23-05-2012, 01:52 PM
STUDY ON JOB SATISFACTION FACTORS OF FACULTY MEMBERS AT UNIVERSITY OF BALOCHISTAN
STUDY ON JOB SATISFACTION FACTORS OF FACULTY MEMBERS AT UNIVERSITY OF BALOCHISTAN.pdf (Size: 217.81 KB / Downloads: 53)
ABSTRACT
Job satisfaction is one of the most widely discussed issues in organizational behavior, personnel and human
resource management and organizational management. As teaching does require a great deal of thoroughness
and commitment, so in teaching it is more important to have mental commitment and loyalty than physical
presence. In this study the researcher investigated the present level of job satisfaction among the faculty members
of university of Balochistan. The major purpose of this descriptive-correlational study was to examine factors
affecting job satisfaction of faculty members of University of Balochistan which is explained by Herzberg job
motivator and hygiene factors. A random sample of 120 faculty member of Balochistan University was selected as
a statistical sample. Employing a descriptive-correlative survey method and data were collected through
questionnaire. The faculty members were generally satisfied with their jobs. However, male faculty members were
less satisfied than female faculty members. The factor “work itself” was the most motivating aspect for faculty. The
least motivating aspect was “working conditions.” The demographic characteristics were negligibly related to overall
job satisfaction. The factors “work itself,” and “advancement” explained 60 percent of the variance among faculty
members’ overall level of job satisfaction. The demographic characteristics (age, years of experience, academic
rank, degree) were negligibly related to overall job satisfaction.
Key words: Faculty Members, Job Satisfaction, Motivator Factors, Hygiene Factors
1. INTRODUCTION
The extensive research that has been done on levels of job satisfaction may have distinctive applications to
academic faculty. This is especially true when the separation between satisfaction and dissatisfaction is viewed in
relation to the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of academic employment.
In his well known motivational model, Herzberg (1987) makes some basic distinctions between intrinsic and
extrinsic factors. The differentiations are founded on needs related to prime human characteristics, the ability to
achieve and through that achievement to experience psychological growth. The dual factors arise from alternate
needs that spring from basic animal nature, a drive to avoid pain from the environment and all the learned drives
that are built on those basic needs. For example, an extrinsic factor, the drive to earn a good salary, is built upon
the basic need of hunger. However, intrinsic factors such as responsibility and the satisfaction with work itself arise
from the human ability to personally advance and grow.
In the educational setting, intrinsic factors involve a direct link between faculty and their day to day routine,
the actual performance of the job itself. "Intrinsic to the job are: the work itself, responsibility, and growth or
achievement (Herzberg, 1987)." Herzberg's extrinsic or dissatisfaction-avoidance factors include organizational
policy, status, pay, benefits, and overall work conditions. These factors comprise the background of one's work, the
environment setting. Extrinsic factors less immediately affect the day to day job but are always in the background.
Job satisfaction is an elusive, even mythical, concept that has been increasingly challenged and refined
particularly since the Herzberg, Mauser and Snyderman study in 1959. The job satisfaction of an employee is a
topic that has received considerable attention by researchers and managers alike (Gautam; Mandal and Dalal,
2006). The most important information to have regarding an employee in an organization is a validated measure of
his/her level of job satisfaction (Roznowski and Hulin, 1992).
Behavioral and social science research suggests that job satisfaction and job performance are positively
correlated (Bowran and Todd, 1999). A better understanding of job satisfaction and factors associated with it helps
managers guide employees' activities in a desired direction. The morale of employees is a deciding factor in the
organization's efficiency (Chaudhary and Banerjee, 2004). Thus, it is fruitful to say that managers, supervisors,
human resource specialists, employees, and citizens in general are concerned with ways of improving job
satisfaction (Cranny et al 1992). The foundation of job satisfaction or job motivation theory was introduced by
Maslow. He (1943, 1954) asserts that human motives emerge sequentially to satisfy a hierarchy of five needs:
physiological (food, clothing, shelter, sex), safety (physical protection), social (opportunities to develop close
associations whit other persons), and achievement/esteem (prestige received from others), and self-actualization
(opportunities for self-fulfillment and accomplishment through personal growth). Individual need satisfaction is
influenced both by the importance attached to various needs and the degree to which each individual perceive that
different aspects of his or her life should, and actually do, fulfill these needs. Porter (1961) argues that within the
work environment, individual develop attitudes concerning their jobs based upon their perception of the presence or
absence of positively-valued job characteristics that address specific needs. Thus, a person’s job satisfaction is
268 | www.ijar.lit.az
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 3. No.1. January, 2011, Part I
contingent on that individual’s expectations of and actual need fulfillment from his or her position. Job dissonance
result when job-related exceptions and needs remain unfulfilled.
