Job Satisfaction
American University in Kyrgyzstan
[pic]
Organizational Behavior
Camilla Sharshekeeva
Research and Reflection Paper
Theme:
“Job Satisfaction”
Student: Kanatbek Beishekeev
Group ВА-498
Bishkek-2001
Do people really like their jobs? Definitely, everyone knows from the
news about dissatisfied workers going on strike or even acting violently
toward their supervisors, directors, but overall people are quite satisfied
with their jobs. According to the surveys percentage of satisfied people
averages in the US is about 85 percent. The feelings, reflecting attitudes
toward one’s job, are known as job satisfaction.
Settings, related to the personnel job satisfaction and devotion to
the company, are presenting special interest for the theory of
organizational behavior and practice of human resource management.
A discussion of the job satisfaction problem concentrates attention on
the employees’ attitude toward their job, and a discussion of organization
devotion –on the attitude toward the organization in the whole.
What is job satisfaction once more?
Lock gives a following detail definition of job satisfaction: “
pleasant, positive emotional condition coming from your job evaluation or
job experience.”1 Job satisfaction is a result of the very employees
perception of the fact for how much their job provides important, from
their viewpoint, things.
There are three most important parameters of job satisfaction. First,
job satisfaction represents emotional reaction for the situation lay at the
office. It’s impossible to see it, it can be only experienced. Second, job
satisfaction is defined often by that extent how much results of work
correspond to expectations. For instance, if organization employees see
they work much more, than other department employees, but receive less for
that, more probably, they will have negative attitude toward their job,
supervisor and colleagues.
They will experience dissatisfaction feeling. From another hand, if
they see, they get favorable attitude and materially rewarded, their
attitude toward the job will be positive. They will experience satisfaction
feeling from their job. Third, through job satisfaction some another
settings are expressed. Smit, Hendall and Hulin suppose that there is five
parameters of job, most exactly characterizing it from the viewpoint of
those affective reactions, which job causes by people. These parameters are
enumerated below:
1. Job itself. The extent, in which job gives people interesting
assignments, opportunities to perceive new, experience responsibility
feeling for the job laid upon.
2. Payment. The sum of money reward, which is paid for the job, and that in
which way the given sum corresponds to reward, receiving by other
organization member.
3. Promotion possibilities. Career promotion opportunities.
4. Management. The capacity of a head to provide as technical, as moral
support.
5. Colleagues. The extent of technical knowledge of colleagues and the
level of social support.2
Factors influencing on Job Satisfaction
Let’s mark several factors, influencing on Job Satisfaction. For
example, last research show that if after college graduation students are
immediately employed according their specialization, then on the basis of
both events coincidence it’s probable to predict a following job
satisfaction.3 There are the main factors influencing on Job Satisfaction
below:
Job itself. The main source of satisfaction is, of course, job itself.
Thus, for instance, research, dedicated to job characteristics and carried
out in correlation with working place projecting, testify that the very
content of work and autonomy by its implementation represent two most
important motivation factors correlated with labor. As research indicated,
other main components of job satisfaction are interesting and difficult job
without time for tedium and job giving a man one certain status.4
Payment. The system of money rewards is considered as a significant
but multicomplex and multisided job satisfaction factor. Money not only
gives people an opportunity to satisfy their primary needs, but also
fosters satisfaction of higher levels needs. Employees more often perceive
their salary’s level as a reflection of that how management estimates their
contribution to the company’s activity. Additional indulgences are also
important, but their role is less meaningful. One of the reasons is that
employee more often have no the slightest idea about the amount of received
as indulgences. Moreover, many are prone to underestimate these
indulgences; insofar they do not see their practical value.5 Nonetheless,
recent research indicated that if employees have an opportunity to choose
themselves to some extent independently indulgences from the whole package
rendered by the company that is named a flexible indulgences system, then
they receive greater satisfaction from indulgences receivables and the job
in the whole.6
Job promotion. Promotion opportunities make different influence on job
satisfaction. That comes because of that promotions can be implemented in
various forms and be accompanied with diverse rewards. For instance, people
receiving promotion for the length of service, although experience
satisfaction from job but not in such an extent as employees, which receive
promotion for the results achieved. Aside from, job promotion with salary
increase of 10% usually does not give that pleasure as position promotion
with a supplement of 20%. These differences can explain, why promotions on
the level of high management bring larger contenting than advancements on
the lower levels of organization.
