Studying the constructs of job satisfaction and its impact on public sector workers In Southwest Shoa Zone of the Oromia Region, Ethiopia

Abstract

As organizations struggle to sustain operations and compete innovatively, the key to achieving strategy is investing in human resources. In maintaining efficiency and securing sustainability, employee job satisfaction is a prerequisite. Job satisfaction is a litmus paper of employee performance in organizations that indicates how well the job is done. The foremost objective of the study is to see the contribution of the constructs to the employee satisfaction level of the organization. To achieve the objective of the study, 281 sample respondents were contacted to collect data. Data were collected through a self-reported Likert scale questionnaire, which allowed for quantitative data analysis. The degree of the association tested significant, and the constructs proved momentous contribution to employee job satisfaction. Working on building and upholding all aspects of satisfaction helps to increase and nurture the level of job satisfaction of employees which ultimately contributes to the growth of the organization. A synergistic and holistic approach to the various constructs of employee job satisfaction can create a better shed for employees to remain steady and pleasant.

Introduction

Job satisfaction is always a big issue as an organization needs efficiency and creativity. Innovation and efficiency require employee engagement and commitment, employee satisfaction can be a guarantee of deep engagement, which ultimately leads to sustaining the business. Hence, the link between employee job satisfaction and employee performance caught the attention of many scholars. Employees in the organization have an unrivaled role in the normal functioning of the business. Job satisfaction is the employee’s thoughts and feelings they have regarding their job and it is how they value their job. In maintaining efficiency and securing sustainability employee job satisfaction is a prerequisite. Job satisfaction is a litmus of employee performance in organizations that indicates how well the job is done.
An employee’s performance delineates the organization’s performance and competitiveness. The crucial factor in making sure employee performance is the job satisfaction an employee derives from his workplace. Regularly checking the level of employee satisfaction helps to identify the fissures and allows one to work on it to maintain a high level of satisfaction in the environment (Mone & London, 2018). Employees’ outlook towards their job constructs satisfaction (Robbins, 2001). Job satisfaction relates to employees’ personal assessment of what is important to them. Because emotions and feelings are involved in such evaluations, employees’ job satisfaction can have a significant impact on their personal, social, and work lives, and as such, affect their behavior at work (Roodt, Rieger & Sempane, 2002). Studies revealed that investing resources to ensure a higher level of satisfaction would help to witness a drastic change in improved productivity, lesser withdrawal from the job, minimal turnover and reduced absenteeism (Robbins 1994).

Reinforcing the importance of job satisfaction, Robbins (2009) emphasized the role of job satisfaction in maintaining employee performance, inspiration and efficiency. Locke (1976) exquisitely described job satisfaction as a pleasant affective state resulting from one’s own evaluation of one’s work experience. Hashim & Mahmood (2011) described job satisfaction as it is a set of favorable or unfavorable emotions and feelings that employees experience in relation to their work. Job satisfaction is used to understand the employees’ attitude towards their organization and to measure their perception towards organizational treatment (Jung, 2018). As cranny et al. (1992) portrayed, to evaluate an employee’s work performance, organizations should consider the employee’s job satisfaction as it is directly correlated to his performance and his excellence in performing. A job-satisfied employee produces quality service that delights customers, which ultimately brings customer trust to the company. Job satisfaction greatly affects employee morale and productivity in the organization. Mounting the level of employee satisfaction helps an organization to benefit by tuning the attitude of employees in a positive manner. It is now a universal reality that evaluating job performance and maintaining an optimum level of satisfaction help an organization secure their competitive place in the market, engaging employees in creative work and sustaining the business. Job satisfaction and productivity are inextricably linked in determining the future of the organization, hence, exhaustively searching for the constructs of job satisfaction and working on them should be a daily routine.

Conceptualizing the problem

When thinking about employee performance, it is difficult to think without job satisfaction, they are inextricably intertwined. Job satisfaction determines an employee’s level of efficiency, productivity, initiation & motivation and engagement. Hence, job satisfaction is an important element in preserving the balance and health of working environments in the organization (Haile & Premanandam, 2017; Ahmed et al., 2010). Increased productivity (Quality & Quantity) seems to be the result of job satisfaction (Padhy & Bhuyan, 2015). Spector (1997) denoted job satisfaction as how an individual view, think and sense his job. Enumerating factors that affect job satisfaction, it is possible to mention different factors. Ndulue & Ekechukwu (2016), signified any constructs and elements of a job and issues associated with the work clearly determine an employee’s degree of satisfaction. Job satisfaction involves a complex set of variables, situations, emotions, and behavioral tendencies (Singh & Jain, 2013). Among the challenges affecting employee satisfaction levels on the job include low pay, ineffective communication, poor motivational practice, inadequate workplaces and inadequate staffing, characteristics of the job, remuneration, impaired relationship in the organization and leadership styles (Robbins, 2001; Marzuki, et al., 2012). Furthermore, Gormley (2003) & Sikowo et al., (2016) have indicated factors that may inversely affect job satisfaction, which includes autonomy of decision-making, role conflict, work atmosphere, role ambiguity, expectations, supervisor support, characteristics of the organization, lack of training, delayed promotions and job insecurity.
