SUPPLEMENT FOR SIP REPORT

Literature Review on Job Satisfaction

SEPTEMBER 1, 2013
MOHAMMAD SALIM Roll #: 11294

Job Satisfaction
Definitions: Job satisfaction refers to how well a job provides fulfillment of a need or want, or how well it serves as a source or means of enjoyment. Job satisfaction is the degree to which individuals feel positively or negatively about their jobs. Job satisfaction is in regard to ones feelings or state-of-mind regarding the nature of their work. Job satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of factors, eg, the quality of ones relationship with their supervisor, the quality of the physical environment in which they work, degree of fulfillment in their work, etc. Job satisfaction does not seem to reduce absence, turnover and perhaps accident rates. Robert L. Kahn Job satisfaction is a general attitude towards ones job: the difference between the amount of reward workers receive and the amount they believe they should receive. P. Robbins Job satisfaction defines as The amount of over all positive affect (or feeling) that individuals have toward their jobs. Hugh J. Arnold and Daniel C. Job satisfaction is the amount of pleasure or contentment associated with a job. If you like your job intensely, you will experience high job satisfaction. If you dislike your job intensely, you will experience job dissatisfaction. Feldman

Employee satisfaction: Employee satisfaction has always been an important issue for physicians. After all, high levels of absenteeism and staff turnover can affect your bottom line, as temps, recruitment and retraining take their toll. But few practices ( in fact, few organizations) have made job satisfaction a top priority, perhaps because they have failed to understand the significant opportunity that lies in front of them. Satisfied employees tend to be more productive, creative and committed to their employers, and recent studies have shown a direct correlation between staff satisfaction and patient satisfaction, Family physicians who can create work environment that demands quality and cost efficiency. Whats more, physicians, may even discover that by creating a positive workplace f or their employees, theyve increased their own job satisfaction as well.
1

Importance of job satisfaction Investigated by several disciplines such as psychology, sociology, economics and management sciences, job satisfaction is a frequently studied subject in work and organisational literature. This is mainly due to the fact that many experts believe that job satisfaction trends can affect labour market behaviour and influence work productivity, work effort, employee absenteeism and staff turnover. Moreover, job satisfaction is considered a strong predictor of overall individual well-being (Diaz-Serrano and Cabral Vieira, 2005), as well as a good predictor of intentions or decisions of employees to leave a job (Gazioglu and Tansel, 2002). Beyond the research literature and studies, job satisfaction is also important in everyday life. Organisations have significant effects on the people who work for them and some of those effects are reflected in how people feel about their work (Spector, 1997). This makes job satisfaction an issue of substantial importance for both employers and employees. As many studies suggest, employers benefit from satisfied employees as they are more likely to profit from lower staff turnover and higher productivity if their employees experience a high level of job satisfaction. However, employees should also be happy in their work, given the amount of time they have to devote to it throughout their working lives (Nguyen, Taylor and Bradley, 2003a). Job satisfaction is important in its own right as a part of social welfare, and this (simple) taxonomy [of a good job] allows a start to be made on such questions as In what respects are older workers jobs better than those of younger workers? (and vice versa), Who has the good jobs? and Are good jobs being replaced by bad jobs?. In addition, measures of job quality seem to be useful predictors of future labour market behaviour. Workers decisions about whether to work or not, what kind of job to accept or stay in, and how hard to work are all likely to depend in part upon the workers subjective evaluation of their work, in other words on their job satisfaction. (Clark, 1998) Concept of job satisfaction Job satisfaction has been defined in several different ways and a definitive designation for the term is unlikely to materialise. A simple or general way to define it therefore is as an attitudinal variable: Job satisfaction is simply how people feel about their jobs and different aspects of their jobs. It is the extent to which people like (satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs. (Spector, 1997) Experience has shown that there are basic and universal human needs, and that, if an individuals needs are fulfilled in their current situation, then that individual will be happy.
2

This framework postulates that job satisfaction depends on the balance between work-role inputs - such as education, working time, effort - and work-role outputs - wages, fringe benefits, status, working conditions, intrinsic aspects of the job. If work-role outputs (pleasures) increase relative to work -role inputs (pains), then job satisfaction wil l increase (Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza, 2000). Other theorists (e.g. Rose, 2001) have viewed job satisfaction as a bi-dimensional concept consisting of intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction dimensions. Intrinsic sources of satisfaction depend on the individual characteristics of the person, such as the ability to use initiative, relations with supervisors, or the work that the person actually performs; these are symbolic or qualitative facets of the job. Extrinsic sources of satisfaction are situational and depend on the environment, such as pay, promotion, or job security; these are financial and other material rewards or advantages of a job. Both extrinsic and intrinsic job facets should be represented, as equally as possible, in a composite measure of overall job satisfaction.

