MBA CHAP 2 - Literature Review.edited

7/29/2019 MBA CHAP 2 - Literature Review.edited

1/31

Paaryveanthan Vellasamy (100227571)

~ 12 ~

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

Job satisfaction does not seem to reduce absence, turnover and perhaps accident

rates.

-Robert L. Kahn

Job satisfaction is a general attitude towards ones job: the difference between the

amount of reward workers receive and the amount they believe they should receive.

-P. Robbins

Job satisfaction defines as The amount of over all positive affect (or feeling) that

individuals have toward their jobs.

-Hugh J. Arnold and Daniel C. Feldman

Job satisfaction is the amount of pleasure or contentment associated with a job. If

you like your job intensely, you will experience high job satisfaction. If you dislike

your job intensely, you will experience job dissatisfaction.

-Andrew J DuBrins,


2/31


~ 13 ~

Job satisfaction is not the same as motivation. It is more if an attitude, an

internal state of the person concerned. It could, for example, be associated with a

personal feeling of achievement. Job satisfaction is an individuals emotional

reaction to the job itself. It is his attitude towards his job (Donely, Ivan Cevhic,

Gibson, 1989).

2.2 Independent Variables of Job Satifaction

According to Soeprihanto, John. (1988) Job satisfaction is a complex concept

and difficult to measure objectively. The level of job satisfaction is affected by a

wide range of variables relating to individual factors, social factors, organizational

factors, environmental factors and leadership factors as shown below:-

Individual Factors

Personality Education Gender Age Marital Status and No. of Dependents Tenure Emotions Genetics

Social Factors

Relationship with Co-workers Psychological

Organizational Factors

Pay Company Policies Nature of Work Supervision Recognition and Rewards


3/31


~ 14 ~

Environmental Factors

Working Conditions Communication Overload and Communication Underload

Superior-subordinate Communication

Leadership Factors

Participative Leadership Style Democratic Leadership Style Autocratic Leadership Style Bureaucratic Leadership Style

2.3 Individual Factors

Individuals have certain expectations from their jobs. If their expectations are

met from the jobs, they feel satisfied. These expectations are based on an

individuals level of education, age and other factors. Dessler, Gark, (1999).

2.3.1 Personality

Some research suggests an association between personality and job

satisfaction. Specifically, this research describes the role of negative affectivity and

positive affectivity. Negative affectivity is related strongly to the personality trait of

neuroticism. Individuals high in negative affectivity are more prone to experience

less job satisfaction. Positive affectivity is related strongly to the personality trait of

extraversion. Those high in positive affectivity are more prone to be satisfied in most

dimensions of their life, including their job. Differences in affectivity likely impact

how individuals will perceive objective job circumstances like pay and working

conditions, thus affecting their satisfaction in that job (Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M.,

2002).

There are two personality factors related to job satisfaction, alienation and

locus of control. Employees who have an internal locus of control and feel less

alienated are more likely to experience job satisfaction, job involvement and


4/31


~ 15 ~

organizational commitment. A meta-analysis of 135 studies of job satisfaction

concluded that there is a positive relationship between internal locus of control and

job satisfaction. The study also showed characteristics like high self-esteem, self-

efficacy and low neuroticism are also related to job satisfaction (Schultz & Schultz,

Duane, 2010).

According to Ellickson and Logsdon (2001), the second most commonly

investigated source of variation in job satisfaction pertains to the socio-demographic

characteristics of the employees themselves. Many researchers also believe that

individual attributed serve to moderate the relationship between the environmental

factors and job satisfaction. The present study posited that the profile of the

employees as moderating variables are equally important with that of the

independent variables specifically in testing the variation in job satisfaction. Also,

profile of employees served as the basis for testing the acceptance and rejection of

the hypothesis. The profile includes age, gender, civil status, educational attainment,

position, length of stay/service, and service location.

Robbins (1989, p. 51) defines personality as the sum total of ways in which

an individual reacts and interacts with others. Research indicates that some people

are predisposed by virtue of their personality to be more or less satisfied despite the

changes to their working environment and other factors (Aamodt, 2004; Johns,

1996).

This idea can apparently be traced back to the Hawthorne studies, which

found that certain people were continually complaining about their jobs (Spector,

1996). No matter what the researchers did, the participants found a reason to

complain. They concluded that their dissatisfaction is a product of their personality.

Thus one way to increase the overall level of job satisfaction in an organisation is to

recruit applicants who show high levels of overall job and life satisfaction (Aamodt,

2004).

Schneider and Dachler (1978) as cited by Spector (1996) also found that job

satisfaction seemed stable over time and that it might be the product of personality

traits. This view holds some truth in that people with a negative tendency towards


5/31


~ 16 ~

life would most likely respond negatively to their jobs even if their jobs changed

(Atchison, 1999). The author further advances that many organisations spend much

time trying to turn these negative people around. In these cases, the best

organisations could do is to keep these individuals from affecting the rest of their

employees. On the other hand, people with a positive inclination towards life, would

most probably have a positive attitude towards their job as well.

Aamodt (2004), however, notes that findings on the personality-job

satisfaction relationship are controversial and have received some criticism, therefore

more research is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. Spector (1997)

further indicates that most research on the personality-job satisfaction relationship

has only demonstrated that a correlation exists, without offering much theoretical

explanations.

2.3.2 Education

Level of education of an individual is a factor which determines the degree of

job satisfaction. For example, several studies have found negative correlation

between the level of education, particularly higher level of education, and job

satisfaction. The possible reason for this phenomenon may be that highly educated

persons have very high expectations from their jobs which remain unsatisfied. In

their case, Peters principle which suggests that every individual tries to reach his

level of incompetence, applies more quickly (Dessler, Gark, 1999).