Job satisfaction dictates the activity related to preserving and upholding the high level of performance of the employee and attuning to achieve the desired quality in the work. In determining an employee’s job satisfaction organizational culture and work environment have an enormous role. This indicates the importance of the work environment and its relevance in forming and ascertaining the required level of employees’ job satisfaction in achieving the desired level of work quality (Morris & Bloom, 2002). Job satisfaction plays a great role in retaining key staff, increasing productivity and maintaining quality relationships by engaging employees in continuous quality improvement programs and appreciating their participation in creative and innovative ways (Al-Zu’bi, 2010). More satisfied workers are less likely to quit and leave their organization (Clark, 2001). Job satisfaction is a collection of sentiments that employees have toward their occupations. Every organization confront the challenges associated with job satisfaction every day (Zhu, 2013). The problems create job dissatisfaction which results in various complex problems, like stress, turnover, absenteeism, and tardiness (Singh & Jain, 2013).
It is indisputable over the variations of organizations that operate in different worlds whether it is developed or developing perform under various circumstances which determine their normal operation. The situations may vary from working environment, culture, psychological conditions, economic situations and other societal makeups. Furthermore, because of variations in cultures, traditions, beliefs, and other difficulties, the characteristics of such organizations’ members in industrialized countries vary greatly from those in developing countries. Furthermore, the selection of the constructs of job satisfaction under study is the researcher experience and personal observation in the area. Observation in the area and deep interaction with public sector employees help to collect data for framing the constructs of job satisfaction. It is possible to say that the concept of job satisfaction and its result have been studied a lot, but most of the studies have been confined to organizations operating specifically in the developed world. It is rare to find studies that expound on job satisfaction in developing nations (Ali & Wajidi, 2013; Rabbanee, Yasmin, & Sarwar, 2012).
Research questions
This study answered the following basic questions that are related to the issue that was designed in the statement of the problem.
1. To what extent does the work environment influence employees’ job satisfaction?
2. How does payment affect employee job satisfaction?
3. How do promotional opportunities affect employees’ job satisfaction?
4. What will be the contribution of supervision to employees’ job satisfaction?
5. To what extent does the nature of the job affect employees’ job satisfaction?
Literature review
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is a positive attitude or a pleasant emotional state, which comes from the evaluation of the job as fulfilling one’s important work values, these values ​​are consistent with one’s needs (Locke, 1976). Job satisfaction occurs when employees’ demands and job characteristics are in harmony when the job is enjoyable, and an individual identifies with the job and sees the job as fulfilling a higher level of need. It can be also expressed as the degree or measure of individual liking about their job (Smith et al., 1969). Job satisfaction is a psychological state of the human mind, which represents the emotional results that allow employees to work in organizations (Vroom, 1995). Job satisfaction is an employee’s mental condition that will characterize a job as objective and subjective (Hamermesh, 1997). Researchers also expressed job satisfaction as a motive for organizational commitment (Mueller et al., 1994). Job satisfaction is the degree to which employees like their job and its different aspects such as pay, supervision, promotion, and co-workers.
Factors determining employees’ job satisfaction
Across scholarly studies, there are various factors that can be accounted in affecting workers job satisfaction. Compensation, job orientation, coordination, promotion, control, and motivation are the most frequently studied constructs affecting employee job satisfaction (Sokoya, 2000). George and Jones (2008) identified personality, values, work environment and social influence as the dynamics affecting individual job satisfaction. The constructs that would cause change in employee job satisfaction can be classified at various levels, namely personal, organizational, and administrative. Bearing in mind, well-skilled, experienced and informed leaders are great role players in gearing changes and stimulating job satisfaction among employees (Ariana, Soleimani, & Oghazian, 2018). Job satisfaction includes five factors which are satisfaction with the work itself, salary, promotion opportunity, supervision and relationship with co-workers (Phillips and Connell, 2003). Several studies in the area of satisfaction indicate that the main facets contributing to job satisfaction are intellectually challenging work, fair rewards, supportive work conditions, and helpful colleagues (Robbins & Judge, 2009).
Work environment
For better job satisfaction, the work environment is the main thing that should be considered by employers. In order to sustain growth and development, it is imperative to maintain the efficiency, productivity and effectiveness of the institutions by equipping the employees with various facilities. The work environment is the most crucial factor for employees. Therefore, it should be the prior concern of an organization to create a better working environment to have stable manpower in the system and normal functioning of the business.
When talking about the work environment, it is about job security, employee safety, performance appreciation, stimulating facilities and maintaining good understanding between coworkers and supervisors (Spector, 1997). Whereas pay scale, flexible working times, and involving employees in decision-making play a vital role in a better working environment (Lane et al., 2010). The work environment comprises two important dimensions, the intrinsic characteristics of work and the Physical work environment. Various studies have shown that the work environment has a positive and significant relationship with the intrinsic aspect of job satisfaction (Gazioglu and Tanselb, 2006; Skalli, et.al. 2008). By the intrinsic character of work we mean, it is about the characteristics of the work such as the way the work is performed and done, the training of practical events, the control of work-related tasks, the sense of accomplishment derived from work, and the variety and intrinsic value of the work (Sousa-Poza & Sousa-Poza, 2000). The working environment is a broad concept that has different constructs causing job satisfaction swings to be positive or negative. Wage, working hours, decision discretion, organizational structure and the communication system among staff are among the few facets of the work environment (Lane et al., 2010).
Many organizations do not understand the importance of the work environment and suffer to sustain consolidated upward growth of productivity. Such organizations are considered internally weak and unable to introduce innovativeness in the system (Clarke & Aiken, 2008). It is a clear fact that an organization is a place where employees spend their most valuable time, so organizations must promote and maintain an appropriate work environment for employees to positively affect employee job satisfaction. Confirming this fact, Clark (1997) indicated that employee detachment and work withdrawal are common and expected if they are dissatisfied with their work environment. Organizations must ensure an encouraging, attractive and appealing work environment for their employees to achieve better results by setting appropriate standards for their work environment. The results of various studies show that the worst situation comes from organizations that place less importance on the work environment (Spector, 1997).
In order to harness the full potential of the employee requires a work environment that provides a suitable platform for practicing creativity. Neglecting to invest and forgetting to optimize the work environment will cost organizations by reducing productivity and reducing employee performance. Conversely, an organization that pays due attention to creating a work environment that empowers employees will help to be more productive and increase profitability (Chandrasekar, 2011; Spector, 1997). A poor work environment is probably one of the main reasons for high employee turnover rates and a negative impact on job performance (Schaefer & Moos, 1996; Landeweerd, & Boumans, 1988; Ito et al., 2001). By providing the necessary resources, the work environment helps the employee to perform the necessary tasks and allows the employee to be satisfied with the job (Kawada & Otsuka, 2011). It is important to regularly audit the working environment. Organizations need to regularly check the condition and quality status of their work environment as it is the biggest factor in maneuvering employee satisfaction levels (Burnard, Morrison, & Phillips, 1999). Poor working conditions prevent employees from expressing their talents and showing their full potential. Therefore, it is important to ensure job satisfaction in a comfortable work environment to get maximum employee motivation and commitment to the organization (Raziq & Maulabakhsh, 2015).
Payment
Pay is known as financial benefits and is widely used by employers to catalyze the motivation level of employees. Dessler (2012) pointed out that the employee’s pay includes all the compensation conditions that are provided in contrast to the work. Most individuals may cite money as the most important reason for doing the job (Jurgensen, 1978). However, in reality, the reasons individuals devote themselves to work are varied and may mention different reasons, one may express a job as a source of one’s identity (Hulin, 2002). A lot of arguments have been there regarding pay and satisfaction. It is difficult to say whether pay only satisfies an employee or induces dissatisfaction (Bassett, 1994). However, there are empirical studies substantiating how pay is significantly and positively related to job satisfaction. Brown and Sessions (2003) pointed out that workers prefer environments that seem rewarding to their productivity and such environments are associated with employees’ optimism about future work and pay. It is evident that employees who are paid less or labelled poor pay often result in lower job satisfaction and lower performance (Agwu, 2013; Mbah & Ikemefuna, 2012; Rony & Suki, 2017). The analysis made on employees’ exit interviews and the comments written in the suggestion/remarks records, the most common reason for separation is pay. Payment is the biggest concern of many employees in the company (Hosie et al., 2013; Rony & Suki, 2017). Job satisfaction helps employees to perceive and measure whether an organization is fair and just to them. Employees want pay systems and appraisal policies that they perceive to be fair, clear and consistent with their expectations. Fair pay is positively related to job satisfaction (Witt and Nye, 1992).
An employee’s compensation package is an important part of an employee’s job satisfaction and cannot be ignored (Artz, 2010). Hamermesh (1997) explained that an increase or decrease in compensation has an abrupt effect on the employees’ job satisfaction level. The main factor linking pay to satisfaction is not the absolute amount paid, but the perception of fairness (Robbins, 2003). Equity is the art of one individual being fair and impartial in social interactions with another individual (Adams, 1965). Employees find two types of inequities in pay, positive inequity (overpayment) when their input level is low but their outcome level is high (when compared to others’ inputs/outcomes) and negative inequity (underpayment) when they feel their level of input is high, but they are not getting an outcome high enough for their level of input (when compared to others’ inputs/outcomes) (Williams, McDaniel & Nguyen, 2006; Adams, 1965). When employees perceive the imbalance between what they contribute and what they receive (balance between input and output) their behavior changes (Personia.com, 2022). Knowing the level of equity in the organization helps to balance how employees feel about their work and how hard they should work as a result, which ultimately helps to design a good pay system. Because, inequity is a strong predictor of pay satisfaction (Klein, 1973). When pay is considered fair and based on job demand, skill and knowledge level and societal pay standards, then, it is possible for satisfaction to occur.
employee feels that their input level is low
but their outcome level is high (when compared to others’ inputs/outcomes) they
experience overpayment/positive inequity
Promotional opportunities
Promotion is an employee advancement from one position to another that has a higher status, responsibility and rank which leads to an improved compensation package (Fried et al., 2002; Lazear, 1986). Career promotion programs facilitate personal growth, create a room for greater responsibility, and improve social value status (Yaseen, 2013). The findings of many scholars confirm a direct and positive relationship between promotion opportunities and job satisfaction (McCausland, Pouliakas, & Theodossiou, 2005). De Nobile & McCormick (2008) mentions that job satisfaction among employees who have promotional opportunities depends on the equity of promotion.
