A Study of The Relationship Between Job Satisfaction, Age, Degree Major, and Formal Educational Levels of Employees Working in Human Resources

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION, AGE,
DEGREE MAJOR, AND FORMAL EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF EMPLOYEES
WORKING IN HUMAN RESOURCES
by
Steven Gonzalez
DAVID CHAPMAN, PSY.D. Faculty Mentor and Chair
LORI LACIVITA, Ph.D., Committee Member
SANDRA HARRIS, Ph.D., Committee Member
Garvey House, Ph.D., Dean, Harold Abel School of Psychology
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University
August 2008
3316428
3316428
2008
Steven Gonzalez, 2008
Abstract
Job satisfaction of employees has been measured by human resources professionals for
many years however this study measured the job satisfaction of human resources
employees. This study examined the potential relationship that existed between formal
education levels of human resource employees, age, degree major, and their job
satisfaction. The use of a correlational research design determined the possible
relationship that existed between the two variables. The theoretical framework that the
researcher used for this study was Hertzberg Motivation-Hygiene Theory, which
considers motivational factors and hygiene factors as they relate to satisfaction. The
researcher obtained human resource employees as participants for this research from a
single national organization with over 200 human resources employees. These employees
completed a demographic survey and the Abridged Job Satisfaction Index assessment.
The demographic survey obtained the formal education levels as well as age, degree
major, gender, position title, tenure and length with the organization. This study utilized a
multiple regression analysis to determine the positive or negative relationship between
the two variables as well as the strength.

Dedication
I would like to take a moment in time and dedicate this work to my loving
parents, my wonderful supportive wife and to those that provided me a push when I
needed it the most. I would also like to thank Dr. David Chapman for being such a
positive role model for me over the years and helping me work through the rough
patches. I would like to thank my committee members Dr. Lori LaCivita and Dr. Sandra
Harris for always providing great insight and mentorship in the writing of this document.
While my mother is no longer on this earth, I send her a spiritual hug and a kiss saying, I
did it mom, just as I promised I would and I miss you. To my father who was always the
foundation for my personal growth and formal education, I cannot thank you enough and
want you to know much of my success is because of the invaluable sharing of knowledge,
experience, love and caring you and mom provided for me. To my loving and wonderful
wife, I thank God the day you came into my life and brought me back the strength to
complete this adventure. Without the love and support you gave me when mom passed
away and dad was in the hospital, I could not have completed this degree. You are my
best friend and without you this would not have been possible.
- iii -
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
Background of the Study ........................................................................... .2
Statement of Problem.............................................................................................. 4
Purpose of this Study .............................................................................................. 5
Research Questions................................................................................................. 5
Significance of Study.............................................................................................. 7
Definition of Terms............................................................................................... 10
Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................... 11
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................... 13
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 14
Literature Review of Variables.....14
Job Satisfaction ..................................................................................................... 14
Age......................................................................................................................... 18
Degree Major ......................................................................................................... 22
Formal Education .................................................................................................. 27
Literature Review of Methodology ....................................................................... 30
Choice of Variables ............................................................................................... 30
Theoritical Framework........................................................................................... 33
Quantitative Design ............................................................................................... 37
Correlational Research Design ............................................................................... 39
Job Descriptive Index ............................................................................................ 40
Synthesis/Summary of Research Findings.............................................................. 42
- iv -
Larger Themes ...................................................................................................... 42
Inconsistancies ...................................................................................................... 44
Strengths and Weaknesses .................................................................................... 45
Adding to Existing Knowledge/Summary............................................................ 47
Methods of Obtaining Research.............................................48
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 50
Purpose of this Study ............................................................................................ 50
Research Design.................................................................................................... 50
Target Population.................................................................................................. 51
Selection of Participants ....................................................................................... 51
Variables ............................................................................................................... 53
Measures ............................................................................................................... 54
Procedures............................................................................................................. 57
Research Questions............................................................................................... 58
Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 59
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 60
Expected Findings................................................................................................. 61
CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS................................ 63
Introduction............................................................................................................ 63
Description of Sample............................................................................................ 63
Summary of Results............................................................................................... 69
Research/Hypothesis Questions............................................................................. 72
Research Question 1 ..............................................................................................73

