The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive

hive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7720.htm

Symphony
Rewards and sacrifices in élite orchestras
and non-élite organizations
Participation in valued activities and job
satisfaction in two symphony orchestras 93
Josephine Pichanick Mogelof
McKinsey & Company, New York, New York, USA, and
Lisa Haueisen Rohrer
Sterling Research Group, St Petersburg, Florida, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The original purpose of this study was not to focus on job satisfaction, but rather to
conduct an exploratory investigation of how symphony orchestra players cope with the frustrations
and disappointments of orchestra life. Symphony orchestra players report surprisingly low levels of
job satisfaction given the perception held by many that life and work in symphony orchestras is
glamorous and rewarding.
Design/methodology/approach – Job satisfaction data were collected in the form of interviews
and surveys from 66 musicians in an élite, major orchestra and a non-élite, regional orchestra.
Findings – Players in both orchestras were similarly satisfied with co-worker relationships and
experienced similar levels of intrinsic work motivation and job involvement. Despite better financial
resources in the major orchestra, satisfaction with opportunities for growth and opportunities to exert
influence increased with tenure in the regional orchestra, whereas the opposite was true for major
players.
Originality/value – The article discusses context-driven job satisfaction tradeoffs associated with
careers in élite versus non-élite organizations and the role organizations may play in facilitating or
impeding workers’ participation in valued activities. It emphasizes the importance of participation in
valued activities as a key driver of job satisfaction.
Keywords Job satisfaction, Employee participation, Performing arts
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
What could be more blissful than earning a living playing some of the most beautiful
music ever composed, surrounded by gifted and motivated musicians as one’s
colleagues, being showered with the enthusiastic applause of sophisticated audiences,
revered for one’s creative talent and artistry, and admired for one’s cultural
contribution to society? Few jobs could offer such rewards. It could be ideal, but
symphony orchestra life also entails numerous challenges.
Symphony orchestra players indeed may experience the rewards previously
described, but they also often meet with disappointments in this highly demanding
world. The nature of ensemble work is such that individual recognition for
International Journal of Manpower
Vol. 26 No. 1, 2005
This research was supported by grants from Harvard University and the National Science pp. 93-109
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Foundation. The authors wish to acknowledge J. Richard Hackman as well as Erin Lehman for 0143-7720
their assistance with this research. DOI 10.1108/01437720510587307
IJM performances is rare; musical directors can be difficult to please and hard to respect;
26,1 rehearsing and performing in extremely close quarters with the same people
day-after-day can be taxing; days are spent practicing, nights and weekends are spent
working; playing from the symphonic repertoire season after season becomes
repetitive; the strain of practicing and performing can become physically and
psychologically incapacitating; and the magical musical moments that make it all
94 worthwhile may be few and far between – all in a context in which diminishing public
support for the arts is a constant threat.
Musicians in even the most prestigious orchestras, who are well-compensated and
at the apex of their profession, must contend with these challenges. As a recently
retired musician from an élite orchestra put it, “to the outsider it may look like a
glamorous job, but it’s not. It’s a factory job with a little bit of art thrown in”. Indeed,
symphony orchestra musicians report being only slightly more satisfied with their jobs
than industrial production workers and are less satisfied than federal prison guards
(Allmendinger et al., 1996). Young and talented individuals who were drawn to music
as children, devoted significant portions of their lives to mastering their instruments,
received laudatory notices at conservatories, and won competitive auditions for seats
in elite symphony orchestras may one day come to regard their life’s work as a “factory
job”.
And those are the lucky ones – but what about the thousands of musicians in
smaller and less well-known regional symphony orchestras who must contend with all
these same sacrifices but are bolstered by relatively little of the financial support, job
security, and prestige that come with being in a major orchestra? With fewer financial
resources and rewarding opportunities to compensate for the difficult elements of
orchestra life for these players, surely their plight must be much worse.
The original purpose of this study was not to focus on job satisfaction, but rather to
conduct an exploratory investigation of how symphony orchestra players cope with
the frustrations and disappointments of orchestra life. We assumed that musicians in
an elite orchestra, so designated due to its status as a financially well-off, prestigious,
major orchestra, would be more satisfied with their jobs relative to a comparison group
of regional orchestra players, and that these differences in job satisfaction would have
implications for how musicians coped. We, therefore, collected data on job satisfaction
as a “manipulation check” so that whatever conclusions we drew about musicians’
coping behaviors in these two contexts could be validly associated with variance in job
satisfaction. As we analyzed our data, however, we realized that our assumptions
about job satisfaction in the élite versus non-élite orchestra were not entirely supported
by the data. In fact, what was intended to be a manipulation check actually produced
some counterintuitive results that we felt warranted a reframing of the study. It was
not the case that the regional orchestra was merely a “poor man’s” version of the major
orchestra. Musicians in the major orchestra were not more satisfied than regional
players across the board. The present paper presents our job satisfaction findings and
uses both quantitative and qualitative data to explore the theoretical drivers of job
satisfaction in élite and non-élite organizations.

