The Influence of Job Satisfaction on Job Performance - Coursework Example

A STUDY TO EXAMINE THE RELATION BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION AND JOB PERFORMANCE Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Professors’ Name Date Job Performance Berghe (2011, p.24) defines job performance to be all set of behaviours that workers of an organisation would engage in while they conduct their daily tasks and how good they execute all tasks assigned to them within any particular moment in time. Research into ascertaining job performance and its requirements is not straightforward in nature given that nowadays it is made up of a set of interacting attributes that related to the job; employee as well as the immediate environment for which the tasks are executed (Saari & Judge, 2004). According to Javed, Balouch and Hassan (2014, p.123) notes that job performance is concerned with whether or not an individual employee is able to conduct their job duties in clear and almost perfect manner. It is the immediate way for which workers are able to execute their daily duties. Bakotic (2016, p.2) argues that organisational performance does not relate to summation of individual workers’ performance however; there are research studies that indicate a positive correlation between job satisfaction and individual employees performances. Job performance is affected by both internal and external factors for which an organisation has control and lack control over respectively. Indermun and SaheedBayat (2013, p.5) notes that employee job performance is focused on an organisation knowledge that resides in workers and forms a fundamental attribute of superior levels of service quality and direct influencing the existing markets as a whole. It is thus important to study job performance since a committed and dedicated workforce will usually act as a valuable; scarce and non-imitable resource that can improve the underlying profitability levels of a firm from a strategic point of view. Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction is the degree of positive emotions that is a result of appraisals of one’s work duties or even experiences. It defines a linkage between workers’ immediate expectations of work duties and the real end results of this experience (Berghe, 2011). The possible connection between employees’ satisfaction and performance on the workplace has been an area that has received enormous attention over the years. Pugno and Depedri (2009) notes that monetary compensation as well as incentives to employees for work efforts made do not necessarily result to be of fundamental importance for job satisfaction but rather; it is highly dependent on the immediate interests and attitudes of workers at any given moment in time. Notably, some of the psychologists posit that in the event that satisfaction related to employees’ live in its entirety; then job performance would be positive connected to it (Khan et al, 2012). Recent research into job satisfaction indicates that management would always wish to work with employees who have a positive perception towards their job. This is so because such workers would definitely be in love with their work duties and feel justice in an environment for which they conduct business and this job provides them with an opportunity to experience enormous work challenges-thereby breaking possible monotony and good remuneration as well. It is important to study job satisfaction amongst workers because it seeks to inform management of whether the underlying human resource is fairly positioned to tackle duties effectively and efficiently. In fact, happy workers will likely commit to using some part of their private time to work-related duties; will show elements of creativity and commitment; they will definitely try and seek possible ways of going above any possible obstacles that might be present in the course of realising their job duties; and they will also likely ensure to provide assistance to their fellow colleagues and supervisors (Bakotic, 2016, p.2). According to Indermun and SaheedBayat (2013, p.2), modern workers are dynamic and no longer want to stay in their jobs in case it lacks elements related to motivation and satisfaction. Parent Theory Theory of unplanned behaviour is theory that resulted from a smoking and drug use that helped demonstrate that past individual behaviour could easily affect future behaviours (Berghe, 2011). It presumes that an individual that portrayed a specific behaviour in the past would be likely to show similar behaviour in a near future period. It is an improvement to the theory of reasoned action meaning it has a fourth component more; the concept of perceived behavioural control (Berghe, 2011). The theory assumes that portrayed behavioural control will definitely have a direct influence on the behaviour of an individual and indirectly through intentions. This theory can be adopted in this study of finding the correlation between job satisfaction and job performance especially since perceived behavioural control is highly dependent on self efficacy theory, which is the an individual’s conviction to successfully conduct a specific set of behaviour that would help attain expected results (Berghe, 2011). It means that if a worker is confident that they will exhibit specific behaviours then they will likely make efforts to portray it as long as it leads to desired and expected results. An employee would definitely acquire specific behaviours in order to ensure that they achieve job outcome at the end. It is also a reliable theory for this study because it forms a dominant framework of attitudes-behaviour relations within a workplace environment. In fact, since employees’ intention of being satisfied is related to their attitude and behaviours; the theory fits so well with establishing this attribute altogether. Contradictory research findings for the possible influence of job satisfaction on job performance Support from the literature for the possible influence of job satisfaction on job performance Berghe (2011) notes that the correlation between job satisfaction and job performance is non-significant and modest in nature. The author presents an inconclusive result on whether job satisfaction causes job performance; whether job performance is a contributing element on job satisfaction; and whether the two variables were mutually influential in any way possible. Judge et (2001) ascertains that the relationship between job performance and job satisfaction is positioned moderately at 0.30 thereby postulating an insignificant correlation. Bako (N, d) ascertains that employee fulfilment is directly identified with the notion of prosperity. The author confirm that a high job satisfaction will likely result to high productivity; reduced level of turnover; improved attendance; reduced level of mis-chances and lower degree of unionisation. The author further clarifies that a dis-satisfied worker will experience job stress; poor overall performances; lack of productivity; and a high employee turnover rate. Khan et al (2012) argues that there is a positive correlation between job satisfaction and performance. The relationship is defined by elements related to pay; promotion; job safety and security; underlying working situations and different forms of relations with co-workers, supervisors; and nature of the work being done. The author further argues that a better performance of a given workforce is direct result of the underlying job satisfaction. In fact, it is emphasised that the level of job satisfaction and degree of motivation will likely affect employee’s level of productivity at any given moment in time. A low level of job satisfaction is seen to be adversely affecting the overall employee commitment and in consequences, affects the accomplishment of organisation objectives and performance altogether. A research conducted by Javed, Balouch and Hassan (2014) indicates that there is a significant relationship job performance and job satisfaction- with job satisfaction representing more than 11% to the overall job performance. The study by Pugno and Depedri (2009) indicates that there is a positive correlation between job performance and job satisfaction and that economic incentives do not necessarily result to be the major motivational factor of job performance. Interest in the work is ascertained to be a contributory factor of job satisfaction. Intrinsic motivation as well as aspects of self-esteem is found to be major contributory factors of job satisfaction and performance. Bakotic (2016) notes that there a clear connection between job satisfaction and overall organisation behaviours in both directions but with insignificant amount of intensity. It is put forward that job satisfaction determines job organisational performance but not the other way round. Indermun and SaheedBayat (2013) agrees that there is a positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance only when there are economic incentives and rewards; in cases where employees exhibit high self-esteem; organisation tenure security; career development and the need for achievement. The table above indicates that some researches find a positive correlation between job performance and job satisfaction while others find insignificant correlation between the two variables. Researches that indicate a positive correlation indicate that the relationship between the two variables is only possible in cases where employees are motivated through their pays; promotion packages; self-esteem; possess a need for achieving certain results among others. A highly motivated employee will exhibit high performance; productivity; lower turnover rates improved attendance; reduced level of mis-chances and lower degree of unionisation. On the contrary, it is established that a dissatisfied employee will suffer from low productivity levels and job-related stress. In essence, research indicating a weak correlation between job satisfaction and performance is based on prior meta-analysis of the variables that indicated unsubstantial correlation. Proposition Taking into consideration the theory of planned behaviour and the literature reviews presented above; we propose that: Job satisfaction Influences Job Performance Conclusion In lieu of the discussion above, the importance of job satisfaction on job performance cannot be overlooked by management. In addition to providing economic incentives, management should focus on providing security of employment tenure; offer career-related development programs; make sure to improve on employee self-esteem and attitudes towards work in order to improve on overall job performance as a whole. References List Berghe, J.V.2011. Job Satisfaction and Job Performance at the Work Place, Degree Thesis: International Business, Paper No. 8299, pp.2-47 Bakotic, D. 2016. Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organisational Performance, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, vol.29, no.1, pp.118-130 Bako, A, A. N, d. The Positive and Negative Effects of Job Satisfaction on Employee’s Performance in an Organisation, SCIE Journals, pp. 45-49 Indermun, V & SaheedBayat, M. 2013. The Job Satisfaction -Employee Performance Relationship: A Theoretical Perspective, International journal of Innovative Research in Management, vol.11, no.2, pp.1-9. Isen A.M., J. Reeve (2005) The influence of positive effect on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, Motivation and Emotion, vol. 29, no.4, pp. 298-325 Javed, M & Balouch, R. Hassan, F. 2014. Determinants of Job Satisfaction and its Impact on Employee Performance and Turnover Intentions, International Journal of Learning & Development, vol. 4, no.2,pp.120-140 Judge T, A et al. The Job Satisfaction-Job Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitave Review, Psychological Bulletin, vol.127. no.3, pp.376-407 Khan et al. 2012. Impact of job satisfaction on employee performance: An empirical study of autonomous Medical Institutions of Pakistan, African Journal of Business Management, vol. 6 no.7, pp. 2697-2705 Pugno, M & Depedri, S. 2009. Job Performance and Job Satisfaction: An Integrated Survey, Discussion Paper, 4. Saari, L.M., & Judge, T.A. (2004) Employee Attitudes and Job Satisfaction. Human Resource Management, vol.43, no.4, pp. 395-407 Read More