Volume - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 IC Value : 56.

46 e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187

EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review SJIF Impact Factor(2016) : 6.484
ISI Impact Factor (2013): 1.259 (UAE)

Research Paper

SCALE FOR MEASURING JOB

SATISFACTION – A REVIEW OF
www.eprawisdom.com
LITERATURE

SMD.Azash1 Research Scholar, Department of Business Administration,

1

Rayalaseema University, Kurnool - 518 007, A.P, India

Professor, Department of Business Administration, Aurora’s P.G College,

2

Dr.N.Thirupalu2 Ramanthapur, Hyderabad,Telangana - 500 013. India

ABSTRACT

J ob satisfaction as employees emotional state regarding the job, considering what they
expected and what they actually got out of it. In fact, an employee with low expectations
can be more satisfied with a certain job than someone who has high expectations. If one’s expectations
are met or exceeded by the job, then one is happy and satisfied with the job. In this paper, an attempt
is made to review the facets of job satisfaction and measuring instruments which are used by the
scholar for measuring the facets of job satisfaction and the job satisfaction in general.

KEYWORDS: Emotional, Expectations, Instruments, Job, Job Satisfaction

CONCEPT AND DEFINITION OF JOB subjective experience, on one’s work situation –one’s
SATISFACTION responses and feelings towards different facets of his
work role. Hoppock (1935) was the first industrial
Job satisfaction is the way an employee feels psychologist to provide the concept “job satisfaction
about his or her job. It is a generalised attitude towards “, a logical definition. He defined job satisfaction as any
the job based on evaluation of different aspects of the combination of psychological, physiological and
job. Job satisfaction indicates the satisfaction derived environmental circumstances, which cause a person to
from the being engaged in a piece of work. It is essentially truthfully say “I am satisfied with my job”.
related to human needs and their fulfilment through According to Cranny, Smith and Stone (1992)
work. Job satisfaction is the resulting feeling of define job satisfaction as employees emotional state
satisfaction which the employee gains from the job regarding the job, considering what they expected and
following the fulfilment of his needs and desires. By what they actually got out of it. In fact, an employee
working on a job, most men gratify many of their needs. with low expectations can be more satisfied with a certain
Work in this regard, is a potent source of need job than someone who has high expectations. If one’s
gratification of all types such as physical, security, social expectations are met or exceeded by the job, then one is
and ego needs. happy and satisfied with the job.
The term Job satisfaction has been given According to Locke (1969) who defines job
different connotation by different authorities on the satisfaction as feelings of contentment derived from the
subject. Job satisfaction referees to an individual’s appraisal of one’s job and the understanding that the
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 114
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671, p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187 SMD.Azash & Dr.N.Thirupalu
job is assisting in achieving one’s goals. Job Mosadeghrad and Yarmohammadian (2006)
dissatisfaction is the unpleasant affections that one feels argue that the key to understanding job satisfaction is
if one appraises the job as a barrier in achieving one’s to consider the difference between what a worker
values. Locke (1969) states that three factors exist in experiences on the job and what he or she wants or
any appraisal process of the job: the perception about expects to find.
the facet of the job, a value system, and an evaluation Vroom (1964) suggests, job satisfaction is a
of the relationship between the perception and the value function of a perceived difference between what was
system. People have set goals and values in mind. If expected as a fair and reasonable return and what was
their job assists them in achieving those goals, they are experienced. Therefore, the higher the expectations of
satisfied. individuals, the more likely they are to be less satisfied
Robbins (2005) defines job satisfaction as a with their jobs, all other things being constant. Indeed,
set of emotions that one feels about one’s job. Smith, changes in expectations can have a profound impact on
Kendall and Hulin (1969) define job satisfaction as the perceived satisfaction of employees.
“feelings or affective responses to facets of the Porter and Steers (1973) argue that the extent
situation.” of employee job satisfaction reflects the cumulative level
In words of Smith et al. (1969) state that those of ‘met worker expectations’. That is, employees expect
feelings are caused by the difference between what is their job to provide a mix of features (for example, pay,
expected from the job and what is actually experienced, promotion, autonomy), but when the accumulation of
and comparing this difference to alternative jobs. Agho, unmet expectation becomes sufficiently large, there is
Mueller and Price (1993) define job satisfaction as the less job satisfaction (Field, 2005) . For these expectations,
extent to which workers are happy with their jobs. each employee has certain preferential values and these
“An attitudinal variable that reflects how preferences vary for different individuals.
people feel about their jobs overall as well as various According to Spector (2008) job satisfaction
aspects of them.” He defines job satisfaction as an as an attitudinal variable that reflects how people feel
attitude, and considers different aspects of the job in about their jobs. Armstrong (2004) opines that job
addition to the overall feeling that one may have about satisfaction as “the attitudes and feelings people have
one’s job. Considering different aspects of the job about their work. Such feelings towards work are often
creates a better understanding of how employee feels evaluated via measures of job satisfaction. Positive and
about the job, because one may be satisfied with one favourable attitudes towards the job indicate job
aspect, not satisfied with another, and overall satisfied satisfaction. Negative and unfavourable attitudes
(Spector P. , 1996). towards the job indicate job dissatisfaction.
In words of Bullock (1952) “job satisfaction is Purohit (2004) indicates that job satisfaction is
an attitude which results from balancing and summation a specific subset of attitudes held by organisational
of many specific likes and dislikes experienced in members. It is the attitude one has toward specific
connection with the job. According to (Locke E. , 1976) factors, such as wages, security of employment and
job satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive emotional conditions of work.
state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or Spector (2008) and Kreitner and Kinicki (2006)
experience. state that job satisfaction encompasses a global feeling
Victor Vroom (1978) viewed job satisfaction as about the job and includes a related constellation of
“the positive orientation of an individual towards all attitudes about various facets of the job (such as pay,
aspects of the work situation”. Grunberg (1997) defines supervision and co-workers) to which the employee
job satisfaction as an individual’s emotional reactions responds effectively. This definition implies two
to a particular job. approaches to job satisfaction, namely, the global
In the view of Luthans (2005) Job satisfaction approach, which is used when the overall attitude is of
as an emotional/cognitive response claims that it is interest, and the facet approach, which is used to find
intangible and can only are inferred. out which parts of the job produce satisfaction or
Dawis (2004) suggests two basic components dissatisfaction. This definition implies two approaches
of the term ‘satisfaction’: a cognitive or evaluative to job satisfaction, namely, the global approach, which
component (the perception that one’s needs are being is used when the overall attitude is of interest, and the
fulfilled), and an affective or emotional component (the facet approach, which is used to find out which parts of
feeling that accompanies the cognition). the job produce satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 115
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review| SJIF Impact Factor(2016) : 6.484
In view of Spector (1997) indicates that the d) Overall job satisfaction is the sum of the
concept of job satisfaction has shifted in the last 30 product of goal importance and the difference
years from need fulfilment to job satisfaction as an between goal aspiration and goal attainment
attitudinal variable. For instance, employees can have JS= Goals “( GASP-GATT)
an attitude of being engaged with or disassociated from Keith and Davis (1977) considered job
their organisation. Schermerhorn et al. (2005), who define satisfaction as” the favourableness or
job satisfaction as “the degree to which people feel unfavourableness with which employees view their
positively or negatively about a job and its various work.it results when there is a fit between job
facets” characteristics and wants of employees. It expresses
Job satisfaction as an overall emotional the amount congruence between one’s expectations of
orientation of individuals toward the work roles that the job and the rewards that the job provides”.
they are presently occupying (Kalleberg, 1977). Balzer According to Blum and Naylor (1968)”job
et al. (2000) defined job satisfaction as “the feelings a satisfaction is the result of many attitude possessed by
worker has about his or her job or job experiences in an employee. It is a general attitude which is the result
relation to previous experiences, current expectations, of many specified attitudes in three areas namely (i) job
or available alternatives”. factors; (ii) individual characteristics; and (iii) group
Eagly and Chaiken (1993) defined job relations outside the job”.
satisfaction as “an internal state that is expressed by Schermerhorn (1993) defines job satisfaction
affectively and/or cognitively evaluating an experienced as an affective or emotional response towards various
job with some degree of favour or disfavour. aspects of an employee’s work. The author emphasises
Benge and Hickey (1984) recognized job that likely causes of job satisfaction include status,
satisfaction as a collection of different attitudes of an supervision, co-worker relationships, job content,
employee at a given time. “Brief (2002) describes job remuneration and extrinsic rewards, promotion and
satisfaction as an internal state that is expressed by physical conditions of the work environment, as well as
affectively and/or cognitive evaluating an experienced organisational structure.
job with some degree of favour or disfavour” (Huff & Similarly, Mc Namara (1998) points out that job
Yeoh, 2008). satisfaction refers to an individual’s feeling or state of
Weiss (2002) contended that job satisfaction mind giving heed to the nature of the individual’s work.
is an attitude, as “a positive (or negative) evaluative The author further explains that job satisfaction can be
judgment one makes about one’s job or job situation”. influenced by a diversity of job dimensions, inter alia,
According to Kovack (1977), job satisfaction is a the quality of the employee’s relationship with their
component of organisational commitment. supervisor, the status of the physical environment in
Job satisfaction, according to McCormick and which the individual works, degree of fulfilment in work.
Ilgen (1985), is an association of attitudes held by an According to Rue and Byars (1992) job
organisation’s members. The way each employee satisfaction as an individual’s mental state about the
responds towards their work is an indication of the job. Robbins et al. (2003) add that an individual with
commitment towards their employers. Many employees high job satisfaction will display a positive attitude
are of the opinion that downsizing; rightsizing and towards their job, and the individual who is dissatisfied
