Data Analysis Reserach Report- on Between Employee Satisfaction and Performance

SUBMITTED TO : SIR ASIF KHURSHID

Submitted by: Sana Munir

Najam us SaqibJaveria

MBO I & MBO II

JOB SATISFACTION AND PERFORMANCE

RESEARCH DATA ANALYSIS REPORT

COURSE : EMPLOYEE RELATION MANAGEMENT

COMSATS INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

2

RESEARCH STUDY: JOB SATISFACTION & PERFORMANCE

TABLE OF CONTENT

1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................2

2 LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................5

2.1 Job Satisfaction (Dissatisfaction).........................................................................6

2.2 Theories of Job Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction........................................................6

2.3 Performance:......................................................................................................8

2.4 How can HRM be a Major Player in improving Performance?................................11

2.5 Setting expectations to increase motivation and performance:...........................11

3 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS....................................................................................................13

3.1 Communication of Goals & Strategies................................................................14

3.2 Communication & Information Flow....................................................................14

3.3 Communication & Interpersonal relationship......................................................15

3.4 Interaction with other employees.......................................................................15

3.5 Value of Effort...................................................................................................16

3.6 Degree of Motivation.........................................................................................17

3.7 Level of Job Security..........................................................................................17

3.8 Methodology of Implementing Change...............................................................18

3.9 Performance of Tasks........................................................................................19

3.10 Personal Growth & Development........................................................................19

3.11 Conflict resolution.............................................................................................20

3.12 Utilization of Skills............................................................................................21

3.13 Flexibility allowed.............................................................................................21

3.14 Climate of the Workplace...................................................................................22

3.15 Salary vs. Experience........................................................................................23

3.16 Quantity of work Expected.................................................................................23

3.17 Free Hand at Work............................................................................................24

3.18 Physical working conditions...............................................................................24

3.19 Workplace Discrimination..................................................................................25

4 PROPOSED MODEL FOR THE RESEARCH STUDY.....................................................27

4.1 Our Proposed Model – P&S MODEL (P: Performance and S: Satisfaction)..............27

5 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................30

6 APPENDIX............................................................................................................................31


1 INTRODUCTION

Attempting to understand the nature of job satisfaction and its effects on work performance is not easy. For at least 50 years industrial/organizational psychologists have been wrestling with the question of the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. Researchers have put a considerable amount of effort into attempts to demonstrate that the two are positively related in a particular fashion:

A happy worker is a productive worker

Although this sounds like a very appealing idea, the results of empirical literature are too mixed to support the hypothesis that job satisfaction leads to better performance or even that there is a reliable positive correlation between these two variables. On the other hand some researchers argue that the results are equally inconclusive with respect to the hypothesis that there is no such relationship. As a result of this ambiguity, this relationship continues to stimulate research and re-examination of previous attempts. This report strives to describe the relation of job satisfaction and performance, keeping in mind the value this relation has for organizations.

Job Satisfaction – An Internal State

Job satisfaction is a complex and multifaceted concept, which can mean different things to different people. Job satisfaction is usually linked with motivation, but the nature of this relationship is not clear. Satisfaction is not the same as motivation. "Job satisfaction is more an attitude, an internal state. It could, for example, be associated with a personal feeling of achievement, either quantitative or qualitative." In recent years attention to job satisfaction has become more closely associated with broader approaches to improved job design and work organization, and the quality of working life movement.

Relationship between Job Satisfaction & Job Performance

The relationship between job satisfaction and performance is an issue of continuing debate and controversy. One view, associated with the early human relation's approach, is that satisfaction leads to performance. An alternative view is that performance leads to satisfaction. However, a variety of studies suggest that research has found only a limited relationship between satisfaction and work output and offer scant comfort to those seeking to confirm that a satisfied worker is also a productive one. Labor turnover and absenteeism are commonly associated with dissatisfaction, but although there may be some correlation, there are many other possible factors. No universal generalizations about worker dissatisfaction exist, to offer easy management solutions to problems of turnover and absenteeism. The study suggests that it is primarily in the realm of job design, where opportunity resides for a constructive improvement of the worker's satisfaction level.

Spector & Gibson Findings

Some say job satisfaction is simple how people feel about their jobs and different aspects of their jobs (Spector, 1997). This assumes that if employee like their jobs or certain aspects of their jobs, they will be satisfied or happy. If they don’t like their jobs or certain aspects of their jobs,

2


they will be satisfied or happy. If they don’t like their jobs or certain aspects of their jobs, they will be dissatisfied or unhappy. Others view job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction as feelings of happiness or unhappiness associated with doing a particular job as expressed by the job-holder (Gibson et al. 2000). This assumes that if employees verbally say they are happy with their jobs, we must assume that they are satisfied with their work. If they verbally say they are unhappy with the jobs, we must assume that they are dissatisfied.

Cheung and Scherling Finsings

Cheung and Scherling (1999) assert that job satisfaction or dissatisfaction from the perspective of fairness and processes used to meet out rewards. If people feel fairly treated from the outcomes they receive, or the processes used, they will be satisfied. If on the other hand, people feel unfairly treated from the outcomes they receive, or the processes used to disseminate those outcomes, they will be dissatisfied. Job satisfaction consists of the feelings and attitudes one has about one’s job. All aspects of a particular job, good and bad, positive and negative are likely to contribute to the development of feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction

Basic Factors of Job Satisfaction

Individual performance is generally determined by three factors of Job Satisfaction. Motivation, the desire to do the job, ability, the capability to do the job, and the work environment, the tools, materials, and information needed to do the job. If an employee lacks ability, the manager can provide training or replace the worker. If there is an environmental problem, the manager can also usually make adjustments to promote higher performance. But if motivation is the problem, the manager's task is more challenging. Individual behavior is a complex phenomenon, and the manager may not be able to figure out why the employee is not motivated and how to change the behavior. Thus, also motivation plays a vital role since it might influence negatively performance and because of its intangible nature.

Practical Implications

Job Satisfaction can be an important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and a predictor of work behaviors such as organizational citizenship, absenteeism, and turnover. Further, job satisfaction can partially mediate the relationship of personality variables and deviant work behaviors.

One common research finding is that job satisfaction is correlated with life satisfaction. This correlation is reciprocal, meaning people who are satisfied with life tend to be satisfied with their job and people who are satisfied with their job tend to be satisfied with life. However, some research has found that job satisfaction is not significantly related to life satisfaction when other variables such as non work satisfaction and core self-evaluations are taken into account.

An important finding for organizations to note is that job satisfaction has a rather tenuous correlation to productivity on the job. This is a vital piece of information to researchers and businesses, as the idea that satisfaction and job performance are directly related to one another is often cited in the media and in some non-academic management literature.

In short, the relationship of satisfaction to productivity is not necessarily straightforward and can be influenced by a number of other work-related constructs, and the notion that "a happy worker is a productive worker" should not be the foundation of organizational decision-making.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnover_(employment)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absenteeism


With regard to job performance, employee personality may be more important than job satisfaction. The link between job satisfaction and performance is thought to be a spurious relationship; instead, both satisfaction and performance are the result of personality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spurious_relationship

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spurious_relationship

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/personality

2


2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In the field of Industrial / Organizational psychology, one of the most researched areas is the relationship between job satisfaction and work performance (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001). Landy (1989) described this relationship as the “Holy Grail” of Industrial psychology. Research linking job performance with satisfaction and other attitudes has been studied since at least 1939 with the Hawthorne studies (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939). In Judge et al. (2001), it was found by Brayfield and Crockett (1955) that there is only a minimal relationship between job performance and job satisfaction. However, since 1955 Judge et al. (2001) cited that there are other studies by Locke (1970), Schwab & Cummings (1970), and Vroom (1964) that have shown that there is at least some relationship between those variables. Iffaldano and Muchinsky (1985) did an extensive analysis on the relationship between job performance and job satisfaction.

There are also strong relationships depending on specific circumstances such as mood and employee level within the company (Morrison, 1997). Organ (1988) also found that the job performance and job satisfaction and job performance relationship follows the social exchange theory; employees’ performance is giving back to the organization from which they get their satisfaction.

Judge et al. (2001) argued that there are seven different models that can be used to describe the job satisfaction and job performance relationship. Some of these models view the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance to the unidirectional, that either job satisfaction causes job performance or vice versa. Another model stated that the relationship is a Personality and Job Reciprocal one; this has been supported by the research of Wanous (1974). The underlying theory of this reciprocal model is that if the satisfaction is extrinsic, then satisfaction leads to performance, but if the satisfaction is intrinsic then the performance leads to satisfaction. Other models suggest that there is either an outside factor that causes a seemingly relationship between the factors of that there is no relationship at all. However , neither of these models have much research.

The final model is “Alternative Conceptualizations of Job Satisfaction or Job Performance.” This model discusses how positive attitudes towards one’s job can predict a high degree of job performance. George and Brief (1996) and Isen and Baron (1991) both found that employees’ attitudes are reflected in their job performance. If this is the case then it can be argue that that there is a relationship between employees’ jobs satisfaction and job performance, as satisfaction is an attitude about their job. Industrial psychologists do not justify any relationship between job satisfaction and job performance; although it has been found that a positive mood is related to higher levels of job performance and job satisfaction.


In this chapter we will explore the theories job satisfaction and performance. These theories attempt to explain the relationship between job satisfaction and work performance.

2.1 Job Satisfaction (Dissatisfaction)

The theories of work motivation used to explain what energizes people to strive or put an effort in what they do. The same theories could be utilized to elucidate why other people are satisfied in their jobs and others not. Foe example, Maslow’s need theory would say that people would be happier in their jobs if their needs are met, but unhappy if their needs are not met. Learning theories would propose that people would be motivated by seeing others rewarded for achieving certain standards of performance, and therefore put more efforts in their duties so that they could earn the same or more rewards then their role models, and hence be satisfied. Conversely, if people see others being punished for not achieving certain standards of performance, people might exert more efforts to avoid the pain of punishment and so on. These theories will therefore not be repeated in this section, the focus will be on examining job satisfaction or dissatisfaction, related theories and literature.

2.2 Theories of Job Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction

2.2.1 VIE Theory:This theory is derived from the Expectancy model of Vroom by Porter and Lawler (1968). In addition to three basic components of valence, instrumentality, and expectance, this model incorporates abilities and traits, role perceptions, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and the perceived equity of the rewards.