Research shows that a promotion program that ensures equity and fairness in the work process has the greatest potential to create employee job satisfaction (Kabir & Parvin, 2011). Organizations can use promotions as a reward for highly productive employees, creating an incentive for employees to put in more effort. Given the extent to which job promotions affect employee performance and compensation, relatively it is negligent attention that has been given to the importance of job promotions in determining job satisfaction (Kosteas, 2011). Promotion can be used as a motivational tool. It serves as a means of aligning organizational goals with personal goals as it is a way to reward employees for achieving organizational goals (Lazear & Rosen, 1981). Any individual’s hierarchy is determined by his ability, the higher the level of talent in any individual the higher his position in the hierarchy. Promotion increases organizational performance as an employee moves up the career ladder and thus increases salary (Carmichael, 1983). Promotion is a progressive process of moving up the career ladder, resulting in favorable changes in pay, autonomy, and supervision. Locke (1976) argues that the need for promotion stems from the need for psychological growth, the need for social value and the need for justice.
Supervision
Walumbwa et al. (2011) inscribed job satisfaction as the result of employee perceptions of how well his job provides things that are considered important. According to him, Supervision is the ability of supervisors to provide technical assistance and behavioral support and it is a good construct of job satisfaction. The supervisor’s behavior greatly determines the morale, attitude and satisfaction level of an employee and it has a greater role in shaping their behavior (Mayo, 2003). When supervisors change, employee behavior and attitudes change. If their attitude is positive towards their boss’s supervisory style, they will boost up their sincerity and develop loyalty to their job (Roethlisberger and Dickson, 2003).
In their study, Haward and Frink (1996) indicated that job satisfaction and supervision are positively related and their association is significant. In addition, the behavior of the supervisor and the relationship with coworkers have positively associated with and significantly determine job satisfaction. Although previous studies have shown discrepancies and inconsistencies in the Leader’s behavior of initiating structure and consideration, Seeman (1957) found that leadership characteristics have been able to determine subordinate job satisfaction significantly and positively. Having an efficient and effective supervisor enables subordinates to meet their professional and personal goals within the organizational premises. The synergistic approach to supervision provides supervisors with opportunities to engage their new professional staff members in orientation and socialization processes that should reduce job dissatisfaction and attrition among new professionals (Tull, 2006). The presence of high-quality supervision may also contribute to satisfaction. Therefore, job satisfaction is expected to have a momentous and constructive relationship with virtuous and remarkable supervision and supervisory relationship (Kavanagh et al., 2003).
Nature of job
In their definition Ahmed et al., (2010) presaged the nature of work as the actual content of the job or work characteristics no matter whether these characteristics or the content of that work is positive or negative. Furthermore, their study indicated that the job nature of the work is a major factor in predicting employee job satisfaction. According to their study, Benrazavi & Silong (2013) implied nature of work is considered as a behavioral attitude that will enable an employee’s job satisfaction and ultimately contribute to the employee’s voluntary disposition to work in teams. The nature of a Job and its characteristics are an important predictor of employee job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is meaningfully and positively related to the nature of work that facilitates the opportunity to be innovative, have the discretion to implement skills, and work independently (Saleem, Majeed, Aziz & Usman, 2013). Regarding job satisfaction, Sinha, and Singh (1995) explained that the satisfactory nature of the job is subject to various factors in the organization, and one of the main factors that construct satisfaction is the nature of the work.
Model specification
To find out the best set of predictors of employee Job Satisfaction (JS), five predictors of multiple linear regression models were proposed. The five predictor variables were Work environment (WE) (X1), Payment (X2), Promotional opportunities (PO) (X3), Supervision (X4) and Nature of the job (NJ) (X5). The equation of the proposed multiple linear regression model was as follows:
Y(JS) = β0 + β1(X1) + β2(X2) + β3(X3) + β4(X4) + β5(X5) + ε
Where: βn = coefficients
Xn = constructs of job satisfaction
ε = error term
Materials and Methods
To produce an accurate explanation of the factors affecting job satisfaction among Sectoral employees and predict future occurrences an explanatory research method is applied. It is quantitative research, using mainly primary sources of data to conduct the study on factors that affect employee job satisfaction in the case of South West Shewa Zone Public Sectors. Self-administered Questionnaire is used to collect data from randomly distributed respondents. From 31 public sectors in the Zone, 258 sample respondents have been enumerated. It is a cross-sectional study. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis was used to find the degree of association that the antecedents have with job satisfaction. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to measure the magnitude of changes and how well each construct predicted the level of job satisfaction. The study adopted the job satisfaction survey (JSS) questionnaire from Spector (1985) which can be used as a reliable and valid questionnaire for measuring the job satisfaction of an employee. The survey questionnaire is slightly modified to meet the different background differences without affecting the basic meaning of the questionnaire. Since the study has been made in a different environment and with slight modification, the reliability test on the questionnaire is made and all are at satisfactory levels.
Results and discussion
Results
This part analysis through the Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) the degree of association between the independent variables and the dependent variable were computed to determine the strength, direction, and statistical significance of the relationships.