Another study was conducted by Rivera (2003) on the Dimensions of Work

Ethics and its Relationship with Job Satisfaction Factors: The Case of NBI, on the

overall, clerical and non-clerical employees have expressed a moderate level of

satisfaction in their work and that the demographic profile of the respondents such as

age, civil status, length of service and nature of work did not significantly influence

their job satisfaction as well as the performance. The researcher found out that the

higher educational level does not necessarily mean greater job satisfaction. This may

be due in part to increase expectations prompted by higher levels of education.

Exceptions to this trend may be found at the level of graduate education, especially

at the doctoral and post-doctoral levels in medicine and other disciplines.


6/31


~ 17 ~

2.3.3 Gender

More and more women are entering the workforce and it has become

important to understand how men and women might differ in their job attitudes.

There is a large body of research explaining the gender-job satisfaction relationship.

However, research in this regard has been inconsistent. Some literature reports that

males are more satisfied than females, others suggest females are more satisfied and

some have found no differences in satisfaction levels based on gender.

According to Spector (2000), most studies have found only a few differences

in job satisfaction levels amongst males and females. Studies conducted by Loscocco

(1990) indicated that female employees demonstrated higher levels of job

satisfaction than male employees across different settings. This author purports that

most women value rewards that are readily available to them, such as relationships

with co-workers. It therefore becomes easier for them to experience job satisfaction.

Male employees on the other hand, most likely desire things like autonomy and

financial rewards which are not as readily available. This might result in lower levels

of job satisfaction.

A study by Alavi and Askaripur (2003) amongst 310 employees in

government organizations, found no significant difference in job satisfaction among

male and female employees. Carr and Humans (1988) research is consistent with

this view. These authors investigated a sample of 224 employees at a textile plant in

the Western Cape and found no significant relationship between gender and

satisfaction. Furthermore, Pors (2003) conducted a study including 411 Danish

library managers and 237 library managers from the United Kingdom and concluded

that there is no overall difference in job satisfaction in relation to gender. A possible

explanation is offered by Tolbert and Moen (1998), who maintain that men and

women attach value to different aspects of the job. This therefore makes it difficult to

measure differences in job satisfaction based on gender.

On the other hand, a study conducted by Okpara (2004) which involved 360

Information Technology managers in Nigeria, indicated that female employees are

less satisfied than their male counterparts - specifically with pay, promotion and


7/31


~ 18 ~

supervision. According to Okpara (2004), this finding may be attributed to higher

educational levels of women in this sample. The author postulates that higher

education levels raise expectations about status, pay and promotion and if these

expectations are not met, they might experience lower levels of satisfaction.

2.3.4 Age

Individuals experience different degree of job satisfaction at different stages

of their life. Job satisfaction is high at the initial stage, gets gradually reduced, starts

rising upto certain stage, and finally dips to a low degree. The possible reasons for

this phenomenon are like this. When individuals join an organization, they may have

some unrealistic assumptions about what they are going to drive from their work.

These assumptions make them more satisfied. However, when these assumptions fall

short of reality, job satisfaction goes down. It starts rising again as the people start to

assess the jobs in right perspective and correct their assumptions. At the last,

particularly at the fag end of the career, job satisfaction goes down because of fear of

retirement and future outcome (Dessler, Gark, 1999).

While research has yielded mixed evidence on the influence of age on job

satisfaction, most studies suggest a positive correlation, that is, older workers tend to

be more satisfied with their jobs than younger workers (Okpara, 2004; Rhodes, 1983

as quoted by Kacmar & Ferris, 1989; Saal & Knight, 1988). Numerous explanations

may be presented to explain the positive correlation between age and job satisfaction

(Okpara, 2004):

Older employees have adjusted to their work over the years, which maylead to higher satisfaction.

Prestige and confidence are likely to increase with age and this could resultin older employees being more satisfied.

Younger employees may consider them more mobile and seek greenerpastures, which could lead to lower satisfaction levels.

Younger employees are more likely to hold high expectations of their jobsand if these expectations are not met, they may experience lower

satisfaction levels.


8/31


~ 19 ~

However, in contrast to this, other studies found that age does not

significantly explain the variance in job satisfaction levels (Alavi & Askaripur, 2003;

Carr & Human, 1988; Kacmar & Ferris, 1989; Siu, 2002).

2.3.5 Marital Status and No. of Dependents

Research has consistently found that married employees are more satisfied

with their jobs than their un-married co-workers (Chambers, 1999; Loscocco, 1990;

Robbins et al., 2003). Chambers (1999) in particular, found that married employees

experienced increased satisfaction with pay, work, supervision and co-worker

subscales of the JDI. A possible explanation is provided by Robbins (1989). He

purports that marriage imposes increased responsibilities which might make a steady

job more valuable, hence increasing their satisfaction. However, Robbins et al.

(2003) note that the available research only distinguishes between being single and

married. Divorcees, couples who cohabit and the widowed have been excluded from

research and these are in need of investigation.

Furthermore, a study by Alavi and Askaripur (2003) reported no significant

difference in job satisfaction and its five dimensions among single and married

personnel. Researchers are therefore in disagreement concerning the relationship

between marital status and job satisfaction.

Robbins (1989) purports that there is strong evidence suggesting a positive

relationship in between the number of dependents and job satisfaction. This implies

that the higher the number of dependents an employee has, the higher the job

satisfaction is likely to be. A possible explanation could be that employees with more

children are probably older and longer in their jobs. They might therefore have

adapted to their work situations, hence the increase in job satisfaction. Studies by

Alavi and Askaripur (2003) amongst employees in government organizations

reported no statistically significant relationship between the number of dependents

and job satisfaction. Research in this area is, however, limited.


9/31


~ 20 ~

2.3.6 Tenure

According to Saal and Knight (1988), research suggests that tenure is likely

to influence job satisfaction. Literature overwhelmingly indicates a positive

correlation between tenure and job satisfaction, that is, employees with longer job

experience are more satisfied compared to those with fewer years of experience

(Bilgic, 1998 as cited by Okpara, 2004; Jones-Johnson & Johnson, 2000; Staw,

1995). Okpara (2004) provides an explanation for this positive correlation and

advances that employees settle into their jobs over time, which leads to an increase in

organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Furthermore, Robbins (1989)

maintains that the longer an employee holds a job, the more they tend to be satisfied

with the status quo.