reengineering give employers an opportunity to dispose will have a negative attitude about the job. This
of those workers who are a liability to the organisation. definition is expanded by Greenberg and Baron (1995)
Evans (1969) refers to the following four who define job satisfaction as an individual’s cognitive,
combinations to use to denote job satisfaction: affective and evaluative reactions toward their jobs.
a) Overall job satisfaction is the sum of job facet Job satisfaction is defined by Arnold and
satisfaction (JFS) JS= Facets “ (JFS) Feldman (1986) as the amount of overall positive affect
b) Overall job satisfaction is the sum of the (or feelings) that individuals have towards their jobs. In
product of facet satisfaction and job facet view of Robbins (1996), Job satisfaction is the difference
importance (JFI) JS= facets “ (JFS*JFI) between the amount of rewards employees receive and
c) Overall job satisfaction is the sum of difference the amount they believe they should receive.
between goal aspiration (GASP) and goal Mobey and Lockey (1970) opined Job
attainment (GATT) JS= Goal “ (GASP-GATT) satisfaction and dissatisfaction are function of the
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 116
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671, p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187 SMD.Azash & Dr.N.Thirupalu
perceived relationship between what one expects and through work. In fact, job satisfaction is generated by
obtains from one’s job and how much importance or individual’s perception of how well his job on the whole
value one attributes to it. is satisfying his various needs”.
Porter (1961) defines Job satisfaction as a one- Pestonjee (1991) defined job satisfaction as
dimensional contract; that is, one is generally satisfied “summation of employees’ feelings in four important
or dissatisfied with one’s job. In contrast, Smith, Kendall areas, namely, job, management, personal adjustment
and Hulin (1969) argue that Job satisfaction is and social relations. The first two areas encompass
multidimensional; that is one may be more or less factors directly connected with the job (intrinsic factor)
satisfied with one’s supervisor, pay or workplace etc. and the other two include factors not directly connected
Luthan (1998) posited that there are three with job but which are presumed to have a bearing on
important dimensions to job satisfaction: job satisfaction (extrinsic factors)”.
 Job satisfaction is an emotional response to a According to Katzel (1964) job satisfaction was
job situation. As such it cannot be seen. It can the verbal expression of an incumbent’s evaluation of
only be inferred. his job. The verbal evaluation was made operational by
 Job satisfaction is often determined by how some form of attitude questionnaire or scale by means
well outcome meets or exceeds expectations. of which the incumbent rates his job on a continuum of
For instance, if organization participants feel “like-dislike”, or approximate synonyms, such as
that they are working much harder than others satisfied-dissatisfied.
in the department but are receiving fewer Job satisfaction indicates the satisfaction
rewards they will probably have a negative derived from being engaged in a piece of work. It was
attitudes towards the work, the boss and co- essentially related to human needs and their fulfilment
workers. On the other hand, if they feel they through work. In fact job satisfaction was generated by
are being treated very well and are being paid the individual’s perception of how his job on the whole
equitably, they are likely to have positive was satisfying his various needs (Sinha D. , the
attitudes towards the job. satisfaction and Job Behaviour , 1972). According to
 Job satisfaction represents several related Srivastava (1974) job satisfaction may be defined as the
attitudes which are most important attitude, people hold towards their job, positive
characteristics of a job about which people attitudes towards the job connote satisfaction and
have effective response. These to Luthans are: negative attitude towards the job connote
the work itself, pay, promotion opportunities, dissatisfaction, with it.
supervision and co-workers. Job satisfaction is either a global feeling about
Sharma and Jyoti (2006) mention that job the job or a related constellation of attitude about various
satisfaction is a function of the degree to which an aspects of facets of the job. The facet approach is used
employee’s needs to be satisfied. Bruce and Blackburn to find out which parts of the job produce satisfaction
(1992) stated that enriched jobs contain the presences or dissatisfaction. For most employees, work also fills
of five work dimensions: (a) task identity, (b) task the need for social interaction and so, friendly,
significance, (c) skill variety, (d) autonomy, and (e) supportive employees also lead to increased job
feedback. “The presence of these psychological states satisfaction (Drago, Wooden, & Sloan, 1992).
leads ultimately to: motivation, high quality performance, There are three major approaches proposed to
low absenteeism and turnover, and high job understand the concept of job satisfaction. They are (1)
satisfaction” attitudinal approach (Herzberg, The Motivation to
Sudhir Kakar (1974) used the word “work Work, 1959) (2) need gratification approach (Maslow A.
satisfaction “and referred to it as is “an individual‘s H., 1954) and (3) factorial approach (Vroom V. , 1964;
subjective experience of his work situation-his Lawler, Pay and Organisational Effectiveness : A
responses, the level of feelings, towards different facets Psychological View, 1971).
of his work role”. The attitudinal approach of job satisfaction
D.Sinha (1972) opines “job satisfaction covers interprets job, in terms of a generalised affective
both the satisfaction derived from being engaged in orientation, to all aspects of the job resulting from many
piece of work or in any pursuit of a higher order. It is specific affective orientations in the area of individual