Pearson correlations were conducted to determine the relationship between the five independent variables: work environment (WE), payment (PAY), promotional opportunities (PO), supervision (SUP), nature of the job (NJ), and employees’ job satisfaction (EJS), all correlation coefficients are positive and significant at p < .05 level of precision. Therefore, from these results, it can be inferred that the five factors of employees’ job satisfaction were significantly and positively related to the job satisfaction of employees in public sectors of the Zone. The index of the relationships between two variables shows the relationships between the variables are linear and showing association is continuous.
The summary table depicts how strong and significant are the constructs in contributing to the satisfaction level of employees. The table clearly portrays how strong association is there between the constructs (predictor variables) and job satisfaction which is very strong, positive and significant (R = .827). The R square value indicates how much that the percentage of the variation of job satisfaction is directly attributable to its constructs. It tells us how well the model predicts the outcomes. The Adjusted R square is the most useful measurement of the success of a model, therefore, the adjusted R square value for the model is .678 indicating the biggest variation (67.8%) in job satisfaction is attributed to the predictor variables that construct job satisfaction. The variation caused by satisfaction constructs are positive and have an immense contribution to forming employee job satisfaction.
The table clearly portrays that, the regression model was found to fit and the constructs under study were able to predict employees’ job satisfaction considerably.
As it is observed from the above regression table all of the five independent predictor variables were found to be significant in explaining employees Job Satisfaction (JS). The constructs under study did contribute considerably and positively to the variation in Job Satisfaction (JS). Payment takes the greatest contribution in impacting the job satisfaction level of employees (β = .323), followed by Promotional opportunities (β = .293), Nature of the job (β = .261), Supervision (β = .180), and the least contribution has been recorded by the work environment (β = .101).
Discussion
The study has clearly depicted how constructs are good enough in predicting the employee’s job satisfaction level. It is important to substantiate the finding by looking into the previous empirical findings. As it is possible to observe from the coefficient table pay contributes to job satisfaction for employees (β = .323) significantly. Purporting the finding, Beutell & Wittig-Berman (1999) in their research identified how pay has a significant association with job satisfaction. Though salary is considered a dissatisfaction creator the studies made by Ruthankoon & Ogunlana, (2003) and Wang (2002) indicated the significant effect of salary on employees’ job satisfaction. Additionally, a meta-analysis of the literature by Judge et al. (2010) found that the greatest change in employee job satisfaction was due to pay. According to Muhammad & Akhter’s (2010) study, the higher income group indicated greater personal satisfaction. Pay and work environment is one of the most vital contributing aspects to assuring job satisfaction. The study by Mafini and Dolodlo (2014) confirms the findings regarding the work environment. Their research illuminates how the work environment is capable of creating a significant variance in employees’ job satisfaction in a positive way. Moreover, Tharu (2019) reaffirms the contribution of the working environment in maintaining and promoting the satisfaction level of employees meaningfully in their work setting. It is true that creating a conducive, engaging and open work environment has a multiplier effect on the level of satisfaction (Ruthankoon & Ogunlana, 2003; Crossman & Abou-Zaki, 2003). The constructive relationship between job satisfaction and growth opportunities also has different empirical foundations. As Islam et al. (2011) concluded, employees are generally satisfied when an organization provides opportunities for growth and development. Having well-established promotion programs and allowing for growth opportunities have a momentous impact on the degree of employee job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). A fair promotional opportunity arranged for the employee drives their satisfaction level to the climax (Santhapparaj & Alam, 2005; Wang, 2002). The prevalence of Supportive supervision in the organizational setting is capable of driving the level of job satisfaction in the desired direction, therefore, the study confirms this fact. The quality of the supervisor-subordinate relationship is able to produce a substantial, constructive influence on the employee’s overall level of job satisfaction (Luthans, Wahl & Steinhaus, 1992). It cannot be denied that an employee who receives integrated supervision has a propitious substantial effect on the level of job satisfaction (Tull, 2006).
Job satisfaction has been interrelated to the quality of supervision received (Amey, 2002; Arminio & Creamer, 2001; Schneider, 2002). Lack of supervision or poor supervision methods frequently become a cause of dissatisfaction (Spence et al., 2001). The finding in the study is in harmony with other previous scholars in the area. Among the job satisfaction constructs in their study, Youssef and Luthans (2005) identified work, pay, promotion and supervision are good constructs of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is the product of an employee’s perceptions towards the amenity of compensation and benefits, work characteristics, the status deemed to be achieved, social security, development opportunities and respect (Tella, Ayeni, & Popoola, 2007).
