REFLECT OF EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION IN THE ORGANIZATION PERFORMANCE

 

Figure:1, source: Getty Images

Introduction

In this post how organization can explore the impact management practices on achieving employee satisfaction. Employee satisfaction would fully mediate job analysis, design, employee performance appraisal, Compensation and reward and Training and development.

The concept of job satisfaction has been defined as the degree to which employees feel fulfilled and content with their work. It has been recognized as a key factor influencing productivity, morale, and overall organizational success. Satisfied employees are more likely to be engaged, motivated, and committed to their roles, thus contributing to positive organizational outcomes.

Highlights

Job satisfaction is rich and multi-layered, peppered with definitions, concepts, and theories. The importance of considering job satisfaction and striving to optimize arises from the significant amount of time people spends at work.

 

Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction

   Figure:2 source: question pro

These factors affecting job satisfaction requires a holistic and tailored approach, recognizing each employee's unique needs and expectations 

Source: you tube

Theories (6) About Job Satisfaction

1. Locke’s range of affect theory 

With origins in organizational psychology, Edwin Locke’s (1976) range of affect theory is perhaps the most well-recognized model of job satisfaction. Locke’s theory recognized the importance of how much people value different aspects of their job, along with how well their expectations are met. In short, our values inform our expectations, and the closer these are to reality, the more satisfied we feel.

2. The dispositional approach

The dispositional approach was formed in light of evidence that affective disposition predicts job satisfaction (Stow, Bell, & Clausen, 1986). They argued that people’s tendency to experience positive or negative emotion accounts for individual differences in job satisfaction. Being limited by its largely empirical approach, the dispositional approach has faced criticism. Yet personality researchers have shown that personality traits remain largely stable over time, and the same is true with job satisfaction, even though different jobs and careers (Stow & Cohen-Charish, 2005).

 

3. The Job Characteristics Model

The Job Characteristics Model aims to specify conditions under which people are satisfied by their work and motivated to perform effectively (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Five core characteristics have been reported, along with three psychological states acting as a sort of ‘gateway’ to satisfaction.

4. Equity theory

Equity theory was outlined in the 1960s by workplace and behavioral psychologist John Stacey Adams (1965). He posited that jobs involve a continuous assessment of how much ‘give and take’ there is between employer and employee. The basic premise of this model is that job satisfaction and motivation result from a fair balance between an employee’s ‘inputs’ and ‘outputs.’

5. The social information processing theory

This brings us to the next job satisfaction theory. As social creatures, human beings pay very close attention to the opinions and behaviors of the group. In other words, we’re not living in a vacuum. Going back to theories of social comparison, people have a drive to look to others for information that helps generate a complete picture of themselves (Festinger, 1954). Couldn’t this also apply to job satisfaction? Social information processing theory argues this case. With links to the sociological concept of ‘constructivism,’ it recognizes that people form a picture of reality by interacting with people around them. According to this model, people might (consciously or unconsciously) scrutinize how their colleagues feel before deciding how they feel. As you’d expect, if coworkers feel positive about the work they do and the environment they’re in, a person is more likely to feel satisfied (Jex, 2002).

6. Self-determination theory (SDT)

According to SDT, people can assimilate extrinsic motivations into their core sense of self and value system, changing their behavioral framework. On the back of this, three universal needs involved in self-determination have been recognized as essential to such integration: the need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

How Job Satisfaction Affected Employee Performance

Employee Benefits That Affect Job Satisfaction

Strategies for realize employee job satisfaction in an organization with HR practices

Human resource management actively implements strategies to enhance job satisfaction its open communication is maintained to ensure understanding among employees. Authority and responsibility are delegated to empower staff simultaneously contributions are acknowledged regularly, employee creating motivation and continuous learning and career progression opportunities are provided to promote growth. Staff workloads are managed fairly to prevent burnout and in addition to that culture of support and respect are fostered to encourage collaboration. HR should give regular feedback is solicited to identify areas for improvement, and they have flexibility in work arrangements are offered to accommodate personal needs at the same time recognition programs are implemented to celebrate achievements. Employee engagement surveys are conducted to gauge satisfaction levels. Hence leadership development programs are established to cultivate future leaders.

