Background & Objectives: In the current complex and dynamic environment, traditional educational systems face increasing challenges that require continuous adaptation and essential changes. Consequently, attention to employee wellbeing has become critical for fostering motivation, acceptance of change, and loyalty among staff. Employee commitment is considered a unique competitive advantage, yet it is difficult to sustain amid evolving psychological contracts, global competition, and socioeconomic uncertainties. Amid increasing global competition and mounting pressures on employees in educational institutions, adopting wellbeing–oriented human resource management (HRM) practices has become essential to support employees and meet organizational performance expectations. Despite several scattered studies on employee wellbeing in Iran, wellbeing–oriented HRM has not yet gained recognition as a distinct managerial approach in the scientific literature or among educational administrators. Therefore, the present study employed a qualitative grounded theory approach to develop a conceptual model of well–being–oriented HRM in the education system.

Methods: The present study was qualitative. The qualitative phase was based on Strauss and Corbin’s Grounded Theory (1990) and employed a paradigmatic model to structure data analysis. The research population consisted of administrators and deputy directors in the Department of Education, and faculty members from the provinces of Lorestan and Kermanshah, Iran, in 2024. A total of 35 participants were selected using purposive and snowball sampling, guided by the theoretical saturation principle. The inclusion criteria for university faculty members were as follows: holding at least the rank of Assistant Professor in Educational Management, Human Resource Management, Human Resource Education and Development, Higher Education Management and Planning, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, or Educational Psychology and having published peer–reviewed or ISI–indexed articles in the fields of educational management, human resource management, human resource development, positive psychology, or related areas. The inclusion criteria for administrators and deputy directors in the Department of Education were as follows: having at least five years of experience in a managerial position within the Lorestan Provincial Department of Education; and currently serving as, or having previously served as, the head of one of the educational centers or offices affiliated with the Lorestan Provincial Department of Education.

Data were collected through semi–structured interviews, and their validity was confirmed via triangulation, while reliability was assessed with an inter–coder agreement coefficient of 0.84. The researchers developed the interview questions. Each interview with the experts and specialists lasted approximately 30–45 minutes. Some interviews were conducted face–to–face at a prearranged time and location, while others were carried out electronically. During the interviews, in addition to taking notes on the main points, all interviews were audio–recorded to facilitate subsequent review and ensure accurate documentation of the data. It should be noted that all participants were informed that the interviews would be audio–recorded, and their informed consent was obtained in accordance with ethical principles. Data analysis was conducted using open, axial, and selective coding in MAXQDA–10.

Results: The analysis revealed 121 initial concepts, grouped into 30 subcategories and 6 main categories. The causal conditions category, “support and minimization of organizational blockages,” included meritocracy, managerial support, effective supervision, attention to employee development, decentralization, and anti–corruption practices. The core phenomenon, “wellbeing–oriented HRM,” encompassed job security, training, development, and learning opportunities; job quality; information exchange; and managerial communication. The intervening factors category, “organizational dynamism,” comprised continuous progress perception, purposeful career pathways, extra–role behaviors, and knowledge sharing within the organization. Contextual factors, identified as “organizational climate,” included a sense of participation, accountability, shared goals, and cooperative spirit. Strategies, described as “organizational positivity,” included organizational socialization, justice, leadership skills, the creation of shared identity, effective communication, reward systems, and a sense of belonging. Finally, the outcomes category encompassed organizational loyalty as the primary result of implementing wellbeing–oriented HRM. Based on these analyses, a paradigmatic model illustrating the interrelations among causal conditions, core phenomena, contextual and intervening factors, strategies, and outcomes was developed to guide wellbeing–focused HRM in educational settings.

Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, educational managers and policymakers can use the indicators and components identified to establish wellbeing–oriented human resource management.