Because of the ramifications of the problems connected with job satisfaction, surveys and studies have been carried out on a community-wide basis, in specific professional or occupational groups and, of course, in specific industrial establishments.
One of the early community-wide surveys was conducted by Hoppock in the town of New Hope, Pennsylvania (1935). Eighty-eight percent of the 351 employed adults answered the lengthy questionnaire. Table 12.1 presents the results.
These results indicate that 15 percent of the sample had negative attitudes, or job dissatisfaction. This early finding is quite similar to the preponderance of evidence that has since been reported. Robinson and Hoppock have collated the data on 191 assorted studies reporting percentages of job dissatisfaction (1952). The median figure is 18 percent dissatisfied.
These figures are quite different from the “common sense” view in which workers are considered as robots doomed to dissatisfaction in their work because of industrial mechanization and other self-attributed causes. Hoppock asked 36 nationally prominent personnel officers to estimate percentages of workers who were dissatisfied. The answers ranged from 0 to 80 percent, the average being 49 percent. As Hoppock points out, if numbers from 0 to 100 were put in a hat, the average of the numbers drawn would be 50. Hence it may well be that the 49 percent is as void of meaning as chance itself.
The view that is clearly taken is that the majority of the gainfully employed tend to have job satisfaction or are at least neutral. Only a small percentage have job dissatisfaction. An index of job satisfaction was computed; the results are shown in Figure 12.1. A breakdown according to occupational classification indicates that the average index is lowest for the unskilled category and highest for the professional category; this is shown in Table 12.2.
This survey indicated that there is considerably more job satisfaction than dissatisfaction when all the persons who are gainfully employed are included in the survey. Hoppock also conducted a survey on people in one occupation, namely, teaching. Five hundred teachers from 51 urban and rural communities in the northeastern United States estimated their job satisfaction on four attitude scales. By combining these scales, a measure of job satisfaction was obtained. Of this group the 100 most satisfied and 100 least satisfied were asked about 200 questions.
A comparison of their answers differentiated the satisfied from the dissatisfied teachers in the following areas:
1. The satisfied showed fewer indications of emotional maladjustment.
2. The satisfied were more religious.
3. The satisfied enjoyed better human relationships with superiors and associates.
4. The satisfied were teaching in cities of over 10,000 population.
5. The satisfied felt more successful.
6. Family influence and social status were more favourable among the satisfied.
7. The satisfied “selected” their vocations.
8. Monotony arid fatigue were reported more frequently by the dissatisfied.
9. The satisfied averaged 7.5 years older.
One interesting finding is that the difference in average salaries between the two groups was not statistically significant.
One brief comment is necessary about this survey. No attempt was made to measure the proficiency of the teachers, and therefore it is not known whether those who were dissatisfied were less “good” than the satisfied group. This survey also brings out the point that job satisfaction and vocational interest are not identical.
For example, 84 percent of the dissatisfied teachers answered “yes” to the question “Is your work interesting?”
In the epilogue to his study on job satisfaction, Hoppock proposes the following six major components of job satisfaction:
1. The way the individual reacts to unpleasant situations
2. The facility with which he adjusts himself to other persons
3. His relative status in the social and economic group with which he identifies himself
4. The nature of the work in relation to the abilities, interests, and preparation of the worker
These six items are not of the minute and specific character measured in many studies on job satisfaction: possibly that is what is wrong with these studies. Hop- pock’s approach is to be commended for this reason: He is aware of the real factors which contribute to job satisfaction and does not get lost in the petty details.
Job satisfaction is an important generalized attitude in an individual, not a specific attitude about specific job factors. The idea that it is related to the individual’s emotional adjustment suggests that those who are unstable emotionally may have considerably more difficulty adjusting themselves to a job and may therefore be dissatisfied with it.
Factor Analysis Studies:
One of the more elegant ways of assessing the basic underlying factors in job satisfaction is through the statistical technique of factor analysis.