The model assumes that for an effort to translate into a desired level of performance, the person must have the ability to perform well (abilities and traits) and he must understand the demand of his job (role clarity). The model acknowledges that people work for both extrinsic rewards such as money and promotions and intrinsic rewards such as pride in one’s work and a sense of accomplishment, The model also assumes that the level of performance a person attain will affect the level of rewards he perceives to be equitable. Specifically, if a person expends a great amount of effort that culminates in high performance levels, he will perceive that he deserves a substantial reward (Dipboye, Smith, and Howell. 1994).

2.2.2 Comparison Theory:Lawler (1973) in Dipboye, Smith and Howell (2000) incorporated the concepts of attained versus described needs in his model of facet satisfaction. This model is an extension of the Porter-Lawler (1968) of motivation explained above. It is a facet satisfaction model because satisfaction with various components or facets of a job, such as supervision, pay, or the work itself, is considered. Lawler’s model specifies that workers compare what their jobs should provide in term of job facets, such as promotions and pay, to what they currently from their jobs. However,

2


simple need comparison theory is extended by also weighing the influence of certain worker characteristics (such as skills, training, and age) and job characteristics (such as degree of responsibility and difficulty). In addition the model draws concepts from the equity theory of motivation by assuming that workers ultimately determine their job satisfaction by comparing their relevant job inputs and outputs to referent (comparison) other (Dipboye, Smith and Howell, 2000).

Simple interpretation of the facet model of satisfaction is that:

o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is equal to the amount received (B), the worker will be satisfied or happy

o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is greater then the amount received (B) the worker will be dissatisfied of unhappy

o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is smaller than the amount received (B) the worker will feel guilty, uncomfortable because of perceived inequality.

2.2.3 Opponent Process Theory:An other interesting theory of job satisfaction is that of Landy (1978) which hypothesizes that job attitudes emanate from a person physiological state opponent process theory assumes that when you experience an extreme emotional state, central nervous system mechanism attempts to bring you back to a state of emotional equilibrium or neutrality. In returning to neutrality, the emotional state may even surpass equilibrium and progresses to the opposite emotional state. For example when you were first appointed to your job, you probably felt happy even elated. This positive emotional state waned over time to a neutral state or perhaps to a slightly depressed or a unhappy state. Opponent processes theory presents an intriguing explanation of why job attitudes change over time and why workers may become bore with jobs they once found satisfied. It does not explain, however, why some workers are continually either very satisfied or dissatisfied with their jobs the theory has also not been empirically tested, so we can’t judge whether it is a viable theory of job satisfaction (Dipboye, Smith and Howell, 2000)

2.2.4 High Performance Cycle Theory:The high performance cycle theory is really an integration of work motivation and job attitudes theories. This model uses the motivational framework of goal setting theory and predictions that high goals and high success expectations lead to high performance. High performance, in turn, produces rewards, satisfaction and commitment to future goals. The model also considers the influence of personnel and situational factors such as ability and tasks complexity.


2.3 Performance:Every manager, no matter what his or her role, knows that exceptional employee performance is critical in today’s world. The need for human resource managers to move beyond HR’s traditional performance management approaches and partner with line managers to remove barriers to exceptional employee performance that exists in organizational work environments.

2.3.1 Job Satisfaction is the key to performance improvement

There is an old saying that you can take a horse to the water but you cannot force it to drink, it will drink only if its thirsty – so with people. They will do what they want to do or otherwise motivated to do. Weather it is to excel on the workshop floor or in the “ivory tower” they must be motivated or driven to it, either by themselves or through external stimulus.

Are they born with the self-motivation or drive? Yes and no. If no, they can be motivated, for motivation is a skill that can and must be learnt. This is essential for any business to survive and succeed.

Performance is considered to be a function of ability and motivation, thus

JP = (a*m)

Where JP = Job Performance A = Ability M = Motivation

Ability in turn depends on education, experience and training and its improvement is a slow and long process. On the other hand motivation can be improved quickly. There are many options and an uninitiated manager may not even know where to start. As a guideline, there are broadly seven strategies for motivation.

o Positive Reinforcement / High expectationso Effective discipline and punishment o Treating people fairly o Satisfying employees needso Setting work related goals o Restructuring jobso Base rewards on job performance

There are certain basic strategies, through the mix in the final “recipe” will vary from workplace situation to situation. Essentially, there is a gap between an individual’s actual state and some desired state the manager tries to reduce this gap.

Motivation is, in effect, a means to manipulate and reduce this gap. It is inducing others in a specific way towards goals specifically stated by the motivator. Naturally, these goals must conform to the corporate policy of the organization. The motivational system must be tailored to the situation and to the organization.

2


2.3.2 How can we Achieve Exceptional Employee Performance?

The first thing to remember is that employee performance does not occur in a vacuum. We have to take a systems perspective and look not only at our employees, but also at the environments in which we expect them to perform.

It has been said that if we put good performance in bad systems, the system will win every time. We know that behavior in every facet of our lives is a function not only of the person, but also of the environment-more specifically of the interaction of the person and the environment. Behaviors at work then are a function of the interaction of the employees (with their person factors) and the work environment (all the organizational systems factors). And it is behavior that leads to performance.

A. Yesterday’s Solution: Fix the Employees:

Yesterday’s solution to the issue of employee performance was simple: “Fix the employees!” The focus was on the immediate problem and the solution was either training or discipline.

As we grew a bit more sophisticated we became more proactive and got ahead of the curve by instituting performance management systems that often provided for goal setting and performance appraisal processes which gave a more rational and defensible basis for training and discipline. We also implemented careers planning and development systems, which gave us more of a future focus, and changed the name of the Training and Development function to Human Resource Development to reflect the broader scope.

B. Today’s Solution:

Today, we are generally doing a better job. We recognize and deal with most of the “hygiene factors” – fair pay, reasonable benefits, clean and safe working conditions, etc. These are important there is no question that they are necessary for improving employee performance for fairly obvious reasons. To use simplistic examples, employee performance improvement interventions may not stand much of a chance if employees are really annoyed because we did a poor job of implementing a benefits change or if they are preoccupied with work schedules they consider unfair.

This is a big step beyond yesterday’s solution of fix the employee with training and discipline. The competency area currently tested by the Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) reflects this broad area of knowledge. These areas truly are a critical foundation for improved employee performance, but they are not also enough. We must do more. We are looking at personal system factors outside of work as they impact employees, but still not looking hard enough at the system factors at work.

C. Tomorrow’s Solution:


A relatively simple but highly effective way of looking at this issue was provided by Tom Gilbert 1994, who developed a diagnostic tool called the Behavior Engineering Model (BEM). There are other approaches but the BEM will serve as a good example. It looks at the following six areas:

1. Information2. Resources3. Incentives4. Skills and Knowledge5. Capacity6. Motivation

Let’s look at each of these in a bit more detail. Information is critical for obvious reasons. It starts with output specifications. People have to know what they are expected to produce. They need to get a feedback. They need to be aware of policy and procedures and the reasons for these policies and procedures, and so on. Resources, again is fairly obvious. No matter how skilled an employee without the tools and materials (and information can overlap with resources here) needed to do the job, it probably isn’t going to get done. The best welder in the world cannot weld without a torch. The issue of incentives is a bit more complex, but boils down to this. In the work environment, are these truly incentives for good performance and truly consequences for poor performance? Often we end up in effect, punishing our best performers. They get all the tough jobs because we know we can count on them and the poor performers get the easier work.

“Skills and knowledge” is certainly a familiar area. People have to know how to do their jobs. Capacity is important for obvious reasons also. No matter how committed the employee, if we hire someone 5’10’’ to guard an NBA center in the low post, he isn’t going to get the job done. Motivation is important also, a strictly person based definition of performance is that performance is a function of motivation and ability. We can work on the ability, it’s harder to work on motivation because it is so internal to the individual, but we can work on the environment and make sure we remove the barriers to performance. Gilbert also developed a list of questions he called the PROBE questionnaire, to help determine in which of these areas the cause of an employee performance shortfall could be found.

How well do we currently address these person and system factors in HRM? If we have done the things we currently teach that we should (today’s solution), then we probably do fairly well in the person factors skills and knowledge, capacity and motivation. We may have a corporate university and provides excellent training for our employees, focusing on the skills that will be needed tomorrow as well as today. Our promotion and selection systems may be good enough to ensure that employee capacity is never an issue. The rewards, training (including well trained supervisors or team leaders) and career focus may combine to help motivate our employees. But all this may not be enough if there are major problems in the system factors. This is not to say the system factors are ignored. We put a lot of effort into communication programs and

2


comfortable facilities, and tweak our compensation program endlessly. But too frequently, this is not dome with performance improvement in mind and does not result in high performance.

2.4 How can HRM be a Major Player in improving Performance?

Once we are sure of the solid basic HR foundation is in place, there are two more issues for HR organizations and HR Managers who wish to be key players in improving employee performance and who wish to do more than provide the traditional HR solutions. The first is to understand the methodology for diagnosing human performance problems and designing and implementing performance improvement interventions. The second is to forge effective partnerships with the line managers.

The methodology is not complex, but before the methodology can be used effectively, one must develop a mind set that recognizes that there are many solutions to employee performance problems other than training (Marilyn Westmas, of Rayovac, has developed taxonomy of well over 200 performance improvement interventions). Then we need to an understanding of the methodology a basic approach that is not all that different from that used daily by HR managers in problem solving. Start with front end analysis determines the problem area, select, design and develop an appropriate intervention, implement the intervention and evaluate the result to determine if adjustments are needed. The critical point is that training is always the appropriate intervention we may need a job aid, an electronic performance support system (EPSS), more and better information getting the people to doing the work or additional resources. Problem must be approached with the willingness to look at the whole work environment and not walk away when it does not appear the intervention needed is a traditional HR approach that we are comfortable with.

The last point is the key to forgoing effective partnerships with the line managers, team leaders or self managed work teams. There are tremendous opportunities for synergy when the skills and perspectives of HR representatives combine with the people involved with the work on daily basis. They should be willing not to walk away when the solution appears to be outside the traditional HR area of expertise. Rather, they should be true business partners, stay with the people with the problem, help find the expertise needed and ensure the solution is designed and implemented in such a way that it leverages our employee’s capabilities.

