See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289442567

Job Satisfaction among School Teachers

Article  in  IIMB Management Review · January 2006

CITATIONS READS

82 14,751

2 authors, including:

Jeevan Jyoti
University of Jammu
69 PUBLICATIONS   945 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pschological Capital View project

‘Understanding the Role of Business Analytics-Some Applications ’ View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jeevan Jyoti on 17 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


R D Sharma
Jeevan Jyoti
R D Sharma is Professor of Commerce,
Coordinator, SAP, and Rector, Kathua Campus,
University of Jammu.
ramjirdsharma@rediffmail.com
Jeevan Jyoti is Lecturer in Commerce, University
of Jammu. jyotigupta64@rediffmail.com
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
Job Satisfaction among
School Teachers
A
high quality teaching staff is the cornerstone of a successful
educational system. Teachers are both the largest cost and the largest
human capital resource of an education system, particularly at the
school level. Attracting and retaining high quality teachers is thus a primary
necessity for educational institutions. However, good teachers are difficult to
recruit and almost impossible to retain if the rewards of teaching do not
outweigh the possible frustrations on account of poor job conditions1. The
first step in developing a high quality faculty is to understand the factors
associated with teaching quality and retention. One of the important factors
is job satisfaction, which has been studied widely by organisational researchers
and has been linked to organisational commitment as well as to organisational
performance2. Satisfaction with teaching as a career, not merely as a job, is an
important policy issue since it is associated with teacher effectiveness, which
ultimately affects student achievement3. Thus, understanding the factors that
contribute to teacher satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) is essential to improving
the information base needed to support a successful educational system.
Job satisfaction is an affective reaction to an individual’s work situation, and
has been described as a positive emotional response resulting from appraisal
of one’s job4. It is the function of the degree to which one’s needs can be
satisfied5 and operationalised as a discrepancy between ‘how much is there
now’ and ‘how much there should be’6. One of the aspects that can lead to
dissatisfaction is one’s attitude towards one’s job7. Job attitude can be defined
as an overall feeling about one’s job or career or in terms of specific facets of
the job or career (e.g. compensation, autonomy, coworkers) and can be
related to specific outcomes, such as productivity8. While some studies indicate
349

Individuals enter the teaching
profession because they want to
work with young people. Very few
teach because of salary, benefits
or prestige. However, while
intrinsic forces may motivate
people to become teachers,
extrinsic conditions can influence
their job satisfaction and their
desire to remain in teaching
throughout their career.
that employees generally want stable employment, higher
promotion opportunities and satisfactory salary9, others show
that social satisfaction, attitude of superiors and flexible
working schedule also affect the job satisfaction level of the
employees10. Thus job satisfaction is a multidimensional
concept that breaks down into several dimensions including
intrinsic task satisfaction, attachment to people at work, the
behaviour of superiors, and satisfaction with security, income
and chances of promotion11.
A teacher’s satisfaction with his or her career may have strong
implications for student learning. Specifically, it may influence
the quality and stability of instruction given to students. Some
researchers argue that teachers who do not feel supported in
their work may be less motivated to do their best in the
classroom12. In addition, highly satisfied teachers are less likely
to change schools or to leave the teaching profession
altogether than those who are dissatisfied with many aspects
of their work life13. These actions disrupt the school
environment and result in the shift of valuable educational
resources away from actual instruction towards costly staff
replacement efforts.
Factors Associated with Teacher Satisfaction
The factors that affect a teacher’s satisfaction include intrinsic
and extrinsic factors, demographic factors, and individual
characteristics of the teacher and of the school.
Intrinsic Factors
Intrinsic satisfaction to the teachers can come from classroom
activities. Daily interactions with students inform teachers’
350
feelings about whether or not students have learned
something as a result of their teaching. Student characteristics
and perceptions of teacher control over the classroom
environment also are intrinsic factors affecting teacher
satisfaction14. Several studies have found that these factors
are related to both attrition and satisfaction in teaching as
well as other professions. Some researchers hold that
conferring professional autonomy will enhance the
attractiveness of the profession as a career choice and will
improve the quality of classroom teaching and practice15.
Intrinsic factors play a significant role in motivating individuals
to enter the teaching profession because they enjoy teaching
and want to work with young people. Very few teachers
enter the profession because of external rewards such as
salary, benefits, or prestige16. However, while intrinsic forces
may motivate people to become teachers, extrinsic conditions
can influence their job satisfaction and their desire to remain
in teaching throughout their career.
Extrinsic Factors
A variety of extrinsic factors have been associated with teacher
satisfaction, including salary, perceived support from
administrators, school safety, and availability of school
resources, among others17. These and other characteristics
of a teacher’s work environment have been targeted by public
commissions, researchers, and educators who claim that
poor working conditions have demoralised the teaching
profession; when teachers perceive a lack of support for their
work, they are not motivated to do their best in the classroom,
and when teachers are not satisfied with their working
conditions, they are more likely to change schools or to leave
the profession altogether18.
Demographic Factors
Similar to professionals in other occupations, job satisfaction
in teachers has been related to demographic variables
including age, education, marital status and gender19. Perie
and Baker, in a study conducted on job satisfaction among
more than 36,000 elementary and secondary public school
teachers, reported that female teachers reported higher levels
of job satisfaction than male teachers and that teachers’ job
satisfaction showed weak correlations with salary and
benefits20. In addition, they observed that their results were
important for policy makers and administrators who could
make changes to enhance teacher satisfaction by creating or
maintaining safe work environments, increasing feelings of
autonomy, fostering greater parental involvement, and
improving administrative support.
Job Satisfaction among School Teachers
Specific Teacher and School Characteristics
Although organisational factors related to teacher satisfaction
are often the focus of research efforts, several teacher and
school characteristics are also related to satisfaction. For
instance, research examining the satisfaction of public and
private school teachers indicates that teaching in a private
school is associated with greater job satisfaction21. Similarly,
elementary school teachers tend to be more satisfied with
their working conditions than secondary school teachers22.
A Study of Job Satisfaction among School
Teachers
The literature reviewed above provides a piecemeal account
of various dimensions of job satisfaction from the teachers’
perspective. None of the studies discussed covers all aspects
of the multidimensional concept of job satisfaction of teachers
and the related variables that affect it. The present study takes
into account all the intrinsic (nature of the work, promotion
and recognition, etc), extrinsic (behaviour of superiors, co-
workers, pay, etc) and demographic variables (age, education
level, sex, marital status, etc) to judge the level of job
satisfaction of school teachers both in government and private
schools. Correlation analysis is done to throw light on the
relationship of these variables with job satisfaction.
Hypotheses
Within the broad scope of the research gap that was identified
in the literature, the review led to the formulation of the
hypotheses for the present study.
Haque23 found that Indian academicians are deriving only a
modest degree of job satisfaction and there seems to be a
growing discontentment among the teachers towards their
job despite the different plans and programmes started for
their benefit. Consequently the standard of education is
falling24. This leads to the following hypothesis:
H1: Teachers are not satisfied with their job.
The education commission25 reported a disparity between
the pay scales of government and private school teachers,
which causes dissatisfaction. Das and Panda26 found that
government teachers are more satisfied than private school
teachers but Godiyal and Srivastava27 reported that English
medium schools teachers were more satisfied than
government model school teachers, while Sundrajan and
Sabesan28 did not find any significant difference between
government and private school teachers with respect to job
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
One of the reasons frequently
cited by teachers for leaving was
dissatisfaction with the school
principal. Dissatisfaction increases
when one has to work under an
incapable, inefficient and
indifferent head; on the other hand
democratic functioning generates
an open, friendly and cooperative
atmosphere and increases job
satisfaction.
satisfaction. Hence, the next hypothesis:
H2: Government school teachers are more satisfied than
private school teachers.
A survey of skilled and unskilled workers indicated that
occupation level was an important variable in determining
employee satisfaction. Probe29 in a research project observed
that the higher the level of occupation, the higher is the
satisfaction of the teachers. However, some research
indicated that the elementary level teachers are more satisfied
than their secondary level colleagues30. The above literature
led to the formulation of next hypothesis:
H3: There is significant difference in the job satisfaction of
primary and secondary school teachers.
One of the reasons frequently cited by teachers for leaving
was dissatisfaction with the school principal. Ahuja31 reported
that dissatisfaction increases when one has to work under an
incapable, inefficient and indifferent head or boss; on the
other hand democratic functioning generates an open,
friendly and cooperative atmosphere. Teachers working
under such conditions are likely to be more content and
happy32. The role played by the superior towards the job
satisfaction of an employee as indicated in the literature leads
to setting up of the fourth hypothesis:
H4: There is a strong positive relationship between the job
satisfaction of a teacher and the behaviour of the principal.
Dwivedi33 reported that friends, co-workers and family
members exercise influence on an individual and affect his
job satisfaction, which was further confirmed by
Ramakrishanaiah34 who found that 93 percent of college
teachers who were highly satisfied with their job expressed
351

