Job Satisfaction Overview

Job satisfaction is the most widely researched job attitude and among
the most extensively researched subjects in Industrial/Organizational
Psychology (Judge & Church, 2000). Several work motivation theories
have corroborated the implied role of job satisfaction.
Work satisfaction theories, such as Maslows (1943) Hierarchy of
Needs, Hertzbergs (1968) Two-Factor (Motivator-Hygiene) Theory,
Adams (1965) Equity Theory, Porter and Lawlers (1968) modified
version of Vrooms (1964) VIE Model, Lockes (1969) Discrepancy
Theory, Hackman and Oldhams (1976) Job Characteristics Model,
Lockes (1976) Range of Affect Theory, Banduras (1977) Social
Learning Theory, and Landys (1978) Opponent Process Theory, have
tried to explain job satisfaction and its influence, .
Such expansive research has resulted in job satisfaction being linked
to productivity, motivation, absenteeism/tardiness, accidents,
mental/physical health, and general life satisfaction (Landy, 1978). A
common theory within the research has been that, to an extent, the
emotional state of an individual is affected by interactions with their
work environment. People identify themselves by their profession,
such as a doctor, lawyer, or teacher. Hence, an individual's personal
well-being at work is a significant aspect of research (Judge & Klinger,
2007).
The most widely accepted theory of job satisfaction was proposed by
Locke (1976), who defined job satisfaction as a pleasurable or
positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job or job
experiences (Locke, 1975, p.1304). Job satisfaction has emotional,
cognitive, and behavioral components (Bernstein & Nash, 2008). The
emotional component refers to job-related feelings such as boredom,
anxiety, acknowledgement and excitement. The cognitive component
of job satisfaction pertains to beliefs regarding one's job whether it is
respectable, mentally demanding / challenging and rewarding. Finally,
the behavioral component includes people's actions in relation to their
work such as tardiness, working late, faking illness in order to avoid
work (Bernstein & Nash, 2008).
Job satisfaction refers to the positive attitudes or emotional
dispositions people may gain from work or through aspects of work.

Employees job satisfaction becomes a central attention in the

researches and discussions in work and organizational psychology
because it is believed to have relationship with the job performance.
There are essentially two types of job satisfaction based on the level
of employees' feelings regarding their jobs. The first, and most
analysed, is global job satisfaction, which refers to employees' overall
feelings about their jobs (e.g., "Overall, I love my job.") (Mueller &
Kim, 2008). The second is job facet satisfaction, which refers to
feelings regarding specific job aspects, such as salary, benefits, work
hierarchy (reporting structure), growth opportunities, work
environment and the quality of relationships with one's co-workers
(e.g., "Overall, I love my job, but my schedule is difficult to manage.")
(Mueller & Kim, 2008). According to Kerber and Campbell (1987),
measurements of job facet satisfaction helps identify specific aspects
of a job that require improvement. The findings may aid
organizations in improving overall job satisfaction or in understanding
organizational issues such as high turnover (Kerber & Campbell,
1987).
There are several myths regarding job satisfaction. One such myth is
that a happy employee is a productive employee (Syptak et al., 1999).
Research has offered little to support that a happy employee is
productive, on the contrary, some research has suggested that
casualness may creep in, shifting from productivity to satisfaction
(Bassett, 1994). Hence, if there is a correlation, it is a weak one.
Knowing that research does not support the idea that happiness and
employee satisfaction creates higher production, why do I/O
psychologists and organizations still attempt to keep employees
happy? Many have pointed out that I/O psychologists
research perspective moves beyond increasing the bottom line of an
organization. Happy employees do not negatively affect productivity
and can have a positive effect at workplace and on society at large. It
also positively impacts the organization's brand image. Therefore, it
still benefits all parties to have happy and satisfied employees.
Another fallacy is that the pay is the most important factor in job
satisfaction. In reality, employees are more satisfied when they enjoy
the environment in which they work (Berry, 1997). An individual can
have a high paying job and not be satisfied because it is boring and
lacks sufficient stimulation. In fact, a low-paying job can be seen as
satisfying if it is adequately challenging or stimulating. There are
numerous factors that must be taken into consideration when

determining how satisfied an employee is with his or her job, and it is

not always easy to determine which factors are most important to
each employee. Job satisfaction is very subjective for each employee
and each situation being assessed.

Figure 1. Components of job satisfaction ( The Pennsylvania State

University, 2010).
(Return to Top)

Variables of Job
Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction
People tend to evaluate their work experiences based on 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. 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
Job characteristics approach research has revealed that the nature of
an individuals job or the characteristics of the
organization predominantly determines job satisfaction (Jex, 2002).
According to Hackman & 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 &
Oldham (1980) proposed five core job characteristics that all jobs
should contain: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy,
and feedback. They also defined four personal and work outcomes:
internal work motivation, growth satisfaction, general satisfaction, and
work effectiveness which have been added to the more popular
dimensions of job satisfaction assessment: the work itself, pay,
promotional opportunities, supervision, and co-worker relations (Smith
et al., 1969).
A common premise in research of the effects of job circumstances on
job satisfaction is that individuals assess job satisfaction by comparing
the current receivables from the job with what they believe they
should receive (Jex, 2002). For example, if an employee receiving an
annual salary of $45,000 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 dissatisfied. 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 even more complex
since the importance of work facets differs as per individual
perception. 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 forth the ideas of the range of affect theory. The hypothesis
of this theory is that employees weigh facets differently while
assessing job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). Consequently, this leads to
an individual measure of satisfaction or dissatisfaction when
expectations are met or not. 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.

Figure 2. Job Satisfaction Model (Field, 2008).

Social information processing (organizational characteristics)

Based mainly on Festingers (1954) Social Comparison Theory, Jex

(2002) explains that during social information processing, employees
look to co-workers to make sense of and develop attitudes about their
work environment. In other words, if employees find their co-workers
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. New hires may become tainted
during the socialization process if 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 that required subjects to view a
training video where assembly-line workers either made positive or
negative comments regarding 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).
Mirolli et al., (1998) also conducted a similar study. In this study, the
subjects performed a task with two experimenters pretending to be
other subjects (referred to 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 rated 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, Netzwerk,
an IT company in Germany, implemented rules in their

contracts. Employees who work at this company must sign a contract

agreeing not to whine or complain and have even fired employees for
excessive whining (Aamondt, 2009).
Dispositional (worker characteristics)
Internal disposition is the crux of the latest method of explaining job
satisfaction which hints some people being inclined to be satisfied or
dissatisfied with their work irrespective of the nature of the job or the
organizational environment (Jex, 2002). More simply put, 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 et al., 1989). 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 et al. (1986) found that adolescent evaluations of
affective disposition were correlated with adult job satisfaction as
many as forty years later.
Several years of research have been conducted on the dispositional
source of job satisfaction, and have presented strong evidence that
job satisfaction, to some extent, is based on disposition (Judge &
Larsen, 2001). Dispositional 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 affective people feel enthusiastic, active, alert and
optimistic while negative affective people feel anger, contempt,
disgust, guilt, fear and nervousness (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen,
1988).