Motivation is described as one of the most pivotal concerns of modern organizational research. Just like anything that is considered pivotal, motivation influences many other important issues within an organization: employee performances, employee retention, creativyt and problem solving and other actions if we combine motivation with other measures such as commitment. No wonder, motivational studies are the most reasearched topics. Managers need to understand and create gourp motivation and design work context that create and maintain motivation which in turn lead to job satisfaction, productivity and profitability.

Theories of job satisfaction

The chapter presents two theories of job satisfaction, variance theory and the model of job characteristics. Variance theory is based on a simple subjective idea: if you want x from your work then you are satisfied to the extent that it provides you with x. The major problem with this theory is defining what people want from their work. The job characteristic model suggests the causes of job satisfaction are objective characteristics. Hackman and Oldham (1975) suggested that jobs differ in the extent to which they involve five core dimensions: 1. Skill variety. 2. Task identity. 3. Task significance. 4. Autonomy. 5. Task feedback. They suggest that if jobs are designed in a way that increases the presence of these core characteristics three critical psychological states can occur in employees: 1. Experienced meaningfulness of work. 2. Experienced responsibility for work outcomes. 3. Knowledge of results of work activities. According to Hackman and Oldham, when these critical psychological states are experienced, work motivation and job satisfaction will be high.

Other Theories of job satisfaction

Affect Theory Edwin A. Lockes 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/arent 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 doesnt 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. 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 ones 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 Selfevaluations Model, proposed by Timothy A. Judge in 1998. Judge argued that there are four Core Self-evaluations that determine ones 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 ones own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction. Having an internal locus of control (believing one has control over her\his own life, as opposed to outside forces having control) leads to higher job satisfaction. Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction.

Correlates of job satisfaction

As well as the theories above, there have also been attempts to establish whether specific variables such as gender, age, personality or occupational status are predictive of job satisfaction. Despite the findings presented in chapter 18 regarding gender and employment, women report similar levels of job satisfaction to men. However, there is evidence that job characteristics have a different impact on men and women. There is growing evidence that there is a relationship between age and job satisfaction but not linear one. Age itself rather than the variables associated with it have a direct impact on job satisfaction. Variables such as socio economic status may also cause different groups of workers to construct different meanings as to what constitutes a satisfactory job.

Behavioural correlates of job satisfaction

The behavioural correlates of job satisfaction should be higher work performance, lower absenteeism and lower staff turnover. However, research has failed to However, research has failed to establish a strong direct link between job satisfaction and workplace behaviour. Job satisfaction and performance are relatively independent of each other. This is explained firstly that in many jobs variations in satisfaction cannot lead to variations in productivity (machine work) and secondly where correlations do occur they may be spurious in that both may be associated with other factors.

Connection job motivation- job performance- job satisfaction

The issue of job satisfaction and the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance and between job motivation and job performance has been a constant concern for researchers but also for practitioners. There have been, over time, different views on satisfaction and its role in obtaining job performance. During the 1950s, is considered that satisfaction is the direct and immediate cause of the job performance. Today, thanks to the evolution of society and science, it is considered that although satisfaction is related to performance, it is only one of its possible causes. G. Johns made some comments on this issue that come to clarify this phenomenon: "job satisfaction refers to a collection of the workers attitudes towards their work," showing two related concepts: satisfaction facets - the tendency of an employee to be more or less satisfied with various facets of his work (the work itself, salary, recognition, working conditions, colleagues, organizational politics, etc..) and overall satisfaction "- an average or a total attitudes that individuals have toward different facets of their work. Once accepted that satisfaction has several facets, researchers have questioned their count, making numerous studies in this regard. They have shown that there are between five and twenty facets of job satisfaction and subsequently, their number was limited to five: the work itself, pay, supervision, co-workers, promotion. Determining the relationship between motivation and satisfaction and between satisfaction and performance is still not a complete agreement among experts, given the complexity of the phenomena being studied. Over time, the relationship between motivation and satisfaction was addressed by organizational managerial psychology from multiple perspectives. The first belongs to authors considered that only motivation leads to behaviour change, representing the impulse in this respect, while satisfaction no involves such change, it is a subjective state of pleasure. It is thus inferred that only motivation affects work performance, but not the satisfaction. Research has shown a clear link between satisfaction and productive behaviour. Other authors insist on the relationship between motivation and satisfaction, which is presented unilaterally, only from the motivation to satisfaction, which is considered as an effect of motivation. Human relations movement generalize inverse relationship from satisfaction to motivation, considering satisfaction as the direct cause of motivation. Each of the three perspectives emphasizes one aspect of the phenomena analyzed without explaining the interaction between them and without regard to their unit. In the literature of our country, a clear approach to the problem of interaction between motivation and satisfaction is given by Professor Mielu Zlate witch shows that: - The Status of satisfaction or dissatisfaction is an indicator of motivation; - Motivation and satisfaction appear in a double capacity: cause and effect which means that motivation leads to satisfaction and vice versa; - Both motivation and satisfaction relate to job performance and they can influence it either positively or negatively; the satisfaction obtained as a result of the participation of individuals in organizational life is not only an individual problem but also one of their
6

