Job Satisfaction And Dissatisfaction

Introduction

Definitions of job satisfaction are general and broad in nature. It is concluded as follow, it is an individual’s positive or negative attitude toward their job. It can be positive feelings about one’s job based on one’s evaluation of the characteristics of the job. Some researchers defined job satisfaction as “the feelings a worker has about his job”. Similarly that job satisfaction is “the collection of feelings and beliefs that people have about their current jobs. People’s levels or degrees of job satisfaction can range from extreme satisfaction to extreme dissatisfaction.”. According to Kreitner and Kinicki (2007), job satisfaction is essentially the extent to which someone likes his or her job(). No matter how various the definitions stated, the essential meaning is that a person’s job is not only serving customers or making a product, but also requires interaction with coworkers and supervisors, adhering to organizational policies and procedures, accepting working conditions, and meeting the required performance standards to name a few (Robbins and Judge, 2007). Therefore, job satisfaction or dissatisfaction is not that simple. Researchers have concluded that many different dimensions related to satisfaction, such as recognition, compensation, supervision, job security, and advancement on the job, work, pay, promotions, coworkers, and supervision, to name a few().

Two important work attitudes are job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Job satisfaction is the collection of feelings and beliefs that people have about their current jobs. Organizational commitment is the collection of feelings and beliefs that people have about their organization as a whole. Work attitudes have three components: an ...

... middle of paper ...

... the context of a cross-lagged longitudinal model, and did not take measurement error into account. Correlated errors can be problematic in longitudinal models, and unreliability in measures can differentially attenuate estimates of causal effects. This may account for their failure to find an effect of satisfaction on commitment. Second, they did not examine the possibility that temporal sources of error influenced their results. For example, method effects can produce underestimates of causal effects in longitudinal studies. Third, they did not employ the wide range of statistical controls that a high degree of confidence in the findings would mandate. This study's objectives were to replicate and extend Bateman and Strasser's findings. Our model was similar to theirs and our respondents came from a comparable population, employees of hospital nursing departments.