Although the root desire for pay is
the individual’s desire to satisfy his
physical needs, an additional
factor is the employees’ desire to
sustain their position according to
their capabilities viz, knowledge
and education, at the work place.
If their expectation does not match
with their jobs, they experience
dissatisfaction.
cordial relations with their colleagues. This leads to the next
hypothesis:
H5: There is a positive relationship between co-workers’/
society’s attitude and job satisfaction.
The nature of work is a very important element of job
satisfaction. In fact, it can probably be said that it is the major
determinant of job satisfaction35. Vicroy et al reported that
employees tend to be less satisfied when working on a boring
job36 and a strong association has been reported between job
satisfaction and perceived job security as well as teachers’
evaluation of work place37. It has been observed that high
strain jobs result in ill health (emotional exhaustion,
psychosomatic health problems) and active jobs give rise to
positive outcomes like job challenge and job satisfaction38.
Thus challenging jobs create an environment of satisfaction.
The nature of work done is a very important element of job
satisfaction and is the major determinant of job satisfaction.
This takes us to the next hypothesis:
H6: There is a positive relationship between elements of work
and job satisfaction.
Rai and Sinha39 found that satisfaction of a higher level of
challenge and other motivational aspects result in high
magnitude of self-esteem and hence internal job satisfaction
is a significant predictor of self-esteem. It has been further
suggested that jobs with opportunities for growth,
achievement, recognition and advancement enhance
motivation and job satisfaction40. Thus, the next hypothesis
follows:
H7
H7:: Growth opportunities and recognition affect the job
satisfaction of an individual.
352
Lawler41 suggested that pay satisfaction is a function of two
perceptions: (1) the amount of pay the employee feels that he
should receive and (2) the amount of pay he receives.
Although the root desire for pay as such is the individual’s
desire to satisfy his physical needs, an additional factor is the
employees’ desire to sustain their position according to their
capabilities viz., knowledge and education, at the work place
and if their expectation does not match with their jobs, they
experience dissatisfaction. The findings of research
concentrating on the relationship between level of education
and job satisfaction have been inconsistent. Some of them
revealed a positive relationship42, while others identified no
relationship or an inverse relationship43. Generally married
adults are better adjusted than unmarried counterparts44. As
adjustment is positively related to job satisfaction, one may
expect married teachers to be more satisfied with their jobs45.
Gender difference has also been found to affect job satisfaction
as males reported that they were more satisfied than females
with their jobs46. Age has been found as one of the most
important variables in exercising its influence on job
satisfaction, and the relationship between these is quite
complex47. From the above-mentioned literature it becomes
quite clear that features of demographic profile effect the job
satisfaction of an individual. Hence, the next hypothesis:
H8: There is a positive relationship between demographic
profile (age, education level, sex and marital status), pay and
job satisfaction.
Research Design and Methodology
The study is an evaluative and diagnostic attempt to discover
empirically the nature of relationships between job satisfaction
and different factors, as well as independent aspects of job
satisfaction within the extensively drawn domain of the
problem in question.
Sample Size and Design
The sample comprised school teachers working in
government and private schools in Jammu city. There are
485 teachers working in government schools and 470
teachers working in private schools in Jammu city, thus the
total research population amounted to 955. Around 16
percent (150) of the teachers out of total population were
chosen as respondents for the study. The sample was selected
on the basis of a three digit random number table48 from the
alphabetical list. After dropping 30 questionnaires that were
not filled in properly, the effective sample size came to 120.
With equal representation of government and private school
Job Satisfaction among School Teachers
teachers, as well as primary and secondary teachers in the
population, each group (secondary government school
teachers, primary government school teachers, secondary
private school teachers and primary private school teachers)
had 30 representatives.
Data Collection Form and Generation
of Scale Items
To produce a reliable questionnaire both primary and
secondary information was used. The questionnaire was
prepared on the guidelines of the Job Descriptive Index (JDI)49,
the validity of which already stands tested50. Likert’s five-point
scale was used for measuring attitudes. Besides the
demographic profile items, the questionnaire comprised 109
statements in six sections, as follows: (a) Principal’s behaviour
– 22 statements; (b) Society and colleagues’ behaviour – 16
statements; (c) Work itself – 30 statements; (d) Pay and
rewards – 11 statements; (e) Growth opportunities and
recognition – 20 statements; and (f) Students’ behaviour and
others – 10 statements.
Before the finalisation of the questionnaire, pre-testing of the
questionnaire was carried out for the qualitative investigation.
Fifteen percent of the total sample was administered the
questionnaire for this purpose. Subsequently, the language
was simplified, unnecessary questions were deleted and
counterchecks were added in the questionnaire. In order to
collect the data, visits were paid to the schools. The teachers
were personally briefed about the purpose of the study and
all queries of the respondents were clarified before
administering the questionnaire to them. Due to the passive
nature of the respondents, the questionnaires had to be filled
in personally which, though time consuming, resulted in a
small but effective sample.
In this study the job satisfaction of the teachers was calculated
in two ways. First, the overall job satisfaction was calculated
on the basis of satisfaction secured from the above mentioned
dimensions (a) to (f). Secondly, a master statement ‘you are
satisfied with your job’ was added in the third dimension
(Work itself), which was later used to measure the degree of
correlation between job satisfaction and different dimensions
of job satisfaction. This statement was not entered in the
factor analysis.
Data Purification
Factor analysis was carried out through SPSS to simplify and
reduce the data. It was carried along with principal
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
The questionnaire was prepared
on the guidelines of the Job
Descriptive Index. Besides the
demographic profile items, the
questionnaire comprised 109
statements on principal’s
behaviour; society and
colleagues’ behaviour; work itself;
pay and rewards; growth
opportunities and recognition; and
students’ behaviour and others.
component analysis along with orthogonal rotation
procedure of varimax for summarising the original
information with minimum factors and optimal coverage.
Statements with factor loadings less than 0.5 and eigen values
less than 1.0 were ignored for the subsequent analysis51. The
data was subjected to factor analysis twice. Initially, it was
carried with all the statements from six sections, which
comprised the different dimensions of job satisfaction. As
job satisfaction is a multi-dimension phenomenon, statements
that were clubbed in all the three factors belonged to different
dimensions of job satisfaction. Hence factor analysis was again
carried out for each dimension separately52.
The process of data reduction and purification carried with
the help of factor analysis resulted in eight factors with
different levels of Variance Explained (VE). The total VE for
each dimension was 89.52 for principal’s behaviour, 84.36
for society and colleagues’ behaviour, 83.47 for work itself,
80.30 for pay and rewards, 83.31 for growth and recognition
opportunities, and 84.80 for students’ behaviour and others.
Reliability and Validity
The reliability of the data collected was judged through
different tests including ANOVA and Cronbach Alpha. The
mean values of both halves were above the average. The
coefficients of reliability show very high values signifying the
reliability of the data collected. The ‘t’ distribution of the
students was also performed to strengthen the validity. Further,
the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling
adequacy, the eigen values and the positive correlation matrix
all proved very good for all the six dimensions constituting
job satisfaction.
353
Findings
The overall level of job satisfaction measured on the basis of
responses derived from government as well as private school
teachers teaching in the primary and secondary standards in
Jammu city was found to be 3.17 on the five point Likert scale
used. The job satisfaction of the teachers in each group on
individual dimensions was also studied separately (Exhibit 1).
The analysis below reveals that all the dimensions studied
have a positive relationship with job satisfaction and that
teachers are dissatisfied with their pay package.
Job Satisfaction among Government School
Teachers
The level of job satisfaction derived by government school
teachers is modest (3.03). The maximum satisfaction derives
from the dimension of principal’s behaviour (3.33) and the
minimum from pay and rewards (2.64), indicating high
dissatisfaction with the pay and rewards package provided
to them. Around 60% are satisfied and rest are dissatisfied
with their job. Moreover, the majority (56%) are enjoying the
element of job security, which makes them stick to their job.
The level of job satisfaction derived by the government
teachers has been worked out separately for primary and
secondary school teachers.
Job satisfaction among government secondary
school teachers: The mean job satisfaction enjoyed by
secondary standard teachers is 3.17. None of the teachers
has secured highest level of job satisfaction as the mean scores
on different dimensions are between 3.25 and 2.37, depicting
that all is not well in their job. Satisfaction obtained from
principal’s behaviour contributes the most towards the total
job satisfaction; only 20% teachers are dissatisfied with their
principal. By and large, the principal is seen as a strict person
but an efficient administrator, who does not point out their
faults in public. Analysis of this dimension reveals that a
principal with a guiding approach towards the errors of his
subordinates helps in improving the superior subordinate
relationship. The coefficient of correlation has come to .94
between principal’s behaviour and job satisfaction confirming
the belief that the superior’s attitude is related with his
subordinate’s job satisfaction.
The majority of the teachers (84%) also found their colleagues
friendly, though some (32%) agreed that there are sometimes
quarrels between them. These teachers are also of the opinion
that society underestimates the teacher’s job, and consider
this profession insufficient to meet their basic needs. This
issue can be the cause of occasional strikes by the teachers
demanding higher salary as they want to be on par with other
professions that society values. The coefficient of correlation
has arrived at .82 between society and colleagues’ behaviour
and job satisfaction.
The level of satisfaction secured from the work dimension is
3.31. Most of the teachers (76%) reported their work as
interesting but 60 percent would still like to change their job
if the opportunity is provided. The root cause of dissatisfaction
is that work in the desired class or area of interest is not
provided, which frustrates them. The teachers further
reported that the facilities for carrying on the work are
inadequate and this negatively affects their ability or willingness
to do the work. It lowers the morale of the teachers and leads

