Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is one of the most researched variables in the area of workplace psychology [1],
and has been associated with numerous psychosocial issues ranging from leadership to job
design [2]. This article seeks to outline the key definitions relating to job satisfaction, the main
theories associated with explaining job satisfaction, as well as the types of and issues
surrounding the measurement of job satisfaction. While it is also important to explore what
factors precede and are impacted by job satisfaction, this is covered in a separate article.

Definition of job satisfaction

Due the popularity of job satisfaction within the field of occupational and organisational
psychology [2], various researchers and practitioners have provided their own definitions of what
job satisfaction is. However, the two most common definitions describe job satisfaction as: “the
pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job as achieving or facilitating
the achievement of one’s job values (pg. 1342)" [3]; and “the extent to which people like
(satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs (pg. 2)“ [2].

In general, most definitions cover the affective feeling an employee has towards their job. This
could be the job in general or their attitudes towards specific aspects of it, such as: their
colleagues, pay or working conditions [4]. In addition, the extent to which work outcomes meet or
exceed expectations may determine the level of job satisfaction [5]. However, job satisfaction is
not only about how much an employee enjoys work. Taber and Alliger [6] found that when
employees of an American educational institute rated how much they enjoyed individual tasks
within their role, their scores were moderately correlated to satisfaction with the work itself, and
associated (although weakly) with global job satisfaction. Taber and Alliger [6] also found that
other measures (such as, level of concentration required for the job, level of supervision, and task
importance) all had no impact on satisfaction. This study demonstrates that the accumulating
enjoyment of work tasks added up to overall job satisfaction. However, the low relationship does
suggest that other factors, besides enjoyment, contribute to how satisfied employees feel at work.

Theories of job satisfaction

Job satisfaction theories have a strong overlap with theories explaining human motivation. The
most common and prominent theories in this area include: Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory [7];
Herzberg’s [8] motivator-hygiene theory; the Job Characteristics Model [9]; and the dispositional
approach [10]. These theories are described and discussed below.

Hierarchy of needs

Although commonly known in the human motivation literature, Maslow’s [7] needs hierarchy
theory was one of the first theories to examine the important contributors to job satisfaction. The
theory suggests that human needs form a five-level hierarchy (Figure 1) consisting of:
physiological needs, safety, belongingness/love, esteem, and self-actualisation. Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs postulates that there are essential needs that need to be met first (such as,
physiological needs and safety), before more complex needs can be met (such as, belonging and
esteem).

Figure 1: Maslow’s Five-level hierarchy [11]

Maslow’s needs hierarchy was developed to explain human motivation in general. However, its
main tenants are applicable to the work setting, and have been used to explain job satisfaction.
Within an organisation, financial compensation and healthcare are some of the benefits which
help an employee meet their basic physiological needs. Safety needs can manifest itself through
employees feeling physically safe in their work environment, as well as job security and/ or
having suitable company structures and policies. When this is satisfied, the employee’s can focus
on feeling as though they belong to the workplace. This can come in the form of positive
relationships with colleagues and supervisors in the workplace, and whether or not they feel they
are a part of their team/ organisation. Once satisfied, the employee will seek to feel as though
they are valued and appreciated by their colleagues and their organisation. The final step is
where the employee seeks to self-actualise; where they need to grow and develop in order to
become everything they are capable of becoming. Although it could be seen as separate, the
progressions from one step to the next all contribute to the process of self-actualisation.
Therefore, organisations looking to improve employee job satisfaction should attempt to meet
the basic needs of employees before progressing to address higher-order needs. However, more
recently this approach is becoming less popular as it fails to consider the cognitive process of the
employee and, in general, lacks empirical supporting evidence [2]. In addition, others [12] have
found fault with the final stage of self-actualisation. The lack of a clear definition and conceptual
understanding of self-actualisation, paired with a difficulty of measuring it, makes it difficult to
measure what the final goal is or when it has been achieved.
Motivator-Hygiene Theory

Herzberg’s [8] motivator-hygiene theory suggests that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not
two opposite ends of the same continuum, but instead are two separate and, at times, even
unrelated concepts. ‘Motivating’ factors like pay and benefits, recognition and achievement need
to be met in order for an employee to be satisfied with work. On the other hand, ‘hygiene’ factors
(such as, working conditions, company policies and structure, job security, interaction with
colleagues and quality of management) are associated with job dissatisfaction.

Fi
gure 2: Graphical Representation of Herzberg’s Description of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers [13]

Because both the hygiene and motivational factors are viewed as independent, it is possible that
employees are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. This theory postulates that when hygiene factors
are low the employee is dissatisfied, but when these factors are high it means the employee is not
dissatisfied (or neutral), but not necessarily satisfied. Whether or not an employee is satisfied is
dependent on the motivator factors. Moreover, it is thought that when motivators are met the
employee is thought to be satisfied. This separation may aid in accounting for the complexity of
an employee’s feelings, as they might feel both satisfied and dissatisfied at the same time; or
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

Whilst the Motivator-Hygiene theory was crucial in first distinguishing job satisfaction from
dissatisfaction, the theory itself has received little empirical support. Herzberg’s original study
[13] has been criticised for having been conducted with a weak methodology [12][14]. As a result,
subsequent attempts to test this theory have obtained mixed results with some researchers
supporting it [15][16] and others not [17][18].

Job Characteristics Model

The Job Characteristics Model (JCM)[9] explains that job satisfaction occurs when the work
environment encourages intrinsically motivating characteristics. Five key job characteristics:
skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback, influence three
psychological states (Figure 3). Subsequently, the three psychosocial states then lead to a number
of potential outcomes, including: job satisfaction. Therefore from an organisations’ point of
view, it is thought that by improving the five core job dimensions this will subsequently lead to a
better work environment and increased job satisfaction.
Figure 3: Job Characteristics Model [9]

Unlike the Maslow or Herzberg’s theories, the JCM has received more empirical support.
However, it has also drawn criticism as many studies utilising this model investigate the direct
impact core job dimensions have on personal and work outcomes, completely disregarding the
critical psychological states [19]. Despite this, the JCM and its impact on job satisfaction has been
the subject of three reviews [20][21][22], which further lend support to the model. Further to this,
Behson and colleagues’ [23] meta-analysis of 13 studies specifically focused on the role of critical
psychological states, and found these psychological states to play a crucial practical and
theoretical role within the JCM.

