). PeopleForce. Retrieced from:: https://peopleforce.io/uk/hr- glossary/employee-net-promoter-score
  14. Gura, N., & Veldbrekht, O. (2021). The job satisfaction questionnaire: its factor structure and psychometric characteristics. Psychological journal, 7(6), p. 7–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2021.7.6.1
  15. Wendy K. Smith and Marianne W. Lewis, (2011). “Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing,” Academy of Management Review 36, no. 2, p. 381–403.