Guidance. Guidance also represents moderately important factor by the
analysis of job satisfaction. In some other places the importance of
leadership skills could be analyzed. Here it’s sufficient to restrict
yourself with a comment of that there are two main leadership parameters
influencing on job satisfaction. First is an orientation of the chief on
the employee that is measured by the degree of getting interest of the
management in his colleagues’ favorability. As a rule, this interest exerts
in that if chiefs verify the activity of their subordinate, give advices
regarding his work, support, and also treats him not only officially,
formally, but also informally. In the US employer are usually discontented
with their principals just on the given parameter. For instance, recently
navigated questioning showed that less than half of respondents receive
regular feedback and support in their problems solving from the side of
principals.7
Another parameter is involving or influence; this is illustrated by
the managers’ activity that let their colleagues participate in decision
making that has direct relation to their work. In the majority of cases
this approach draws to the job satisfaction feeling boost. In particular,
deep metaanalysis brought to the conclusion that employees’ involving into
the process of decision-making really positively affects on job
satisfaction. The whole climate of involving created by a principal makes
larger impact on job satisfaction than participation in the making of
decision of limited range.8
Working groups. Direct affect on job satisfaction makes the very
nature of work groups. Benevolent, ready to come to help colleagues are
personally a certain source of job satisfaction feeling for any individual.
Working group serves for a single office worker is a source of support,
comfort, advice and enjoyment from the very job. A “good” working group
fosters a gaining of a greater joy and pleasure from job. On another hand,
when the opposite situation is observed, i.e. when it is hard to get along
with the people, the given factor imposes negative impact on job
satisfaction.
Working conditions. One more factor imposing moderate impact on job
satisfaction is working conditions. If conditions are good (e.g. offices
are neat and cosy, clean and engaging), staff could easier manage their
job. If bad working conditions were available (e.g. it is hot or noisy in
the office), it would be more difficult for employees to implement their
work. Otherwise, working conditions affect job satisfaction similar to
working group’s influence. If all were favorably around, there would not be
problems with job satisfaction.
A majority of people does not pay any special attention, if only these
are not excessively bad. Moreover, availability of numerous claims on
working conditions often testifies an availability of other problems. For
example, a manager may claim on that evening before his office has been
badly cleaned, however anger indeed is the result of his morning meeting
with chiefs during that he had been reproved for bad implementation.
Nonetheless, for the last years working conditions obtain once again great
importance in terms of work force diversification. For instance, several
organizations included an opportunity to choose a flexible work schedule in
employers’ working conditions that illustrates a fragment “Diversification
management in action: Flexible approach –key to success”.
The consequences of Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is presented desirable as from a viewpoint of a
single employer as society in total.
Never the less, pragmatically, from personnel effective management side and
organization in the whole, it is important to determine, in which detailed
way job satisfaction corresponds to the results of industrial activity.
Otherwise, if employers are content with the job, it is asked, whether it
means that they would work better, and also whether organization
productivity will increase in the whole. On other hand, by the low
satisfaction one may ask, if there would be problems with productivity and
low efficiency. During many years this question interests as researches,
engaged in the given sphere, as managers-practicians. There are no simple
answers for these questions.9 Observing the results of job satisfaction, it
is necessary to break analysis apart onto some specific sub chapters. The
most important of them could be considered below.
Job satisfaction and labor productivity. So, one can say that
employees satisfied with their labor are of high productivity than those
who are discontented with the job? An absence of direct correlation between
satisfaction and labor results during many years embarrasses researches.
Indeed, it is natural to suppose a direct dependence between satisfaction
and labor results, however the data given show that there is no close
correlation between them. In particular, implemented metaanalysis of
scientific literature on the given question shows that only in 17 cases out
of 100 between these two parameters it is succeeded in the direct
correlation identification. Not always satisfaction experiencing employees
are characterized with utmost productivity. There are different altering
factors influencing on this dependence. The most important form such
factors, apparently, is material encouragement for employers. If people
receive material spur that they consider as adequate their satisfaction
increases, and altogether, as a rule, and labor productivity. Further,
recently certificates were gotten that even if job satisfaction does not
lead to the productivity growth of separate employers, it can forward
positive budges on the level of the whole organization.10 At last, alive
discussions are still kept arising if job satisfaction leads to the
productivity growth or not or, on the contrary, the growth of productivity
– to job satisfaction.
Job satisfaction and personnel turnover. Does a high degree of
employees’ labor satisfaction lead to low stuff turnover? In difference
from labor productivity in correlation between labor satisfaction and
personnel turnover it can be noticed some laws-guidance. High degree of
satisfaction cannot itself hold turnover at the low level, however,
undoubtedly, can improve situation significantly. On one hand, in case of
low labor satisfaction it is likely to have a high staff turnover. One
group of researchers revealed that for women of age from 18 to 25 years old
a degree of their labor satisfaction helps foretell if they would change
their jobs. On other hand, by the process of augmenting their length of
service (duration of working in the given company) a likelihood of their
move to another job place decreases. Service length for men is a serious
factor as well, neutralizing later discontent feeling with their job.11
There are also other factors, such as devotion to organization, which
plays important role in the correspondence defining between job (labor)
satisfaction and personnel turnover. Some people just cannot imagine
themselves at any other place, which is why they stay working at the same
work place regardless of contentment degree. Another factor is a common
economy state. When economical situation is stable and unemployment rate is
low, personnel turnover as a rule magnifies, insofar people start seeking
for them new better places in other organizations. Even if they are content
with their available job, many still desire leave in that case if in
another place there would be better opportunities, scopes, or chances
granted. When an opposite situation is observed, i.e. by the lack of job
places, employees can stay at their job, even if it does not suffice them.