Herzberg, Mauser and Snyderman (1959) posited the view that job satisfaction is not a unidimensional
concept, but rather that work-related variables which contribute to job satisfaction are separate and distinct from
those factors which contribute to job dissatisfaction. By 1968 Herzberg had advanced the dual factor theory, which
held that to not have job satisfaction does not imply dissatisfaction, but rather no satisfaction, whereas the absence
of job dissatisfaction does not imply satisfaction with the job, but only no dissatisfaction. Looked at in terms of
‘opposites’, the ‘opposite’ of job satisfaction is no satisfaction rather than dissatisfaction and the ‘opposite’ of job
dissatisfaction is no job dissatisfaction, rather than satisfaction According to Herzberg (1959), intrinsic elements of
the job are related to the actual content of work, such as achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibilities,
and advancement. These were referred to as ‘motivational’ factors and are significant elements in job satisfaction.
By contrast, Herzberg described extrinsic factors as elements associated with the work environment, such as
working conditions, salary, working conditions, supervision, company policy, and interpersonal relationships. These
were referred to as ‘context’ or ‘hygiene’ factors which are related to job dissatisfaction. Herzberg concluded that
satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not on the same continuum. As a result, he argued that income), and that such
decisions are influenced by intrinsic motives, such as seeking opportunities for professional growth through
compatible work activities and colleagues. Manger and Eikeland (1990) also examined factors that impact on
academics’ intentions to leave the university, and found that relations with colleagues were the largest predictor of
intention to leave. They also found that general job satisfaction was a further strong predictor of intention to leave.
In short, academics who found their work less intrinsically satisfying than others, more commonly intended to leave
the university. Salary or economic resources as such did not appear to influence intentions to stay or go. Such
studies indicate that the ‘climate’ or ‘culture’ of the environment in which academics work has a large influence on
their feelings of satisfaction with the job as a whole, and their commitment to stay in the job rather than seeking to
fulfill intrinsic needs elsewhere. The motivation to investigate the degree of job satisfaction arises from the fact that
a better understanding of employee satisfaction is desirable to achieve a higher level of motivation which is directly
associated with student achievement. Recently, the assessment of employees’ attitude such as job satisfaction has
become a common activity in organizations in which management is concerned with the physical and psychological
well being of people (Spector, 1997).
The relationship between the individual and the factors determining job satisfaction has been extensively
researched in developed countries. In 1992, it was estimated that over 5,000 articles and dissertations have
examined the topic of job satisfaction (Cranny et al., 1992), and this is a continuing topic for research. An early
assumption can be made that interest in the subject illustrates the significance that employee satisfaction seriously
influences the total operation of an organization. Staples et al. (1998) suggest that the reason for this interest is
that work takes up such a significant amount of a person’s life, and by increasing an individual’s overall satisfaction
with his or her work life improves the overall well-being of the individual, the organization, and the society where
both the individual and the organization reside.
2. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of study was to examine factors affecting job satisfaction of faculty members of University of
Balochistan that explained by Herzberg job motivator and hygiene factors. In addition, this study sought to
determine the overall job satisfaction of faculty members. To understand about this study the following research
objectives were formulated.
To describe selected demographic characteristics of Balochistan University teachers.
To describe the overall level of job satisfaction among University faculty members.
To describe the University of Balochistan faculty member’s level of satisfaction with the job motivator
factors (achievement, advancement, recognition, responsibility, and work itself).
To describe the University faculty member’s level of satisfaction with job hygiene factors (pay, working
conditions, supervision, policy and administration, and interpersonal relations).
To describe relationships between faculty members’ level of job satisfaction and demographic
characteristics.
To describe relationships between selected job satisfier factors (achievement, advancement,
recognition, responsibility, and the work itself) and the overall job satisfaction of faculty members.
To describe the relationships between selected jobs dissatisfied factors (interpersonal relations, policy
and administration, salary, supervision, and working conditions) and the overall job satisfaction of
faculty members.
The population for this study was all faculty members of University of Balochistan (N=450). A random
sample of 120 faculty members was selected as a statistical sample. The sample comprised of 100 male and 20
female faculty members. Employing a descriptive-correlative survey method and data were collected through
questionnaire.
3. METHODOLOGY
The research design was descriptive-correlative survey method and data were collected through a
questionnaire that Castillo and Cano (2004) developed. Section one of the questionnaire consisted of the Faculty
B a k u , A z e r b a i j a n | 269
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH Vol. 3. No. 1. January, 2011, Part I
job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction scale (Wood, 1973) which assessed the dimensions of the Herzberg motivatorhygiene
theory. This Section consisted of a 75-item five-point Likert type scale with responses varying from 1 (very
dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Section tow consisted of the Job Satisfaction Index. The Job Satisfaction Index
considered all facets of the job when measuring job satisfaction, utilizing an 18-item, five-point Likert type scale,
with responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to 5 (strongly agree). The final section of the questionnaire
consisted of questions pertaining to the demographic characteristics. Content and face validity were established by
a panel of experts consisting of faculty members at University of Balochistan. A pilot test was conducted with 16
faculty members not included in the sample. Questionnaire reliability was estimated by calculating Cronbach’s
alpha. Reliability for the overall instrument was .83. The reliability coefficient for section one of the questionnaire
was .81, while the coefficients for the ten subscales of Part II were: achievement, .72; advancement, .76;
interpersonal relations, .64; policy and administration, .85; recognition, .77; responsibility, .80; salary, .86;
supervision, .79; work itself, .66; and, conditions, .88. The reliability coefficient for Section tow of the questionnaire
was .85.