Exhibit 1 Job Satisfaction among Government and

Private School Teachers
Dimensions of Secondary Primary Mean Secondary Primary Mean
Satisfaction Standard Standard Satisfaction Standard Standard Satisfaction
Teachers Teachers (Pvt) Teachers Teachers (Govt)
(Pvt) (Pvt) (Govt) (Govt)

Principal’s Behaviour 3.90 3.30 3.60 3.25 3.41 3.33

Society & Colleagues 3.65 3.51 3.57 3.17 3.19 3.18

Work Itself 3.27 3.22 3.24 3.31 2.95 3.13

Pay & Rewards 2.76 2.43 2.60 2.37 2.92 2.64

Growth & Recognition 3.07 3.16 3.12 2.73 3.02 2.88

Students & 3.72 3.68 3.70 2.90 3.17 3.03

Physical Facilities

Mean JS 3.40 3.22 3.31 3.17 2.89 3.03

354 Job Satisfaction among School Teachers

to dissatisfaction. The coefficient of correlation is .88 between
work and job satisfaction, which indicates a positive
relationship.
The mean level of satisfaction drawn from the pay and
rewards dimension has arrived at 2.37, which is below the
average. Very few (6%) teachers feel that they are being paid
adequately and the rest of them feel they are not getting what
they deserve. Many of them indirectly reported that they have
to turn private tuitions to meet their financial needs. Job
security is the only consoling feature as most of them find
their jobs secure. The coefficient of correlation has come to
only .94 between pay and job satisfaction.
The dimension of growth and recognition opportunities also
contributes little to the job satisfaction of the teachers (2.73).
The majority (65%) feel that the promotion and transfer
policies adopted by the government are not genuine and
service rules are so rigid that they induce an element of fear
in them. The coefficient of correlation has come to .94 for
this dimension.
The degree of satisfaction drawn from students’ behaviour
and other physical facilities is below average (2.9). Although
77 percent of the teachers are satisfied with the physical
facilities, they feel that there is an element of social mischief
among the students. The coefficient of correlation has come
to .95 for this dimension hinting at the intensity of positive
relationship between the two.
An analysis of the dimensions of job satisfaction indicates
that job security and a guiding approach by the principal
towards his subordinates add to the job satisfaction of
government secondary school teachers. On the other hand
underestimation of the profession by society and the antisocial
elements among the students lead to dissatisfaction.
Job satisfaction among government primary school
teachers: The degree of job satisfaction obtained by these
teachers is 2.89 (Exhibit 1). Although the mean job satisfaction
in this group is not high, the majority of them (88%) have
secured above the average level of job satisfaction. These
teachers are very satisfied with their principal due to his
impartial and appreciating attitude. Despite these positive
features about the principal’s behaviour the teachers have
also pointed out that principal’s habit of getting things done
according to his own will is a source of dissatisfaction for
them. It indicates that dictatorial behaviour among superiors
in this profession causes dissatisfaction to the subordinates.
Coefficient of correlation is .95 between the principal’s
behaviour and job satisfaction.
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
An analysis of the dimensions of job
satisfaction indicates that job security
and a guiding approach by the
principal towards his subordinates
add to the job satisfaction of
government secondary school
teachers. On the other hand
underestimation of the profession by
society and the antisocial elements
among the students lead to
dissatisfaction.
The behaviour of colleagues has been found friendly but the
teachers (74%) have a strong notion that inappropriate and
undesirable people enter into this profession as they have
exhausted other options, so society underestimates their
profession. It hurts the genuine lovers of the profession, lowers
their self-esteem and ego, which in turn leads to dissatisfaction.
A significant relationship has been found between job
satisfaction and society and colleagues’ behaviour as the
coefficient of correlation has come to.92 between the two.
The teachers in this group have secured more mean pay
satisfaction (2.92) than the teachers in other samples i.e.,
2.37, 2.76 and 2.43 (Exhibit 1). The reason for this is reflected
in the education level of primary standard government
teachers, as 40% of the teachers are matriculates and their
level of pay satisfaction is above average, which raises the
mean pay satisfaction level. This analysis confirms the facts
that at the same standard of teaching, highly qualified teachers
are less satisfied with their pay and reward system than
teachers with low qualifications. An interesting fact is that
the majority of the teachers (56%) don’t want to leave or
change their job. This is due to the age and experience of the
teachers in this sample. Most of the teachers (80%) are above
30 years, with experience between 10 to 30 years. This
suggests that as people grow older their expectations and
requirements closely match with the job requirements that
occupy their time and efforts, and hence they do not want to
change or leave their job.
All this reveals that primary standard government teachers
are more satisfied with the behaviour of their colleagues and
principals than other dimensions of satisfaction, and the lower
the level of academic qualification, the higher is the degree of
pay satisfaction.
355

Private primary school teachers
have secured the maximum
satisfaction from the students and
the physical environment and
minimum satisfaction from the pay
and rewards dimension. The
reason for their dissatisfaction is
probably their high qualification
but low job status. They further
reported that their position does
not match their experience.
Job Satisfaction among Private School Teachers
The level of job satisfaction derived by private school teachers
is modest at 3.31 (Exhibit 1). The source of maximum
satisfaction is the dimension of students and physical
environment (3.70), while the minimum is pay and rewards
(2.60). The level of job satisfaction derived by the private
school teachers has been worked out separately for primary
and secondary levels.
Job satisfaction among private secondary school
teachers: The overall level of job satisfaction for these