Lambert, Hogan, Barton and Lubbock (2001) on the other hand argue that

there is an inverse relationship between tenure and job satisfaction. Hence, longer

tenured employees are less satisfied than those who have been in the organization for

shorter periods. A possible explanation could be that employees, who hold the same

jobs over a long period of time, may become bored and experience lower levels of

satisfaction.

Another view is provided by Alavi and Askaripur (2003). The authors

conducted a study amongst 310 employees in government organizations and found

no significant difference in job satisfaction amongst employees based on their years

of service. Research in this regard is thus contradictory.

2.3.7 EmotionsMood and emotions form the affective element of job satisfaction. Moods

tend to be longer lasting but often weaker states of uncertain origin, while emotions

are often more intense, short-lived and have a clear object or cause (Weiss HM,

Cropanzano R., 1996).


10/31


~ 21 ~

Some research suggests moods are related to overall job satisfaction (Weiss

HM, Nicholas JP, Daus CS., 1999). Positive and negative emotions were also found

to be significantly related to overall job satisfaction (Fisher D., 2000).

Frequency of experiencing net positive emotion will be a better predictor of

overall job satisfaction than will intensity of positive emotion when it is experienced

(Fisher D., 2000).

Emotion work (or emotion management) refers to various types of efforts to

manage emotional states and displays. Emotion management includes all of the

conscious and unconscious efforts to increase, maintain, or decrease one or more

components of an emotion. Although early studies of the consequences of emotional

work emphasized its harmful effects on workers, studies of workers in a variety of

occupations suggest that the consequences of emotional work are not uniformly

negative (Pugliesi K., 1999).

It was found that suppression of unpleasant emotions decreases job

satisfaction and the amplification of pleasant emotions increases job satisfaction

(Cote S.,Morgan LM, 2002).

2.3.7.1 Emotion regulation model

The understanding of how emotion regulation relates to job satisfaction

concerns two models:

2.7.3.1.1 Emotional dissonance model.

Emotional dissonance is a state of discrepancy between public displays of

emotions and internal experiences of emotions (Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H.,

1993 & Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I., 1989). that often follows the process of emotion

regulation. Emotional dissonance is associated with high emotional exhaustion, low

organizational commitment, and low job satisfaction (Abraham, R., 1999 & Morris,

J. A., & Feldman, D. C., 1997).


11/31


~ 22 ~

2.7.3.1.2 Social interaction model

Taking the social interaction perspective, workers emotion regulation might

beget responses from others during interpersonal encounters that subsequently

impact their own job satisfaction. For example: The accumulation of favorable

responses to displays of pleasant emotions might positively affect job satisfaction

(Cote S.,Morgan LM, 2002).

2.3.8 Genetics

It has been well documented that genetics influence a variety of individual

differences (Rowe, D. C., 1987). Some research suggests genetics also play a role in

the intrinsic, direct experiences of job satisfaction like challenge or achievement (as

opposed to extrinsic, environmental factors like working conditions). One

experiment used sets of monozygotic twins, reared apart, to test for the existence of

genetic influence on job satisfaction. While the results indicate the majority of the

variance in job satisfaction was due to environmental factors (70%), genetic

influence is still a minor factor. Genetic heritability was also suggested for several of

the job characteristics measured in the experiment, such as complexity level, motor

skill requirements, and physical demands (Arvey, R. D., Bouchard, T. J., Segal, N.

L., & Abraham, L. M., 1989).

2.4 Social Factors

2.4.1 Relationship with co-workers

Another dimension which influences job satisfaction is the extent to which

co-workers are friendly, competent and supportive (Robbins et al., 2003). Research

indicates that employees who have supportive co-workers will be more satisfied with

their jobs (Aamodt, 2004; Robbins, 1989; 2005). This is mainly because the work

group normally serves as a source of support, comfort, advice and assistance to the

individual worker (Luthans, 1995, p. 127).


12/31


~ 23 ~

Researchers further found that employees observe the levels of satisfaction of

other employees and then model these behaviors (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1997 as cited

by Aamodt, 2004). Hence, if an organizations veteran employees work hard and talk

positively about their jobs, new employees will model this behavior and be both

productive and satisfied. The reverse can also be true.

Johnston (2000) also cited that job satisfaction and employee retention are

directly linked to the quality of an employees relationships. Emphatic and

available human resource professionals are in a unique position not only empower

employees solve personal and professional problems, but, through their interpersonal

skills, help their company save thousands of dollars that would otherwise be spent in

employment-related legal fees. The trick in dealing with problem employees is not

putting a bandage on their boo-boos when they cry, but rather help them learn how to

heal their own. Not only this help them mature, it will leave you with the energy at

the end of the day to deal with children you want to take care ofthe ones at home.

2.4.1.1 Group working

Individuals work in group either created formally of they develop on their

own to seek emotional satisfaction at the workplace. To the extent such groups are

cohesive; the degree of satisfaction is high. If the group is not cohesive, job

satisfaction is low. In a cohesive group, people derive satisfaction out of their

interpersonal interaction and workplace becomes satisfying leading to job

satisfaction. Robbin, Stephen ,P (1999).

2.4.1.2 Workplace friendship

According to Fehr (1996), friendship is a voluntary, personal relationship

typically providing intimacy and assistance (p. 20). The definitions of WF,

however, are distinct from general types of friendship because workplace friendship

is focused on friendship occurred in the workplace (Song, 2005). Berman et al.

(2002) define workplace friendship as nonexclusive voluntary workplace relations

that involve mutual trust, commitment, reciprocal liking and shared interests and

values (p. 218). WF is a phenomenon that is beyond mere behaviours engaged in


13/31


~ 24 ~

friendly ways among people in an organization; there should be trust, liking, and

shared interests or values rather than being only mutual acquaintances (Berman et

al., 2002, p.218).

Workplace friendship has been considered valuable for both individuals and

organizations. According to Fine (1986), WF increases support and resources that

help individuals to accomplish their job, reduce work stress, and provide increased

communication, cooperation, and energy. Hamilton (2007) also suggested that when

in a friendship at work, people might feel comfortable with their workplace friends

and reduce feelings of insecurity and uncertainty. They also share more information

and empathies with workplace friends about work-related problems and concerns.

Jehn and Shah (1997) further argued that employees in a friendship exchange words

of encouragement, confidence, trust, respect, and critical feedback, which may

increase enthusiasm and a positive attitude.

Based on these functional values of WF, previous empirical research in

psychology, sociology, and management commonly revealed that WF can influence

employees work-related attitudes, intentions, and behaviours such as job

satisfaction, OCB, job performance, turnover intention, and absenteeism (Riordan &

Griffeth, 1995; Ross, 1997). Dotan (2007) suggested that when employees have

trustful friends at work, they can get help or advice from their friend co-workers and,

therefore, gain feelings of security, comfort, and satisfaction with their job at work.

Also, employees in friendship tend to engage in altruistic behaviours by

providing co-workers with help, guide, advice, feedback, recommendation, or

information on various work-related matters (Hamilton, 2007). This aspect of WF as

a source of work assistance is linked to the altruism dimension of OCB. Research

further suggested that WF may enhance organizational performance because

employees in friendships like to help each other with tasks, communicate with

morale-building behaviours, have few communication difficulties and thus can

increase their effort and rate of production (Bandura, 1982). Additionally, research

has shown that individuals who have a close friend at work are less likely to be

absent or leave the organization than individuals who do not because they gain a


14/31


~ 25 ~

sense of belongingness and obligation to the workplace friends who have accepted,

understood, and helped them at work (Morrison, 2004; Sias & Cahill, 1998).

2.4.2 Psychological

Psychological well-being (PWB) is defined as the overall effectiveness of an

individuals psychological functioning as related to primary facets of ones life:

work, family, community, etc (Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R., 2000). There are

three defining characteristics of PWB. First, it is a phenomenological event, meaning

that people are happy when they subjectively believe themselves to be so. Second,

well-being involves some emotional conditions. Particularly, psychologically well

people are more prone to experience positive emotions and less prone to experience

negative emotions. Third, well-being refers to one's life as a whole. It is a global

evaluation (Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R., 2000). PWB is primarily measured

using the eight-item Index of Psychological Well-Being developed by Berkman

(IPWB). IPWB asks respondents to reply to a series a questions on how often they

felt pleased about accomplishing something, bored, depressed or unhappy, etc

(Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R., 2000).

Psychological well-being (PWB) in the workplace plays an important role in

determining job satisfaction and has attracted much research attention in recent years

(Baptiste, N. R., 2008). These studies have focused on the effects of PWB on job

satisfaction as well as job performance (Robertson, I. T., Birch, A. J., & Cooper, C.

L., 2012). One study noted that because job satisfaction is specific to ones job, the

research that examined job satisfaction had not taken into account aspects of ones

life external to the job (Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G., 2007). Prior

studies had focused only on the work environment as the main determinant of job

satisfaction. Ultimately, to better understand job satisfaction (and its close relative,

job performance), it is important to take into account an individuals PWB. Research

published in 2000 showed a significant correlation between PWB and job

satisfaction (r = .35, p < .01) (Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R., 2000). A follow-up

study by the same authors in 2007 revealed similar results (r = .30, p < .01) (Wright,

T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G., 2007). In addition, these studies show that

PWB is a better predictor of job performance than job satisfaction alone.


15/31


~ 26 ~

2.5 Organizational Factors

2.5.1 Pay

Pay refers to the amount of compensation received for a specific job

(Robbins et al., 2003). Luthans (1995, p. 127) notes that wages and salaries are

recognized to be a significant, but complex, multidimensional predictor of job

satisfaction. According to Spector (1997) and Berkowitz (1987), the correlation

between the level of pay and job satisfaction tends to be surprisingly small. This

suggests that pay in itself is not a very strong factor influencing job satisfaction.

Berkowitz (1987, p. 545) notes that there are other considerations, besides

the absolute value of ones earnings that influences attitudes toward satisfaction with

pay.

Spector (1996, p. 226) postulates that it is the fairness of pay that determines

pay satisfaction rather than the actual level of pay itself. If an employees

compensation is therefore perceived to be equitable, when compared to another

person in a similar position, satisfaction might be the likely result. Atchison (1999)

however, points out that an increase in pay only acts as a short-term motivator and

management therefore has to look at other ways to increase the levels of job

satisfaction.

Wages do play a significant role in determining of satisfaction. Pay is

instrumental in fulfilling so many needs. Money facilities the obtaining of food,

shelter, and clothing and provides the means to enjoy valued leisure interest outside

of work. Moreover, pay can serve as symbol of achievement and a source of

recognition. Employees often see pay as a reflection of organization. Fringe benefits

have not been found to have strong influence on job satisfaction as direct wages

(Hani T Handoko, 1996).

Pay has long been considered one of the most important organizational

rewards because it allows employees to obtain other rewards. Frederick Taylor

(1911) was one of the earliest to recognize the motivating effects of pay when he


16/31


~ 27 ~

proposed that workers put forth extra effort on the job to maximize their economic

gains.

Although this premise lost favor in the late 1920s with the emergence of the

human relations school (Wren, 1994), money remains the fundamental way that

organizations reward employees. Yet, despite the long-standing importance of pay,

the way pay impacts the behavior of employees remains to be explained.