organizational repercussions on its; the influence of motivation and satisfaction on job performance is essential for managers to pay particular attention of these elements. The issue of the relationship between satisfaction and performance is also at least as controversial as the issues discussed above with respect to these phenomena. In connection with this relationship existed in the literature, over time, at least three points of view which held that: a) satisfaction causes performance; b) performance causes satisfaction; c) rewards are involved between satisfaction and performance. The first and second terms have not been confirmed by empirical research, they actually demonstrating that satisfied workers are not more productive than dissatisfied. This led to the hypothesis that the performance when it is followed by rewards, causes satisfaction. Porter and Lawler showed that satisfaction does not lead to job performance and job performance not lead to satisfaction unless certain conditions are met. Thus, employees performances lead to extrinsic or intrinsic rewards. The rewards themselves do not lead to the emergence of satisfaction, but only if they are perceived as fair in relation to the effort and to the rewards of others. Therefore, the rewards perceived as fair, resulting in drivers of employee satisfaction to make a new effort, to obtain new achievements. The conclusion reached by researchers is that "job satisfaction and job performance are virtually unrelated, a significant relationship only emerges when considering the role of rewards and the circumstances in which they are granted."We believe that this view is quite real and can be verified by each of us. The implication of this conclusion is very important for the organization management and it is about ensuring a rigorous results assessment and rewards based on fairness, transparency, openness, leading to fair rewards for employees, coupled with the results obtained. Experts have questioned the type of relationship existing between job satisfaction and job performance. Between the two variables there is a divergent relationship, or a convergent relationship? Thus, there are some researchers who claim that there is a negative, divergent relationship between the two variables, which can be explained as follows: increased productivity (that is, high performance) can be achieved only by increasing human strain over the accepted level for a human being. This means that obtaining performance would result in lower satisfaction. In this respect, increased job satisfaction could be obtained by decreasing productivity and thus, economic profitability. The research reached the following conclusion: divergence or convergence of two factors, job satisfaction and job performance, is not a matter of principle, but depends on the methods of work organization, social and psychological conditions in the organization, which means that in some circumstances the two factors are actually divergent while in the others circumstances they are converging. Thus, the thesis of divergence between job satisfaction and job performance is valid in exploited labour conditions, conducted in a socio-cultural environment in which the people and the quality of human life have a lower value and in the organizations that use predominantly extrinsic and negative forms of motivation.
7

The thesis of convergence is valid in organizations that promote employees p articipation, cooperation and use complex and varied forms of motivation. Relationship of convergence between job satisfaction and job performance is much higher if the work is complex, involving a high degree of responsibility, unless simple work, repetitive, poorly qualified. The issues presented in this section lead us to conclude that the connection between job motivation, job satisfaction and job performance is not a linear connection or a constant connection and must be interpreted nuanced, depending on the conditions under which it manifests itself. This indicates the importance of work environment in increase both performance and satisfaction, and in terms of management, the need to develop an organizational culture that promotes values, creativity, fairness and justice, aimed to obtain both the organizational performance and employee satisfaction. These conclusions are verified with a survey conducted among trade enterprises in the Romanian Western Region, and on this basis we will try to outline a motivational system adapted to trade specific business.

