Job satisfaction Job satisfaction describes how content an individual is with his or her job. The happier people are within their job, the more satisfied they are said to be. Job satisfaction is not the same as motivation, although it is clearly linked. Job design aims to enhance job satisfaction and performance, methods include job rotation, job enlargement and job enrichment. Other influences on satisfaction include the management style and culture, employee involvement, empowerment and autonomous work groups.
Job satisfaction is a very important attribute which is frequently measured by organizations. The most common way of measurement is the use of rating scales where employees report their reactions to their jobs. Questions relate to rate of pay, work responsibilities, variety of tasks, promotional opportunities the work itself and co-workers. Some questioners ask yes or no questions while others ask to rate satisfaction on 1-5 scale (where 1 represents “not at all satisfied” and 5 represents “extremely satisfied”). Definitions
Job satisfaction has been defined as a pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job; an affective reaction to one’s job; and an attitude towards one’s job. Weiss (2002) has argued that job satisfaction is an attitude but points out that researchers should clearly distinguish the objects of cognitive evaluation which are affect (emotion), beliefs and behaviours. This definition suggests that we form attitudes towards our jobs by taking into account our feelings, our beliefs, and our behaviors History One of the biggest preludes to the study of job satisfaction was the Hawthorne studies.
These studies (1924-1933), primarily credited to Elton Mayo of the Harvard Business School, sought to find the effects of various conditions (most notably illumination) on workers’ productivity. These studies ultimately showed that novel changes in work conditions temporarily increase productivity (called the Hawthorne Effect). It was later found that this increase resulted, not from the new conditions, but from the knowledge of being observed. This finding provided strong evidence that people work for purposes other than pay, which paved the way for researchers to investigate other factors in job satisfaction.
Scientific management (aka Taylorism) also had a significant impact on the study of job satisfaction. Frederick Winslow Taylor’s 1911 book, Principles of Scientific Management, argued that there was a single best way to perform any given work task. This book contributed to a change in industrial production philosophies, causing a shift from skilled labor and piecework towards the more modern approach of assembly lines and hourly wages. The initial use of scientific management by industries greatly increased productivity because workers were forced to work at a faster pace.
However, workers became exhausted and dissatisfied, thus leaving researchers with new questions to answer regarding job satisfaction. It should also be noted that the work of W. L. Bryan, Walter Dill Scott, and Hugo Munsterberg set the tone for Taylor’s work. Some argue that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory, a motivation theory, laid the foundation for job satisfaction theory. This theory explains that people seek to satisfy five specific needs in life – physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualization.
This model served as a good basis from which early researchers could develop job satisfaction theories. Job satisfaction can also be seen within the broader context of the range of issues which affect an individual’s experience of work, or their quality of working life. Job satisfaction can be understood in terms of its relationships with other key factors, such as general well-being, stress at work, control at work, home-work interface, and working conditions. Models of job satisfaction Affect Theory Edwin A. Locke’s Range of Affect Theory (1976) is arguably the most famous job satisfaction model.
The main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what one has in a job. Further, the theory states that how much one values a given facet of work (e. g. the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one becomes when expectations are/aren’t met. When a person values a particular facet of a job, his satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively (when expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who doesn’t value that facet.
To illustrate, if Employee A values autonomy in the workplace and Employee B is indifferent about autonomy, then Employee A would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy and less satisfied in a position with little or no autonomy compared to Employee B. This theory also states that too much of a particular facet will produce stronger feelings of dissatisfaction the more a worker values that facet. Dispositional Theory Another well-known job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional Theory Template:JacksonApril 2007.
It is a very general theory that suggests that people have innate dispositions that cause them to have tendencies toward a certain level of satisfaction, regardless of one’s job. This approach became a notable explanation of job satisfaction in light of evidence that job satisfaction tends to be stable over time and across careers and jobs. Research also indicates that identical twins have similar levels of job satisfaction. A significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory was the Core Self-evaluations Model, proposed by Timothy A.
Judge in 1998. Judge argued that there are four Core Self-evaluations that determine one’s disposition towards job satisfaction: self-esteem, general self-efficacy, locus of control, and neuroticism. This model states that higher levels of self-esteem (the value one places on his/her self) and general self-efficacy (the belief in one’s own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction. Having an internal locus of control (believing one has control over herhis own life, as opposed to outside forces having control) leads to higher job satisfaction.
Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction. [edit] Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) Frederick Herzberg’s Two factor theory (also known as Motivator Hygiene Theory) attempts to explain satisfaction and motivation in the workplace This theory states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by different factors – motivation and hygiene factors, respectively. An employee’s motivation to work is continually related to job satisfaction of a subordinate.
Motivation can be seen as an inner force that drives individuals to attain personal and organizational goals (Hoskinson, Porter, ; Wrench, p. 133). Motivating factors are those aspects of the job that make people want to perform, and provide people with satisfaction, for example achievement in work, recognition, promotion opportunities. These motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job, or the work carried out. Hygiene factors include aspects of the working environment such as pay, company policies, supervisory practices, and other working conditions.
While Hertzberg’s model has stimulated much research, researchers have been unable to reliably empirically prove the model, with Hackman & Oldham suggesting that Hertzberg’s original formulation of the model may have been a methodological artifact. Furthermore, the theory does not consider individual differences, conversely predicting all employees will react in an identical manner to changes in motivating/hygiene factors. Finally, the model has been criticised in that it does not specify how motivating/hygiene factors are to be measured. Job Characteristics Model
Hackman ; Oldham proposed the Job Characteristics Model, which is widely used as a framework to study how particular job characteristics impact on job outcomes, including job satisfaction. The model states that there are five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) which impact three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility for outcomes, and knowledge of the actual results), in turn influencing work outcomes (job satisfaction, absenteeism, work motivation, etc. . The five core job characteristics can be combined to form a motivating potential score (MPS) for a job, which can be used as an index of how likely a job is to affect an employee’s attitudes and behaviors—-. A meta-analysis of studies that assess the framework of the model provides some support for the validity of the JCM. Measuring job satisfaction There are many methods for measuring job satisfaction. By far, the most common method for collecting data regarding job satisfaction is the Likert scale (named after Rensis Likert).
Other less common methods of for gauging job satisfaction include: Yes/No questions, True/False questions, point systems, checklists, and forced choice answers. This data is typically collected using an Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) system. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI), created by Smith, Kendall, & Hulin (1969), is a specific questionnaire of job satisfaction that has been widely used. It measures one’s satisfaction in five facets: pay, promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the work itself. The scale is simple, participants answer either yes, no, or can’t decide (indicated by ‘? ) in response to whether given statements accurately describe one’s job. The Job in General Index is an overall measurement of job satisfaction. It is an improvement to the Job Descriptive Index because the JDI focuses too much on individual facets and not enough on work satisfaction in general. Other job satisfaction questionnaires include: the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), and the Faces Scale. The MSQ measures job satisfaction in 20 facets and has a long form with 100 questions (five items from each facet) and a short form with 20 questions (one item from each facet).
The JSS is a 36 item questionnaire that measures nine facets of job satisfaction. Finally, the Faces Scale of job satisfaction, one of the first scales used widely, measured overall job satisfaction with just one item which participants respond to by choosing a face. Factors effecting Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction is a multi-variable and indescribable concept. There are number of factors that influence job satisfaction of employees. These factors can be classified into two categories. They are a) Organizational and b) Personal variables. a) The organizational determinants of job satisfaction plays a very important role.
The employees spend major part of their time in organisation so there are number of organisational factors that determine job satisfaction of the employees. The job satisfaction in the organizations can be increased by organising and managing the organisational factors. The organisation determinants of job satisfaction are as follows:- i) Wages: Wage can be described as the amount of reward that a worker expects from the job. Wages are an instrument of fulfilling the needs as every worker expects to get an appropriate reward. The wages are supposed to be fair, reasonable and equitable.
A feeling of job satisfaction is felt by attaining fair and equitable rewards. ii) Nature of Work: The nature of work has significant impact on the job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is highly influenced by the nature of work. Employees are satisfied with job that involves intelligence, skills, abilities, challenges and scope for greater freedom. Job dissatisfaction arises with a feeling of boredom, poor variety of tasks, frustration and failures. iii) Working Conditions: Employees are highly motivated with good working conditions as they provide a feeling of safety, comfort and motivation.
On contrary, poor working conditions brings out a fear of bad health in employees. iv) Job Content: Factors like recognition, responsibility, advancement, achievement etc can be referred to as job content. A job that involves variety of tasks and less monotonous results delivers greater job satisfaction. A job that involves poor content produces job dissatisfaction. v) Organisational Level: The jobs that are at higher levels are viewed as prestigious, esteemed and opportunity for self-control. The employees that are working at higher level jobs express greater job satisfaction than the ones working at lower level jobs. i) Opportunities for Promotion: Promotion can be reciprocated as a significant achievement in the life. It promises and delivers more pay, responsibility, authority, independence and status. So, the opportunities for promotion determine the degree of satisfaction to the employees. vii) Work Group: There is a natural desire of human beings to interact with others and so existence of groups in organisations is a common observable fact. This characteristic results in formation of work groups at the work place. Isolated workers dislike their jobs. The work groups make use of a remarkable influence on the satisfaction of employees.