essentially related to human needs and their fulfilment adjustment, specific job factors and group interaction.
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 117
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review| SJIF Impact Factor(2016) : 6.484
Need gratification approach was presumed to closely etc. The motivator needs are higher order or growth
relate to job satisfaction. In the process of seeking needs, which are unique to humans. Things that are
adjustment with were of significance to them, they were part of human nature itself satisfy these needs. They
expected to develop to develop positive attitudes are autonomy, variety, creativity and the like. Herzberg
towards their job and this reveals higher job satisfaction leaves one in the dark, concerning the source of the
in them. In other words, job satisfaction can act as an needs.
index of need gratification in this approach. But the From the above literature review it is found that job
factorial approach has attempted to discover the satisfaction is not a Uni-dimensional aspect it is the
determinants of job satisfaction, by taking into account result of multiple factors are too caused satisfaction and
the underlying sources of job satisfaction. To dissatisfaction. The preferences of satisfaction and/or
understand these approaches, it is fit and proper to go dissatisfaction factors are difference with the individual.
through the different theories of work motivation. MEASUREMENT OF JOB
The need hierarchy theory of Maslow (1954) SATISFACTION
explains that individual is concerned with the basic needs Measuring job satisfaction has often been the
of food, shelter, clothing etc. When these are fulfilled focus of attention of researchers and organisational
they seek security and safety. When these needs are management interested in identifying the determinants
satisfied, individuals become concerned with the next of job satisfaction (Ellickson & Logsdon, 2001; Jamieson
higher level needs of affection, belongingness etc. Next & Richards, 1996). However, one of the major obstacles
in order, are the esteem needs. Individual look for facing researchers is the need for an adequate measure
recognition and regard from their peers. When these to assess job satisfaction. The first contemporary
are met, individual move to self-actualization needs. This measure of job satisfaction, published by Hoppock in
explanation of human motivation is simple and easy to 1935, was a 4-item measure of general job satisfaction.
understand. Therefore, it has become very popular. Dozens of measures to assess job satisfaction followed
Some empirical support may also be found. However, (Cook, Hepworth, Wall, & Warr, 1981).
there are some serious and important questions, which Not only have many definitions of job
this theory does not satisfactorily explain. For, example, satisfaction been used, but also many different scales
the question: “when an individual reaches the ultimate of measurement. The importance of these scales for
level of motivation (self-actualization) will he cease to measuring job satisfaction stems from the fact that if
be motivated?” Maslow’s theory assumes that self- unreliable scales are used in measuring job satisfaction
actualization is a process that is sustained by it. The the result will consequently be incorrect (Hinkin, 1995).
most problematic aspect of Maslow’s theory is the It has been argued that no single desirable
concept of “need” itself. Does it have a physiological measurement exists since job satisfaction is related
and/or psychological base? Does it arise from the directly to the complexity of human feelings (Wanous
deficiency only or does it always exist? & Lawler III, 1972). In reviewing the literature, it becomes
Alderfer (1972) slightly modified the need hierarchy apparent that different methods have been used to
theory of Maslow. He added to the “fulfilment- assess job satisfaction, such as (1) asking supervisors
progression” process, the “frustration-regression or observers, (2) questionnaires, (3) interviews and (4)
“component. Alderfer differs from Maslow both in critical incident analysis (a procedure for measuring job
content and process. For Maslow, there are five needs satisfaction in which employees describe incidents
and for Alderfer, three needs. For Maslow, there is a relating to their work they found especially satisfying
progression from a lower level need to a higher level or dissatisfying) (Greenberg & Baron, 2000). The problem
one. For Alderfer besides this progression there is also is, asking supervisors or observers to estimate the
regression from the higher level to a lower level need. satisfaction of other employees will not give accurate
The most celebrated Herzberg’s two-factor theory results because only the observed employee knows
popularly known as “Motivation-Hygiene “theory of about his or her own attitude (Spector P. , 2008).
job satisfaction basically assumes the need for However, researchers, in general, seem to favour
satisfaction of two types of needs. The hygiene, which questionnaire techniques to measure job satisfaction
are essentially maintenance needs, which provide rather than other data collection methods due to the
conductive environment for work, include such thing demands of time (Spector P. , 2008).
as pay, security, co-workers, general working conditions
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 118
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671, p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187 SMD.Azash & Dr.N.Thirupalu
The measurement technique most commonly (b)The Job Satisfaction Index (JSI)
utilised regarding job satisfaction is the Likert scale This scale was developed by Brayfield and
(Locke E. A., 1976; Arnold, Silvester, Patterson, & Rothe (1951) to measure global job satisfaction. It has
Robertson, 2005).Three major approaches have been sound psychometric properties and has been used
used to measure job satisfaction: global measures, facet extensively by researchers. The JSI comprises 18 items
measures and a combination of global and facets to measure overall job satisfaction (for example, ‘Most