2.5 Setting expectations to increase motivation and performance:

To increase the motivational level following steps should be taken;

o Reconcile Job and Task Expectations o Work together to decide how expectations will be monitored o Work together to decide what the positive and not so positive consequences should be if

employee exceeds, meets or does not meet expectationso Building competence: How do I do it?


o Giving feedback: How am I doing?o Providing support: Will I succeed?o Rewards: What’s in it for me?

2


3 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS

In an order to study the relationship between Job Satisfaction & Job performance, we conduct a survey in various Telecommunication Companies in Islamabad. To make a clear picture of it, we divide the Job Satisfaction into three elements:

Task Satisfaction Employee Satisfaction Market Satisfaction

Task satisfaction comes from performing the tasks required of the job. Increasing a person's salary may make an undesirable task more bearable, but it doesn't necessarily make it more enjoyable.

Employment satisfaction consists of elements such as personnel policies, benefits, career opportunities, work environment, style of management, fit in the organization, etc. Many of these elements are within the company's control; others are not. For example, there may be very little that a company can do for an employee who does not get along with his/her peers. The employer can try to assure that all individuals are treated professionally, but the company cannot make the coworkers become close friends.

Market satisfaction is comprised of forces external to the company that affect the individual's job. Political situations and public laws can easily affect job satisfaction. An individual may be unhappy because of some environmental factor but the company cannot waive the requirement to improve an individual's job satisfaction. In most cases, market satisfaction will be consistent across the job market; the same external forces will be present even if the employee changes employers. However there are differences in the external forces affecting jobs within the government and those within the private sector.

Keeping in mind these basic elements of Job Satisfaction, we prepared a Questionnaire and conduct a study. The analyses of these questionnaires are:


3.1 Communication of Goals & StrategiesMore than 80% of the employees show complete satisfaction regarding the communication of goals & strategies in the Company. The findings also display two outcomes, firstly, the company is focused on communicating its goals and objectives throughout the Organization & secondly, it shows the employees level of interest by working accordingly to achieve the Company’s goals.

Does the company communicates its goals and strategies to you?

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

PercentValid Very

Dissatisfied1 2.5 2.5 2.5

Not Satisfied 3 7.5 7.5 10.0

Somewhat Satisfied

19 47.5 47.5 57.5

Satisfied 17 42.5 42.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Very Dissatisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

Per

cen

t

3.2 Communication & Information FlowMost of the employees are quite content with the communication and information flow in the Company. This shows that there is an efficient system of information flow within the Organization. The Company works on an Intranet Application so that the information is readily available throughout the different levels of the Organization.

Are you satisfied with the communication and information flow of your organization?


PercentValid Somewhat



Somewhat Satisfied

29 72.5 72.5 82.5

Satisfied 7 17.5 17.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

2


Somewhat Dissatisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

20

40

60

80

Per

cen

t

3.3 Communication & Interpersonal relationshipPeople enjoy their work if they are having good interpersonal relationships with those people whom they are working with. They may be their colleagues, their subordinates or supervisors. Thus, building a strong interpersonal relationship is very important to increase Job Satisfaction. The results from our survey show that more than 70% of the employees believe that a strong working relationship exist in the Organization.

Are you satisfied with the communication and interpersonal relationship in your organization?


PercentValid Not Satisfied 8 20.0 20.0 20.0

Somewhat Satisfied

23 57.5 57.5 77.5

Satisfied 9 22.5 22.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.4 Interaction with other employeesOne of the most effective ways of achieving goals is to determine that how much the employees are interacted with one another. The result shows that around 70% of the employees are given various opportunities to interact with one another. These opportunities are group meetings,


seminars, & other get together activities. The purpose of the gathering is to have a formal talks and discussions over various issues and problems which the employees face during their work.

Do you receive enough opportunities to interact with other employees on a formal level?


PercentValid Very


Not Satisfied 11 27.5 27.5 30.0

Somewhat Satisfied

12 30.0 30.0 60.0

Satisfied 16 40.0 40.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Very Dissatisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

Per

cen

t

3.5 Value of EffortThe employees get more committed and dedicated towards their work if their efforts in achieving the Organizational Goals are valued. They feel their presence and importance in the Company which ultimately affects the overall satisfaction level of the employees. The results have shown that more than 80% of the employees are happy with the outcome of their efforts.

Does your effort sin achieving the goals valued?



Somewhat Satisfied

29 72.5 72.5 82.5

Satisfied 7 17.5 17.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

2



0

20

40

60

80

Per

cen

t

3.6 Degree of MotivationEmployees should feel motivated in the jobs they are performing at the workplace. The degree of motivation is achieved through many ways, that is, interaction with others, job security, personal growth and other factors. The analysis of our survey shows that 27.5% of the employees are not happy in performing their tasks and only 15% showed that they enjoy their work. The majority of the employees do not have any say about it.

Degree of motivation as far as the job is concerned?



Satisfied5 12.5 12.5 12.5

Not Satisfied 11 27.5 27.5 40.0

Somewhat Satisfied

18 45.0 45.0 85.0

Satisfied 6 15.0 15.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Somewhat Satisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

Per

cen

t

3.7 Level of Job SecurityOne of the key elements for employees to perform well is the level of security they feel with their position in the Company. If an employee is under the impression that he might get shifted to another position or even might get fired, it is going to affect his/her performance in a negative manner. The results have shown that around 50% of the employees are not feeling secured about their position in the company. Practically speaking, this percentage is quite high for any


company. The figure also tells that the employees who are working at the middle and lower levels are the one that are feeling insecure about their job positions.