Dispositional approach

This dispositional approach suggests that job satisfaction is closely related to personality. It
postulates that an individual has a strong predisposition towards a certain level of satisfaction,
and that these remain fairly constant and stable across time [24]. The evidence for this approach
can be divided into indirect studies and direct studies. Judge and colleagues [10][25] have reviewed
these areas in greater detail.

The indirect evidence comes from studies that do not explicitly measure personality. Data from
the National Longitudinal Studies in the United States found that measures of job satisfaction
tend to remain fairly stable over 2, 3 and 5 year periods [26]. This even includes significant
employment changes, such as: changes in employer or occupation. Interestingly, a twin based
study [27] examined 34 twins whom had been raised independently of one another. This study
found genetic factors accounted for 30% of job satisfaction levels when assessed in later life.

The indirect studies, however, are vulnerable to a number of important criticisms, namely that
other unaccounted factors might be contributing to job satisfaction levels [28]. This highlights the
respective importance of studies directly assessing the role of personality. Most prominently,
there is research evidence that self-esteem, self-efficacy, emotional stability and locus of control
comprise a broad personality construct, which contribute to how an individual sees themselves
[24]
. A review of 169 correlations between each of four affective constructs (i.e., self-esteem, self-
efficacy, emotional stability and locus of control) and job satisfaction, found that as self-reported
levels of self-esteem, self-efficacy, emotion stability and locus of control increased so did job
satisfaction [29]. Similarly, investigations into the link between the five factor model of
personality and job satisfaction revealed neuroticism, conscientiousness and extraversion to have
a moderate relationships with job satisfaction [30].

Summary of theories

Despite its past popularity, it is unfortunate that there is little empirical support for the hierarchy
of needs and motivator-hygiene approaches [12][14]. On the other hand, the dispositional approach
and JCM continues to grow in empirical support [29]. However, it is difficult to deny that the
motivating factors influence the surrounding environment and has an impact on how satisfied
employees are in their work, and that personality or the JCM do not fully explain job satisfaction.
Consequently, Furnham and colleagues [31] integrated Herzberg’s motivator-hygiene approach
alongside personality to better understand the combined impact on job satisfaction. Findings
revealed that demographic variables and scores on the five commonly used personality traits
(including, openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) together
accounted for a significant portion of job satisfaction.

Measurement of job satisfaction

Type of measurement

The measurement of job satisfaction can be classified into three different methods [32]: single
question, global measurement, and facet measurement.

The single question asks only one question as an indication of how satisfied an employee is at
work. This is commonly found in large surveys, such as: the US National Longitudinal Survey.
The Survey asks ‘How do you feel about the job you have now?’, and requires respondents to
answer on a scale (like it very much, like it fairly well, dislike it somewhat, dislike it very much)
[32]
. Despite the assumption that having more questions can obtain more objective and accurate
results as well as being less prone to error, research has shown that asking a single question,
either on overall job satisfaction or on individual facets of job satisfaction can be equally as
effective [33]. Proponents of this approach believe that employees generally know how happy they
are, and, therefore, there is little point in asking them multiple questions about the same thing.

The global measurement seeks to obtain a single score representing the overall job satisfaction an
employee has [32]. Several questions or statements are provided relating to different aspects of the
job (such as, pay, work activities, working conditions and career prospects), but combines them
to provide an overall score. On the other hand, facet measurements have questions or items for
these different areas and provides one score to represent each area. Established global measures
include the Job Satisfaction Scales [34] and the Overall Job Satisfaction Scale [35]; whilst the Job
Description Index (JDI) [36] is one established facet measure.

The availability of diverse job satisfaction measurements means those intending to measure this
concept have the option of choosing a particular measure which best fits their purpose. However,
the multiple options can make comparisons difficult, while a poor choice of measurement can
lead to unreliable or invalid outcomes [37].

Issues with measurements

Despite the availability of questions and measures for assessing job satisfaction, there are a few
issues that need to be taken into consideration when selecting a suitable measure and when
interpreting the results. The prolific number of measures of job satisfaction has raised issues
surrounding the reliability and validity of them. This is further complicated when assessing
across different cultures, languages and ages as they can all confound the results obtained.

Reliability and validity

The popularity of job satisfaction has lead to numerous measures being created for this concept.
Unfortunately, many of them, including some by academics and practitioners, are simply not
sufficiently valid or reliable [38]. This means the measure might not accurately measure job
satisfaction, or that it is not able to provide consistent results. Van Saane and colleagues [38]
reviewed 29 commonly used job satisfaction measures they found in the academic literature:
examining the validity (i.e., does it measure what it is supposed to) and reliability (i.e, how
consistent are the results on the measure) of the reviewed measures. The study found that only
seven of the measures were found to have adequate validity and reliability. Consequently, those
intending to measure job satisfaction have to ensure that the measure being used has been shown
to be both reliable and valid.

Cross cultural issues

Organisations and practitioners that work across different national and cultural boundaries have
to be aware of the suitability of the chosen measure to a particular workforce [39]. Using a
different measure for each workforce makes comparison more difficult [40]. However, the use of
the same measure across different countries can be problematic as different workforces interpret
it differently.