Conclusion
The study focused on evaluating the various satisfaction constructs that are contributing to employee job satisfaction. The job satisfaction constructs studied here are supervision, pay, work environment, promotion opportunities, and nature of the job. The study conducted a detailed analysis and found those constructs to be positive and contribute significantly to employee satisfaction levels. However, the strength of each construct’s contribution to employee job satisfaction varies. Overall impacts of the constructs are very high and their contribution towards employee job satisfaction is significant and positive. However, it is impossible for the study to exhaustively address the various theoretical factors of job satisfaction suggested by different authors. Therefore, future researchers can evaluate the role of other constructs in predicting the level of employee job satisfaction in various settings. Employee job satisfaction is the cumulative effect of its constructs. Working on building and taking care of all the elements that comprise satisfaction helps to increase and nurture the level of employee job satisfaction which ultimately contributes to the growth of the organization. An organization has to try to mitigate and sort out ways to help employees to have a better work environment and understand the job characteristics. The employee evaluation system needs to be clear, transparent and embracing. The organization’s commitment is important in ensuring the steady growth of employees all around and checking the system is permissible for them to go up the ladder of development. A synergistic and holistic approach to supervision is important to the staff since it allows better communication augmenting job satisfaction. Pay level shall be in equity and fair in removing job dissatisfaction.
References
Adams, J. S. (1965): Inequity in social exchange. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
Agwu, M. O. (2013): Impact of fair reward system on employee’s job performance in Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited Port. Harcourt. British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioral Science, 3(1), 47-64.
Ahmed, I.­ – Nawaz M. M. – Iqbal, N. – Ali, I. – Shaukat, Z. – Usman, A. (2010): Effects of motivational factors on employees job satisfaction a case study of University of the Punjab, Pakistan. International journal of business and management, 5(3), 70.
Ali, R. M. – Wajidi, F. A. (2013): Factors influencing job satisfaction in Public Healthcare Sector of Pakistan. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 13 , 61-66.
Al-Zu’bi, H. A. (2010): A study of relationship between organizational justice and job satisfaction. International journal of business and management, 5(12), 102.
Amey, M. J. – Jessup-Anger, E. – Tingsou-Gatuz, C. R. (2002): Unwritten rules: Organizational and political realities of the job. Beginning your journey: A guide for new professionals in student affairs, 13-30.
Arian, M. – Soleimani, M. – Oghazian, M. B. (2018): Job satisfaction and the factors affecting satisfaction in nurse educators: A systematic review. Journal of Professional Nursing, 34(5), 389-399.
Arminio, J. – Creamer, D. G. (2001): What supervisors says about quality supervision. College Student Affairs Journal, 21(1), 35.
Artz, B. (2010): Fringe benefits and job satisfaction. International Journal of Manpower, 31(6), 626-644.
Bassett, G. (1994): The case against job satisfaction. Business Horizons, 37(3), 61-69.
Benrazavi, S. R. – Silong, A. D. (2013): Employees’ job satisfaction and its influence on willingness to work in teams. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 14(1), 127-140.
Beutell, N. J. – Wittig-Berman, U. (1999): Predictors of work-family conflict and satisfaction with family, job, career, and life. Psychological Reports, 85(3), 893-903.
Brown, S. – Sessions, J. G. (2003): Attitudes, expectations and sharing. Labour, 17(4), 543-569.
Burnard, P. – Morrison, P. – Phillips, C. (1999): Job satisfaction amongst nurses in an interim secure forensic unit in Wales. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 8(1), 9-18.
Carmichael, L. (1983): Firm-specific human capital and promotion ladders. The Bell Journal of Economics, 251-258.
Chandrasekar, K. (2011): Workplace environment and its impact on organisational performance in public sector organisations. International journal of enterprise computing and business systems, 1(1), 1-19.
Clark, A. E. (1997): Job satisfaction and gender: why are women so happy at work?. Labour economics, 4(4), 341-372.
Clark, A. E. (2001): What really matters in a job? Hedonic measurement using quit data. Labour economics, 8(2), 223-242.
Clarke, S. P. – Aiken, L. H. (2008): An international hospital outcomes research agenda focused on nursing: lessons from a decade of collaboration. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(24), 3317-3323.
Cranny, C. J. – Smith, P. C. – Stone, E. (1992): Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs.
Crossman, A. – Abou‐Zaki, B. (2003): Job satisfaction and employee performance of Lebanese banking staff. Journal of Managerial Psychology.
De Nobile, J. J. – McCormick, J. (2008): Job satisfaction of Catholic primary school staff: a study of biographical differences. International Journal of Educational Management.
Dessler, G. (2012): Human resource management (Ed.). Florida: Florida International University.
Fried, Y. – Melamed, S. – Ben‐David, H. A. (2002): The joint effects of noise, job complexity, and gender on employee sickness absence: An exploratory study across 21 organizations–the CORDIS study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75(2), 131-144.
George, J.M. – Jones, G.R. (2008): Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Fifth Edition. Upper Saddle River: New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall.
Haile, M. – Premanandam, P. (2017): Employees’ job satisfaction in Ethiopia: A comparative study of selected public and private sectors in Woldia district. International Journal of Applied Research, 3(4), 19-25.
Hamermesh, D. (1977): Economic aspects of job satisfaction. Essays in labour market analysis, Toronto, John Wiley et Sons.
Hashim, R. A. – Mahmood, R. (2011): What is the state of job satisfaction among academic staff at Malaysian Universities?. UNITAR e-Journal, 7(1).
Hosie, P. – Jayashree, P. – Tchantchane, A. – Lee, B. S. (2013): The effect of autonomy, training opportunities, age and salaries on job satisfaction in the South East Asian retail petroleum industry. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(21), 3980-4007.