Level of job security?




Not Satisfied 21 52.5 52.5 60.0

Somewhat Satisfied

9 22.5 22.5 82.5

Satisfied 7 17.5 17.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Pe

rce

nt

3.8 Methodology of Implementing ChangeThe successful Organizations use various methods and tools to successfully implement the change in their businesses. Though a change is continuous, the implementation should be a steady process for it to be effectively implemented. The overall result of 42.5% NOT SATISFIED shows that the employees are not quite content with the methods by which the change is being implemented at the workplace.

Methodology by which change is implemented in organization?




Not Satisfied 17 42.5 42.5 47.5

Somewhat Satisfied

21 52.5 52.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

2


Somewhat Dissatisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.9 Performance of TasksAnother key aspect to show a correlation between Performance and Satisfaction is to evaluate the ways and manners of performing tasks which the employees practice. If the employees are provided effective ways of doing their task, that is going to increase their performance at work. The findings have shown that around 25% of the employees are not satisfied with the ways they perform their responsibilities, which clearly shows one thing that most of these employees are performing at the lower level and they are lacking equipments, resources or other accessories to do their tasks.

The manner of tasks you are required to perform?


PercentValid .00 1 2.5 2.5 2.5

Not Satisfied 10 25.0 25.0 27.5

Somewhat Satisfied

23 57.5 57.5 85.0

Satisfied 6 15.0 15.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

.00 Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.10 Personal Growth & DevelopmentAn employee feel encouraged to perform if he/she has given the opportunity of personal growth and development in the Organization. The percentile of 35% clearly shows that the career growth opportunities are not uniformly distributed throughout the Organization.


The extent to which personal growth and development is possible?




Not Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 35.0

Somewhat Satisfied

21 52.5 52.5 87.5

Satisfied 5 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.11 Conflict resolutionIt is a common practice that the employees face issues working with one another. Successful organizations follow effective methods of conflict resolution to overcome these issues. Serious conflicts may lead to job dissatisfaction and ultimately resulting in decreasing the overall employee’s performance. Through the surveys which we have conducted, we found that around 40% of the employees are not satisfied with the conflict resolution methods being practiced at their workplace.

The methods of conflict resolution in your organization?




Not Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 40.0

Somewhat Satisfied

19 47.5 47.5 87.5

Satisfied 5 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

2



0

10

20

30

40

50

Per

cen

t

3.12 Utilization of SkillsEmployees in any Organization feel pride in themselves if their skills are properly utilized. The foremost and important thing for this to happen is to have right people at the right place. From the survey, we found that 22.5% of workforce is not able to utilize their skills completely and 57.5% are those employees who have an ambiguity over it, only 12.5% are those workers who feel that their skills are properly utilized.

Degree to which your skills are utilized?





Somewhat Satisfied

23 57.5 57.5 87.5

Satisfied 5 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.13 Flexibility allowedFlexibility in the working environment keeps the employees in a positive frame of mind. The results from the research concluded that 32.5% of the employees feel that they are given free hand at work. On the other hand, 27.5% are those employees who do not feel flexible in their work.

Flexibility and independance allowed?




Disatisfied2 5.0 5.0 5.0

Not Satisfied 11 27.5 27.5 32.5

Somewhat Satisfied

14 35.0 35.0 67.5

Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Somewhat Disatisfied Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

Per

cen

t

3.14 Climate of the WorkplaceThe overall climate of the Organization depends on the relationship of employees, performance of tasks, access of knowledge and various other factors as well. The results have shown that the majority of the employees are quite satisfied with the overall climate of their workplace.

Are you satisfied with the over all climate of the organization?


PercentValid .00 1 2.5 2.5 2.5


Somewhat Satisfied

18 45.0 45.0 67.5

Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

.00 Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

Per

cen

t

2


3.15 Salary vs. ExperienceOne of the most important factors of increasing Job Satisfaction in an organization is to make your employees feel that they are paid according to their worth. If an employee feels that he/she is under paid, its going to affect his/her performance at work. Our results show that the level of dissatisfaction is quite high, that is 42.5%. That percentile suggests that almost half of the workforce is under the impression that they are not paid a good income at work.

Your level of salary with respect with your experiance?


PercentValid Very


Somewhat Dissatisfied

5 12.5 12.5 15.0

Not Satisfied 17 42.5 42.5 57.5

Somewhat Satisfied

12 30.0 30.0 87.5

Satisfied 5 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied

Not Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied

Satisfied

0

10

20

30

40

50

Per

cen

t

3.16 Quantity of work ExpectedThe employee’s performance ultimately degrades if he/she is given a load of work. Thinking from an employee’s perspective, an employee will feel that he/she is not efficient at the work which demoralizes him/her. The results display a balanced outcome from the survey we conducted. 22.5% are not satisfied with the amount of work they are doing, while a healthy percentile is quite satisfied about it.

The quantity of work allocated / expected to you?