teachers is 3.40, which is highest in comparison to the
satisfaction obtained by teachers in other samples. They are
very satisfied with the behaviour of their principals. The mean
satisfaction obtained (3.90) is the highest in this dimension.
The coefficient of correlation arrived at is .86 indicating
positive association between the two.
The behaviour of society and colleagues is also high at 3.65.
Friendly behaviour of colleagues and their appropriateness
for the job is enhancing the satisfaction level of the teachers.
The coefficient of correlation has come to .85 between society
and colleagues’ behaviour and job satisfaction, which shows
the importance of the relationship between the two.
The satisfaction obtained from the work dimension is 3.27.
The high score gaining statements are the fulfilment of moral
values and creativity, with 48 percent stating that the idea of
imparting knowledge is very important to them. The majority
(84%) find their work interesting but with the lapse of time
there is a lack of novelty in the work. This situation leads to
boredom, which in turn leads to dissatisfaction. The coefficient
of correlation has come to .86 for work and job satisfaction
356
indicating a positive relationship between them.
The level of satisfaction regarding pay and rewards is 2.76,
which is the lowest dimension for this group, bringing down
the overall level of satisfaction. The coefficient of correlation
is .86 between pay and rewards and job satisfaction.
The growth and recognition opportunities dimension
contributes moderately to the total level of job satisfaction
(3.07). Most of the teachers (84%) agreed that they have a
constant thirst for knowledge and that the job makes further
studies possible. They have also reported that the service rules
induce an element of fear in them, which hampers their
satisfaction. The coefficient of correlation (.97) between
growth and recognition opportunities and job satisfaction is
significant.
The behaviour of students and physical facilities adds highly
(3.72) to the total level of job satisfaction. It shows that most
of the teachers are satisfied with the behaviour of students,
peons and sanitary facilities in their schools. The coefficient
of correlation has arrived at .94.
An analysis of the job satisfaction of private secondary school
teachers reveals a positive relationship between different
dimensions of satisfaction and job satisfaction.
Job satisfaction among private primary school
teachers: The degree of job satisfaction secured by this group
is moderate at 3.22 (Exhibit 1). They have secured the
maximum satisfaction (3.68) from the students and physical
environment and minimum satisfaction from the pay and
rewards dimension (2.43). It shows that the teachers are not
satisfied with their present pay and reward system. About 60
percent pointed out that they are not being paid according to
the amount of work they do and most of them (92%) are of
view that the present salary is less than what they actually
deserve. The reason for their dissatisfaction is probably their
high qualification but low job status: 40% of them are
postgraduates, 24% are trained graduates and 36% are
graduates. They further reported that their position does not
match their qualifications and experience. The degree of
satisfaction drawn from other dimensions has been estimated
at 3.30 from principal’s behaviour, 3.22 from work itself,
3.16 from growth and recognition opportunities and 3.51
from society and colleagues’ behaviour.
Most of the teachers in the group (52%) have secured below
average level of job satisfaction. The reason for such a grim
picture has been attributed to the element of lack of job
security. Due to this insecurity, 76 percent would like to
change their job if given the opportunity. This group is the
only one in which teachers expressed a negative attitude to
Job Satisfaction among School Teachers
 Exhibit 2 Job Satisfaction at Different schools are less satisfied than those working in government
Levels of Teaching in concerns. But the results of this study show a different picture
Government and Private Schools i.e. the level job satisfaction enjoyed by government teachers
Primary Std Secondary Std is less than that of private teachers (Exhibit 2). Although the
School Deviation School Deviation level of job satisfaction in both the cases is modest (3.17 for
Govt School Teachers 2.89 1.0418 3.17 1.132
govt. teachers and 3.31 for private teachers), the difference
cannot be ignored. However, the difference was not found
Pvt School Teachers 3.22 1.1651 3.40 1.087
significant when subjected to test of significance (Exhibit 3).
Total mean JS 3.055 1.082 3.285 1.134
The attitude of colleagues and society has been reported to
their principal, pointing to a partial attitude and policy of be friendly by the private school teachers. They are also
divide and rule as a cause of dissatisfaction. The coefficient of enjoying their work more than the government teachers.
correlation has come to .947 between principal’s behaviour The government teachers are however more satisfied with
and job satisfaction, which is very significant. the financial aspects (pay and rewards) of their job than the
private school teachers, with 26% of government teachers
Comparative Analysis of Job Satisfaction reporting satisfaction with their salary against only 8% of
between Primary and Secondary School private teachers. Most of the private school teachers felt
Teachers they were not being paid what they deserved. Money acts as
As can be seen from Exhibit 2, the overall mean level of job a source to satisfy the physical needs of an individual and
satisfaction enjoyed by the secondary standard teachers when it is lacking in the job, it leads to dissatisfaction. On the
(3.285) is greater than the job satisfaction secured by primary other hand in government schools, the greater job security
standard teachers (3.055). The result is similar in both means that teachers are more stable in their job.
government and private schools. The comparative analysis of job satisfaction secured by
The mean difference in the job satisfaction of primary and government and private school teachers leads to rejection
secondary standard teachers has been found significant when of the hypothesis H2 that government school teachers are
subjected to test of significance (Exhibit 3). more satisfied than private school teachers.

