Job Satisfaction Characteristics - Essay Example

For start, there are challenges in gathering reliable data about job satisfaction: “One objection that may be raised to the use of job satisfaction responses as measures of individual well-being is that satisfaction is subjective and hence cannot be compared across individuals” (Clark, 1996, p. 193). Many studies acknowledge this either explicitly, by using questionnaire data but taking it as indicative rather than accurate, or implicitly by focussing on more reliably observable data like reasons cited for leaving, and incidences of non-productive and counter-productive work. Interestingly, many studies conclude that pay is not generally a factor in job satisfaction, but job type, sex, age, being married and education do seem to be relevant factors (Clark, 1996).

In an older study from the mid-1970s, Katzell and Yankelovitch concluded that job satisfaction and productivity “do not necessarily follow parallel paths” (1975, p. 12). What this means is that workers may be very committed, and very happy with their jobs, but they do not necessarily channel this into goals that the company wants to achieve. With the passage of time, and the focus more and more on hi-tech and knowledge-based industries, the need for growing creativity and commitment in workers is evident, but the divergence between individual and company needs seems to be growing too. Added to this is the uncertainty and risk of free market economics, and the fact that workers can no longer count on a fixed career plan or a permanent position in any one company. It is very tempting to conclude that “the degree of relationship between job satisfaction and job performance is so tenuous and variable that, if there is a causal connection, it must either be intrinsically weak or conditioned by other circumstances in the work situation” (Katsell and Yankelovich, 1975, p. 124).

Later research has fortunately delved a little more deeply into those ill-defined “other circumstances in the work situation” and has begun to look beyond simple productivity at attributes like commitment and creativity which are increasingly required. DeFillipi and Arthur observed that  “individual creativity is viewed as arising from a dialectical or interactive process, in response to a set of rules and practices transmitted from an existing domain” (2002, p. 258). The connection, therefore,  between job satisfaction for the worker, and increased commitment and creativity for the benefit of the employer, is fostered in the way that the worker interacts with colleagues, with management, and with the whole. It is a two-way process.

On a very large scale, there have been studies exploring the optimum environments for creativity and job satisfaction to prevail. In Sweden, Andersson et al identified examined rates of patent submission as a good objective measure of the optimum application of creativity in the industry. They traced this over the whole country and concluded that “creativity is greater in labour markets with more diverse employment bases and in those which contain a larger share of national employment in certain industries, thus confirming the importance of urbanisation and localisation economies in stimulating creativity” (2005, p. 1). It was not just a matter of “agglomeration”, or location and critical mass, however, since they found also that “diversity matters for creativity, especially within manufacturing industries” (Andersson et al, 2005, p. 18).

Studies on smaller scales, and in business contexts, echo the point that the whole ecosystem and culture of a workplace are critical in fostering a committed and productive kind of productivity that benefits both the company and the employees. Internationalism, diversity in appointments and promotions systems, and openness to new working practices are all important features of a successful organization because they allow employees to experience innovation at first-hand and interact with this. All too often poor management techniques, such as pointless deadline setting, huge swings in priorities and goals, lack of organizational support, and clinging to outdated and useless systems can result in a company where creativity is “killed rather than supported” (Amabile, 1998, p. 77).

In conclusion, then, job satisfaction is a necessary precondition for employee creativity and commitment, and it should therefore be pursued by responsible organizations. It is a mistake to assume, however, that this alone will bring the desired benefits, especially if purely monetary rewards or other single measures are adopted to achieve greater job satisfaction. The way job satisfaction works best when it is integrated into a flexible, diverse and supportive organizational environment, and this is more to do with ethos and openness than with concrete rewards.