There is ample 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 an individuals thought process and
perceptions can be a source of unhappiness. Moreover, 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)
examined these concepts in detail. They discussed cognitive
processes like perfectionism, over-generalization and dependence on
others as causation for depression leading to unhappiness. They
claimed 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. This type
of recollection indicates that job satisfaction may 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 0.44, which supports the theory
of 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 often 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 (1992) caution

that dysfunctional thinking is not singularly responsible for
dispositional factors affecting job satisfaction. They mention selfesteem, locus of control, self-efficacy, intelligence, and ambition as
well.

Social Cognitive aspects have been found to contribute significantly to

job satisfaction; however, researchers have not conducted
simultaneous comparison 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. Weiss and
Cropanzano (1996) advocated 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 et al., 2004); however, less research has been conducted on
the dispositional approach, since it is fairly new (Coutts & Gruman,
2005).

Figure 3. Facets of job satisfaction ( Hackman & Oldham, 1980;

Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969).
(Return to Top)

Other Variables of Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction

Life Satisfaction
Life satisfaction is often considered separately from job satisfaction
with regard to productivity in the workplace, but since the majority of
this research is correlational, it is crucial to explore potential

relationships between these two factors themselves rather 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 0.44 (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 (Judge et al., 1993). Nevertheless, one cannot
deny there is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and
life satisfaction based on correlational research (Jones, 2006).
Engagement
It is difficult to establish all the antecedents that lead to job
satisfaction. However, an additional construct that has a positive
correlation to job satisfaction is engagement. In a meta-analysis, the
correlation between job satisfaction and engagement is 0.22 (Harter
et al., 2002). Stirling (2008) notes that 20 percent of engaged
individuals do 80 percent of the work. An engaged team member is
one who is enthusiastic about the organization and the work they do.
Examples of employee engagement include a team member helping
another struggling to complete a task, or an associate who take over
and completes a pending task in the absence of the responsible party.
Therefore, it is crucial to continue to cultivate job satisfaction among
such highly productive individuals.
A study completed examined three possible factors which play a part
in employee engagement. The three factors are vigor, dedication, and
absorption (Alarcon & Lyons, 2010). Vigor is directly related to the
amount of energy and effort an individual will put forth to complete a
task, regardless of difficulties (Alarcon & Lyons, 2010). Dedication
relates to the amount of overall significance a task carries and
absorption is the depth of work immersion the individual experiences
(Alarcon & Lyons, 2010). The study found that the three factors all
had an impact on engagement, however they also noted that a
positive disposition toward ones job also correlated with positive
engagement (Alarcon & Lyons, 2010).
(Return to Top)

The Importance of Job Satisfaction

As mentioned in the overview, job satisfaction has been linked to
many variables including performance, absenteeism and turnover,
which will be discussed further in this section.
Job satisfaction is significant because a person's attitude and beliefs
may affect his or her behavior. Attitudes and beliefs may cause a
person to work harder or work less. Job satisfaction also impacts a
person's general well being for the simple reason that people spend a
good part of the day at work. Consequently, a person's dissatisfaction
with work could lead to dissatisfaction in other areas of life.
Employee performance
The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance has a
long and controversial history. Researchers were first made aware of
the link between satisfaction and performance through the 1924-1933
Hawthorne studies (Naidu, 1996). Since the Hawthorne studies,
numerous researchers have critically examined the idea that "a happy
worker is a productive worker". Research results of Iaffaldano and
Muchinsky (1985) have found a weak connection, approximately 0.17,
between job satisfaction and job performance. However, research
conducted by Organ (1988) discovered that a stronger connection
between performance and satisfaction could not be established
because of the narrow definition of job performance. Organ
(1988) believes that when the definition of job performance includes
behaviors such as organizational citizenship (the extent to which one's
voluntary support contributes to the success of an organization) the
relationship between satisfaction and performance will
improve. Judge, Thoreson, Bono, and Patton (2001) discovered that
after correcting the sampling and measurement errors of 301 studies,
the correlation between job satisfaction and job performance
increased to 0.30. It is important to note that the connection between
job satisfaction and job performance is higher for difficult jobs than for
less difficult jobs (Saari & Judge, 2004).
A link does exist between job satisfaction and job performance;
however, it is not as strong as one would like to believe. The weak link
may be attributed to factors such as job structure or economic
conditions. For example, some jobs are designed so that a minimum
level of performance is required providing no scope for greater
satisfaction. moreover, in times of high unemployment, dissatisfied

employees will perform well, choosing unsatisfying work over

unemployment.
In 2006, researcher Michelle Jones analyzed three studies combining
74 separate investigations of job satisfaction and job performance in
12,000 workers. She wrote: "The conclusions drawn by these
researchers, and many others, indicate the presence of a positive, but
very weak, relationship between job satisfaction and job performance"
(Jones, 2006). Jones argues that we have been measuring the wrong
kind of satisfaction. Instead of job satisfaction, we should be looking at
the link between overall satisfaction with life and output at work
(Bright, 2008). In this study, Jones implies that the more satisfied we
are with our life in general, the more productive we will be in our jobs.
Employee absenteeism
One of the more widely researched topics in Industrial Psychology is
the relationship between job satisfaction and employee absenteeism
(Cheloha, & Farr, 1980). It is only natural to assume that if individuals
dislike their jobs then they will often call in sick, or simply look for a
new opportunity. Yet again, the link between these factors and job
satisfaction is weak. The correlation between job satisfaction and
absenteeism is 0.25 (Johns, 1997). It is likely that a satisfied worker
may miss work due to illness or personal matters, while an unsatisfied
worker may not miss work because he or she does not have any sick
time and cannot afford the loss of income. When people are satisfied
with their job they are more likely to attend work even if they have
a cold; however, if they are not satisfied with their job, they would be
more likely to call in sick even when they are well enough to work.
Employee turnover
According to a meta-analysis of 42 studies, the correlation between
job satisfaction and turnover is 0.24 (Carsten, & Spector, 1987). One
obvious factor affecting turnover would be an economic
downturn, during which unsatisfied workers may not have other
employment opportunities. On the other hand, a satisfied worker may
be forced to resign his or her position for personal reasons such as
illness or relocation. This holds true for the men and women of the US
Armed Forces, who might fit well in a job but are often made to
relocate regardless. In such case, it would be next to impossible to
measure any correlation of job satisfaction. Furthermore, a person is
more likely to be actively searching for another job if they have low

satisfaction; whereas, a person who is satisfied with his or her job is

less likely to be job hunting.