-v-
Research Question 4 ..........................................................................................76
Research Question 5 ......................................................................................78
Additional Tests .....................................................................................................86
Data Analysis and Results......................................................................................86
Conclusion .........................................................................................................90
CHAPTER 5 RESULTS, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...................................... 92
Introduction............................................................................................................92
Summary of Results................................................................................................92
Discussion of Results..............................................................................................95
Limitations............................................................................................................107
Recommendation for Further Study......................................................................109
Recommendation Derived from Data...................................................................110
Recommendation Based upon Delimitations........................................................112
Conclusions...........................................................................................................113
References ............................................................................................................115
Appendix Data......................................................................................................122
- vi -
List of Tables
Table 1. Age Demographic Data ................................................................................65
Table 2 .Department Demographic Data.....................................................................66
Table 3. Position Title Demographic Data..................................................................66
Table 4. Years With Organization Demographic Data................................................67
Table 5. Abridged Job Descriptive Index Response Results...................................69
Table 6. Pearson Correlation of Formal Education and Job Satissfaction..................74
Table 7. Pearson Correlation of Degree Major and Job Satisfaction Scales...............75
Table 8. Pearson Correlation of Age and Job Satisfaction Scales...............................76
Table 9. Multiple Regression Coefficients for Work on the Present Job ...................77
Table 10. Multiple Regression Coefficients for Present Pay......................................79
Table 11. Multiple Regression for Age, Major, Level and Opp. for Promotion.....81
Table 12. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and Supervision..........83
Table 13. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and People at Work.85
- vii -
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
As organizations continue to grow in complexity, human resources (HR)
professionals are serving more of an important role in making companies a better place to
work (Reid, 2006). HR employees are the front line in developing a culture of service for
the employee as they demonstrate fairness, equality, and a positive image for the
organization (Reid, 2006). While HR departments focus on creating a positive workplace
culture for employees, they are also responsible for performing such tasks as payroll,
labor relations, benefits, and training (Rau-Foster, 1999). According to Rau-Foster
(1999), while HR departments are conduits of culture, yearly job satisfaction surveys
taken by employees are often the measure of the success of the department. However,
little research currently exists regarding the effects of formal education, age, and degree
major on job satisfaction for HR employees.
According to Simon (2004), organizations need to increase their awareness of
employee and job satisfaction to improve retention. A study conducted by the Charter
Institute of Personnel and Development showed out of eighteen hundred HR employees
surveyed, 80% of them stated they were happy with their career choice. According to
Millar, (2005) 80% further stated that if they had the option to restart their careers, they
would choose the HR profession again (Millar, 2005). In 2005, a study conducted on
satisfaction levels of HR employees across different industries found that 39% of HR
employees surveyed stated that they were displeased and unhappy with their current job
role (Millar, 2005). While 46% stated they were happy 54% felt job satisfaction was an
issue for employees working in HR (Millar, 2005).
-1-
According to Fuller (2006), HR employees are going through a transformation
from focusing on data entry of benefits and applications to requiring them to become
internal consultants and providing guidance on complex legal employment issues. As this
transition takes place, HR employees are expected to exhibit a high degree of educational
development in such an environment (Fuller, 2006). A survey conducted of four-
thousand four-hundred HR employees across multiple business sectors showed that an
increase in turnover is taking place across the board (Fuller, 2006). Entry level HR
employee turnover rates have increased in from 3% in 2004 to 10% in 2005. Middle level
HR employees turnover rates have increased in from 3.8% to 7.2% while director level
HR employee turnover rates have remained relatively steady with only a 1% increase
between the years 2003 through 2004 (Fuller, 2006).
A director of recruitment from Robert Walters, an international recruitment firm,
states that if junior HR employees are not growing and learning, they will quickly exit the
organization. According to Millar (2006), organizations will be increasing their HR
recruiting in the upcoming years, as HR employees are harder to find. Millar (2006)
further states that while HR employees are harder to find, organizations are looking for
HR employees with specialist skills and expertise in areas of human resources as opposed
to generalists.
With the demand for skilled HR employees increasing, determining elements of
what increases job satisfaction for employees will help organizations retain HR
employees longer (Simon, 2004). Job satisfaction studies exist across many different
organizations in multiple industries. Some of the common factors measured in
satisfaction surveys are compensation, promotional opportunities, job security and benefit
-2-
plans (HR Focus, 2005). Job satisfaction is important due to the higher cost of replacing
and retraining employees in the workforce (Simon, 2004). While organizations
continuously deal with employee turnover and poor job satisfaction, many focus on
hiring better employees for those positions. Organizations tend to focus on future
replacements as opposed to understanding what caused the employee to leave or what
relationship may exist causing the employee to exit (Simon, 2004).
Many studies on job satisfaction have been conducted using the theoretical
framework of the Herzberg Two Factor Motivation-Hygiene Theory (Barrette & Myrick,
1998, Koelbel, Fuller & Misener, 1991; Salvitt, Stamps, Piedmont, & Haase, 1978;
Timmreck, 2001). The Motivation-Hygiene Theory discusses multiple factors that
contribute to employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Hersberg, Mauser & Synderman,
1959). Herzberg refers to psychological factors associated with the motivation such as
achievement, recognition, advancement, responsibility, and the work itself (Hersberg,
Mauser & Synderman, 1959). According to Bassette-Jones and Loyds (2005), continued
research into the Herzberg Two-Factor theory has shown that it continues to show value
as an approach to understanding job satisfaction.
A large amount of research on factors affecting job satisfaction can be found in
the literature; however limited research exists on how formal education, age and degree
level affects the level of job satisfaction for HR employees. One survey conducted of one
thousand three hundred eighty-five employees across many organizations showed that a
possible relationship between education and job satisfaction did exist (Clifford, 1984).
Therefore, research on how education relates to HR job satisfaction could provide
support on how to further understand satisfaction levels among HR employees.
-3-
Statement of the Problem
Organizations today are concerned with levels of employee satisfaction and how
that affects their profitability (Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser, & Schlesinger, 1994).
Many studies exist regarding job satisfaction in the workplace and focus on areas such as
the causes of dissatisfaction among employees as a whole (Bassett, 1994).While many
organizations focus on the satisfaction of their employees, few focus on the possible
relationship that may exist between formal education and job satisfaction of HR
personnel. According to Reid (2006), HR employees help mold and develop the culture
of the organization. While HR employees shape and develop organizational culture,
understanding the factors that contribute to their satisfaction would also be beneficial
(Reid, 2006).
According to Reid (2006), HR employee satisfaction becomes critical as they are
contributors to overall culture of the organization. Reid (2006) further states that due to
this when you have dissatisfaction within the HR department; the propensity for the
dissatisfaction to carry out to non HR employees is likely. Keis (2005) suggests that HR
employees in the workplace today are not engaging employees and are highly dissatisfied
with their jobs; thus not supporting the positive culture they are tasked with creating.
According to Fuller (2006), as the trend of turnover increases for HR employees, the
requirement of more specialized educational skills for jobs increases; thus, HR personnel
need to be better prepared through their own education. However, due to the lack of
research literature, limited information exists on the possible relationship between formal
education levels and job satisfaction of HR personnel
-4-
Purpose of this Study. The purpose of this research was to understand if a
significant relationship existed between job satisfaction, formal education levels, age and
degree major of HR employees. According to Reid (2006), HR employees serve as the
ambassadors of creating job satisfaction in the workplace. This study focused on a
purposeful sample of HR employees across one industry in a single organization. The
researcher requested employees to fill out a demographic survey and complete the Job
Descriptive Index Satisfaction survey. A correlational research design was used to
determine if a statistically significant relationship exists between having less than 59
college credit hours, having 60 college credit hours or an associates degree, having a
completed bachelors degree, having a completed masters degree or completion of a
professional degree such as a Doctor of Philosophy or Doctor of Jurisprudence. This
research also focused on additional variables of age and degree major. This approach
utilized the Herzberg motivational theory as the theoretical framework for the research.
Research Question. After reviewing the literature, it was revealed that limited
research regarding the relationship between formal educational levels and job satisfaction
exists. Due to the lack of existing research, the researcher proposed the following
questions:
1. To degree is there a significant relationship between formal educational level and
job satisfaction?
2. To degree is there a significant relationship between degree major and job
satisfaction?
3. To degree is there a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction?
-5-
4. To what statistically significant degree do age, degree major and formal
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the work on the
present job facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the present pay
facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the opportunities
for promotion facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the supervision
facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the people at
work facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
It was the intention of the researcher to understand if a statistically significant
relationship exists between the above described variables. Having an understanding of
how formal education, age and degree major affects job satisfaction could provide
organizations the opportunity to build better job descriptions so that educational levels
match human resources positions. In addition, formal educational programs could be
created for HR professionals possibly increasing the tenure of employees (Fuller 2006).
The satisfaction assessment utilized in this research study is titled the abridged job
descriptive index. This assessment was used to measure job satisfaction through five
-6-
different facets contributing to overall job satisfaction (Blazer et al., 2000). The
researcher provided answers to each of the research questions by analyzing the five
satisfaction facets with the independent variables. While the researcher only described
two questions in this chapter, a total of 8 questions were discussed in chapter five to
further define the correlation and predictive values between each independent variable
and the five facets of job satisfaction.
Significance of the Study. Job satisfaction in the workplace today is a key to
increasing profitability, customer loyalty, and longevity of an organizations financial
health (Bassett, 1994). Keeping employees satisfied with the work they do and the
personal relationships they maintain in the workplace leads to a reduction in turnover and
an increase in productivity (Bassett, 1994). Numerous studies have shown that education
is an important factor that leads to employee satisfaction across many different industries
(Clifford, 1984). Job satisfaction for HR employees is also a key component as they mold
and structure the culture of an organization on a daily basis (Reid, 2006).
According to Fuller (2006), a survey conducted of four-thousand four-hundred
HR staff employees across multiple industries showed that HR employees are leaving
their employers more quickly than they were before. While employees are exiting
organizations more quickly, Millar (2006) states that HR employees will be harder to find
in the future. Simon (2004) suggested that organizations today focus on the turnover data
as opposed to the cultural factors that cause employees to leave organizations. He further
suggested that having an understanding of why employees leave will provide the
organization the opportunity to increase job satisfaction and reduce turnover (Simon
2004).
-7-
With the stress that HR employees experience on a daily basis, Johnnie (1993)
suggests that HR employees must utilize expert communication skills to be able to
function with all types of employees in an organization. He further suggests that formal
education is an important factor of consideration for all HR employees to obtain so they
can develop the critical thinking skills necessary to function in such a stressful
environment (Johnnie, 1993). To better prepare employees to deal with factors associated
with satisfaction in the workplace, organizations are beginning to create formal internal
programs through partnerships with universities so that all employees can develop their
creativity and decision making skills (Johnnie, 1993). According to Sobhan and Ahmad
(1980), formal education has helped employees develop leadership in organizations, open
communication channels and develop awareness of sensitivity issues in the workplace.
The research literature suggests there are many benefits of formal education in the
workplace and the positive changes it can bring (Johnnie, 1993).
The significance of understanding how education may play a role in job
satisfaction for HR employees may provide a value to organizations seeking to
understand the dynamics of their HR departments (Fuller, 2006). Studies have shown that
education has a positive relationship with job satisfaction thus leading to a reduction in
turnover rates (Clifford, 1984). As turnover rates continue to rise, it is more important
than ever to gain an understanding of what relationship education may play in job
satisfaction for HR personnel (Fuller, 2006).
A potential benefit an organization could derive from this research could be a
more in-depth understanding of how education may play a role in designing job
requirements for HR employees. According to Greengard (2001), employers are moving
-8-
towards understanding how training effects job performance and its relationship to the
skills required for success. Other potential benefits could include the value of a formal
education program as it relates to job satisfaction and how to build educational objectives
for employee succession planning (Johnson, 2005).
The research literature showed that organizations across the country spend on
average ten billion dollars a year on formal education for employees. In a survey
completed by Johnson (2005), out of one thousand three hundred and four HR managers
surveyed, one in three employers did not know the value their formal education programs
served. Furthermore, 36% of employers did not use this as a tool to measure an increase
in performance for their employees (Johnson, 2005). This researcher found a large
amount of literature for job satisfaction in the workplace; however, no studies measured
the possible correlational relationship between formal education and job satisfaction.
This researcher found examples of studies that had components of the proposed
research topic such as job satisfaction among critical care nurses (Hedstrom, 1991). In
this study formal educational levels were used as a variable to determine satisfaction for
critical care nurses. Konert (1997) described the relationship among middle-school
teachers burnout, stress, job satisfaction and coping styles. In this study the level of
education the teacher obtained was found to be a contributing factor in their job
satisfaction (Konert, 1997) An additional study conducted on food service managers
found that formal education was an element that contributed to burnout and turnover for
managers (Ghiselli, La Lopa, Bai, 2001).
Marion (1996) and Clark (2005). Conducted two studies related to human
resource employees. These studies focused on the satisfaction levels of employees. Both
-9-
studies found that human resources employees differed in their satisfaction levels
compared to non-HR employees. One of the factors considered in both studies was
education. These studies all had different theoretical foundations and approaches to
understand the relationships between the variables. The potential benefits of
understanding the relationship between formal education and job satisfaction for HR
employees as mentioned above could provide a strong foundation for future research and
application of educational programs in organizations and HR departments.
Definition of Terms. HR Employee: Any employee that works in a function under
the department title of Human Resources. This employee reported to a supervisor that
also works under the Human Resources department.
Formal Education: Formal education refers to classes that were taken towards
obtaining a terminal degree through a regionally accredited school recognized by the
Department of Education.
Degree Major: Degree major refers to the specific area or concentration on the
degree in which the student has chosen as an area of specialization.
Age: Age is referenced as that of the individual that is participating in this study
from the date of their birth.
Education Level: Education level refers to the amount of post-high school
education that an individual has completed. Participants had several options to choose
from when completing the survey. Education level choices are categorized as:
1. Having completed less than 59 college credit hours
2. Having completed 60 college credit hours or an associates degree
3. Have completed a bachelors degree
- 10 -
4. Having completed a masters degree
5. Having completed a professional degree to include a Doctorate.
Gender: Gender was defined as a male employee or a female employee.
Work on present job: This facet seeks to understand the type of work that is being
done by the individual and the level of satisfaction of performing daily required job tasks
(Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra, 1997).
Present Pay: Present pay refers to the level of satisfaction about their pay both
actual and expected (Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra,
1997).
Opportunities for Promotion: This facet measures the satisfaction of the
promotional process and the method in which that process is administered (Balzer, Kihm,
Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra, 1997).
Supervision: The supervision facet measures the level of satisfaction the
employee has with their supervisor based on their relationship, communication, and
leadership method (Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra,
1997).
Co-workers: The co-workers facet is measuring the level of satisfaction between
themselves and the co-workers they work with on a daily basis. The method of
measurements is based upon the daily interaction and relationships with other employees
(Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra, 1997).
Assumptions and Limitations. The researcher has developed the following
assumptions for this research:
Assumptions:
- 11 -
1. All participants were able to read at the high school level to understand the Job
Descriptive Index.
2. All participants in this study view job satisfaction similarly.
3. No employees that participate in this study are on any form of disciplinary action
plan for performance improvement causing a bias to the satisfaction rating.
4. All participants were honest in answering the Abridged Job Descriptive Index
survey.
5. The Job Descriptive Index is a valid and reliable instrument that provides true
measures of job satisfaction.
6. The researchers position within the organization, would not bias the decision of
the participants to participate in the survey or modify their responses.
The researcher has developed the following limitations for this research:
Limitations:
1. Hertzbergs theory suggests that multiple factors contribute to job satisfaction and
this study only research formal education levels, age and degree major but did not
include other factors such as tenure, part-time status, corporate culture, and length
of time in the HR Department.
2. Participation in this study is voluntary and not all employees agreed to become
participants.
3. The results of this study may only be generalized to the level of validity and
reliability of the satisfaction assessment instrument utilized in the study.
4. The instrument was administered to a single human resources department
functioning over a national corporation.
- 12 -
5. The research does not address what salary the person is making at the time of the
survey.
6. Additional variables outside of the study were not addressed.
Organization of the Remainder of the Study. Chapter 2 provides an extensive
overview of the existing literature on Herzberg Two-Factor theory and how it relates to
motivation in the workplace. In addition, a review of the literature on human resources
employees and the relationship to Herzberg Two-Factor Motivational Theory was
explored. Chapter 3 discusses the research methodology and procedures used in this
study. This chapter further provides a detailed analysis on the instrumentation used,
validity and reliability of the tool, procedures utilized to collect and analyze data, and the
process utilized to develop the findings. In Chapter 4, the researcher provided the results
from the data collection, data analysis and the reader with an overall summary of the
results. Chapter 5 provides the summary, conclusions and recommendations for
additional research
- 13 -
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Research studies have demonstrated that human resources employees deal with
multiple factors that contribute to their satisfaction in the workplace. This chapter
discussed several variables associated with the literature review as it pertains to this
research study. The first section of this chapter discussed job satisfaction and how it
correlates with age for employees. The second section of this chapter discussed how the
degree major obtained by professionals may correlate with job satisfaction. The third
section discussed how formal educational levels correlate with job satisfaction for
employees. In addition to the sections described above, the researcher further discussed
the rationale for choosing the variables, research questions, design, research
methodology, theoretical framework, assessment tools and statistical approach for
conducting this study.
Literature Review of Variables
To assist the reader in further understanding the variables chosen for this study,
the research described in detail the current literature found for each of the variables. In
this study, job satisfaction has been chosen as the dependent variable and the level of
satisfaction was determined by the abridged Job Descriptive Index satisfaction survey.
The level of satisfaction was compared to the independent variables chosen for the study.
Existing literature that supports or contests this research was reviewed and discussed as it
is relevant to this study. The independent variables chosen for this study were age, degree
major and formal educational level. Each of these variables were discussed and existing
literature that supports or contests were also examined as it applies to this study.
Job satisfaction
- 14 -
Research studies on job satisfaction have been conducted since the early 1970s
and have shown positive correlational relationships between job satisfaction and formal
educational levels (Weaver, 1980). A study on job satisfaction in the workplace
conducted by Charles Weaver between the years of 1972 through 1978 showed that a
positive correlation existed between job satisfaction, age, income and occupation
(Weaver, 1980). This study included an N = of 4,709 workers that were employed on a
full time basis. Full-time employment was defined as having worked a minimum of 35
hours or more per week. This study also considered age and occupation as independent
variables in determining the level of satisfaction. During studies conducted by Charles
Weaver in the 1970s, his research determined that a positive relationship between the
above mentioned variables did exist (Weaver, 1980).
Weaver (1980) suggested that based upon his studies conducted using multiple
national surveys, he was able to conclude that while no signification relationship existed
between the years of 1958 through 1964, his studies showed that an increase between the
years of 1972 through 1978 did yield a positive relationship between job satisfaction and
formal educational levels. Weaver (1980) further implies that while a positive
relationship was determined through his studies between the time period of 1972 through
1978, job satisfaction in the workplace has been consistently stable. The assertion that the
constant stability of job satisfaction between the years he conducted his studies remained
the same, Weaver (1980) then suggested that due to this, job satisfaction does not respond
to changes that society goes through.
According to Quinn et al., (1974), between the years of 1958 through 1964,
national surveys showed either that a relationship did not exist or was negative during
- 15 -
that time period between job satisfaction, age, income, education and income. A series of
studies were conducted by Quinn et al., (1979) that showed a significant decrease in job
satisfaction for workers in the United States. Studies from previous years to include 1973
and 1977 were compared together to determine trends. It was discovered by Quinn et al.,
(1979) that a sharp decline was present and it contradicted many other existing studies
that stated job satisfaction was stable. This research showed that a five point significant
decline was present between 1973 and 1977. The suggested areas that showed the decline
fell into six categories to include comfort, challenge, financial reward, resources
adequacy and promotion (Chelte, Wright & Tausky, 1982).
In the findings presented by Quinn, et al., (1979), he suggests that changes took
place in all categories researched. A significant trend was present that showed the decline
in satisfaction was greater for males as opposed to females. Quinn et al., (1979) also
states that his research also showed that a significantly larger increase took place for
older workers and workers with lower skilled positions. Staines and Quinn (1979)
concluded that three fundamental reasons were present that created a downward shift to
include demographic changes in the workforce, specific requirements of the jobs were
becoming vague, and employees were expecting to get more out of the job they were
performing.
An analysis was conducted by Chelte, Wright, and Tausky (1982) to review some
of the research conducted by the previous studies mentioned above. The researchers were
concerned with the methodologies in which the studies were conducted and sought to
determine if a true drop in job satisfaction had taken place during the period of 1973
through 1977. According to Chelte et al., (1982), the job satisfaction levels had remained
- 16 -
constant during this time period as shown by multiple research studies conducted during
this time period. The study conduced by Quinn et al., (1979) however showed that a
decline had taken place when all other studies showed it was in a constant state. Chelte et
al., (1982), wanted to demonstrate that out of the three series of surveys conducted by
Quinn et al., (1979), the third and final survey was the only survey that showed a
decrease in job satisfaction. Chelte et al., (1982), suggests that while the third study did
show a decrease, the other two studies did not show a drop in job satisfaction, rather they
showed a constant state of job satisfaction. The third series of surveys that were done on
job satisfaction by the author were done at the same time as the other two series, however
question segments were left out in the third which the author suggests may be the
plausible reason for the decrease (Chelte et al., 1982).
A recent study was conducted by Goetze (2000) on the contributing factors
associated with employees leaving an HR company that works in traditional versus non-
traditional environments. This study included the variables of age, gender, formal
educational level and job type. This study surveyed 602 HR employees and received a
response rate of 413 participants (Goetze, 2000). The researcher divided the participants
into two distinct groups. One of the groups was titled sales representatives and the
secondary group was titled technical consultants. The title of sales representative depicted
that this level of employee was tasked with bringing in new business into the
organization. The technical consultant was an HR professional that provided human
resources information systems, payroll, employee-manager self service, recruitment and
training and development services (Goetze, 2000).
- 17 -
The survey response rate was 68.7 %; however multiple reminders and additional
surveys had to be mailed out to obtain this rate (Goetze, 2000). The researcher chose to
use the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire to measure 10 different areas of potential
job satisfaction. The statistical data demonstrated that age, gender, formal educational
level and job type did not contribute to employees wanting to leave a HR company; they
did however contribute to the overall satisfaction (Goetze, 2000). While the data analyzed
showed that the variable of age, gender, formal educational level, and job type had no
correlation to overall job satisfaction, the study further demonstrated that job satisfaction
was a strong indicator on whether or not employees would leave the organization
(Goetze, 2000).
The researcher described the association of overall job satisfaction as one that had
a negative relationship with age, gender, formal education level or job type, but rather a
positive relationship with workers who worked in non-traditional work environments.
Goetze (2000) describes this positive relationship as one that was focused on job
advancement, ability utilization, technical supervision and working conditions.
According to Goetze (2000), 38.2% of the variance for the overall intent to stay with an
organization was contributed to job advancement, ability utilization, technical
supervision and working conditions. Age, gender, type of job and formal educational
level had no contribution to the result (Goetze, 2000).
Age. A study on job satisfaction in America that included trends and social
demographic correlates was conducted between the years of 1972 through 2006. This
study was interested in determining if a relationship existed between multi-variables to
include age and correlation with job satisfaction. The researcher in this study looked to
- 18 -
determine if job satisfaction had truly maintained a positive constant for the last 40 years
(Smith, 2007). The data showed that 36,872 responses were received between the years
of 1972 through 2006. The data showed that 86% of all Americans stated that they were
satisfied with their jobs (Smith, 2007). This study further researched the level of job
satisfaction in relation to the age of professionals in the workplace. The study reveled that
employees that were older were more satisfied than those that were younger (Smith,
2007). Smith (2007) further defined older employees as being at the age of 65 years or
older and young employees as being between 29 years or younger. The scaling on how
age was broken into segments for this research was 18 to 29 years, 30 to 39 years, 40 to
49 years, 50 to 64 years, and 65 years or older (Smith, 2007).
In the above described age groups, the data showed that the age group of 64 years
or older had a satisfaction rate of 71.3%. The age group between 18 to 29 years of age
had a satisfaction rate of 42.3% (Smith, 2007). The author of this study further suggests
that younger workers are most likely in positions that are not creative and tactical in
nature. Older workers however are more exposed to positions that allow for creativity and
specialization in their field of interest. According to Smith (2007), employees who grow
older and move up the ladder will show higher levels of job satisfaction and general
satisfaction has remained constant for the last 40 years due to this dynamic.
A study was conducted by Smyer and Catsouphes (2007) to understand some of
the dynamics of what keeps older employees in the workplace. According to Smyer and
Catsouphes (2007), older workers in the workplace are significantly more satisfied with
their job than are younger workers. Smyer and Catsouphes (2007) further suggest that age
has a direct connection between job satisfaction and why older workers stay in the
- 19 -
workplace. In 2006, a focus group survey was promoted by Boston College to workers
that were 50 plus years old by the center on aging and work. This focus session would
seek to understand why it was that older workers were interested in staying in the
workplace. Smyer and Catsouphes (2007) reviewed the data collected from this focus
group to determine what correlations existed between age group and workplace
satisfaction among other variables.
The sample size obtain from through this focus group was not provided by the
researchers, however it was evident that they used a correlation methodology to
determine any potential relationships (Smyer & Catsouphes, 2007). It was suggested by
the authors of this research that while age was a contributor to job satisfaction, other
variables also contributed to the necessity of older workers remaining in the workplace
(Smyer & Catsouphes, 2007). Some of the factors outside of age that contributed to their
job satisfaction were also financial factors, health and vitality (Smyer & Catsouphes,
2007).
In 2005, a survey was conducted to determine the level of pride associated with
age and their jobs. It was determined that 59% of employees aged 55 years or older
agreed or strongly agreed that a good deal of pride comes from my work and career
(Smyer & Catsouphes, 2007, pg.26). The age group between 18 and 34 years of age was
compared and the data showed they had a 48% satisfaction rate of pride in the type of
work that they do. Studies conducted by Harris (2005) have shown that 59% of older
workers, 55 years or older, had a high level of agreement that pride in their work was
important. In the same study, 37% of younger workers between the ages of 18 to 34
stated pride was important in their work and 48 % of workers ages 35 to 54 years old
- 20 -
stated pride was important. While the study mentioned above suggests that age is an
indicator to levels of job satisfaction, Training and Development (2007), state that age is
not a factor that contributes to job satisfaction. According to Training and Development
(2007), it is simply the level of skill of that manager of that employee that indicates job
satisfaction.
According to Training and Development (2007), a study was conducted by a
staffing agency to determine the level of job satisfaction of older employees reporting to
younger managers. The survey had 567 adult respondents working in an office
environment and 84% of those employees stated that they would not mind working for a
younger manager (Training and Development, 2007). Within the same study, 89 % of the
young office workers surveyed stated they would not be bothered by supervising older
workers. A likert scale was used to obtain the data, and after the interpretation of the
results, Training and Development (2007, pg. 2) stated, Companies recognize the
benefits of having diverse, well-rounded teams, and employees may be just as likely to
report to a younger supervisor as an older one. In either case, the bosss management
abilities are more of a factor in employee job satisfaction than his age.
A study conducted by Ganzach (1998) and the center for human resources
research reviewed 12,686 surveys to determine if there was a relationship between
intelligence and job satisfaction. Of the sample size taken; only 5,423 respondents were
used in the study which was conducted in 1982. Some of the variables that were
researched included intelligence, job complexity, occupation, sex, age, ethnic origin,
years of education, mother educational level, fathers educational level, and family
income. The focus of this research was on intelligence and it relationship with job
- 21 -
satisfaction; however the variables mentioned above had a significant positive impact on
the results as they related to job satisfaction. The variable of age however had a negative
impact on the relationship with job satisfaction (Ganzach, 1998).
According to Ganzach (1998), many researchers have looked at age and the
potential relationship with job satisfaction and found a favorable relationship between the
two. In this study, the relationship showed to have a negative impact on job satisfaction
and a negative relationship with overall job satisfaction. Ganzach (1998) further suggests
that as employees age, the job expectations continue to grow, thus creating
dissatisfaction with jobs in the beginning of their careers. Ganzach (1998) however
believes that as the employee ages, their level of satisfaction begins to change. As they
progress through their careers and reach their peak, they have high levels of satisfaction
which creates a positive relationship with their level of job satisfaction. At the middle of
their career, Ganzach (1998) suggests that no relationship exist within job satisfaction
and age. He further suggests that to truly measure job satisfaction and age, you must look
at the demographic of the population being studying.
Degree Major. Students have many different majors they can chose from when
attending a college or university. According to Leslie and Brinkman (1998), Pascarella
and Terenzini (1991), it has been very well researched and demonstrated that the choice
of degree major has a direct correlation to job satisfaction. Further research has also
shown that a direct correlation exists between the type of major chosen and up to 25 to 35
% more earning potential within their field of their study (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991).
The researcher was not able to find research on human resources professionals and the
direct correlation between job satisfaction and the degree major.
- 22 -
The research literature demonstrates that while an existing relationship does exist
between the job satisfaction and degree major; there are many more variables that need to
be considered that contribute or detract from the existing correlation (Holland, 1997).
Some of the variables that should be considered are age, gender, career expectations, and
seniority (Astin, 1984). In 1993, a statistical analysis was conducted by Horn and Zahn,
(2001) to determine if a relationship between degree majors and job satisfaction existed.
This survey analyzed 9,274 participants at the bachelors degree level. These participants
were surveyed four years after they had completed their schooling and none of the
participants were enrolled or graduated from a graduate degree program at the time of
this analysis (Horn & Zahn, 2001). According to Horn and Zahn (2001), this population
was chosen due to 70% of the survey sample entering the workforce immediately after
completing the bachelors degree.
Of the survey population sampled, business was the highest chosen major among
13 other possible fields of study (Horn & Zahn, 2001). The data results from this study
showed that out of the 13 majors researched; the business major was not ranked in the
top 50 percentile of having job satisfaction (Horn & Zahn, 2001). Engineering,
architecture, and computer science majors were ranked to be the most satisfied across the
13 majors. The researchers did not distinguish in this study what majors within the
business field were chosen. An interesting dynamic discovered from this research is that
on average, the student that chose business as their major was an average of 30 years old
or older, thus supporting previous studies demonstrating the older the employee, the more
likely they are satisfied (Smyer & Catsouphes, 2007). In this study it was demonstrated
- 23 -
that even though these students in business were older, they did not have a significant
high level of job satisfaction (Horn & Zahn, 2001).
The data from the analysis demonstrated that the degree chosen by the student did
have a relationship with the type of satisfaction they experienced (Horn & Zahn, 2001).
After having been in the workforce for a period of 4 years, data showed that students in
the engineering, architecture, and computer science were the most satisfied. The
researcher contributed this to higher salaries being offered and better benefits. Students
that had chosen other majors, such as business, were offered lower salaries and more
costly benefits thus leading to lower satisfaction levels (Horn & Zahn, 2001; Smyer &
Catsouphes, 2007).
A second research study on degree majors and job satisfaction was conducted in
1990 with a sample of 6,540 participants. These participants were sampled from a study
titled The National Longitudinal study of high school students conducted in 1972
(Kolb,1990). In order for the participants to be part of the study, they were required to
have completed or participated in obtaining a bachelors degree (Kolb, 1990). Kolb (1990)
used a multiple regression analysis methodology to conduct his study and the variables of
employee background, educational level, job type and what the researcher described as
job fit characteristics.
According to Kolb (1990), he was able to determine there were 14 majors from
the surveyed participants in this study. Out of the 14 majors he determined 3 majors were
considered to be the most satisfied among the survey group. Business, health and law
were the top three major that reported the highest level of job satisfaction (Kolb, 1990).
While Kolb (1990) did not distinguish between the types of majors that existed within the
- 24 -
business variable, he was able to show a positive relationship between job satisfaction,
business and law majors. Human resources professionals today are required to
demonstrate competencies to function in their jobs that reflect the business and law
majors (Millar, 2006). In Kolb (1990) data results section, he discusses the positive
relationship between job satisfaction and the degree major obtained. Kolb (1990) states
that he was able to determine that a positive relationship does exist between an obtain
degree and job satisfaction. The distinction is further define by Kolb (1990), he states that
while a degree does show a positive correlation with job satisfaction, the degree major
obtained has a much larger influence on the variables associated within job satisfaction
(Kolb, 1990).
A study was conducted by Bowen and Bok (1998) to determine job satisfaction
levels for African Americans in comparison to other graduates who entered college in
1976. These graduates were selected across 28 different colleges and universities and
contacted 20 years after they have completed their formal education (Bowen & Bok,
1998). One of the variables researched was degree major and its correlation to job
satisfaction. Upon completion of the study, the researcher found no existing relationship
between degree major and job satisfaction.
The research did demonstrate that a positive relationship between obtaining a
degree and income level, however the researcher did not conduct further analysis to
determine a potential relationship between job satisfaction and degree major (Bowen &
Bok, 1998). The researcher further suggested that degree major had no influence on the
level of job satisfaction. The researcher did suggest that the obtainment of a degree shows
the significance on satisfaction (Bowen &Bok, 1998). According to Fatemi (2001), there
- 25 -
is no significant relationship between degree major obtained and job satisfaction. Fatemi
(2001) conducted a study to determine if a relationship between job satisfaction and the
perceptions of their graduate experience after entering the workforce. The sample of the
population included graduate level students and doctoral level students. The total sample
used was 1,850 master level degree graduates and a 105 doctoral degree graduates from
the graduating classes between the years 1994 to 1998 (Fatemi, 2001).
This study looked at four different types of departments offering graduate
degrees. The four degrees areas were Educational Leadership, Counseling/Human
Organizational studies, Teacher preparation and Special education. The researcher
provided the data analysis in multiple sections to demonstrate the statistical significance
of job satisfaction as it relates to the degree major (Fatemi, 2001). Statistical data was
also given on the relationship of job satisfaction to work effectiveness, faculty role and
academic preparation. In the section that describes job satisfaction, the researcher states
that the data did not provide any evidence that a positive relationship existed with the
degree major obtained and the level of job satisfaction (Fatemi, 2001). According to
Fatemi (2001), the participants in the study did not show a relationship with job
satisfaction, however the data did support that due to their level of education, they had a
high level of overall job satisfaction.
The data on work effectiveness and job satisfaction did not support a
relationship between the degree major obtained and the level of satisfaction (Fatemi,
2001). The data supported that the participants did show a high level of satisfaction;
however it was not related to their degree major. In the sections that discuss the role of
the faculty and the academic preparation, the data did not show any significant
- 26 -
relationship existed with job satisfaction. One significant data point is that the graduates
in the Special Education/Teacher Preparation majors allowed for more opportunities for
their students to gain work experience. This was allowed to be completed during their
degree program, explaining the higher levels of job satisfaction among the different
degree majors (Fatemi, 2001). Fatemi (2001) suggests that overall job satisfaction has no
relationship with the degree major obtained, however a significant relationship does exist
with having a degree and overall job satisfaction.
Formal Education. Job satisfaction and formal education has been researched
since the early 1970s on many different organizations and different types of jobs. Some
of the early studies conducted on the potential relationship between job satisfaction and
education had differing outcomes. In 1974, Quinn et al., (1974) reviewed 15 surveys
conducted by multiple research organizations on job satisfaction. After conducting his
own analysis, he showed the relationship was constant between job satisfaction and
formal educational. Quinn et al., (1974) stated that no significant relationship could be
determined between job satisfaction and formal education. According to Quinn et al.,
(1974), the data demonstrated that levels of job satisfaction had not changed during the
time period the survey was given inclusive of the survey between 1972 through 1978.
Weaver (1980) discussed that while Quinn et al., (1974) suggested job satisfaction was
consistent from an overall standpoint, age and formal education did have a variance
worth discussing. A significant difference existed between those that had obtained a
college education and those that had only matriculated from high school (Weaver, 1980).
Weaver (1980) demonstrated through his review of the surveys conducted in 1958
and 1964 that a negative relationship existed between job satisfaction and formal
- 27 -
education. Weaver (1980) reviewed four national surveys between the years of 1972
through 1978 with a survey sample of 4, 709 American employees. These participants
were currently in the workforce and found that compared to his pervious study of 1958
and 1964, a positive relationship had developed. This research study included the
following variables to be investigated; the level of formal education, age of the
participant, the type of formal degree obtained by the participant if any, and the level of
job satisfaction of the participant. Weavers (1980) review of the survey study on job
satisfaction and its potential relationship to formal education contradicted the results from
Quinn et al., (1974).
Weaver (1980) found that the older aged employees showed a higher level of job
satisfaction compared to the younger employees. He categorized the participants by less
than 20 years, 20 29 years of age, 30 39 years of age, 40 49 years of age and 50 and
older. The highest level of satisfaction was shown to be in the 50 and older
categorization. In this same study, he distinguished formal education by categories to
include grade school, high school, some college and college or more (Weaver, 1980). His
data results demonstrated that the individuals that had a college degree or higher showed
a higher level of satisfaction. In his study, he did not distinguish the different types of
college degrees nor did he make a distinction between a four year degree, masters degree
and a doctoral degree (Weaver, 1980).
In 1990, a research study was conducted by Zaring (1990) on the relationship
between registered nurses and job satisfaction. A component within the study reviewed
the possible relationship that formal education could have on job satisfaction. A sample
of 1,300 nurses was taken from two state nursing boards and the findings showed no
- 28 -
relationship existed between formal levels of education and job satisfaction (Zaring,
1990). The sample of registered nurses that was obtained for this study had the following
degrees: 274 had nursing diploma certificates, 207 had an associates degree in nursing,
193 had a bachelors degree in nursing, and 6 respondents had a masters degree of
nursing.
This study concluded that nurses who obtained higher than the diploma
certification showed higher levels of dissatisfaction with their job (Zaring, 1990). The
researcher concluded that nurses that only obtained the diploma certification were not
only more satisfied in their daily job, but showed that they were more clinically
proficiently (Zaring, 1990). According to Zaring (1990), one of the variables that lead to
job dissatisfaction was that a nurse can obtain a diploma certificate or a masters degree
in nursing and their universal identifier is the RN behind their name. This in turn creates
a hidden divide among nurses and continues to be a problem between registered nurses
that are degreed and non-degreed (Zaring, 1990).
In an additional study by DeSantis and Durst (1996), a comparison between
government and private sector workers and job satisfaction was done. The findings
showed that a negative correlation existed between job satisfaction and formal
educational levels (DeSantis & Durst, 1996). The researchers were interested in
understanding if job satisfaction varied between the private and the public sector. These
researchers were able to demonstrate that the more educated the workers were the more
dissatisfied they would become with their jobs (Desantis & Durst, 1996). The literature
has demonstrated that both outcomes have been found through different methods of
research. Some of the studies mentioned above show that a positive correlation did exist
- 29 -
between formal education and job satisfaction, however similar studies also demonstrated
no relationship existed.
Literature Review of Methodology. Researching job satisfaction age, degree major
and formal education can be completed utilizing many different methodologies. In
reviewing the existing literature on job satisfaction and its relationship to age, degree
major and formal education, researchers have included many different variables in their
studies. The researcher reviewed many of these existing studies and utilized the most
commonly used variables to be included in their study. In this section, the researcher
reviewed the literature for choosing those variables and the development of the research
questions. The researcher further discussed the research methodology, design, and type of
analysis and survey tool to be used to obtain data results.
Choice of Variables. Many studies have been conducted on job satisfaction since
the early 1930s using different variables to determine their relationship to satisfaction
(Weaver, 1980). Researchers have included such variables as age, gender, education,
education to determine the potential relationship with job satisfaction (Steers, 1977). A
study was completed to determine the relationship between certain demographic variables
and job satisfaction. The variables that were included in this study included gender, age,
education, martial status and job related experience (Scott, Taylor, & Swortzel, 2005).
According to Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, and Capwell (1957) and Scott et al., (2005),
when someone is seeking to understand the factor that lead to job satisfaction,
demographic variables should always be considered. Scott et al., (2005) further states
without researching demographic variables; a researcher cannot understand the true
factors that lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction in the work environment.
- 30 -
A recent study in 2006 was done on the level of job satisfaction and mid-level
managers working in the student administration field. The researcher concluded based off
of his findings that there was only a small variance between job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction for mid-level administration workers (Grant, 2006). In this study, the
researcher used variables to further define the potential relationship that job satisfaction
may have to formal educational level, age, gender, and race. Grant (2006) defined his age
groups from 21 30 years of age, 31 - 40 years of age, 41 50 years of age, 51 60
years and age and 60 years and older.
The researcher found that while little variance existed between this variable and
job satisfaction, it was noted that the age group between 51 60 had the highest level of
satisfaction and the age group of 60 and above was secondary in their level of
satisfaction (Grant, 2006). The variable of formal education was defined by Bachelors,
Masters, Specialist, EdD or PhD and Juris Doctorate degree. The data from this research
demonstrated again that the PhD/EdD showed the highest level of job satisfaction among
the obtain degree levels (Grant, 2006). An interesting anomaly shown in the data set was
the individuals that obtain a Juris Doctorate degree had the lowest level of job satisfaction
among all of the Bachelors, Masters and Specialists degrees. This research did not
investigate the specialization of the degree received and their relationship to job
satisfaction (Grant, 2006).
A second study on job satisfaction among student affairs professionals found
that a significant relationship did exist between the variables of age, formal educational
level, gender and ethic background (Cook, 2006). The study found that a statistically
significant relationship between the the level of job satisfaction and the level of
- 31 -
education obtained. The researcher utilized a sample of 66 participants that were
currently working in the student affairs professions. The variable of formal education
level was defined as having obtained a Bachelors degree, Masters degree, Doctorate
degree or other (Cook, 2006).
Of the participants that responded, 4.5% had a bachelors degree, 65.2% had
obtained a master degree and 27.3% had obtained a doctorate degree. Only 2% reported
having obtained a different degree major. The data demonstrated that the PhD/EdD
showed the highest level of job satisfaction with the Masters degree following second
and the Bachelors degree third. An interesting variance shown in the data was a
participant had chosen other for the degree section had the highest level of satisfaction
of all the degrees surveyed (Cook, 2006). According to Cook (2006), age was also a
variable that was researched and showed a positive correlation with job satisfaction. The
research did not show a variance on how the age groups were broken in segments; rather
it showed how they were connected with 2 of Hertzberg hygiene variables of satisfaction.
The data did however give a general idea that participants under the age of 30 years of
age showed no correlation with achievement and satisfaction as compared to those over
the age 30 that did show a statistically significant relationship (Cook, 2006).
A study conduct by Horn and Zahn (2001) demonstrated that a significant positive
relationship did exist between the degree major obtained and overall job satisfaction.
Horn and Zahn (2001) considered the fields of business, humanities, health related
majors, and computer science in their study. An important finding was that across all
fields, there was only a slightly significant variation between the different majors. The
researchers suggested that while little variation existed, a significant difference did exist
- 32 -
in the financial compensation between major which could be a variable to consider in job
satisfaction (Horn & Zahn, 2001). As previously demonstrated in the above studies, the
variables age, gender, degree major, and formal educational level were included as
variables of job satisfaction in this research and shown to be important in attempting to
understand true job satisfaction (Weaver, 1980).
Theoretical Framework. Fredrick Herzberg is considered by many as one of the
most important contributing researchers of motivational theory in the workplace
(Bassette-Jones & Loyds, 2005). Herzberg researched the idea that motivation in the
workplace has two fundamental distinctions that contribute to job satisfaction. The two
areas considered important by Herzberg were described as intrinsic and extrinsic, later
illustrated as hygiene and motivational factors (Herzberg, 1959). As Herzberg continued
his exploration of the intrinsic and extrinsic factors, he developed what is known today as
the Two-Factor Motivational Hygiene Theory (Bassette-Jones & Loyds, 2005). The Two-
Factor Motivational Hygiene Theory describes motivational and hygiene factors in
relevance to their effect on workplace motivation (Herzberg, 1959).
Herzberg suggests that understanding the difference between hygiene factors and
motivational factors could lead a researcher to understand the fundamental process of
what may cause dissatisfaction in the workplace (Herzberg, 1959). Herzberg describes
the hygiene factors as being extrinsic factors such as the environment. He further
suggests that those elements could be policies, supervision, salary, interpersonal
relationships, and working conditions (Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman, 1967;
Herzberg, 1968). In describing the motivational factors, Herzberg suggests that
achievement, type of work, recognition, responsibility, and advancement are the factors
- 33 -
that contribute to creating satisfaction in the workplace (Herzberg, Mausner &
Snyderman, 1967; Herzberg, 1968).
An initial study was conducted by Herzberg on accountants and engineers to
determine what factors contributed to their satisfaction in the workplace. The participants
of this research were asked to provide times when they felt positive about their job as
well as negative. They were also asked to provide reasons why they felt positive or
negative and provide a chronological timeline of events leading to their feelings about
their job (Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman 1959). According to Herzberg et al., (1959),
the positive satisfiers that were found in this study were the work itself, the type of
recognition given for the job they did, advancement opportunities offered and the
reasonability given. Herzberg et al., (1959) stated the negative satisfiers were the existing
working conditions, company policy, interpersonal relationships, supervision, job
security, salary and personal life. Herzberg found through his research with this group
that if motivating factors were present, the likelihood that the employee was satisfied was
greater (Herzberg, 1959). He further found that both motivating factors and hygiene
factors could co-exist in the same work environment; however, it was the absence of
either of the factors that contributed to the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the employee
(Mumford, 1972).
The application of Herzbergs theoretical idea of motivational factors such as
achievement may explain the possible relationship of how formal education may be
related to the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of an HR employee with their job. This theory
may help demonstrate why formal education for an HR employee may provide higher
levels of job satisfaction. Additional research using the Herzberg Two-Factor
- 34 -
Motivational Hygiene Theory has been conducted across many industries to test for
formal education in such studys as those conducted by Wignall (2004), Grant (2006), and
Cook (2006).
A study conducted using the Herzberg Two-Factor Theory to test formal
education level and job satisfaction was conducted by Wignell (2004). This study
examined the relationship between education level and job satisfaction of the Florida
State Prison industry workers. Seven independent variables were measured to include
education level as one of the factors to be researched. Four hundred and fifty inmate
workers were measured across 10 prisons all within the Florida state correctional system.
A data sheet was submitted by all participants in the study to include the highest level of
education obtained. This study demonstrated the motivational factor of achievement as
stated by Herzberg in the form of educational level to have a significance of value in the
measurement of job satisfaction. Inmates were measured for their education level upon
entering the classification process when entering the prison system.
The inmate population was categorized by three different job titles: General Work
Assignment, Agricultural jobs and Traditional Prison Industries (Wignell, 2004). Inmate
jobs were generally assigned as facility maintenance positions and in a few cases
agricultural labor positions. No distinction was made in this study on whether college
degrees obtained were considered when assigning jobs (Wignell, 2004). Inmate workers
with an educational level below eigth grade had the lowest level of job satisfaction and
inmate workers with a college degree or higher had the highest level of job satisfaction
(Wignell, 2004).
- 35 -
A second study using the theoretical approach of the Herzberg Two Factor Theory
was researched by Grant (2006). This research was conducted to measure the level of job
satisfaction or dissatisfaction for mid-level managers in the student affairs administration
field. This study had six variables of measurement and two were formal degree level
obtained and currently seeking a degree (Grant, 2006). Both intrinsic and extrinsic
factors were determined to be important; however, formal degree level and seeking a
degree demonstrated moderate significance to the overall level of job satisfaction; thus
those who had degrees or were in the process of obtaining one showed moderately higher
levels of satisfaction.
The areas of mid level management that were considered were enrollment
management, co-curricular, leaning assistance, and student development. Each mid level
manager had to have a minimum of fours years in that content area to be considered a
participant in this study The researcher did not classify the content area to level of job
satisfaction, however they incorporated the larger theme of satisfaction as a whole for the
different areas mid level managers were working in (Grant, 2006).According to Grant
(2006), while the data reveled the level of education was moderately significant,
achievement and responsibility showed significance as suggested by the Herzberg
Motivitional Two-Factor Theory.
An additional study on job satisfaction with multiple variables was conducted
using Herzbergs Motivational Two Factor Theory by Cook (2006). This study
researched ten variables on the interrelationship among job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction of student affairs professionals and selected demographic variables. One
of the ten variables researched, was the level of degree obtained as identified by the
- 36 -
Herzberg Two Factor Motivitional Theory (Cook, 2006). This research demonstrated that
professionals with a doctoral degree were significantly higher in job satisfaction than
those with a masters or bachelors degree. Employees with a masters degree had higher
levels of job satisfaction than those with a bachelors degree but not a doctorate degree.
Employees with a bachelors degree showed high levels of job satisfaction but not as high
as master or doctoral level employees (Cook, 2006).
Quantitative design. When a researcher seeks to discover the potential
relationship between two or more variables, a quantitative design is best utilized to work
with data (Davis, 1997). The researcher chose a quantitative research design to look at the
potential relationship between multiple variables. According to Charles (1998, pg.30),
when you use surveys and data to research a problem, it is best to utilize the quantitative
methodology to provide yourself with statistical information which one can base a
conclusion on. In the research studies reviewed, the researcher found studies with
similar designs.
When working with a descriptive research methodology, researchers have
different approaches that can be used to best obtain the results they seek. One of the
approaches that can be utilized is a correlation research method (Jefferies, 1999). In this
approach the researcher seeks to develop an understanding of the possible relationship
between variables through the use of obtained data. A correlation analysis however does
not seek causation, rather only focuses on the potential relationship between variables
(Jefferies, 1999). According to Charles (1998), the use of test and questionnaires are the
most important tools when conducting descriptive research.
- 37 -
The first study that was researched was Wignall (2004). In this study, the
researcher was interested in understanding if a relationship between gender, age, race,
education, length of sentence, and tenure contributed to overall job satisfaction for
Florida State prisoner industry workers. The researcher utilized a correlational research
design to measure the differences between each of the above described variables and the
overall job satisfaction (Wignall, 2004). A quantitative research design was utilized due
to the researcher having to obtain survey data to be analyzed through a regression
analysis methodology (Wignall, 2004). According to Charles (1998), the use of different
research designs depended solely on the type of question that is being asked by the
researcher.
In a second study, the researcher investigated the interrelationship between job
satisfaction/dissatisfaction and multiple variables. The research methodology used was
descriptive analysis and a correlational design was used to determine if a relationship
existed (Cook, 2006). In this study, the researcher used variables to include age, highest
degree earned and gender as some of the variables to be studied (Cook, 2006). These
variables are similar to the variables chosen to be part of this current research study. In
the example studies cited above, similar variables and research methodology were used
as the research proposed in this study.
Additional studies that used the quantitative research design were Scott et al.,
(2005) seeking to understand the relationship between the variables of age, gender,
formal education for extension agents. Horn and Zhan (2001) conducted a study to
determine if a relationship existed between the degree major obtained and job
- 38 -
satisfaction. This study also utilized a quantitative research design and included the
variables of age, gender, formal degree level in their study.
Correlation Research Design. Correlational research allows the researcher to
determine the relationship between one or more variables (Hatfield, Faunce & Somaes,
2006). When using a correlation research design, the researcher does not create any type
of influence on the variables being tested, rather they seek only to understand and
determine potential existing relationships (Siegle, n.d.) When conducting correlational
research, the potential for a positive or negative relationship exists. It can further be
determined that the variables being studied can have a positive, negative or no
relationship which is described as direction (Siegle, n.d.). According to Siegle (n.d.),
strength is also a component of the correlation research design. Strength is designed to
describe the level of the existing relationship. The strength can be either negative or
positive from 0 to +/- 1.00 in the variable for the study.
Many studies on job satisfaction have been researched using the correlational
research design. An example of a correlational research study and job satisfaction is Hall
(1999). This study was interested in determining if a relationship existed between conflict
management styles and job satisfaction of the California community college police chiefs
and security directors. Variables that were used for this study included age, gender,
ethnicity, and longevity as it relates to job satisfaction. This study found that the variables
did have existing relationships with job satisfaction, however they were only marginal
and not of great significance (Hall, 1999).
A second correlation study that used the variables of age, gender, ethnicity,
educational level and decision making style was conducted by Payson (1988). This study
- 39 -
was seeking to determine if a relationship between the above mentioned variables and job
satisfaction for psychiatric nurses existed. The variables of age, gender, ethnicity and
educational level showed no significant relationship to job satisfaction and the decision
making model for psychiatric nurses (Payson, 1988).
Abridged Job Descriptive Index. The Job Descriptive Index has been one of the
most popular job satisfaction survey instruments utilized since its inception in the early
1960s. This survey assessment tool has been used in over 300 published and
unpublished research projects to date (Blazer et al., 2000, pg.5). This assessment tool
has also been administered to over 1000 organizations (DeMeuse, 1985). According to
Blazer et al., (2000), this instrument has been able to maintain its internal validity and
reliability and continues to prove itself over many different organizational populations.
With over 1000 administrations of the aJDI, it has been the most commonly researched
and utilized five facet construct measurement of job satisfaction (DeMeuse, 1985).
A study on the relationship between burnout and job satisfaction for intensive care
unit nurses was conducted using the JDI as its assessment tool (Roth, 1986) This study
used a correlational research methodology to determine if a relationship existed between
burnout and job satisfaction. Some of the variables that were included in this study were
age, ethnicity, marital status and educational level (Roth, 1986). According to Roth
(1986), the Job Descriptive Index is an excellent job satisfaction measurement tool due to
it looking at individual facets of nursing satisfaction rather than a global level of
satisfaction.
Roth (1986) also states that the JDI provides specific measurement in the areas of
job satisfaction given the researcher a precise area related to either the satisfaction or
- 40 -
dissatisfaction. Roth (1986) further suggests that the questions are easily understood and
the level of sophistication of the individual taking the assessment is irrelevant. An
additional element suggested by Roth (1986) is the length of the assessment does not add
to fatigue or boredom when being administered. Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1975) suggest
that much of the existing research literature on job satisfaction is grounded upon six
facets defining job satisfaction. Those six facets are nature of work, present pay,
opportunities for promotion, supervision on the present job, co-workers on the job and
the job in general. Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1975) state that the aJDI uses the above
previously described facets to measure job satisfaction in its assessment tool. According
to Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1975) the JDI has provided strong construct and content
validity and proven itself as a good measurement tool for job satisfaction.
A research study was conducted on conflict management styles of school
administrators for the deaf and it potential relationship to job satisfaction (Alexander,
1995). The sample taken for this study consisted of 30 school superintendents, 42
principles, and 90 teachers serving deaf schools across America. An instrument by the
name of the Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode instrument was utilized to measure the type
of conflict management style utilized by the school administration (Alexander, 1995).
The administrators were also given the Job Descriptive Index assessment to measure the
level of job satisfaction with the five facets excluding the job in general facet (Alexander,
1995).
The outcome of the research demonstrated that administrators had significant
levels of job satisfaction when their superior was using a collaborate style of conflict
techniques. Furthermore, the JDI assisted the researcher obtain specific information on
- 41 -
how the collaborative style of conflict management related to job satisfaction for
administrator pay, supervision, promotional opportunities, work relationships and the
nature of the work (Alexander, 1995). For all of the facets in the JDI, the researcher
reported that job satisfaction in the five facets was high when the superior use a
collaborative conflict management model. A significant variance took place when a non-
collaborate model was not used (Alexander, 1995). According to Smith, Kendall, and
Hulin, (1969), the aJDI/JDI is one of two of the most reliable and validated job
satisfaction assessment tool in research today.
Synthesis / Summary of Research Findings. In this section of the chapter, the
researcher discussed the larger themes and inconsistencies of the research findings. The
researcher further discussed the strengths and weakness of the existing research and
relationship this topic has to the existing research. The researcher finally described how
this study added to the existing body of knowledge for the area of Human Resources and
Job Satisfaction.
Larger Themes. Job satisfaction is one of the most researched and controversial
topics in organizational psychology (Judge & Church, 2000). Many researchers have
found that positive relationships exist and others have found that no relationships exist
between job satisfaction and various demographic variables (Judge & Church, 2000). In
reviewing the studies presented in this research, job satisfaction has been linked to have
both a positive and negative relationship with formal education, degree major, age and
other demographic variables (Weaver, 1980; Goetze, 2000; Quinn et al., 1974).
According to Franco (2005), most Americans today are unhappy with their jobs. A
sample of 5000 US households were taken and 50% stated they were satisfied with their
- 42 -
job and only 14% stated they were very satisfied (Franco, 2005). According to Franco
(2005), the rising demands of employees, technological advances and job expectation all
contribute to the negativity being experienced in the workplace today.
Two groups have shown the largest drop in job satisfaction within the past ten
years. Workers between the ages of 35 to 44 have the highest level of dissatisfaction
compared to all other age groups. Out of the 5000 households surveyed, this age group
showed 66% dissatisfaction with their present job (Franco, 2005). The second most
effected age group was the age group of 45 to 54 year old employees. This employees
group showed a 57.3 % dissatisfaction rate with their current jobs (Franco, 2005). An
interesting statistic stated by Franco (2005) is that over 40% of Americans today do not
feel any connection to their employers and for every three employees, two do not feel
motivated to support their companies goals and objectives. According to Franco (2005),
there are many aspects we need to research to find out how to increase job satisfaction for
employees. She further states that less than 30% of the 5000 responds claim to be
satisfied with educational/training programs and no monetary reward systems.
In a survey conducted by Mercer HR consulting group (2007), over 3000 HR
professionals were surveyed across the world currently working in a Human Resources
role. Industries included in this survey were textile goods, manufacturing, food, tobacco,
beverage, cosmetic, banking, financial services, general business, chemical and
pharmaceutical to name a few (Mercer, 2007). The purpose of this survey was to gain and
understanding of the level of satisfaction of employees working in the HR field. The
survey showed that 53% of all responses were from participants in the generalists role
and 31% were from the benefits/compensation role. Of all the respondents, 42% were
- 43 -
currently in the manager role, 7% were in a supervisor role, 8% were in a coordinator role
and 21% were in a director role. A small percentage was lower than the coordinator role
and only 6% were above the director role (Mercer, 2007).
Of the respondents in this survey, 61% were females and 39% were males. The
age of the respondents were as follows: 9% were between the ages of 22 to 28 years,
32% were age 36 to 42 years old, 27% were ages between 29 and 35 years old, 31% were
43 years or older. None of the participants in this survey were 21 years or younger
(Mercer, 2007). The results of this survey demonstrated that employees working within
the human resources field today are demonstrating the possibility of high turnover within
the HR field in the future (Mercer, 2007). Mercer (2007) further suggests that it is
important for organizations today to understand the dynamics within the HR field to
manage their HR employees better. According to Mercer (2007), it is important to have a
keen insight to understand the variables creating job satisfaction for the HR employee.
With this information, an organization can build better career development programs and
reduce turnover rates for human resources employees.
Inconsistencies. In the review of the existing literature, the researcher found many
studies that demonstrate a positive or negative relationship with job satisfaction and the
variables being researched in this study. One of the largest inconsistencies demonstrated
by the existing literature is the lack of consistency between the variables being studied
and job satisfaction. According to Roth (1986), many of the research studies on job
satisfaction review the overall measure of satisfaction rather than specific facets of job
satisfaction. Roth (1986) further states this can be misleading to the reader because
averages and generalizations are used to determine a set parameter to indicate
- 44 -
satisfaction. Roth (1986) suggests that it is more accurate to get an understanding of job
satisfaction when variables are broken into individual facets that can be measured
independently rather than as a whole.
An important variable that is commonly measured in job satisfaction studies is the
type of formal education. Some studies that show a strong relationship with formal
education and job satisfaction exist. Some studies measure the level of degree, however
the concentration or degree major obtained may not have been measured. Fatemi (2001)
suggests that while his study did not indicate a positive relationship with the degree major
obtained, it is important to understand how the degree major could contribute to other
facets of job satisfaction and potential relationships. In a study conducted by Desantis and
Durst (1996), public sectors and government workers were compared to determine the
potential relationship between job satisfaction and formal educational levels. The study
found the more education the worker had, the more dissatisfied they became. An
inconsistency was that this did not address the issue of the degree major of the formal
education and what industry it applied too.
Strengths and Weaknesses. One of the strengths of this study is demonstrated
through the solid theoretical foundation in Herzberg Motivational theory. Job satisfaction
research has considered Herzberg motivational theory one of the most appropriate
foundations for truly understanding what creates satisfaction in the workplace today
(Bassette-Jones & Loyds, 2005). Herzberg motivation theory has been used as the
theoretical framework in many studies on job satisfaction (Bassette-Jones & Loyds, 2005;
Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman 1959; Mumford, 1972; Wignall, 2004; Grant, 2006;
Cook,2006). Herzberg motivational theory consists of 2 factor known as intrinsic and
- 45 -
extrinsic (Herzberg, 1959). This theoretical foundation focus on what he calls hygiene
and motivational factors (Herzberg, 1959). According to Herzberg (1959), this
foundation focuses on the factors of achievement, type of work, recognition,
responsibility, and advancement which are all contributors to job satisfaction.
A second strength in this study is the use of the Abridged Job Descriptive Index
as the assessment tool used to measure the level of job satisfaction. There are many job
satisfaction assessment tools available to the researcher to measure job satisfaction;
however few have the reliability and validity of the Abridged Job Descriptive Index
(Balzer, et al., 1997). The Job Descriptive Index was originally introduced in 1969 and
has been tested in over 1600 research projects and continues to be revised and validated
to increases it effectiveness (Balzer, et al., 1997). The Abridged Job Descriptive Index
was reviewed and revised to meet the stand in shorter form of the original JDI (Balzer, et
al., 1997). According to Blazer et al., (1997), in the reviews of the aJDI, evidence was
found that it held the same predictive properties and values as the full length Job
Descriptive Index.
A third strength in this study is the methodology and variables that are being
included. After review of the existing literature on job satisfaction, the researcher found
that a quantitative research methodology was commonly used to measure the level of job
satisfaction. Furthermore it was also found that the variables of age, formal educational
level and degree major were included in many studies reviewed by the researcher
(Bassette-Jones & Loyds, 2005; Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman 1959; Mumford, 1972;
Wignall, 2004; Grant, 2006; Cook, 2006).
- 46 -
This research has some area of weakeness that are important and need to be
addressed. One of the areas of weakness is the limited variables that are being researched
in the study. The current study is looking at job satisfaction level, age, formal educational
level and the degree major obtained. Additional demongraphical information is being
obtained to include gender, time in position, current age and ethnicity, however they were
not be addressed as part of the study. An additional area of weakness in this research is
that this study is specific to human resources employees only and not generalizable to the
overall population.
This study is also limited to only one organization and not multiple organizations
across multiple industires. The organization being studied has gone through a merger of 4
smaller companies to form a national corporation. This dynamic has taken place within
the last 2 years and human resources policies and procedures are still currently being
consolidated. An additional weakness that needs to be adderssed is that this study does
not address which participant was currently on any form of discipline for performance
issues, policy violations or attendance issues. A final weakness is that this study utilizes
the Abridged Job Descriptive Index as the only assessment tool. The Job In General is an
additional assessment tool that could be used in conjunction to provide additional
information on the varaibles researched by the aJDI (Balzer, et al., 1997).
Adding to Existing Knowledge. Employees of today are different from the
traditional employee back in the 1950s. Todays employee is more vested in their future
and is seeking to develop themselves through their companies career development
programs (Mercer, 2007). Human resources employees are generally tasked with creating
and maintaining the culture and environment within corporations (Reid, 2006).
- 47 -
According to Mercer (2007), human resources employees are not any different than those
interested in developing themselves through career development programs. Job
satisfaction for all employees is an important topic for corporations today (Mercer, 2007).
With limited literature on job satisfaction for human resources employees, this study
assisted by adding to the existing literature and providing some insight into some of the
potential relationships between formal educational levels, age, degree major and job
satisfaction for HR employees.
The methodology and tools that were used for this research have been used
consistently over many research studies (Blazar et al., 2000; Franco, 2005). Numerous
studies have used the aJDI to measure job satisfaction with numerous variables to include
age, degree major and type of formal education level (Davis, 1997; DeMeuse, 1985;
Blazer et al., 2000; Roth, 1986). The variables chosen for this study have also been
consistently utilized in job satisfaction studies (Weaver, 1980; Quinn et al., 1979; Goetze
2000). Utilizing a strong theoretical foundation adds to the knowledge for HR employees
as they are considered the leaders in organization culture of today (Reid, 2006).
Method of Obtaining Research. The researcher utilized many different methods to
obtain and gather information for this study. Both published and unpublished journals
related to job satisfaction were utilized from the years of 1970 through 2007. The use of
the Capella University library was the primary source for information gathering and
referencing. Within the university library, such search databases as ABI/IMFORM
(ProQuest), PsycINFO (Ebscohost), Eric database, PsyArticles (Ebscohost); online
journals, articles, published white papers and dissertation were utilized. In addition to the
resources made available through the university, the researcher utilized their personal
- 48 -
library of psychology and research text books. The internet was also utilized to search
other online libraries for reference materials and papers.
The researcher exhausted basic and advanced searches in the above mentioned
databases through searches with key words Job Satisfaction, HR Job Satisfaction,
Human Resources Job Satisfaction, and Personnel Satisfaction. Reviews were
conducted on the most current journals related to job satisfaction causing the researcher
to conclude that the most current and relevant literature had been uncovered.
- 49 -
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research was to understand if a relationship existed between
job satisfaction levels, formal education levels, age, and degree majors of HR employees.
The research examined if formal levels of education, age, degree levels have a
statistically significant relationship to job satisfaction for human resources employees.
Research regarding job satisfaction has revealed large amounts of literature; however,
limited research exists on the relationship of formal education, age, degree major and job
satisfaction as it relates to HR employees. The variables of age, level of formal education
and degree major were researched to determine if any relationship exists.
Research Design
The proposed research study used a quantitative, correlational research design to
determine the possible relationship between formal educational levels, age, degree major,
and job satisfaction for human resources employees. The researcher utilized a regression
analysis to further determine the possible relationship and the strength between the
variables. A regression analysis is used when the researcher is seeking to determine if a
relationship exists between two or more variables (McDonald, 2006).
According to McDonald (2006), when seeking to understand if two variables have
influence over each other, it is important to consider if the variables can be ranked by
order. If they can be ranked in a specified order, then using a regression analysis is
appropriate. Regression analysis is considered to be one of the most popularly used tools
to determine correlational analysis for correlational research designs (Williams,
Zimmerman, Zumbo, Bruno & Ross, 2003).
- 50 -
Having multiple variables, the total score of job satisfaction and formal
educational level, age, degree major allowed the researcher to determine if any of the
variables have influence over the other based upon the data (Davis, 1997). According to
Davis (1997), correlational research functions at its best when research is looking to
determine relationships between variables. He further states that, unlike experimental
research, correlation research does not seek causation, but rather how independent factors
affect the relationship of a dependent factor. To further understand the relationship
between formal educational levels, age and degree major and job satisfaction, a multiple
regression analysis was conducted to allow the researcher to make predictive assumptions
about the relationships of the variables formal educational levels, degree major, and age
(Davis, 1997).
The use of a demographic survey allowed the researcher to collect information on
different demographic areas such as age, gender, formal education level, degree major,
tenure with the organization, and position within the HR department. The researcher also
administerd the Abridged Job Descriptive Index (aJDI) survey tool in conjunction with
the demographic survey to all participants. Data collected from the demographic survey
and the aJDI were entered and computed though the use of a statistical package titled
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
This study focused on a single purposeful sample of human resources employees
within a large national corporation. The participants in this study were required to fill out
a demographic survey and complete the Abridged Job Descriptive Index assessment. A
correlation research design was used to determine if a significant relationship exists
- 51 -
between job satisfaction in the workplace and levels of formal education, age and degree
major. Data was collected on the participant education level in the following manner:
1. Having less than 59 college credit hours
2. Having 60 college credit hours or an associates degree
5. Having completed a professional degree to included a Doctorate
Target Population. The target populations for this research study were HR
employees of any age, gender, position, or job shift that work for a Human Resources
department. Participants that volunteer to be involved in this research must report directly
into a HR department. The researcher utilized a single HR department within a single
organization spanning across the United States to inform them of the purpose of the study
and to request volunteers for the research. The invitation to participate in this study was
extended to the entire HR department; however, individual HR employees can participate
even if the department area such as benefits, for example, does not participate (Appendix
B).
Selection of Participants. Selections of the participants in this research study were
obtained by using a purposeful sampling procedure. Due to having a specific group the
researcher is seeking to understand, human resources staff, purposeful sampling was used
to obtain the data (Trochim, 2006). The sample size was determined by conducting a
power analysis (Tabachnik & Fidell, 2001). According to Tabachnik & Fidell (2001), the
following numeric values can be used to determine the correct sample size need for this
study: alpha size of .05, .3 predictors, an anticipated effect size of .15 and a statistical
- 52 -
power level of .8). The current sample group that was used for this research consisted of
76 human resources employees working in the following areas: employee relations,
training, learning and performance, benefits, payroll, recruitment, HR information
systems, HR communication and HR senior leadership. The researcher requested
participants of all genders, all age groups, ethnicities and tenures within the organization.
The formula used to determine the sample size was based upon the alpha size,
number of predictors, anticipated effect size and the desired statistical power level.
(Tabachnik & Fidell, 2001). The current population size was 200 HR employees with a
minimum acceptable error rate of +/- 5%. The confidence level the researcher used was a
95% confidence with an anticipated effect size of .15 and a power level of .8. According
to Cohen, West, Aiken (2003), using the above described formula the minimal acceptable
sample size would be seventy-six employee responses in which eighty responses have
been received. According to Cohen (1988), an acceptable statistical power level that has
been used for social science research is a .8.
The researcher contacted a national organization to request permission to
conduct this research study. This organization was chosen for the study due to the
researcher currently working in their human resources department. The researcher sent a
letter requesting permission to conduct a research study. This letter was sent to the Vice-
President of Human Resources. After approval was given to conduct the study, the
researcher then sent out individual packets containing an informed consent form,
demographic survey, the Job Descriptive Index, and a stamped confidential return
envelope to all human resources employees within the organization.
Variables. This research entailed the use of the following variables:
- 53 -
Criterion Variable 1 Level of job satisfaction in the workplace as defined by the
Abridged Job Descriptive Index. The Abridged Job Descriptive Index measured five
categories including work, supervision, pay, promotion, and co-workers for a cumulative
score that provided the level of satisfaction. The aJDI scale range is between 0 and 15
with a suggested median point of neutrality of 7.5 points (Blazer et al.,. 1997).
Predictor Variable 2 Formal Education Level as defined by the following:
1. Having less than 59 college credit hours
2. Having 60 college credit hours or an associates degree
5. Having completed a professional degree to include a Doctorate
Predictor Variable 3 Age Respondents were asked what age they current are at the
time of taking the demographic survey and the Abridged Job Descriptive Index.
Predictor Variable 4 Degree major Respondents were asked what major their degree
was in if they obtain one.
Measures. The job satisfaction scale utilized by the researcher was the Abridged
Job Descriptive Index (Appendix E). This scale, originally introduced in 1969 by Patricia
Cain Smith, has been tested for over 40 years and administered by over one thousand
organizations (DeMeuse, 1985). The Abridged Job Descriptive Index has five areas of
concentration: Work, Pay, Promotions, Supervision and Coworkers (Ironson, Smith,
Brannick, Gibson, & Paul, 1989). Many organizations have used the Abridged Job
Descriptive Index (aJDI) to determine levels of job satisfaction as well as how an
individual or group is functioning in a new role or position (DeMeuse, 1985).
- 54 -
Since the original development of the aJDI, Mary Roznowski, a university
professor at Ohio State University, updated the test to include additional elements to test
the environment, job specific satisfaction and technologies existing within the
organization (Roznowski, 1989). According to Roznowski (1989), once the JDI was
updated and underwent further testing, alpha reliability appears to have increased. The
aJDI has been thoroughly examined and updated and demonstrates a strong validity and
reliability (Spector, 1997).
According to Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, and Parra
(1997), this assessment was initially tested for validity in 1959. These studies of the tool
lasted for five years before they could determine the strength and weakness. Balzer, et al.,
(1997) further states it was concluded that they found strong levels of convergent validity
and discriminate validity. According to Smith, Kendall, and Hulin (1969), the scoring
methodology used in the aJDI was considered to be the most understood and accurate in
measuring job satisfaction.
The reliability of this instrument was tested in 1997 with over 1600 different case
studies. The reliability of the coefficient alphas ranged from .86 to .92 (Balzer, et al.,
1997). According to Balzer, et al., (1997), the level of coefficient for work was .90, pay
was .86, promotions was.87, supervision was .91, and co-workers were also a .91. With
the strong reliability of the coefficient alphas, the JDI/aJDI continues to be one of the
most widely used job satisfaction instruments for research (Smith, Kendal, Hulin, 1969).
Between the period of 1970 1978, researchers used the JDI in more than 50% of all
management research studies looking at job satisfaction (Smith, Kendal, Hulin, 1969).
- 55 -
According to Yeagor (1981), there are many reasons for the common use of the
JDI. One of these reasons includes the ease of administration across many different
demographic populations. Yeagor (1981) further suggests that the aJDI is very effective
in the measurement of job satisfaction because of the methodology that was used in the
development of the tool and the continued revisions. With the continued research and
revision of the JDI, it continues to be one of the most popular job satisfaction assessments
used in research (Kinicki, 2002).
According to Blazer et al., (2000), the scorning of this instrument is done
independently for each scale. A value is assigned to each answer provided by the
participant. The participant has the option of choosing three possible answers for the
instrument. The three possible answers are Y for yes, N for No and ? for not sure.
Blazer et al., (2000) further states that approximately 50% of the assessment has been
worded in a positive format. If the participant were to give an answer of Y it receives a
value of 3 points. If they were to answer N, they receive a value of 0 point and if they
gave an answer of ?, they receive a value of 1 point.
Blazer et al., (2000) further stated that the remaining 50% of the assessment has
been created using reverse scoring for the dissatisfaction items. This then reverses the
above mention scoring system giving the Y yes answer a value of 0 point, a N
answer a value of 3 points and the ? answer a value of 1 point. According to Blazer et
al., (2000) the ? answers tends to be an indication of dissatisfaction and has been
generally associated with a negative attitude. The aJDI was created to measure the five
facets independently and not to be summed us a whole (Blazer et al., (2000). The five
facet scale can be summed together to provide one overall numeric value to job
- 56 -
satisfaction, however giving equal value to each scale for an overall value cannot be
validated. Blazer et al., (2000) further states that this cannot be done due to individual
value given by the participant to each facet. According to Blazer et al., (2000), while the
scale cannot be summed for an overall estimate of job satisfaction, the scale median value
is 7.5. The full scale range is 0 through 15. A score above 7.5 shows a positive level of
satisfaction and a score below 7.5 shows job dissatisfaction.
Procedures. The research required the researcher to send a letter of organizational
approval to the Vice-President of Human Resources for a national organization
(Appendix C). The national organization was chosen due to the researcher currently
working in the human resources department and having availability to a large human
resource population. Approval was received from the Vice-President of Human
Resources to conduct this study, all currently employed human resources employees at
this national organization. were considered as part of the sample (Appendix C). The
human resources population at this national organization was 200 HR employees. All
participants in the sample were sent via mail an informed consent packet. The informed
consent packet included an instruction letter, informed consent letter, a demographic
survey, the Job Descriptive Index assessment, and a pre-postage envelope to return the
forms (Appendix B,D,E,F). An Instructional sheet was also included in the packet to
guide them on how to fill out the packet information and return them to the researcher
(Appendix F). The employee that choose to participate in the study return the packet back
to the researcher, all documents were then sorted and reviewed by the researcher.
A data coding system was used to number the packets from one to two-hundred so
that the researcher could keep all the information organized. In order to maintain
- 57 -
anonymity, participants were instructed not to place their names on any of the data forms
or the return addressed envelopes. Access was provided only to the researcher for review.
The researcher used the data obtained from the demographic survey and the job
descriptive index to determine statistical values of the responses received from the
participants. The data is stored in a locked cabinet for a period of seven years after
publication; after the seven year period, all the documents were shredded. Confidentiality
is being kept by storing the filing cabinet at the researchers home and locked at all times.
All electronic files relevant to this research were copied to a CD and deleted from the
researchers email system.
Research Questions. The research focused on the following research questions:
1. To degree is there a significant relationship between formal educational level
and job satisfaction?
2. To degree is there a significant relationship between degree major and job
satisfaction?
3. To degree is there a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the work on
the present job facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the present
pay facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
- 58 -
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the
opportunities for promotion facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
supervision facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the people at
work facet of the abridged job satisfaction index?
Data Collection. The researcher provided the demographic survey and the Job
Descriptive Index assessment to all participants in a written format via mail. A cover
letter was found in the packet of information received by the participant providing
instructions on how to fill out the data forms and the process to return the data to the
researcher. The data collection process entailed the collection of demographic
information related to formal educational levels, degree major, and age. Additional data
was collected about job satisfaction based upon the scales developed for the Abridged
Job Descriptive Index assessment. The following areas were assessed in the Abridged Job
Descriptive Index: Work, Pay, Promotions, Supervision and Coworkers (Ironson, Smith,
Brannick, Gibson, & Paul, 1989). Once the participant completed the forms, the
coversheet provided them with instructions on how and where to mail back the data.
The researcher was the only individual collecting and handling the data when it is
returned. A methodology to prevent response bias in the Abridged Job Descriptive Index
has been tested by using three methods of testing (Hill, 1985). The first method that was
- 59 -
used was a list of adjectives that were administer to a group of participants to determine if
the adjectives used were satisfiers or dissatisfers. The second method used was a triadic
scoring system to determine if the adjectives were related to their job and the job they
wanted, wouldnt want, or not sure if they wanted. The third test they used was to use a
direct scoring system to determine positive or negatives directions to adjectives (Hill,
1985).
Data Analysis. The study analyzed the data utilizing a multiple regression analysis
methodology. According to Howell (2004), multiple regression analysis is a statistical
technique used to test the direction and strength of the relationship between an
independent variable and a dependent variable. Multiple regression analysis allowed the
researcher to measure the variable, job satisfaction, with the variable, formal educational
level, age and degree major to determine if a positive or negative relationship exists
between the multiple variables.
Multiple regression analysis allowed the researcher to use two data sets to
determine the potential strength between the relationships of ordinal data (Howell, 2004).
This analysis further allowed the researcher to rank the data set by levels of formal
education such as having fifty-nine hours or less of college credit courses, an associates
degree, a bachelors degree, a masters degree or a doctorate level degree. The ranking of
this data allowed the researcher to demonstrate the potential relationship and strength in a
bar graph.
A multiple regression analysis was completed on the data to determine the
predictability of the relations between multiple variables. The variables that were
- 60 -
addressed in the multiple regression analysis were formal educational levels, degree
major, age and how they are predictors of job satisfaction.
All collected data was analyzed utilizing the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS). The methodology of this correlational research utilized a correlational
analysis to determine if a significant relationship exists between formal educational
levels, age, degree major and job satisfaction. A correlational coefficient analysis assisted
in determining the strength of the relationship between the variables. A value of +1/-1
was used to determine the positive or negative confidence level of the relationship
(Howell, 2004). A regression analysis was further be conducted to determine if a
significant relationship between age, degree major, and job satisfaction exists. Upon
completion of the statistical analysis, all data was presented to demonstrate the values
found and represented by the data set. The ranges of scores determined by the data were
discussed in detail; the mean demonstrates a mid-range average represented by the data,
standard deviations were discussed and overall analyses of the findings are explained.
Expected Findings. It is expected that there was a statistically significant
relationship between formal educational levels, age, degree major, and job satisfaction for
HR employees. In conducting this research, the researcher aspired to provide a
foundation for organizations to understand that formal education in the workplace may
lead to higher HR satisfaction levels. According to research conducted by Marion (1996)
and Clark (2005), formal education is an important aspect leading to job satisfaction for
HR employees. It was further expected that a statistically significant relationship between
job satisfaction, degree major, age and formal educational levels was to be found. If it
were, it may have prompted HR departments to develop formal education partnerships
- 61 -
with colleges and universities as demonstrated by Johnson (2005). The researcher further
aspired to add to the body of knowledge of job satisfaction for not only service managers
as shown by Ghiselli, La Lopa, Bai, (2001), but for Human Resource professionals as
well. The researcher understood that this research study determined a negative
relationship between formal educational levels, age, degree major and job satisfaction.
The researcher further acknowledged that the data determined that no relationship
between the variables existed.
- 62 -
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to research the relationship between job
satisfaction, formal education level, age and degree major. The population that was
studied was a group of human resources professionals currently working for a top 16
national corporation. This chapter presents the data results from the statistical analysis
conducted utilizing the SPSS student edition. Numerous statistical analyses were
conducted to include demographic analysis, job satisfaction analysis, multiple regression
analysis and ANOVA analysis and correlational coefficient analysis. The data analyzed
in this chapter was used to answer the following questions:
1. Is there a significant relationship between formal educational levels, age, degree
major, and job satisfaction for HR employees?
2. To what statistically significant degree do formal educational levels, age, degree
major and job satisfaction predict job satisfaction for HR personnel?
Description of Sample
This research study included a total sample of 76 human resources employees that
were currently working within the organization. The employees were employed under the
human resources department in order to be considered part of the study. The following
table provides demographic information on the participants of this study. According to
Wadsworth (1997), data collection strategies and methods can be utilized for different
types of studies. He further states that studies that seek to understand areas such as job
satisfaction use surveys as a method to obtain reliable data. One of the challenges facing
researchers is how often the survey has been administered and tested for validity and
- 63 -
reliability. Wadsworth (1997) suggests that two methods are most effective when
obtaining survey data. These methods are structured and semi-structured surveys tools.
This research study utilized the structured method to obtain data in a specific measured
and quantifiable method.
Data was gathered from HR professionals at multiple sites across the United
States, asking the same questions, allowing for fixed structured answers, mailed at the
same time and in the same format. Wadsworth (1997) states that in order for data
collection methods to be valid and reliable, the research must make certain that the tool
asks the same questions to all participants, is administered consistently, is provided in the
same format and is administered to multiple sites across different regions. According to
Wadsworth (1997), one of the most important aspects to measure reliability is ensuring
that the assessment tool asks the questions in the same manner and provides responses in
an identical fashion. The research design in this study asked the demographic survey and
AJDI assessment with the same questions and allowed the same answers to be chosen
without any open-ended responses.
The demographic data for gender and the percentages they represent in the study.
The male population accounted for 32.9% of the population and the female gender
accounted for 67.1% of the overall respondents. The total overall sample population was
76 employees in the personnel department. Table 1 represents the age category for the
respondents that participated in this research study. The smallest group represented by
this study were between the ages of 60 years and older. They represented 3.9% of the
overall contribution to this study. The two largest groups represented in this study were
the age groups of between 30 39 years of age and 40 to 49 years of age. The age group
- 64 -
between 30 to 39 years of age responded with an n = 35 or 46.1% of the population. The
age group of 40 49 years of age had an n = 21 and represented 27.6% of the overall
population.
Table 1. Age Demographic Data
Category N %
Age Category
20 29 years of age 8 10.5
30 39 years of age 35 46.1
40 49 years of age 21 27.6
50 59 years of age 8 10.5
60 years and above 3 3.9
Total 76 100
The largest group representing an n = 57 or a total of 75% of the responding
population were in the white category. The second largest category with an n = 7 or
9.2% was the Hispanic population. The black population represented 7.9% of the
responses and the Asian population represented 6.6% of the population. There was a
1.3% response rate for the other category or an n = 1.
Table 2 provides the demographic information on the response rate and frequency
by department. The largest responding department was the employee relations with an n
= 27 representing 35.5% of the overall population. The second largest population that
responded to this study were the learning and development department with an n = 19
representing the overall population of 25%. The benefits and recruitment department
responded with an n = 9 or 11.8% of the population individually. The remaining
departments ranged between 2.6 to 3.9% of the population participating in this study.
- 65 -
Table 2. Department Demographic Data
Category N %
Department
Payroll 2 2.6
Compensation 2 2.6
Benefits 9 11.8
Learning and Performance 19 25
Employee Relations 27 35.5
Communications 2 2.6
Human Resources Information Systems 3 3.9
Recruitment 9 11.8
Training 3 3.9
Total 76 100
Table 3 represents the position titles for the population that participated in this
study. The ranges represent a total of an n = 0 for the lowest percentage to the highest
participating department with an n = 17 or 22.4% for the Specialist position. The second
highest response came from the Analyst role with an n = 14 or 18.4% of the response
population. The third largest population with an n = 13 or 17.1% was the Manager
position. The remaining position titles responded at 0% to 10.5% of the overall
population.
Table 3. Position Title Demographic Data
Category N %
Position Title
Coordinator 2 2.6
Specialist 17 22.4
Developer 1 1.3
Analyst 14 18.4
Senior Analyst 9 11.8
Supervisor 6 7.9
Advisor 4 5.3
Manager 13 17.1
Director 8 10.5
- 66 -
Table 3. Position Title Demographic Data (continued)
Category N %
Position Title
Vice-President 1 1.3
Unknown 1 1.3
Total 76 100
Table 4 provides a representation of the years the participants were employed by
this organization. The largest group representing 27.6% of the respondents were with the
organization between 1 to 3 years. The second largest group representing 17.1% of the
responding population were with the organization one year or less. The smallest
responding group had an n = 1 and represented 1.3 % of the population were with the
organization between 12 and 15 years. The majority of the participants having worked 9
years or less showed a representation of 86.9% of the overall population.
Table 4. Years with Organization Demographic Data
Category N %
Years with the Organization

