A

Research paper on

JOB SATISFACTION AND

PERFORMANCE
RESEARCH DATA ANALYSIS REPORT

Submitted to Submitted
by

Dr. Vidhi Agarwal Manoj

Aggarwal, Mohit Gupta

Vipul
Singh, Ankur Tayal

Page
1
Ajay Kumar Garg Institute of Management
27 Km Stone, Delhi-Hapur Bypass Road, P.O. Adhyatmik Nagar
Ghaziabad-201009
Page 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We take this opportunity to express our sincere thanks and deep gratitude to
our professor Dr. Vidhi Agarwal. She was extremely cooperative and helping
and have been very supportive for our work with her motivating approach. We
are deeply thankful to the organization for providing me the opportunity to
undergo this project.
And we also want to extend our sincere thanks to all those people who have
helped us and encouraged us in preparing this project.

Thank you,
Manoj Aggarwal

Mohit Gupta

Vipul Singh

Ankur Tayal

Page
3
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the

research report titled “Job Satisfaction and Performance :

Research Data Analysis Report” which is being submitted by

Manoj Aggarwal, Vipul Singh, Ankur Tayal, Mohit Gupta

student of AKGIM for the fulfillment of the needs of PGDM. This

research paper has been successfully completed under the

complete guidance and supervision of Dr. Vidhi Agarwal.

Page
(DR. VIDHI AGARWAL)
4
TABLE OF CONTENT

1 INTRODUCTION…..5

2 LITERATURE REVIEW…..8

2.1 Job Satisfaction (Dissatisfaction)

2.2 Theories of Job Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction
2.3 Performance:
2.4 How can HRM be a Major Player in improving Performance?
2.5 Setting expectations to increase motivation and performance:

3 FINDINGS & ANALYSIS…..14

3.1 Communication of Goals & Strategies

3.2 Communication & Information Flow
3.3 Communication & Interpersonal relationship
3.4 Interaction with other employees
3.5 Value of Effort
3.6 Degree of Motivation
3.7 Level of Job Security
3.8 Methodology of Implementing Change
3.9 Performance of Tasks
3.10 Personal Growth & Development
3.11 Conflict resolution
3.12 Utilization of Skills
3.13 Flexibility allowed
3.14 Climate of the Workplace
3.15 Salary vs. Experience
3.16 Quantity of work Expected
3.17 Free Hand at Work
3.18 Physical working conditions
3.19 Workplace Discrimination

4 PROPOSED MODEL FOR THE RESEARCH STUDY…..25

Page
4.1 Our Proposed Model – P&S MODEL (P: Performance and S: Satisfaction)
5
5 CONCLUSIONS…..28

6 APPENDIXES…..29

7 REFERENCES…..30
INTRODUCTION

Attempting to understand the nature of job satisfaction and its effects on work
performance is not
easy. For at least 50 years industrial/organizational psychologists have been wrestling
with the
question of the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. Researchers
have put
a considerable amount of effort into attempts to demonstrate that the two are positively
related in
a particular fashion:

A happy worker is a productive worker

Although this sounds like a very appealing idea, the results of empirical literature are too
mixed
to support the hypothesis that job satisfaction leads to better performance or even that
there is a
reliable positive correlation between these two variables. On the other hand some
researchers
argue that the results are equally inconclusive with respect to the hypothesis that there
is no such
relationship. As a result of this ambiguity, this relationship continues to stimulate
research and
re-examination of previous attempts. This report strives to describe the relation of job
satisfaction and performance, keeping in mind the value this relation has for
organizations.

Job Satisfaction – An Internal State

Job satisfaction is a complex and multifaceted concept, which can mean different things
to
different people. Job satisfaction is usually linked with motivation, but the nature of this
relationship is not clear. Satisfaction is not the same as motivation. "Job satisfaction is
Page
more an
attitude, an internal state. It could, for example, be associated with a personal feeling of
6
achievement, either quantitative or qualitative." In recent years attention to job
satisfaction has
become more closely associated with broader approaches to improved job design and
work
organization, and the quality of working life movement.

Relationship between Job Satisfaction & Job Performance

The relationship between job satisfaction and performance is an issue of continuing
debate and
controversy. One view, associated with the early human relation's approach, is that
satisfaction
leads to performance. An alternative view is that performance leads to satisfaction.
However, a
variety of studies suggest that research has found only a limited relationship between
satisfaction
and work output and offer scant comfort to those seeking to confirm that a satisfied
worker is also a productive one. Labor turnover and absenteeism are commonly
associated with
dissatisfaction, but although there may be some correlation, there are many other
possible
factors. No universal generalizations about worker dissatisfaction exist, to offer easy
management solutions to problems of turnover and absenteeism. The study suggests
that it is
primarily in the realm of job design, where opportunity resides for a constructive
improvement
of the worker's satisfaction level.

Spector & Gibson Findings

Some say job satisfaction is simple how people feel about their jobs and different aspects
of their
jobs (Spector, 1997). This assumes that if employee like their jobs or certain aspects of
their jobs,
they will be satisfied or happy. If they don’t like their jobs or certain aspects of their jobs,
they
will be satisfied or happy. If they don’t like their jobs or certain aspects of their jobs, they
will be
dissatisfied or unhappy. Others view job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction as feelings of
happiness or unhappiness associated with doing a particular job as expressed by the job-
holder
(Gibson et al. 2000). This assumes that if employees verbally say they are happy with
their jobs,
we must assume that they are satisfied with their work. If they verbally say they are
unhappy
with the jobs, we must assume that they are dissatisfied.
Page
Cheung and Scherling Findings
7
Cheung and Scherling (1999) assert that job satisfaction or dissatisfaction from the
perspective
of fairness and processes used to meet out rewards. If people feel fairly treated from the
outcomes they receive, or the processes used, they will be satisfied. If on the other hand,
people
feel unfairly treated from the outcomes they receive, or the processes used to
disseminate those
outcomes, they will be dissatisfied. Job satisfaction consists of the feelings and attitudes
one has
about one’s job. All aspects of a particular job, good and bad, positive and negative are
likely to
contribute to the development of feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction

Basic Factors of Job Satisfaction

Individual performance is generally determined by three factors of Job Satisfaction.

Motivation,
the desire to do the job, ability, the capability to do the job, and the work
environment, the
tools, materials, and information needed to do the job. If an employee lacks ability, the
manager
can provide training or replace the worker. If there is an environmental problem, the
manager can
also usually make adjustments to promote higher performance. But if motivation is the
problem,
the manager's task is more challenging. Individual behavior is a complex phenomenon,
and the
manager may not be able to figure out why the employee is not motivated and how to
change the
behavior. Thus, also motivation plays a vital role since it might influence negatively
performance
and because of its intangible nature.

Practical Implications

Job Satisfaction can be an important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and
a
predictor of work behaviors such as organizational citizenship, absenteeism, and
turnover.
Further, job satisfaction can partially mediate the relationship of personality variables
and
deviant work behaviors.

One common research finding is that job satisfaction is correlated with life satisfaction.
This
correlation is reciprocal, meaning people who are satisfied with life tend to be satisfied
with their job and people who are satisfied with their job tend to be satisfied with life.
However, some Page
research has found that job satisfaction is not significantly related to life satisfaction
8
when other
variables such as non work satisfaction and core self-evaluations are taken into account.
An important finding for organizations to note is that job satisfaction has a rather
tenuous
correlation to productivity on the job. This is a vital piece of information to researchers
and
businesses, as the idea that satisfaction and job performance are directly related to one
another is
often cited in the media and in some non-academic management literature.
In short, the relationship of satisfaction to productivity is not necessarily straightforward
and can
be influenced by a number of other work-related constructs, and the notion that "a
happy worker
is a productive worker" should not be the foundation of organizational decision-making.
With regard to job performance, employee personality may be more important than job
satisfaction. The link between job satisfaction and performance is thought to be a
spurious
relationship; instead, both satisfaction and performance are the result of personality.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In the field of Industrial / Organizational psychology, one of the most researched areas is
the
relationship between job satisfaction and work performance (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, &
Patton,
2001). Landy (1989) described this relationship as the “Holy Grail” of Industrial
psychology.
Research linking job performance with satisfaction and other attitudes has been studied
since at
least 1939 with the Hawthorne studies (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939). In Judge et al.
(2001),
it was found by Brayfield and Crockett (1955) that there is only a minimal relationship
between
job performance and job satisfaction. However, since 1955 Judge et al. (2001) cited that
there are
other studies by Locke (1970), Schwab & Cummings (1970), and Vroom (1964) that have
shown
that there is at least some relationship between those variables. Iffaldano and Muchinsky
(1985) Page
did an extensive analysis on the relationship between job performance and job
9
satisfaction.

There are also strong relationships depending on specific circumstances such as mood
and
employee level within the company (Morrison, 1997). Organ (1988) also found that the
job
performance and job satisfaction and job performance relationship follows the social
exchange
theory; employees’ performance is giving back to the organization from which they get
their
satisfaction.

Judge et al. (2001) argued that there are seven different models that can be used to
describe the
job satisfaction and job performance relationship. Some of these models view the
relationship
between job satisfaction and job performance to the unidirectional, that either job
satisfaction
causes job performance or vice versa. Another model stated that the relationship is a
Personality
and Job Reciprocal one; this has been supported by the research of Wanous (1974). The
underlying theory of this reciprocal model is that if the satisfaction is extrinsic, then
satisfaction
leads to performance, but if the satisfaction is intrinsic then the performance leads to
satisfaction.
Other models suggest that there is either an outside factor that causes a seemingly
relationship
between the factors of that there is no relationship at all. However , neither of these
models have
much research.

The final model is “Alternative Conceptualizations of Job Satisfaction or Job

Performance.” This
model discusses how positive attitudes towards one’s job can predict a high degree of
job
performance. George and Brief (1996) and Isen and Baron (1991) both found that
employees’
attitudes are reflected in their job performance. If this is the case then it can be argue
that that
there is a relationship between employees’ jobs satisfaction and job performance, as
satisfaction
is an attitude about their job. Industrial psychologists do not justify any relationship
between job
satisfaction and job performance; although it has been found that a positive mood is
related to
higher levels of job performance and job satisfaction.

In this chapter we will explore the theories job satisfaction and performance. These
theories Page
attempt to explain the relationship between job satisfaction and work performance.
10

2.1 Job Satisfaction (Dissatisfaction)

The theories of work motivation used to explain what energizes people to strive or put an
effort
in what they do. The same theories could be utilized to elucidate why other people are
satisfied
in their jobs and others not. Foe example, Maslow’s need theory would say that people
would be
happier in their jobs if their needs are met, but unhappy if their needs are not met.
Learning
theories would propose that people would be motivated by seeing others rewarded for
achieving
certain standards of performance, and therefore put more efforts in their duties so that
they could
earn the same or more rewards then their role models, and hence be satisfied.
Conversely, if
people see others being punished for not achieving certain standards of performance,
people
might exert more efforts to avoid the pain of punishment and so on. These theories will
therefore
not be repeated in this section, the focus will be on examining job satisfaction or
dissatisfaction,
related theories and literature.

2.2 Theories of Job Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction

2.2.1 VIE Theory:

This theory is derived from the Expectancy model of Vroom by Porter and Lawler (1968).
In
addition to three basic components of valence, instrumentality, and expectance, this
model
incorporates abilities and traits, role perceptions, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and the
perceived equity of the rewards.

The model assumes that for an effort to translate into a desired level of performance, the
person
must have the ability to perform well (abilities and traits) and he must understand the
demand of
his job (role clarity). The model acknowledges that people work for both extrinsic
rewards such
as money and promotions and intrinsic rewards such as pride in one’s work and a sense
of
accomplishment, The model also assumes that the level of performance a person attain
will affect
the level of rewards he perceives to be equitable. Specifically, if a person expends a
great amount of effort that culminates in high performance levels, he will perceive that Page
he deserves a
11
substantial reward (Dipboye, Smith, and Howell. 1994).

2.2.2Comparison Theory:

Lawler (1973) in Dipboye, Smith and Howell (2000) incorporated the concepts of attained
versus
described needs in his model of facet satisfaction. This model is an extension of the
Porter-
Lawler (1968) of motivation explained above. It is a facet satisfaction model because
satisfaction
with various components or facets of a job, such as supervision, pay, or the work itself, is
considered. Lawler’s model specifies that workers compare what their jobs should
provide in
term of job facets, such as promotions and pay, to what they currently from their jobs.
However,
simple need comparison theory is extended by also weighing the influence of certain
worker
characteristics (such as skills, training, and age) and job characteristics (such as degree
of
responsibility and difficulty). In addition the model draws concepts from the equity
theory of
motivation by assuming that workers ultimately determine their job satisfaction by
comparing
their relevant job inputs and outputs to referent (comparison) other (Dipboye, Smith and
Howell,
2000).

Simple interpretation of the facet model of satisfaction is that:

o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is equal to the
amount received (B), the worker will be satisfied or happy
o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is greater then
the
amount received (B) the worker will be dissatisfied of unhappy
o If the employee perceives that the amount that should be received (A) is smaller than
the
amount received (B) the worker will feel guilty, uncomfortable because of perceived
inequality.

2.2.3Opponent Process Theory:

An other interesting theory of job satisfaction is that of Landy (1978) which hypothesizes
that Page
job attitudes emanate from a person physiological state opponent process theory
12
assumes that
when you experience an extreme emotional state, central nervous system mechanism
attempts to
bring you back to a state of emotional equilibrium or neutrality. In returning to neutrality,
the
emotional state may even surpass equilibrium and progresses to the opposite emotional
state. For
example when you were first appointed to your job, you probably felt happy even elated.
This
positive emotional state waned over time to a neutral state or perhaps to a slightly
depressed or a
unhappy state. Opponent processes theory presents an intriguing explanation of why job
attitudes
change over time and why workers may become bore with jobs they once found
satisfied. It does
not explain, however, why some workers are continually either very satisfied or
dissatisfied with
their jobs the theory has also not been empirically tested, so we can’t judge whether it is
a viable
theory of job satisfaction (Dipboye, Smith and Howell, 2000)

2.2.4High Performance Cycle Theory:

The high performance cycle theory is really an integration of work motivation and job
attitudes
theories. This model uses the motivational framework of goal setting theory and
predictions that
high goals and high success expectations lead to high performance. High performance,
in turn,
produces rewards, satisfaction and commitment to future goals. The model also
considers the
influence of personnel and situational factors such as ability and tasks complexity.

2.3 Performance:

Every manager, no matter what his or her role, knows that exceptional employee
performance is
critical in today’s world. The need for human resource managers to move beyond HR’s
traditional performance management approaches and partner with line managers to
remove
barriers to exceptional employee performance that exists in organizational work
environments.

2.3.1Job Satisfaction is the key to performance improvement

There is an old saying that you can take a horse to the water but you cannot force it to
drink, it
will drink only if its thirsty – so with people. They will do what they want to do or Page
otherwise
13
motivated to do. Weather it is to excel on the workshop floor or in the “ivory tower” they
must
be motivated or driven to it, either by themselves or through external stimulus.
Are they born with the self-motivation or drive? Yes and no. If no, they can be motivated,
for
motivation is a skill that can and must be learnt. This is essential for any business to
survive and
succeed.
Performance is considered to be a function of ability and motivation, thus

JP = (a*m)

Where JP = Job Performance A = Ability M = Motivation

Ability in turn depends on education, experience and training and its improvement is a
slow and
long process. On the other hand motivation can be improved quickly. There are many
options
and an uninitiated manager may not even know where to start. As a guideline, there are
broadly
seven strategies for motivation.

o Positive Reinforcement / High expectations

o Effective discipline and punishment
o Treating people fairly
o Satisfying employees needs
o Setting work related goals
o Restructuring jobs
o Base rewards on job performance

There are certain basic strategies, through the mix in the final “recipe” will vary from
workplace
situation to situation. Essentially, there is a gap between an individual’s actual state and
some
desired state the manager tries to reduce this gap.

Motivation is, in effect, a means to manipulate and reduce this gap. It is inducing others
in a
specific way towards goals specifically stated by the motivator. Naturally, these goals
must
conform to the corporate policy of the organization. The motivational system must be
tailored to
the situation and to the organization.

2.3.2How can we Achieve Exceptional Employee

Performance? Page
14
The first thing to remember is that employee performance does not occur in a vacuum.
We have
to take a systems perspective and look not only at our employees, but also at the
environments in
which we expect them to perform.

It has been said that if we put good performance in bad systems, the system will win
every time.
We know that behavior in every facet of our lives is a function not only of the person, but
also of
the environment-more specifically of the interaction of the person and the environment.
Behaviors at work then are a function of the interaction of the employees (with their
person
factors) and the work environment (all the organizational systems factors). And it is
behavior that
leads to performance.

A. Yesterday’s Solution: Fix the Employees:

Yesterday’s solution to the issue of employee performance was simple: “Fix the
employees!”
The focus was on the immediate problem and the solution was either training
or discipline.

As we grew a bit more sophisticated we became more proactive and got ahead of the
curve by
instituting performance management systems that often provided for goal setting and
performance appraisal processes which gave a more rational and defensible basis for
training and
discipline. We also implemented careers planning and development systems, which gave
us more
of a future focus, and changed the name of the Training and Development function to
Human
Resource Development to reflect the broader scope.

B. Today’s Solution:

Today, we are generally doing a better job. We recognize and deal with most of the
“hygiene
factors” – fair pay, reasonable benefits, clean and safe working conditions, etc. These
are
important there is no question that they are necessary for improving employee
performance for
fairly obvious reasons. To use simplistic examples, employee performance improvement
interventions may not stand much of a chance if employees are really annoyed because
we did a poor job of implementing a benefits change or if they are preoccupied with work
schedules they
consider unfair. Page
15
This is a big step beyond yesterday’s solution of fix the employee with training and
discipline.
The competency area currently tested by the Human Resource Certification Institute
(HRCI)
reflects this broad area of knowledge. These areas truly are a critical foundation for
improved
employee performance, but they are not also enough. We must do more. We are looking
at
personal system factors outside of work as they impact employees, but still not looking
hard
enough at the system factors at work.

C. Tomorrow’s Solution:

A relatively simple but highly effective way of looking at this issue was provided by Tom
Gilbert
1994, who developed a diagnostic tool called the Behavior Engineering Model (BEM).
There
are other approaches but the BEM will serve as a good example. It looks at the following
six
areas:

1. Information
2. Resources
3. Incentives
4. Skills and Knowledge
5. Capacity
6. Motivation

Let’s look at each of these in a bit more detail. Information is critical for obvious reasons.
It
starts with output specifications. People have to know what they are expected to
produce. They
need to get a feedback. They need to be aware of policy and procedures and the reasons
for these
policies and procedures, and so on. Resources, again is fairly obvious. No matter how
skilled an
employee without the tools and materials (and information can overlap with resources
here)
needed to do the job, it probably isn’t going to get done. The best welder in the world
cannot
weld without a torch. The issue of incentives is a bit more complex, but boils down to
this. In the
work environment, are these truly incentives for good performance and truly
consequences for
poor performance? Often we end up in effect, punishing our best performers. They get all
the
tough jobs because we know we can count on them and the poor performers get the
easier work. Page
16

“Skills and knowledge” is certainly a familiar area. People have to know how to do their
jobs.
Capacity is important for obvious reasons also. No matter how committed the employee,
if we
hire someone 5’10’’ to guard an NBA center in the low post, he isn’t going to get the job
done.
Motivation is important also, a strictly person based definition of performance is that
performance is a function of motivation and ability. We can work on the ability, it’s
harder to
work on motivation because it is so internal to the individual, but we can work on the
environment and make sure we remove the barriers to performance. Gilbert also
developed a list of questions he called the PROBE questionnaire, to help determine in
which of these areas the
cause of an employee performance shortfall could be found.

How well do we currently address these person and system factors in HRM? If we have
done the
things we currently teach that we should (today’s solution), then we probably do fairly
well in
the person factors skills and knowledge, capacity and motivation. We may have a
corporate
university and provides excellent training for our employees, focusing on the skills that
will be
needed tomorrow as well as today. Our promotion and selection systems may be good
enough to
ensure that employee capacity is never an issue. The rewards, training (including well
trained
supervisors or team leaders) and career focus may combine to help motivate our
employees. But
all this may not be enough if there are major problems in the system factors. This is not
to say
the system factors are ignored. We put a lot of effort into communication programs and
comfortable facilities, and tweak our compensation program endlessly. But too
frequently, this is
not dome with performance improvement in mind and does not result in high
performance.

2.4 How can HRM be a Major Player in improving

Performance?

Once we are sure of the solid basic HR foundation is in place, there are two more issues
for HR
organizations and HR Managers who wish to be key players in improving employee
performance
and who wish to do more than provide the traditional HR solutions. The first is to
understand the Page
methodology for diagnosing human performance problems and designing and
17
implementing
performance improvement interventions. The second is to forge effective partnerships
with the
line managers.

The methodology is not complex, but before the methodology can be used effectively,
one must
develop a mind set that recognizes that there are many solutions to employee
performance
problems other than training (Marilyn Westmas, of Rayovac, has developed taxonomy of
well
over 200 performance improvement interventions). Then we need to an understanding
of the
methodology a basic approach that is not all that different from that used daily by HR
managers
in problem solving. Start with front end analysis determines the problem area, select,
design and
develop an appropriate intervention, implement the intervention and evaluate the result
to
determine if adjustments are needed. The critical point is that training is always the
appropriate
intervention we may need a job aid, an electronic performance support system (EPSS),
more and
better information getting the people to doing the work or additional resources. Problem
must be
approached with the willingness to look at the whole work environment and not walk
away when
it does not appear the intervention needed is a traditional HR approach that we are
comfortable
with.

The last point is the key to forgoing effective partnerships with the line managers, team
leaders
or self managed work teams. There are tremendous opportunities for synergy when the
skills and
perspectives of HR representatives combine with the people involved with the work on
daily
basis. They should be willing not to walk away when the solution appears to be outside
the traditional HR area of expertise. Rather, they should be true business partners, stay
with the
people with the problem, help find the expertise needed and ensure the solution is
designed and
implemented in such a way that it leverages our employee’s capabilities. Page
18

2.5 Setting expectations to increase motivation and

performance:

To increase the motivational level following steps should be taken;

o Reconcile Job and Task Expectations
o Work together to decide how expectations will be monitored
o Work together to decide what the positive and not so positive consequences should be
if
employee exceeds, meets or does not meet expectations
o Building competence: How do I do it?
o Giving feedback: How am I doing?
o Providing support: Will I succeed?
o Rewards: What’s in it for me?

FINDINGS & ANALYSIS

In an order to study the relationship between Job Satisfaction & Job performance, we
conduct a
Page
survey in a department of max new york life insurance gurgaon. To make a clear picture
19
of it, we
divide the Job Satisfaction into three elements:

• Task Satisfaction
• Employee Satisfaction
• Market Satisfaction

Task satisfaction comes from performing the tasks required of the job. Increasing a
person's
salary may make an undesirable task more bearable, but it doesn't necessarily make it
more
enjoyable.

Employment satisfaction consists of elements such as personnel policies, benefits,

career
opportunities, work environment, style of management, fit in the organization, etc. Many
of these
elements are within the company's control; others are not. For example, there may be
very little
that a company can do for an employee who does not get along with his/her peers. The
employer
can try to assure that all individuals are treated professionally, but the company cannot
make the
coworkers become close friends.

Market satisfaction is comprised of forces external to the company that affect the
individual's
job. Political situations and public laws can easily affect job satisfaction. An individual
may be
unhappy because of some environmental factor but the company cannot waive the
requirement to
improve an individual's job satisfaction. In most cases, market satisfaction will be
consistent
across the job market; the same external forces will be present even if the employee
changes
employers. However there are differences in the external forces affecting jobs within the
government and those within the private sector.

Keeping in mind these basic elements of Job Satisfaction, we prepared a Questionnaire

and
conduct a study. The analyses of these questionnaires are:

Page
20
3.1 Communication of Goals & Strategies

More than 80% of the employees show complete satisfaction regarding the
communication of
goals & strategies in the Company. The findings also display two outcomes, firstly, the
company
is focused on communicating its goals and objectives throughout the Organization &
secondly, it
shows the employees level of interest by working accordingly to achieve the Company’s
goals.

Does the company communicates its goals and strategies to you?

frequency percenta
ge

very dissatisfied 1 2.5

3.2 Communication & Information Flow
somewhat 0 0
dissatisfied
Most of the employees are quite content with
not satisfied 3 7.5 the communication and information flow in the
Company. This shows that there is an efficient
somewhat satisfied 19 47.5
system of information flow within the
satisfied 17 42.5 Organization. The Company works on an
Intranet Application so that the information is
total 40 100
readily
available throughout the different levels of the
Organization.
Are you satisfied with the communication and information flow of your organization?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 1 2.5 3.3 Communication & Interpersonal

dissatisfied relationship Page
21
not satisfied 3 7.5 People enjoy their work if they are having
good interpersonal relationships with those
somewhat 29 72.5 people
satisfied whom they are working with. They may be
their colleagues, their subordinates or
satisfied 7 17.5
supervisors.
total 40 100 Thus, building a strong interpersonal
relationship is very important to increase Job
Satisfaction.
The results from our survey show that more than 70% of the employees believe that a
strong
working relationship exist in the Organization.
Are you satisfied with the communication and interpersonal relationship in your organization?

frequenc percenta
y ge
3.4 Interaction with other employees
very 0 0
dissatisfied One of the most effective ways of achieving
goals is to determine that how much the
somewhat 0 0 employees
dissatisfied are interacted with one another. The result
shows that around 70% of the employees are
not satisfied 8 20 given
various opportunities to interact with one
somewhat 23 57.5 another. These opportunities are group
satisfied meetings,
seminars, & other get together activities. The
satisfied 9 22.5
purpose of the gathering is to have a formal
total 40 100 talks
and discussions over various issues and
problems which the employees face during
their work.
Do you receive enough opportunities to interact with other employees on a formal level?

frequenc percenta
y ge 3.5 Value of Effort

very 1 2.5 The employees get more committed and

dissatisfied dedicated towards their work if their efforts
in achieving
somewhat 0 0 the Organizational Goals are valued. They
dissatisfied feel their presence and importance in the
Company which ultimately affects the
not satisfied 11 27.5 overall satisfaction level of the employees.
The results have shown
somewhat 12 30 that more than 80% of the employees are Page
satisfied happy with the outcome of their efforts.
22
satisfied 16 40 Does your effort sin achieving the goals valued?

