Factors Explaining Job Satisfaction Among Faculty

Castillo and Cano (2004) had conducted a study explaining the influence of Herzberg et al (1959) Motivator-Hygiene theory on job satisfaction among the faculty in College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Science at Ohio State University. Their research was mooted by Bowen’s (1980) report that the said theory was not applicable for teacher educators in agriculture. Moreover, the motivator-hygiene theory had been popularly used in testing the level of job satisfaction. In addition to that, it was to the researchers’ intention to determine which measures constituted a valid assessment of job satisfaction. Also, the researchers wanted to validate the one-item measure of overall job satisfaction.

There were 172 faculty members involved in the study. Hundred and forty eight respondents returned the questionnaires which represented 86% of the response rate. The questionnaires contained three parts. Part I consisted of 18 items from Job Satisfaction Index questionnaire. Each item was to be answered using the 5-Likert scale ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. In Part II, the Faculty Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction Scales by Wood (1973) was used. This part consisted of 79 items of six-point Likert type scale with responses varying from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied). A one-item measurement on overall job satisfaction was also applied in this part. The last part, Part III, was on the demographic questionnaire.

Five determinants representing each motivator and hygiene acted as independent variables. The five factors for motivator were achievement, advancement, recognition, responsibility, and work itself. Meanwhile, the five factors that representing hygiene were relationship, policy and administration, salary, supervision, and working condition. The result derived from the multiple regression analysis shown that only three factors could explain the variability among overall job satisfaction. They were recognition which accounted for 43% of the variance, supervision which accounted for 52% of the variance, and interpersonal relationship which accounted for 58% of the variance.

From their study, the researchers asserted the important of the three areas that the college administrator needed to improve on. In term of recognition, the college must ensure that the reward system was compatible and competitive. Enough funds for faculty members’ supervision should also be made available. Efforts should be made to generate active socialization among inter and intra departmental. Finally the researchers also learned that the single-item measure was still valid to be used along with multi-item measure (Job Satisfaction Index).

For my critical evaluation, I found that the result would not be so convincing. This is due to the fact that only 17 respondents were female faculty (there were 122 male respondents). Thus, the concluding result that only recognition, supervision and interpersonal relationship were significant might be changed. This was what the researchers meant by the remark that the faculty were most satisfied with the content of their job and least satisfied with the context in which their job was performed.

(Any comment is highly appreciated. I give my credit to Jaime X. Castillo and Associate Professor Jamie Cano for their published article which will be cited in my thesis for PhD as above)

cited by,
Jakaria Dasan
PhD Candidature, USM
for thesis entitled "Developing Sense of Belonging among Malaysian Academicians: Promotion, QWL and Stress"

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SEJARAH KEMERDEKAAN SABAH

KRONOLOGI MASYARAKAT PERIBUMI SABAH SEDASAWARSA SEBELUM MERDEKA

THE ESSENCE OF EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION