INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

NOBLE ECO SYSTEMS _____________________, Chennai. About 55 employees are working in

this company. This research has been done to find out the satisfactory level of employees in

their respective jobs and factors influencing their satisfaction about the job. The data was

collected from direct feed back of the employees. About 50 employees were introduced and

the details of their experience, feeling about their job, motivation type, promotion criteria,

training system, working condition provided by the company, etc. were analyzed and

satisfaction level was established among various employees. The report gives the details about

the job satisfaction of the NOBLE ECO SYSTEMS. Suggestions are also added with this report to

overcome the problems to make the employees more satisfactory.

INTRODUCTION

Job satisfaction describes how content an individual is with his or her job. Job satisfaction refers to person feelings of satisfaction on the job, which acts as a motivation to

work and it is dynamic in nature. Everyone has an emotional reaction pertaining to their job. it

can decline more quickly than it develops because employees spend approximately one third of

their life at work. Their expectation is constantly changing regarding their job hierarchy round

the clock through the year.

The happier people are within their job, the more satisfied they are said to be. Job

satisfaction is not the same as motivation, although it is clearly linked. Job design aims to

enhance job satisfaction and performance; methods include job rotation, job enlargement and

job enrichment. Other influences on satisfaction include the management style and culture,

employee involvement, empowerment and autonomous work groups. Job satisfaction is a very

important attribute which is frequently measured by organizations. The most common way of

measurement is the use of rating scales where employees report their reactions to their jobs.

Questions relate to rate of pay, work responsibilities, variety of tasks, promotional

opportunities the work itself and co-workers. Some questioners ask yes or no questions while

others ask to rate satisfaction on 1-5 scale (where 1 represents "not at all satisfied" and 5

represents "extremely satisfied").

A variety of attitudes relating to employment has been measured and studied. Examples include-

(1)-job involvement (preoccupation with one s work) (2)-organizational commitment (loyalty to one s employer) (3)-job satisfaction.

Only satisfaction is discussed here because it has the longest history of both theory and measurement.

DEFINITIONS

"Job satisfaction is defined as "the extent to which people like (satisfaction) or

dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs" (Spector, 1997, p. 2).This definition suggests job satisfaction is a general or global affective reaction that individuals hold about their job. While researchers and practitioners most often measure global job satisfaction, there is also interest in measuring different "facets" or "dimensions" of satisfaction. Examination of these facet conditions is often useful for a more careful examination of employee satisfaction with critical job factors. Traditional job satisfaction facets include: co-workers, pay, job conditions, supervision, nature of the work and benefits." (Williams)

 The job satisfaction of employee means the subjective sensational response to

the relevant objective factors of jobs. Within this research, the operational definition of employee job satisfaction is based on the sum of variance between expected satisfaction and actual satisfaction in the mind or job takers (MSQ) proposed by Weisset al. (1967). We also refer to the measuring scales of job satisfaction research respectively proposed by Feng (1997) and Chen (2002).

THEORIES OF JOB SATISFACTION

HISTORY: One of the biggest preludes to the study of job satisfaction was the Hawthorne studies. These studies (1924-1933), primarily credited to Elton Mayo of the Harvard Business School, sought to find the effects of various conditions (most notably illumination) on workers productivity. These studies ultimately showed that novel changes in work conditions temporarily increase productivity (called the Hawthorne Effect). It was later found that this increase resulted, not from the new conditions, but from the knowledge of being observed. This finding provided strong evidence that people work for purposes other than pay, which paved the way for researchers to investigate other factors in job satisfaction. Scientific management (aka Taylorism) also had a significant impact on the study of job satisfaction. Frederick Winslow Taylor s 1911 book, Principles of Scientific Management, argued that there was a single best way to perform any given work task. This book contributed to a change in industrial production philosophies, causing a shift from skilled labor and piecework towards the more modern approach of assembly lines and hourly wages. The initial use of scientific management by industries greatly increased productivity because workers were forced to work at a faster pace. However, workers became exhausted and dissatisfied, thus leaving researchers with new questions to answer regarding job satisfaction. It should also be noted that the work of W.L. Bryan, Walter Dill Scott, and Hugo Munster berg set the tone for Taylor s work. Some argue that Maslow s hierarchy of needs theory, a motivation theory, laid the foundation for job satisfaction theory. This theory explains that people seek to satisfy five specific needs in life physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualization.

This model served as a good basis from which early researchers could develop job satisfaction theories.

FACTORS OF EMPLOYEES JOB SATISFACTION: There are two main factors of employees job satisfaction and they are:  External satisfaction  Internal satisfaction

External satisfaction:
Workers show their own satisfaction extents on factors like pay, promotion, superiors admiration and affirmation and colleague interaction rising from tasks.

Internal satisfaction:
Workers show their own satisfaction extents on the values, responsibility sense, social status, positions, autonomy and self-esteem triggered by tasks themselves.

MODELS OF JOB SATISFACTION: Affect Theory Edwin A. Locke s Range of Affect Theory (1976) is arguably the most famous job satisfaction model. The main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what one has in a job. Further, the theory states that how much one values a given facet of work (e.g. the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one becomes when expectations are/aren t met. When a person values a particular facet of a job, his satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively (when expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who doesn t value that facet. To illustrate, if Employee A values autonomy in the workplace and Employee B is indifferent about autonomy, then Employee A would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy and less satisfied in a position with little or no autonomy compared to Employee B. This theory also states that too much of a particular facet

will produce stronger feelings of dissatisfaction the more a worker values that facet. Dispositional Theory Another well-known job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional Theory. It is a very general theory that suggests that people have innate dispositions that cause them to have tendencies toward a certain level of satisfaction, regardless of one s job. This approach became a notable explanation of job satisfaction in light of evidence that job satisfaction tends to be stable over time and across careers and jobs. Research also indicates that identical twins have similar levels of job satisfaction. Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) Frederick Herzberg s Two factor theory (also known as Motivator Hygiene Theory) attempts to explain satisfaction and motivation in the workplace. This theory states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by different factors motivation and hygiene factors, respectively.

Motivating factors are those aspects of the job that make people want to perform, and provide people with satisfaction, for example achievement in work, recognition, promotion opportunities. These motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job, or the work carried out. Hygiene factors include aspects of the working environment such as pay, company policies, supervisory practices, and other working conditions. While Hertzberg's model has stimulated much research, researchers have been unable to reliably empirically prove the model, with Hackman & Oldham suggesting that Hertzberg's original formulation of the model may have been a methodological artifact. Furthermore, the theory does not consider individual differences, conversely predicting all employees will react in an identical manner to changes in motivating/hygiene factors. Finally, the model has been criticized in that it does not specify how motivating/hygiene factors are to be measured. Job Characteristics Model Hackman & Oldham proposed the Job Characteristics Model, which is widely used as a framework to study how particular job characteristics impact on job outcomes, including job

satisfaction. The model states that there are five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) which impact three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility for outcomes, and knowledge of the actual results), in turn influencing work outcomes (job satisfaction, absenteeism, work motivation, etc.). The five core job characteristics can be combined to form a motivating potential score (MPS) for a job, which can be used as an index of how likely a job is to affect an employee's attitudes and behaviors----. A meta-analysis of studies that assess the framework of the model provides some support for the validity of the JCM. MEASURING JOB SATISFACTION: There are many methods for measuring job satisfaction. By far, the most common method for collecting data regarding job satisfaction is the Likert scale (named after Rensis Likert). Other less common methods of for gauging job satisfaction include: Yes/No questions, True/False questions, point systems, checklists, and forced choice answers. This data is typically collected using an Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) system. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI), created by Smith, Kendall, & Hulin (1969), is a specific questionnaire of job satisfaction that has been widely used. It measures one s satisfaction in five facets: pay, promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the work itself. The scale is simple, participants answer either yes, no, or can t decide (indicated by ? ) in response to whether given statements accurately describe one s job. The Job in General Index is an overall measurement of job satisfaction. It is an improvement to the Job Descriptive Index because the JDI focuses too much on individual facets and not enough on work satisfaction in general. Other job satisfaction questionnaires include: the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS), and the Faces Scale. The MSQ measures job satisfaction in 20 facets and has a long form with 100 questions (five items from each facet) and a short form with 20 questions (one item from each facet). The JSS is a 36 item questionnaire that measures

nine facets of job satisfaction. Finally, the Faces Scale of job satisfaction, one of the first scales used widely, measured overall job satisfaction with just one item which participants respond to by choosing a face. JOB SATISFACTION AND EMOTIONS: Mood and emotions while working are the raw materials which cumulate to form the affective element of job satisfaction. (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996). Moods tend to be longer lasting but often weaker states of uncertain origin, while emotions are often more intense, short-lived and have a clear object or cause.

There is some evidence in the literature that state moods are related to overall job satisfaction. Positive and negative emotions were also found to be significantly related to overall job satisfaction Frequency of experiencing net positive emotion will be a better predictor of overall job satisfaction than will intensity of positive emotion when it is experienced.

Emotion regulation and emotion labor are also related to job satisfaction. Emotion work (or emotion management) refers to various efforts to manage emotional states and displays. Emotion regulation includes all of the conscious and unconscious efforts to increase, maintain, or decrease one or more components of an emotion. Although early studies of the consequences of emotional labor emphasized its harmful effects on workers, studies of workers in a variety of occupations suggest that the consequences of emotional labor are not uniformly negative. It was found that suppression of unpleasant emotions decreases job satisfaction and the amplification of pleasant emotions increases job satisfaction. The understanding of how emotion regulation relates to job satisfaction concerns two models:
1. Emotional dissonance. Emotional dissonance is a state of discrepancy between public displays of emotions and an internal experience of emotions that often follows the process of emotion regulation. Emotional dissonance is associated with high emotional exhaustion, low organizational commitment, and low job satisfaction.

2. Social interaction model. Taking the social interaction perspective, workers emotion regulation might beget responses from others during interpersonal encounters that subsequently impact their own job satisfaction. For example: The accumulation of favorable responses to displays of pleasant emotions might positively affect job satisfaction. Performance of emotional labor that produces desired outcomes could increase job satisfaction.

RELATIONSHIPS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Job Satisfaction can be an important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and a predictor of work behaviors such as organizational citizenship, absenteeism, and turnover. Further, job satisfaction can partially mediate the relationship of personality variables and deviant work behaviors. One common research finding is that job satisfaction is correlated with life satisfaction. This correlation is reciprocal, meaning people who are satisfied with life tend to be satisfied with their job and people who are satisfied with their job tend to be satisfied with life. However, some research has found that job satisfaction is not significantly related to life satisfaction when other variables such as no work satisfaction and core self-evaluations are taken into account. An important finding for organizations to note is that job satisfaction has a rather tenuous correlation to productivity on the job. This is a vital piece of information to researchers and businesses, as the idea that satisfaction and job performance are directly related to one another is often cited in the media and in some non-academic management literature. A recent meta-analysis found an average uncorrected correlation between job satisfaction and productivity to be r=.18; the average true correlation, corrected for research artifacts and unreliability, was r=.30. Further, the meta-analysis found that the relationship between satisfaction and performance can be moderated by job complexity, such that for highcomplexity jobs the correlation between satisfaction and performance is higher ( =.52) than for jobs of low to moderate complexity ( =.29). In short, the relationship of satisfaction to productivity is not necessarily straightforward and can be influenced by a number of other

work-related constructs, and the notion that "a happy worker is a productive worker" should not be the foundation of organizational decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The field of industrial/organizational psychology has a long, rich, and, at times controversial history related to the study and understanding of employee attitudes and job 404 HUMAN

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, winter 2004 satisfaction. Some of this research is very specific and aimed primarily at other researchers, while other publications provide practical guidance on understanding, measuring, and improving employee attitudes (e.g., Edwards & Fisher, 2004; Kraut, 1996). One likely future direction of employee attitude research will be to better understand the interplay between the person and the situation and the various internal and external factors that influence employee attitudes. In particular, a better understanding of the role of emotion, as well as broader environmental impacts, is needed and has been largely overlooked in past research. In addition, ongoing research will provide more in-depth understanding of the effects of employee attitudes and job satisfaction on organizational measures, such as customer satisfaction and financial measures. Greater insights on the relationship between employee attitudes and business performance will assist HR professionals as they strive to enhance the essential people side of the business in a highly competitive, global arena.