Factors affecting employee satisfaction: 1. Achievement 2. Recognition 3. Work itself 4. Responsibility 5. Advancement 6. Personal growth 7. Company policy and administration 8. Supervision 9. Relationship with supervisor 10. Work conditions 11. Salary 12. Relationship with peers 13. Personal life 14. Relationship with subordinates 15. Status 16. Security

Components of job satisfaction

Causes of Job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction

Since people tend to be evaluative, they look at their work experiences in terms of liking or disliking and develop feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction regarding their job, as well as the organization in which they work (Jex, 2002). There are many probable influences that affect how favorably an individual appraises his or her job: specifically, an individuals attitude toward his or her job. Through years of extensive research, I/O psychologists have identified numerous variables that seem to contribute to either job satisfaction or organizational commitment (Glisson & Durick, 1988). To explain the development of job satisfaction, researchers have taken three common approaches: job characteristics, social information processing (organizational characteristics), and dispositional (worker characteristics) (Glisson & Durick, 1988; Jex, 2002). Job Characteristics In relation to the job characteristics approach, research has revealed that the nature of an individuals job or the characteristics of the organization that the individual works for predominantly determines job satisfaction (Jex, 2002). According to Hackman and Oldham (1980) a job characteristic is an aspect of a job that generates ideal conditions for high levels of motivation, satisfaction, and performance. Furthermore, Hackman and
9

Oldham (1980) proposed five core job characteristics that all jobs should contain: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. Hackman and Oldham (1980) also defined four personal and work outcomes: internal work motivation, growth satisfaction, general satisfaction, and work effectiveness. These characteristics have been added to the more popular dimensions of job satisfaction assessment: the work itself, pay, promotional opportunities, supervision, and co-worker relations (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). A common premise in research of the effects of job circumstances on job satisfaction is that individuals determine job satisfaction by comparing what they are currently receiving from the job and what they would like to or believe that they should receive (Jex, 2002). For example, if an employee is receiving an annual salary of $45,000 and believes that he or she should be receiving a salary of $43,000, then he or she will experience satisfaction; however, if the employee believes that he or she should be receiving $53,000, then he or she will feel dissatisfaction. This comparison would apply to each job facet including: skill level, seniority, promotional opportunities, supervision, etc. (Jex, 2002). According to Locke (1976), this process becomes complex since the importance of work facets differs for each individual. For example, one employee may feel that pay rate is extremely important while another may feel that social relationships are more important. To explain the effects of these differences, Locke (1976) put forward the ideas of the range of affect theory. The hypothesis of this theory is that employees weigh facets differently when assessing job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). Consequently, this leads to an individual measure of satisfaction or dissatisfaction when expectations are or are not met. For example, the job satisfaction of an employee who places extreme importance on pay would be positively impacted if he or she receives a salary within expectation. Conversely, his or her level of pay would minimally impact the job satisfaction of an employee who places little importance on pay.

10

Job Satisfaction Model Social information processing (organizational characteristics) Based mainly on Festingers (1954) Social Comparison Theory, Jex (2002) explains that during social information processing, employees look to coworkers to make sense of and develop attitudes about their work environment. In other words, if employees see that their co-workers are positive and satisfied then they will most likely be satisfied; however, if their co-workers are negative and dissatisfied then the employee will most likely become dissatisfied as well. Accordingly, organizations are counseled that new hires can become tainted during the socialization process if they are placed around employees who are dissatisfied (Jex, 2002). Although laboratory studies have found that social-information has a prevailing impact on job satisfaction and characteristic perceptions, organizational tests have been less supportive (Jex & Spector, 1989). Weiss and Shaw conducted a study where the subjects viewed a training video where assembly line workers either made positive or negative comments about their jobs. The subjects who viewed the video were then given the opportunity to perform the job. The study found that the subjects who were shown the positive video enjoyed performing the job tasks more than the subjects who viewed the negative tape (Aamondt, 2009).