Job satisfaction
More than 5,000 articles containing key word references to the construct of job
satisfaction have been catalogued in PsycINFO since 1986. In fact, job satisfaction is
cited as the most frequently investigated variable in research on organizational Symphony
behavior (Cranny et al., 1992; Gruneberg, 1976; Spector, 1997; Staw, 1984). Most simply orchestras
put, job satisfaction is how people feel about their jobs (Gruneberg, 1976; Spector,
1997). A more technical definition provided by Brief (1998, p. 86) suggests job
satisfaction “is an internal state that is expressed by affectively and/or cognitively
evaluating an experienced job with some degree of favor or disfavor”.
Drawing on constructs used in prior studies of arts organizations in the USA and 95
abroad (Allmendinger et al., 1996; Margolis, 1997), we assessed the following aspects of
job satisfaction in symphony orchestras: general job satisfaction, internal work
motivation, job involvement, and satisfaction with compensation, job security,
management, coworkers, opportunities for growth, and opportunities to exert
influence. We used a broad range of job satisfaction variables to provide an
opportunity to understand differences in musicians’ experiences of their work in
greater detail. We expected players’ level of tenure and the status of the orchestras to
be associated with job satisfaction.

Tenure
Despite the difficulties associated with orchestra work, most players do not choose to
leave their jobs before retirement (Allmendinger et al., 1996). In fact, most orchestral
musicians will play in only one or two orchestras during their entire careers. This
evidence suggests that symphony players’ job satisfaction may increase over their
careers, otherwise they likely would change jobs more often. In addition, previous job
satisfaction studies have consistently shown a positive linear relationship between
tenure and job satisfaction (Lee and Wilbur, 1985; Lynn et al., 1996; White and Spector,
1987). The tendency for musicians to continue their orchestral careers – despite the
many challenges of such a lifestyle, in combination with the consistent relationship
between job satisfaction and tenure in previous studies led us to expect senior
musicians in both orchestras to be more satisfied with their jobs than their younger
counterparts.

Organizational status
Sociologists have long been concerned with how the status hierarchy of occupations is
derived and the ways in which individuals’ occupational status affects their mobility
and the educational and occupational attainment of their children (e.g. Blau and
Duncan, 1967; Hout, 1988). It has been clearly shown that status confers certain
advantages to élite individuals and organizations. Individuals who graduate from élite
educational institutions tend to benefit disproportionately from the credentialing effect
of their colleges and universities over individuals possessing lower status degrees,
even when controlling for academic performance and family background (Kingston
and Smart, 1990). Likewise, high status organizations are able to charge a higher price
for their goods and services than other organizations selling into the same market
(Podolny, 1993). In the context of symphony orchestras, musicians who play in high
status orchestras benefit from the higher financial rewards and prestige that come
from being a member in an elite organization. Given the benefits associated with high
status, we expected the major orchestra players to report higher levels of job
satisfaction than the regional orchestra musicians. We expected the comparative lack
of financial resources and public recognition in the less prestigious, regional orchestra
IJM to decrease those players’ job satisfaction relative to the musicians in the major
26,1 orchestra. We assumed that the regional players would have all the challenges faced by
major players but with fewer perquisites and resources to make the difficulties more
bearable.
Thus, we began this study assuming that in general, senior players in the major
orchestra would be most satisfied with their jobs, and that junior players in the
96 regional orchestra would be least so. We did not have a prediction about which of the
two effects, tenure or orchestra, would be stronger. During the course of analyzing our
data, it became clear that job satisfaction was not just a main effect of either tenure or
status, or both – at least with respect to some components of job satisfaction. Players’
satisfaction with some aspects of job satisfaction depended on the interaction of status
and tenure. Specifically, satisfaction with opportunities for growth and opportunities
to exert influence increased with tenure in the regional orchestra, whereas the opposite
was true for major players.

Interaction of status and tenure

Although organizational status and tenure have previously been studied as correlates
of job satisfaction, little research has examined the interaction between these factors.
Several social psychological theories could account for an interactive effect of tenure
and status on job satisfaction. We briefly introduce three relevant theories here and
conjecture how they may account for the interaction between orchestra status and
tenure. Later in the paper, we use data to evaluate which theory best captures the
interactive phenomena we observed.
Unmet expectations and realistic job previews. Previous research from the literature
on realistic job previews argues that job satisfaction decreases to the extent that a
mismatch exists between individuals’ expectations for work prior to starting their jobs,
and their actual experience (Premack and Wanous, 1985). Winning a seat in a major
symphony orchestra may be accompanied with a host of expectations about the
opportunities major orchestra life will afford. More generally, individuals entering high
status organizations might have unrealistically high expectations which, over time,
could lead to dissatisfaction when they are unmet.
Cognitive dissonance. Research on cognitive dissonance suggests that people feel
uncomfortable with inconsistencies between their attitudes and behavior, and therefore
engage in cognitive work to bring their attitudes in alignment with their behavior
(Festinger, 1957). Perhaps individuals in lower status organizations adjust their
attitudes to match their behavior: “I’m still here, so I must like it”.
Valued participation. In their theory of life task participation and well-being, Cantor
and Sanderson (1999) suggest that what people need most is to be able to continue to
participate on a regular basis in valued life tasks. Similarly, the expansion hypothesis
maintains that:
. . . the benefits of multiple roles far outweigh the strains, resulting in a net gain in well-being
. . . By providing linkages to other persons and resources, multiple roles bring rewards such
as privileges, status, security, self-esteem, personality enrichment, and social relationships . . .
Human energies expand to meet the challenges of multiple roles provided the roles are
rewarding (Froberg et al., 1986, p. 81).
A study testing this theory examined the responses of 500 employed women to
questions about self-esteem, satisfaction with careers, partners, and children, and
perceptions of life stress and pleasure (Pietromonaco et al., 1986). Findings indicated Symphony
that higher self-esteem was associated with holding more roles. Furthermore, having a orchestras
multi-dimensional sense of self has been associated with individuals being less prone
to depression, perceived stress, physical symptoms, and the occurrence of flu (Linville,
1985, 1987). It may be the case that over time high versus low status organizations
afford individuals different opportunities to participate in valued activities and
develop multiple roles. These differences could account for variance in satisfaction 97
over a career.
We use both quantitative and qualitative evidence to evaluate the extent to which
each of these theories can account for our observations. We come to the conclusion that,
while many psychological forces may be in operation, participation in valued activities
is a key factor in determining job satisfaction.
In sum, we studied musicians in two symphony orchestras to examine the relations
among tenure, status, and job satisfaction. This research contributes to our
understanding of job satisfaction in several ways. First, we investigate variables at two
levels of analysis to better understand the individual-level and organizational-level
conditions under which job satisfaction thrives and deteriorates. Second, our
exploration of unexpected interactions between individual and organizational level
variables has theoretical and practical implications for understanding the tradeoffs in
rewards and sacrifices faced by individuals in élite and non-élite organizations.