Team-building activities are organized to strengthen relationships which conflict resolution mechanisms implementation in place to address disputes promptly. Health and wellness programs are promoted to support physical and mental well-being.  Equity and inclusion initiatives are integrated into the organizational culture. Clear career paths are defined to provide direction and purpose. Performance management systems are utilized to set goals and measure progress. Compensation and benefits packages are reviewed regularly to meet financial needs. Training programs are designed to enhance skills and knowledge. Mentorship opportunities are created to facilitate guidance from experienced colleagues.

Work life balance is prioritized to ensure personal time even if employee resource groups are established for support and networking. Transparency in decision making processes is ensured, Technology and tools are provided to enhance productivity same time Professional development support from external training.
 

Enhancing Job Satisfaction

Enhancing job satisfaction is a dynamic and ongoing process involving strategic interventions and a deep understanding of the factors affecting job satisfaction. Key strategies include

·         Fostering Open Communication

Establishing transparent communication channels encourages feedback and dialogue, helping address concerns and aspirations.

·        Personalized Recognition

Tailoring recognition to individual preferences and achievements can significantly boost morale and satisfaction.

·         Professional Development Goals and Opportunities

Investing in employee growth and development enhances skills and increases job satisfaction

·        Flexible Work Arrangements

Adapting work schedules and locations to accommodate diverse needs can improve work-life balance and satisfaction.

·        Inclusive and Fair Policies

Ensuring equity and inclusivity in organizational policies reinforces a sense of fairness and belonging.

Those factors affecting job satisfaction, organizations can unlock the full potential of their workforce and foster a culture of engagement and excellence.

 

 Measurement of Job Satisfaction

When it comes to measuring job satisfaction, several tools and methods are commonly used. Employee surveys, like the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) or Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), gauge satisfaction on various job aspects. Interviews and focus groups offer deeper insights into employee attitudes. Performance metrics, such as productivity levels, attendance, and turnover rates, indirectly measure job satisfaction. 360-degree feedback collects comprehensive feedback from peers, subordinates, and supervisors. Pulse surveys capture real-time sentiments to track changes over time. Exit interviews reveal critical satisfaction areas needing attention. Observation of employee behavior, such as engagement and interactions, also helps gauge satisfaction levels. Together, these methods provide a comprehensive picture of job satisfaction.

Performance Appraisal for Job Satisfaction

Performance analysis as a variable that explored on an individual level, and organizational performance which investigated at the firm level. One is an individual or a worker, because the analysis of job satisfaction assumed questioning each individual worker about his/her job satisfaction, and the other level was the company-level which implied the analysis of its organizational performance. The logic of this individual variable -organizational variable relationship in the premise that job satisfaction of each employee could influence the enhancement of organizational performance 

Organizational Performance Appraisal

Performance very much depends on perception, values, and attitudes. There appears to be so many variables influencing the job performance that it is almost impossible to  make a sense of them (Puskpakumari, 2008). Performance refers to an individual ability, skill and effort in a given situation (Porter and Lawler, 1974). Performance is the outcome of the effort extended to the job by an employee or group or organization. Effort is an internal force of a person which makes him or her work willingly. When employees are satisfied with their job and their  needs are  met, they develop an attachment to work  or make  an  effort to  perform  better. Increased effort results in better  performances. Richard et al. (2009) defined organizational performance as an organizations’ actual output or results as  measured against its intended outputs (or goals and objectives). Organizational performance generally covers three  explicit  areas  of  firm  outcomes  which  are:  financial performance (profits, return on assets, return on investment, etc.), product market performance (sales, market share, etc.) and  shareholder  return  (total  shareholder  return,  economic value  added,  etc.).  According  to  Market  Business  News (2019)  organizational  performance  involves  “analyzing  a company’s  performance  against its  objectives  and goals.  In other  words,  organizational  performance  comprises  real results  or  outputs compared  with  intended  outputs.”  It  also relates  to  how  successfully  an  organization  performs  or achieves their predetermined objectives and goals. 

Employee Performance Appraisal

 

An employee performance evaluation, also known as a “performance review,” is a process used by organizations to give employees feedback on their job performance and formally document that performance. Although companies determine their own evaluation cycles, most conduct employee performance evaluations once per year. Some companies also conduct evaluations when employees reach the end of their initial probationary period. Those who perform well on that evaluation are typically removed from probationary employment status. Evaluation information is stored in the employee's file and may be requested by future employers or institutions of higher education. Performance evaluations vary significantly in structure and format across industries and companies. They might include rating scales, self-assessment checklists, formal observations or performance tasks. Typically, at least a portion of an employee's performance evaluation includes a review of outcome metrics or progress against previously identified goals.In the corporate sector, for example, part of an employee's performance evaluation might include a review of sales generated or company growth targets. In a school setting, the academic performance of students in a specific class is included as a component of the evaluation.

