American University in Kyrgyzstan
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:
Job itself. The extent, in which job gives people interesting
assignments, opportunities to perceive new, experience responsibility
feeling for the job laid upon.
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.
Promotion possibilities. Career promotion opportunities.
Management. The capacity of a head to provide as technical, as moral
support.
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
PAGE
PAGE 6
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
Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter
