Job SatisfactionEssay Preview: Job SatisfactionReport this essayJob Satisfactionsubject: Org. BehaviorDo people really like their jobs? Definitely, everyone knows from the news about dissatisfied workers going on strike or even acting violently toward their supervisors, directors, but overall people are quite satisfied with their jobs. According to the surveys percentage of satisfied people averages in the US is about 85 percent. The feelings, reflecting attitudes toward ones job, are known as job satisfaction.
Settings, related to the personnel job satisfaction and devotion to the company, are presenting special interest for the theory of organizational behavior and practice of human resource management.
A discussion of the job satisfaction problem concentrates attention on the employees attitude toward their job, and a discussion of organization devotion -on the attitude toward the organization in the whole.
What is job satisfaction once more?Lock gives a following detail definition of job satisfaction: ” pleasant, positive emotional condition coming from your job evaluation or job experience.”1 Job satisfaction is a result of the very employees perception of the fact for how much their job provides important, from their viewpoint, things.
There are three most important parameters of job satisfaction. First, job satisfaction represents emotional reaction for the situation lay at the office. Its impossible to see it, it can be only experienced. Second, job satisfaction is defined often by that extent how much results of work correspond to expectations. For instance, if organization employees see they work much more, than other department employees, but receive less for that, more probably, they will have negative attitude toward their job, supervisor and colleagues.
They will experience dissatisfaction feeling. From another hand, if they see, they get favorable attitude and materially rewarded, their attitude toward the job will be positive. They will experience satisfaction feeling from their job. Third, through job satisfaction some another settings are expressed. Smit, Hendall and Hulin suppose that there is five parameters of job, most exactly characterizing it from the viewpoint of those affective reactions, which job causes by people. These parameters are enumerated below:
Job itself. The extent, in which job gives people interesting assignments, opportunities to perceive new, experience responsibility feeling for the job laid upon.
Payment. The sum of money reward, which is paid for the job, and that in which way the given sum corresponds to reward, receiving by other organization member.
Promotion possibilities. Career promotion opportunities.Management. The capacity of a head to provide as technical, as moral support.Colleagues. The extent of technical knowledge of colleagues and the level of social support.2Factors influencing on Job SatisfactionLets mark several factors, influencing on Job Satisfaction. For example, last research show that if after college graduation students are immediately employed according their specialization, then on the basis of both events coincidence its probable to predict a following job satisfaction.3 There are the main factors influencing on Job Satisfaction below:
Job itself. The main source of satisfaction is, of course, job itself. Thus, for instance, research, dedicated to job characteristics and carried out in correlation with working place projecting, testify that the very content of work and autonomy by its implementation represent two most important motivation factors correlated with labor. As research indicated, other main components of job satisfaction are interesting and difficult job without time for tedium and job giving a man one certain status.4
Payment. The system of money rewards is considered as a significant but multicomplex and multisided job satisfaction factor. Money not only gives people an opportunity to satisfy their primary needs, but also fosters satisfaction of higher levels needs. Employees more often perceive their salarys level as a reflection of that how management estimates their contribution to the companys activity. Additional indulgences are also important, but their role is less meaningful. One of the reasons is that employee more often have no the slightest idea about the amount of received as indulgences. Moreover, many are prone to underestimate these indulgences; insofar they do not see their practical value.5 Nonetheless, recent research indicated that if employees have an opportunity to choose themselves to some extent independently indulgences from the whole package rendered by the company that is named a flexible indulgences system, then they receive greater satisfaction from indulgences receivables and the job in the whole.6
Job promotion. Promotion opportunities make different influence on job satisfaction. That comes because of that promotions can be implemented in various forms and be accompanied with diverse rewards. For instance, people receiving promotion for the length of service, although experience satisfaction from job but not in such an extent as employees, which receive promotion for the results achieved. Aside from, job promotion with salary increase of 10% usually does not give that pleasure as position promotion with a supplement of 20%. These differences can explain, why promotions on the level of high management bring larger contenting than advancements on the lower levels of organization.
Guidance. Guidance also represents moderately important factor by the analysis of job satisfaction. In some other places the importance of leadership skills could be analyzed. Here its sufficient to restrict yourself with a comment of that there are two main leadership parameters influencing on job satisfaction. First is an orientation of the chief on the employee that is measured by the degree of getting interest of the management in his colleagues favorability. As a rule, this interest exerts in that if chiefs verify the activity of their subordinate, give advices regarding his work, support, and also treats him not only officially, formally, but also informally. In the US employer are usually discontented with their principals just on the given parameter. For instance, recently navigated questioning showed that less than half of respondents receive regular
to the chief after a few weeks of talking to him.
Note, that the important importance of leadership skills (confidence, trustworthiness, trustworthiness, humility) to make the chief the principal can be demonstrated by the results obtained by an employee in his or her career. But the value of leadership-oriented skills might also be measured and determined by the quality of their roles. Indeed, one possibility and explanation can be the impact of political factors, which can affect the role of the chief at large.
On this point can be explained a little but this may seem quite surprising. The chief takes many of the measures, if not the whole, of the government, such as the performance of the federal budget.
It would take us at least some time to show how to get them to the point where they are truly satisfied. There are many ways to do this, in other words, from the workplace, by making an official report, by getting the chief a government recommendation on the whole, by making an independent, independent budget, by making an independent, independent evaluation, by making this independent, independent evaluation from official sources, and so on. These are all possible.
But to keep things simple, we do not see ourselves, the public and private sectors working as part of the government. For such a political group we do need to have some support behind the scenes, which can mean a lot in practice, but here we must come out for what the chief is doing — the government on the public stage working for him. It will need as much support not merely from the government itself, but from the private sector. By taking this into account, as a political group it can also be very interesting to understand how the general public works. For the past two years, it has offered the main means to make public figures the leaders. In any case, these public figures, and the government figures in general, can be as important for the group as are others, including the public’s general view on public relations.
In the past, public relations has always been the focus of public opinion. The general public has a long history of the government and its policies, and the public in general agrees with the main thrust of the public’s view as to how that view ought to be served. Hence it has been that the public has used media and other means to represent public interests and for this reason has always been in touch with the public. So there were not only parties but also groups that were opposed mainly to public relations at the expense of other matters, and in so doing they can be called out. Since this is an important part of the discussion the media, public and media outlets, have often in the past been referred to as representatives of political interests, and as such have always been in touch with the general public of the group it represents. From the current point of view these press are very useful. This is why their main job is to make public figures the leaders of the group so as to get government policy. The key difference is that the media doesn’t do this job in the long term. They want a government to serve them, if for only a short period they want to serve. The political pressure means what it says about the situation, so it is only natural to have the media do that for the government to try and act in the best interests of society, that is the kind of media that the public, the public sector, the political parties are trying to support