Another researcher viewed the relationship between job satisfaction

and an employee's intent to leave the organization, turnover intention,
as mediated by workplace culture. Medina (2012) found that job
satisfaction was strongly inversely correlated with turnover intention
and this relationship was mediated by satisfaction in workplace
culture. The study provides evidence that should be further explored
to aid in the understanding of employee turnover and job satisfaction;
particularly in how job satisfaction and employee turnover relate to
workplace culture (Medina, 2012).
(Return to Top)

The Importance of Job Satisfaction to

Employee Retention
The following video depicts the importance of job satisfaction to
employee retention. Employee retention is one of the most difficult
operational areas for human resources managers to determine
exactly why employees leave the organization, and what they should
do to retain them. This is of primary importance because
organizations invest significant resources in training, developing,
tangible and intangible compensation and taking the time to build
organizational citizenship and buy-in to goals and objectives (Kazi, &
Zadeh, 2011). In difficult economies and highly competitive markets,
both organizations and employees want the best resources. Job
dissatisfaction leads to job turnover. This dissatisfaction can be from
intrinsic or extrinsic factors (PSU WC, L11, p.5). Job turnover can
result from various conditions such as job satisfaction. Job satisfaction
is multi-faceted, implying that one can be satisfied in one area but

does not necessarily mean satisfaction in all areas; likewise,

dissatisfaction in one area does not mean complete job dissatisfaction
(Kazi, & Zadeh, 2011). Additionally, job turnover can also be related to
work-life conflict. The work life and personal life is an individuals
experience to maintain harmony (balance) between work and
personal relationships. Kazi & Zadeh propose that an imbalance or
dissatisfaction in work leads to dissatisfaction in personal life. This can
lead to job turnover. This is precisely what Swift (2007) reported in his
article about having a more fulfilled and productive workforce. For
organizations to remain competitive, they need to understand and
address the issues around work-life balance to maintain job
satisfaction among employees. To support this idea, Bright (2008)
article reports that people who are happy with life are happier
employees and show better organizational citizenship, courtesy and
conscientiousness.
Employee satisfaction is of utmost importance for employees to
remain happy and also deliver their level best. Satisfied employees
are the ones who are extremely loyal towards their organization and
stick to it even in the worst scenario. The first benefit of employee
satisfaction is that individuals hardly think of leaving their current jobs.
Employee satisfaction is essential to ensure higher revenues for the
organization. Satisfied employees tend to adjust more and handle
pressure with ease as compared to frustrated ones.

(Return to Top)
Job Satisfaction and Retirement
In a 2013 study from Lehigh University, individuals begin to think
about retirement in their early years and develop a plan of action over
the years. While individuals who begin working a career earlier on in

their life plan to retire earlier, individuals who begin a career later in
life, plan to retire later in life as well. The research shows that job
satisfaction has very little to do with how we plan for our retirement.
While the survey shows that many individuals do consider income,
location and attitude when discussing retirement options, they do
not solely decide if and when retirement is an option for them nor do
the factors (poor work environment, long hours, unhappy with
position, etc) (Lehigh University, 2013) There are many studies that
have questioned if job satisfaction is something that you experience
more in your younger years or older. Studies have returned with both
sets of results. Some individuals have more job satisfaction in their
earlier years while others experience it more when they are older. So,
it is undetermined if you will retire from a job that you have been
satisfied at or unsatisfied at.

Application of Job Satisfaction in the Workplace

The application of job satisfaction in the workplace is a difficult

concept to grasp due to its individualistic and situational nature. What
one employee desires from work, another may not. For instance, one
employee may put salary in high regard, while another may find
autonomy the most important. Unfortunately, one aspect alone will
most likely not effect an employee's job satisfaction. According to
Syptak, Marsland, and Ulmer (1999), there are numerous aspects of a
job through which an organization can manage increase satisfaction
in the workplace, such as:

Company Policies - Policies that are transparent, fair and

applied equally to all employees will decrease dissatisfaction.
Therefore, fairness and clarity are crucial in improving employee
attitude. For example, if a company has a policy for lunch breaks
having the same length and time for all, it will be seen as a norm and
will help cut down on wasted time and low productivity.

Salary/Benefits - Making sure employee salaries and benefits

are comparable to other organization salaries and benefits will help
raise satisfaction. If a company wishes to produce a competitive
product they must also offer competitive wages. Furthermore, this
can help reduce turnover, as employees will invariably be more
satisfied when paid competitive wages as opposed to being
underpaid.

Interpersonal/Social Relations - Encouraging employees to

develop a social aspect to their job may increase satisfaction as well
as develop a sense of teamwork. Co-worker relationships will benefit
the organization as a whole since teamwork is a very important aspect
of organization productivity and success. Moreover, when people are
allowed to develop work relationships they care more about pulling
their own weight and not letting co-workers down. Employee
involvement groups are a great way to help employee's interact with
individuals outside their department or organization.

Working Conditions - upgrading facilities and equipment and

ensuring employees have adequate personal workspace can
decrease dissatisfaction. A cramped employee is a frustrated
employee plus faulty equipment leads to frustration in trying to get
work done.

Achievement - Ensuring employees are appropriately placed to

utilize their talents may enhance satisfaction. When employees are
given proper role and feel a sense of achievement and challenge,
their talents will be in line with the goals best suited for them.

Recognition - Ensuring a job well done is duly acknowledged

increases the likelihood of employee satisfaction. Positive and
constructive feedback boosts an employee's morale and helps them
work at the desired level and towards the desired direction.

Autonomy - Giving employees the freedom and sense of

ownership of their work may help raise job satisfaction as
the individuals realise they are responsible for the outcome of their
work.

Advancement - Allowing employees showing high performance

and loyalty, the room to advance will help ensure satisfaction. A new /
higher position and sense of responsibility can often increase job
satisfaction in an employee.

Job Security - Especially in times of economic uncertainty, job

security is a very crucial factor in determining an employee's job
satisfaction. Giving an employee the assurance that their job is secure
will most likely increase job satisfaction.

Work-life Balance Practices- In times where the average

household is changing, it is becoming increasingly important for an
employer to recognize the delicate balancing act that its employees
perform between their personal life and work life. Policies that cater to
common personal and family needs can be essential to maintaining
job satisfaction.

The image above displays the difference in viewpoints between an

organization and an individual when it comes to overall job
satisfaction.