total 40 100
 frequenc percenta
y ge
3.6 Degree of Motivation
very 0 0
dissatisfied Employees should feel motivated in the jobs
they are performing at the workplace. The
somewhat 0 0 degree of
dissatisfied motivation is achieved through many ways,
that is, interaction with others, job security,
not satisfied 4 10 personal
somewhat 29 72.5 growth and other factors. The analysis of our
survey shows that 27.5% of the employees
satisfied
are not
satisfied 7 17.5 happy in performing their tasks and only
15% showed that they enjoy their work. The
total 40 100 majority
of the employees do not have any say about
it.
Degree of motivation as far as the job is concerned?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 5 12.5 3.7 Level of Job Security

dissatisfied
One of the key elements for employees to
not satisfied 11 27.5 perform well is the level of security they feel
with
somewhat 18 45 their position in the Company. If an
satisfied employee is under the impression that he
might get shifted to
satisfied 6 15
another position or even might get fired, it is
total 40 100 going to affect his/her performance in a
negative
manner. The results have shown that around
50% of the employees are not feeling secured about Page
their position in the company. Practically speaking, this percentage is quite high for any
23
company. The figure also tells that the employees who are working at the middle and
lower
levels are the one that are feeling insecure about their job positions.
Level of job security?
 frequenc percenta
y ge 3.8 Methodology of Implementing
Change
very 0 0
dissatisfied The successful Organizations use various
methods and tools to successfully
somewhat 3 7.5 implement the
dissatisfied change in their businesses. Though a
change is continuous, the implementation
not satisfied 21 52.5 should be a steady process for it to be
somewhat 9 22.5 effectively implemented. The overall result
of 42.5% NOT
satisfied
SATISFIED shows that the employees are not
satisfied 7 17.5 quite content with the methods by which the
change is being implemented at the
total 40 100 workplace.
Methodology by which change is implemented in
organization?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied
3.9 Performance of Tasks
somewhat 2 5
dissatisfied Another key aspect to show a correlation
between Performance and Satisfaction is to
not satisfied 17 42.5 evaluate the
ways and manners of performing tasks
somewhat 21 52.5 which the employees practice. If the
satisfied employees are
provided effective ways of doing their task,
satisfied 0 0
that is going to increase their performance
total 40 100 at work.
The findings have shown that around 25% of
the employees are not satisfied with the
ways they
perform their responsibilities, which clearly shows one thing that most of these Page
employees are
24
performing at the lower level and they are lacking equipments, resources or other
accessories to
do their tasks.
The manner of tasks you are required to perform?
 frequenc percenta
y ge
3.10Personal Growth & Development
very 0 0
dissatisfied An employee feel encouraged to perform if
he/she has given the opportunity of personal
somewhat 1 2.5 growth
dissatisfied and development in the Organization. The
percentile of 35% clearly shows that the
not satisfied 10 25 career growth
somewhat 23 57.5 opportunities are not uniformly distributed
throughout the Organization.
satisfied
The extent to which personal growth and
satisfied 6 15 development is possible?

total 40 100
frequenc percenta
y ge
3.11Conflict resolution
very 0 0
dissatisfied It is a common practice that the employees
face issues working with one another.
somewhat 1 2.5 Successful
dissatisfied organizations follow effective methods of
conflict resolution to overcome these issues.
not satisfied 13 32.5 Serious
conflicts may lead to job dissatisfaction and
somewhat 21 52.5 ultimately resulting in decreasing the overall
satisfied employee’s performance. Through the
surveys which we have conducted, we found
satisfied 5 12.5
that around
total 40 100 40% of the employees are not satisfied with
the conflict resolution methods being
practiced at
their workplace.
The methods of conflict resolution in your organization?

Page
25
 frequenc percenta
y ge 3.12Utilization of Skills

very 0 0 Employees in any Organization feel pride in

dissatisfied themselves if their skills are properly
utilized. The
somewhat 3 7.5 foremost and important thing for this to
dissatisfied happen is to have right people at the right
place. From
not satisfied 13 22.5 the survey, we found that 22.5% of
somewhat 19 47.5 workforce is not able to utilize their skills
completely and
satisfied
57.5% are those employees who have an
satisfied 5 12.5 ambiguity over it, only 12.5% are those
workers who
total 40 100 feel that their skills are properly utilized.
Degree to which your skills are utilized?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 3 7.5
dissatisfied 3.13Flexibility allowed

not satisfied 9 22.5 Flexibility in the working environment keeps

the employees in a positive frame of mind.
somewhat 23 57.5 The
satisfied results from the research concluded that
32.5% of the employees feel that they are
satisfied 5 12.5
given free
total 40 100 hand at work. On the other hand, 27.5% are
those employees who do not feel flexible in
their
work.
Page
Flexibility and independance allowed?
26
 frequenc percenta
y ge 3.14Climate of the Workplace

very 0 0 The overall climate of the Organization

dissatisfied depends on the relationship of employees,
performance
somewhat 2 5 of tasks, access of knowledge and various
dissatisfied other factors as well. The results have shown
that the
not satisfied 11 27.5 majority of the employees are quite satisfied
somewhat 14 35 with the overall climate of their workplace.
satisfied Are you satisfied with the over all climate of the
organization?
satisfied 13 32.5
frequenc percenta
total 40 100
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 1 2.5
dissatisfied 3.15Salary vs. Experience

not satisfied 8 20 One of the most important factors of

increasing Job Satisfaction in an organization
somewhat 18 45 is to make
satisfied your employees feel that they are paid
according to their worth. If an employee
satisfied 13 32.5
feels that he/she
total 40 100 is under paid, its going to affect his/her
performance at work. Our results show that
the level of
dissatisfaction is quite high, that is 42.5%. That percentile suggests that almost half of
the
workforce is under the impression that they are not paid a good income at work.
Your level of salary with respect with your experiance?