11

Mirolli, Henderson and Hills (1998) also conducted a similar study. In this study, the subjects performed a task with two experimenters who were pretending to be other subjects (the study referred to them as confederates). In one condition, positive comments were made by the confederates about the job and how much they enjoyed it. In the second condition, the confederates made negative comments about the job and how much they disliked it. In the control condition, no positive or negative comments were made regarding the job. The actual subjects exposed to the confederates who made positive comments rate the job tasks as more enjoyable than the subjects exposed to the negative comments by the confederates. This further supports social information processing theory (Aamondt,2009). Generally, the research on social information processing theory supports the idea that social environment does have an effect on employees attitudes and behaviors (Aamondt, 2009, p.374). As an application of social information processing theory, an IT company in Germany, Netzwerk, implemented rules in their contracts. Employees who work at this company must sign a contract agreeing not to whine or complain. They have even fired employees for excessive whining (Aamondt, 2009). Dispositional (worker characteristics) Internal disposition is the basis of the latest method to explaining job satisfaction and hints that some people are inclined to be satisfied or dissatisfied with their work no matter the nature of the job or the organizational environment (Jex, 2002). More simply, some people are genetically positive in disposition (the glass half full), whereas others are innately negative in disposition (the glass half empty). For instance, a study of twins who were reared apart (same genetic characteristics but different experiences) found that 30 percent of inconsistency in satisfaction was accredited to genetic factors (Arvey, Bouchard, Segal, & Abraham, 1989). Furthermore, although individuals change jobs and employers, individual disposition has been shown to be consistent by the use of survey results on job satisfaction (Staw & Ross, 1985). Additionally, Staw, Bell, and Clausen (1986) also found that adolescent evaluations of affective disposition were correlated with adult job satisfaction for as many as forty years later. Many years of research has been conducted on the dis-positional source of job satisfaction and has presented strong evidence that job satisfaction, to some extent, is based on disposition (Judge & Larsen, 2001). Dis-positional affect is the predisposition to experience related emotional moods over time (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2008). Accordingly, this approach assumes that an employees attitude about his or her job originates from an internal (mental) state. Positive affect is a predisposition favorable to positive emotional experience, whereas negative affect is a predisposition to experience a wide array of negative emotions (Watson, Clark, & Carey, 1988). Positive
12

affective people feel enthusiastic, active, alert, and optimistic (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). On the contrary, negative affective people feel anger, contempt, disgust, guilt, fear, and nervousness (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). There is also strong evidence supporting disposition causing job satisfaction from a Social Cognitive aspect as well. Causation through disposition indicates that job satisfaction can be determined by an individual's general overall outlook. In psychology, Cognitive Theory of Depression states that individuals thought processes and perceptions can be a source of unhappiness. Further, the automated thoughts and processes (Beck, 1987) resulting from irrational and dysfunctional thinking perpetuate emotions of depression and unhappiness in individuals. Judge and Locke (1992) examine these concepts in detail. They discuss cognitive processes like perfectionism, overgeneralization, and dependence on others as causation for depression leading to unhappiness. They claim that subjective well-being resulting from an affective disposition leads to individuals experiencing information recall regarding their job. In short, happy individuals tend to store and evaluate job information differently than unhappy individuals do. This type of recollection indicates that job satisfaction can be influenced by subjective well-being. Tait, Padgett, and Baldwin (1989) performed a meta-analytic review discovering an average correlation between job and life satisfaction to be .44, which supports the theory of a dispositional effect on job satisfaction. In addition, Howard and Bray (1988) determined through a study they performed on AT&T managers that motives such as ambition and desire to get ahead serve as some of the strongest predictors for advancement. Also, Bandura (1986) states that individual's aspirations become their standards of self-satisfaction indicating that those with high goals, theoretically, should be harder to satisfy than people with low goals. This would indicate that a high level of ambition resulting from high standards can point to a lower satisfaction as an end result. In addition, it is oftentimes the case that unsatisfied workers are highly ambitious but unhappy as a result of their inability to be promoted within an organization. For this reason, ambition can negatively influence job satisfaction. However, Judge and Locke caution that dysfunctional thinking is not singularly responsible for dispositional factors affecting job satisfaction. They mention self-esteem, locus of control, self-efficacy, intelligence, and ambition as well. All three of the above-mentioned causes have been found to contribute to job satisfaction; however, researchers have not conducted simultaneous comparison of all three of these approaches (Baker, 2004). Job characteristics have been shown to impact job satisfaction (Baker, 2004). Recent studies on social informational processing have found that leadership actions influence job satisfaction (Baker, 2004). Various research findings have indicated that a relationship between disposition and job satisfaction does in fact exist. For instance, Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) advocate that emotionally significant procedures at work may be influenced by disposition, which in turn influences job satisfaction. Job characteristics have been favored in research (Thomas, Bubholtz, &
13

Winklespecht, 2004); however, less research has been conducted on the dis-positional approach, since it is fairly new (Coutts & Gruman, 2005).