Method
Data and sample
Our methodology comprised case studies of an élite and a non-élite orchestra in the
USA, the former located in a major metropolitan area and the latter in a smaller city in
the same region. Our motive for selecting these two orchestras was to find contrasting
environments where the nature of the work was similar but the resources and contexts
varied greatly.
Major symphony orchestra (MSO). The MSO was located in the heart of a major
metropolitan city. It had a reputation as being one of the world’s best orchestras with
an endowment of over $150 million and a celebrated concert hall. In addition to
generous salaries (over $75,000 on average), players enjoyed year-round employment,
ample benefits, four weeks of vacation, and retirement pensions. Typically, hundreds
of people would audition for a single seat in the MSO. One violinist described the
advantages of playing in such a well-respected orchestra:
People in this city, a lot of people, hundreds of people are . . . involved with the MSO . . . They
all come to regular concerts. It’s well supported. For instance our pension has been increased
considerably in the last two or three years . . . It jumped way up. And it did not have to jump
because we insisted it jump up. People are sympathetic . . . I think that’s what makes it; we are
well taken care of. . .You have to think about both the financial and the personal support of
these people. And they love what we do. They come all the time. That’s what makes it worth it.
Regional symphony orchestra (RSO). The RSO was located in a smaller city nearby.
The RSO was not particularly well-known, had an annual budget of less than $5
million, and was experiencing financial difficulties at the time of the study. They did
not have their own concert hall and frequently had problems gaining access to the local
performance center. Core members of the orchestra earned an average annual salary
that was less than $17,000, below the poverty line for a family of four, and most
IJM members held full-time jobs in addition to playing in the orchestra. While entrance to
26,1 the RSO was still by audition, it was considered less competitive than the MSO. One
long-time viola player described the interaction between the orchestra and the
community:
What seems to be the case is that nobody wants to push the orchestra, promote the orchestra
in the community and outside the community. It’s kind of demoralizing. Why shouldn’t we be
98 playing all over the state, for instance, since it’s the best orchestra in the state . . . There’s no
incentive for the management, or the board, or the community to promote the orchestra now.
And that’s kind of an insult. It’s a good orchestra . . . Mostly, you’d like an attitude of support
in the community. You’d like to see billboards up, promoting the RSO. Or advertisements in
the paper. Or something that shows the community cares about the orchestra. But they don’t.

Survey
We obtained permission from the administrative officers and players’ committees of
both orchestras to contact their players by mail and phone. Surveys were mailed to all
individuals for whom addresses were available in both orchestras. The response rates
for the mail survey were 26.4 percent for the MSO and 38.8 percent for the RSO. The
total number of surveys received was 68 (MSO 31; RSO: 37). The responses of two
major players were omitted due to excessive missing data resulting in a final sample of
29 surveys from the MSO and 37 from the RSO.
Table I displays the sample characteristics according to gender, ethnicity, tenure,
and age, along with the type of instrument they played. The respondents from the two
orchestras were fairly similar with the exception that over two-thirds of major
respondents were male whereas the RSO respondents were more evenly balanced by
gender. A second difference between respondents from the two orchestras concerns the
number of previous orchestras in which the musicians had played. On average,
members of the MSO had played previously in one other orchestra while RSO members
had played in two orchestras prior to the RSO.
The job satisfaction questionnaire we administered contained 29 items in random
order, on a 1-7 Likert-type scale, and addressing nine elements of job satisfaction
similar to those used by Allmendinger et al. (1996), and Margolis (1997). These factors
were: general job satisfaction, satisfaction with compensation, job security, and

MSOa % RSOb %

Musicians 29 37
String 21 72.4 25 67.6
Wind 4 13.8 3 8.1
Brass 3 10.3 7 18.9
Percussion 1 3.4 1 2.7
Other 0 0.0 1 2.7
Female 9 31.0 18 48.6
Male 20 69.0 19 51.4
Caucasian 21 72.4 35 94.6
Other 8 27.6 2 5.4
Table I. Tenure (SD range) 18.3 11.2, 0.5-36 18.3 12.0, 0.5-40
Sample characteristics by Age (SD range) 45.6 11.6, 23-68 46.2 12.4, 23-74
orchestra Previous orchestras (SD) 1.1 0.84 2.2 3.1
management, intrinsic work motivation, job involvement, and satisfaction with Symphony
coworker relationships, opportunities for growth, and opportunities for influence.
In addition to survey questions relating to job satisfaction, we also inquired about
orchestras
organizational tenure, which was measured as the number of years of service to the
RSO or MSO. The age of the players was highly correlated with their tenure in the
orchestra (r ¼ 0.77, p , 0.05) since musician turnover is extremely low. Therefore, in
our analysis we control for number of previous orchestras in which musicians worked 99
but omit the variable for age.
Table II lists the means, standard deviations, and inter-correlations for the job
satisfaction composite variables. Inter-item reliabilities for the components of job
satisfaction were all greater than 0.6, indicating a sufficient level of internal
consistency for the composites. The inter-correlations demonstrate adequate
discriminant validity because conceptually related items are significantly related,
while unrelated factors show no significant relationship. For example, satisfaction with
management is significantly related to satisfaction with compensation and job security
(r ¼ 0.59, p , 0.001; r ¼ 0.47, p , 0.001), whereas satisfaction with management is
unrelated to internal work motivation (r ¼ 0.17, p . 0.05).
We used OLS regression to conduct our analyses using the nine factors of job
satisfaction as dependent variables with tenure and orchestra as our main independent
variables. We also tested the interaction between tenure and orchestra. All analyses
controlled for the number of previous orchestras in which musicians had played. We
tested for off-the-scale predictions on our dependent variables and found none.