measures (Spector P. , 2008; Fields, 2002). According to days, I am enthusiastic about my work’). Responses
Spector (1997), sometimes both approaches can be used follow a five-point Likert scale for each statement
to obtain a complete picture of employee job satisfaction. ranging from a value of 1 for ‘strongly disagree’ to 5 for
GENERAL JOB SATISFACTION ‘strongly agree’. The JSI has good reliability with a value
MEASURE of Cronbach’s alpha equal to .87 (Fields, 2002).
A general measure is simply the measure of an FACET-SPECIFIC JOB
individual’s overall job satisfaction as seen in answers SATISFACTION MEASURE
to questions such as ‘Overall, how satisfied are you This second method of measuring job
with your job?’ The general measure suggests that job satisfaction involves looking at certain facets that make
satisfaction is more than the sum of its parts, and up a particular job, such as pay, supervision and
individuals can express dissatisfaction with facets of promotion. Researchers like Howard and Frink (1996)
the job and still be generally satisfied (Thierry, 1998) and Porter and Steers (1973) emphasise that job
1998). Nagy (2002) indicates that having just one satisfaction is a multifaceted construct, with various
question to measure global job satisfaction can be just features or facets contributing to the construct as a
as good because workers generally know how satisfied whole. This kind of measurement is conducted to find
they are, and do not need a whole set of questions to out how workers feel about each aspect of the job and
express this. Similarly, Thierry (1998) criticises this to identify areas of dissatisfaction that should be
measure on the premise that individuals may not attribute targeted for improvement (Spector P. , 1997). It is worth
equal importance to each of the facets. Researchers mentioning that the levels of facet satisfaction had
argue that the use of global measures reflects individual different degrees of relationship with global satisfaction.
differences in the construct rather than simply focusing For example, satisfaction with pay might have the largest
on responses to specific items (Fields, 2002). Moreover, positive correlation while satisfaction with supervision
studies that have used global measures argue that the might have the lowest (Fields, 2002).
global measure is more inclusive (Scarpello & Campbell, Researchers who have used the facet measure
1983; Highhouse & Becker, 1993). Examples of popular argue that the global approach is too broad and,
survey instruments designed to measure overall job therefore, responses cannot be effectively interpreted
satisfaction, namely, the Job in General (JIG) scale and (Rice, McFarlin, & Bennet, Standards of comparison and
the Job Satisfaction Index (JSI), are presented as follows. job satisfaction, 1989; Morrison, 1996). Facet measures
(a) the Job in General (JIG) Scale increase accuracy by including many different facets of
This scale was developed by Ironson et al. (1989) to the attitude concerned and by avoiding the possibility
assess overall job satisfaction, and consists of items that a careless response to a single question will
that do not reflect the various facets of the job. The JIG invalidate the measure (Arnold, Silvester, Patterson, &
uses 18 items to describe global job satisfaction. Each Robertson, 2005). Numerous standardised reliable and
item is a short phrase about the job in general. It uses valid instruments are available for this type of
three response choices. For example, responses are measurement. The most important ones are described
obtained as ‘YES’ if the employee agrees that the item below
describes his/her job in general, ‘NO’ if the item does The Job Descriptive Index (JDI)
not and the ‘?’ sign if the employee is undecided. The This scale was developed by Smith et al. (1969)
scale has good reliability and correlates well with other and it has become the most popular facet scale among
scales of overall job satisfaction (Spector P. , 2008). More organisational researchers. It also may be the most
specifically, Field (2002) reviewed many studies and developed and validated scale (Spector P. , 2008).The
found that the Coefficient alpha values of JIG ranged JDI contains 72 items, which assess five facets of job
from .82 to .94 satisfaction, namely, work, supervision, pay, co-workers,
and promotional opportunities. Each item is a short
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 119
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review| SJIF Impact Factor(2016) : 6.484
phrase that describes the job. The JDI uses three (Spector P. , 2006). However, authors like Schriesheim et
response choices: ‘YES’ if the employee agrees that the al . (1993) have questioned the way the items are
item describes his/her job in general, ‘NO’ if the item classified into the intrinsic and extrinsic groups. The
does not and the ‘?’ sign if the employee cannot decide limitation of the MSQ scale is its length, as considerable
Measures of strengths and weaknesses within time is required to complete it (Jex, 2002).
each facet tell practitioners where improvements can be The Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)
made. Cook et al. (1981) observed that some items in the This scale was developed by Spector (1997); it
JDI scale may not apply to all employee groups. Spector yields an overall satisfaction score and 9 facet-specific
(2008) comments that this is true for all job satisfaction scores. The facet-specific scales include pay, promotion,
scales and states that the weakness of the JDI scale is supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards,
that it has only five facets to assess job satisfaction. operating conditions, co-workers, nature of work, and
Although the actual scale tends to be lengthy, with 72 communication. The JSS utilizes a six-point Likert scale
questions, it does not provide much information about with 1 representing ‘disagree very much’ and 6
issues such as recognition, autonomy and feedback. representing ‘agree very much’. Respondents are asked