Page
27
 frequenc percenta
y ge 3.16Quantity of work Expected

very 1 2.5 The employee’s performance ultimately

dissatisfied degrades if he/she is given a load of work.
Thinking
somewhat 5 12.5 from an employee’s perspective, an
dissatisfied employee will feel that he/she is not efficient
at the work
not satisfied 17 42.5 which demoralizes him/her. The results
somewhat 12 30 display a balanced outcome from the survey
we
satisfied
conducted. 22.5% are not satisfied with the
satisfied 5 12.5 amount of work they are doing, while a
healthy
total 40 100 percentile is quite satisfied about it.
The quantity of work allocated / expected to you?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 0 0 3.17Free Hand at Work

dissatisfied
If the employees are given free hand at
not satisfied 9 22.5 work, they are more promising in performing
their duties.
somewhat 23 57.5 In other words, we can say that the
satisfied employees feel the responsibility in
achieving the set targets.
satisfied 8 20
This factor thus lead to increase in Job
total 40 100 satisfaction and hence performance. From
our findings,
25% of the employees are dissatisfied, and a
small figure of 7.5% shows the satisfaction level.
Degree to which you feel extended to your job? Page
28
 frequenc percenta
y ge 3.18Physical working conditions

very 0 0 For employees to perform well, they should

dissatisfied have a good environment and conditions to
work on.
somewhat 0 0 As mentioned earlier, it is very important to
dissatisfied provide the employees the required
resources as well
not satisfied 10 25 as a healthy working environment. The
somewhat 27 67.5 results show that the employees are very
satisfied with
satisfied
their working conditions. Only 5% showed a
satisfied 3 7.5 dissatisfaction level.
Are you satisfied with the physical working
total 40 100 conditions?

frequenc percenta
y ge

very 0 0
dissatisfied

somewhat 0 0
dissatisfied
3.19Workplace Discrimination
not satisfied 2 5
Employees feel discourage at work, if they
somewhat 25 62.5 experience any discrimination, either
satisfied gender,
educational background, linguistic or race.
satisfied 13 22.5
Successful organizations always try to
total 40 100 eliminate any
discrimination they may experience at the
workplace. From our survey, we concluded
that
majority of the employees do not feel any discrimination at their jobs. Although 20% of
them do
feel that there is discrimination, but that figure can be easily overcome by organizing Page
activities
29
within the organization.

Individual differences like gender, educational background, and race are respected in your organization?
 frequenc percenta
y ge

very 2 5
dissatisfied
From the analysis of the survey, we find out
somewhat 1 2.5 that all the three elements play an important
dissatisfied role in
evaluating the overall Job Satisfaction level
not satisfied 8 20 of the employees. Though, some factors are
somewhat 16 40 more
convincing than the others. That is why; the
satisfied
overall result shows a different picture, for
satisfied 13 32.5 example,
if an employee is satisfied with his salary, it
total 40 100 does not mean that he is also satisfied with
his job.
There are other factors which come into play
when we talk about the term “Job Satisfaction”, i.e.
the working conditions, personal growth, utilization of skills and all others mentioned
above. But
one thing is clear from this survey, that all these factors of Job Satisfaction do affect the
performance of the employees – either directly or indirectly.

PROPOSED MODEL FOR THE RESEARCH STUDY

Page
To begin our findings, let us again divide job satisfaction as a combination of three
30
elements.
These all three elements have been used collectively in our survey.

1. Task Satisfaction
2. Employment Satisfaction
3. Market Satisfaction

The diagram in Figure below illustrates the simple correlation between job satisfaction
and job
performance. The theory is that the employee's performance is in direct correlation to
their
satisfaction; improve their satisfaction and you will improve their performance.

4.1 Our Proposed Model – P&S MODEL (P: Performance and S: Satisfaction)

After conducting our survey and looking at things in a new ways for performance vs.
satisfaction, let’s start with a very basic view: comparing the satisfaction and
performance of a
specific task. We will refer to these as task satisfaction and task performance. Task
satisfaction is
strongly influenced by a person's aptitude; it is the satisfaction received by the
employee for
performing that specific task.
In the figure below, let us break the relationship of performance and satisfaction into
four
quadrants to further explore and explain the complexity of the relationship. This figure
helps to
understand the complexity while trying to keep the concept manageable. There are
varying
degrees of satisfaction and performance so it is difficult to state exactly where one would
draw
the line between high performance and low performance and between high satisfaction
and low
satisfaction. Each person is somewhere along those two lines. We can only try to
understand
what will happen as the employees move along those lines.

Page
31

Figure: Two Dimensional View of Task Satisfaction vs. Task Performance

The above Figure creates Four quadrants.

• High Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance.

• Low Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance.
• High Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance.
• Low Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance.

4.1.1High Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance

This individual loves his/her job. He/she has the aptitude, the skill, and resources
necessary to
perform the assigned task, and he/she performs the task quite well. A person in this
quadrant may
become so caught up in his/her task that the person does not realize that he/she has
worked past
quitting time.
Page
4.1.2Low Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance
32
The manager should consider whether or not something is missing. Does the employee
lack the
aptitude, the skills, or the resources necessary to perform the task well? Being in this
quadrant
does not mean that the employee is not trying! From the employee's perception, the
employee
may be expending a great deal of effort in trying to complete the task. The employee
may feel
that he/she is doing everything humanly possible and he/she does not understand why
management is unhappy with his/her performance. This person may experience very low
task
satisfaction because he/she finds it difficult or unfavorable to perform the task. This
person may be a clock-watcher, never arriving early or staying late without being
mandated and compensated.