Facets of job satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). Life Satisfaction Life satisfaction is often considered separately from job satisfaction with regard to productivity in the workplace, but as the majority of this research is correlational, it is beneficial to explore potential relationships between these two factors themselves rather
14

than strictly with regard to performance. Research suggests there is in fact a significant relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction, with a correlation of .44 (based on a meta analysis of 34 studies with a combined sample size of 19,811). (Tait et al., 1989) With this relationship being correlational, causation cannot be determined, though it is suggested that the nature of the relationship is reciprocal or bi-directional. (Judge et al., 1993) In other words, life satisfaction may positively influence job satisfaction, and job satisfaction will also positively influence life satisfaction. Conversely, some research suggests that life satisfaction often precedes and is a good predictor of job satisfaction-some directionality (Judge et al., 1993). Whichever the case may be, it cannot be ignored that there is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction based on correlational research (Jones, 2006). Other Factors It is difficult to establish all the antecedents leading towards job satisfaction. However, an additional construct that suggests a positive correlation to job satisfaction not yet discussed is engagement. In a meta-analysis, the correlation between job satisfaction and engagement is .22 (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002). Stirling (2008) notes that 20 percent of engaged individuals do 80 percent of the work. Therefore, it is vital to continue to cultivate job satisfaction among these highly productive individuals.

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 ones satisfaction in five facets: pay, promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the work itself. The scale is simple, participants answer either ye s, no, or cant decide (indicated by ?) in response to whether given statements accurately describe ones 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
15

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.

Job satisfaction and emotions Mood and emotions while working are the raw materials which cumulate to form the affective element of job satisfaction. Moods tend to be longer lasting but often weaker states of uncertain origin, while emotions are often more intense, short-lived and have a clear object or cause. There is some evidence in the literature that state moods are related to overall job satisfaction. Positive and negative emotions were also found to be significantly related to overall job satisfaction. Frequency of experiencing net positive emotion will be a better predictor of overall job satisfaction than will intensity of positive emotion when it is experienced. Emotion regulation and emotion labor are also related to job satisfaction. Emotion work (or emotion management) refers to various efforts to manage emotional states and displays. Emotion regulation includes all of the conscious and unconscious efforts to increase, maintain, or decrease one or more components of an emotion. Although early studies of the consequences of emotional labor emphasized its harmful effects on workers, studies of workers in a variety of occupations suggest that the consequences of emotional labor are not uniformly negative. It was found that suppression of unpleasant emotions decreases job satisfaction and the amplification of pleasant emotions increases job satisfaction. The understanding of how emotion regulation relates to job satisfaction concerns two models:
1. Emotional dissonance. Emotional dissonance is a state of discrepancy between public displays of emotions and internal experiences of emotions, that often follows the process of emotion regulation. Emotional dissonance is associated with high emotional exhaustion, low organizational commitment, and low job satisfaction. 2. Social interaction model. Taking the social interaction perspective, workers emotion regulation might beget responses from others during interpersonal encounters that subsequently impact their own job satisfaction. For example: The accumulation of favorable responses to displays of pleasant emotions might positively affect job satisfaction performance of emotional labor that produces desired outcomes could increase job satisfaction.

16

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 non-work satisfaction and core self-evaluations are taken into account. 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.

17

Psychological Keys to Job Satisfaction

Do you get a pleasant satisfied feeling after a hard day at work?

If some job satisfaction surveys are to be believed then as many as a third of us are considering a change of job. Clearly many are finding it hard to get that feeling of satisfaction from work. Job satisfaction is important not just because it boosts work performance but also because it increases our quality of life. Many people spend so much time at work that when it becomes dissatisfying, the rest of their life soon follows. Everyone's job is different but here are 10 factors that psychologists regularly find are important in how satisfied people are with their jobs. 1. Little hassles If you ask doctors what is the worst part of their jobs, what do you think they say? Carrying out difficult, painful procedures? Telling people they've only got months to live? No, it's something that might seem much less stressful: administration. We tend to downplay day-to-day irritations, thinking we've got bigger fish to fry. But actually people's job satisfaction is surprisingly sensitive to daily hassles. It might not

18

seem like much but when it happens almost every day and it's beyond our control, it hits job satisfaction hard. This category is one of the easiest wins for boosting employee satisfaction. Managers should find out about those little daily hassles and address themyour employees will love you for it. 2. Perception of fair pay Whatever your job, for you to be satisfied the pay should be fair. The bigger the difference between what you think you should earn and what you do earn, the less satisfied you'll be. The important point here is it's all about perception. If you perceive that other people doing a similar job get paid about the same as you then you're more likely to be satisfied with your job than if you think they're getting more than you. 3. Achievement People feel more satisfied with their job if they've achieved something. In some jobs achievements are obvious, but for others they're not. As smaller cogs in larger machines it may be difficult to tell what we're contributing. That's why the next factor can be so important... 4. Feedback There's nothing worse than not knowing whether or not you're doing a good job. When it comes to job satisfaction, no news is bad news. Getting negative feedback can be painful but at least it tells you where improvements can be made. On the other hand positive feedback can make all the difference to how satisfied people feel. 5. Complexity and variety People generally find jobs more satisfying if they are more complex and offer more variety. People seem to like complex (but not impossible) jobs, perhaps because it pushes them more. Too easy and people get bored. To be satisfied people need to be challenged a little and they need some variety in the tasks they carry out. It sounds easy when put like that but many jobs offer neither complexity nor variety.