Hulin, C. L. (2002): Lessons from industrial and organizational ­psychology. In The psychology of work (pp. 19-38). Psychology Press.
Islam, M. A. – Cheong, T. W. – Yusuf, D. H. M. – Desa, H. (2011): A study on’generation y’behaviours at workplace in Penang. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 7(11), 1802-1812.
Ito, H. – Eisen, S. V. – Sederer, L. I. – Yamada, O. – Tachimori, H. (2001): Factors affecting psychiatric nurses’ intention to leave their current job. Psychiatric services, 52(2), 232-234.
Judge, T. A. – Piccolo, R. F. – Podsakoff, N. P. – Shaw, J. C. – Rich, B. L. (2010).:The relationship between pay and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of vocational behavior, 77(2), 157-167.
Jung, C. S. (2018): Current-ideal culture incongruence, hierarchical position, and job satisfaction in government agencies. International Public Management Journal, 21(3), 432-460.
Jurgensen, C. E. (1978): Job preferences (What makes a job good or bad?). Journal of Applied psychology, 63(3), 267.
Kabir, M. N. – Parvin, M. M. (2011): Factors affecting employee job satisfaction of pharmaceutical sector. Australian journal of business and management research, 1(9), 113-123.
Kavanagh, D. J. – Spence, S. H. – Strong, J. – Wilson, J. – Sturk, H. – Crow, N. (2003): Supervision practices in allied mental health: Relationships of supervision characteristics to perceived impact and job satisfaction. Mental health services research, 5(4), 187-195.
Kawada, T. – Otsuka, T. (2011): Relationship between job stress, occupational position and job satisfaction using a brief job stress questionnaire (BJSQ). Work, 40(4), 393-399.
Klein, S. M. (1973): Pay factors as predictors to satisfaction: A comparison of reinforcement, equity, and expectancy. Academy of Management Journal, 16(4), 598-610.
Kosteas, V. D. (2011): Job satisfaction and promotions. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 50(1), 174-194.
Landeweerd, J. A. – Boumans, N. P. (1988): Nurses’ work satis­faction and feelings of health and stress in three psychiatric departments. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 25(3), 225-234.
Lane, K. A. – Esser, J. – Holte, B. – McCusker, M. A. (2010): A study of nurse faculty job satisfaction in community colleges in Florida. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 5(1), 16-26.
Lazear, E. P. (1986): Salaries and piece rates. Journal of business, 405-431.
Lazear, E. P. – Rosen, S. (1981): Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. Journal of political Economy, 89(5), 841-864.
Locke, E. A. (1976): The nature and causes of job satisfaction. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: RandMc Narlly, 2(5), 360-580.
Luthans, F. – Wahl, L. V. K. – Steinhaus, C. S. (1992): The importance of social support for employee commitment: A quantitative and qualitative analysis of bank tellers. Organization Development Journal.
Mafini, C. – Dlodlo, N. (2014): The linkage between work-related factors, employee satisfaction and organisational commitment: Insights from public health professionals. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(1), 12.
Marzuki, P. F. – Permadi, H. – Sunaryo, I. (2012): Factors affecting job satisfaction of workers in Indonesian construction companies. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 18(3), 299-309.
Mayo, E. (2003): The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203487273
Mbah, S. E. – Ikemefuna, C. O. (2012): Job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intentions in total Nigeria plc. Lagos State. In­ternational journal of humanities and social science, 2(14), 275-287.
McCausland, W. D. – Pouliakas, K. – Theodossiou, I. (2005): Some are punished and some are rewarded: A study of the impact of performance pay on job satisfaction. International Journal of Manpower.
Mone, E. M. – London, M. (2018): Employee engagement through effective performance management: A practical guide for managers. Routledge.
Morris, A. – Bloom, J. R. (2002): Contextual factors affecting job satisfaction and organizational commitment in community mental health centers undergoing system changes in the financing of care. Mental health services research, 4(2), 71-83.
Mueller, C. W. – Boyer, E. M. – Price, J. L. – Iverson, R. D. (1994): Employee attachment and noncoercive conditions of work: The case of dental hygienists. Work and occupations, 21(2), 179-212.
Muhammad, N., & Akhter, M. (2010): Supervision, salary and opportunities for promotion as related to job satisfaction. ASA University Review, 4(1), 255-261.
Ndulue, T. I. – Ekechukwu, H. C. (2016): Impact of job satisfaction on employees performance: A study of Nigerian breweries PLC Kaduna State Branch, Nigeria. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 33(3820), 1-11.
Padhy, P. K. – Bhuyan, D. (2015): Determinant of job satisfaction in public and private sector: an empirical study. International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied Sciences, 3(1).
Personia.com. (2022, November 07). Why Does Equity Theory Matter At Work? Retrieved from Personio: https://www.personio.com/hr-lexicon/equity-theory-at-work/#start
Phillips, J. J. – Connell, A. O. (2003): Managing employee retention: a strategic accountability approach. Routledge.
Rabbanee, F. K. – Yasmin, S. – Sarwar, A. (2012): Determinants of job Satisfaction: A study on Bangladesh perspective. International Journal Research of Commerce & Science, 1(8), 28-36.
Raziq, A. – Maulabakhsh, R. (2015): Impact of working environment on job satisfaction. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 717-725.