4.1.3Low Task Satisfaction and High Task Performance

This person is indicating that they would rather be doing another job, but at the same
time their
personal values are such that they are giving this task their best effort. A company
should think
that this is a person they want to keep. It may well be worth the company’s effort to look
at
developing a graceful transition plan that would allow this individual to move to another
position
while minimizing the impact to your present operations.

4.1.4High Task Satisfaction and Low Task Performance

From a positive viewpoint, a person in this quadrant loves his/her work but he/she is not
performing as expected. The employee may find it hard to quit working on a task
knowing that
he/she can always make it better (i.e., a perfectionist that never finishes his task). Or,
the person
may enjoy what he/she is doing but lacks the aptitude, skill, or other resources
necessary to do
the task quickly.

Page
33
CONCLUSION

The Model shows that if the person's aptitude is such that they enjoy the tasks and they
have the
skills to perform the tasks, then they have the potential of being in the high satisfaction
and high
performance quadrant. If the basic needs are not met, then increasing the person's
salary is not
going to improve performance.

If a person should be in the high task satisfaction and high task performance quadrant
and they
are not performing as expected then the question is one of choice,
"Why did the employee conscientiously or unconscientiously chose to move towards the
left
(decreased performance) in Figure?"

The answer is quite simple; factors influencing the person's conscious or unconscious
movements along the performance line include those which are related to employment
Page
satisfaction and market satisfaction.
34
Though it has been shown in our research that there exists a relationship between Job
Satisfaction and Job Performance, we will never be able to pinpoint an exact correlation
between
job satisfaction and performance that will work in every situation. Doing a job well may
improve
job satisfaction, being satisfied may encourage a person to try harder, and each person's
personal
value system will have an effect on how he/she reacts to motivators and impediments.
The best
we can do is try to understand that performance is a complex issue, and recognize
where we have
control to address issues affecting an individual's performance.

APPENDIX

JOB SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE

Name: ____________________
Organization: _____________
Sector:____________________
Department: _______________
Post: ______________________
Length of services:____________

Key : Very dissatisfied = 1, Somewhat dissatisfied = 2, Not satisfied = 3, Somewhat

Page
satisfied = 4, Satisfied = 5 35
1 Does the company communicate its goals and strategies to you? 1
2345

2 Are you satisfied with the communication and information flow of your organization? 1
2345

3 Are you satisfied with the interpersonal relationship in your organization? 1

2345
4 Do you receive enough opportunities to interact with other employees on a formal level? 1
2345

5 Does your efforts in achieving the goals valued? 12

345

6 Degree of motivation as far as the job is concerned? 1

2345

7 Level of job security? 1

2345

8 Methodology by which change is implemented in organization? 1

2345

9 The manner of tasks you are required to perform? 1

2345

10 The extent to which personal growth and development is possible? 1

2345

11 The methods of conflict resolution in your organization? 1

2345

12 Degree to which your skills are utilized? 1

2345

13 Flexibility and independence allowed? 1

2345

14 Are you satisfied with the overall climate of the organization? 1

2345

15 Your level of salary with respect with your experience? 1

2345

16 The quantity of work allocated / expected to you?

12345

17 Degree to which you feel extended to your job? 1

2345

18 Are you satisfied with the physical working conditions? Page

12345
36
19 Individual differences like gender, educational background, and race are respected in your
organization?
1
2345

REFERENCES
o Alderfer, P, 1969, “An empirical test of a new theory of human needs.
Organizational Behavior and Performance”, 142-175.

o Alexander, C. 2000, Organization Behavior, London.

o Arvey, Richard D., L. M. Abraham, T.J. Bocahrd, & N. L. Segal. 1989, “Job
Satisfaction: Environment and Genetic Components”, Journal of Applied Psychology.

o Amsden, A.H, 1994, “a Review of the World Bank East Asia Study”, World Dev AND elopment,
pp.627-633.

o Barber AE & Bretz RD, Jr, 2000, Compensation attraction, and retention. In Rynes SL.

o Beck, R.C, 1994, “Motivation: Theories and Principles. (2nd ED.)” Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.

o Berkowitz, L., Fraser, C., Treasure, P, & Cochran, S, 1987. “Pay equity, job
gratifications and comparisons in pay level satisfaction”, Journal of the applied Psychology,
72, 544-551.

o Blau, Gary, 1994, “Testing the effect of level and Importance of Pay Referents on Pay Level
Satisfaction”
Humans Relations 47:1251-68.

o Blau, P. M, 1964, Exchange and power in Social Life, New York.

o Bordia, P., & Blau G, 1998, Pay referent comparison and pay level satisfaction.

o Bretz RD, Jr, Thomas SL. (1992). Perceived equity, motivation, and final offer
arbitration in major league baseball. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 280- 287.

o Herzberg, F. 1968, “One more time: How do you motivated employees?”

Harvard Business Review, Vol. 46, iss. 1, pp. 53-62.

o Taylor, G. S, & Vest, M.J. 1992. “Pay comparison and pay satisfaction among
public sector employees”. Public Personnel Management, 21, 445-445.

o Vroom, V. H, 1995, Work and Motivation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

o http:// www. Answers.com/topic/job-satisfaction

o http:// www. Careervision.org/JobSatisfaction-Paper.htm

Page
o http:// ezinerarticles.com/?Job-Performance-and- Satisfaction & id=290072
37
o http:// www.jstor.org/view/0018392/di995472/99p002r/0

o http:// www.careerkey.org/asp.career options/job satisfaction. asp

o http:// www.icbs.com/KB/inspiration/kb inspiration-what-motivation-satisfaction.htm