19

6. Control You may have certain tasks you have to do, but how you do them should be up to you. The more control people perceive in how they carry out their job, the more satisfaction they experience. If people aren't given some control, they will attempt to retake it by cutting corners, stealing small amounts or finding other ways to undermine the system. Psychologists have found that people who work in jobs where they have little latitude at every level find their work very stressful and consequently unsatisfying. 7. Organisational support Workers want to know their organisation cares about them: that they are getting something back for what they are putting in. This is primarily communicated through things like how bosses treat us, the kinds of fringe benefits we get and other subtle messages. If people perceive more organisational support, they experience higher job satisfaction. Remember: it's not just whether the organisation is actually being supportive, it's whether it appears that way. The point being that appearances are really important here. If people don't perceive it, then for them it might as well not exist. That's why great managers need a politician's touch. 8. Work-home overflow Low job satisfaction isn't only the boss' or organisation's fault, sometimes it's down to home-life. Trouble at home breeds trouble at the office. Some research, though, suggests that trouble at the office is more likely to spill over into the family domain compared with the other way around (Ford et al., 2007). Either way finding ways of distancing yourself from work while at home are likely to protect you against job stressors (Sonnentag et al., 2010). 9. Honeymoons and hangovers Job honeymoons and hangovers are often forgotten by psychologists but well-known to employees. People experience honeymoon periods after a month or two in a new job when their satisfaction shoots up. But then it normally begins to tail off after six months or so. The honeymoon period at the start of a new job tends to be stronger when people were particularly dissatisfied with their previous job (Boswell et al., 2009). So hangovers from the last job tend to produce more intense honeymoons in the next job.
20

10. Easily pleased? Some of us are more easily satisfied (or dissatisfied) than others, no matter how good (or bad) the job is. To misquote a famous clich: You can't satisfy all the people all the time. Still, some jobs do seem better suited to certain types of people. A lot of work has been done on person-environment fit but because jobs vary so much it's difficult to summarise. One generalisation we can make, though, is that people get more satisfied with their jobs as they get older. Perhaps this is because the older people are, the more likely they are to have found the right work for them. There's little evidence for this but I'd certainly like to think it was true. On my darker days, though, I tend to think it's because young people have sky-high expectations (which are soon dashed) and older people have learned to live with their lot, however uninspiring it is.

21

Managers can enhance job satisfaction:

Goal Employees are motivated by performance goals, and they find pride in achieving or exceeding their goals. Managers should also make goals designed to bring personal and professional satisfaction. For example, if as a sales manager you get a quarterly bonus based on revenue numbers, then set a goal to exceed those numbers and claim a larger bonus. A manager can also set a goal to increase departmental production to get the executive team to allow for necessary upgrades and changes to departmental equipment. Get Subordinates Involved Managers who feel the need to perform all of the administrative and managerial tasks for their departments on their own are adding to their own stress and alienating their staff. Learn to get your employees involved in making daily decisions by empowering employees to develop their own work methods. Have a weekly staff meeting where the employees give input on solving departmental issues. Your employees will feel a sense of involvement in the success of the department, and you will have reduced your stress and gained the satisfaction of improving employee development. Take Breaks The stress of being a manager can drain some of the sense of satisfaction you get from departmental and personal accomplishments. Taking breaks throughout the day is a simple but effective way to avoid overworking yourself and allow yourself time to collect your thoughts. Your job satisfaction improves because you are giving yourself a chance to relieve stress as opposed to constantly feeling the need to work. Training To get more out of yourself as a manager, you need to continue your educational and professional development. Industry training and advancing your educational background can help you to contribute more to your team. You can also improve your own career path by maintaining your own personal development.

22

Other methods of enhancing job Satisfaction:

Designing Jobs that Motivate Hackman and Oldham identified five factors of job design that typically contribute to people's enjoyment of a job:

Skill Variety Increasing the number of skills that individuals use while performing work. Task Identity Enabling people to perform a job from start to finish. Task Significance Providing work that has a direct impact on the organization or its stakeholders. Autonomy Increasing the degree of decision making, and the freedom to choose how and when work is done. Feedback Increasing the amount of recognition for doing a job well, and communicate the results of people's work.

