Основные особенности внимания дошкольников
American University in Kyrgyzstan
Organizational Behavior
Camilla Sharshekeeva
Research and Reflection
Paper
Theme:
“Job
Satisfaction”
Student:
Kanatbek Beishekeev
Group
ВА-498
Bishkek-2001
Do people really
like their jobs? Definitely, everyone knows from the news about dissatisfied
workers going on strike or even acting violently toward their supervisors,
directors, but overall people are quite satisfied with their jobs. According
to the surveys percentage of satisfied people averages in the US is about 85
percent. The feelings, reflecting attitudes toward one’s job, are known as job
satisfaction.
Settings, related to the
personnel job satisfaction and devotion to the company, are presenting special
interest for the theory of organizational behavior and practice of human
resource management.
A discussion of
the job satisfaction problem concentrates attention on the employees’ attitude
toward their job, and a discussion of organization devotion –on the attitude
toward the organization in the whole.
What is job satisfaction once more?
Lock gives a
following detail definition of job satisfaction: “ pleasant, positive
emotional condition coming from your job evaluation or job experience.”1
Job satisfaction is a result of the very employees perception of the fact for
how much their job provides important, from their viewpoint,
things.
There are three
most important parameters of job satisfaction. First, job satisfaction
represents emotional reaction for the situation lay at the office. It’s
impossible to see it, it can be only experienced. Second, job satisfaction is
defined often by that extent how much results of work correspond to
expectations. For instance, if organization employees see they work much more,
than other department employees, but receive less for that, more probably, they
will have negative attitude toward their job, supervisor and colleagues.
They will
experience dissatisfaction feeling. From another hand, if they see, they get
favorable attitude and materially rewarded, their attitude toward the job will
be positive. They will experience satisfaction feeling from their job. Third,
through job satisfaction some another settings are expressed. Smit, Hendall and
Hulin suppose that there is five parameters of job, most exactly characterizing
it from the viewpoint of those affective reactions, which job causes by people.
These parameters are enumerated below:
1.
Job itself. The
extent, in which job gives people interesting assignments, opportunities to
perceive new, experience responsibility feeling for the job laid upon.
2.
Payment. The sum
of money reward, which is paid for the job, and that in which way the given sum
corresponds to reward, receiving by other organization member.
3.
Promotion possibilities. Career promotion opportunities.
4.
Management. The
capacity of a head to provide as technical, as moral support.
5.
Colleagues. The
extent of technical knowledge of colleagues and the level of social support.2
Factors influencing on Job Satisfaction
Let’s mark several factors,
influencing on Job Satisfaction. For example, last research show that if after
college graduation students are immediately employed according their
specialization, then on the basis of both events coincidence it’s probable to
predict a following job satisfaction.3 There are the main factors influencing
on Job Satisfaction below:
Job
itself. The main source of satisfaction is, of
course, job itself. Thus, for instance, research, dedicated to job
characteristics and carried out in correlation with working place projecting,
testify that the very content of work and autonomy by its implementation represent
two most important motivation factors correlated with labor. As research
indicated, other main components of job satisfaction are interesting and
difficult job without time for tedium and job giving a man one certain status.4
Payment. The system of money rewards is
considered as a significant but multicomplex and multisided job satisfaction
factor. Money not only gives people an opportunity to satisfy their primary
needs, but also fosters satisfaction of higher levels needs. Employees more
often perceive their salary’s level as a reflection of that how management
estimates their contribution to the company’s activity. Additional indulgences
are also important, but their role is less meaningful. One of the reasons is
that employee more often have no the slightest idea about the amount of
received as indulgences. Moreover, many are prone to underestimate these
indulgences; insofar they do not see their practical value.5
Nonetheless, recent research indicated that if employees have an opportunity to
choose themselves to some extent independently indulgences from the whole
package rendered by the company that is named a flexible indulgences system,
then they receive greater satisfaction from indulgences receivables and the job
in the whole.6
Job
promotion. Promotion opportunities make
different influence on job satisfaction. That comes because of that promotions
can be implemented in various forms and be accompanied with diverse rewards.
For instance, people receiving promotion for the length of service, although
experience satisfaction from job but not in such an extent as employees, which
receive promotion for the results achieved. Aside from, job promotion with
salary increase of 10% usually does not give that pleasure as position
promotion with a supplement of 20%. These differences can explain, why
promotions on the level of high management bring larger contenting than
advancements on the lower levels of organization.
Guidance. Guidance also represents moderately
important factor by the analysis of job satisfaction. In some other places the
importance of leadership skills could be analyzed. Here it’s sufficient to
restrict yourself with a comment of that there are two main leadership
parameters influencing on job satisfaction. First is an orientation of the
chief on the employee that is measured by the degree of getting interest of the
management in his colleagues’ favorability. As a rule, this interest exerts in
that if chiefs verify the activity of their subordinate, give advices regarding
his work, support, and also treats him not only officially, formally, but also
informally. In the US employer are usually discontented with their principals
just on the given parameter. For instance, recently navigated questioning
showed that less than half of respondents receive regular feedback and support
in their problems solving from the side of principals.7
Another parameter is involving or influence; this is illustrated by
the managers’ activity that let their colleagues participate in decision making
that has direct relation to their work. In the majority of cases this approach
draws to the job satisfaction feeling boost. In particular, deep metaanalysis
brought to the conclusion that employees’ involving into the process of
decision-making really positively affects on job satisfaction. The whole
climate of involving created by a principal makes larger impact on job
satisfaction than participation in the making of decision of limited range.8
Working
groups. Direct affect on job satisfaction makes
the very nature of work groups. Benevolent, ready to come to help colleagues
are personally a certain source of job satisfaction feeling for any individual.
Working group serves for a single office worker is a source of support,
comfort, advice and enjoyment from the very job. A “good” working group fosters
a gaining of a greater joy and pleasure from job. On another hand, when the
opposite situation is observed, i.e. when it is hard to get along with the
people, the given factor imposes negative impact on job satisfaction.
A majority of people does not pay any special attention, if only
these are not excessively bad. Moreover, availability of numerous claims on
working conditions often testifies an availability of other problems. For
example, a manager may claim on that evening before his office has been badly
cleaned, however anger indeed is the result of his morning meeting with chiefs
during that he had been reproved for bad implementation. Nonetheless, for the
last years working conditions obtain once again great importance in terms of
work force diversification. For instance, several organizations included an
opportunity to choose a flexible work schedule in employers’ working conditions
that illustrates a fragment “Diversification management in action: Flexible
approach –key to success”.
The consequences of Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is presented desirable as from a viewpoint of a
single employer as society in total.
Never the
less, pragmatically, from personnel effective management side and organization
in the whole, it is important to determine, in which detailed way job
satisfaction corresponds to the results of industrial activity. Otherwise, if
employers are content with the job, it is asked, whether it means that they
would work better, and also whether organization productivity will increase in
the whole. On other hand, by the low satisfaction one may ask, if there would
be problems with productivity and low efficiency. During many years this
question interests as researches, engaged in the given sphere, as
managers-practicians. There are no simple answers for these questions.9
Observing the results of job satisfaction, it is necessary to break analysis
apart onto some specific sub chapters. The most important of them could be
considered below.
Job satisfaction and labor productivity. So, one can say that employees
satisfied with their labor are of high productivity than those who are
discontented with the job? An absence of direct correlation between
satisfaction and labor results during many years embarrasses researches.
Indeed, it is natural to suppose a direct dependence between satisfaction and
labor results, however the data given show that there is no close correlation
between them. In particular, implemented metaanalysis of scientific literature
on the given question shows that only in 17 cases out of 100 between these two
parameters it is succeeded in the direct correlation identification. Not always
satisfaction experiencing employees are characterized with utmost productivity.
There are different altering factors influencing on this dependence. The most
important form such factors, apparently, is material encouragement for
employers. If people receive material spur that they consider as adequate their
satisfaction increases, and altogether, as a rule, and labor productivity.
Further, recently certificates were gotten that even if job satisfaction does
not lead to the productivity growth of separate employers, it can forward
positive budges on the level of the whole organization.10 At
last, alive discussions are still kept arising if job satisfaction leads to the
productivity growth or not or, on the contrary, the growth of productivity – to
job satisfaction.