 

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Performance Relationship

The  extent  of the  relationship between  job satisfaction  and performance  has  been  basically  evaluated  in  different organizational  settings.  Outcomes  of  these  investigations have  not  tailored  toward  one  direction  Cummings  (1970) distinguished  three  key  perspectives  concerning  this relationship. .  Satisfaction causes  performance, performance causes satisfaction and  rewards cause both performance and satisfaction.  Kornhanuser and Sharp (1976) have conducted in  excess of  thirty  research to  find  out ho  satisfaction  and performance  correlate.  Katzell,  Barnet  and  Porker  (1952) showed that job satisfaction neither relates with turnover nor with production quality. Smith and Cranny (1968) also posit that  job  satisfaction  positively  correlate  with  employ performanceas well as effort, commitment Studies  done  by  Brayfied  and  Crockett  (1955),  Fournet (1966) Lee and Chan (1996) have demonstrated that there are connections  between  job  satisfaction  and  productivity  and that the higher the level of satisfaction, the greater the effort to increase  productivity. Carroll,  Keflas and Watson (1964) found  that  satisfaction  and  job  productivity  are  essential relationships  in  which  every  influence  the  other.  They recommend that performance prompts more work effort due to  high  apparent  anticipation  of  rewards  or  other  positive outcomes.  The exertion  prompts  powerful  presentation, which  again  prompts  fulfillment  in  urgent  relationship. David, Joseph  and William (1970)  recommend that  the sort of  remuneration  framework  under  which  laborers  perform emphatically impact the relationship between satisfaction and performance. The  implication of  the  last argument  (performance  lead  to reward  which  in  turn  lead  to  satisfaction)  is  that  a manager/management  create  employee  job  satisfaction  by first  establishing  conditions  under  which  a  performer  can achieve  high  performance  level  and,  then,  by  offering equitable rewards for the person’s performance. According to Baridam and Nwibere  (2008:114) this view is important for the understanding and managing of organizational behavior, not because it resolves the satisfaction-performance paradox, but  because  of  the  proactive  research  and  managerial implications with which it is associated.

Conclusions

Job satisfaction is a multifaceted construct deeply intertwined with the fabric of organizational life and individual well-being. Understanding and addressing the factors affecting employee satisfaction is paramount in creating a work environment that attracts and retains top talent. Hence, we analysis of the relations between job satisfaction and organizational performance.

The lessons from factors affecting job satisfaction, providing examples of job satisfaction, and embracing strategies to enhance satisfaction, organizations can navigate the complexities of the modern workplace.

Job satisfaction is desirable needed by employees to perform at peak levels. Employees who are satisfied are more likely to be settled at work, and are also likely to be more committed in  helping  in achievement  of  organizational goal. The factors  that  lead  to  job  satisfaction  among employees  includes:  higher  pay,  recognition,  good  work environment, challenging and fulfilling work and relationship with supervisors and co-workers, among others. it  is  recommended  that  managers  should  be interested in their employees attitudes because attitudes gives warnings  of potential  problems and  because they  influence behavior.  Managers  should  raise  employee  satisfaction  by focusing on the  intrinsic and extrinsic parts of the job, such as  making  the  work  challenging  and  interesting,  and  also high  and  equitable  pay  in  order  to  keep  the  employees motivated  and committed  to drive  organizations vision and goals  domain.  An  unmotivated  employee  hardly  commits serious  effort  towards achievement  of  organizational  goals and  objectives.  Management should also put in place structures that enhance  employees’  job  satisfaction in  order to induce  positive  subsequent  employee  positive  outcomes that  may  lead  to  maintain,  and  supported  organizational competitiveness in today’s highly competitive global era. Managers should know that creating a satisfied workforce is hardly a guarantee of successful organizational performance. Therefore, effort should be made to position the organization to take an advantage of opportunities that abound of that rises in the environment through effective environmental scanning, and  effective  corporate  planning. Management  should  also focus on all facets of job satisfaction and not only on any one factor in order to  enhance the  employee performance in  the organization

 

References

Aaron, D.A., Anusorn, S. & Vivian, T. (2015). Consumers as employees:  the  impact  of  social  responsibility  on quality  of  work  life  among  Australian  engineers. Social Responsibility Journal, 11 (1),  98 – 108

 Academic Journal of Current Research:Vol.6, No.12; December-2019;  ISSN (2343 – 403X);  p –ISSN 3244 - 5621 Impact factor: 5.92

Adams, J. S. (1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(5), 422–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040968

Ahmad, H. A. R., Jafar, A.A., Zainab, A., Khulood, B.,Eman, 

A.R.,  Asia, A.S.  &  Erika, S.  F. (2012).  Jordanian nurses' job satisfaction and intention to quit. Leader-ship in Health Services, 25 (3), 216-231.

Baridam,  D.  M.  and Nwibere,  B.M.  (2008).Understanding and  managing  organizational  behavior.  Port Harcourt: Sherbrook Associates.

Bass, B.M. (1965) Organizational Psychology, Boston: Allyn& Bacon, Inc., pg.   36-38.

Bayfield, A.H. &  Crockett, W.H.  (1955). Employee attitude and employee  performance. Psychological  Bulletin vol. 5, (396-424).

Boselie P, Paauwe J, Richardson R (2003) Human resource management, institutionalization and organizational performance: a comparison of hospitals, hotels and local government. Int J Hum Resour Manag 14:1407–1429

Buchanan,  K.  (1974).  Job  Performance  and  Satisfaction:

Retrieved from:http://ezinearticles.com/?Job.Performance_and_Satisfaction&id=290072.

Carrol, S.  Keflas, R.  & Watson, C.  (1964). Job satisfaction and productivity. Irwin: Illinois.

Clark, A. E. (2003). Unemployment as a social norm: Psychological evidence from panel data. Journal of Labor Economics, 21, 323–351.

Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C., & Stoner, E.F. (Eds.) (1992).  Job satisfaction: How  people feel  about their  jobs and how  it  affects  their  performance.  New  York: Lexington Books.

Cummings,  K.  (1970).  Job  satisfaction  and  Performance. Journal of Social Psychology, 1411(5) 541-563.

David,  F.J.  &  William,  K.  (1970).  Job  satisfaction commitment, Irwin: Illonois.

Edwin A. Locke in 1976, Locke’s Range of Affect Theory- A Complete Guide

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202

Fournet,  G.P.  (1966) “Job  Satisfaction:  Issue  and Problems. Personnel   Psychology,  6  (Summer)  (165-183).

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7

Ironson, G.H., Smith, P.C., Brannick, M.T., Gibson, W.M. &Paul, K.B. (1989). Construction of a job in general scale: A comparison of global, composition  and specific  measures.  Journal  of Applied  psychology,74, 1-8.

Kahn,  R.L  (1960).  Productivity  and  Job  Satisfaction. Personnel Psychology. 3 (13), utumn: 277.

Kasim, R.& Abdul,  G.C. (2012),  Leadership style, satisfaction  and  commitment.Engineering,  Construction and Architectural Management, 19 (1), 61-85.

Katzell, A. Barret, C & Porker (1952). Motivation and labor turnover. Illinois: Irwin Inc.

Kornhanuser,  F.  &  Sharp,  P.  (1976).  Job  satisfaction  and motivation  of  employees  in  industrial  sector. Journal of Social Psychology, (1983) 145, 323-342.

Koys, D. J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational  citizenship  behavior,  and turnover  on organizational effectiveness: A unit‐level, longitudinal study. Personnel psychology, 54(1), 101-114.

Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York:McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Linda, D. & Michael,  H. (2014).  Dealing  with  the  “GrumpyBoomers”: reengaging the disengaged  and  retaining talent. Journal of  Organizational Change  Management, 27(4), 660 – 676

Locke,  E.  A.  (1976).  The  nature  and  causes  of  job satisfaction. In. M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). New York: John Wiley  Sons.

Longenecker,  J.G.  (1977).  Principles  of  management  and organizational  behavior.  Colombus,  Ohio: CharlesE. Merrill Publishing Company.

Luthans.  F.  (1985).  Organizational  behavior.  Illinois:McGraw-Hill.

Market Business News (2019). Organization

MD Pushpakumari The impact of job satisfaction on job performance: An empirical analysis City Forum 9 (1), 89-105

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Staw, B. M., Bell, N. E., & Clausen, J. A. (1986). The dispositional approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392766

Steve M Jax Wiley, Nov 22, 2002 - Psychology - 552 pages A comprehensive treatment of the science and practice of organizational psychology