1 year of less 13 17.1
1 to 3 years 21 27.6
3 to 5 years 10 13.2
5 to 7 years 12 15.8
7 to 9 years 10 13.2
9 to 12 years 5 6.6
12 to 15 years 1 1.3
15 years or more 4 5.3
Total 76 100
More than half of the population, 57.9%, had obtained a minimum of a bachelors
degree. The second largest population with an n = 15 or 19.7% had obtained a masters
level degree. Participants with 59 hours or less represented 13.2% and those with 60
- 67 -
hours or an associates degree represented 7.9%. Only one person in the study
represented having obtained a Doctoral level degree or 1.3% of the population. The
population showed that 65.8 % of the respondents had obtained a degree, 13.2% of the
respondents had up to 59 hours or less, and 21% had obtained an advance level degree.
The demographic information on the degree majors of the participants included in
this study. The population with the largest n = 31 or 40.8% had obtained degrees in other
areas outside of the business and human resources function. The second largest group
representing an n = 21 or 27.6% of the population had obtained a business concentration
for their degree. A total of 18.4% had obtained a degree major in human resources and
13.2% stated in the demographic survey that this section was not applicable to them.
A purposeful sample methodology was used to generate the potential participants
for this research study. According to Patton (1990), if a researcher is seeking to
understand a particular population that is small, purposeful sampling can be one of the
best methods to gather intimate and specific data on a population. The population for this
study consisted of 76 employees currently working under the department title of Human
Resources. Table 3 provides a listing of all the department employee titles that
volunteered to participate in this study.
The power analysis was conducted utilizing a multiple regression formula to
determine the minimum sample size for this study. According to Tabachnik & Fidell
(2001), the minimum sample size allowed for this study is 76 participants. The researcher
had 80 surveys returned and 4 of the participants did not wish to participate in the study.
These surveys were return blank with no data or signatures to participate. To determine
the sample size, an alpha level of .05 was used and the number of predictors, 3, was
- 68 -
calculated. A sample size of .15 was used as well as a statistical level of power of .8
(Tabachnik & Fidell, 2001).
Summary of Results. This section provides the statistical information obtained
through the administration of the Abridged Job Descriptive Index. The aJDI results were
based on the five facets measured to include work on the present job, opportunities for
promotion, pay, supervision and people on the present job (Roth, 1986). Each facet was
measured independently to provide satisfaction results in a particular area (Blazer et al.,
2000). According to Blazer et al., (2000), the five facets of the aJDI cannot be
consolidated into one measurement to provide overall global satisfaction. They can
however be measured independently of each other to reach a satisfaction score.
Table 5. Abridged Job Descriptive Index Response Results