Reinforcement theory and expectancy theory emerged as the earliest theories

to shed some light on how pay influences employee behavior. Reinforcement theory

(Skinner, 1953) suggests that pay acts as a general reinforcer because of its repeated

pairing with primary reinforcers. People learn from life experiences that a primary

need, such as food or shelter, can be satisfied if money is obtained. Other theorists

suggest that through similar experiences a drive for money itself develops (Dollard

& Miller, 1950). Whether treating pay as a means to an end or as an end itself,

reinforcement theory does not provide a clear explanation for how pay acts as an

impetus for action. People engage in behaviors because of past experiences, but the

process by which past experiences determine an individuals future behavior

remained unclear.

Vrooms (1964) expectancy theory helped clarify how pay influences future

behavior. According to expectancy theory, three components determine motivation:

A judgment regarding the likelihood that an effort leads to a certain levelof performance (expectancy)

A judgment regarding the likelihood that this level of performance leadsto a certain outcome (instrumentality)

The importance of the outcome to the individual (valence).

Life experience, the key determinant of behaviour as suggested by

reinforcement theory, influences the determination of both expectancy and

instrumentality. If an individual has prior experience which leads him or her to

believe that a certain level of effort will lead to a given level of performance and that

this level of performance will lead to a given outcome, that person will be more


17/31


~ 28 ~

likely to engage in that behaviour, if the outcome is desirable (high valence). Vroom

(1964) suggests that pay motivates behaviour only if valued by the employee or if

pay allows individuals to obtain some other highly valued outcome.

It was assumed an individual has a general feeling about his or her pay and

that this overall feeling is an important determinant of the individuals attitudes and

behaviours (Lawler, 1971). Equity and discrepancy theories offer insight into how

pay satisfaction is determined and suggests possible consequences of pay

dissatisfaction.

According to Luthans (1989) revealed that salary is the significant factor in

job satisfaction. Money not only helps people attain their basic needs, but it is

instrumental in providing upper-level needs satisfaction. Employees often see pay as

a reflection of how management views their contribution to the organization.

Leveriza (1995) cited in his book that whether in private business or in the

government, the most significant of a job to a worker is the income he derived from

it. There, indeed, may be other vital elements of satisfaction attached to the position

or the work process itself but generally a worker would not be in his job unless he

earns something out of it for his subsistence.

On the other hand, Syptak et.al. (1999) pointed out that 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 not want to be paid fairly. If individuals believe

they are not compensated well, they will be unhappy working for you.

Luthans (1989) viewed fringe benefits are also important, but they are not as

influential. One reason undoubtedly is that most employees do not even know how

much they are receiving in benefits. Moreover, most tend to undervalue these

benefits because they cannot see their practical value.

Zulueta (2002) claims that it is always presumed that happy and satisfied

workers in any kind of organization are productive workers. Their attitudes

behaviours and job satisfaction are very important to the organization, for the desired


18/31


~ 29 ~

goals and objectives to be realized. However, job satisfaction and human behaviour

have been association with organizational problems and issues and have been the

focal point of deliberate efforts toward improving workers performance and

productivity. It cannot be denied that any type of connected and related to some of

the encouraging outcomes that the managers want.

2.5.2 Company policies

Jimfrase and his collegues propose that the culture of the workplace is the

foundation from which workers develop an assessment of appropriate organizational

behavior (Jimfrase & Co,2002). And their qualitative analysis highlights that the

perceived gap between organizational norms and their actual implementations

creates a deeply felt discontent for many workers from a number of social groupings.

Harris and Mossholder (1996) point out that organizational culture stands as

the center from which all other factors of human resource management derive. It is

believed that culture influences individuals attitudes concerning outcomes, such as

commitment, motivation, morale, and satisfaction. Wallach (1983) has suggested that

individual job performance and favorable job outcomes, including job satisfaction,

propensity to remain with the organization, and job involvement, depend upon the

match between an individuals characteristics and the organizations culture.

A study conducted by Jill L. Mckinnon and co in Taiwan (2003) indicates

that there is a quite compelling support for the importance of organizational culture

in affecting job-satisfaction.

Odom, Boxx, and Dunn (1990), found that the bureaucratic culture neither

improves nor distracts an employees commitment and satisfaction. They also found

that employee attitudes and behaviors are enhanced by an organizational culture that

exhibits innovative characteristics. Additionally, they found that employees who

work in a supportive environment express more job-satisfaction.

One factor related to job satisfaction is the extent to which employees

perceive that they are being treated fairly (Aamodt, 2004). According to Robbins


19/31


~ 30 ~

(1989), employees seek for policies and systems that they perceive to be fair as this

will likely result in an increase in job satisfaction.

Johns (1996) distinguishes between distributive fairness and procedural

fairness. Distributive fairness is perceived fairness of the actual decisions made in an

organisation. If employees perceive that decisions are made in a fair manner, they are

likely to express satisfaction with their jobs (Robbins, 2005).

Procedural fairness on the other hand, occurs when the processes to

determine work outcomes/decisions are perceived to be reasonable. According to

Johns (1996, p. 142), procedural fairness is particularly relevant to outcomes such

as performance evaluations, pay raises, promotions, layoffs and work assignments.

Hence, if the processes used to arrive at for example, promotion decisions are

perceived to be fair, it could lead to job satisfaction. Aamodt (2004) states that the

relationship between perceptions of justice and job satisfaction is very strong, hence

employers should be open about how decisions are made and provide feedback to

employees who might not be happy with certain important decisions.

2.5.3 Nature of work

Nature of the work itself plays a very major role in determining how satisfied

employees are with their jobs. By and large, workers want jobs that are challenging;

they do want to be doing mindless jobs day after day. The two most important aspect

of the work itself that influence job satisfaction are variety and control over work

methods and work place. In general, job with a moderate amount of variety produce

the most job satisfaction. Jobs with too little variety cause workers to feel bored and

fatigue. Jobs with too much variety and stimulation cause workers to feel

psychologically stressed and burnout. Hani T Handoko. (1996).