Interviews
In addition to the survey, the first author conducted in-depth interviews with 22
orchestra members: ten major and 12 regional players. Interviews were held in person
and tape-recorded with participants’ permission. Each interview lasted approximately
40 minutes. In both the interviews and the surveys, we inquired about job satisfaction
and coping behaviors.

Results
Quantitative results
We had expected to find significant main effects for orchestra and tenure across all
aspects of job satisfaction, with major players being more satisfied than regional
players, and senior players being more satisfied than their junior counterparts. Table III

Meanb SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. General satisfaction 5.20 1.18

2. Compensation 4.18 2.17 0.55***
3. Job security 4.82 1.98 0.44*** 0.79***
4. Management 4.08 1.47 0.52*** 0.59*** 0.47***
5. Internal work motivation 5.96 0.83 0.46*** 0.20 0.16 0.17
6. Job involvement 3.30 1.87 2 0.03 2 0.06 2 0.07 0.14 0.14
7. Co-workers relations 5.07 1.30 0.20 0.20 0.12 0.33** 0.26* 0.21 Table II.
8. Growth 4.54 1.30 0.63*** 0.35*** 0.28* 0.44*** 0.53*** 0.18 0.43*** Composite score
9. Influence 4.07 1.25 0.46*** 0.30* 0.15 0.51*** 0.30** 0.17 0.43*** 0.66*** inter-correlations for job
Notes: an = 66; bScale ranged from 1 to 7 * p , 0.05; **
p , 0.01; ***
p , 0.001 satisfaction factorsa
IJM Group 1 models Group 2 models
26,1
General job satisfaction
Constant 5.19 (0.34)**** 4.84 (0.40)****
MSO 0.59 (0.28)*** 1.36 (0.54)**
Tenure 20.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.02)
100 Previous orchestras 20.09 (0.06) 20.08 (0.06)
MSO***tenure 20.04 (0.02)*
R2 0.12 0.16
Compensation
Constant 3.32 (0.55)**** 2.70 (0.64)****
MSO 2.44 (0.46)**** 3.79 (0.88)****
Tenure 20.01 (0.02) 0.02 (0.03)
Previous orchestras 20.03 (0.10) 0.00 (0.10)
MSO***tenure 20.07 (0.04)**
R2 0.33 0.36
Job security
Constant 3.39 (0.44)**** 3.18 (0.53)****
MSO 2.70 (0.38)**** 3.17 (0.72)****
Tenure 0.01 (0.02) 0.02 (0.02)
Previous orchestras 0.00 (0.08) 0.02 (0.01)
MSO***tenure 20.02 (0.03)
R2 0.47 0.47
Management satisfaction
Constant 3.82 (0.42)**** 3.64 (0.51)****
MSO 0.99 (0.36)**** 1.39 (0.69)****
Tenure 20.02 (0.02) 20.01 (0.02)
Previous orchestras 0.06 (0.43) 0.07 (0.08)
MSO***tenure 20.02 (0.03)
R2 0.13 0.13
Internal work motivation
Constant 6.46 (0.24)**** 6.43 (0.28)****
MSO 20.17 (0.20) 20.93 (0.39)
Tenure 20.01 (0.01) 20.01 (0.01)
Previous orchestras 20.13 (0.04)**** 20.12 (0.04)****
MSO***tenure 20.00 (0.02)
R2 0.14 0.14
Job involvement
Constant 3.65 (0.57)**** 3.65 (0.67)****
MSO 0.40 (0.83) 0.39 (0.92)
Tenure 20.02 (0.02) 20.02 (0.03)
Previous orchestras 20.02 (0.10) 20.04 (0.10)
MSO***tenure 0.00 (0.04)
R2 0.03 0.04
Co-worker relationships
Constant 5.66 (0.39)**** 5.58 (0.47)****
MSO 20.24 (0.33) 0.07 (0.64)
Tenure 20.19 (0.01) 20.02 (0.02)
Previous orchestras 20.08 (0.07) 20.08 (0.07)
Table III. MSO***tenure 20.01 (0.03)
Results of OLS regression R2 0.04 0.04
analysesa (continued)
 Group 1 models Group 2 models
Symphony
orchestras
Opportunities for growth
Constant 4.41 (0.39)**** 3.79 (0.45)
MSO 0.04 (0.33) 1.39 (0.61)***
Tenure 0.01 (0.01) 0.04 (0.02)***
Previous orchestras 20.07 (0.07) 20.04 (0.07) 101
MSO***tenure 20.07 (0.03)***
R2 0.04 0.13
Opportunities for influence
Constant 4.37 (0.38)**** 3.90 (0.44)****
MSO 20.33 (0.32) 0.69 (0.61)
Tenure 20.00 (0.01) 0.02 (0.02)
Previous orchestras 20.06 (0.07) 20.04 (0.07)
MSO***tenure 20.05 (0.03)**
R2 0.02 0.08
Notes: aFigures represent unstandardized coefficients with standard errors in parentheses
*
p , 0.10; **p , 0.05; ***p , 0.01; ****p , 0.001 Table III.