Category Mean SD
Work on Present Job 2.752 .744658

Present Pay 2.062 1.32043
Opportunities for Promotion 2.062 1.23416
Supervision 2.560 .975396
People at Work 2.706 .770452
According to Blazer et al., (2000), the measurement of each facet will be
conducted by summing all of the scores together to provide a value of between 0 and 15.
There is not a numeric value that shows positive or negative satisfaction, however any
value above 7.5 has been given as the medium number to determine if satisfaction can be
suggested as positive. Any number below 7.5 has been suggested as being potentially
negative in satisfaction (Blazer et al., 2000).
The following discussion demonstrate the summation of the values for the aJDI.
The highest satisfaction average is 13.93 and suggests that employees do not find
- 69 -
working in their position as being uninteresting. The lowest average score for this section
was 13.13%. This suggested that of the type of work conducted within the job, employees
suggest that challenging work is the lowest ranked. According to Blazer et al., (2000) any
number above 7.5 would suggest positive satisfaction, thus this table demonstrates a high
level of satisfaction with the work done on the present job.
The facet scale averages for the Present Pay category of the abridged job
satisfaction index. It is important to point out that of the five facet categories, this section
showed the highest level of dissatisfaction. The highest level of satisfaction for this
category was insecurity. This section averaged an 11.93 out of a possible 15 points.
The second highest average was income adequate for normal expenses with an average
of 11.93. The facets of fair pay and underpaid were within approximately 1 point
with averages of 9.47 and 10.29. The most significant average of this scale shows a high
level of dissatisfaction within the well paid facet. The average for this facet was 6.93
the lowest of all five categories.
The averages for the Opportunities for Promotion group facet scale. This
category was the second lowest scoring across all five sections for job satisfaction. The
highest ranking score in this category was an average of 12.27 for unfair promotion
policy The next two highest sections reported were dead end job with an average of
11.40 and promotion on ability at an average of 10.80. The lowest 2 facets of this
category are important to discuss as they represent two of the lowest facets of the five
categories. An average of 8.93 was reached for good chance for promotion, and the
lowest average of 7.67 for this scale was reported for good opportunities for promotion.
- 70 -
The sums and averages for the facet of Supervision. The two highest ranking
scores were for the facets of supervision were tactful and bad. The sum for the
tactful facet was 13.33 and for the bad facet were 13.20. The annoying facet had an
average of 12.67 and praises good work had an average of 12.67. The lowest ranking
facet average score for this section was an average of 11.67 for up to date. While the
score shows to be the lowest in the facet, it shows to be above the 7.5 average for positive
satisfaction as suggest by Blazer et al., (2000).
The data results from the people at work facet. The highest average score for
this facet was 14.07 showing a high satisfaction level with the highest scale ranking of
15. The second highest ranking score for this facet was 14.00 for intelligence. The
sections of helpful and responsible scored within 1.14% point. The facet helpful
scored at 13.47 and the responsible section scored 13.33. The lowest section scored for
this facet was 12.47 for lazy.
The review of the abridged job descriptive index assessment showed that overall
the human resources professionals that responded to this survey had a high level of job
satisfaction. The highest rank facet was work on the present job with an overall average
of 13.67. The second highest overall facet average was 13.47 for people on the job. The
facet of supervision showed an average of 12.75 and present pay showed a 10.29 average.
The lowest ranking facet average was 10.21 for promotional opportunities. There was a
standard deviation of .473 between the males and females for the overall average of the
five job satisfaction facets. Females however showed to be slightly less satisfied than
males did for all five facets.
- 71 -
The age group of 20 to 29 years of age showed the highest level of satisfaction at
an average of 13.14. The second highest satisfied group was 50 to 59 years of age at an
average of 12.81 and the lowest satisfied age group was 30 to 39 years of age with an
average of 12.42. For the level of degree, the most satisfied were those that had obtained
a doctorate degree at an average of 14.32. An important note about this population is that
participants with a doctoral degree only represent 1.3% of the population. The least
satisfied group was those with a masters degree that showed an average of 12.10 on the
facet scale. An important note when looking at this data was that the population with 59
hours or less averaged a level of satisfaction of 12.38, slightly higher than those with a
masters degree.
Participants that had obtained a degree with a major in other showed the highest
average with an average of 12.67. This group represented 40.3% of the total population
that responded to the survey. The second highest average of job satisfaction for degree
major was the business major with an average of 12.64 representing 27.3% of the
population surveyed for this study. The not applicable degree option scored an average
of 12.17 representing 13% of the population. The lowest average was for the degree
major Human Resources with an average score of 11.8 representing 18.2% of the
population.
Research Questions/Hypothesis Testing. The intent of this research was to
determine to what significant degree do relationships exists between human resources
professionals and job satisfaction. This research utilized a quantitative approach with a
correlation regression analysis methodology to answer the following questions:
- 72 -
Research Question 1. To what degree is there a significant relationship between
formal educational level and job satisfaction for HR personnel?
Null Hypothesis 1.
Ho: There is not a statistically significant relationship between formal
educational levels and job satisfaction for HR personnel.
Research question one was addressed by conducting a Pearson Moment
Correlation analysis with a 95% confidence level. This question was interested in
determining the level of strength between formal educational levels and job satisfaction
for human resources personnel. The facets of the abridged job satisfaction index scale
were shown on the horizontal axis and formal level of education was shown on the
vertical axis. Due to low level negative correlations between formal educational levels
and a low positive level correlation between one facet, the null hypothesis was accepted.
A statistically low level of correlation was shown with an r = -.071 for the facet of
supervision. A secondary low level of correlation with a level of r = -.051 for
opportunities for promotion was also shown. In addition, an r = -.015 for present pay
and an r = -.002 for work on the present job were also shown. For the people at work
facet, a low positive correlation was shown with an r = .018. In summary, formal
education level and job satisfaction show a very low level of negative correlation. The
section of people at work shows a positive low correlation of r =.018. The strongest
correlation is an r = -.071 for supervision and the weakest correlation is an r = -.002 for
work on the present job. Table 6 presents the results obtained utilizing Pearson moment
correlation analysis. Due to the low relationship the null hypothesis was accepted.
- 73 -
Table 6. Pearson Moment Correlation of Formal Educational and Job Satisfaction Scales
Category Work on Opportunities
Present Present For Super People
Job Pay Promotion at work
Formal Education Pearson -.002 -.015 -.051 -.071 .018

Level Correlation
Sig.(2-tailed) .851 .899 .660 .543 .875
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Research Question 2.
To what degree is there a significant relationship between degree major
and job satisfaction for HR personnel?
Null Hypothesis 2.
Ho: There is not a statistically significant relationship between degree
major and job satisfaction for HR personnel.
Research question two was researched using a Pearson Moment correlation
analysis with a 95% confidence level. The results from this analysis provided the reader
with the level of strength between the variables of degree major and job satisfaction as
describe by the abridged job descriptive index. The facets of the job descriptive index
were shown on the horizontal axis and the variable of degree major was shown on the
vertical axis.
The independent variable of degree major was measured with the five facets of
the abridged job descriptive index satisfaction scale. For the section work on the
present job an r = .009 was found. According to Hinton (1996), if a Pearson correlation
if found between +.2 and -.2 then there is a high probability that is shows no correlation.
For the section on present pay, an r = .047 was found. In the section of opportunities
for promotion a -.004 was found, the supervision section had a -.069 and the people
- 74 -
at work section had a -.016. The correlation analysis showed that at the significance
level of .05, there were no signification relationships found between the variables. After
reviewing the data results, an insignificant level of correlation was found between degree
major and job satisfaction. Due to this, the null hypothesis was accepted.
Table 7. Pearson Moment Correlation of Degree Major and Job Satisfaction Scales
Degree Major Pearson .009 .047 -.004 -.069 -.016

Correlation
Sig.(2-tailed) .936 .684 .974 .555 .889
To what degree is there a significant relationship between age and job
satisfaction for HR personnel?
Null Hypothesis 3.
Ho: There is not a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction
for HR personnel.
In question three, a Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to determine the
significance of the relationship between age and job satisfaction as determined by the
abridged job descriptive index. A statistical significance level of 95% confidence was
used to determine the relationship. According to Hinton (1996), in order for a correlation
to have significance, it must be at the minimum of a -.2 or a +.2 correlation. The highest
level of correlation was shown in the work on the present job category.
The data in this section was an r = .170 which was slightly below the minimum of
showing low level of correlation between the two variables (Hinton, 1996). The second
- 75 -
highest section score was an r = -.104 for the opportunities for promotion section. The
remaining scales were people at work with an r = 0.060, supervision with an r = -
.026 and finally present pay with an r = -.015. Using a 95% confidence level, this data
did not demonstrate any significant level of correlation between the dependant variables
of age, degree major or degree level and the five facets of job satisfaction. Due to the data
results showing low levels of correlation below the -.2 or +.2 levels, the null hypothesis
has been accepted.
Table 8.Pearson Moment Correlation of Age and Job Satisfaction Scales

Age Pearson .170 -.015 -.104 -.026 .060

Correlation
Sig.(2-tailed) .142 .898 .373 .875 .604
To what statistically significant degree do age, degree major and formal
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the work
on the present job facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Null Hypothesis 4.
Formal educational levels, age and degree major do not predict to any
significant degree job satisfaction for HR personnel in the work on the
present job facet of the abridged job descriptive index.
A multiple regression analysis was conducting utilizing the variables of age,
degree level and degree major. This regression analysis was run to determine the
predictability for the work on the present job facet scale as the dependent variable and
- 76 -
age, degree major and degree level as the independent variables. Model one in table 9
shows that age group only accounts for 2.9% of the variance as it is related to the facet
work on the present job. When degree major is added to the regression model the R
square accounts for an additional 2.9% of the variance. Level of degree is then added to
the model and the R square shows a constant relationship at r = 2.9%.
Table 9. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and Work on Present Job
Model R Square Beta SIG
1 .029 .170 .967

2 .029 -.006 .979
3 .029 -.004 .150
Predictors: (Constant), Age Group
Predictors: (Constant), Age Group, Degree Major
Predictors: (Constant), Age Group, Degree Major, Level of Degree
Dependent Variable: Work on Present Job
This results from the statistical significance ANOVA test provided values for the
independent variables. For the variable of age, a significance value of p .142 was
provided. The variables of age group and degree level provided a significance level of p
.342. When the variable of degree major was added a final statistical result was
provided of a p .545. This test was run with a significance level of p .05 level thus all
of the variables run through the ANOVA test show no statistical significance. In table 9,
the results from a multiple regression coefficients analysis was presented. A
determination of the significance of the predictor variables were used for this multivariate
model at the p .05 value. The variable of age group showed a significance p-value of
.142, degree major showed a p-value of .974, and level of degree showed a p-value of
.979.
The data in table 9 did not support the independent variables as being significant
predictors of work on the present job satisfaction. It is important to point out the highest
- 77 -
standardized coefficient Beta shows to be a .170 for age which could conclude that of all
the independent variable, age was the most important however not statistically
significant. Due to the data not showing a statistically significant relation between formal
education and work on the present job, the null hypothesis was accepted.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the present
pay facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Null Hypothesis 5.
significant degree job satisfaction for HR personnel in the present pay
facet of the abridged job descriptive index.
The independent variables of age, degree major and formal educational level were
used in a multiple regression analysis to determine their predictability with the present
pay facet from the abridged job descriptive index. The results from model one show that
age has a.0% variance as it relates to the present pay facet of job satisfaction. In model
two, degree major is added to age and an increase to show that only 3% of the variance is
related the present pay facet. When degree level is added in the final model, the level of
variance increased to an overall .3% for the present pay facet. All models shows a
positive relationship with the dependent variable, however the level of significance is
very low.
- 78 -
Table 10. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and Present Pay
1 .029 .018 .883

2 .029 .057 .689
3 .029 .015 .917
Dependent Variable: Present Pay
An ANOVA test was conducted to determine the statistical significance in
relationship to the facet of present pay. A p-value of .898 was found for age, a p-value
for age and degree major was at the p-value .909 significance level. For the final model
of age, degree major and level of degree a p-value of .978 was found. Due to the
models not showing significance at a level of p-value .05, none of the independent
variables were found to be true predictors of satisfaction for the present pay facet. In
table 10, the data was presented for multiple regression coefficient analysis run between
the independent variables and the present pay job satisfaction facet.
In the coefficients data analysis, it demonstrated that a significance level of p-
value .898 was given to age. Model number two which combined age and degree major
had a significance level of p-value .678 for degree major and finally the last model
which included level of degree showed a significance level of p-value .917 for level of
degree. According to the SPSS (2003), in order for a variable to be a significant
predictor in a multivariate model, they must have a significant p-value .05. As
demonstrated by the data present for this facet, the significance level are not considered
significant.
The values presented in the standardized beta column demonstrated the
importance of each of the variables in the models; however the independent variables
- 79 -
have shown not to have a significance value at a p-value .05. It is important that the
highest value shown through this test was a p-value .057 for degree major as showing
to be the most important among the variables tested for level of significance. Due to the
data demonstrated below showing a statistically significant low relationship with the
dependant variable of present pay, the null hypothesis was accepted.
opportunities for promotion facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Null Hypothesis 6.
significant degree job satisfaction for HR personnel in the opportunities
for promotion facet of the abridged job descriptive index.
A multiple regression analysis was used to determine the predictive significance
of the independent variables age, degree major and formal educational level. The
dependent variable used for this analysis was opportunities for promotion as described
by the abridged job descriptive index. The data analysis for this model show that age has
a p-value of .011 in its relationship to opportunities for promotion. When the other
independent variables were added to the model, it showed a p-value of .011 for degree
major and .016 for level of degree. All the models presented here show a low
relationship with the opportunities for promotion satisfaction facet and are considered
statistically insignificant.
- 80 -
Table 11. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and Opportunities for
Promotion
1 .029 -.112 .347