Somewhat Satisfied

23 57.5 57.5 80.0

Satisfied 8 20.0 20.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Per

cen

t

3.17 Free Hand at WorkIf the employees are given free hand at work, they are more promising in performing their duties. In other words, we can say that the employees feel the responsibility in achieving the set targets. This factor thus lead to increase in Job satisfaction and hence performance. From our findings, 25% of the employees are dissatisfied, and a small figure of 7.5% shows the satisfaction level.

Degree to which you feel extended to your job?



Somewhat Satisfied

27 67.5 67.5 92.5

Satisfied 3 7.5 7.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per

cen

t

3.18 Physical working conditionsFor employees to perform well, they should have a good environment and conditions to work on. As mentioned earlier, it is very important to provide the employees the required resources as well as a healthy working environment. The results show that the employees are very satisfied with their working conditions. Only 5% showed a dissatisfaction level.

Are you satisfied with the physical working conditions?


Percent

2


Valid Not Satisfied 2 5.0 5.0 5.0

Somewhat Satisfied

25 62.5 62.5 67.5

Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per

cen

t

3.19 Workplace DiscriminationEmployees feel discourage at work, if they experience any discrimination, either gender, educational background, linguistic or race. Successful organizations always try to eliminate any discrimination they may experience at the workplace. From our survey, we concluded that majority of the employees do not feel any discrimination at their jobs. Although 20% of them do feel that there is discrimination, but that figure can be easily overcome by organizing activities within the organization.

Individual differences like gender, educational background, and race are respected in your organization?


PercentValid Very


Somewhat Dissatisfied

1 2.5 2.5 7.5


Somewhat Satisfied

16 40.0 40.0 67.5

Satisfied 13 32.5 32.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0


Very Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied


0

10

20

30

40

Per

cen

t

From the analysis of the survey, we find out that all the three elements play an important role in evaluating the overall Job Satisfaction level of the employees. Though, some factors are more convincing than the others. That is why; the overall result shows a different picture, for example, if an employee is satisfied with his salary, it does not mean that he is also satisfied with his job. There are other factors which come into play when we talk about the term “Job Satisfaction”, i.e. the working conditions, personal growth, utilization of skills and all others mentioned above. But one thing is clear from this survey, that all these factors of Job Satisfaction do affect the performance of the employees – either directly or indirectly.

2


4 PROPOSED MODEL FOR THE RESEARCH STUDY

To begin our findings, let us again divide job satisfaction as a combination of three elements. These all three elements have been used collectively in our survey.

1. Task Satisfaction2. Employment Satisfaction

3. Market Satisfaction

The diagram in Figure below illustrates the simple correlation between job satisfaction and job performance. The theory is that the employee's performance is in direct correlation to their satisfaction; improve their satisfaction and you will improve their performance.

4.1 Our Proposed Model – P&S MODEL (P: Performance and S: Satisfaction)

After conducting our survey and looking at things in a new ways for performance vs. satisfaction, let’s start with a very basic view: comparing the satisfaction and performance of a specific task. We will refer to these as task satisfaction and task performance. Task satisfaction is strongly influenced by a person's aptitude; it is the satisfaction received by the employee for performing that specific task.

In the figure below, let us break the relationship of performance and satisfaction into four quadrants to further explore and explain the complexity of the relationship. This figure helps to understand the complexity while trying to keep the concept manageable. There are varying degrees of satisfaction and performance so it is difficult to state exactly where one would draw the line between high performance and low performance and between high satisfaction and low satisfaction. Each person is somewhere along those two lines. We can only try to understand what will happen as the employees move along those lines.


Figure: Two Dimensional View of Task Satisfaction vs. Task Performance

The above Figure creates four

quadrants.

High Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance. Low Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance. High Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance. Low Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance.

4.1.1 High Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance

This individual loves his/her job. He/she has the aptitude, the skill, and resources necessary to perform the assigned task, and he/she performs the task quite well. A person in this quadrant may become so caught up in his/her task that the person does not realize that he/she has worked past quitting time.

4.1.2 Low Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance

The manager should consider whether or not something is missing. Does the employee lack the aptitude, the skills, or the resources necessary to perform the task well? Being in this quadrant does not mean that the employee is not trying! From the employee's perception, the employee may be expending a great deal of effort in trying to complete the task. The employee may feel that he/she is doing everything humanly possible and he/she does not understand why management is unhappy with his/her performance. This person may experience very low task satisfaction because he/she finds it difficult or unfavorable to perform the task. This person may

2


be a clock-watcher, never arriving early or staying late without being mandated and compensated.

4.1.3 Low Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance

This person is indicating that they would rather be doing another job, but at the same time their personal values are such that they are giving this task their best effort. A company should think that this is a person they want to keep. It may well be worth the company’s effort to look at developing a graceful transition plan that would allow this individual to move to another position while minimizing the impact to your present operations.

4.1.4 High Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance

From a positive viewpoint, a person in this quadrant loves his/her work but he/she is not performing as expected. The employee may find it hard to quit working on a task knowing that he/she can always make it better (i.e., a perfectionist that never finishes his task). Or, the person may enjoy what he/she is doing but lacks the aptitude, skill, or other resources necessary to do the task quickly.


5 CONCLUSION

The Model shows that if the person's aptitude is such that they enjoy the tasks and they have the skills to perform the tasks, then they have the potential of being in the high satisfaction and high performance quadrant. If the basic needs are not met, then increasing the person's salary is not going to improve performance.