The use of any scales across national boundaries raises various issues, and users of job
satisfaction scales should bear in mind how two particular issues, language and culture, might
affect their results [40]. Language has a powerful influence on how individuals perceive their
reality, as various languages bring about different labels for concepts and objects [41]. When using
a scale in two separate countries which speak the same language (i.e. the United Kingdom and
Australia) there are fewer issues than when the measure is presented in a different language. Not
only does the similar language imply similar understanding, but the one language used means
translation is not required. This avoids having discrepancy between the original and the
translated version, which can affect the meaning of the measure; either due to a lack of
compatible vocabulary or because of poor translation [40]. However, when a scale of the same
language is administered in two different cultures it can lead to respondents with different values
understanding the scale differently [42]. Alternatively, how rating scales are interpreted is
impacted by culture. Riodan and Vanderberg [43] found a rating of ‘4’ on a 1-7 point scale had
different meaning to Koreans and Americans.
Despite these issues there are job satisfaction measures that have been demonstrated to be
reliable and valid across different languages and cultures. For example, Ryan and colleagues [44]
found similar satisfaction scores when respondents from the US and Australia completed the
same measure in English. Across languages, the Nordic Employee Index [45] consistently assesses
job satisfaction across the Nordic nations. Similarly, Liu and colleagues [40] examined the
German Job Satisfaction Survey filled out by employees in 18 countries, in German, English and
Spanish. They found similarities across countries, which have the same language or a similar
cultural background.

Age

The relationship between job satisfaction and age has been shown to have either a ‘U’ or positive
relationship. In the ‘U’ relationship [46][47], high satisfaction in early and latter career is separated
with a dip in the middle. Using a sample of over 5000 employees in the UK, Clarke and
colleagues [46] found that job satisfaction was high amongst those in their teens, and then went
down when they were between 20 and 30, increased again in their 40s to the same level as those
in their teens, and progressing higher in their 50s and 60s. Alternatively, some have shown a
gradual increase in satisfaction as age increased [48][49].

Both approaches demonstrate higher satisfaction in older age, which could be due to a number of
reasons, including that [46][47]:

 Older employees might have lowered their expectations over time and learnt to be more
satisfied.
 Unhappy older employees may be more likely to take early retirement and leave the
workforce, leaving the more satisfied older employees.
 Older employees would have had more time to change jobs and end up in a position in
which they are happy with.
 Due to a lack of longitudinal studies, the differences between younger and older
employees might be due to a generational difference.

Conclusion

Considering that job satisfaction impacts every employee across the globe it is hardly surprising
that it has received a lot of attention in the research literature. However, this has lead to a large
number of definitions, theories and measures. At a European level the focus has been less about
these traditional theories of job satisfaction [50]. Instead job satisfaction is typically examined as a
consequence of workplace stress and the job demand-control model. Despite this, all together
they are important in providing not only a better understanding of this concept, but as a resource
where job satisfaction can be best understood and measured in different situations. Care also
needs to be taken as there are also numerous ill fitting theories and measurements which can
harm our understanding of job satisfaction. It is also important to be aware on how job
satisfaction impacts on worker health and productivity, which is explored further in the Job
satisfaction: evidence for impact on reducing psychosocial risks article.

References
[1] Lu, H., Barriball, K. L., Zhang, X. & While, A.E.. ‘Job satisfaction among hospital nurses
revisited: A systematic review’, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49, 2012, pp. 10-17.

[2] Spector, P.E., Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences, London:
Sage, 1997

[3] Locke, E.A., ‘The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction’. In Dunnette, M.P. (Ed.) Handbook
of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976, pp. 1297-1350.

[4] Lu, H., While, A.E. & Barriball, K.L., ‘Job satisfaction among nurses: a literature review’,
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42, 2, 2005, pp. 211.

[5] Luthans, F., Organisational Behaviour (6th Edition). New York, McGraw-Hill, 1992.

Further reading

Eurofound – European Foundation for Improving Living and Working Conditions, Job
satisfaction and labour market mobility, 2007. Retrieved 2 March 2013, from:
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef0710.htm

Judge, T. A., Church, A.H., Job satisfaction: research and practice. In C. L. Cooper and E. A.
Locke (Eds.). Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Linking Theory with Practice,
Blackwell, Oxford, 2000, pp.166–174.

Job Satisfaction: Overview (this is a summary of some of Locke’s, 1976

Handbook article. Herzberg’s theory is not mentioned below because
his theory is no longer considered valid. Both so-called motivators and
hygienes lead to both satisfaction and dissatisfaction).
Edwin A. Locke (2016)

Job Factors in Satisfaction

1. Work
 Love of the activity, personal interest
 Love of achievement (meeting standards of excellence)
 [NOTE: the above two have been confounded as “intrinsic motivation”—this is a
serious error—the two are not the same—you can like doing something without
trying to be expert at it and you can work to be good at something that you do not
greatly enjoy)
 Mental challenge, engaging your mind, growing, learning new things- without
this you get bored—control over key aspects of the work
 Belief that the work is in some way important
2. Pay
 Pay is set by a fair method or procedure (procedural justice)
 Amount of pay is fair (distributive justice)
 Pay is high (almost no one thinks they are paid too much and most would like
more)
3. Pomotions: opportunity for advancement, growth; fair process (for those with ambition)
4. Peers, colleagues
 Nice to work with, cooperative, considerate
 Honest
 Competent: can do their jobs well
5. Supervisor (if have one)
 Can trust their competence, their integrity and their good will
 Make clear what your job goals are
 Give fair recognition, credit, praise
 Considerate, respectful
6. Top Leadership
 Competent: can put the pieces together so that the organization succeeds
 Honest
7. Benefits & policies
 Competitive with similar organizations
 The more the better (there is no limit to what might be offered)
 Healthy, safe working conditions
Attributes of the Individual
 Individual factors obviously play a role. Most fundamental are one’s values; people will enjoy
jobs that are commensurate with their values or allow them to pursue their values. Personality and
mental health also play a role.

Job Satisfaction and Action

This is a big subject. The most consistent result as that dissatisfaction leads to turnover but
many other factors can lead to turnover as well (see the work of Lee, Mitchell et al). Satisfaction is
sometimes associated with performance but the causal direction can work both ways. Satisfaction may
contribute to health and life happiness.
 Job Satisfaction Theory
Article shared by:

Everything you need to know about the theories of job satisfaction.

