The Creation Of High Levels Of Job Satisfaction - Essay Example

The Creation Of High Levels Of Job Satisfaction Introduction There are two forms of work performance, states Biswas (2011). They are in-role and extra-role performances. The former refers to an employee’s action to fulfill the requirements of his/ her job description, while extra-role performances relate to those which are outside formal role requirements, and undertaken at the employee’s discretion. Participatory management practices such as open communication, empowerment, and motivation help to raise employees’ experience of job satisfaction, and consequently the levels of employees’ performance. The organization’s culture also plays a part in determining the extent and type of participatory management practices. Moreover, according to Chen et al (2002), internalization of organizational values and systems lead to increased organizational commitment levels of employees, enhancing an individual’s intrinsic motivation to display higher levels of on-the-job performance. “Job satisfaction refers to an employee’s overall sense of well-being at work” (Biswas 2011: 96), and relates to intrinsic, extrinsic and social satisfaction. It enhances work performance, and has a positive correlation with organizational citizenship behavior. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate and discuss the statement that if employees’ performance at soaring levels has to be achieved, it is necessary to create high levels of job satisfaction among the employees. Employees’ Engagement in the Workplace Impacts Productivity There is a strong relationship between organizational support, job satisfaction and employee performance. Organizational citizenship and work performance are also related to leader supportiveness as well as follower job satisfaction. Perceived organizational support is the extent to which the organization values employees’ contributions and is concerned about their well-being. A supportive organization shows commitment towards its workers (Miao & Kim 2010). Theorists of organizational support state that a high level of perceived organizational support improves work attitudes and creates effective work behavior based on two reasons. First, these beneficial outcomes result from a process of social exchange. The work of researchers Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli and Lynch (1997) suggests that workers examine the discretionary actions and infer the extent to which they are being supported. They then seek to compensate for this favorable treatment, thereby becoming more hard-working and committed to their work and the organization. Further, if an organization gets adequate training, resources, and support from management, the possibility of the members wanting their organization to succeed would be higher, and they would be more capable of contributing to the success. Hence, it appears likely that the extent of the organization’s perception of being supported will positively correlate with the display of organizational citizenship behavior in favor of the organization. Additionally, Miao & Kim (2010) found that job satisfaction improved employee performance. Managers aiming to improve employee job satisfaction need to address diverse variables such as sharing profits with the employees, resolving their concerns, enriching their jobs, and reducing workplace discrimination, to enhance performance. According to evidence from a research study conducted by Biswas (2011: 106) “job satisfaction is a significantly positive antecedent of employee performance”, because happy workers are productive workers. Employee job satisfaction as a composite of intrinsic, extrinsic and social satisfaction arises from human resource managers’ policies and procedure, and their designing of jobs to provide room for autonomy, discretion, and adequate socialization apart from being innovative and meaningful. In this manner, job satisfaction translates practically into employees’ high performance. Pertaining to the importance of communication, a study examined communication between employer and employee as one of the factors associated with job satisfaction, Lapierre and Hackett (2007) tested competing theoretical models relating organizational citizenship behavior to trait consciousness, job satisfaction, and the quality of communication between employer and employee. The evidence indicates that in the optimal model, employees displaying more organizational citizenship behavior helps to increase communication between leader and member, subsequently leading to higher employee job satisfaction. “In turn, employees reciprocate their higher job satisfaction by demonstrating more organizational citizenship behavior” (Lapierre & Hackett 2007: 539). Further, the authors state that their findings also legitimize the notion that organizational citizenship behavior can help to nurture higher quality of interaction between leader and member, and to gain access to more satisfying job experiences. Thus, task performance and contextual performance were found to influence turnover, job satisfaction and affective commitment, by Van Scotter (2000) in two research samples of Air Force mechanics. The results underscored the distinction between task performance and contextual performance. Task performance predicted reenlistment eligibility and promotion eligibility in one sample, but only reenlistment ability in the other. Contextual performance predicted promotion eligibility in the first sample, but predicted both outcomes in the second sample. Job Satisfaction is Related to Core Self-Evaluation Traits Core self-evaluation traits were found to be related to job satisfaction through both direct and indirect means. The four traits of self-esteem, locus of control, neuroticism, and generalized self-efficacy taken as a single latent construct impacted job satisfaction in three independent samples of research conducted by Judge & Bono (2001). “A person with high self-esteem will view a challenging job as a deserved opportunity which he can master and benefit from, whereas a person with a low self-esteem is more likely to view it as an undeserved opportunity or a chance to fail” (Locke, McClear & Knight 1996: 21). Earlier research such as that conducted by Dodgson & Wood 1998) suggests that individuals with high self-esteem have higher levels of optimism even in the face of failure, thus increasing their potential for future success and consequently future satisfaction. Further, it was noted that selfconsistency plays an important part in self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem choose occupations in alignment with their interests, thereby leading to greater job satisfaction (Judge & Bono 2001). Job Performance is Also Related to Core Self-Evaluation Traits The relationship between the four core self-evaluation traits and job satisfaction is found to exist in these core self-evaluation traits’ relationship to job performance. Earlier research on the effects of these traits on job performance have been qualitative. In relation to self-esteem, the effect on job performance was found to be more optimistic, although the relationship appeared to hold only in certain circumstances. Internal factors appeared to perform better than external factors. “Because of the small number of primary studies measuring generalized self-efficacy, there have been no published reviews of the relationship between generalized self-efficacy and job performance” (Judge & Bono 2001: 81). Although task-specific and generalised self-efficacy are different constructs (Stajkovic & Luthans 1998), research evidence indicates that state or task-specific self-efficacy is related to job performance. Consequently, generalised self-efficacy may also correlate with job performance, state Judge and Bono (2001). A further self-evaluation trait is the employee’s attitude, which plays a significant part in achieving higher job satisfaction and subsequently improved work performance. Schleicher, Watt & Greguras (2004) argue that international researchers perceive job satisfaction and overall job attitudes in an overly simplistic manner. Further, earlier research has not investigated the affective-cognitive consistency (ACC) of job attitudes and their implications on the strength of the attitude and its impact on behaviour or job performance. The authors conducted two studies. From Study 1, it was found that affective-cognitive consistency is a powerful moderator of the job satisfaction-job performance connection. Those employees having greater affective-cognitive consistency show a markedly higher correlation between job satisfaction and performance, than those with less affective-cognitive consistency. The results from Study 2 confirmed the above findings, as the research was conducted for the purpose of replicating the previous study. Thus, job attitudes forms a major construct in determining job satisfaction and performance in the workplace. In addition to the self-evaluation traits studied above, employee effort has also been found to have a marked influence on job satisfaction and job performance. Christen, Iyer & Soberman (2006) conducted a research study to clarify ambiguities in the literature pertaining to the associations among three key constructs of work relationships: effort, job performance, and job satisfaction. The relationship between job performance and job satisfaction is a key issue in research related to organisational psychology. At the same time, “empirical research in this area finds that the link between these constructs is weak at best” (Christen et al 2006: 137). Agency theory agrees that the higher the level of employee effort, the more negative its effect; however there is limited empirical evidence to reinforce this hypothesis. Taking into consideration the three constructs including job satisfaction, job performance, and effort as a combined construct, the evidence from the study conducted by Christen et al (2006) revealed a significantly high positive effect of job performance on job satisfaction. Further, accounting for the moderating effect of job performance, effort was found to have a strong negative effect on job satisfaction. This result supports the theoretical assumption of empirical studies of contracts, such as sales force compensation plans. The positive effects of effort on job satisfaction found in some studies is explained by omitted variables and construct definition problems. The result of the model formulated by Christen et al (2006) aligns with the agency theory explanation of effort. On the other hand, some studies have discovered a positive effect of effort on job satisfaction. Thus, using a model that utilizes the main constructs from agency theory and organisational psychology, the research study conducted by Christen et al (2006) found that effort had a negative, direct effect; while job performance had a positive direct effect. The researchers conclude that the opposing results found in the literature are the outcome of inconsistency in the measurement as well as the definition of constructs across research investigations that do not fully take into account all the relationships between the different constructs. Findings from the research conducted by Christen et al (2006) underscore the need to differentiate precisely between criteria that depict employees’ inputs in a work relationship, that is effort, and those criteria that stand for their outputs such as job performance. Further, the importance of properly accounting or controlling for all key variables to remove biases that may arise in empirical research on work relationships, is also focused on, in the research study. It is essential to acknowledge the contribution of other determinants of job satisfaction in mediating the impact of effort on job satisfaction. Another important factor is compensation that has to be incorporated into a theory of work relationships. Agency theory differentiates between fixed compensation such as salary, and variable compensation that depends on output, for example bonuses based on individual or organisation’s performance. According to the agency theory, fixed compensation should have a significant effect on job satisfaction, but not on effort, regardless of an employee’s risk preference. Christen et al’s (2006) research findings support this prediction. Besides an examination of fixed salary, the researchers’ data set enabled them to examine a common compensation variable: “corporatewide profit-sharing plans tied to overall firm performance” (Christen et al 2006: 138). This type of compensation is significant because in a large corporation, it is neither fixed nor impacted only by each employee’s performance. These profit-sharing plans were discovered to deeply influence both job satisfaction as well as effort. Conclusion This summative essay has highlighted the impact of employees’ high levels of job satisfaction on their increased work performance. Employees’ commitment and engagement in the workplace positively impacted their productivity. Further, the evidence indicates that self-esteem, locus of control, neuroticism, and generalized self-efficacy are core self-evaluation traits that impact both job satisfaction as well as performance. Other traits found to have a significant influence were found to be employees’ attitude and the extent of their efforts in performing their jobs. Further, employees’ compensation was identified by agency theory to be an important factor. Similarly, the organisation’s profit-sharing plans played an important role in both job satisfaction and work performance. It is concluded that employees’ job satisfaction and their performance are positively correlated. Job satisfaction is the result of an employee’s overall sense of well-being; it increases performance and enhances organisational citizenship behavior. Therefore, human resource personnel who adopt a multidimensional view on work performance take into account the importance of communication, feedback, employees’ core self-evaluation traits, as well as individual skills and capabilities. These help to empower and motivate them to achieve greater commitment, engagement, and job satisfaction. Bibliography Biswas, S. (2011). Commitment, involvement and satisfaction as predictors of employee performance. South Asian Journal of Management, 18 (2): pp.92-107. Chen, Z.X., Tsui, A.S. & Farh, J.L. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor versus organizational commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75: pp.339-356. Christen, M., Iyer, G. & Soberman, D. (2006). Job satisfaction, job performance, and effort: A reexamination using agency theory. Journal of Marketing, 70: pp.137-150. Dodgson, P.G. & Wood, J.V. (1998). Self-esteem and the cognitive accessibility of strengths and weaknesses after failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75: pp.178-197. Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S. & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (5): pp.812-820. Fitch, B. (2008). Motivation: Rethinking the supervisor’s role. Law & Order, 56 (3): pp. 100-104. Judge, T.A. & Bono, J.E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits- self- Esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability – with job satisfaction and job analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (1): pp.80-92. Lapierre, L.M. & Hackett, R.D. (2007). Trait consciousness, leader-member exchange, Job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: A test of an integrative model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80 (3): pp.539-554. Lashley, C. (2001). Empowerment: HR strategies for service excellence. Great Britain: Butterworth-Heinemann. Locke, E.A., McClear, K. & Knight, D. (1996). Self-esteem and work. International Review of Industrial/ Organisational Psychology, 11: pp.1-32. Miao, R. & Kim, H-G. (2010). Perceived organizational support, job satisfaction and employee performance: A Chinese empirical study. Journal of Service Science and Management, 3 (2): pp.257-264. Pathak, R.D., Budhwar, P.S., Singh, V. & Hannas, P. (2005). Best HRM practices and employees’ outcomes: A study of shipping companies in Cyprus. South Asian Journal of Management, 12(4): pp.7-18. Schleicher, D.J., Watt, J.D. & Greguras, G.J. (2004). Reexamining the job satisfaction- Performance relationship: The complexity of attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (1): pp.165-177. Stajkovic, A.D. & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work related performance: A Meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124: pp.240-261. Van Scotter, J.R. (2000). Relationships of task performance and contextual performance with turnover, job satisfaction, and affective commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 10 (1): pp.79-95. Read More