If a person should be in the high task satisfaction and high task performance quadrant and they are not performing as expected then the question is one of choice,

"Why did the employee conscientiously or unconscientiously chose to move towards the left (decreased performance) in Figure?"

The answer is quite simple; factors influencing the person's conscious or unconscious movements along the performance line include those which are related to employment satisfaction and market satisfaction.

Though it has been shown in our research that there exists a relationship between Job Satisfaction and Job Performance, we will never be able to pinpoint an exact correlation between job satisfaction and performance that will work in every situation. Doing a job well may improve job satisfaction, being satisfied may encourage a person to try harder, and each person's personal value system will have an effect on how he/she reacts to motivators and impediments. The best we can do is try to understand that performance is a complex issue, and recognize where we have control to address issues affecting an individual's performance.

2


6 APPENDIX

JOB SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE

Name: ____________________

Organization: _____________

Sector:____________________

Department: _______________

Post: ______________________

Length of services:____________

Key : Very dissatisfied = 1, Somewhat dissatisfied = 2, Not satisfied = 3, Somewhat satisfied = 4, Satisfied = 5

Very Satisfied Dissatisfied

1 Does the company communicate its goals and strategies to you?

1 2 3 4 5

2 Are you satisfied with the communication and information flow of your organization?

1 2 3 4 5

3 Are you satisfied with the interpersonal relationship in your organization?

1 2 3 4 5

4 Do you receive enough opportunities to interact with other employees on a formal level?

1 2 3 4 5

5 Does your efforts in achieving the goals valued? 1 2 3 4 5

6 Degree of motivation as far as the job is concerned? 1 2 3 4 5

7 Level of job security? 1 2 3 4 5


8 Methodology by which change is implemented in organization?

1 2 3 4 5

9 The manner of tasks you are required to perform? 1 2 3 4 5

1

0

The extent to which personal growth and development is possible? 1 2 3 4 5

1

1

The methods of conflict resolution in your organization?1 2 3 4 5

1

2

Degree to which your skills are utilized?1 2 3 4 5

1

3

Flexibility and independence allowed?1 2 3 4 5

1

4

Are you satisfied with the over all climate of the organization?1 2 3 4 5

1

5

Your level of salary with respect with your experience?1 2 3 4 5

1

6

The quantity of work expected / allocated to you?1 2 3 4 5

1

7

Degree to which you feel extended to your job?1 2 3 4 5

1

8

Are you satisfied with the physical working conditions?1 2 3 4 5

1

9

Individual differences like gender, educational background, and race are respected in your organization? 1 2 3 4 5

2

0

Considering everything are you satisfied with your job?1 2 3 4 5

REFERNCES

2


o Alderfer, P, 1969, “An empirical test of a new theory of human needs.

Organizational Behavior and Performance”, 142-175.

o Alexander, C. 2000, Organization Behavior, London.

o Arvey, Richard D., L. M. Abraham, T.J. Bocahrd, & N. L. Segal. 1989, “Job

Satisfaction: Environment and Genetic Components”, Journal of Applied

Psychology.

o Amsden, A.H, 1994, “a Review of the World Bank East Asia Study”, World Dev

ANDelopment, pp.627-633.

o Barber AE & Bretz RD, Jr, 2000, Compensation attraction, and retention. In

Rynes SL.

o Beck, R.C, 1994, “Motivation: Theories and Principles. (2nd ED.)” Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

o Berkowitz, L., Fraser, C., Treasure, P, & Cochran, S, 1987. “Pay equity, job

gratifications and comparisons in pay level satisfaction”, Journal of the

applied Psychology, 72, 544-551.

o Blau, Gary, 1994, “Testing the effect of level and Importance of Pay Referents

on Pay Level Satisfaction” Humans Relations 47:1251-68.

o Blau, P. M, 1964, Exchange and power in Social Life, New York.

o Bordia, P., & Blau G, 1998, Pay referent comparison and pay level

satisfaction.

o Bretz RD, Jr, Thomas SL. (1992). Perceived equity, motivation, and final offer

arbitration in major league baseball. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 280-

287.

o Herzberg, F. 1968, “One more time: How do you motivated employees?”

Harvard Business Review, Vol. 46, iss. 1, pp. 53-62.

o Taylor, G. S, & Vest, M.J. 1992. “Pay comparison and pay satisfaction among

public sector employees”. Public Personnel Management, 21, 445-445.

o Vroom, V. H, 1995, Work and Motivation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.

o http:// www. Answers.com/topic/job-satisfaction

o http:// www. Careervision.org/JobSatisfaction-Paper.htm


o http:// ezinerarticles.com/?Job-Performance-and- Satisfaction & id=290072

o http:// www.jstor.org/view/0018392/di995472/99p002r/0

o http:// www.careerkey.org/asp.career options/job satisfaction. asp

o http://www.icbs.com/KB/inspiration/kb inspiration-what-motivation-satisfaction.htm

http://www.icbs.com/KB/inspiration/kb

http://www.careerkey.org/asp.career

http://www.jstor.org/view/0018392/di995472/99p002r/0

Documents

Data Analysis Reserach Report- on Between Employee Satisfaction and Performance