Summarizing above-mentioned, one must note that labor, or job satisfaction
plays important role in the defining of personnel turnover. Although full
absence of this staff turnover not always fruitful for organization, none
the less, maintaining at the low level, as a rule, imposes favorable impact
on organization due to costs decrease on training and costs linked to the
utilization of unqualified employees at the work places.
Job (Labor) satisfaction. Researches enough convincing show converse
proportional dependence between labor satisfactions and absents. If
satisfaction degree is high, a number of absents is insignificant, if it is
low – their number increases. Never the less, like other cases, there are
some averaging factors, such as people realization of the importance of
their work. For example, research carried out among governmental
institutions employees showed that people considering their job important
more rarely afforded absents than those that thought otherwise. Aside from,
one should remember that if high labor contentment not compulsory brings to
absent number decrease, then low satisfaction would lead to their number
boost with a high likelihood.12
Other consequences of job (labor) satisfaction. In addition to above-
mentioned there are other consequences caused by high contentment with
their job. The results of researches show that employees experiencing job
satisfaction feeling with their job possess better physical and moral
health, master faster necessary skills, more rarely suffer from industrial
traumatism and come with claims. Another positive factor disclosed in one
recent research is that employees satisfied with their labor more often
demonstrate examples of pro-social, “civilized” behavior and deeds, for
instance more frequent assist their colleagues and clients and in common
exert inclination to co-operation.13
In the very whole overview researches occupied in a sphere of
organization behavior equally with managers-practicians consider that labor
contentment is very important for organization. Some critics notice that
this statement still a conjecture, insofar, positive affect of labor
contentment still little researched. On other hand, negative impact of
labor contentment on organization is unquestionably acknowledged fact. That
is why even if consider job satisfaction as a minimal claim, it represents
a certain value for the whole health and efficacy of organization and,
therefore, deserves study and utilizing in sphere of organizational
behavior.
References
1 Terence R. Mitchell and James R. Larson, Jr. People in Organization, 3d
ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1987, p.146
2 P. C. Smith, L. M. Kendall, and C. L. Hulin, The Measure of Satisfaction
in Work and Retirement, Rand Mc Nally, Chicago, 1969.
3 Mary Ann M. Fricko and Terry A. Beehr, “A Longitudinal Investigation of
Interest Congruence and Gender Concentration as Predictors of Job
satisfaction”, Personnel Psychology, September 1992, pp. 99-118.
4 Jane Ciabattari, “The Biggest Mistake Top Managers Make”, Working Woman,
October 1986, p.48
5 Brenda Major and Ellen Konar, “An Investgation of Sex Differences in pay
Expectations and Their Possible Causes”, Academy of Management Journal,
December 1984, pp.777-792.
6 Alison E. Barber, Randall B. Dunham, and Roger A. Formisano, “The Impact
of Felxible Benefits on Employee Satisfaction: A Field Study”, Personnel
Psychology, September 1992, pp.55-76.
7 “Labor Letter”, The Wall Street Journal, Dec.22, 1987, p.1.
8 Katharine I. Miller and Peter R. Monge, “Participation, satisfaction, and
Productivity: A Meta-Analytic Review”, Academy of Management Journal,
December 1986, p.748.
9 Look, e.g.: Barry M. Staw and Sigal G. Barsade, “Affect and Managerial
Performance: A Test of the Sadder-but-Wiser vs. Happier-and-Smarter
Hypotheses”, Administrative Science Quarterly, June 1993, pp. 304-331.
10 Cheri Ostroff, “The Relationship Between Job Performance and Job
Satisfaction”, in E. A. Locke (ed.), Generalizing from Laboratoryto Field
Settings, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass., 1986.
11 Herbert Parnes, Gilbert Nestel, and Paul Andrisiani, The Pre-Retirement
Years: A Longitudinal Study of the Labor Market Experience of Men, vol.3,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1973, p.37.
12 C. W. Clegg, “Psychology of Employee Lateness, Absenteeism, and
Turnover: A Methodological Critique and an Empirical Study: Journal of
Applied Psychology, February 1983, pp.88-101.
13 D. W. Organ, Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier
Syndrome, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass., 1987
|