A study published by The Families and Work Institute shows that,

despite the numerous aspects of a job, there are a few that
specifically allow for greater improvement of satisfaction. According to
their study, workplace support and job quality collectively account for
70 percent of the factors influencing job satisfaction. Surprisingly,
earnings and benefits only account for 2 percent (Employee Retention
Headquarters, n.d.).

Figure 5. Factors impacting job satisfaction (Employee Retention

Headquarters, n.d.).
When it comes to ensuring job satisfaction in the workplace, it is
important to look at all aspects of job satisfaction. Every employee is
different and will have different views which makes job
satisfaction extremely hard to research; however, Everett (1995)
suggests that responsible employees ask themselves the following
questions:

When have I come closest to expressing my full potential in a

work situation?

What did it look like?

What aspects of the workplace were most supportive?

What aspects of the work itself were most satisfying?

What did I learn from that experience that could be applied to

the present situation?
For the employee to answer these questions, job satisfaction must be
fully deployed within the organization. Listed in the above section are
numerous aspects that organizations can utilize to help increase
satisfaction. In addition to these aspects, organizations must also
consider the needs of the employee. For example, an employee, who
is a great asset to the company as he or she is highly educated and
motivated, may have personal issues such as a child who requires
daycare. As a remedy, organizations could allow flexible work
arrangements such as telecommuting, which would create a win-win
situation both for the employee and the organization. Additionally, an
organization should provide more opportunities for employees to help
increase job satisfaction. Consequently, this would peak an interest in
the employee, allowing him/her to take more pride in his or her work.
Allowing married women the flexibility to work from home is another
consideration. Although research might be difficult for job satisfaction
theories, especially within the correlation field, there is just enough
useful information to help employees and organizations become
successful and enjoy their jobs, provided the right type of leadership is
at the helm.

(Return to Top)

Measures of Job Satisfaction

The following are measures of job satisfaction as outlined by Fields

(2002):

Overall Job Satisfaction - Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and

Klesh (1983) developed this measure as part of the Michigan
Organizational Assessment Questionnaire (OAQ). In this measure

three items are used to describe an employees subjective response

to working in the specific job and organization (Fields, 2002, p. 20).

Job Descriptive Index (JDI) - This was originally developed by

Smith, Kendall, and Hulin (1969). There are 72 items in this index
which assess five facets of job satisfaction which includes: the work,
pay, promotions, supervision and co-workers. Through the
combination of ratings of satisfaction with the facets, a composite
measure of job satisfaction is determined. Roznowski (1989) updated
the JDI to include work atmosphere, job content and work
technology. A shorter 30-item version, was developed by Gregson
(1990) based on 6 items which included work, pay, promotions,
supervision and co-workers (Fields, 2002, p. 23).

Global Job Satisfaction - Warr, Cook, and Wall (1979)

developed this measure which includes 15 items to determine overall
job satisfaction. Two sub-scales are used for extrinsic and intrinsic
aspects of the job. The extrinsic section has eight items and the
intrinsic has seven items (Fields, 2002, p. 27).

Job Satisfaction Relative to Expectations - Bacharach,

Bamberger, and Conley (1991) developed this measure. It assesses
the degree of agreement between the perceived quality of broad
aspects of a job and employee expectations (Fields, 2002, p. 6). It is
most effective in determining how job stresses, role conflicts, or role
ambiguities can hinder an employee from meeting job expectations
(Fields, 2002, p. 6).

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire - The long form of this

survey is made up of 100 questions based on 20 sub-scales which
measure satisfaction with ability, utilization, achievement, activity,
advancement, authority, company policies and practices,
compensation, co-workers, creativity, independence, moral values,
recognition, responsibility, security, social service, social status,
supervision-human relations, supervision-technical variety, and
working conditions (Fields, 2002, p. 7). There is a shorter version of
the MSQ which consists of 20 items. This can also be separated into
two sub-scales for intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction.

Job in General Scale - This measure was developed by

Ironson, Smith, Brannick, Gibson and Paul (1989). It consists of 18
items which describe global job satisfaction and can be used in

conjunction with the JDI, which assesses satisfaction with five job
facets. This was developed to assess global satisfaction independent
from satisfaction with facets (Fields, 2002, p. 9).

Job Satisfaction Survey - This was developed by Spector

(1985) and contains 36 items based on nine job facets. The job facets
include pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards,
operating procedures, co-workers, nature of work and
communication. When it was initially developed, it was specific to job
satisfaction in human service, nonprofit and public organizations
(Fields, 2002, p. 14).

Job Satisfaction Index - Schriescheim and Tsue, (1980)

developed this measure. It consists of six items that form and index
what determines overall job satisfaction. The items are work,
supervision, co-workers, pay, promotion opportunities and the job in
general (Fields, 2002, p. 16).

Job Diagnostic Survey - Hackman and Oldham (1974)

developed this survey which measures both overall and specific
facets of job satisfaction. There are three dimensions of overall job
satisfaction which includes general satisfaction, internal work
motivation and growth satisfaction, which are combined into a single
measure. The facets which are measured on the survey include
security, compensation, co-workers and supervision (Fields, 2002, p.
20).

Career Satisfaction - Greenhaus, Parasuraman, and Wormley

(1990) developed this measure. This is a measure of career success
as opposed to job satisfaction. It assesses general satisfaction with
career outcome and satisfaction with career progress (Fields, 2002, p.
29).
Fields outlines specific types of employee satisfaction measures
which describe an employees satisfaction with one or more aspects
of their job. These include the following (Fields, 2002):

Employee Satisfaction with Influence and

Ownership developed by Rosen, Klein, and Young (1986).

Satisfaction with Work Schedule Flexibility developed by

Rothausen (1994).