Robert Hoppock (1935), who presented the earliest definition on Job Satisfaction,
describes the concept “as being any number of psychological, physiological, and environmental
circumstances which leads a person to express satisfaction with their job.

Job Satisfaction is in regard to one’s feelings or state-of-mind regarding the nature of their work. Job
satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of factors, e.g., the quality of one’s relationship with their
supervisor, the quality of the physical environment in which they work, degree of fulfillment in their
work, etc.

There are three major theories of job satisfaction, viz.,-

ADVERTISEMENTS:

(1) Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene theory, (2) Need-fulfillment theory and (3) Social reference-group
theory. Under the need- fulfillment theory it is believed that a person is satisfied if he gets what he wants
and the more he wants something, or the more important it is to him, the more satisfied he is when he
gets it and the more dissatisfied he is when he does not get it.

Some of the important theories of job satisfaction are:-

1. Frederick Herzberg Two Factor Theory 2. Locke’s Value Theory 3. Adam’s Equity Theory 4. Opponent
Process Theory 5. Fulfillment Theory 6. Discrepancy Theory 7. Dispositional Theory and 8. Job
Characteristics Model.

Theories of Job Satisfaction: Frederick Herzberg Two Factor

Theory, Locke’s Value Theory, Adam’s Equity Theory and a
Few Others
Theories of Job Satisfaction – 4 Important Theories: Frederick Herzberg Two Factor
Theory, Locke’s Value Theory, Adam’s Equity Theory and Opponent Process Theory
Robert Hoppock (1935), who presented the earliest definition on Job Satisfaction, describes the concept
“as being any number of psychological, physiological, and environmental circumstances which leads a
person to express satisfaction with their job.” Vroom (1982) defined the construct “as workers’
emotional orientation toward their current job roles”.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

According to Locke (1976), job satisfaction is defined as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state
resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences”.

In the definitions mentioned above, there is a subjective component of a person’s appraisal of his/her
satisfaction with their job. The definitions also highlight that the JS construct includes attitudes that
individuals hold towards overall as well as specific aspects of their jobs.

There are variety of theories explaining what causes satisfaction to workers.

Some of the famous theories are given below:

1. Frederick Herzberg Two Factor Theory:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

More than four decades back, Herzberg et al., (1959) were intrigued by the question of what people
want from their jobs. They applied critical incident technique and surveyed 200 accountants and
engineers from Pittsburg. They were asked to describe the events which made them feel good or bad
about their jobs. The responses were tabulated as follows. Their approach is popularly known as Two
Factor Theory.

According to Herzberg, there are two factors; ‘Motivators’ and ‘Hygiene factors’. It is only the motivating
factors which generate job satisfaction. The very task/job and the outcomes of the job like recognition
reward, responsibility, promotion, and growth have potential to generate job satisfaction.

He categorically explained that the second set of factors called ‘hygiene factors’ should be present in the
organization so as to avoid dissatisfaction from job. For example power cut, poor relations with
superiors and colleagues, poor pay, restrictive policies, absence of job security and so on have the
power to disturb the employees. But they cannot empower the employees.

2. Locke’s Value Theory:

This theory was conceptualized by E.A. Locke. This theory states that job satisfaction occurs where job
outcomes an employee receives matches with those desired by him. Accordingly, the more the
employee receives as outcomes they value, the more they feel satisfied; the less they receive as
outcome they value, the less they feel satisfied.

In other words, the discrepancy between present aspects of the job and the aspect desired by the
employee generates job dissatisfaction. The greater the discrepancy, the greater the job dissatisfaction
and vice versa. This theory invites the attention of management to those aspects of job which cause
dissatisfaction and transform them so that employee feels satisfied.

3. Adam’s Equity Theory:

This theory was contributed by J.S. Adam. The basic postulate of this theory is that employees compare
the ratio of output to inputs with that of others. According to him inequity occurs where a person
perceives that ratio of his outcomes to inputs and the ratios of a relevant others outcome to inputs are
unequal.

Inputs refers to age, gender, education, social status, organizational position, qualification, hard work,
etc., while output signifies reward, pay, status, promotion, etc.

Thus perception of equity generates job satisfaction and perception of inequity causes dissatisfaction.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

According to Adam, workers want equitable payment. They neither want under payment nor over
payment. They need fair pay. Where the inequity exists, workers strike to alter inputs or outcomes to
restore equity; cognitively distort the inputs or outcome or leave the field or act on the other or change
the other.

The critics attacked this theory on the ways advocated by Adam to deal with inequity. However, this
theory highlighted the need of workers to be fairly treated by management.

4. Opponent Process Theory:

This theory was developed by F.J. Landy. The crux of this theory is that constant input does not result in
constant output. Initiating some change in the job may enhance worker’s satisfaction in general but may
not increase satisfaction consistently over a period. Landy applied this concept in goal setting theory.
Employees may resist the change aggressively in the initial stage. Consequently job satisfaction declines.
But pleasure form the job increases progressively as an employee gains experience in goal setting
exercises.
In other words, interventions intended to increase job satisfaction may not become popular on their
introduction but it ensures satisfaction by regular practice. In sum, introducing changes in job over a
period of time generates job satisfaction. A single change generates job satisfaction for a certain period.
Thus introducing change should be a continuous phenomenon. It should be progressively done.

Theories of Job Satisfaction – 4 Different Theories: Fulfillment Theory, Discrepancy

Theory, Equity Theory and Two-Factor Theory

ADVERTISEMENTS:

There are vital differences among experts about the concept of job satisfaction. Basically, there are four
approaches/theories of job satisfaction.

They are:

(i) Fulfillment theory,

(ii) Discrepancy theory,

ADVERTISEMENTS:

(iii) Equity theory, and

(iv) Two-factor theory.

(i) Fulfillment Theory:

The proponents of this theory measure satisfaction in terms of rewards a person receives or the extent
to which his needs are satisfied. Further, they thought that there is a direct/positive relationship
between job satisfaction and the actual satisfaction of the expected needs.