Robbins, S. P. (1994): Essentials of organizational behavior. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Robbins, S. P. – Judge, T. (2009): Organizational behavior. Pearson South Africa.
Robbins, S.P. (2003): Organisational Behaviour, 10th ed., Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Roethlisberger, F. J. – Dickson, W. J. (2003): Management and the Worker (Vol. 5). Psychology press.
Rony, N. I. – Suki, N. M. (2017): Modelling the relationships between internal marketing factors and employee job satisfaction in oil and gas industry. Asian Social Science, 13(3), 135-144.
Roodt, G. – Rieger, H. – Sempane, M. E. (2002): Job satisfaction in relation to organisational culture. SA Journal of industrial Psychology, 28(2), 23-30.
Ruthankoon, R. – Ogunlana, S. O. (2003): Testing Herzberg’s two‐factor theory in the Thai construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.
Saleem, S. – Majeed, S. – Aziz, T. – Usman, M. (2013): Determinants of job satisfaction among employees of banking industry at Bahawalpur. Journal of emerging issues in economics, finance and banking, 1(2), 150-162.
Santhapparaj, A. S. – Alam, S. S. (2005): Job satisfaction among academic staff in private universities in Malaysia. Journal of social sciences, 1(2), 72-76.
Schaefer, J. A. – Moos, R. H. (1996): Effects of work stressors and work climate on long‐term care staff’s job morale and functioning. Research in nursing & health, 19(1), 63-73.
Schneider, R. S. (2002).:Supervisory style: The photographer within. Beginning your journey: A guide for new professionals in student affairs, 51-70.
Seeman, M. (1957): A comparison of general and specific leader behavior descriptions. Leader behavior: Its description and measurement, 86-102.
Sikowo, D. C. – Namusonge, G. S. – Makokha, E. N. – Nyagechi, A. K. (2016): Determinants of employee satisfaction on organizational performance: A survey of Trans Nzoia County Government. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(10), 77-94.
Singh, J. K. – Jain, M. (2013): A study of employees’ job satisfaction and its impact on their performance. Journal of Indian research, 1(4), 105-111.
Sinha, J. B. – Singh, S. (1995): Employees satisfaction and its organizational predictors. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 135-152.
Smith, P. C. – Kendall, L. M. – Hulin, C. L. (1969): The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitudes. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.
Sokoya, S. K. (2000): Personal predictors of job satisfaction for the public sector manager: Implications for management practice and development in a developing economy. Journal of business in developing nations, 4(1), 40-53.
Sousa‐Poza, A. – Sousa‐Poza, A. A. (2000): Taking another look at the gender/job‐satisfaction paradox. Kyklos, 53(2), 135-152.
Spector, P. E. (1985): Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the Job Satisfaction Survey. American journal of community psychology, 13(6), 693.
Spector, P. E. (1997): Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences (Vol. 3). Sage.
Spence, S. H. – Wilson, J. – Kavanagh, D. – Strong, J. – Worrall, L. (2001): Clinical supervision in four mental health professions: A review of the evidence. Behaviour change, 18(3), 135-155.
Tella, A. – Ayeni, C. O. – Popoola, S. O. (2007): Work motivation, job satisfaction, and organisational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo State, Nigeria. Library philosophy and practice, 9(2).
Tharu, R. P. (2019): Multiple regression model fitted for job satisfaction of employees working in saving and cooperative organization. International Journal of Statistics and Applied Mathematics, 4(4), 43-49.
Tull, A. (2006): Synergistic supervision, job satisfaction, and intention to turnover of new professionals in student affairs. Journal of college student development, 47(4), 465-480.
Vroom, V. H. (1995): Work and Motivation.-Revised Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Boss Classics.
Walumbwa, F. O. – Luthans, F. – Avey, J. B. – Oke, A. (2011): Retracted: Authentically leading groups: The mediating role of collective psychological capital and trust. Journal of organizational behavior, 32(1), 4-24.
Wang, Y. (2002): Job satisfaction of nurses in hospital. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 37(8), 4-593.
Williams, M. L. – McDaniel, M. A. – Nguyen, N. T. (2006): A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of pay level satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 392-413.
Witt, L. A. – Nye, L. G. (1992): Gender and the relationship between perceived fairness of pay or promotion and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied psychology, 77(6), 910.
Yaseen, A. (2013): Effect of compensation factors on employee satisfaction-a study of doctor’s dissatisfaction in Punjab. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 3(1), 142.
Youssef, C. M. – Luthans, F. (2005): A positive organizational behavior approach to ethical performance. Positive psychology in business ethics and corporate responsibility, 1-22.
Zhu, Y. (2013): A review of job satisfaction. Asian Social Science, 9(1), 293.

Esayas Degago Demissie, PhD Student
Károly Ihrig Doctoral School of Management and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

Daniel Kibet Koech, PhD Student
Károly Ihrig Doctoral School of Management and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

Shah Ali Murtaza, PhD Student
Károly Ihrig Doctoral School of Management and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

Dr. Attila Szakács, College Associate Professor
Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Hungary.

Dr. Edina Molnár
College professor, Head of Psychological Department Social Sciences Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Debrecen, Hungary.