Satisfaction with My Supervisor developed by Scarpello and

Vandenberg (1987).
(Return to Top)

Research on Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is the most frequently studied variable in
organizational behavior (Spector, 1997). Research on job satisfaction
is performed through various methods including interviews,
observations and questionnaires. The questionnaire is the most
frequently used research method because it is unrestrained in nature.
Researchers can use an existing assessment tool or scale, as a
means of assessment. Using an existing scale provides the
researcher with a valid, reliable and consistent construct while
assessing job satisfaction. Job satisfaction can be assessed using a
general scale, facet satisfaction scale or global satisfaction scale. The
Jobs Descriptive Index (JDI) is the most popular job satisfaction
assessment tool with researchers (Spector, 1997). The JDI is broken
down into five facets of satisfaction: work, pay, promotion, supervision
and co-workers.
The most significant research study that shows the importance of job
satisfaction is the Hawthorne studies (Muchinsky, 1985). The purpose
of the study was to research the relationship between lighting and
efficiency. The experiment was conducted in 1924 by researchers
from Western Electric and Harvard University at the Hawthorne Works
of the Western Electric Company. Various sets of lights at various
intensities were set up in rooms where electrical equipment was being
produced. The amount of illumination (bright, dim, or a combination)
provided to the workers seemed to have no effect on production. The
results of the study were so unexpected that further investigation
revealed many previously unknown aspects of human behavior in the
workplace. Researchers learned that factors other than lighting affect
worker's productivity. The workers responded positively to the
attention they were receiving from the researchers and as a result,
productivity rose. Job performance continued to improve because of
the novelty of the situation; when the novelty wore off, production
returned to its earlier level. Research has offered little support that a
happy employee is productive; in fact, research suggests that

causality may flow in the opposite direction from productivity to

satisfaction (Bassett, 1994).
Research on this theory supports that job satisfaction is an important
factor not only for employees but for organizations as well. For
example, in a research survey by Grant, Fried, and Juillerat (2010) at
a large bank, managers found that bank tellers were very dissatisfied
with their jobs stating that they were "just glorified clerks". They also
said that their jobs were boring and felt micromanaged because they
were unable to make decisions even small ones, without the approval
of their managers. In this case, the managers of the bank decided to
re-design the teller jobs to increase job satisfaction. New tasks were
added to provide variety and the use of a broad range of skills. In
addition to their checking cash, deposit and loan payment tasks, they
were trained to handle commercial and traveler's cheques as well as
post payments online. The tellers were also given more autonomy in
their roles and decision-making responsibilities. Finally, when
feedback time approached, the managers felt that by re-designing the
role of the teller they were giving the tellers responsibility to own
their customers. In this particular case, it was observed that job
satisfaction had increased. A survey was taken six months later and it
was found that not only were the tellers more satisfied with their role
but they were also more committed to the organization. Finally, during
employee/manager evaluations, it was found that there was an
increase in performance by the tellers and that the job satisfaction
provided by the job redesign had effects lasting at least four years
(Grant et al., 2010).
According to another study by Syptak, Marsland, and Ulmer (1999)
satisfied employees tend to be more productive, creative and
committed to their employers. Furthermore, recent studies have
shown that there is a direct correlation between staff satisfaction and
patient satisfaction. In the case of the physician's office, a study found
that not only were the employees and patients more satisfied, the
physicians found an increased level of job satisfaction as well. The
study conducted in the physician's office was based on Herzberg's
Motivation-Hygiene Theory. Hygiene factors are related to the work
environment and include: company policies, supervision, salary,
interpersonal relations and working conditions. Motivators factors are
related to the job and make employees want to succeed and include:
achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility and
advancement. According to Herzberg, once the hygiene issues are

addressed, the motivators promote job satisfaction and encourage

production. In applying Herzberg's theory to the real life physician's
practice. The study first addressed the hygiene factors "because
these are important in creating an environment in which employee
satisfaction and motivation are possible (Syptak et al., 1999). The
study discussed in detail each aspect of the hygiene factors and how
the physicians could apply these factors to create an environment that
promoted job satisfaction. The study then moved on to the motivators
and again discussed in detail the aspects of each factor. Finally, "by
creating an environment that promotes job satisfaction, you are
developing employees who are motivated, productive and fulfilled
(Syptak et al., 1999). The image below provides a visual between the
differences in motivators and de-motivators in job satisfaction.

Figure 6. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory (Herzberg, 1968; Herzberg,

Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959).
(Return to Top)

Correlation versus Causation

While one may wish to understand which variables increase or

decrease job satisfaction, it is important to remember that correlation
is not equivalent to causation (Steinberg, 2008). Research has
shown that there is a correlation between job satisfaction and
performance, turnover, and absenteeism. A correlation indicates that
there is a relationship between these variables; however, it
does not explain "which variable, if either, caused the relationship"
(Steinberg, 2008, p. 419). It is entirely possible that an outside
variable is responsible for the correlation (Steinberg, 2008). For
example, job satisfaction and job performance are positively
correlated (when job satisfaction increases, job performance
increases). However, for one person, satisfaction may increase
because performance increases, whereas, for another, performance
may increase because satisfaction increases. It is impossible to tell
whether job satisfaction causes increased job performance or that job
performance causes increased job satisfaction based on correlation
alone.
The following is a list of alternative explanations of a correlation

(Pearson, 2010):

Reverse causation - The causal direction is opposite to what

has been hypothesized; e.g., job performance causes an increase in
job satisfaction rather than the other way around.

Reciprocal causation -The two variables cause each other;

e.g. high job satisfaction causes high job performance which then
increases job satisfaction.

Common-causal variables -Variables not part of the research

hypothesis cause both the predictor and the outcome variable; e.g.
individual disposition may cause both satisfaction and job
performance.

Spurious relationship -The common-causal variable produces

and explains away the relationship between the predictor and
outcome variables; e.g., individual differences in disposition as
described above.

Extraneous variables -Variables other than the predictor

causes the outcome variable, but do not cause the predictor variable;
e.g., pressure from a supervisor causes high performance.

Mediating variables -Variables caused by the predictor variable

in turn cause the outcome variable; e.g. experience could cause high
performance which then could cause satisfaction (performance would
be the mediating variable).

Figure 4. Job satisfaction correlation ( Iaffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985;

Johns, 1997; Carsten & Spector, 1987).

(Return to Top)

Experimental Research on Job

Satisfaction
Even though job satisfaction is highly researched, only a few studies
have conducted experiments in this area. Experimental research is
very valuable for explaining the causation of the existing relationship
between variables, while correlational studies only point out that these
relationships exist and describe them.
Brief, Butcher, and Roberson (1995) conducted a field experiment
with 57 hospital workers in order to examine how social information
and disposition affect job satisfaction. The researchers tested three
hypotheses; the first one was that negative affectivity (NA) is
associated negatively with job satisfaction. The second one was that
positive mood inducing events increase job satisfaction; and the last
one was that the effects of positive events on job satisfaction are
weaker among high NA individuals than they are among low NA
individuals as a result of interaction of NA and positive mood inducing
events (Brief et al., 1995). The subjects of this study were randomly
assigned to two groups. The experimental group received positive
mood-inducing incentives; they received cookies, soft drinks and
attractively wrapped toys. The control group did not receive any
incentives. Both groups filled out the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale
(TMAS) that measured NA and questionnaires that measured job
satisfaction (a modified version of Kunins Faces scale). The results
demonstrated that a disposition to NA is negatively associated with
job satisfaction. The next findings indicated that positive moodinduced events increased job satisfaction. The last results showed
that the individuals with high NA are resistant to positive moodinduced events. All these results were consistent with the hypotheses.
This study supplements the knowledge of job satisfaction by
providing valuable information about how social information
processing (mood inducing events) and dispositional characteristics
(NA as a personality trait) affect job satisfaction. The information
provided by this research might be utilized by managers in personnel
hiring process and to boost job satisfaction. The managers might use
the instruments that measure NA and PA (positive affectivity) in order

to predict job satisfaction among employees. In addition, they may

introduce positive mood-inducing events in the form of incentives that
would lead to increased job satisfaction.