shows the results from the OLS regressions. The table presents two groups of models.
In Group 1, the main effects of orchestra (coded as a dummy variable where 1 ¼ MSO),
individual tenure and the number of previous orchestras are shown with each of the
nine job satisfaction factors. In Group 2 models, we added the interaction between
tenure and orchestra.
We found several main effects of organizational status. As expected, major players
were more generally satisfied than RSO players overall. More specifically, major
players were significantly more satisfied than regional players with their
compensation, job security, and the quality of their management. This finding was
reflected in the qualitative data as well. As one MSO player of four years described:
[This] is one of the best orchestra jobs in the country. There are very few. So, I feel very
privileged to be here. My former colleagues in [a regional] symphony are just struggling all
the time. I don’t think I need to tell you that it’s completely different here. It’s a full-time job,
year-round benefits. Medical care. Pension. All that. Plus an excellent salary. That doesn’t
necessarily have much to do with music, but it’s important.
Compensation is higher for major players; job security is better; and management has
far more resources to allocate to improving players’ quality of life. That these
differences were reflected in players’ survey responses serves as a manipulation check
that two very different organizational contexts were under investigation. Had we not
found these differences, the credibility of the rest of our results might have been in
question.
Lack of effects. We found no main effects for tenure on any of the job satisfaction
variables. In addition, the job satisfaction variables of job involvement, internal work
motivation, and satisfaction with coworker relationships did not vary by tenure or
orchestra.
Interaction effects. We found that the interaction of tenure and orchestra status was
a significant predictor of players’ satisfaction with opportunities for growth and
opportunities for exerting influence.
IJM In the Group 1 models for these dependent variables, shown in Table III,
26,1 orchestra and tenure were not significant. However, once the interaction term was
inserted in the Group 2 models, the explanatory power of the models increased
significantly, and the interaction terms were significant. In particular, younger
MSO players saw growth and influence opportunities as high early in their careers
but older players reported less satisfaction with them. By contrast, the RSO
102 players at the beginning of their careers were not as satisfied but senior members
were more so.
Finally, the interaction between orchestra and tenure for general job satisfaction
was significant at the p , 0.10 level. While major players reported higher levels of job
satisfaction overall, this satisfaction declined across tenure, whereas for regional
players, general job satisfaction increased across tenure. The most senior members of
both orchestras reported equivalent levels of general job satisfaction.

Results from interviews

To better understand the unexpected interactions we turned to the interview data. Data
from the interviews supported the interaction of organizational status and tenure as an
important factor in job satisfaction. Many major players commented that their
frustration with work was compounded by the fact that the MSO’s financial success
and reputation removed any incentive on the part of management and musicians alike
to improve the organization. This feeling intensified over time. One MSO player of 15
years said:
My biggest disappointment is the fact that in an organization that seemed to be world-class
. . . it is image over substance . . . We would like to put in some effort to try and make this
better, but for all the griping and groaning, half of the people I have talked to who agree, don’t
really have the energy or want to do anything about it.
An older major player commented:
The younger people when I first came, who are now in their 40s . . . I guess they sort of –
“mellow” is not the right word – they break down; they’re broken down by the system.
The nature of the orchestra appeared to compromise many players’ ability to exert
influence and experience growth.
In the RSO, by contrast, with its financial instability and lower profile, players
reported achieving greater leverage in the governance of the organization over time.
Thus, the increase in satisfaction with growth and influence opportunities that
occurred with tenure in the RSO may reflect that these players, with their increasing
experience and seniority, actually do have more opportunities to exert influence, grow
and develop. As one RSO player of 25 years put it:
As the years go by you get more involved . . . And you just keeping working to make small
gains . . . And there will be small gains . . . I say to people that if you think you are going to be
in the X Symphony next year, . . . you should be grateful for the people who have been in X for
20 years making that a better orchestra for you.
Another regional player added:
We have ten musicians on the full board, . . . and we have six members on the executive
committee, . . . so we have full representation, and it took a little while before we all got real
 brave. But we’ve gotten to be quite outspoken, and finally non-musician board members as a Symphony
whole, they finally think that we know what we are talking about.
orchestras
These data support the idea that differences in status between the two orchestras lent
themselves to organizational contexts with mixed rewards and sacrifices that changed
over time for the individuals employed within them.
In addition to regional players having more opportunities to get involved within the
orchestra, their relatively poor job security and low pay forced most regional players to 103
seek work outside of the orchestra as well. Therefore, many regional players wore
many hats, or they starved – literally. One musician spoke of a fellow regional player
for whom she was genuinely concerned:
I don’t know how she survives. She lives on what she makes playing and that is under
$20,000 a year. She lives on rice and beans, and you look at her sideways and she disappears.
Obviously, it is an issue.
Many of the regional players not only participated in the players’ committees involved
with the orchestra, but taught several music students and held outside jobs unrelated
to music, such as selling insurance, engineering, banking, or computer programming.
Major players, too, found solace and reprieve in their extra-orchestral activities. Many
of them reported playing in chamber groups and teaching. However, because they were
not forced to seek these activities for monetary reasons, and because their MSO
performance and rehearsal schedules left them less time, fewer people in the MSO
reported participating in such activities. The interview data suggest that over time
many major players found themselves more and more committed to an organization
fraught with frustrations, whereas for regional players their more diversified activities
actually increased the satisfaction they derived from their orchestra work.