According to Luthans (1995), the content of the work performed by

employees is a major predictor of job satisfaction. Not surprisingly, research is

fairly clear that employees, who find their work interesting, are more satisfied and

motivated than employees who do not enjoy their jobs (Gately, 1997 as cited by

Aamodt, 2004, p. 326). Employees tend to prefer jobs which afford them the


20/31


~ 31 ~

opportunity to apply their skills and abilities, offer them variety and freedom as well

as jobs where they get constant feedback on how well they are doing (Robbins,

2005). Hence, it is important for managers to take innovative steps to make work

more interesting in order to increase the levels of job satisfaction of employees.

Furthermore, if a job is highly motivating, employees are likely to be

satisfied with the job content and deliver higher quality work, which in turn could

lead to lower rates of absenteeism (Friday & Friday, 2003). Fox (1994) as cited by

Connolly and Myers (2003, p. 152) however, advances a contradictory view and

maintain that as workers become more removed from the ability to make meaning

through work, the opportunity to experience job satisfaction becomes more

difficult. This stems from the fact that job satisfaction is related to a myriad of

factors, including physical, psychological and demographic variables, which are

unrelated to the workplace.

Nature of job determines job satisfaction which is in the form of occupation

level and job content.

2.5.3.1Occupation level

Higher level jobs provide more satisfaction as compared to lower levels. This

happens because high level jobs carry prestige and status in the society which itself

becomes source of satisfaction for the job holders. For example, professionals derive

more satisfaction as compared to salaried people: factory workers are least satisfied.

Luthans, Fred. (2006).

Oshagbemi (1997) highlights the fact that relatively few studies have

attempted to investigate the relationship between employees job level and

corresponding levels of job satisfaction. However, according to Mowday, Porter and

Steers (1982) and Saal and Knight (1988), the limited research available suggests

that people who hold higher level jobs are more satisfied than those who hold lower

level positions. Several other researchers also found support for a positive correlation

between job level and satisfaction. Smither (1998) states that job satisfaction tends to

be lower among employees in jobs characterized by hot or dangerous conditions,

which is normally of a lower level nature. Furthermore, Miles, Patrick and King


21/31


~ 32 ~

(1996) found that job levels moderates the communication-job satisfaction

relationship. It is possible that the more challenging, complex nature of higher-level

jobs lead to higher job satisfaction. Also, employees in professional and managerial

jobs are normally paid more, have better promotion prospects, autonomy and

responsibility which might also increase the levels of job satisfaction (Saal & Knight,

1988). It seems therefore that job level is a reliable predictor of job satisfaction; more

specifically employees in higher level jobs have greater satisfaction than lower level

employees.

2.5.3.2Job content

Job content refers to the intrinsic value of the job which depends on the

requirement of skills for performing it, and the degree of responsibility and growth it

offers. A higher content of these factors provides higher satisfaction. For example, a

routine and repetitive lesser satisfaction; the degree of satisfaction progressively

increases in job rotation, job enlargement, and job enrichment. Luthans, Fred.

(2006).

2.5.4 Supervision

According to Friday and Friday (2003), satisfaction with promotion assesses

employees attitudes toward the organizations promotion policies and practices. In

addition to this, Bajpai and Srivastava (2004) postulate that promotion provides

employees with opportunities for personal growth, more responsibilities and also

increased social status. Robbins (1989) maintains that employees seek promotion

policies and practices that they perceive to be fair and unambiguous and in line with

their expectations. Research indicates that employees who perceive that promotion

decisions are made in a fair and just manner are most likely to experience job

satisfaction.

The type of supervision affects job satisfaction as in each type of supervision;

the degree of importance attached to individuals varies. In employee-oriented

supervision, there is more concern for people which is perceived favourably by them

and provides them more satisfaction. In job oriented supervision, there is more


22/31


~ 33 ~

emphasis on the performance of the job and people become secondary. This situation

decreases job satisfaction. Luthans, Fred. (2006).

Two dimensions of supervisor style:

Employee centred or consideration supervisors who establish a supportivepersonal relationship with subordinates and take a personal interest in

them.

The other dimension of supervisory style influence participation indecision making, employee who participates in decision that affect their

job, display a much higher level of satisfaction with supervisor an the

overall work situation (Hani T Handoko, 1996).

2.5.5 Recognition and Rewards

According to Friday and Friday (2003), satisfaction with promotion assesses

employees attitudes toward the organizations promotion policies and practices. In

addition to this, Bajpai and Srivastava (2004) postulate that promotion provides

employees with opportunities for personal growth, more responsibilities and also

increased social status. Robbins (1989) maintains that employees seek promotion

policies and practices that they perceive to be fair and unambiguous and in line with

their expectations. Research indicates that employees who perceive that promotion

decisions are made in a fair and just manner are most likely to experience job

satisfaction.

A Watson Wyatt Worldwide study identified a positive outcome between a

collegical and flexible work environment and an increase in shareholder value.

Suggesting that employee satisfaction is directly related to financial gain. Over 40

percent of the companies listed in the top 100 of Fortune magazines, Americas

Best Companies to Work For also appear on the Fortune 500. It is possible that

successful workers enjoy working at successful companies, however, the Watson

Wyatt Worldwide Human Capital Index study claims that effective human resources


23/31


~ 34 ~

practices, such as employee recognition programs, lead to positive financial

outcomes more often than positive financial outcomes lead to good practices.

Employee recognition is not only about gifts and points. It's about changing

the corporate culture in order to meet goals and initiatives and most importantly to

connect employees to the company's core values and beliefs. Strategic employee

recognition is seen as the most important program not only to improve employee

retention and motivation but also to positively influence the financial situation

(Insight Magazine, January 2013). The difference between the traditional approach

(gifts and points) and strategic recognition is the ability to serve as a serious business

influencer that can advance a companys strategic objectives in a measurable way.

The vast majority of companies want to be innovative, coming up with new

products, business models and better ways of doing things. However, innovation is

not so easy to achieve. A CEO cannot just order it, and so it will be. You have to

carefully manage an organization so that, over time, innovations will emerge

(Forbes, May 2011).