(Return to Top)

The Consequences of Job Dissatisfaction

According to the exit- voice- loyalty- neglect- framework (Farrell,

1983), employees response to dissatisfaction with the workplace can
take four forms, each of which differs from the others on two
dimensions: active vs. passive and constructive vs. destructive. The
four responses are:
1.

Exit: exit refers to behavior aimed at leaving the company, such

as looking for a new job. Exit is a destructive and active response.

2.

Voice: voice refers to employee initiative to improve conditions

in the organization, for example, offering ideas on how to improve the
business. Voice is an active and constructive response.

3.

Loyalty: loyalty refers to an employees attitude of trust toward

the organization. It can manifest itself as a passive but optimistic hope
for improvements to come about. Loyalty is passive and constructive.

4.

Neglect: neglect occurs when an employee shows absenteeism,

shows up late for work and puts less effort at work. By performing
inadequately at work, the employee is allowing conditions to
deteriorate. Neglect is passive and destructive.
So far we have only been focusing on Job Satisfaction but what about
those who become dissatisfied? Only 30% of Americans enjoy their

job which leads us to believe that nearly 70% of working Americans

do not enjoy their job (Notte 2013). Not only is satisfaction important
in running a happy and productive workplace because job
dissatisfaction can cost the company. For example, unhappy workers
that call in sick and find ways to avoid working cost U.S. companies
$450 billion to $550 billion every year (Notte 2013). It is especially
important for companies to not lose money due to their employees
as loss due to employee neglect is a tremendous cost. Companies
must better employ strategies and techniques listed above in order to
increase overall job satisfaction and revenue in the company.
Currently, nearly half of American employees are disengaged with
their work causing them to not perform to their best. In order for
companies to work best, they must have employees who are working
their best; business must change and adapt to the employees in order
to improve job satisfaction.
Cognitive belief about work is not a fixed emotion as it can be altered
and influenced by current happenings in and out of the company
which cause feelings to change for the better or worse. Job
productivity, as well as many other important aspects to a happy work
environment, has been proven to work better, with more satisfied
workers. Changes in the structure of American business must
significantly improve to increase the satisfaction of employees.
(Return to Top)

Research on the Consequences of Job

Dissatisfaction
Researchers Henne & Locke (1985) designed a model that illustrates
what they hypothesize happens to individuals who are dissatisfied
with their jobs. When job dissatisfaction strikes it is merely an
emotional state; in response to the emotional state people will devise
an alternative plan that is dependent upon the individual, his
estimation of the situation and his own capabilities or aspirations. The
alternative plan (see diagram below) will be behavioral (action) or
psychological (Henne & Locke, 1985).

(Henne & Locke, 1985)

(Return to Top)

Action Alternatives

Performance - Its almost intuitive to conclude that people who

are dissatisfied dont perform as well as people who are satisfied with
their job. However this isnt always the case; discontentment can
trigger a change in people to come up with creative solutions to
problems (Zhou & George, 2001). If a person is dissatisfied they may
perform better to rectify the situation, so performance level may be
high or low depending on the individual.

Protest - Another form of action an unhappy worker may resort

to, is the protest. One form of protest is unionization. People tend to
join unions for a number of reasons, including support if there is a
problem at work or to improve pay and work conditions (Wadditigton &
Whitston, 1997). Protests are usually an attempt to change the cause
of the unhappiness (Henne & Locke, 1985).

Withdrawal - Absenteeism and/or leaving the job is another

recourse a worker may take when they become dissatisfied in their
workplace.

Psychological Alternatives

Change perception People can choose to change their

outlook and views on life. They can decide that instead of focusing
on things at the job that are dissatisfying, they would focus on things
about the job they enjoy.

Change values Most companies have a mission statement or

a group of core values. If there is a conflict between personal values
and company values, a person can change their values to align with
the companys values in order to alleviate dissatisfaction.

Change reaction Another alternative an individual might have,

while experiencing dissatisfaction, would be to avoid it using
psychological defense mechanisms such as repression and evasion
(Henne & Locke, 1985). He or she may choose to avoid aspects of
the job they are unhappy with, or he or she may suppress their
unhappiness.

Toleration Others may simply tolerate their displeasure. They

may reason out that they derive happiness from other sources in their
life so they can put up with the displeasure at work (Henne & Locke,
1985).

Consequences of Choices

Life Satisfaction Henne & Locke (1985) believed that work is

a component of a persons life and will affect ones attitude towards

life as a whole. "Since work is a component of one's life, it will affect

one's attitude toward life as a whole." This is not exclusive, though.
The effect on life satisfaction will depend on the importance of the job
to the individual. (1985)

Mental Health Locke (1976) suggests that the existence of

dissatisfaction implies conflict in the employee's mind and the conflict
may lead to issues. Whether or not dissatisfaction will lead to mental
illness depends on the causes. Mental illness is more likely when an
individual's values and actions are part of the problem. (Henne &
Lock, 1985).

Physical Health - If the dissatisfaction event increases stress

levels in an individual, it may have health implications. Many studies
have proven the physical effects stress can have on the body
including ulcers, headaches, high blood pressure, hyperacidity, and
heart disease. (Henne & Locke, 1985)
Chapter 3 Attitudes and Job Satisfaction
What are attitudes?
Attitudes are evaluative statements or judgments concerning objects, people,
or events.
Cognitive component of an attitude is the opinion or belief segment of an
attitude.
Affective component is the emotion or feeling segment of an attitude.
Behavioral component of an attitude is an intention to behave in a certain
way toward someone or something.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory any incompatibility between two or more attitudes or between behavior and
attitudes
Our desire to reduce dissonance depends upon:

Importance of elements creating dissonance

Degree of individual influence over elements

Rewards involved in dissonance

Note: People seek consistency among their attitudes and seek to reconcile
divergent attitudes and behavior so they appear to be rational and consistent.
Measuring the A-B relationship
Recent research indicates that attitudes (A) significantly predict behaviors (B) when
moderating variables are taken into account.