Discussion
While the major players were indeed more generally satisfied than the regional players,
this difference in satisfaction did not hold up across all aspects of job satisfaction at all
tenure levels. Major players were more satisfied with their pay, job security, and
management while there were few differences between regional and major players’
satisfaction with co-worker relations, job involvement, and internal work motivation.
The findings regarding individuals’ satisfaction with opportunities for influence and
growth revealed more complicated results. Across tenure, MSO players were more
dissatisfied with these aspects of their jobs while the musicians from the more
impoverished RSO reported more satisfaction with opportunities for growth and
influence. The oldest members of the RSO were significantly more satisfied with these
opportunities than the oldest members of the MSO while for the youngest members the
opposite was true. Finally, despite the superior financial resources and renowned
reputation of the MSO, major and regional players’ with 25 or more years of tenure did
not differ in their levels of general job satisfaction.
While the data supported most of our expectations regarding the main effect of
organizational status, we found no main effects for tenure, and yet these effects have
been found fairly consistently in other studies (Lee and Wilbur, 1985; Lynn et al., 1996).
What accounts for our lack of results in this area? White and Spector (1987) explained a
positive relationship between age and satisfaction by noting that older workers in a
Florida study had higher salaries, higher job levels, better matches between their jobs
IJM and their needs and preferences, and a greater sense of control over their work.
26,1 Symphony orchestras differ from traditional work places in the extent to which they
provide these types of upward mobility. First, orchestras are not very hierarchical.
Each instrumental section has a leader but beyond these principals, and occasionally
an assistant principal, there is little room for promotion, especially given the lengthy
tenures most players hold. Thus, tenure in orchestras is not as closely tied to
104 differences in jobs or positions as it is in many traditional organizations.
Second, while other types of professions similarly may not have much upward
mobility, such as lawyers for instance, in most professions the substance of the work
changes as people advance. In the case of law, young attorneys start out producing
documents and doing research while senior lawyers are mostly responsible for
bringing in new accounts and may actually not do much “lawyering” at all. While
lawyers develop and employ a wide range of skills as their careers progress, symphony
orchestra players’ jobs do not contain similar variability throughout their tenure. While
they continue to pursue perfection in their playing and while every run through a
musical piece may be slightly different, fundamentally players are not accorded more
responsibility or different responsibilities as their tenure in the organization increases.
In addition, many other types of professionals work fairly autonomously, especially
after an extended apprenticeship period. Symphony orchestra players, by contrast,
have very little autonomy even though they are highly specialized experts in their
work. One major player commented:
Playing in the symphony orchestra is really a lot like being a good soldier in an army. They
call it the rank and file . . . without any kind of independent or creative role.
Therefore, the lack of main effects of tenure on musicians’ job satisfaction in this study
can be explained by the symphony orchestra context, which does not provide
traditional levels of upward mobility, variation in the substance of work, and increases
in autonomy over time that are associated with increases in job satisfaction in other
professions.
The results from the analyses showed that neither orchestra nor individual tenure
significantly affected the dependent variables of internal work motivation, job
involvement and satisfaction with coworker relationships. The first two dependent
variables (internal work motivation and job involvement) are both related to the work
itself. Previous research suggests that variables associated with the nature of the work
itself are important to job satisfaction (Hackman and Oldham, 1980). While we did
expect the nature of symphony work to influence players’ job satisfaction, we expected
the work itself to be consistent across both organizations. Regardless of orchestra and
tenure, symphony work involves playing music from the symphonic repertoire in an
ensemble. Because the nature of symphony work is held constant across orchestras
and over career spans, the lack of differences in players’ intrinsic motivation and job
involvement was not surprising.
As for satisfaction with co-worker relationships, the two orchestras are not so
different in terms of the players they hire. For the most part these musicians come from
the same pool of competition, with perhaps the top 1 percent of players ending up in the
MSO, the top 2 percent in the RSO. We had no reason to believe that the people in these
organizations differed in any way that would affect their interpersonal relationships.
Thus, the consistent nature of the work and the people, across orchestras and tenure,
explain the lack of differences in job involvement, internal work motivation, and Symphony
coworker relationships. orchestras
Evaluating explanations for the interactions
We were mistaken in assuming that the status of the major orchestra would lead to
more job satisfaction in every aspect for the major players. In order to explain the
interactions we found, we turned to our qualitative data. As discussed earlier, we 105
explored several theories that might account for the interactive effect of status and
tenure on job satisfaction.
Unmet expectations and realistic job previews. Perhaps major players reported
decreases in satisfaction across tenure due to disappointment. Given that a job in a
well-respected major orchestra is the pinnacle of success in the orchestra world, new
major players may assume that all the rewards of an orchestral career are in store for
them. To the extent that these expectations are not met, major players’ job satisfaction
declines. Premack and Wanous (1985) conducted a meta-analysis of 21 studies on
realistic job previews, which are interventions that are intended to align employees’
expectations with the realities of their jobs. They found that realistic job previews
tended to lower initial job expectations, while increasing self-selection, organizational
commitment, job satisfaction, performance, and job survival. It could be argued that
neither major nor regional players received a realistic preview of the jobs they were
about to enter, and that players’ resulting unmet expectations explain the interactions.
While unmet expectations may explain some of the effects we observed, the theory
offers an incomplete explanation. Research on realistic job previews tends to examine
mismatches between expectations and real experiences within a much shorter time
span than the decades of a career represented here. While we might expect to see an
initial steep drop in satisfaction among major players, it seems unlikely that the
decrease in job satisfaction due to unmet expectations would continue to have an
impact over the course of an entire career. Interviews suggested that when
expectations were not met, it took at most a period of a few years to adjust, not an
entire career. Evidencing the adjustment that these players make, a regional player of
20 years said:
When I first joined I had hoped to be in a better symphony. And for one reason or another I
have come to feel that this has been a very good place for me to be. . . In the grand scheme of
things I feel very fortunate to have been able to play. Although earlier on I felt it was just a
stepping stone. I thought I would just be here for a while and then I would get into a better
orchestra. And that didn’t happen. I think I went through some time of adjusting to that.
Thus, even if differences in expectations resulted in an initial decline in satisfaction for
major players, and an initial increase in satisfaction for the regional players, it is
unlikely this continues to be a force throughout the career.
Cognitive dissonance. Perhaps cognitive dissonance explains why the older regional
players reported greater job satisfaction. If this were the case, regional players might
have stated that they were more satisfied with their opportunities for growth and
influence as justification for remaining in jobs that are otherwise so unsatisfying. In
accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, over time their attitudes improve to
become aligned with their behavior of staying in the orchestra.
This explanation also leaves something to be desired because there is no compelling
reason that cognitive dissonance processes would occur in the areas of growth and
IJM influence, but not in other job satisfaction factors we assessed. Also, if cognitive
26,1 dissonance processes explain why older regional players reported higher levels of
satisfaction, then major players, who were also remaining in their orchestra, should
report improving attitudes as well. The data do not reflect this pattern. For these
reasons, we feel cognitive dissonance is not sufficient to explain the interactions we
found.
106 Valued participation. The interviews with musicians suggested that the
opportunity, and often pressure, to participate in additional valued activities both
within and outside the organization was a key component to regional players’
satisfaction. This situation led to some regional players feeling frustrated that their
colleagues were not as committed to the orchestra as they might be, but at the same
time, these multi-tasking players appear to have benefited from having multiple roles.
We argue that the prestige and financial rewards associated with the élite orchestra
satisfy many important needs that symphony orchestra players have. However, it is
these same rewards that may over time lead to less satisfaction of other needs such as
growth and exerting influence because these areas are sometimes neglected in the
context of a resource-rich organization. The musicians in the non-élite orchestra faced a
host of challenges that negatively affected job satisfaction. These same challenges,
however, created opportunities in other areas of job satisfaction that many regional
players were able to successfully exploit via their participation in valued activities over
their careers.
Thus, although processes of dealing with unmet expectations and cognitive
dissonance may have played some role in influencing players’ job satisfaction in these
orchestras, we do not feel that these theories sufficiently explain why we saw increases
in regional players’ satisfaction with growth and influence across tenure, and the
opposite in major players. Instead, we believe that the interactions we found in
satisfaction were the product of real differences in players’ experiences of opportunities
to participate in valued activities both within and outside their organizations over the
course of their careers.