Job enrichment addresses these factors by enhancing the job's core dimensions and increasing people's sense of fulfillment. Job Enrichment Options The central focus of job enrichment is giving people more control over their work (lack of control is a key cause of stress, and therefore of unhappiness.) Where possible, allow them to take on tasks that are typically done by supervisors. This means that they have more influence over planning, executing, and evaluating the jobs they do. In enriched jobs, people complete activities with increased freedom, independence, and responsibility. They also receive plenty of feedback, so that they can assess and correct their own performance. Here are some strategies you can use to enrich jobs in your workplace:

Rotate Jobs Give people the opportunity to use a variety of skills, and perform different kinds of work. The most common way to do this is through job rotation. Move your workers through a variety of jobs that allow them to see different parts of the organization, learn different skills and acquire different experiences. This can be very motivating, especially for people in jobs that are very repetitive or that focus on only one or two skills. Combine Tasks Combine work activities to provide a more challenging and complex work assignment. This can significantly increase "task identity" because people see a job through from start to finish. This allows workers to use a wide variety of skills, which can make the work seem more meaningful and important.
23

For example, you can convert an assembly line process, in which each person does one task, into a process in which one person assembles a whole unit. You can apply this model wherever you have people or groups that typically perform only one part of an overall process. Consider expanding their roles to give them responsibility for the entire process, or for a bigger part of that process.

These forms of job enrichment can be tricky because they may provide increased motivation at the expense of decreased productivity. When you have new people performing tasks, you may have to deal with issues of training, efficiency, and performance. You must carefully weigh the benefits against the costs.

Identify Project-Focused Work Units Break your typical functional lines and form project-focused units. For example, rather than having all of your marketing people in one department, with supervisors directing who works on which project, you could split the department into specialized project units specific storyboard creators, copywriters, and designers could all work together for one client or one campaign. Allowing employees to build client relationships is an excellent way to increase autonomy, task identity, and feedback. Create Autonomous Work Teams This is job enrichment at the group level. Set a goal for a team, and make team members free to determine work assignments, schedules, rest breaks, evaluation parameters, and the like. You may even give them influence over choosing their own team members. With this method, you'll significantly cut back on supervisory positions, and people will gain leadership and management skills. Implement Participative Management Allow team members to participate in decision making and get involved in strategic planning. This is an excellent way to communicate to members of your team that their input is important. It can work in any organization from a very small company, with an owner/boss who's used to dictating everything, to a large company with a huge hierarchy. When people realize that what they say is valued and makes a difference, they'll likely be motivated. Redistribute Power and Authority Redistribute control and grant more authority to workers for making job-related decisions. As supervisors delegate more authority and responsibility, team members' autonomy, accountability, and task identity will increase. Increase Employee-Directed Feedback Make sure that people know how well, or poorly, they're performing their jobs. The more control you can give them for evaluating and monitoring their own performance, the more enriched their jobs will be. Rather than have your quality control department go around and point out
24

mistakes, consider giving each team responsibility for their own quality control. Workers will receive immediate feedback, and they'll learn to solve problems, take initiative, and make decisions. Job enrichment provides many opportunities for people's development. You'll give them lots of opportunity to participate in how their work gets done, and they'll most-likely enjoy an increased sense of personal responsibility for their tasks.

25

References

1. Job Satisfaction, Spector, The University of South Florida 1997 2. Measuring Job Satisfaction in Surveys Comparative Analytical Report Nguyen, Taylor and Bradley, 2003a 3. Washington University St. Louis, MO 63130, USA, University of California Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA, 1998 4. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R, Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey, Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 1975 5. Edwin A. Lockes Range of Affect Theory 1976 6. Organizational Psychology: A Scientist-Practitioner Approach, B.S., Central Michigan University; Ph.D., University of South Florida 2002 7. Job-satisfaction; Organizational-commitment; Human-services-personnelPsychology, Last edited on 2005/03/10 10:22:38 US/Mountain Glisson & Durick, 1988; Jex, 2002 8. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI), Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969 9. Industrial/Organizational Psychology: An Applied Approach Aamondt, 2009 10. A quantitative review of mentoring research: Test of a model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 269-283 Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2008 11. A multi-source study on the benefits of psychological detachment, Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Box 42, D-78457 Konstanz, Germany Sonnentag et al., 2010

26