The significant difference between the job satisfaction enjoyed

by the teachers of secondary and primary standards leads to
the acceptance of hypothesis H3. This also suggests that as
the occupation level increases, the job satisfaction of an
individual also increases, due to the greater status, position
and authority enjoyed by teachers at the higher level.
Comparative Analysis of Job Satisfaction
between Government and Private School
Teachers
There is a general notion that people working in private
Overall Degree of Job Satisfaction among
School Teachers
The degree of job satisfaction secured by teachers of primary
and secondary standards, being modest at 3.17, leads to
rejection of hypothesis H1 that the teachers teaching in the
schools of Jammu city are not satisfied with their job.
The level of satisfaction obtained from all the dimensions of
job satisfaction is modest except the satisfaction secured from
pay and rewards dimension, which is below average (Exhibit
4). The majority (68%) felt they were being paid inadequately.

Exhibit 3 Independent Samples Test

t-test for Equality t Df Sig Mean Std Error 95% Confidence
of Means (2-tailed) Difference Difference Interval of
the Difference
Lower Upper

Primary and Secondary 0.473 118 0.049 0.29833 0.20253 -0.10273 0.69939
Standard Teachers

Govt and Private 1.352 118 0.179 0.27267 0.2016 -0.12656 0.6719
School Teachers

IIMB Management Review, December 2006 357

 Exhibit 4 Dimensionwise Satisfaction
4

Mean Satisfaction
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Principal Colleagues Work Pay Growth Students
& Society and and Physical
Recognition Facilities
Dimensions

A noteworthy point is that although most of the teachers feel
themselves morally committed to their job and experience
an element of creativity, they want to shift to some other
profession due to inadequate returns for their efforts on the
job and their desire for better status than the present one.
All the dimensions of satisfaction have been found positively
correlated to job satisfaction. The coefficients of correlation
arrived at were: .767 for principal’s behaviour, .823 for society
and colleagues’ behaviour, .865 for work itself, .837 for pay
and rewards, .907 for growth and recognition opportunities,
.898 for students and .838 for physical environment.
This analysis leads to the acceptance of the hypotheses H4,
H5, H6 and H7 regarding strong relationships between
principal’s behaviour, society and colleagues’ behaviour, work
elements and growth and recognition opportunities with job
satisfaction.
Demographic Profile and Job Satisfaction
Age: Agewise analysis of job satisfaction revealed
insignificant coefficient of correlation between the two at
.08, indicating lack of linear relationship between age and
job satisfaction of an individual. An attempt was also made
to shed further light on the cyclical relationship between the
two reported by previous researches53. To this purpose, class
intervals of age were made and the mean job satisfaction
obtained by teachers in each group was calculated. The
results thus obtained revealed a cyclical pattern, where the
maximum job satisfaction is during 41-45 and 55-60 years.
Kendall’s W test for several related samples was used to find
the significance of the difference between mean of different
age groups. The results revealed significant difference in
mean job satisfaction of various age groups (26-30 and 36-
40; 26-30 and 56-60; 31-34 and 41-45; 36-40 and 41-45).
But no significant mean difference was found in age groups
ranging between 41-60 years. The above analysis shows that
satisfaction level varies for different age groups (Exhibit 5).
Marital Status: The analysis of the degree of job satisfaction
of the married (60 percent) and unmarried (40 percent)
revealed that the mean level of job satisfaction secured by the
married teachers (3.26) is more than their unmarried

Exhibit 5 Agewise Job Satisfaction

4.5
4
Mean Job Satisfaction

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
20 - 25 26 - 30 31 - 35 36- 40 41 - 45 46 - 50 51 - 55 56 - 60