The main difficulty in this approach is that job satisfaction as observed by willing, is not only a function
of what a person receives but also what he feels he should receive as there would be considerable
difference in the actuals and expectations of persons.

Thus, job satisfaction cannot be regarded as merely a function of how much a person receives from his
job. Another important factor/variable that should be included to predict job satisfaction accurately is
the strength of the individuals’ desire of his level of aspiration in a particular area. This led to the
development of the discrepancy theory of job satisfaction.

(ii) Discrepancy Theory:

The proponents of this theory argue that satisfaction is the function of what a person actually receives
from his job situation and what he thinks he should receive or what he expects to receive. When the
actual satisfaction derived is less than expected satisfaction, it results in dissatisfaction.
ADVERTISEMENTS:

“Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are functions of the perceived relationship between what one wants
from one’s job and what one perceives it is offering.” This approach does not make it clear whether or
not over-satisfaction is a part of dissatisfaction and if so, how does it differ from dissatisfaction. This led
to the development of equity theory of job satisfaction.

(iii) Equity Theory:

The proponents of this theory are of the view that a person’s satisfaction is determined by his perceived
equity, which in turn is determined by his input-output balance compared to his comparison of others’
input-output balance. Input-output balance is the perceived ratio of what a person receives from his job
relative to what he contributes to the job.

This theory is of the view that both rewards — over rewards as well as under rewards lead to
dissatisfaction. An under-reward causes feelings of unfair treatment while over-reward leads to feelings
of guilt and discomfort among employees.

(iv) Two-Factor Theory:

This theory was developed by Herzberg, Manusner, Peterson and Capwell who identified certain factors
as satisfiers and dissatisfiers. Factors such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, etc., are satisfiers,
the presence of which causes satisfaction but their absence does not result in dissatisfaction.

On the other hand, factors such as supervision, salary, working conditions, etc., are dissatisfiers, the
absence of which causes dissatisfaction. Their presence, however, does not result in job satisfaction. The
studies designed to test their theory failed to give any support to this theory, as it seems that a person
can get both satisfaction and dissatisfaction at the same time, which is not a valid proposition.

Theories of Job Satisfaction

There are three major theories of job satisfaction, viz.,- (1) Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene theory, (2)
Need-fulfillment theory and (3) Social reference-group theory. Under the need- fulfillment theory it is
believed that a person is satisfied if he gets what he wants and the more he wants something, or the
more important it is to him, the more satisfied he is when he gets it and the more dissatisfied he is when
he does not get it.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The social reference-group theory is similar to need-fulfillment theory except that it takes into account
not the desires, needs and interests of the individual, but rather the point of view and opinions of the
group to whom the individual looks for guidance. Such groups are defined as the “reference-group” for
the individual in that they define the way in which he should look at the world and evaluate various
phenomena in the environment (including himself)-
It would be predicted, according to this theory, that if a job meets the interests, desires and
requirements of a person’s reference group, he will like it and if it does not, he will not like it. A good
example of this theory has been given by C.L. Hulin. He measured the effects of community
characteristics on job satisfaction of female clerical workers employed in 300 different catalogue order
offices.

He found that with job conditions held constant job satisfaction was less among women living in a well-
to-do neighbourhood than among those whose neighbourhood was poor. Hulin thus provides strong
evidence that such frames of reference for evaluation may be provided by one’s social groups and
general social environment.

However, it is obvious that this theory gives an incomplete explanation since while some people may go
along with group opinions and group evaluation of organizational phenomena many people are
independent of these pressures.

In summary, the three theories respectively tell us that:

(1) Job satisfaction is a function of, or is positively related to the degree to which the various motivations
or satisfiers are present in the job situation;

ADVERTISEMENTS:

(2) Job satisfaction is a function of or is positively related to the degree to which one’s personal needs
are fulfilled in the job situation; and

(3) Job satisfaction is a function of, or is positively related to the degree to which the characteristics of
the job meet with approval and the desires of the group to which the individual looks for guidance in
evaluating the world and defining social reality.

Theories of Job Satisfaction – Herzberg’s Theory of Satisfying Employees or

Workers in an Organisation

To apply Herzberg’s theory to real-world practice, let’s begin with the hygiene issues. Although hygiene
issues are not the source of satisfaction, these issues must be dealt with first to create an environment
in which employee satisfaction and motivation are even possible.

i. Company and Administrative Policies:

An organization’s policies can be a great source of frustration for employees if the policies are unclear or
unnecessary or if not everyone is required to follow them. Although employees will never feel a great
sense of motivation or satisfaction due to your policies, you can decrease dissatisfaction in this area by
making sure your policies are fair and apply equally to all.

Also, make printed copies of your policies-and-procedures manual easily accessible to all members of
your staff. If you do not have a written manual, create one, soliciting staff input along the way. If you
already have a manual, consider updating it (again, with staff input). You might also compare your
policies to those of similar practices and ask yourself whether particular policies are unreasonably strict
or whether some penalties are too harsh.

ii. Supervision:

To decrease dissatisfaction in this area, you must begin by making wise decisions when you appoint
someone to the role of supervisor. Be aware that good employees do not always make good
supervisors. The role of supervisor is extremely difficult. It requires leadership skills and the ability to
treat all employees fairly.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

You should teach your supervisors to use positive feedback whenever possible and should establish a set
means of employee evaluation and feedback so that no one feels singled out.

iii. Salary:

The old adage “you get what you pay for” tends to be true when it comes to staff members. Salary is not
a motivator for employees, but they do want to be paid fairly. If individuals believe they are not
compensated well, they will be unhappy working for you. Consult salary surveys or even your local help-
wanted ads to see whether the salaries and benefits you’re offering are comparable to those of other
offices in your area. In addition, make sure you have clear policies related to salaries, raises and
bonuses.

iv. Interpersonal Relations:

Remember that part of the satisfaction of being employed is the social contact it brings, so allow
employees a reasonable amount of time for socialization (e.g., over lunch, during breaks, between
patients). This will help them develop a sense of camaraderie and teamwork.