The type of linkage that is provided between job performance and rewards

determines the degree of job satisfaction. If the reward is perceived to be based on

the job performance and equitable, it offers higher satisfaction. If the reward is

perceived to be based on considerations other than the job performance, it affects job

satisfaction adversely. Luthans, Fred. (2006).

Promotional opportunities have a moderate impact on job satisfaction. A

promotion to a higher level in an organization typically involves positive changes I

supervision, job content and pay. Jobs that are at the higher level of an organization

usually provide workers with more freedom, more challenging work assignments and

high salary. Hani T Handoko. (1996).


24/31


~ 35 ~

2.6 Environmental Factors

2.6.1 Working conditions

Working conditions refers to the working environment and all existing circumstances

affecting labour in the workplace, including job hours, physical aspects, legal rights

and responsibilities. For example, Congress has explained that the purpose of the

federal Occupational Safety and Health Act, which IOSHA implements in Indiana, is

to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and

healthful working conditions (29 USCS 651; LTV Steel Co. v. Griffin, 730

N.E.2d 1251, 1261, Ind. 2000). In the context of machines or equipments, working

condition means it is operational. For example, once the State introduced prima facie

evidence that the machine was in proper working condition, the burden of production

shifted to Mullins to rebut the State's prima facie showing.

Working conditions is an extrinsic factor that has a moderate impact on an

employees job satisfaction (Luthans, 1995). Working conditions refer to such

aspects as temperature, lighting, noise and ventilation. Robbins (1989) stated that

employees are concerned with their work environment for both personal comfort and

for facilitating good job performance. Studies have demonstrated that employees

prefer physical surroundings that are safe, clean, comfortable and with a minimum

degree of distractions (Robbins, 2005). According to Spector (1997), research has

shown that employees, who perceive high levels of constraints in terms of their work

environment, tend to be dissatisfied with their jobs. Contradictory literature,

however, indicates that most people do not give working conditions a great deal of

thought unless they are extremely bad (Luthans, 1995, p. 128).

The employees desire good working condition because they lead to greater

physical comfort. The working conditions are important to employees because they

can influence life outside of work. If people are require to work long hours and / or

overtime, they will have very little felt for their families, friends and recreation

outside work. Hani T Handoko. (1996).


25/31


~ 36 ~

Working conditions, particularly physical work environment, like conditions

of workplace and associated facilities for performing the job determine job

satisfaction. These work in two ways. First, these provide means job performance.

Second, provision of these conditions affects the individuals perception about the

organization. If these factors are favourable, individuals experience higher level of

job satisfaction. Luthans, Fred. (2006).

According to Luthans (1999) said that working conditions are another factor

that have a modest effect on job satisfaction. If the working conditions are good

(clean, attractive surroundings, for instance), the personnel will find it easier to carry

on their jobs. If the working conditions are poor (hot, noisy surroundings, for

example) the personnel will find it more difficult to get things done.

Syptak, et.al. (1999) stated that the environment in which people work has a

tremendous effect on their level of pride for themselves and for the work they are

doing.

Also, Bell et.al. (1996), made mentioned that in general, employees do list

physical conditions as important as job satisfaction. In addition to productivity,

managers and others have become concerned with that design of the work

environment can influence job satisfaction. The authors also mentioned that, work

environment can be designed to maximize productivity through facilitating workflow

and providing safe and healthy working conditions.

2.6.2 Communication overload and communication underload

One of the most important aspects of an individuals work in a modern

organization concerns the management of communication demands that he or she

encounters on the job (Krayer, K.J., & Westbrook, L., 1986). Demands can be

characterized as a communication load, which refers to the rate and complexity of

communication inputs an individual must process in a particular time frame

(Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., & Russell, H. M., 1977). Individuals in an organization

can experience communication over-load and communication underload which can

affect their level of job satisfaction. Communication overload can occur when an


26/31


~ 37 ~

individual receives too many messages in a short period of time which can result in

unprocessed information or when an individual faces more complex messages that

are more difficult to process (Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., & Russell, H. M., 1977).

Due to this process, given an individuals style of work and motivation to complete

a task, when more inputs exist than outputs, the individual perceives a condition of

overload (Krayer, K.J., & Westbrook, L., 1986) which can be positively or

negatively related to job satisfaction. In comparison, communication under load can

occur when messages or inputs are sent below the individuals ab ility to process

them (Farace, R. V., Monge, P. R., & Russell, H. M., 1977). According to the ideas

of communication over-load and under-load, if an individual does not receive

enough input on the job or is unsuccessful in processing these inputs, the individual

is more likely to become dissatisfied, aggravated, and unhappy with their work

which leads to a low level of job satisfaction.

Figure 1: Example of organizational communication flow

2.6.3 Superior-subordinate communication

Superior-subordinate communication is an important influence on job

satisfaction in the workplace. The way in which subordinates perceive a supervisor's

behaviour can positively or negatively influence job satisfaction. Communication

behaviour such as facial expression, eye contact, vocal expression, and body

movement is crucial to the superior-subordinate relationship (Teven, p. 156).


27/31


~ 38 ~

Nonverbal messages play a central role in interpersonal interactions with respect to

impression formation, deception, attraction, social influence, and emotional

(Burgoon, J.K. Buller, D.B. and Woodall, W.G., 1996). Nonverbal immediacy from

the supervisor helps to increase interpersonal involvement with their subordinates

impacting job satisfaction. The manner in which supervisors communicate with their

subordinates non-verbally may be more important than the verbal content (Teven, p.

156). Individuals who dislike and think negatively about their supervisor are less

willing to communicate or have motivation to work whereas individuals who like

and think positively of their supervisor are more likely to communicate and are

satisfied with their job and work environment. A supervisor who uses nonverbal

immediacy, friendliness, and open communication lines is more likely to receive

positive feedback and high job satisfaction from a subordinate. Conversely, a

supervisor who is antisocial, unfriendly, and unwilling to communicate will naturally

receive negative feedback and create low job satisfaction in their subordinates in the

workplace.

2.7 Leadership Factors

Leadership styles range widely from a job-or task-centered orientation to a

people or relationship-centered one, with many other combinations. A participative

style has special merit for consideration. A supervisor uses in trying to direct,

activate or otherwise provide a motivational atmosphere for employees. It includes

leadership traits skills attitudes and behaviour that employees perceive their

supervisor to have and consistently use.

According to John W. Newstorm (2001) study guide stated that leadership is

one in which the leader sets goals, makes decisions, gives orders and demands

obedience, autocratic style of leadership. A democratic or consultative style is one

in which the leader presents problems, consults with relevant individuals or solicits

ideas from those with expertise and interest before making decisions. It is highly

consistent with the need to employees and assumptions of Theory Y. True

participation gives one or more employees the right to explore problems, gather

information, make decisions, and implement them.


28/31


~ 39 ~

Leadership style is the behaviour of leader that has expressed ability to

influence the subordinates toward the achievement of goals (Armandi Oppedisans &

Sherman 2003). Leadership style has been classified in different ways in prior

researches.

2.7.1 Participative Leadership Style

Is defined as a leader who shares decision making with group members or

subordinates (Dubrin, 1995). The leader will identify the problem, generate

solutions and evaluate the alternatives together with subordinates. The decision-

making of participative leadership style is decentralized authority throughout the

organization (Steers, 1977).

The positive results are employees are mentally and emotionally to its

success. Conditions that should be in place to assist in having the participative

approach succeed include:-

Adequate time to consult with employees. The benefits of allowing participation must exceed the cost. The issue must be sufficiently interesting to engage the workers mind and

imaginations.

The problem must be within the supervisors area of job freedom. Not all problems lead themselves to the participative approach and the

supervisor and employees must understand this.

Examples of formal programs that encourage employee participation

include:-

Suggestion systems, which invite individual employees to submitrecommendations for work improvements.

Quality circles and total quality programs which involve formal training andproblem solving, group decision making, and statistical techniques to

encourage employee to continuously search for improvements in their

operations.


29/31


~ 40 ~

Employee ownership plans, also called employee stock ownership plans(ESOPs) which allow employees to purchase shares of common stock in the

company, thereby becoming art owners.

When participate leadership fails its often because:-

It is uncomfortable to change old habits. It is attempted in a insincere fashion. Supervisors fail to follow through on employee input and

decisions.

Performance pressures produce fear and insecurity.

Supervisors fear it could result in a loss of personal power.

2.7.2 Democratic Leadership Style

Is defined as a friendly, helpful leader who encourages participation. A

leader with a democratic leadership style shares his or her power with subordinates

and decisions are made by consensus or majority vote (Seidenberg & Snadowsky,

1976). Democratic leaders encourage subordinates to discuss and make decisions as

a group on the policy and steps towards achieving goals.

Democratic leaders are open in nature and want to get the opinions of

everyone. This free information sharing ensures the teams talents and skills are all

utilized rather than expecting conformity. The end decision however still sits with

them.

These leaders exhibit the following characteristics: Team members are included in decision making but the final say is made by

the leader

Team involvement results in high productivity These teams have highly developed people skills Due to the inclusive nature of these leaders decisions can be delayed as

everyones thoughts are sought (including those who may not have the skill

and knowledge to provide high quality input)


30/31


~ 41 ~

They are highly suited to teams that need to work together and where theneed for quality outweighs the need for high levels of productivity

They make their staff feel empowered

2.7.3 Autocratic Leadership Style

Is defined as a directive leader, controlling, discouraging or suppressing

participation. An autocratic leader centralizes power with little or no room for

subordinates to participate in decision-making process (Seidenberg & Snadowsky

1976). Autocratic leader determine all policies, dictate techniques and activities,

assign tasks and work partners to group members and are personal in their criticism

and praise. These leaders exhibit the following characteristics:

As the leader they believe that they have total authority and control Their focus is on goal completion They adopt a dictatorial approach when allocating tasks They shows little concern for the opinion of their team, even if these would

be beneficial

They think of them self as being the sole decision maker

The perceived benefit of this style of leadership is that decisions are made

quickly and efficiently and work is done efficiently. This type of leadership is most

often seen in:

Military Manufacturing

Construction

2.7.4 Bureaucratic Leadership Style

These leaders exhibit the following characteristics:

They follow rules and procedures to the letter and without deviation


31/31


If they are unsure of what to do they defer up the chain of command They act as an enforcer rather than leader

The bureaucratic leader works well in situations such as:

For work involving high levels of health and safety concerns e.g. Height,

toxicity or machinery when outine tasks are performed over and over safety or

security.

This style of leadership does not work in organizations that require staff to be

creative, innovative or flexible.

They are often promoted to leader because of rule following rather than

qualifications or expertise and this can produce a culture of resentment.

2.8 Summary

According to Saunders et al. (2009), critical review of literature explores and

identifies some key themes and issues relevant to the research topic. This research

project is based on the effect of job satisfaction and work performance of employees

at JUPEM Negeri Sembilan. There are several factors that influences the job

satisfaction and these include- organizational factors, e.g. organizational

commitment, structure of wages and salary, human resource management policies

and regulations, job design and description etc. and employees personal factors-

attitudes towards job, self-motivation, age, wages and salaries according to level of

experiences, willingness and innovative in working approach etc. There are severalapproaches such as rating scales, global measures, facet measure, interviews,

psychometric tools, balanced scorecard etc. to measure the level of job satisfaction.

The measure of efficiency and productivity is vital for the purpose of measuring job

performance of employees within an organization. The job satisfaction plays great

role within the organization in relation to improve and increase the job performance

of the employees, for example, in respect to organizational perspective including

more customer satisfaction and loyalty to organization and in respect to employee

perspective including efficient and productive outputs in relation to service.

MBA CHAP 2 - Literature Review.edited

Documents

Transcript of MBA CHAP 2 - Literature Review.edited