Age Groups

358 Job Satisfaction among School Teachers

counterparts (3.01), but this difference is not significant as
the level of significance (.414) is greater than .05.
Gender: The proportion of male (50%) and female (50%)
teachers, being matched with their natural census report,
revealed that the female teachers are more satisfied (3.39)
than the male teachers (2.94). The difference was found to
be significant when subjected to the paired sample T test. The
level of satisfaction secured by female teachers is quite
noticeable as they have secured above the average degree of
job satisfaction and male teachers have secured below the
average job satisfaction. The reason for this can be attributed
to low expectation about job status among the female teachers
as compared to the male teachers. Moreover the majority of
the female teachers (80%) like this profession due to the nature
and socio-cultural value of the teaching profession.
Level of education: Previous research has shown that as
the level of academic qualification increases, the level of job
satisfaction enjoyed by an individual also increases. However,
when the job satisfaction secured by the teachers in the study
was matched with their respective academic qualification,
the results revealed that the degree of job satisfaction secured
by the untrained postgraduates was more than that of the
trained postgraduates. The simple graduates also secured
greater job satisfaction than trained graduates. So, it is not
confirmed that job satisfaction increases with an increase in
education level of an individual.
In order to find out whether there exists some relation
between the education level of the teachers and their pay
satisfaction or not, the degree of pay satisfaction has been
studied in relation to different levels of education. The analysis
revealed that as the level of education increases, the level of
pay satisfaction decreases (Exhibit 6). The level of pay
satisfaction enjoyed varies from the maximum of 3.07 in case
Exhibit 6 Level of Education and Pay Satisfaction
Qualification Secondary Primary
Std Teachers Std Teachers
(Pvt) (Pvt)
MA/MSc, BEd 2.41 - 2.36
MA/MSc 2.76 2.17
BA/BSc, BEd 2.43 2.34
BA/BSc 2.55 2.48
Trained Hr Secondary - -
Trained Matric - -
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
of matriculate-trained teachers and minimum of 2.41 in case
of trained postgraduate teachers. So, it can be concluded
that there is an inverse relationship between education level
and pay satisfaction of an individual.
Relative Importance of Factors Influencing Job
Satisfaction
In order to find out the extent of variance caused by different
dimensions in determining the degree of job satisfaction of
the schoolteachers, multiple regression equation was drawn
through SPSS. The equation and the ANOVA analysis revealed
that the influence of different factors varies. The aspect of
promotion and recognition plays the most influential role in
the determination of the level of job satisfaction, causing 23
percent variation in job satisfaction. The principal’s behaviour
(20%), physical facilities (20%), students’ behaviour (17.7%)
and pay (17.7%) are also causing considerable variation in the
level of job satisfaction. It is thus concluded that various
dimensions of JS are positively correlated but the extent of
influence exerted by them in determining the overall level of
job satisfaction is different.
Discussion and Conclusions
The degree of job satisfaction secured by teachers is not high
and the reason lies in insufficient pay. Unless the physical
needs, which require money, are satisfied, an employee will
not be tempted to achieve higher order needs. An interesting
fact that has come to light is that private school teachers are
more satisfied than government school teachers despite the
poor pay package, due to the congenial atmosphere being
provided by the private schools for their teachers. Female
teachers are more satisfied than their male counterparts due
to the nature of the job and the socio-cultural value of the
Secondary Primary Mean JS
Std Teachers Std Teachers
(Govt) (Govt)
2.41 2.39
2.70 2.69 2.58
2.74 2.82 2.58
- 2.92 2.65
- 2.95 2.95
- 3.07 3.07
359