At the same time, you should crack down on rudeness, inappropriate behavior and offensive comments.
If an individual continues to be disruptive, take charge of the situation, perhaps by dismissing him or her
from the practice.

v. Working Conditions:

The environment in which people work has a tremendous effect on their level of pride for themselves
and for the work they are doing. Do everything you can to keep your equipment and facilities up to date.
Even a nice chair can make a world of difference to an individual’s psyche.

Also, if possible, avoid overcrowding and allow each employee his or her own personal space, whether it
be a desk, a locker, or even just a drawer. If you have placed your employees in close quarters with little
or no personal space, do not be surprised that there is tension among them.

Before you move on to the motivators, remember that you cannot neglect the hygiene factors. To do so
would be asking for trouble in more than one way. First, your employees would be generally unhappy
and this would be apparent to your patients. Second, your hardworking employees, who can find jobs
elsewhere, would leave, while your mediocre employees would stay and compromise your practice’s
success. So deal with hygiene issues first, then move on to the motivators:

vi. Work Itself:

Perhaps most important to employee motivation is helping individuals believe that the work they are
doing is important arid that their tasks are meaningful. Emphasize that their contributions to the
practice result in positive outcomes and good health care for your patients.

Share stories of success about how an employee’s actions made a real difference in the life of a patient,
or in making a process better. Make a big deal out of meaningful tasks that may have become ordinary,
such as new-baby visits.

Of course employees may not find all their tasks interesting or rewarding, but you should show the
employee how those tasks are essential to the overall processes that make the practice succeed. You
may find certain tasks that are truly unnecessary and can be eliminated or streamlined, resulting in
greater efficiency and satisfaction.

vii. Achievement:

One premise inherent in Herzberg’s theory is that most individuals sincerely want to do a good job. To
help them, make sure you have placed them in positions that use their talents and are not set up for
failure. Set clear, achievable goals and standards for each position and make sure employees know what
those goals and standards are.

Individuals should also receive regular, timely feedback on how they are doing and should feel they are
being adequately challenged in their jobs. Be careful, however, not to overload individuals with
challenges that are too difficult or impossible, as that can be paralyzing.

viii. Recognition:

Individuals at all levels of the organization want to be recognized for their achievements on the job.
Their successes do not have to be monumental before they deserve recognition, but your praise should
be sincere.

If you notice employees doing something well, take the time to acknowledge their good work
immediately. Publicly thank them for handling a situation particularly well. Write them a kind note of
praise. Or give them a bonus, if appropriate. You may even want to establish a formal recognition
program, such as “employee of the month.”

ix. Responsibility:

Employees will be more motivated to do their jobs well if they have ownership of their work. This
requires giving employees enough freedom and power to carry out their tasks so that they feel they
“own” the result. As individuals mature in their jobs, provide opportunities for added responsibility.
Be careful, however, that you do not simply add more work. Instead, find ways to add challenging and
meaningful work, perhaps giving the employee greater freedom and authority as well.

x. Advancement:

Reward loyalty and performance with advancement. If you do not have an open position to which to
promote a valuable employee, consider giving him or her a new title that reflects the level of work he or
she has achieved. When feasible, support employees by allowing them to pursue further education,
which will make them more valuable to your practice and more fulfilled professionally.

Theories of Job Satisfaction – 4 Main Theories: Affect Theory, Dispositional Theory,

Motivator-Hygiene Theory and Job Characteristics Model

1. Affect Theory:

Edwin A. Locke’s Range of Affect Theory (1976) is arguably the most famous job satisfaction model. The
main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants
in a job and what one has in a job. Further, the theory states that how much one values a given facet of
work (e.g., the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one becomes
when expectations are/ aren’t met.

When a person values a particular facet of a job, his satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively
(when expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who
doesn’t value that facet.

To illustrate, if Employee A values autonomy in the workplace and Employee B is indifferent about
autonomy, then Employee A would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy
and less satisfied in a position with little or no autonomy compared to Employee B. This theory also
states that too much of a particular facet will produce stronger feelings of dissatisfaction the more a
worker values that facet.

2. Dispositional Theory:

Another well-known job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional Theory. It is a very general theory that
suggests that people have innate dispositions that cause them to have tendencies toward a certain level
of satisfaction, regardless of one’s job.

This approach became a notable explanation of job satisfaction in light of evidence that job satisfaction
tends to be stable overtime and across careers and jobs. Research also indicates that identical twins
have similar levels of job satisfaction.

A significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory was the Core Self-evaluations
Model, proposed by Timothy A. Judge in 1998. Judge argued that there are four Core Self-evaluations
that determine one’s disposition towards job satisfaction- self-esteem, general self-efficacy, locus of
control and neuroticism.
This model states that higher levels of self-esteem (the value one places on his/her self) and general
self-efficacy (the belief in one’s own competence) lead to higher work satisfaction. Having an internal
locus of control (believing one has control over her\his own life, as opposed to outside forces having
control) leads to higher job satisfaction. Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job
satisfaction.

3. Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory):

Frederick Herzberg’s Two factor theory (also known as Motivator Hygiene Theory) attempts to explain
satisfaction and motivation in the workplace. This theory states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are
driven by different factors – motivation and hygiene factors, respectively. An employee’s motivation to
work is continually related to job satisfaction of a subordinate.

Motivation can be seen as an inner force that drives individuals to attain personal and organization
goals. Motivating factors are those aspects of the job that make people want to perform and provide
people with satisfaction, for example achievement in work, recognition, promotion opportunities.

These motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job, or the work carried out. Hygiene
factors include aspects of the working environment such as pay, company policies, supervisory practices
and other working conditions.

While Hertzberg’s model has stimulated much research, researchers have been unable to reliably
empirically prove the model, with Hackman & Oldham suggesting that Hertzberg’s original formulation
of the model may have been a methodological artefact.