2 .029 -.046 .744
3 .029 -.091 .521
Dependent Variable: Opportunities for Promotion
An ANOVA test was also completed on these independent and dependent
variables to determine the level of significance within the model. The results
demonstrated that age group showed a p-value of .373. When degree major was added
to the model, a p-value of .674 was determined and in the third model level of degree
was added and the model showed a p-value of .753. The model gives us data that
supports none of the variables presented in this regression as being significant to
predicting satisfaction for the opportunities for promotion facet of the abridged job
satisfaction index.
According to SPSS (2003), the level of significance should be a p-value of .05 in
order to be considered statistically significant and a valid predictor of job satisfaction.
The following is the data obtained through the coefficient analysis for age, degree major
and level of degree. The age category showed a p-value of .373 in this multivariate
model. The variable of degree major showed a p-value of .971 and the third model
showed a p-value of .521 for level of degree. The third model showed the closest data
value to the significance of p-value of .05. The information demonstrated through these
models show that the variables of age, degree level and degree major are not significant
- 81 -
predictors of job satisfaction in the opportunities for promotion facet as described by
the abridged job satisfaction index.
The correlational coefficients column shows that all the variables have a negative
effect on the prediction of satisfaction for the opportunities for promotion facet. Model
three shows that a for age, a p-value of -.548 exists, for degree major a p-value of -
.241 and for level of degree a p-value of -.486 was shown. The values shown in the
output for the Beta column show that the values have a low significance level and are not
statistically significant to determine satisfaction for the opportunities for promotion
facet. According to SPSS (2003), the beta value must have a high + 1 or - 1 in order for it
to be a high predictor of the dependent variable. Due to the lack of strength with the
dependent variable, the null hypothesis was accepted.
supervision facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Null Hypothesis 7.
significant degree job satisfaction for HR personnel in the supervision
facet of the abridged job descriptive index.
The multiple regression function was used to determine the predictive value of
age, degree major and degree level with the facet of supervision as described by the
abridged job satisfaction index. According to SPSS (2003), the data value shown in the
model summary described as the R square provided the variation of supervision
- 82 -
satisfaction in table 11. All of the predictors for this model are shown to be negative and
with low significance to the variable of supervision satisfaction. The age variable
shows a p-value of .001 for the first model. The second model shows age and degree
major with a p-value of .005. The third model shows age, degree major and degree
level with a p-value of .023. The strongest model is the second which would suggest
that 15.3% would account for the satisfaction in the supervision facet.
Table 12. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and Supervision
1 .029 -.035 .770

2 .029 -.157 .266
3 .029 -.163 .251
Dependent Variable: Supervision
An ANOVA test was done to determine the significance of the independent
variables as they are associated with the facet of supervision as described by the
abridged job satisfaction index survey. The result of age shows a p-value of .823 as a
level of significance. The second model includes degree major and shows a p-value of
.828 and the final model shows a p-value of .635. The data from these results
demonstrate that the variables describe above do not show a statistically significant
predictive p-value of .05 as related to the promotion facet.
The correlational coefficient test shows the predictive values in the significance
column in table 12. The value shown for age is a p-value of .823, the p-value of degree
major is .568 and the p-value of level of degree is .251. According to SPSS (2003), in
order for a variable to be a significant predictor in one of the following models, they must
- 83 -
have a p-value of .05 or lower. The data clearly demonstrates that the values are
significantly higher than a p-value of .05. When reviewing the B column, it clearly
demonstrates that all the values are negative and the Beta column also demonstrate that
while the relationship is negative, there is still a statistically low significance level which
according to SPSS (2003), the higher the predictive value is to a +1 or a -1, the more
important the variable is in predicting job satisfaction for the opportunities for
supervision facet. With the data demonstrating a significant low predictive value as it is
associated with supervision as described by the abridged job satisfaction index, the null
hypothesis was accepted.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the people
at work facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Null Hypothesis 8.
significant degree job satisfaction for HR personnel in the people at
work facet of the abridged job descriptive index.
A multiple regression analysis was used to determine the predictive value of age,
degree major and formal degree level as it predicts job satisfaction for the people at
work facet of the abridged job descriptive index. The values associated with the multiple
regression models for the variable of age are a p-value of .004. The value associated
with model two, with the additional variable of degree major is a p-value of .004. The
third model shows a p-value of .004. The data demonstrates that less than .4% of the
- 84 -
variance can be explained by the three variables included in this model. The ANOVA test
shows significance levels to be a p-value of .604 for the age variable, a p-value of
.861 for the degree major variable and a p-value of .956 for the level of degree. The
data provided does not demonstrate that these variables are strong predictors of job
satisfaction as it relates to the people at work facet of the abridged job descriptive
index.
Table 13. Multiple Regression Model for Age, Major, Level and People at Work
1 .029 .064 .592