Most of the teachers reported
dissatisfaction with the promotion
policy in their schools. School
managements should ensure that
the promotion of the teachers is
based on a fair and transparent
process. Most of the private
school teachers reported lack of
job security. In order to enhance
their job satisfaction this should be
given due consideration.
teaching profession. The level of education inversely affects
the pay satisfaction of employees working at the same level
(primary/secondary).
The study found that each and every aspect of the job played
a role in job satisfaction: superior’s behaviour, colleagues’
behaviour and society, promotion and recognition, students
and physical environment, level of occupation, pay, gender,
age, marital status and nature of job ie, government or private.
Strategic Action
Job satisfaction of teachers is multi-dimensional and in order
to raise it, efforts need to be made by all the concerned parties,
particularly the principal, the management of the school,
government agencies, etc. Some of the strategic actions that
emerged from the findings are summarised below.
Principal’s behaviour: The positive attitude of the principal
helps a lot in improving the job satisfaction of his subordinates.
It is therefore important for the principal to avoid dictatorial
behaviour; he should be a good administrator, who gets the
work done efficiently without hurting the dignity of the
teachers. He should adopt a guiding approach to the faults of
the teachers and never point at their faults in public.
Career planning and development programmes:
Career planning and development has been recognised as
one of the most significant factors in enhancing the job
satisfaction of an individual. So it should be the duty of the
management of both government and private schools to
devise plans for the career and development of school
teachers.
School management: It should be made mandatory by
360
the school management authorities that the selection board
selects only those candidates for whom the teaching
profession is a career of choice. It is proven fact that if the
nature of work and aspirations of an individual do not match,
it results in job dissatisfaction. So the selection board should
ensure an optimal match between the requirements of the
job and aspirations of an individual.
To make the teachers’ work enjoyable, they should be given
the opportunity to teach the subjects that they prefer to teach.
This will prove beneficial to both the teacher and the students.
Moreover, there should be no overcrowding in the
classrooms, taking into consideration the idea of ‘span of
control’54. Planning classes based on the number of students
a teacher can handle ensures that the teacher is not fatigued
and derives satisfaction from his job.
In order to remove the monotony of day-to-day work, some
means of recreation should be provided to the teachers in
their free periods, such as providing periodicals and magazines
in the staff room and setting up a sports or recreational hall
for teachers in every school. Workshops should also be
organised for the teachers, which will help them to improve
their teaching methods while adding an element of novelty. A
variety of training and development programmes including
personality development programmes can be introduced,
besides sending teachers for academic training courses like
BEd or MEd. These will help fulfil both physical and
psychological needs and improve job satisfaction.
Most of the teachers reported dissatisfaction with the
promotion policy in their schools. School managements
should ensure that the promotion of the teachers is based on
a fair and transparent process, i.e. the teachers with the same
qualifications, teaching ability and experience should be
promoted at the same time. For an individual to be highly
satisfied with his job, the discrepancy between what he
expects from his job and what he actually gets should be
minimised.
An individual demands job security when he joins any
profession. Most of the private school teachers reported lack
of job security as they could be fired at the manager’s will. In
order to enhance the job satisfaction of private school
teachers, this element of job security should be given due
consideration. Private schools often ask teachers to sign on
receipts indicating higher sum of pay than they actually get.
This can only be rectified by strict vigilance by the government
authorities and legislation ensuring that private school
teachers receive fair pay. The government should also allow
private school teachers to render their services during the
Job Satisfaction among School Teachers
board examinations, allowing them to supplement their
income and also providing them with confidence and
experience in the functioning of the education system on the
whole.
Government school teachers on the other hand reported
improper transfer policy of the authorities, wherein no heed
is paid to teachers’ requests, causing a great deal of
inconvenience to all of them. The pay package of government
teachers also needs to be enhanced in order to bring this
profession parallel to other administrative jobs. This will
improve their financial and social status and raise the level of
job satisfaction.
References and Notes
1 Rosenholtz, S J, 1985, ‘Effective Schools: Interpreting the
Evidence’, American Journal of Education, pp 352-388.
2 Mathieu, J E, 1991, ‘A Cross-Level Nonrecursive Model of
the Antecedents of Organizational Commitment and
Satisfaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 76, pp 607-618;
Ostroff, C, 1992, ‘The Relationship Between Satisfaction,
Attitudes, and Performance: An Organizational Level
Analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 77, pp 963-974.
3 Ashton, P T, and Webb, R B, 1986, Making A Difference:
Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy and Student Achievement, New
York: Longmann.
4 Locke, E A, 1976, ‘The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction’,
in M D Dunette (Ed), Handbook of Industrial and
Organisational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, pp1297-
1393; Fincham, R, P S Rhodes, 1988, The Individual Work
and Organisation, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London;
Mobley, W H, R W Griffeth, H H Hand, and B M Megino,
1979, ‘Review and Conceptual Analysis of the Employee
Turnover Process’, Psychological Bulletin, Vol 86, pp 493-
522.
5 Glimmer, B V H, 1966, Industrial Psychology, McGraw Hill,
New York; Kuhlen, R G, 1963, ‘Needs, Perceived Need
Satisfaction Opportunities, and Satisfaction with
Occupation’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 47, pp 56-
64.
6 Wanous, J P, and E E Lawler, 1972, ‘Measurement and
Meaning of Job Satisfaction, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol 56, No 2, pp 95-105.
7 Herzberg, F, B Mausner, R O Peterson, and D E Capwell,
1957, Job Attitudes: Review of Research and Opinion ,
Psychological Services of Pittsburg, Pittburg;
Ramakrishnaiah, D, and D B Rao, 1998, Job Satisfaction of
College Teachers, D K Publishers, New Delhi.
8 Wright, T A, and R Cropanzano, 1997, ‘Shared Influence
and Organizational Behaviour: A Meta Analysis of
Situational Variable Expected to Moderate Participation
Outcome Relationship’, Academy of Management
Proceedings, pp 364-371; Wanous and Lawler, ‘Measurement
and Meaning of Job Satisfaction’.
IIMB Management Review, December 2006
9 DeSantis, V S, and S L Durst, 1996, ‘Comparing Job
Satisfaction among Public and Private Sector Employees’
American Review of Public Administration, Vol 26, No 3, pp
327- 344; Seymour, E, and J R Busherhof, 1991, ‘Sources and
Consequences of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction in Nursing:
Findings from a National Survey’, International Journal of
Nursing Studies, Vol 28, No 2, pp 109-124.
10 Daley, D, 1986, ‘Humanistic Management and Organisational
Success: The Effect of Job and Work Environment on
Organisational Effectiveness, Public Responsiveness, and
Job Satisfaction’, Public Personnel Management, Vol 15, No
2, pp 31-142; Emmert, M A, and W A Taher, 1992, ‘Public
Sector Professionals: The Effect of Public Sector Jobs on
Motivation, Job Satisfaction and Work Involvement’,
American Review of Public Administration, Vol 22, No 1, pp
37- 48.
11 Srivastava, K Deepak, Umesh Holani, and Naval Bajpai,
2005, ‘Job Satisfaction in Public Sector’, Indian Management,
Vol 44, No 5, pp 62-65; Ganguly, H C, 1994, Job Satisfaction