Limitations
We note several limitations of this study that suggest future research opportunities.
First, our study focused on contextual factors that influence general career course
adaptation, but it is important not to overlook the influence of individual differences
that may moderate these effects (Staw and Ross, 1985; Staw et al., 1986). Although we
have no reason to believe that there were systematic differences between players in
these orchestras, musicians obviously were not randomly assigned to orchestras. We
cannot definitively rule out the possibility that differences in job satisfaction were due
to there being different types of people in the MSO versus RSO, as opposed to
differences between the organizations themselves. In addition, we measured tenure as
an individual difference, but there are other individual-level variables that might be
related to job satisfaction that we did not include. Examples might include optimism,
self-esteem, and career ambition.
A second limitation of this study is that the data were cross-sectional. The
possibility that differences in tenure were due to cohort effects, not adaptation per se,
cannot be ruled out. In defense of these data, both orchestras have had long-term
conductors and have not undergone major structural or financial changes that appear
to have created obvious cohort differences. Even so, a longitudinal design would have Symphony
been a more valid way to make inferences about tenure and job satisfaction. orchestras
Further, because we had not expected to find interactions between status and
tenure, we did not design our study with the explicit intention to collect data on
expectations, cognitive dissonance, and valued participation. Through our interviews,
we gleaned extensive useful information about these issues, but it would be beneficial
to see if our findings can be replicated by a study that systematically collects the 107
relevant data.