Moderating Variables include:

Importance of the attitude

Specificity of the attitude

Accessibility of the attitude

Social pressures on the individual

Direct experience with the attitude

Self-perception theory = when you use attitudes after the fact to make sense out
of an action that has ALREADY occurred.
Types of Attitudes
1) Job Satisfaction
A collection of positive and/or negative feelings that an individual holds
towards his or her job.
2) Job Involvement
Identifying with the job, actively participating in it, and considering
performance important to self-worth.
3) Organizational Commitment

Identifying with a particular organization and its goals, and wishing to

maintain membership in the organization

Affective, normative, and continuance commitment Note: what are

these? Why are they different? Please be sure you know J
4) Perceived Organizational Support

Degree to which employees feel the organization cares about their wellbeing.
5) Employee Engagement

An individuals involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the

organization.
An Application: Attitude surveys
- A way to capture attitude data via questionnaires about various workplace factors
(job, work groups, supervisors and the organization)
Attitudes and Diversity
-

A growing field of study and important in all organizations today.

Understanding and changing attitudes about others is important for managers
and organizations. Most companies are now training employees re: attitudes
about diversity.
Training activities: Participating in diversity training that provides for selfevaluation and group discussions
Volunteer work in community and social service centers with individuals of
diverse backgrounds

Job Satisfaction

How can we measure it?

Single global rating
Summation score

So..how satisfied are people in their jobs?

Which facets seem to be causing dissatisfaction?

How Can Employee Express Dissatisfaction?

Exit Behavior directed towards leaving the organization
Neglect Allowing conditions to worsen
Voice Active and constructive attempts to improve conditions
Loyalty Passively waiting for conditions to improve
(Also note that job satisfaction relates to OCB (going above and beyond what is
required formally) through fairness. Trust is also important)
Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance
Satisfaction and Productivity
o
Satisfied workers are more productive AND more productive workers
are more satisfied!
o
Worker productivity is higher in organizations with more satisfied
workers.
Satisfaction and Absenteeism
Satisfied employees have fewer avoidable absences.
Satisfaction and Turnover
Satisfied employees are less likely to quit.
Organizations take actions to retain high performers and to weed out
lower performers.
Satisfaction and OCB
Satisfied employees who feel fairly treated by and are trusting of the
organization are more willing to engage in behaviors that go beyond
the normal expectations of their job.
Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction
Satisfied workers provide better customer service.
Satisfied employees increase customer satisfaction because:
They are more friendly, upbeat, and responsive.
They are less likely to turnover, which helps build long-term customer
relationships.
They are experienced.
Note: Dissatisfied customers increase employee job dissatisfaction.

Chapter 3 Attitudes and Job Satisfaction

What are attitudes?
Attitudes are evaluative statements or judgments concerning objects, people,
or events.
Cognitive component of an attitude is the opinion or belief segment of an
attitude.
Affective component is the emotion or feeling segment of an attitude.
Behavioral component of an attitude is an intention to behave in a certain
way toward someone or something.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory any incompatibility between two or more attitudes or between behavior and
attitudes
Our desire to reduce dissonance depends upon:

Importance of elements creating dissonance

Degree of individual influence over elements

Rewards involved in dissonance

Note: People seek consistency among their attitudes and seek to reconcile
divergent attitudes and behavior so they appear to be rational and consistent.
Measuring the A-B relationship
Recent research indicates that attitudes (A) significantly predict behaviors (B) when
moderating variables are taken into account.
Moderating Variables include:

Importance of the attitude

Specificity of the attitude

Accessibility of the attitude

Social pressures on the individual

Direct experience with the attitude

Self-perception theory = when you use attitudes after the fact to make sense out
of an action that has ALREADY occurred.
Types of Attitudes
1) Job Satisfaction
A collection of positive and/or negative feelings that an individual holds
towards his or her job.
2) Job Involvement
Identifying with the job, actively participating in it, and considering
performance important to self-worth.
3) Organizational Commitment

Identifying with a particular organization and its goals, and wishing to

maintain membership in the organization

Affective, normative, and continuance commitment Note: what are

these? Why are they different? Please be sure you know J
4) Perceived Organizational Support

Degree to which employees feel the organization cares about their wellbeing.
5) Employee Engagement

An individuals involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the

organization.
An Application: Attitude surveys
- A way to capture attitude data via questionnaires about various workplace factors
(job, work groups, supervisors and the organization)
Attitudes and Diversity
-

A growing field of study and important in all organizations today.

Understanding and changing attitudes about others is important for managers
and organizations. Most companies are now training employees re: attitudes
about diversity.
Training activities: Participating in diversity training that provides for selfevaluation and group discussions
Volunteer work in community and social service centers with individuals of
diverse backgrounds

Job Satisfaction
How can we measure it?
Single global rating
Summation score

So..how satisfied are people in their jobs?

Which facets seem to be causing dissatisfaction?

How Can Employee Express Dissatisfaction?

Exit Behavior directed towards leaving the organization
Neglect Allowing conditions to worsen
Voice Active and constructive attempts to improve conditions
Loyalty Passively waiting for conditions to improve
(Also note that job satisfaction relates to OCB (going above and beyond what is
required formally) through fairness. Trust is also important)
Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance
Satisfaction and Productivity
o
Satisfied workers are more productive AND more productive workers
are more satisfied!

Worker productivity is higher in organizations with more satisfied

workers.

Satisfaction and Absenteeism

Satisfied employees have fewer avoidable absences.
Satisfaction and Turnover
Satisfied employees are less likely to quit.
Organizations take actions to retain high performers and to weed out
lower performers.
Satisfaction and OCB
Satisfied employees who feel fairly treated by and are trusting of the
organization are more willing to engage in behaviors that go beyond
the normal expectations of their job.
Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction
Satisfied workers provide better customer service.
Satisfied employees increase customer satisfaction because:
They are more friendly, upbeat, and responsive.
They are less likely to turnover, which helps build long-term customer
relationships.
They are experienced.
Note: Dissatisfied customers increase employee job dissatisfaction.

Job Satisfaction Could Have

Different Meanings
Did you ever think that during prehistoric times, when old Bonk the Caveman designed and
fashioned the very first wheel, that his boss (or his tribe leader) gave him a reward or praise?
Now, back in those days, a reward might be a new pelt or praise might be you would not get
hit with a club, but the basics of job satisfaction lie in the fact that we are rewarded for the
job we do.
There are many aspects to job satisfaction, depending on what each individual person feels is
important. In many ways, the word 'reward' alone can mean different things to different
people, and in this lesson, we are going to look at job satisfaction and its place in today's
business environment. Our goal is to understand job satisfaction, or how content someone is
with their job and the sense of accomplishment they get from doing it.