Furthermore, the theory does not consider individual differences, conversely predicting all employees
will react in an identical manner to changes in motivating/hygiene factors Finally, the model has been
criticized in that it does not specify how motivating/hygiene factors are to be measured.

4. Job Characteristics Model:

Hackman & Oldham proposed the Job Characteristics Model, which is widely used as a framework to
study how particular job characteristics impact on job outcomes, including job satisfaction.

The model states that there are five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance,
autonomy and feedback) which impact three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness,
experienced responsibility for outcomes and knowledge of the actual results), in turn influencing work
outcomes (job satisfaction, absenteeism, work motivation, etc.).

The five core job characteristics can be combined to form a motivating potential score (MPS) for a job,
which can be used as an index of how likely a job is to affect an employee’s attitudes and behaviors. A
meta-analysis of studies that assess the framework of the model provides some support for the validity
of the JCM.

Job Satisfaction is in regard to one’s feelings or state-of-mind regarding the nature of their work. Job
satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of factors, e.g., the quality of one’s relationship with their
supervisor, the quality of the physical environment in which they work, degree of fulfilment in their
work, etc.

6 Theories About Job Satisfaction

Before diving into an overview of job satisfaction theory, it first helps to consider how job
satisfaction is defined.

While there are numerous definitions, the consensus is that job satisfaction is a multidimensional
psychological response with three main arms: cognitive, affective, and behavioral (Weiss, 2002).
We form attitudes toward our job by interpreting our feelings, beliefs, and behaviors.

Bear these domains in mind while the following six job satisfaction theories are described;
ideally, a complete theory will address them all at some level.

1. Locke’s range of affect theory

With origins in organizational psychology, Edwin Locke’s (1976) range of affect theory is
perhaps the most well-recognized model of job satisfaction.

Locke’s theory recognized the importance of how much people value different aspects of their
job, along with how well their expectations are met. In short, our values inform our expectations,
and the closer these are to reality, the more satisfied we feel.

For instance, if person A greatly values a work culture of teamwork and collaboration, while
person B regards this facet neutrally, person A is more likely to feel dissatisfied if this
expectation isn’t met by their job.

But Locke argued that too much of a good thing also leads to job dissatisfaction. Taking the
same example, if an emphasis on teamwork comes at the expense of time for solo work, person
A (and person B) could have a negative experience of their job.

2. The dispositional approach

The next job satisfaction theory takes a different view. Outlined by Barry Staw and colleagues,
the dispositional approach was formed in light of evidence that affective disposition predicts job
satisfaction (Staw, Bell, & Clausen, 1986). They argued that people’s tendency to experience
positive or negative emotions accounts for individual differences in job satisfaction.

Being limited by its largely empirical approach, the dispositional approach has faced criticism.
Yet personality researchers have shown that personality traits remain largely stable over time,
and the same is true with job satisfaction, even through different jobs and careers (Staw &
Cohen-Charash, 2005).
Staw’s job satisfaction research stimulated spin-off theories. One of these is the Core Self-
Evaluations Model, for which there is good evidence.

Researchers have demonstrated four self-evaluations mediating stability in job satisfaction,

independent of job attributes (Judge, Locke, & Durham, 1998):

1. Self-esteem: with higher levels linked to greater job satisfaction

2. Self-efficacy: with higher levels linked to greater job satisfaction
3. Locus of control: the tendency toward an internal rather than external locus of control is
linked to job satisfaction
4. Neuroticism: with lower levels linked to greater job satisfaction

3. The Job Characteristics Model

The Job Characteristics Model aims to specify conditions under which people are satisfied by
their work and motivated to perform effectively (Hackman & Oldham, 1976).

With meta-analyses lending support for this job satisfaction theory (Fried & Ferris, 1987), it has
become commonly used to examine characteristics of work leading to job satisfaction.

Five core characteristics have been reported, along with three psychological states acting as a
sort of ‘gateway’ to satisfaction:

Source: Steptoe-Warren (Occupational Psychology, 2013, p. 174)

 1. Skill variety:
As the name implies, this characteristic refers to the presence of different kinds of
challenges at work.
2. Task identity:
The degree to which a job calls for completion of discrete, ‘whole’ pieces of work.
3. Task significance:
Whether the job has substantial impact on the lives/work of other people.
4. Autonomy:
The degree of freedom or independence the job provides.
5. Feedback:
How clearly an individual is told about their performance.

4. Equity theory

Equity theory was outlined in the 1960s by workplace and behavioral psychologist John Stacey
Adams (1965). He posited that jobs involve a continuous assessment of how much ‘give and
take’ there is between employer and employee.

The basic premise of this model is that job satisfaction and motivation result from a fair balance
between an employee’s ‘inputs’ and ‘outputs.’

Here are some common examples of inputs:

 Hard work
 Skill level
 Enthusiasm for the job
 Supporting colleagues
 Personal sacrifice

Common outputs include:

 Financial compensation
 Recognition and reputation
 Praise
 Job security
 Other intangible benefits

The greater the imbalance (or ‘inequity’) between the two, the less likely a strong, productive
relationship will emerge between employer and employee. Besides, dissatisfaction can get worse
if the ratio between inputs and outputs is deemed to be more imbalanced when compared to
others.

5. The social information processing theory

This brings us to the next job satisfaction theory. As social creatures, human beings pay very
close attention to the opinions and behaviors of the group. In other words, we’re not living in a
vacuum.

Going back to theories of social comparison, people have a drive to look to others for
information that helps generate a complete picture of themselves (Festinger, 1954). Couldn’t this
also apply to job satisfaction?

Social information processing theory argues this case. With links to the sociological concept of
‘constructivism,’ it recognizes that people form a picture of reality by interacting with people
around them.

According to this model, people might (consciously or unconsciously) scrutinize how their
colleagues feel before deciding how they feel. As you’d expect, if coworkers feel positive about
the work they do and the environment they’re in, a person is more likely to feel satisfied (Jex,
2002).