2 .029 -.009 .948
3 .029 .021 .883
Dependent Variable: People at Work
The correlational coefficient test shows the predictive value for the variables as it
relates to people at work facet. The significance levels shown for age are at a p-value
of .604. The significance values for degree major show a p-value of .858 and the
variable of degree level show a p-value of .883. These values are not below the p-value
of .05 making them statistically insignificant. Table 13 provides the data demonstrating
the low significance of predictive power associated with the variables of age, degree
major and degree level as associated with the abridged job descriptive index. None of the
values show positive or negative strength of a +1 or 1 for the beta column. The
strongest value shown under the standardized coefficient is a p-value of .064 for age
group and the lowest was a p-value of -.021 for degree major. Due to the data not
supporting a strong predictive relationship, the null hypothesis was accepted.
- 85 -
Additional Tests. An additional Pearson correlation test was done to determine if
any of the other demographic variables had a relationship to the facets of the abridged job
satisfaction index. All variables included in the demographic survey were included in the
correlation analysis to determine if other relationships were significant. The additional
variables included were department, title, gender, and ethnicity. The results of this test
determine that age group and gender had a relationship at the P-value .05. An
additional correlation of P-value .05 was found between gender and title. A P-value
.01 correlation was also found between the degree major and degree level. In additional a
correlational relationship was also found at the P-value .01 for work on the present
job and opportunities for promotions. The facets of supervision and work on the
present job was found to have a significant at the P-value .05 levels.
Details of Analysis and Results. In this section, the researcher presents in details
the findings of the research questions and determinations made for each research
question. The data has demonstrated that all of the null hypotheses have been accepted
due to the data not supporting the original hypothesis. All research questions were tested
to determine if linear relationships existed and if there were equal standard distributions
among the different variables tested. Research question 1 accepted the null hypothesis
due to the Pearson correlation analysis not demonstrating any significant relationship
between the variable of formal educational level and job satisfaction. The correlation
analysis showed that the facet of the satisfaction index that was closest correlated was
supervision at the P-value .543. The remaining facets showed a range of P-values
between .543 to a high of .899. This variable was tested at both the P-value .05 and .01
level.
- 86 -
Research question 2 utilized a Pearson correlation analyses to determine if a
statistically significant relationship existed between degree majors and the abridged job
descriptive index five facets. The correlation analysis was conducted utilizing two-tail
significance at both the P-value .05 and .01 level. The result of the test determined that
no correlation existed at either significance level. The most significant level for this facet
Of supervision was a P-value .555. The remaining facets had P-values that ranged
from .555 to .936. Due to the lack of correlation the null hypothesis was accepted.
Research question 3 also utilized a Pearson correlation analysis to determine if a
relationship exists between age and the five facets of the abridged job satisfaction index.
A statistical level of 95% is necessary to be considered significant for the Pearson
correlation analysis. This test was administered at both the P-value .05 and .01 to test
for significance. The result of the data determined that the closest significance level to
either the P-value .05 or .01 was for the facet opportunities for promotion at a P-
value of .373. The remaining significance values were between P-value .373 and .898
levels of significance. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the null
hypothesis was accepted.
Research question 4 was conducted using a multiple regression analysis between
age degree major and formal degree level and work on the present job facet as
presented in the abridged job satisfaction index. Results from the ANOVA test
determined that the independent variables accounted for a low significance in explaining
the influence over job satisfaction for the facet of work on the present job. Age
accounted for 2.9% of the variance, degree major accounted for 2.9% of the variance and
finally adding the variable of level of degree remaining at a value of 2.9%. These
- 87 -
variables can explain 2.9% of the variance for job satisfaction for this facet. The
coefficient table demonstrated that little significance existed in predictive value as
explained by the independent variables. While the statistical data demonstrates a low
level relationship show, it does not meet the minimum criteria to be statistically
significant at the P-value of .05. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the
null hypothesis was accepted.
Question 5 utilized a multiple regression analysis to determine the predictability
of the age, degree major and degree major with the facet of present pay. The results
from the regression analysis showed that the independent variables had a low significance
level in predicting job satisfaction for the present pay facet. The regression analysis
conducted on this job satisfaction facet showed that all of the variables had low
significance levels. In the ANOVA test the significance level for age was P-value .898,
degree major was a P-value .909 and degree level was a P-value of .978. The
correlation analysis demonstrated that none of the variables of age, degree major and
degree level had a statistically significant level to show predictive value to the present
pay facet for job satisfaction. Degree major had the most significant value at a P-value
of .689. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the null hypothesis was
accepted.
Question 6 looked at the predictive value of the opportunities for promotion
facet had in relation to age, degree major and degree level for job satisfaction. The r-
squared values determined for this test showed that a low predictive relationship existed
between opportunities for promotion and age, degree major and degree major. Model
- 88 -
three best described the relationship by determining that the independent variable
accounted for only 1.6% of the variance when predicting satisfaction.
The ANOVA test that was conducted also demonstrated that for a variable to be
considered significant, it must be at a P-value .05. The most significant variable found
was for the variable age group at a P-value of .373. This however is not considered
statistically significant. The correlation table showed that all of the independent variables
had low levels of significance and did not have statistically significant values at a P-value
of .05. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the null hypothesis was
accepted.
Question 7 used a multiple regression analysis to determine the predictive values
of the job satisfaction facet supervision against the independent variables of age,
degree major and degree level. The regression analysis found that the above mentioned
variables were not significant predictors of satisfaction for supervision as it relates to
job satisfaction. Model three predicted at best that the variables had a predictive value of
2.3% in determine the variance for the dependent variable. The ANOVA test showed that
the different variable had little significance in predictive value towards satisfaction for
supervision as described by the abridged job satisfaction index. The correlation
analysis table supported accepting the null hypothesis by demonstrating that the level of
significance was low. The significance values showing the closest relationship is a P-
value of .251 for degree level. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the
Question 8 utilized a multiple regression analysis to determine the predictive
value of age, degree major and degree level as it relates to the job satisfaction facet
- 89 -
people at work. The r-squared value showed that at best the model could predict only
2.3% of the variation for people at work. The ANOVA results showed that a low
significance of predictive value existed for any of the independent variables. The closest
significant variable was age at a P-value .604. According to SPSS (2003), in order for a
variable to be significant, it must be at a P-value .05. The correlation analysis
demonstrated that the independent variables were not strong predictors of the job
satisfaction for the people at work facet. The closest P-value to .05 was for the
variable of age at a P-value .592. Due to the lack of significance in predictive value, the
Conclusion. This research was interested in understanding the degree to which job
satisfaction was related to age, degree major and degree level. It was also interested in
understanding to what extent the predictability of each of the independent variables had
on the five facets of job satisfaction as described by the abridged job satisfaction index.
All eight of the research questions demonstrated had a very low level of significance and
no predictive value existed between the dependent and independent variables. Due to the
low values demonstrated by the data analysis, the null hypothesis was accepted for
questions one through eight. In the study conducted on job satisfaction and the predictive
relationship it had with age, degree major and degree level by Goetze, (2000). He found
no relationship existed between the independent and the dependent variables for human
resources employees thus supporting the results of this study.
An additional study conducted by Ganzach (1998) on the center for human
resources also demonstrated that no such correlations could be found with age and job
satisfaction for human resources employees supporting the results of this study. In the
- 90 -
review of the data for formal education and job satisfaction, a study done by DeSantis
and Durst (1996) showed that no relationship existed between those two variables for
private versus public sector workers. The data established by this research further
supports that formal education levels and job satisfaction have no statistically significant
relationship. A study on the relationship between degree major and job satisfaction was
conducted by Fatemi, (2001). This study supports affirms the data that no significant
relationship or predictive relationship exist between job satisfaction and degree major.
While the participants in this study show high levels of job satisfaction, the correlation
and multiple regression analysis could not demonstrate that age, degree major and degree
level were significant predictors of overall job satisfaction.
- 91 -
CHAPTER 5 RESULTS, SUMMARY, AND CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
Chapter 5 will present a review of the study that was completed on the variables
of formal education level, age, degree major and job satisfaction. A brief overview of the
problem researched, methods used in conducting this research, literature reviewed and
the findings will be discussed. In addition, the significance of this study, the conclusion
and future recommendations will also be discussed.
Summary of Results
The purpose of this study was to determine to what level of significance the
relationship between formal degree level, age, degree major and job satisfaction existed
for human resources employees. This study was interested in understanding the predictive
value that formal educational levels, age and degree major had on job satisfaction. The
study measured job satisfaction through correlations and predictive values utilizing the
abridged job descriptive index as a point of reference. While many studies apply an
overall value for job satisfaction, the abridged job descriptive index measured job
satisfaction utilizing five separate facets (Blazer et al., 2000). According to DeMeuse
(1985), the abridged job descriptive index uses five facets so that a true measurement of
job satisfaction can be explored through potential indicators of specific satisfaction areas.
This study surveyed 76 employees currently working under the department title
human resources. Each employee was required to be currently working on a full-time
basis. An original list was provided by the director of human resources and a survey
packet was sent out to each potential participant. The survey packet included a copy of
the demographic survey, abridged job descriptive index, an introductory letter, and a
- 92 -
consent form. 80 of the survey packets were returned and 76 of those packets were
returned completed. The remaining 4 packets were returned to the researcher blank.
The researcher reviewed many studies on job satisfaction in the workplace. Many
studies were found related to the variables chosen for this study; however none were
significant or relevant to the human resources personnel. This study adds to the existing
literature and is significant because of the limited amount of research that has been
conducted on the human resources personnel population. This study will not only add to
the existing knowledge for job satisfaction, but it will contribute to helping organizations
understand and discuss how the variables are related to each other and the implications it
could have on turnover rates for HR professionals.
The researcher was able to find a few studies on the human resources population
relevant to job satisfaction, however none specific to the predictive variables that were
measured in this study. In a study conducted by Goetze (2000), he was interested in
understanding the satisfaction levels between traditional and non-traditional employees.
His research found that formal educational level, age, degree major did not have a
relationship with job satisfaction for either traditional or non-traditional employees.
Other studies on job satisfaction for human resources personnel determine little or
no significance with job satisfaction (Goetze, 2000 and DeMeuse 1985). Many of the
studies on job satisfaction for human resources personnel utilized some of the variables
such as the ones used in this study; however they were not the primary area of interest for
the research. In comparison to studies conducted on job satisfaction for other industries
and business areas, a large gap exists for human resources personnel that need to be
filled.
- 93 -
This study also reviewed the demographic information and the areas of
satisfaction and dissatisfaction for the participants in this study. Demographic
information was included to shows potential areas of statistical significance. Satisfaction
scores obtained using the abridged job descriptive index were also reviewed. The purpose
of this was to provide information to both the academic community and the practitioner,
thus supporting the scholar-practitioner model. The problem researched in this study
focused on the significant correlative and predictive level formal education, age and
degree major had with job satisfaction.
The research conducted for this study used a quantitative research design. A
correlation analysis was conducted to determine the level of significance between the
variables of formal educational level, age, degree major and job satisfaction. In addition,
a multiple regression analysis was also administered to understand the potential
predictive relationship between the above describe variables. The ANOVA and
correlation coefficients data was also discussed and reviewed in chapter 4 to determine
predictive values of the independent and dependent variables.
The findings of this study showed that human resources personnel did not show
any statistically significant predictive relationship between formal education level, age,
degree major and the five facets of job satisfaction as described by the abridged job
satisfaction index. There were also no significant correlations found between any of the
independent and dependent variables. While the data did demonstrate some positive and
negative relationships, the significance levels were so low they would not be considered
significant.
- 94 -
Discussion of Results. The study found that out of the eight questions that were
asked, the null hypothesis was accepted for all of them. No statistically significant
relationships were found between any of the independent variables and the dependent
variable. Research studies have been conducted on job satisfaction since the late 1960s
(Weaver, 1980). Studies have shown both positive and negative relationships between the
above describe variables and job satisfaction (Chelte et al., 1982 & Goetze, 2000). The
first three questions were interested in the correlations between the variables of formal
educational level, age and degree major to job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was broken
into the five facets so that the areas of work on the present job, present pay,
opportunities for promotion, supervision and people at work could be measured
independently (Blazer et al., 2000).
To what degree is there a significant relationship between formal educational
levels and job satisfaction for HR personnel?
Question 1 was interested in understanding the potential correlations between
formal educational levels and job satisfaction. This question was researched by using a
correlation analysis to determine the existing relationships. Each of the five job
satisfaction facets were measured against formal education levels to determine existing
correlations. The data obtained from running the analysis showed that no statistically
significant relationships existed between these two variables. The facet of supervision
was the closest to a significant P-value of .05. This value showed a P-value of .543,
thus having no statistical significance. The remaining variables that were correlated
against the facet of supervision had less significant P-values.
- 95 -
The five facets of job satisfaction showed very low statistically insignificant
levels of both positive and negative correlations at less than a p-value of .1. The data
shows a negative relationship between formal educational levels, work on the present
job, present pay, supervision and opportunities for promotion. A very small
negative relationship was shown between opportunities for promotion and formal
educational levels. This would then indicate that even at a very low power level, when
HR personnel have higher levels of education, they have less satisfaction with their
opportunities for promotions.
The facet of supervision had the highest correlation value, however it was still
considered insignificant in this study. While this value was only .03 away for obtaining a
significant value of .01, it still shows a negative relationship between formal education
levels and supervision. This indicates that as HR personnel increase their educational
levels their level of supervision satisfaction tends to decrease at a low significance level.
The remaining facet, people at work, showed that while insignificant to this studys
power level, the more formal education an HR employee has, the higher level of
satisfaction they have with people at work.
The outcome of the data analysis did not support the hypothesis by stating that a
relationship did exist between formal educational levels and job satisfaction. None of the
five facets as described by the abridged job descriptive index showed any level of
statistical significance with the independent variable at the 95% power level. This would
then suggest that while job satisfaction shows to be high according the abridged job
descriptive index, no significant correlation existed. While much research does exist that
demonstrates positive correlations between job satisfaction and formal education level,
- 96 -
this study found that no such relationship existed. The study conducted by DeSantis and
Durst (1996) showed that no relationship between formal education level and job
satisfaction existed which would be supportive of the findings derived from this question.
To what degree is there a significant relationship between degree major and job
satisfaction for HR personnel?
Question 2 was interested in the correlation between the five facets of job
satisfaction and degree major. A correlation analysis was used to determine if a
significant relationship existed between the independent and dependent variables. A
correlation analysis is considered statistically significant when the p-value is .05. The
outcome of this analysis showed that degree major has no statistically significant value
when compared to the five facets of the abridged job satisfaction index. The facet that
had the closest value to p-value .05 was supervision at a p-value of .555, thus having
no statistical value. The remaining values for the five facets of job satisfaction had less
significant value, thus showing no significant correlation between the dependent and
independent variables.
The job satisfaction facets showed two positive correlations and three negative
correlations with degree majors. It is important to point out that while the relationships
show to be both positive and negative, they were considered statistically insignificant at
the 95% power level required for this study. Work on the present job and present pay
showed to have a positive relationship with would indicate that the degree major did have
a positive effect on the type of work being done by the HR personnel and the pay level
for this employee. This information would suggest that the degree major chosen by the
- 97 -
HR professional did have a small amount of influence on the level of satisfaction with
their work and pay. The facets of opportunities for promotion, supervision and
people at work showed a negative relationship with degree major. The results from this
analysis would suggest that degree major negatively influenced the level of satisfaction
particularly with supervision for this facet. This would suggest that the degree majors of
business, human resources and other showed a negative relationship for HR satisfaction
in this working environment.
Other research has demonstrated that both positive and negative relationships do
exist between an individuals degree major and job satisfaction. In a study conducted by
Fatima (2001), degree major was one of the variables tested to determine if an existing
relationship existed with job satisfaction. The outcome of their study showed that even
though one could have high levels of job satisfaction, no significant relationship between
degree majors could be determined as a contributor to the overall satisfaction. The results
from Fatemis (2001) study support and are consistent with the findings of this research
study.
To what degree is there a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction
for HR personnel?
Question 3 was researched using a correlation analysis to determine the possible
relationship between age and the five facets of job satisfaction. When the analysis was
completed, three of the five facets of job satisfaction as described by the abridged job
satisfaction index showed to be insignificant. The correlation analysis did not
demonstrate that any of the values presented by the findings had a statistical p-value of
- 98 -
.05. Two low level correlation values were however found for work on the present job
and opportunities for promotion. The data suggests that as employees age, they show a
higher level of satisfaction with the type of work they do in the human resources field.
The data also suggests that while employees may be more satisfied with their work as
they age, they become much less satisfied with the opportunities for promotion. None of
the significance values demonstrated by the data showed a strong statistical significance
level at the 95% power level required for this study. Due to this, the null hypothesis was
accepted.
In other research found between the variables of age and job satisfaction,
negative, positive and no relationship results could be found. The results determined by
this study showed that no statistically significant correlations could be supported by the
data. The findings of this research are consistent with the findings of Ganzach (1998). In
the study conducted by Ganzach (1998), it was found that age had no correlation with job
satisfaction. The findings from this research question are supportive and consistent with
the findings as presented by Ganzachs (1998) study on age and job satisfaction.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the work on the present
job facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Question 4 was interested in determining to what degree of significance is there a
predictive relationship between age, degree major and formal education level with the job
satisfaction facet of work on the present job. The results were determined by
conducting a multiple regression analysis along with an ANOVA and correlational
- 99 -
coefficient analysis. The results from this analysis showed that age could account for
2.9% of the total variance in explaining the age variable. When the remaining two
independent variables, degree major and level of degree, were added there was no
increase in the variance. The variance remained constant at 2.9% when all three models
were applied.
The ANOVA test conducted to determine significance showed that the data did
not demonstrate any significance between the facet of work on the present job and the
independent variables of degree major and degree level. None of the independent
variables showed a significance level below a p-value of .05. The correlation coefficient
analysis determined that none of the independent variables showed any predictive value
when the facet of work on the present job was compared to degree major and formal
educational level. The data suggests that degree major and formal educational level did
not predict to any significant level the satisfaction level for a human resources employee.
It was further discovered that the amount of education obtained or the degree major they
chose also have no significance.
The data showed that while degree major and level could not predict any
relationship, as age increased it was possible that satisfaction for their pay also increased.
While this could be demonstrated through the data at a level less than a 95% confidence
level, none of the data showed to be statistically significant for this study and thus the
null hypothesis was accepted. Additional information important to mention here was that
of the degree majors chosen for this study, those that had chosen human resources as their
major were more satisfied with their current work assignments. Employee that had 60
hours of course work or associates showed to be the most satisfied of all the degree
- 100 -
majors with their current work assignments. An interesting aspect of the data also showed
that the most satisfied age groups were between the ages of 50 59 years of age.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the present pay facet of
the abridged job descriptive index?
Question 5 demonstrated that the independent variables of age, degree major and
formal educational level had no significance when compared to the present pay facet of
job satisfaction as described by the abridged job descriptive index assessment. A multiple
regression analysis was conducted on the above mentioned dependent and independent
variables and showed that age was significant of 0% of the variance between present
pay and the independent variables. When the additional variable of degree major was
added, it showed an increase to a 3% variance. When the remaining variable of formal
degree level was added, it remained constant at 3% for a total of 3% of the total variance.
The ANOVA analysis showed that the independent variables had no significance
at a p-value of .05 or less. The analysis showed that age, degree major and formal
educational level could not predict at a 95% confidence level the satisfaction obtained
from the pay they were receiving in their current job. Formal educational level and
degree major had no significance when it came to predictive values. Age did show a close
level of significance to demonstrate a small level of predictive value; however it did not
meet the requirements of 95% confidence level for this study.
Even though the data did not find any statistical significance, it is important to
point out that of all the degree majors chosen for this study, neither the human resources
- 101 -
nor the business major show to have the highest satisfaction for their pay level. The
category of other showed to be the most satisfied with their pay. An interesting
outcome of the data also showed that employees who had obtained 60 hours of college or
less showed to be more satisfied with their pay than any other formal degree level. There
is one outlier worthy of mention here; the one person who responded with a doctorate
degree showed the highest level of satisfaction with pay, however they only represented
an N = 1 for the total surveyed population. The age group that showed the highest level
of satisfaction with their pay was the age group between 30 -39 years of age.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the opportunities for
promotion facet of the abridged job descriptive index?
Question 6 final data was determined utilizing a multiple regression analysis. An
ANOVA and correlation coefficient analysis was also conducted to determine the
significance and predictive values of the age, degree major and formal educational level
with the opportunities for promotion facet of job satisfaction. In model one, age
demonstrated to be significant of 1.1% of the variance in predicting satisfaction. When
degree major was added, no change in the level of variance was shown. When the
independent variable of formal education level was added, the variance remained
constant at 1.1%. The total variance showed by all three models was 1.6%.
The ANOVA analysis demonstrated that age group, degree major and formal
educational level were statistically insignificance at a p-value of .05. The correlational
coefficient analysis showed that the independent variables had a negative statistically
- 102 -
insignificance relationship with the dependent variable of opportunities for promotion
job satisfaction facet. This analysis showed that the beta values had low significance far
below the +1 or -1 significance value. While the analysis did not demonstrate any
predictive relationships with the independent variables, it is important to share the results
of the outcome of the survey analysis.
The participants in this study that had majored in business found that they were
the most satisfied with the opportunities for promotion within the organization. The
participants that majored outside of human resources and business were the second most
satisfied. The human resources major showed to be the third most satisfied and the
category of not applicable showed the least satisfaction with the promotional
opportunities. The participant group that obtained 60 hours or an associates degree
demonstrated to have the highest level of satisfaction with the opportunities for
promotion in the organization. Participants that had a bachelors degree were the second
most satisfied, however a deviation of 1.6% points separated their degree of satisfaction.
The age group between 50 59 years of age showed to have the highest level of
satisfaction and the second most satisfied group was the age group between 30 39 years
of age.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the supervision facet of
the abridged job descriptive index?
Question 7 utilized multiple regression analysis to understand what the
predictive values of supervision were as described by the abridged job satisfaction
- 103 -
index. The values of age showed a p-value of .001, degree major had a p-value of
.072 and formal educational level had a p-value of .005. The predictive variance
demonstrated by this data showed that age explained 2.3% of the variance. When degree
major was added, a .4% increase took place. When the final independent variable, formal
educational level, was added it increase 1.9% thus showing that all three variables
explained a total 2.3% of the variance when explaining supervision as it pertains to the
abridged job satisfaction index.
The ANOVA analysis that was conducted showed that all the independent
variables did not have any significant predictive value. None of the data in this analysis
showed to be predictive in nature and was therefore not statistically significant. The
values demonstrated by the output for the correlation analysis showed that the
independent variables of age, degree major and formal educational level had no
significant predictive power when compared to supervision as described by the
abridged job satisfaction index.
The participants who majored in the business field showed to rank the highest in
their satisfaction level for the supervision facet. The remaining majors of human
resources, other, and not applicable were all within a .05% point from each other. The
deviation between employees who majored in business and the other majors was
separated by 1% point. The one participant who had obtained a doctorate degree showed
100 % satisfaction for the supervision facet in this assessment. Participants who had 59
hours or less of college courses and the bachelors degree showed to be the second and
third most satisfied groups. It is important to point out that the separation between these
two groups was by .03% of a point. The age group between 20 -29 years showed to have
- 104 -
the highest level of satisfaction for the supervision facet. The second most satisfied group
was between 50 59 years of age by less than 1% point.
educational levels predict job satisfaction for HR personnel in the people at work facet
of the abridged job descriptive index?
Question 8 used multiple regression analysis to determine the predictive values
between age, degree major, formal educational level and the job satisfaction facet people
at work as described by the abridged job satisfaction index. The data showed age had a
p-value of .1, degree major had a p-value of .5, and formal degree level had a p-value
of 2.3. The total variance that could be explained by theses models were 2.3 % and was
not considered statistically significant.
The ANOVA analysis was also conducted for all three of the independent
variables along with the facet people at work as described by the abridged job
satisfaction index. The results from this analysis showed that there was no statistical
significance showing predictive values for the independent variables. According to SPSS
(2003), in order for a value to be considered statistically significant, it must be at the p-
value of . 05. The correlation coefficient analysis that was conducted showed that there
was low significance values associated with these variables. None of these values in the
previous described tests showed to be significant and could be considered predictors of
job satisfaction.
The analysis showed that age, degree major and formal degree level could not
demonstrate any value in predicting the level of satisfaction for the people that work with
- 105 -
a HR employee. As age increased the satisfaction level remained constant. Both Degree
level and degree major experienced the same results. Due to this the null hypothesis was
accepted and it was demonstrated that the independent variables were not good predictors
of satisfaction for the people at work facet of the abridged job satisfaction index. The
participants in this study that majored in business showed the highest satisfaction with
their fellow co-workers. An important aspect of this analysis shows that while business
majors were the most satisfied, on an overall average, all the majors showed high levels
of satisfaction. The deviation between each of the major was less than a 1 % point.
The individual that obtained a doctorate showed to have the highest satisfaction,
however this satisfaction score was only representative of 1% of the studies population.
The group that had 59 hours or less for formal education showed the second highest
satisfaction with their co-workers. A separation between the second and third most
satisfied group for this section was only by .01% of a point. This group was the third
most satisfied was the masters level group. The age group with the highest rate of
satisfaction was the 50 59 years of age group. The remaining groups showed a
deviation of only 1% point or less that the most satisfied group. An important point to
discuss here is that the age group that was 60 years or older had the lowest score of more
than 2% points.
Additional tests were run to determine if any of the other demographic
information obtained could be contributors to the five facets of job satisfaction. A
correlation analysis was conducted to include the independent variables of this study and
department, title, gender, and ethnicity. The research found that significant correlations
existed between gender and title, degree major and formal level of degree at the 95%
- 106 -
significance level. Correlations were also found between facets of the abridged job
descriptive index at the 95% confidence level. A strong correlation was found between
the facets work on the present job and opportunities for promotions. Another
significant correlation found at the 95% confidence level was supervision and work on
the present job satisfaction facets.
Limitations. This study include three independent variables used to study the
correlation and predictive relationship between age, degree major, formal education level
and the five facets of job satisfaction as described by the abridged job satisfaction index.
An important limitation that needs to be discussed is the limit of the variables that were
used in this study. According to Herzberg, (1959) you will obtain better results from the
data when many of the factors or variables are considered when researching job
satisfaction. This study collected many variables that were not used for this study. Some
of the variables that were collected were department, tenure with the organization, gender
and ethnicity.
The results demonstrated by the output of this study showed a low significance
level relationship between the independent and the dependent variables. In the multiple
regression analysis, all of the independent variables failed to demonstrate a statistically
significant predictive variance explaining the relationship. Having included additional
variables such as department, gender, salary, title, and ethnicity may have influenced the
outcome of the research. In other studies, additional demographic variables were included
in addition to age, degree major and formal educational level and found to have a positive
correlation between the dependent and independent variables (Chelte et al., 1982; Smith,
2007; Horn & Zahn, 2001).
- 107 -
According to Tabachnik & Fidell (2001), the power analysis determined that only
76 participants would be needed for this study at a 95% confidence level. The minimum
numbers of participants were obtained for this study; however having a much larger
sample size could have provided representation on a larger scale for the human resources
population. This study was conducted with one company with 76 human resources
employees as the sample population. An area of opportunity that could have added
strength to this study would be to utilize multiple organizations across many different
industries. The possibility to have a much larger candidate pool would exist and
representation from different industries would allow for a more in-depth analysis.
The job descriptive index is a tool that has been research since its inception back
in the 1960s. This study could have utilized the full version of the job descriptive index
rather than the abridged version. According to Balzer, et al., (1997), the abridged job
descriptive index is significantly shorter than the original job descriptive index; however
it had demonstrated over time that it has strong validity and reliability. The full version of
the job descriptive index would allow the researcher to review the five facets of job
satisfaction in greater detail than allowed by the abridged version (Balzer, et al., 1997).
An important addition to both the abridged job descriptive index and the full
version of the JDI would be the inclusion of the Job In General scale. This scale provides
the overall satisfaction rating that can be used in conjunction with the AJDI/JDI. The job
in general is an additional facet that can be used in conjunction with the either version of
the JDI to provide an additional measurement of overall job satisfaction (Kinicki, 2002).
According to Blazer et al., (2000), the job descriptive index facets cannot be combined to
- 108 -
provide one value to give an overall percentage of job satisfaction. The job in general
scale can be used to provide one value to measure against overall job satisfaction.
An additional limitation that should be addressed as potentially having influence
on the outcome of the results is the integration of the organization at the time the study
was conducted. During the time the participation packets were sent out to the sample
population, the organization had recently gone through a merger between two large
companies. While the researcher was not in a position of authority over the participants in
any capacity, receiving a survey requesting information about your current job
satisfaction level and the demographic information may have contributed to satisficing.
The research has no hard evidence of satisficing; however it may have played a factor in
the reporting of the data.
An important limitation the researcher encountered was the limited availability of
financial support to be able to send out additional surveys to multiple organizations. If the
researcher had additional financial support, multiple organizations could have been
included in this study creating a larger sample population and potentially improved the
quality of the data. The ability to survey more than 76 employees may be more costly,
however the possibility to obtain a better sample representation of the human resources
community could add to the validity and strength of the results. This would not only
strengthen the validity of the study, it would also allow the researcher to better
understand the human resources population in multiple industries both public and private
sectors.
Recommendations for Further Study. In this section of the chapter, the researcher
will discuss a few recommendation areas to be considered for further study. The areas to
- 109 -
be discussed are recommendations for results from the data and delimitations of the
study.
Recommendations Derived from the Data. The data in this study demonstrated to
be statistically insignificant in the correlation and multiple regression analysis conducted
on age degree major and formal education level. The job satisfaction levels showed to be
relatively high in most facets in the abridged job descriptive index; however some of the
areas of satisfaction showed to be rather low. While no correlation or predictive values
could be derived from the data, it was clear from the results that the facets of
opportunities for promotion and present pay were low in comparison to the other
facets. A consideration that that should be mentioned here is the possibility that due to the
small and specific population surveyed; this may have created an attribute specific to the
survey results. There is a possibility that the limited segment of HR professionals
represented in this study may not represent the generalized results should a larger
population have been sampled. This dynamic could have significantly caused the data to
not be representative of the general HR population.
The researcher would recommend that additional research be conducted
specifically in the areas of promotional opportunities. According to Balzer, et al., (1997)
the mid-point score to measure satisfaction versus dissatisfaction was 7.5%. The results
from the survey showed that human resources professionals in this organization found
good chance for promotion to be scored at 8.93% and good opportunities for
promotion at 7.67%. The remaining areas of promotional opportunities were also low in
comparison to other facets of the abridged job satisfaction index. The data further defined
that the most dissatisfied group were those that had not obtained a degree or had 59 hours
- 110 -
of less of formal schooling. This group was further defined by being between the ages of
40 49 years of age or 60 years and above. The group of participants while scoring only
1% point above the 7.5% abridged job descriptive index score recommendation still was
the lowest scoring among all participants. The human resources group followed a close
second with not being satisfied with promotional opportunities.
The lowest rank satisfaction scores were in the facet of present pay. The scores
for this section showed that participants feeling underpaid had a satisfaction score of
9.47%. The only truly statistically negative score in the satisfaction survey was 6.93% for
the well paid section (Balzer, et al., 1997). The group that showed the lowest
satisfaction majored in business, had obtained a bachelors degree and were between the
ages of 50 59 years of age. The researcher would recommend that further studies be
conducted on pay and the potential correlation with job satisfaction as it pertains to
human resources and business professionals. The data clearly showed that those that had
majored in fields outside of human resources and business had higher levels of
satisfaction working in the HR field.
While this study did not find any correlations with the independent variables and
pay, the level of satisfaction for current compensation was not highly regarded by the
participants. Business majors that had obtained their bachelors degree and were between
the ages of 50 59 years of age showed have the highest dissatisfaction with their pay.
Additional analysis of the data showed that males were significantly more satisfied that
females in all facets of the abridged job satisfaction index minus one area. The area
females had higher satisfaction was in the people at work facet. Data showed that of all
the ethnicities, the other group should to have the highest overall satisfaction level. It is
- 111 -
important to note however that only one participant responded with other as an
ethnicity choice. The second most satisfied group was the white participants. The black
participants were within .05 of a percentage point behind this group.
Of the four degree majors, the participants that chose other as their option were
shown to be the least satisfied among the group. Between the majors of human resources,
business and other, the participants that had chosen HR as their major were the second
most dissatisfied group. The group that obtained a masters degree showed to also be the
most overall dissatisfied. The group that followed closely behind were the individuals
that had 59 hours or less of college credit. The groups with the title, developer, analyst
and unknown showed to be the lowest satisfied group among all the positions researched.
Recommendation Based upon Delimitations. The researcher found multiple
delimitations for this study that if changed could add to the strength to the results of the
data output. One of the most significant exclusions done by the researcher was the
exclusion of additional variables in this study. The addition of the variables of tenure,
department, title, gender, salary, ethnicity, length of service could have allowed for the
possibility of additional correlations. A better understanding of the population could have
also been derived from the data set if additional demographical variables had been
utilized.
In addition to the above suggestion, the research would also have included
additional organizations interested in job satisfaction for their human resources employee
population. One area of weakness was the limited population the researcher was able to
sample. A recommendation would be for future studies to include as many organizations
as possible to gain not only a strong sample of the human resources population, but also a
- 112 -
broader sample of different industries and potential differences within those
organizations.
The use of the abridged job in general assessment tool in combination with the
abridged job descriptive index would have added additional knowledge about the human
resources population. The abridged job descriptive index assessed five separate facets of
job satisfaction and was not intended as a tool to provide an overall job satisfaction value
(Balzer, et al., 1997). The abridged job in general would have added more data and
provided the overall statistical value of job satisfaction as suggested by (Balzer, et al.,
1997). The use of both of these instruments together would have provided both the
specific facet satisfaction information as well as the overall satisfaction values.
Conclusion. The objective of this research was to understand to what statistically
significant level job satisfaction had with age, degree major and formal educational level.
Due to the outcome of the data, the researcher accepted the null hypothesis for all the
questions. Job satisfaction demonstrated to be high when averaged over each individual
facet of the abridged job descriptive index; however no statistically significant
correlations or predictive values could be established. While this study may not be
irrefutable to the existence of a positive relationship with the independent variables, it
may provide guidance on specific areas of satisfaction and dissatisfaction for human
resources personnel.
While no areas were statistically significant for this study, some areas did show
low correlations worth mentioning. While age has been researched for many years now,
this study did support existing literate that even at a low level of power, age did have a
relationship with satisfaction. Degree major and formal educational levels also showed
- 113 -
very low levels of predictive values outside of this required power level for this study.
The independent variable for this study did show to be related to the dependent variables;
however the confidence level for this study did not allow then to be considered
significant predictors.
Much of the research conducted on job satisfaction has been done on large sample
populations across multiple disciplines and many industries. This study will begin to add
to the existing knowledge for human resources personnel and the needs of this particular
profession. As human resources personnel begin to take on the increasing demands of
their jobs, a wealth of knowledge needs to continue to be created for both the scientific
community as well as the practitioner. With the continued increase of knowledge and
research to satisfy the needs of this profession, perhaps organizations can continue to
develop the knowledge for this profession to decrease turnover rates, increase job
satisfaction and support human resources personnel as they are essential to all
organizations of today and tomorrow.
- 114 -
REFERENCES
Alexander, D. (1995). Conflict management styles of administrators in schools for the

deaf: teacher perception of job satisfaction. Gallaudet University. Washington
D.C. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and Thesis Full Text database on
April 21, 2008.
Astin, A.W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Balzer, W. K., Kihm, J. A., Smith, P.C., Irw in, J.L., Bachiochi, P.D., Robie, C., Sinar,
E.F., & Parra, L.F. (1997). Users manual for the Job Descriptive Index and the
Job in General Scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University.
Balzer, W.K., Kihm, J.A., Smith, P.C., Irwin, J.L., Bachiochi, P.D., Robie, C., Sinar, E.
F., & Parra, L.F. (2000). Users. manual for the Job Descriptive Index (AJDI; 1997
version) and the Job in General scales. In J.M Stanton and C.D. Crossley (Eds.),
Electronic resources for the AJDI and JIG. Bowling Green , OH : Bowling Green
State University .
Barrette, C & Myrick, F (1998). Job satisfaction in its preceptorship and its effect on the
clinical performance of the perceptee. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27, 364-371.
Bassett, G.A. (1994). The case against job satisfaction - A satisfied worker is not
necessarily a productive worker. Business Horizons Journal, 37(3), 61-69.
Retrived November 5, 2005, fromEBSCOhost database.
Bassette-Jones, N. & Loyds, C. (2005). Does Herzberg motivation theory have staying
power? The Journal of Management Development, 24(10), 929 943.
Bowen, W.G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of
considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Burns, J.P. & Groves, S.K. (1997). The practice of nursing research. (3rd ed.).
Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.
Charles, C. M. (1998). Introduction to educational research. (3rd ed.). New York:

Longman.
Clark, M.M. (2005). Employees, HR differ on satisfaction factors. HR Magazine, 50(8),

32-33. Retrieved January 31, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Clifford, M. (1984). Education and work satisfaction. Human Relations, 37(11), 985-
1004. Retrieved January, 28, 2007, from ProQuest database.
- 115 -
Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Edition),
Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., and Aiken, L.S. (2003) Applied multiple
regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd edition),
Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates
Cook, J. (2006). The Interrelationship among job satisfaction/dissatisfaction of student

affairs professionals and selected demographic variables. Retrieved on April 18,
2007, from Proquest Dissertation Database.
Davis, J. (1997). Correlational research methods. Retrieved January 30, 2007 from
Metropolitan State College of Denver, Department of Psychology Web site:
http://clem.mscd.edu/~davisj/prm2/correl1.html#3
DeMeuse, K. P. (1985). A compendium of frequently used measures in industrial /

organizational psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 23, 53-
59.
DeSantis, V. S. & Durst S. L. 1996. Comparing job satisfaction among

public and private sector employees. American Review of Public Administration.
26(3): 327-43.
Fatemi, M (2001). Graduate students' perceptions of their academic experience after

entering the workplace. Ed.D. dissertation, The George Washington University,
United States -- District of Columbia. Retrieved April 13, 2008, from ProQuest
Digital Dissertations database.
Franco, L. (2005). US Job Satisfaction Keeps Falling. The Conference Board reports
today. Retrieved on April 23, 2008 from: http://www.conference-
board.org/utilities/pressDetail.cfm?press_ID=2582
Fuller, G. (2006). Record number of junior HR staff leaving over lack of opportunities.
Personnel Today, March 21, 2006, pg.4. Retrieved January 27, 2007, from
ProQuest database.
Ganzach, Y. (1998). Intelligence and Job Satisfaction, Academy of Management Journal

41, 526 -539.
Ghiselli F.R. , La Lopa, J.M., & Bai, B. (2001). Job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and
turnover intent: Among food-service managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 28-38. Retrieved January 31, 2007, from
ProQuest database.
Grant, J. (2006) An examination of Job Satisfaction of Mid-Level Managers in student

affairs administration. Retrieved on April 18th, 2007 from Proquest Database.
- 116 -
Greengard, S. (2001). Making smarter decisions: Know what employees can do.
Workforce, 80(11), 42-46. Retrieved January 30, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Hall, P.R. (1999). Conflict management styles of the California community college
police chiefs and security directors. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and
Thesis Full Text database on April 17, 2008.
Harris Interactive. 2005. The New Retirement Survey from Merrill Lynch Reveals How
Baby Boomers Will Transform Retirement. New York: Merrill Lynch. 663s.
Retrieved on November 5, 2007 from EBSCO.
Hatfield, J., Faunce, G. J., & Soames Job, R. F. (2006). Avoiding confusion surrounding
the phrase "correlation does not imply causation." Teaching of Psychology, 33,
49-51.
Hedstrom, C.H. (1991). Job satisfaction among critical care nurses. Peabody College for
Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1991. 84 Retrieved January 31, 2007, from
ProQuest database.
Hersberg, F., Mauser, B., & Synderman, B.B. (1959). The motivation to work. (2nd ed.).
New York:Yiley.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R. O., & Capwell, D. F. (1957). Job attitudes:
Review of research and opinion. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychological Service of
Pittsburgh.
Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser, W.E., Jr., & Schlesinger, L.A. (1994).
Putting the service profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 105-11.
Retrieved November 5, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
Hill, T.D. (1985). Item format and structure of Basis Personality Inventory. Unpublished
Masters of Art Thesis, Department of Psychology University of Western Ontario
Canada. Retrieved from the National Library of Canada Canadian Thesis Service.
Hinton, P.R. (1996) Statistics Explained: A Guide For Social Science Statistics. New
York, N.Y: Rantledge.
Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Horn, L., and Zahn, L. (2001). From Bachelors Degree to Work: Major Field of Study
and Employment Outcomes of 199293 Bachelors Degree Recipients Who Did
Not Enroll in Graduate Education by 1997 (NCES 2001165). U.S. Department
of Education, NCES. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
- 117 -
Howell, D. (2004). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (5th ed.) Pacific
Grove: Brooks/Cole.
Ironson, G. H., Smith, P. C., Brannick, M. T., Gibson, W. M., & Paul, K. B. (1989).
Construction of a job in general scale: A comparison of global, composite and
specific measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 193-200. Retrieved
November 11, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Jefferies, S. (1999). Research Methods. Central Washington University. Retrieved on

March 21, 2008 from http://www.cwu.edu/~jefferis/PEHL557/pehl557.html
Johnnie, P.B (1993). Formal Education: A paradigm for human resources development.
The International Journal of Educational Management, 7(5), pg.4. Retrieved
January 30, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Johnson, R. (2005). The learning curve: The value of tuition assistance. Training, 42(11),
30-34. Retrieved January 30, 2007 from ProQuest database.
Judge, T. A., & Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice. In C. L.
Cooper & E. A. Locke (Eds.), Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking
theory with practice (pp. 166198). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Just half of all US workers are satisfied with their jobs. (2005) HR Focus, 82, page 8.
Retrieved January 27, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Kakar, S. (1998). Self-evaluations of police performance: An analysis of the relationship

between police officers educational level and job performance. Police Strategies
and Management, 21 (4), 632-647.
Keis, K. (2005). HR needs happy staff to show its success. Canadian HR Reporter.
18(3), pg. 14. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Kinicki, A. J. (2002). Assessing the construct validity of the job descriptive index: A
review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 14-32.
Koelbel, P.W., Fuller, S.G., & Misener, T.R. (1991). Job satisfaction of nurse
practitioners: An analysis to use a Herzberg theory. Nurse practitioner: American
Journal of primary health care, 16(4), 43-48.
Kolb, M.N. (1990). Linking education and work: A study of the fit between college
majors and careers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(7), 2283. (UMI
Proquest Digital Dissertations, No. AAT 9034722).
Konert, E. (1997). The relationship among middle-school teacher burnout, stress, job
satisfaction, and coping styles. Wayne State University, 1997, 146. Retrieved
January 31, 2007, from ProQuest database.
- 118 -
Leslie, L. L., & Brinkman, P. T. (1988). The economic value of higher education. New
York: Collier Macmillan.
Marion, L.(1996). Employee satisfaction and HR at ISS. Management Development

Review, 9(4), 9. Retrieved January 31, 2007, from ProQuest database.
McDonald, J. (2006). Spearmans Correlation. Retrieved April 18th, 2007 from

http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/statspearman.html
Mercer Consulting Group (2007). HR Careers Global Satisfaction Survey. Retrieved on

April 24, 2008 from:
http://www.imercer.com/uploads/common/pdfs/2007_hr_careers_global_satisfacti
on_survey.pdf
Millar, M. (2005). Eight out of ten HR professionals are happy with their life in
personnel. Personnel Today, November 1, 2005. 8. Retrieved January 26, 2007,
from ProQuest database.
Millar, M (2006). Demand for HR professionals hits six-year high. Personnel Today,
November 1, 2005.10. Retrieved January 27, 2007, from ProQuest database.
Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and
insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods.2nd Edition. Newbury

Park, California: Sage Publications.
Payson, A. (1988). Job satisfaction and need satisfaction of psychiatric registered

nurses: the influences of nurse management decision-making style. University of
Bridgeport. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and Thesis Full Text database
on April 17, 2008.
Quinn, R. P., Staines, G. S., & McCullough, M. R. Job satisfaction: Is there a trend?
Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of Labor, 1974. 54. Robert Quinn and Linda
Sheppard, The 1972-73 Quality of Employment Survey (Ann Arbor, University of
Michigan, 1974); and Curt Tausky, Work Organizations: Major Theoretical
Perspectives (Itaska> Ill., F. E. Peacock, 1978).
Rau-Foster, M. (1999). Employee satisfaction: The success factor. Contemporary

Dialysis and Nephrology. Retrieved on November 2, 2006, from
http://www.workplaceissues.com/aresatis.htm
Reid, C (2006). Rebuilding the HR Departments Image. Canadian HR Reporter,19(12)

18. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from ProQuest database.
- 119 -
Roznowski, M. (1989). An examination of the measurement properties of the job
descriptive index with experimental items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74,
805-814. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Salvitt, D.B., Stamps, P.L., Piedmont, E.B., & Haase, A.M. (1978). Nurses satisfaction
with their work situation. Nurses Research, 27(2), 114 120.
Scott, M., Swortzel, K., Taylor, W. (2005). The relationship between selected
demographic factors and the level of job satisfaction of extension agents. Journal
of Southern Agricultural Education Research 102 Volume 55, Number 1, 2005
Siegle, D. (n.d.). Principles and Method in Educational Research. University of

Connecticut. Retrieved on April 17, 2008 from
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/research/Correlation/correlation%20notes.htm
Simon, B. (2004). Are businesses missing the dispute resolution boat? A study
underscores lack of early intervention usage. Retrieved April 12, 2006, from
http://www.mediate.com/articles/simon5.cfm
Smith, T. (2007). "In general, job satisfaction increases with age," The General Social
Survey at the National Opinion Center at the University of Chicago. 2007
Retrieved April 13, 2006 from
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSL2813031320070828?pageNum
ber=2&sp=true
Smith, P., Kendall, M., Hulin, L. (1975). The Measurement of Satisfaction In Work and
Retirement: A Strategy For The Study Of Attitudes. Bowling Green, Oh: Bowling
Green State University.
Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in
work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Smyer, M. A.; Pitt-Catsouphes, M. (2007). The Meanings of Work for Older Workers.
Vol. 31 Issue 1, p23-30, 8p.
Sobhan, R. & Ahmad, M. (1980). Public enterprise in an intermediate regime: A study of

political economy of Bangladesh. Dhaka: Bangladesh institute of development
studies.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and

consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
SPSS, (2003). How to get more value from your data. Retrieved on May 17, 2008 from
https://www.spss.com/no/products/spssdimensions/morevalue.pdf
Staines G & Quinn R. (1979). "American workers evaluate the quality of their jobs,"
- 120 -
Monthly Labor Review, January, pp. 3-12.
Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 46-56.
Sudman, S. (1976). Applied Sampling. New York: Academic Press.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Timmreck, T.C. (2001). Managing motivation and developing job satisfaction in the
health care environment. The Health Care Manager, 20(1), 42-59.
Training & Development. Age not an Issue., Jan 2007, Vol. 61 Issue 1, p12-12, 2/3p;
Trochim, William (2006). Research methods knowledge database. Non-probability

Sampling. Retrieved on April 22, 2007 from:
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampnon.htm
Wadsworth, Y. (1997). Do it yourself social research (2nd ed.). St. Leonards, NSW, Australia:
Allen and Unwin.
Weaver, C. (1980). Job Satisfaction in the United States in the 1970s, Journal of Applied
Psychology 65(3), 364-367.
Williams, R. H., Zimmerman, D. W., Zumbo, B. D. & Ross, D. (2003). Charles

Spearman: British Behavioral Scientist. Human Nature Review. 3: 114-118.
Retrieved April 18th, 2007 from Proquest database.
Wignall, R. (2004). An Investigation of Job Satisfaction of Florida State Industry

Workers: An Examination of Hertzberg Two-Factor Theory. Retrieved on April
18th, 2007 from Proquest database.
Yeager, S. (1981). Dimension of the job descriptive index. Academy of Management

Journal, 24(1), 205-212.
Zaraing, B (1990). Job satisfaction in Midwestern Registered Nurses. Okalahoma State

University. Retrieved on March 1, 2008 from Proquest Database.
- 121 -
APPENDIX A
REQUEST TO CONDUCT RESEARCH LETTER
April 22, 2007
Dear Human Resources Professional,
My name is Steven Gonzalez and I am a doctoral student at Capella University in the Harold Abel
School of Psychology. My area of concentration is Industrial/Organizational psychology and I am seeking
to conduct research in the areas of formal education levels and the possible relationship to job satisfaction
for Human Resources professionals. I will be seeking my sample of participants from employees currently
functioning within the Human Resources department.
All participants will be asked to fill out a demographic survey and complete the job descriptive
index to assess job satisfaction. The Demographic survey should take no more than ten minutes to complete
and the job descriptive index assessment should take no more than thirty minutes to complete. All
participation in this research project will be done on a strictly confidential and voluntary basis. I would like
to formally request permission to conduct this research within your organization. I intend to protect the
anonymity of the organization and its participants responses to best of my ability as required under state
and federal law. Upon completion of the study, I will provide you with the results of the study should you
request a copy for review.
Professionally Yours,
Steven Gonzalez, MJA

Doctoral Student
- 122 -
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONCENT FORM
Dear Human Resources Professionals,
My name is Steven Gonzalez and I am a doctoral student working to complete my dissertation and need
your assistance. I am working to complete a dissertation study to determine if formal educational level has
any relationship to job satisfaction for Human Resources employees. I would like to ask you for your
participation to be part of this study. Your participation is completely voluntary and all data collected will
remain strictly confidential. This research study will attempt to determine if there is a relationship between
formal educational levels, age, degree major, and job satisfaction.
If you would like to participate in this study, please place your signature at the bottom of this document and
place it in the prepaid addressed envelope along with the filled out demographic survey and Job Descriptive
Index. Please keep the second copy of this document included in this packet for your records. If you chose
to not participate in this study there will be no bearing on your role with your organization, position, pay or
any future promotional opportunities. All responses will remain confidential and your decision to
participate or not in the study will also remain confidential.
Background Information
Background of the Study: The purpose of this study is to determine if formal educational levels, degree
major, and age have any relationship to job satisfaction in the workplace.
Procedures: You should have a packet with a letter of informed consent, demographic survey and the Job
Descriptive Index assessment. If you agree to participate in the study, you will need to sign one of the
consent forms and keep the second one as a copy for your records. If you chose to not participate in this
study there will be no bearing on your role with your organization, position, pay or any future promotional
opportunities. All responses will remain confidential and your decision to participate or not in the study
will also remain confidential. If you chose to participate, you will need to fill out the demographic survey
- 123 -
and the Job Descriptive Index assessment. Upon completion of the demographic survey and the job
descriptive index, please place them in the self-addressed stamped return envelope. If you have chosen not
to participate, please return the unsigned packet in the included in the self-addressed stamped return
envelope without completing the demographic survey or the Job Descriptive Index.
Risks and Benefits of being involved in the study:
The following risks are associated with the study: As a participant in this study you will not receive any
anticipated direct benefits for participating.
The following are benefits anticipated with this study: As a participant, you may derive some benefit from
knowing that you contributed to a scientific study which may help human resources professionals in the
future This study will also continue to build a foundation for future studies on how to better satisfy
employees working in human resources.
Compensation:
There will be no compensation offered to any of the participants involved in the study.
Confidentiality:
The information you share in this research study will be kept strictly confidential. The data will be kept in
a locked cabinet and only I will have access to the original data compiled for the study. When this study is
published by ProQuest, the researcher will ensure that no information will identify any participant in any
way.
Voluntary Nature of the study:
Your participation in this research study is strictly voluntary and you choice to participate will have no
bearing on your current employment status with your place of employment. Participation in or lack there
of will have no influence on your job status, pay grade, or promotional opportunities. If you choose to
participate in the study, you may withdraw from the study at any point during the study with no bearing on
- 124 -
your employment, job status, pay grade, or promotional opportunities. Withdrawing will have no penalty at
all.
Statement of Consent:
By signing this consent form, I agree that I have read the above information and have asked and received
answers to any and all my questions. I further agree that if I chose to participate in this study, I will fill out
the demographic survey, the job descriptive index and sign the consent form, keep a copy of the consent
form, and return them back in the self-addressed envelope. If I have chosen not to participate, I understand
I am requested to kindly return the packet of material received about this research study I thank you for
your time and consideration.
____________________________________ ___________________________
Participant Signature Date
- 125 -
APPENDIX C
Demographic Survey Questionnaire

In making an effort to better understand the possible relationship between formal education levels and job
satisfaction, the purpose of this survey is to collect demographical information. Please complete each question by
checking the field that best fits your current situation. All information obtained in this survey will remain strictly
confidential and will only be viewed by the researcher.
Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

What is the title of the
department you currently work
for:
What is your current job/
position title:
What is the length of time you
have been employed by your ________ Months ________Years
current organization:
What is your Gender: ________ Male ________Female
What is your current age: ________ Years Old
___White ___ Black ___ Asian ___ Hispanic ___ Pacific Islander ___Indian
What is your Ethnicity:
____Other
If you have received an
Associates degree, what was the ___ Human Resources ____ Business ____ Other ____ Not Applicable
area of concentration?
If you have received a Bachelors
degree, what was the area of ___ Human Resources ____ Business ____ Other ____ Not Applicable
concentration?
If you have received a Masters
concentration?
If you have received a Doctorate
concentration?
Educational Questions Please check Yes or No as it applies to you

1 Have you completed 59 hours of college classes or less? Yes No
2 Have you completed at least 60 hours of college classes Yes No

or received an associates degree?
3 Have you received a Bachelors degree? Yes No
4 Have you received a Masters degree?? Yes No
5 Have you received a Doctoral Degree? Yes No
- 126 -
APPENDIX D
INSTRUCTIONAL LETTER SHEET
Dear Fellow HR Colleague,
Thank you taking time to review the following packet that contains relevant
documents about the research I am conducting. Please review the documents contained in
this packet in the following order:
1. Informed Consent Document
2. Demographic Survey
3. Abridged Job Descriptive Index Assessment
If you have chosen to voluntarily participate in this study and have completed the above
described forms, place the completed documents (1,2,3) in the included white self-
addressed envelope. Seal the envelope and send them via United States postal mail. If
you have chosen to not participate in the study, please place the uncompleted above
described form in the white self-addressed envelope. Seal the envelope and send them via
United States postal service.
Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any questions please feel free to
contact me.
Professionally Yours,
- 127 -

A Study of The Relationship Between Job Satisfaction, Age, Degree Major, and Formal Educational Levels of Employees Working in Human Resources

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Study of The Relationship Between Job Satisfaction, Age, Degree Major, and Formal Educational Levels of Employees Working in Human Resources

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION, AGE,

DEGREE MAJOR, AND FORMAL EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OF EMPLOYEES

WORKING IN HUMAN RESOURCES

DAVID CHAPMAN, PSY.D. Faculty Mentor and Chair

LORI LACIVITA, Ph.D., Committee Member

SANDRA HARRIS, Ph.D., Committee Member

Garvey House, Ph.D., Dean, Harold Abel School of Psychology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

satisfaction. The use of a correlational research design determined the possible

multiple regression analysis to determine the positive or negative relationship between

the two variables as well as the strength.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1

Background of the Study ........................................................................... .2

Purpose of this Study .............................................................................................. 5

Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................... 11

Organization of the Study ..................................................................................... 13

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 14

Literature Review of Variables.....14

Job Satisfaction ..................................................................................................... 14

Degree Major ......................................................................................................... 22

Formal Education .................................................................................................. 27

Literature Review of Methodology ....................................................................... 30

Choice of Variables ............................................................................................... 30

Quantitative Design ............................................................................................... 37

Correlational Research Design ............................................................................... 39

Job Descriptive Index ............................................................................................ 40

Synthesis/Summary of Research Findings.............................................................. 42

Strengths and Weaknesses .................................................................................... 45

Adding to Existing Knowledge/Summary............................................................ 47

Methods of Obtaining Research.............................................48

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 50

Purpose of this Study ............................................................................................ 50

Selection of Participants ....................................................................................... 51

Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 59

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 60

CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS................................ 63

Research Question 1 ..............................................................................................73

Research Question 2 ..............................................................................................74

Research Question 4 ..........................................................................................76

Research Question 5 ......................................................................................78

Research Question 6 ..............................................................................................80

Research Question 7 ..............................................................................................82

Research Question 8 ..............................................................................................84

Additional Tests .....................................................................................................86

Data Analysis and Results......................................................................................86

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...................................... 92

Recommendation for Further Study......................................................................109

Recommendation Derived from Data...................................................................110

Recommendation Based upon Delimitations........................................................112

Table 1. Age Demographic Data ................................................................................65

Table 2 .Department Demographic Data.....................................................................66

Table 3. Position Title Demographic Data..................................................................66

Table 4. Years With Organization Demographic Data................................................67

Table 5. Abridged Job Descriptive Index Response Results...................................69

Table 6. Pearson Correlation of Formal Education and Job Satissfaction..................74

Table 7. Pearson Correlation of Degree Major and Job Satisfaction Scales...............75

Table 8. Pearson Correlation of Age and Job Satisfaction Scales...............................76

Table 10. Multiple Regression Coefficients for Present Pay......................................79

Background of the Study

As organizations continue to grow in complexity, human resources (HR)

organization (Reid, 2006). While HR departments focus on creating a positive workplace

labor relations, benefits, and training (Rau-Foster, 1999). According to Rau-Foster