The satisfaction of an individual is dependent on largely on the relationship with the group members, group dynamics, group cohesiveness and his own need for affiliation. viii) Leadership Styles: The satisfaction level on the job can be determined by the leadership styles. Job satisfaction is greatly enhanced by democratic style of leadership. It is because democratic leaders promote friendship, respect and warmth relationships among the employees. On contrary, employees working under authoritarian and dictatorial leaders express low level of job satisfaction. ) The personal determinants also help a lot in maintaining the motivation and personal factors of the employees to work effectively and efficiently. Job satisfaction can be related to psychological factors and so numbers of personal factors determine the job satisfaction of the employees. They are as follows:- i) Personality: The personality of an individual can be determined by observing his individual psychological conditions. The factors that determine the satisfaction of individuals and his psychological conditions is perception, attitudes and learning. ii) Age: Age can be described as a noteworthy determinant of job satisfaction.
It is because younger age employees possessing higher energy levels are likely to be having more job satisfaction. In older age, the aspiration levels in employees increase. They feel completely dissatisfied in a state where they are unable to find their aspiration fulfilled, iii) Education: Education plays a significant determinant of job satisfaction as it provides an opportunity for developing one’s personality. Education develops and improvises individual wisdom and evaluation process. The highly educated employees can understand the situation and asses it positively as they possess persistence, rationality and thinking power. v) Gender Differences: The gender and race of the employees plays important determinants of Job satisfaction. Women, the fairer sex, are more likely to be satisfied than their male counterpart even if they are employed in small jobs. The job satisfaction can also be determined by other factors like learning, skill autonomy, job characteristics, unbiased attitude of management, social status etc. It is important for managers to consider all these factors in assessing the satisfaction of the employees and increasing their level of job satisfaction. Relationships and practical implications
Job Satisfaction can be an important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and a predictor of work behaviours such as organizational citizenship, absenteeism, and turnover. Further, job satisfaction can partially mediate the relationship of personality variables and deviant work behaviors. One common research finding is that job satisfaction is correlated with life satisfaction. This correlation is reciprocal, meaning people who are satisfied with life tend to be satisfied with their job and people who are satisfied with their job tend to be satisfied with life.
However, some research has found that job satisfaction is not significantly related to life satisfaction when other variables such as nonwork satisfaction and core self-evaluations are taken into account. An important finding for organizations to note is that job satisfaction has a rather tenuous correlation to productivity on the job. This is a vital piece of information to researchers and businesses, as the idea that satisfaction and job performance are directly related to one another is often cited in the media and in some non-academic management literature.
A recent meta-analysis found an average uncorrected correlation between job satisfaction and productivity to be r=. 18; the average true correlation, corrected for research artifacts and unreliability, was r=. 30. Further, the meta-analysis found that the relationship between satisfaction and performance can be moderated by job complexity, such that for high-complexity jobs the correlation between satisfaction and performance is higher (? =. 52) than for jobs of low to moderate complexity (? . 29). Job Satisfaction also high relationship with intention to quit. It is found in many research that Job Satisfaction can lead to Intention to Stay / Quit in an organization (Kim et al. , 1996). Recent research has also shown that Intention to Quit can have effect like poor performance orientation, organizational deviance, and poor organizational citizenship behaviours (Krishnan, Sandeep. , and Singh. , Manjari, 2010). In short, the relationship of satisfaction to productivity is ot necessarily straightforward and can be influenced by a number of other work-related constructs, and the notion that “a happy worker is a productive worker” should not be the foundation of organizational decision-making. With regard to job performance, employee personality may be more important than job satisfaction. The link between job satisfaction and performance is thought to be a spurious relationship; instead, both satisfaction and performance are the result of personality. Survey Objectives
The primary objective of the employee satisfaction survey is to provide ABC with a means to identify key employee concerns that may presently exist within the organisation. More specifically, the objectives of the employee satisfaction survey are: • To measure employee attitudes across a range of key cultural and performance dimensions, • To align management and employee expectations in order to facilitate greater productivity within the workplace environment, • To allow workplace satisfaction to be measured (or benchmarked) over time.