Therefore, using the JDI to measure satisfaction in any to circle one of six numbers that corresponds to their
organisation that has problems with lack of recognition, agreement or disagreement about each item. Each of the
autonomy or feedback would probably not serve the nine facet subscales contains four items, and an overall
purpose required unless some adaptations were made. measure of job satisfaction can be obtained by
Another limitation is the lack of an overall satisfaction calculating the total from all 36 items. Compared to the
scale; the JDI scale does not allow for the collection of other measures, the JSS is fairly typical in that the items
five facets into an overall view (Jex, 2002). Although represent statements about a person’s job or job
some users incorporate the five facets into an overall situation. Respondents are then asked to indicate the
measure of job satisfaction, this practice is not extent to which they agree with each item. Given this
recommended by Ironson et al. (1989). However, this type of scaling, the JSS is more similar to the JDI than to
issue was solved by some researchers of JDI in the MSQ because it is more descriptive in nature (Jex,
developing the JIG scale. Hernández et al. (2004) suggest 2002). Unlike the JDI, however, overall satisfaction scores
that the ‘?’ category would be best eliminated from the can be computed for the JSS by adding up the facet
responses format as it is unclear, and forces the scores. Compared to the JDI and MSQ, not as much
respondents into a dichotomous choice. supporting data are available for the JSS, but the
The Minnesota Satisfaction evidence supporting the psychometric properties of this
Questionnaire (MSQ) scale is still impressive (Jex, 2002; Spector P. , Job
This scale was developed by Weiss et al. (1967) satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and
to measure the employee’s satisfaction with 20 different consequences, 1997). A practical limitation of JDI and
facets or aspects of the work environment. These are MSQ is that the questions are copyrighted by the
activity, independence, variety, social status, developers and a fee is required for their use (Allen &
supervision (human relations), supervision (technical), Wilburn, 2002).
moral values, security, social service, authority, ability Both measurements, general and facet, have
utilization, company policies and practices, their strengths and weaknesses. Highhouse and Becker
compensation, advancement, responsibility, creativity, (1993) indicate that the relationship between the global
working conditions, co-workers, recognition, and and the facet measure of job satisfaction still needs
achievement. The MSQ comes in two forms, one with clarification. Anderson (2002) believes that global and
100 questions and one with 20 questions. Both the long summed facets measures will yield equivalent results.
and short forms were designed to measure the 20 job However, Spector (2008) states that “the sum of facets
facets. Each of the MSQ items consists of statements is an approximation of overall job satisfaction, but it
about various facets of the job and the respondents are may not exactly match the global satisfaction of
asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with each individuals”. Researchers recommend combining both
(Spector P. , 2008). The short form is used to assess measurements because specific facet satisfaction
either global satisfaction or intrinsic satisfaction and measures may better reflect changes in relevant
‘concerns aspects central to the job itself’ and extrinsic situational factors, whereas responses to a global
satisfaction ‘concerns aspects of the work situation’ measure are more likely to reflect individual differences
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 120
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671, p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187 SMD.Azash & Dr.N.Thirupalu
than are responses to specific items (Witt & Nye, 1992; 9. Blum, M. L., & Naylor, J. (1968). Industrial Psychology :
Spector P. , Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, Its Theoretical and Social Foundation. New York: Harper
and R.N.
causes and consequences, 1997). 10. Brayfield, A., & Rothe, H. (1951). An index of job
Another method of measuring job satisfaction satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307-11.
11. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. (2002). Organizational behavior:
is to measure the importance of each facet to workers
Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology,
along with facet measures of job satisfaction. More 53(1), 279-307.
specifically, researchers like Rice et al. (1991) suggest 12. Bruce, W. M., & Blackburn, J. (1992). Balancing job
satisfaction and performance. Westport CT: Quorum.
that worker’s overall job satisfaction is consisted of a 13. Bullock, R. P. (1952). Socal Factors relating to Job
total of the description of each facet multiplied by the satisfaction. Ohio State University, Bureau of Business
importance of that particular facet to the worker. For Research , Columbus.
14. Cook, J. D., Hepworth, S., Wall, T., & Warr, P. (1981).
example, facet measures of job satisfaction would have The experience of work: A compendium and review of 249
to include both descriptions of each facet and a measure measures and their use. London: Academic Press.
or weight of how important the facet was to the worker. 15. Davis, K. (1977). Human Behaviour at Work: Organisation
Behaviour. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill.
These scores would then be multiplied and added 16. Dawis, R. V. (2004). Job satisfaction (Vol. 4). (I. M. (Eds.),
together in order to obtain an overall score of job Ed.) Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons .
17. Drago, R., Wooden, M., & Sloan, J. (1992). Productive
satisfaction. However, Jackson and Corr (2002) have
Relations? Australian Industrial Relations and Workplace
found that there is no increase in predictive ability using Performance.
weighted versus unweighted job satisfaction measures. 18. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of
attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
That is, workers do not process their levels of job College Publishing.
satisfaction by multiplying each facet description by its 19. Ellickson, M., & Logsdon, K. (2001). Determinants of job
corresponding facet importance, but instead evaluate satisfaction of municipal government employees. State
Local Government Review, 33(3), 173-84.
each facet in terms of an overall have-want discrepancy, 20. Evans, M. G. (1969). Conceptual and Operational
therefore, simplifying measures of facet satisfaction. Problems in the Masurement of Various Aspects of Job
Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 93-101.
CONCLUSION 21. Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS ( Second
The sum of facets is an approximation of overall Edition, , ed.). London: Sage.
job satisfaction, but it may not exactly match the global 22. Fields, D. L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: A guide
to validated scales for organizational research and
satisfaction of individuals”. Researchers recommend diagnosis . Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
combining both measurements because specific facet 23. Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. (1997). Behavior in
satisfaction measures may better reflect changes in organizations: understanding the human side of work.
Canada: Prentice-Hal.
relevant situational factors, whereas responses to a 24. Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. (1995). Behavior in
global measure are more likely to reflect individual organizations: Understanding and managing the human
differences than are responses to specific items. side of work (5th ed.). Trenton: Prentice-HallInternational,
REFERENCES Inc.
1. Agho, A. O., Mueller, C., & Price, J. (1993). Determinants 25. Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. (2000). Behaviour in
of employee job satisfaction: An empirical test of a causal organisations: Understanding and Managing the Human
model. Human Relations, 46(8), 1007-1028. Side of Work (Seven Edition ed.). Prentice Hall
2. Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence,related and growth: International, Inc.
Human Needs in Organisational Setting. New York: Free 26. Hernández, A., Drasgow, F., & González-Romá, V. (2004).
Press. Investigating the functioning of a middle category by Means
3. Allen, D., & Wilburn, M. (2002). Linking Customer and of a mixed-measurement model. Journal of Applied
Employee Satisfaction to the Bottom Line. Milwaukee, Psychology, 89, 687-699.
WI: ASQ Quality Press . 27. Herzberg, F. (1959). The Motivation to Work. New York:
4. Armstrong, M. (2004). A handbook of human resource Willey.
management practice (Nine Edition ed.). Kogan Page. 28. Highhouse, S., & Becker, A. (1993). Facet measures and
5. Arnold, H. J., & Feldman, D. (1986). Organizational global job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology,
Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. 8, 117–27.
6. Arnold, J., Silvester, J., Patterson, F., & Robertson, I. 29. Hinkin, T. (1995). A review of scale development practices
(2005). Work Psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the study of organizations. Journal of Management,,
in the workplace (Fourth Edition ed.). FT Prentice Hall. 21(5), 967-988.
7. Balzer, W. K., Kihm, J., Smith, P., Irwin, J., & Bachiochi. 30. Hoppock, R. (1935). job satisfaction. New York: Harper &
(2000). Users’ manual for the job descriptive index (JDI; Row.
1997 version) and the job in general scales. Bowling Green 31. Howard, J. L., & Frink, D. (1996). The effects of
StateUniversity. Bowling, Green OH: In J. M. Stanton organizational restructure on employee satisfaction. Group
and C. D. Crossley (Eds.). and Organizational Management, 21(3), 278-303.
8. Benge, E., & Hickey, J. (1984). Morale and motivation: 32. Huff, J. T., & Yeoh, T. (2008). The effect of attitude
How to measure morale and increase productivity. New strength on the stability of job satisfaction. Midwest
York: Franklin Watts. Midwest, St. Louis, MO.
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 121
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review| SJIF Impact Factor(2016) : 6.484
33. Ironson, G. H., Smith, P., Brannick, M., & Gibson, W. 58. Purohit, P. (2004). Job satisfaction and work motivation.
(1989). Constitution of a job in general scale: A comparison Delhi , India: Sharada Publishing House.
of global, composite, and specific measures. Journal of 59. Rice, R. W., Gentile, D., & McFarlin, D. (1991). Facet
Applied Psychology, 74, 193-200. importance and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
34. J, C. C., Smith, P. C., & Stone, E. F. (1992). Job Psychology, 76(1), 31-39.
satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it 60. Rice, R. W., McFarlin, D., & Bennet, D. (1989). Standards
affects their performance. New York: Lexington Books. of comparison and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
35. Jackson, C. J., & Corr, P. (2002). Global job satisfaction Psychology, 74, 591-598.
and facet description: The moderating role of facet 61. Robbins, S. P. (1996). Organizational Behaviour (7th ed.).
importance. European Journal of Psychological London: Prentice-Hall.
Assessment, 18(1), 1-8. 62. Robbins, S. P. (2005). Organizational behavior. Upper
36. Jamieson, D., & Richards, T. (1996). Committed Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
employee- the key focus in strategic development . Society 63. Robbins, S. P., Odendaal, A., & Roodt, G. (2003).
Conference, MR5 Annual Conference Paper. Organisational behaviour (9th ed.). Cape Town: Prentice-
37. Jex, S. (2002). Organizational psychology:A scientist- Hall International.
practitioner approach. John Wiley & Sons. 64. Rue, L. W., & Byars, L. (1992). Management skills and
38. Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A application (6th ed ed.). NewJersey: Prentice-Hall
theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, International.
42(1), 124-143. 65. Scarpello, V., & Campbell, J. (1983). Job satisfaction:
39. Katzel, R. A. (1964). Personal Values,Job satisfaction and Are all the parts there? Personnel Psychology, 36(3), 577-
Job Behavior. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. 600.
40. Kovack, K. A. (1977). Organisation size, job satisfaction, 66. Schermerhorn, J. R. (1993). Management for productivity
absenteeism and turnover. Washington D.C.: University (4th ed ed.). Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Press of America. 67. Schermerhorn, J., Hunt , J., & Osborn, R. (2005).
41. Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2006). Organizational Organizational behaviour (Ninth Edition ed.). John Willey
behaviour. New York: McGraw Hill.
42. Lawler, E. E. (1971). Pay and Organisational Effectiveness & Sons, Inc.
: A Psychological View. New york: McGraw-Hill. 68. Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K., Scandura, T., & Gandiner,
43. Locke, A. E. (1969). What is job satisfaction? C. (1993). Improving construct measurement in
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 309- management research: Comments and quantitative
336. approaches for assessing the theoretical content adequacy
44. Locke, E. (1976). the nature and causes of job satisfaction of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. Journal of
in M.D.Dunnettee (Ed.,). Rand McNally,Chicago. Management, 19(2), 387-417.
45. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job 69. Sharma, R. D., & Jyoti, J. (2006). Job satisfaction among
satisfaction. In M. (. In Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of school teachers. IIMB Management Review, 18(4), 349-
Industrial and Organisational Psychology,. Chicago, IL: 363.
Rand McNally . 70. Sinha, D. (1972). the satisfaction and Job Behaviour . New
46. Luthans, F. (1998). Organisational Behaviou (8th ed.). Delhi: Shree Ram Centre for Industrial Relations and
Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Human resource .
47. Luthans, F. (2005). Organizational behaviour (Tenth Edition 71. Smith, P. C., Kendall, L., & Hulin, C. (1969). The Job
ed.). Irwin: McGraw-Hill. Descriptive Index Bowling Green. OH. Department of
48. Maslow, A. H. (1954). A theory of Human Motivation. Psychology. Bowling Green State University.
Psychol.Rev, 50, 370-396. 72. Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The
49. McCormick, E. J., & Ilgen, D. (1985). Industrial and measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement.
Organisational Psychology ((8th ed.) ed.). London: Allen Chicago: Rand McNally.
& Unwin. 73. Spector, P. (1996). Industrial and organizational
50. Mobey, & Locke , E. (1970). Job satisfaction and psychology: Research and practice. New York: John Wiley
performance, A theoretical analysis. Organizational and Sons.
Behaviour and Human Performance, 484 – 500. 74. Spector, P. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application,
51. Morrison, K. A. (1996). An empirical test of a model of job assessment, causes and consequences. Thousand Oaks,
satisfaction. Journal of Small Business Management, 34, Calif: Sage.
27-40. 75. Spector, P. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application,
52. Mosadeghrad, A., & Yarmohammadian, M. (2006). A study assessment, causes and consequences. Thousand Oaks,
of relationship between managers’ leadership style and Calif: Sage.
employees’ job satisfaction. Leadership in Health Services, 76. Spector, P. (2006). Industrial and organizational
19 (2), 11-28. psychology: Research and practice (Fourth Edition ed.).
53. Nagy, M. S. (2002). Using a single-item approach to New York: John Wiley & Sons.
measure facet job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational 77. Spector, P. (2008). Industrial and organizational psychology
and Organizational Psychology, 75 (1), 77-86. : Research and practice (Vol. 5). New York: John Wiley &
54. Namara, M. c. (1998). Retrieved from http:// Sons.
www.mapnp.org/library/prsn_wll/job_stfy.htm 78. Spector, P. (2008). Industrial and organizational
55. Pestonjee, D. M. (1991). Motivation and Job satisfaction psychology: Research and practice (Fifth Edition ed.). New
. New Delhi: McMillan India Ltd. York: John Wiley & Sons.
56. Porter, L. W. (1961). A study of perceived need satisfaction 79. Spector, P. (2008). Industrial and organizational
in bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied psychology: Research and practice (Fifth Edition ed.). New
Psychology, 1-10. York: John Wiley & Sons.
57. Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. (1973). Organizational work 80. Srivastava, A. K., & Sinha, M. (1974). Socio personal
and personal factors in employee turnover and variables of degree of job anxiety of blue collar workers.
absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 151-176. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 9, 397-405.
www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 122
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671, p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187 SMD.Azash & Dr.N.Thirupalu
81. sudhir, K. (1974). Personality and authority in work. 86. Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L.
Bombay: Somaiya Publication Pvt.LTD. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction
82. Thierry, H. (1998). Motivation and satisfaction. In H. T. Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
In P J D Drenth (Ed.), Handbook of work and organisational 87. Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction:
psychology (pp. 253-254). Sussex: Psychology Press Ltd. Separating evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences.
83. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 173-194.
Wiley & Sons. 88. Witt, L. A., & Nye, L. (1992). Gender and the relationship
84. Vroom, V. K. (1978). Work and Motivation. New York: between perceived fairness of pay or promotion and job
Wiley. satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(6), 910-
85. Wanous, J. P., & Lawler III, E. (1972). Measurement and 917.
meaning of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology,
56(2), 85-105.

www.eprawisdom.com Vol - 5, Issue- 3, March 2017 123