Rewards and Job Satisfaction

The first aspect that comes to mind when we think about causes for job satisfaction is the
rewards a person gets while doing their job. Rewards can take a monetary form (money) or
be a more intangible reward, like the feeling a person might get when doing a job that helps
others (a nurse, for example). We can even think of a reward as the prestige you get for
actually doing a job (as with a judge or other politicians).
You see, rewards are in the eyes of the beholder and are different for each person, which is
why motivating a person with rewards means you must apply the correct reward to the person
that is receiving it. For example, rewarding a nurse for a job well done monetarily might not
be the best call (beyond paying her her salary, of course!) when a reward like a gift from her
patients might be more appreciated.
In some cases, rewards can take the shape of opportunity to move up in the company.
Someone working hard and wanting to get ahead in an organization might feel rewarded if
they are promoted. That promotion (and the recognition that comes with it) is a means of
recognizing the work the employee does and makes the employee feel better about their job
and the company, thus enriching their overall job satisfaction.
One aspect of job satisfaction that is not really reward-related is job security. Let's face it some people obtain job satisfaction from knowing the company they are in is stable and not
going anywhere. There are individuals who feel this is the most important aspect of a job, and
having a stable company makes them feel secure, which helps promote job satisfaction.

Job Satisfaction and Performance

The relationship between how satisfied a person is with their job and their actual job
performance is open to discussion and debate. You see, it's hard to correlate those two aspects
primarily because when people are asked if they get job satisfaction from working at ABC
Company, a certain percentage will say yes just because they think if they say no, there could
be a negative consequence. After all, if you tell your boss you are not satisfied with your job,
what if his reply is 'Then I guess you better leave'? Thus, while we understand there is a
correlation between satisfaction and performance, it's hard to definitively nail it down without
some sort of survey error being present.
One thing is certain: There are two basic views of satisfaction and performance, and they are
inverted to one another. One believes that satisfaction leads to performance, while the other
believes performance leads to satisfaction. In effect, we are saying if someone is happy with
their job they will perform better, but in order to be satisfied, they have to perform in their job
to get that satisfaction. It is somewhat of a revolving door, and again, it is hard to distinguish
between whether satisfaction drives performance or if performance drives satisfaction.
Regardless of your viewpoint, it does not take a lot of thought to realize that if someone has a
high level of job satisfaction, they will probably have a high level of performance. On the

other hand, if someone is not satisfied with their job, they probably will not have the same
high level of performance.
To make this even a little more complicated, we also have to understand that a person can, in
their eyes, have a great deal of job satisfaction but not be doing the job to the level the
organization wants. The employee is happy with his or her job and gets satisfaction from
doing it, but that does not mean their performance is what the organization wants.

How Can We Measure Job

Satisfaction?
There are a number of ways to measure job satisfaction. Each relies on the fact that the
organization wants the employee to be open and honest about their level of satisfaction. As
we talked about earlier, this is sometimes easier said than done, and it can be a challenge
getting employees to talk openly about their jobs. Still, there are several ways to get job
satisfaction and to gather that information:
To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. Create your account

Register for a free trial

Are you a student or a

teacher?
I am a student

I am a teacher

Course Navigator

Business 107: Organizational Behavior

22 chapters | 142 lessons | 13 flashcard sets
1 - The Evolution of Organizational Behavior
2 - Management and Organizational Behavior

3 - Foundations of Individual Behavior

4 - Personality and Behavior in Organizations
5 - Emotions and Moods in the Workplace
6 - Attitudes and Values in the Workplace
Types of Attitudes in the Workplace: Cognitive,
Affective & Behavioral Components4:49
What is Job Satisfaction: Definition, Causes and
Factors6:50

6:06
Next Lesson

Job Dissatisfaction: Causes, Reasons and Employee

Responses
Deviant Workplace Behavior: Negative Effects on an
Organization5:15
Go toAttitudes and Values in the Workplace
7 - Perception and Attribution
Factors that Influence Perception in the
Workplace6:02
Perceptual Errors in the Workplace: Factors that
Distort Perception5:42

 The Theory of Attribution In Organizational Behavior:

Definition and Three Determinants4:42
Attributional Bias in the Workplace: Self-Serving Bias
and Fundamental Attribution Error3:53
Cultural Perceptions of Time in Organizations:
Monochronic and Polychronic Time3:18
Cultural Perceptions of Power in Organizations: Low
and High Power Distance4:39
Cultural Perceptions of Communication in
Organizations: Low Context and High Context3:28
Go toPerception and Attribution
8 - Employee Motivation
9 - Individual Decision Making in Organizations
10 - Workforce Diversity
11 - Organizational Communication in Business
12 - Groups and Work Teams
13 - Group Decision Making
14 - Conflict in the Workplace
15 - Leadership in Organizational Behavior
16 - Leadership Styles in Organizational Behavior
17 - Organizational Structure and Design
18 - Job Design
19 - Organizational Culture
20 - Organizational Change and Organizational Behavior
21 - Career Management
22 - Studying for Business 107

What is Job Satisfaction: Definition,

Causes and Factors Related Study
Materials

Related

Recently Updated

Popular

Browse by Courses
Business Courses
Human Resources Courses
Organizational Behavior Courses
Study Courses
Study Guide & Help Courses
Advanced Excel Training: Help & Tutorials
Internet & Social Media Marketing: Help & Review
Communications 102: Interpersonal Communication
Intermediate Excel Training: Help & Tutorials
Microsoft Excel Certification: Practice & Study Guide
Business Calculus Syllabus & Lesson Plans
Intro to Economics
UExcel Quantitative Analysis: Study Guide & Test Prep
Financial Accounting Syllabus Resource & Lesson Plans
AEPA Economics: Practice & Study Guide
MTTC Economics: Practice & Study Guide

 Leadership Study Guide

Business Writing: Help & Review

Browse by Lessons
Humor in the Workplace
Ethics in Project Management
Understanding & Dealing with Business Ethics Issues
Frederick Herzberg's Theory of Motivation: Overview
Goal-Setting Theory in Management: Definition & Examples
Quiz & Worksheet - Consideration in Business Law
Quiz & Worksheet - Characteristics & Types of Moods
Quiz & Worksheet - Management Skills
Quiz & Worksheet - Terms of Article 2 of the UCC
Quiz & Worksheet - Types of Personal Power
Perception and Attribution: Help and Review
Learning in the Workplace: Help and Review
Employee Motivation: Help and Review
Individual Decision Making in Organizations: Help and Review
Workforce Diversity: Help and Review

Create an account to start this course

today
Try it free for 5 days!

Create An Account

Explore our library of over

30,000 lessons