Job satisfaction and personnel turnover. Does a high degree of employees’ labor
satisfaction lead to low stuff turnover? In difference from labor productivity
in correlation between labor satisfaction and personnel turnover it can be
noticed some laws-guidance. High degree of satisfaction cannot itself hold
turnover at the low level, however, undoubtedly, can improve situation
significantly. On one hand, in case of low labor satisfaction it is likely to
have a high staff turnover. One group of researchers revealed that for women of
age from 18 to 25 years old a degree of their labor satisfaction helps foretell
if they would change their jobs. On other hand, by the process of augmenting
their length of service (duration of working in the given company) a likelihood
of their move to another job place decreases. Service length for men is a
serious factor as well, neutralizing later discontent feeling with their job.11
There
are also other factors, such as devotion to organization, which plays important
role in the correspondence defining between job (labor) satisfaction and
personnel turnover. Some people just cannot imagine themselves at any other
place, which is why they stay working at the same work place regardless of
contentment degree. Another factor is a common economy state. When economical
situation is stable and unemployment rate is low, personnel turnover as a rule
magnifies, insofar people start seeking for them new better places in other
organizations. Even if they are content with their available job, many still
desire leave in that case if in another place there would be better
opportunities, scopes, or chances granted. When an opposite situation is
observed, i.e. by the lack of job places, employees can stay at their job, even
if it does not suffice them. Summarizing above-mentioned, one must note that
labor, or job satisfaction plays important role in the defining of personnel
turnover. Although full absence of this staff turnover not always fruitful for
organization, none the less, maintaining at the low level, as a rule, imposes
favorable impact on organization due to costs decrease on training and costs
linked to the utilization of unqualified employees at the work places.
Job (Labor) satisfaction. Researches
enough convincing show converse proportional dependence between labor
satisfactions and absents. If satisfaction degree is high, a number of absents
is insignificant, if it is low – their number increases. Never the less, like
other cases, there are some averaging factors, such as people realization of
the importance of their work. For example, research carried out among
governmental institutions employees showed that people considering their job
important more rarely afforded absents than those that thought otherwise. Aside
from, one should remember that if high labor contentment not compulsory brings
to absent number decrease, then low satisfaction would lead to their number
boost with a high likelihood.12
Other consequences of job (labor) satisfaction. In addition to above-mentioned there are other consequences caused
by high contentment with their job. The results of researches show that
employees experiencing job satisfaction feeling with their job possess better
physical and moral health, master faster necessary skills, more rarely suffer
from industrial traumatism and come with claims. Another positive factor
disclosed in one recent research is that employees satisfied with their labor
more often demonstrate examples of pro-social, “civilized” behavior and deeds,
for instance more frequent assist their colleagues and clients and in common
exert inclination to co-operation.13
In the very whole overview researches occupied in a sphere of
organization behavior equally with managers-practicians consider that labor
contentment is very important for organization. Some critics notice that this
statement still a conjecture, insofar, positive affect of labor contentment
still little researched. On other hand, negative impact of labor contentment on
organization is unquestionably acknowledged fact. That is why even if consider
job satisfaction as a minimal claim, it represents a certain value for the
whole health and efficacy of organization and, therefore, deserves study and
utilizing in sphere of organizational behavior.
References
1
Terence R. Mitchell and James
R. Larson, Jr. People in Organization, 3d ed., McGraw-Hill, New York,
1987, p.146
2 P. C. Smith, L. M. Kendall, and C. L.
Hulin, The Measure of Satisfaction in Work and Retirement, Rand Mc
Nally, Chicago, 1969.
3 Mary Ann M. Fricko and Terry A. Beehr, “A
Longitudinal Investigation of Interest Congruence and Gender Concentration as
Predictors of Job satisfaction”, Personnel Psychology, September 1992,
pp. 99-118.
4 Jane Ciabattari, “The Biggest Mistake Top
Managers Make”, Working Woman, October 1986, p.48
5 Brenda Major and Ellen Konar, “An
Investgation of Sex Differences in pay Expectations and Their Possible Causes”,
Academy of Management Journal, December 1984, pp.777-792.
6 Alison E. Barber, Randall B. Dunham, and
Roger A. Formisano, “The Impact of Felxible Benefits on Employee Satisfaction:
A Field Study”, Personnel Psychology, September 1992, pp.55-76.
7 “Labor Letter”, The Wall Street
Journal, Dec.22, 1987, p.1.
8 Katharine I. Miller and Peter R. Monge,
“Participation, satisfaction, and Productivity: A Meta-Analytic Review”, Academy
of Management Journal, December 1986, p.748.
9 Look, e.g.: Barry M. Staw and Sigal G.
Barsade, “Affect and Managerial Performance: A Test of the Sadder-but-Wiser vs.
Happier-and-Smarter Hypotheses”, Administrative Science Quarterly, June
1993, pp. 304-331.
11 Herbert Parnes, Gilbert Nestel, and Paul
Andrisiani, The Pre-Retirement Years: A Longitudinal Study of the Labor
Market Experience of Men, vol.3, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 1973, p.37.
12 C. W. Clegg, “Psychology of Employee
Lateness, Absenteeism, and Turnover: A Methodological Critique and an Empirical
Study: Journal of Applied Psychology, February 1983, pp.88-101.
13 D. W. Organ, Organizational Citizenship
Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass.,
1987