Scales for Effective Management , Concept Publishing
Company, New Delhi.
12 Ostroff, C, 1992, ‘The Relationship Between Satisfaction,
Attitudes, and Performance: An Organizational Level
Analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 77, pp 963-974;
Ashton and Webb, Making A Difference: Teachers’ Sense of
Efficacy and Student Achievement.
13 Choy, S P, et al, 1993, America’s Teachers: Profile of a
Profession, Washington, DC: US Department of Education,
Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National
Center for Education Statistics, NCES 93-025, p 137.
14 Lee, V E, R F Dedrick, and J B Smith, 1991, ‘The Effect of the
Social Organization of Schools on Teachers’ Efficacy and
Satisfaction’, Sociology of Education, Vol 64, pp 190-208.
15 Boe, E E, and D M Gilford, 1992, Teacher Supply, Demand,
and Quality, National Research Council, Washington, DC:
National Academy Press, p 36.
16 Choy et al, America’s Teachers, p 126.
17 Bobbitt, S A, M C Leich, S D Whitener, and H F Lynch, 1994,
Characteristics of Stayers, Movers, and Leavers: Results
from the Teacher Followup Survey, Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education, Office of Educational Research
and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics,
NCES 94-337.
18 Choy et al, America’s Teachers, p 137.
19 Peterson, N K, and R L Custer, 1994, ‘Personality Styles, Job
Satisfaction, and Retention of Teachers of Vocational
Subjects’, Journal of Technology Studies, Vol 20, pp 21–28;
Eichinger, J,, 2000, ‘Job Stress and Satisfaction among Special
Education Teachers: Effects of Gender and Social Role
Orientation’, International Journal of Disability, Development
and Education, Vol 47, pp 397–412.
20 Perie, Marianne, and David P Baker, 1997, ‘Job Satisfaction
among America’s Teachers: Effects of Workplace Conditions,
Background Characteristics, and Teacher Compensation’,
Statistical Analysis Report, US Department of Education
Office of Educational Research and Improvement, NCES
97–XXX.
21 Godiyal, S, and R R Srivastava, 1995, ‘A Study of Teacher’s
361
 Work Involvement, Job Involvement and Job Satisfaction’,
Experiment in Education, Vol 23, No 20, pp 11-13.
22 Choy et al, America’s Teachers; Perie and Baker, Job
Satisfaction among America’s Teachers.
23 Haque, M I, 2004, ‘Job Satisfaction of Indian Academicians:
A Study Based on Gender and Age’, Indian Journal of
Commerce, Vol 57, No 2, pp 102-113.
24 Ramakrishnaiah and Rao, Job Satisfaction of College
Teachers, pp 2-4.
25 Education Commission, 1966, The Report of the Education
Commission (1964-66), Ministry of Education, Government
of India, pp 14-16.
26 Das, L, and B B Panda, 1995, ‘Jobs of College and Higher
Secondary Teachers’, Experiment in Education, Vol 23, No
3, pp 52-56.
27 Godiyal and Srivastava, ‘A Study of Teacher’s Work
Involvement, Job Involvement and Job Satisfaction’.
28 Sundrarajan, S, and S Sabesan, 1992, ‘Job Satisfaction of
High School Teachers in Relation to their Attitude towards
Teaching and their Environment’, Experiment in Education,
Vol 20, No 12, pp 311-317.
29 Probe, G B, 1971, ‘An Investigation of the Relationship
between Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Selected Personal
Characteristics, Doctoral Dissertation’, Dissertational
Abstract International, Vol 31, 5093-A.
30 Smith, H D, 1982, ‘Teacher Voluntary Absenteeism and
Perceptions of the Professional Environment, Job Satisfaction
and Impact of Collective Bargaining’, Dissertation Abstracts
International, Vol 37, No 9, 5517-A; Birmingham, J A, 1985,
‘Job Satisfaction and Burnout among Minnesota Teachers’,
Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol 45, No 8, 2318-A.
31 Ahuja, D C, 1976, ‘Mental Health Hazards among School
Teachers’, Education Review, Vol 8, pp 155-157.
32 Foels, R, J Driskell, B Mullen, and E Salas, 2000, ‘The Effect
of Democratic Leadership on Group Member Satisfaction:
An Interaction’, Small Group Research, Vol 31, No 6, pp 676-
701; Chaudry, Pushpa, and Margaret Wawira Gatembu, 1989,
‘Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction among Teachers and
Principals’, Journal of Educational Planning and
Administration, Vol 3, No 3, pp 112-118.
33 Dwivedi, Neeraja, 1977, ‘A Study of the Effect of Financial
Incentives on Job Satisfaction of Blue Collar Workers’, Indian
Education Review, Vol 12, No 1, pp 49-76.
34 Ramakrishnaiah and Rao, Job Satisfaction of College
Teachers, p 35; Herzberg, F, B Mausner, R O Peterson, and B
B Snyderman, 1959, The Motivation to Work, Wiley, New
York.
35 Herzberg et al, Job Attitudes: Review of Research and
Opinion.
36 Vicroy, S C, J B Shaw and C D Fisher, 1982, ‘Effects of
Temperature, Clothing and Task Complexity on Task
Performance and Satisfaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol 67, No 1, pp 97-102.
37 Joseph, A R, and A Richard, 2002, ‘Worker’s Evaluation in
Five Countries’, International Labour Review, Vol 141, No 4,
pp 305-310.
362
38 Jonge, J, F Dollord, C Dormann, and P Le Blance, 2000, ‘The
Demand Control Model: Specific Demands, Specific Control
and Well Defined Groups’, International Journal of Stress
Management, Vol 7, No 4, pp 269-287.
39 Rai, S and A K Sinha, 2002, ‘Job Delight: Beyond Job
Satisfaction’, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol 23, No 3,
pp126-136.
40 Herzberg et al, Job Attitudes: Review of Research and
Opinion.
41 Lawler, E E, 1971, Pay and Organisational Effectiveness: A
Psychological View, McGraw Hill, New York.
42 Gruneberg, M, 1980, ‘The Happy Worker: An Analysis of
Educational and Occupational Differences in Determinants
of Job Satisfaction’, American Journal of Sociology, Vol 86,
No 2, pp 247-271.
43 Glenn, N D, and C N Weaver, 1982, ‘Enjoyment of Work by
Full-time Workers in the United States’, Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol 46, No 4, pp 459-470; Reudavey, P, 2001, ‘An
Examination of Job Satisfaction and Employee Motivation of
Ground Crew Staff within Ansett Australia’, Working Paper
Series, School of Management, Curtin University of
Technology.
44 Knoop, R, 1995, ‘Relationship among Job Involvement, Job
Satisfaction and Organisational Commitment for Nurses’,
Journal of Psychology, Vol 126, No 6, pp 643-649.
45 Kates, S L, 1950, ‘Rorschach Responses, Strong Blank Scales
and Job Satisfaction among Policemen’, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol 34, No 4, pp 249-254; Herzberg et al, Job
Attitudes: Review of Research and Opinion.
46 Cheung, C, and A S Steven, 1999, ‘Job Satisfaction, Work
Values and Sex Differences in Taiwan’s Organizations’,
Journal of Psychology, Vol 133, No 5, pp 563-576; Haque, ‘Job
Satisfaction of Indian Academicians: A Study Based on
Gender and Age’.
47 Abraham, Rebecca, 1999, ‘The Relationship between
Differential Inequity, Job Satisfaction, Intention to Turnover,
and Self Esteem’, Journal of Psychology, Vol 33, No 2, pp 205-
216; Rao, G D, 1997, Attitude, Values and Perceptions,
Kanishka Publications, New Delhi.
48 Webster, A L, 1995, Statistics for Business Economics, Mc-
Graw-Hill, London.
49 Smith, P C, L M Kendall, and C L Hulin, 1969, Measurement
of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement, Chicago, Rand
McNally.
50 Kinicki, Angelo J, Frances M Mckee-Ryan, Chester A
Schriesheim, and Kenneth P Carson, 2002, ‘Assessing the
Construct Validity of the Job Descriptive Index: A Review
and Meta Analysis’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 87,
No 1, pp 14-32.
51 Hair, Joseph F, Rolph E Anderson, Ronald L Tatham, and
William C Black, 1995, Multivariate Data Analysis, New
Jersey, Prentice Hall; Sharma, R D, and Gurjeet Kour, 2005,
‘Strategy for Customer Satisfaction in Rural Banks - A Case
Study of Shivalik Kshetriya Gramin Banks, Hoshiarpur’,
Prajnan, Vol 33, No 1, pp 23-45.
52 The detailed list of variance explained (VE), factor loadings,
Job Satisfaction among School Teachers
 KMO and eigen values is available on request. Satisfaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 23, pp 547-
564.
53 Leary, P, and P I Nestor, 2000, ‘The Relationship between
Tenure and Non Tenure Track Status of Extension Faculty 54 Flippo, Edwin B, 1976, Principles of Personnel Management,
and Job Satisfaction’, Journal of Extension, Vol 38, No 4, McGraw Hill Kogakusha.
http://joe.org./joe/2000august/rb1.html (last accessed 25th
April 2005); Super, D E, 1939, ‘Occupational Level and Job
Reprint No 06404

IIMB Management Review, December 2006 363

View publication stats