Overall consumption behavior (Lancaster, 1966, 1971) where

Overall satisfaction with a job is a combination of the balance between the satisfiers and dissatisfiers of the job (Hoppock). Of all the major job satisfaction areas, satisfaction with the nature of the work itself—which includes job challenge, autonomy, variety, and scope—best predicts overall job satisfaction, as well as other important outcomes like employee retention (e.g., Fried & Ferris, 1987; Parisi & Weiner, 1999; Weiner, 2000). Thus, to understand what causes people to be satisfied with their jobs, the nature of the work itself is one of the first places for practitioners to focus on.

Overall job satisfaction can be viewed as a weighted outcome of the individual’s satisfaction with each one of the aspects or facets of the job. This is similar to Lancaster’s theory of consumption behavior (Lancaster, 1966, 1971) where the utility that is derived from consuming a given good depends on the utilities that are associated with its characteristics.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

An example of a global measure is “Overall, how satisfied are you with your job?” If a measure is facet-based, overall job satisfaction is typically defined as a sum of the facets. Scarpello and Campbell (1983) found that individual questions about various aspects of the job did not correlate well with a global measure of overall job satisfaction. (Saari and Judge, 2004)

Intrinsic Job Factors

Intrinsic factors deal with the job itself . Intrinsic elements of job satisfaction arise from rewards that are mediated internally.(Mosadeghrad, Ferlie & Rosenberg, 2008). Intrinsic satisfaction refers to job responsibilities and nature of the job such as diversity, autonomy, skill utilization, self- accomplishment, job security and individual-growth (Pietersen, 2005). Intrinsic rewards are individual’s internal factors that do not provide material reward, nonetheless provide psychological benefits. These psychological benefits include autonomy, acknowledgment, individuality, accomplishment, respect, accountability, creativity, independence approval, control and affiliations (Okediji, Etuk & Nnedum, 2011). Moreover, intrinsic rewards are internal factors that drive individuals to pursue their goals, an intrinsic reward include self-fulfillment which results from a worker doing well at work (Okpara, 2006).

Herzberg and Mausner (1959) formulated the two-factor theory of job satisfaction and postulated that satisfaction and dissatisfaction were two separate and sometimes even unrelated phenomena. Intrinsic factors which they named ‘motivators’ (i.e. factors intrinsic to the nature and experience of doing work) were found to be job ‘satisfiers’ and included: achievement, recognition, work itself and responsibility.

Extrinsic Job Factors

Extrinsic factors concern the environment where the job is performed. Extrinsic elements arise from rewards that are mediated externally (Mosadeghrad, Ferlie & Rosenberg, 2008). Extrinsic motivation refers to factors such as pay, bonuses, incentives, compensation, supervision, career advancement, encouragement and work conditions (Pietersen, 2005). Similarly, extrinsic rewards include salary, stipends, fringe benefits, working conditions, and promotion. These are factors that are external to the employee, on the other hand, contribute to his emotional and physical well-being (Okediji, et al., 2011).

Extrinsic factors which they named ‘hygiene’ factors were found to be job ‘dissatisfies’ and included: company policy, administration, supervision, salary, interpersonal relations and working conditions. Herzberg and Mausner’s Motivation-Hygiene theory has dominated the study of the nature of job satisfaction and formed a basis for the development of job satisfaction assessment

 

Job Satisfaction and empowerment

Relationships between job satisfaction and empowerment variables have been explored in various contexts. Several studies also found that empowerment is significantly correlated with job satisfaction (Hechanova, Alampay, & Franco, 2006; Seibert, Silver, & Randolph, 2004; Snipes et al., 2005; Spreitzer, Kizilos, & Nason, 1997).

 Appelbaum and Honeggar (1998) and Rad and Yarmohammadian (2006) showed that empowerment leads to increased job satisfaction. The survey by Menon (2001) also determined that the greater the empowerment, the higher the job satisfaction.

These statements are supported by the research of Bordin et al. (2007) and Pearson and Moomaw (2005) when they state that higher job satisfaction is associated with a high degree of empowerment. Savery and Luks (2001) suggest that level of employee involvement is directly linked to job satisfaction. Empowerment perceptions are associated with increased job satisfaction and work productivity and with a decreased propensity to leave an organisation (Koberg, Boss, Wayne, Jason & Goodman, 1999).

Several Studies have examined the affectivity and job satisfaction relation. For example, Levin and Stokes (1989) using a sample of 315 participants from a large international professional service organization found negative affectivity to be a significant predictor of job satisfaction. Judge (1993) found using a sample of medical personnel that the job dissatisfaction and turnover relationship was stronger for individuals high on positive affectivity.

In general, most research exploring the relationship between empowerment and job satisfaction has focused on how empowerment may be a predictor of job satisfaction (e.g., Billingsley & Cross, 1992; Hoy & Miskel, 2001).In other words, it is debatable whether higher levels of empowerment lead to more job satisfaction or more job satisfaction leads to higher levels of empowerment.

Studies into psychological empowerment (Hechanova et al., 2006; Dewettinck and Van Ameijde, 2007; Laschinger et al., 2004; Spreitzer, 1995, 1996; Spreitzer et al., 1997; Aryee and Chen, 2006; Kuo et al., 2007; Wang and Lee, 2009) pay particular attention to job satisfaction. Behavioral empowerment and an atmosphere of trust lead to a positive impact on job satisfaction (Yoon et al., 2001).

Structural empowerment was a stronger predictor of job satisfaction in various organisational contexts and had a significant direct effect at the individual level of nurses’ job satisfaction (Laschinger et al. 2009, Ning et al. 2009).

Some studies investigated the four dimensions of empowerment as predictors of job satisfaction, Spreitzer et al. (1997) found that meaning and competence predicted job satisfaction, whereas Liden et al. (2000) found a relationship only between meaning and job satisfaction. Only self-determination predicted job satisfaction in a study by Holdsworth and Cartwright (2003).

Hechanova et al. 2006, found a positive relationship between empowerment and employee job satisfaction in the hospitality industry. More recently, (Dickson and Lorenz, 2009) found a positive relationship between empowerment and employee job satisfaction.(Karia and Asaari, 2006) also, indicate that employee empowerment significantly enhances job satisfaction.

Some last studies also supported that empowerment increased individual job satisfaction (Laschinger et al. 2009; Laschinger et al., 2004; Spreitzer, 1997)