6. Self-determination theory (SDT)

Self-determination theory (SDT) emerged from the work of Edward Deci and Richard Ryan. As
a macro theory successfully validated in many fields of intrinsic motivation and behavior, SDT is
well placed to provide insight into job satisfaction.

In contrast with extrinsic motivation, where activities are pursued for an external goal, intrinsic
motivation leads to the initiation of behavior for its own reward (Deci, 1971). This reward could
be interest or satisfaction, for example.

According to SDT, people can assimilate extrinsic motivations into their core sense of self and
value system, changing their behavioral framework.

On the back of this, three universal needs involved in self-determination have been recognized as
essential to such integration: the need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci,
2000).

SDT has led to important insights about work motivation and factors related to job performance,
which will be discussed further below.

6 Proven Factors That Affect Job Satisfaction

 While the factors proven to affect job satisfaction
are numerous, we can cluster them into six overarching themes.

As you read, you’ll likely notice many of them intersect. Different yet similar ideas often
emerge, with many of them showing two-way patterns of cause and effect. This is due to
concepts among various schools of thought overlapping.

1. Work that is engaging

A 2017 report from Gallup found that just 13% of the world’s workforce felt ‘engaged’ at work.
But what does it mean for work to be engaging?

Engaging activities allow people to express their natural strengths and capitalize on their current
skillset. Results from a large observational study of 60 career satisfaction studies spanning two
decades (Todd, 2014) matched this line of thinking, adding that engaging work must provide a
sense of ‘flow’ and hold the individual’s attention.

The study noted four other factors tied to job satisfaction in meta-analyses that make work
engaging. You’ll notice these intersect with the Job Characteristics Model described earlier:

1. Autonomy of work schedule/style

2. Tasks are clear, with an obvious start and end point
3. Task are varied
4. Consistent feedback on performance is provided

2. Work that is meaningful

The same study (Todd, 2014) also highlighted that work entailing help or kindness to others can
be a factor in job satisfaction.

While this makes sense because of our need for relatedness (as per the self-determination
theory), evidence suggests the dimension of ‘meaningfulness’ of work may have explanatory
power.

Despite difficulties pinning down a definition of ‘meaningfulness’ that can be applied across
individuals and cultures, a large review found it to be an influential job satisfaction determinant
(Rosso, Dekas, & Wrzesniewski, 2010). This study also found meaningfulness is linked to work
motivation, behavior, performance, and engagement, along with personal fulfillment and even
career development.
This makes sense at an intuitive level and dovetails with both the Job Characteristics Model and
Locke’s range of affect theory. If the opportunity for positive, meaningful impact is valued by an
individual and that expectation is met, satisfaction will likely ensue.

3. Level of relatedness

On one hand, not everyone is a self-described ‘people person.’ But on the other, our innate need
to interact with, connect to, and care for others is well recognized. According to Maslow’s
(1943) theory of human motivation, human beings long for a sense of approval and belonging.

Relatedness could apply to many aspects of a person’s job, ranging from whether they feel
trusting of their superiors/subordinates to whether they feel part of a meaningful cause that helps
and supports people – either inside or outside their immediate environment.

The degree of relatedness in our jobs can even be used to explain how much passion we feel for
work. Research by Ivan Spehar and colleagues found that while the level of ‘harmonious
passion’ for work does affect job satisfaction, this can partly be explained by how much
‘belongingness’ we feel (Spehar, Forest, & Stenseng, 2016).

4. Ability to leverage character strengths

Environments bringing out the best in us will be more engaging, draw out our best work, and
satisfy us most.

In accordance with a universal need to experience a sense of ‘competence’ in self-determination

theory, jobs enabling people to capitalize on their unique character strengths are likelier to be
satisfying.

Looking to the literature, intellectual, emotional, and interpersonal strengths in particular can
buffer against work-related stress, thereby enhancing job satisfaction (Harzer & Ruch, 2015).

But this isn’t where the benefits end. Linking back to the theme of meaningfulness, a study by
psychologists Claudia Harzer and Willibald Ruch (2012) showed that developing a ‘calling’
could be a byproduct of congruence between one’s character strengths and those demanded by
the workplace.

Furthermore, it was found that being able to apply at least four ‘signature strengths’ at work is
critical for positive experiences.

5. Tendency for ‘job crafting’

As discussed, people’s disposition may be an important piece of the puzzle in determining job
satisfaction. The real question is which personality factors are most pertinent; one of these might
be ‘proactivity.’
Proactive individuals are often more engaged, more satisfied, and more productive at work
because of a tendency toward ‘job crafting’ (Bakkar, Tims, & Derks, 2012).

What is job crafting? Essentially, it’s the philosophy of taking the initiative to redesign the way
you work. Job crafting enables people to sculpt a personalized approach to tasks, professional
relationships, and even the meaning of their job as a whole. And this latter point is usually the
aim: to reimagine a job and derive more positive meaning from it.

Although some may be more predisposed to job crafting, it is absolutely a skill that can be
learned, like any other. Organizations can do plenty to foster job crafting in employees – and
there’s good reason to do so, with studies showing it makes people happier and more satisfied
(Slemp & Vella-Brodick, 2013).

6. Workplace culture

Several other factors affect job satisfaction, which can be bracketed under the umbrella of
workplace culture.

Let’s look at three examples:

Work–life balance

What we do at home can invigorate our experience of work (Todd, 2014). In general, with too
many negative factors like long commutes and unreasonable working hours, personal life can be
eroded, bringing a risk of job dissatisfaction.

Autonomy

Does your workplace promote employee autonomy? Research suggests autonomy is vital in job
satisfaction. We need a degree of control and flexibility in deciding how we want to complete
tasks and set our schedule.

Communication factors

Is there a culture of appreciating employee achievements? Is there a system in place for clear
feedback? Is there too much or too little communication coming from colleagues? These have
been noted as key factors in job satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Krayer & Westbrook,
1986).