Implications and conclusion

The patterns revealed in this study regarding job satisfaction most likely reflect a
combination of psychological processes (e.g. dealing with unmet expectations and
cognitive dissonance) and very real differences in the types of opportunities these
environments provide. Most importantly, our findings demonstrate that all forms of
job satisfaction do not always go hand in hand. Resource-rich, prestigious work
environments do not necessarily lead to higher levels of satisfaction across the board.
On the contrary, there may be aspects of more objectively challenging environments
that lead to greater levels of emotional fulfillment in the long-run. For major players, it
may be that their very employment in a prestigious, resource-rich organization actually
lowers their chances of deriving certain kinds of satisfaction. Our data suggest that
participation in valued activities is not dependent on resources and may even result
from a dearth in resources. Alderfer (1972) in his theory of needs, specified growth as
one of the three basic needs human beings have. Similarly, White (1959) introduced the
concept of effectance, which he defined as individuals’ drive to interact with their
environments, to be competent, in essence, to exert influence. Given the importance of
experiencing growth and exerting influence to human development, it is reassuring to
discover that opportunities for growth and influence are not necessarily coupled with
material resources, and in some cases may even arise due to their scarcity.
Several questions loom as a result of these findings. The first is whether this
tradeoff between financial resources and prestige on the one hand, and opportunities
for growth and influence on the other, is inherent in organizations, or whether it is
possible to find organizations in which individuals can benefit from all these rewards?
The second question follows from the first. In the case it is not possible to co-locate all
these rewards in one organization, then how should individuals go about evaluating
this tradeoff? Presumably being in a job in which one finds increasingly more rewards
over a career span would be most desirable. Cognitive psychology studies suggest that
a steady decline in job satisfaction over 25 years or more would be more difficult to
experience than a steady incline in satisfaction (Hsee and Abelson, 1991; Hsee et al.,
1991). Furthermore, in an article entitled “If we are so rich, why aren’t we happy?”,
Csikszentmihalyi (1999) points to the lack of psychological fulfillment from material
rewards. These ideas suggest that the costs of working in a non-élite organization may
pay off in the long run. On the other hand, people may be more comfortable trading
emotional satisfaction for financial security and status. Further research should
examine how people perceive these choices and make these career decisions.
In any work setting and at any career stage, individuals may encounter a range of
rewards and challenges that may not be present in other organizations or at other
points in their work lives. Researchers should continue to explore the multi-level
IJM influences that separately and interactively shape individuals’ experiences of their
26,1 work over time. Workers who recognize the types of satisfaction they want, and when
they want them, may be best equipped to take advantage of the opportunities they
currently have, work within their organizations to facilitate change, or maneuver
themselves into work environments that will be more fulfilling. Managers who
understand these complexities may stand a better chance of attracting, leading, and
108 developing valued employees.

References
Alderfer, C.P. (1972), Existence, Relatedness, and Growth: Human Needs in Organizational
Settings, Free Press, New York, NY.
Allmendinger, J., Hackman, J.R. and Lehman, E.V. (1996), “Life and work in symphony
orchestras”, The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 194-219.
Blau, P.M. and Duncan, O.D. (1967), The American Occupational Structure, Wiley, New York,
NY.
Brief, A.P. (1998), “Attitudes in and around organizations”, in Whetten, D. (Ed.), Foundations for
Organizational Science, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Cantor, N. and Sanderson, C.A. (1999), “Life task participation and well-being: the importance of
taking part in daily life”, in Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N. (Eds), Well-being:
The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY,
pp. 230-43.
Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C. and Stone, E.F. (1992), Job Satisfaction: How People Feel About Their
Jobs and How it Affects their Performance, Lexington Books, New York, NY.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999), “If we are so rich, why aren’t we happy?”, American Psychologist,
Vol. 54 No. 10, pp. 821-7.
Festinger, L. (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Froberg, D., Gjerdingen, D. and Preston, M. (1986), “Multiple roles and women’s mental and
physical health: what have we learned?”, Women and Health, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 79-96.
Gruneberg, M.M. (1976), Job Satisfaction: A Reader, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1980), Work Re-design, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Hsee, C.K. and Abelson, R.P. (1991), “Velocity relation: satisfaction as a function of the first
derivative of outcome over time”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 60
No. 1, pp. 341-7.
Hsee, C.K., Abelson, R.P. and Salovey, P. (1991), “The relative weighting of position and velocity
in satisfaction”, Psychological Science, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 263-6.
Hout, M. (1988), “More universalism, less structural mobility – the American occupational
structure in the 1980s”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 93 No. 3, pp. 1358-400.
Kingston, P.W. and Smart, J.C. (1990), “The economic pay-off of prestigious colleges”, in Kinston,
P.W. and Lewis, L.S. (Eds), The High-status Track: Studies of Elite Schools and
Stratification, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, pp. 147-74.
Lee, R. and Wilbur, E.R. (1985), “Age, education, job tenure, salary, job characteristics, and job
satisfaction: a multivariate analysis”, Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 781-91.
Linville, P.W. (1985), “Self-complexity and affective extremity: don’t put all of your eggs in one
cognitive basket”, Social Cognition, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 94-120.
Linville, P.W. (1987), “Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and
depression”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 663-76.
Lynn, S.A., Cao, L.T. and Horn, B.C. (1996), “The influence of career stage on the work attitudes Symphony
of male and female accounting professionals”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 135-49. orchestras
Margolis, J.D. (1997), “Dignity in the balance: philosophical and practical dimensions of
promoting ethics in organizations”, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA.
Pietromonaco, P.R., Manis, J. and Frohardt-Lane, K. (1986), “Psychological consequences of 109
multiple social roles”, Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 373-82.
Podolny, J.M. (1993), “A status-based model of market competition”, American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 98 No. 4, pp. 829-72.
Premack, S.L. and Wanous, J.P. (1985), “A meta-analysis of realistic job preview experiments”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 706-19.
Spector, P.E. (1997), “Job satisfaction: application, assessment, causes, and consequences”, in
Barling, J. and Kelloway, K. (Eds), Advanced Topics in Organizational Behavior, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Staw, B.M. (1984), “Organizational behavior: a review and reformulation of the field’s outcome
variables”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 627-66.
Staw, B.M. and Ross, J. (1985), “Stability in the midst of change: a dispositional approach to job
attitudes”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 4, pp. 469-80.
Staw, B.M., Bell, N.E. and Clausen, J.A. (1986), “The dispositional approach to job attitudes: a
lifetime longitudinal test”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 56-77.
White, A.T. and Spector, P.E. (1987), “An investigation of age-related factors in the age –
job-satisfaction relationship”, Psychology and Aging, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 261-5.
White, R.W. (1959), “Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence”, Psychological Review,
Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 297-333.
Copyright of International Journal of Manpower is the property of Emerald Group Publishing Limited and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.