chapter v job satisfaction analysis: a comparative study ... · job satisfaction analysis: a...

221

CHAPTER V

Job Satisfaction Analysis: A Comparative Study of SBI and ICICI Banks

5.1 Introduction

Job satisfaction is a key instrument to gauge the organizational health as service quality largely

depends upon the human resources Saker et al (2003). Job Satisfaction is the buzz word in

today’s corporate era. Since the transformation of personnel into HR, and its inception in the

industry new concepts related to human capital has been emerging day by day. A decade ago this

concept was not practiced or applied and the employees were very loyal to their organizations

and used to start and end their career in the same organizations. Apart from the bread and butter

the organization used to act as their sanctuary and no one was much concerned about the job

itself or job satisfaction. Over the period of time employees have witnessed several eras in

modern business history and the concept of treating humans as assets of the organization has

flourished and has done wonders around the world in terms of growth of companies.

The concept of job satisfaction has several factors contributing to it which are monetary and

non-monetary. Job satisfaction is the favorableness or un-favorableness with which employees

view their work and it is affected by both the internal and external environment of the

organization. Job design affect the job satisfaction, as jobs that are rich in behavioral elements

such as variety autonomy, task importance and feedback contribute to employee’s satisfaction.

Similarly the employee’s acceptance by the work group is important to job satisfaction. To sum

up each element of the organization environment and system can contribute to or detract from

job satisfaction William & Keith (2000).

Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state, resulting

from the appraisal of one’s job experiences.” In general, therefore, job satisfaction refers to an

individual’s positive emotional reactions to a particular job. It is an affective reaction to a job

that results from the person’s comparison of actual outcomes with those that are desired,

anticipated, or deserved Opkara (2002). Job satisfaction has significance towards human health

both physical and mental and is positively or negatively correlated. Employees spend a major

222

part of their lives at the workplace hence the factors related to job satisfaction and employee

behavior and their implication are important to measure Oshagbemi (1999).

Job satisfaction is an attitude of an employee over a period of his/her job so the factors of job

satisfaction and dissatisfaction changes over the period of time. However, in today's business

climate of continuous changes and uncertainty, the importance of job satisfaction to

organizational performance and individual can be “pay”. Job satisfaction is an attitude and

measuring attitudes at workplace is not an easy task.

The paradigm of the banking sector changed with the emergence of plastic money and online

transfers etc. Thus the technological Pay and breakthroughs affected the banking sector and

numerous career opportunities were created in this sector in all disciplines. The paradigm shifted

from a financial sector to a services sector where providing quality service to the customer

became the ultimate goal of the bank. Due to heavy inflow of multinational banks, a new culture

in the banking sector is emerged which is based on performance, rewards and compensations.

This has brought higher employment opportunities, increases in income level, and changes in

consumption pattern and consequently there emerges a competitive environment in the industry.

A review of the literature in this context reveals that a number of researchers have emphasized

the importance of factors affecting job satisfaction. Job satisfaction involves several different

spheres such as satisfaction with pay, promotion opportunities, fringe benefits, job security and

the importance/challenge of the job Nguyen, Taylor, & Bradley (2003). Job satisfaction can lead

to cost reduction by reducing absences, task errors, and turnover. Since work is an important

aspect of people’s lives and most people spend a large part of their working lives at work,

understanding the factors involved in job satisfaction is crucial to improving employees’

performance and productivity. Job satisfaction has often been linked to organizational

commitment, turnover intentions, and absenteeism. These variables are costly to an organization,

as they could lead to low morale, poor performance, lower productivity, and higher costs of

hiring, retention, and training Opkara (2002).

223

The private banks specifically created a cut throat competition by launching new products and

services regularly to gain more market share. The employment patterns in the banking sector

changed abruptly and it became a high volatile market. The salary bands and compensation and

rewards patterns changed and focus became on performance and targets rather than experience

and loyalty. Hence, pay and job satisfaction became a key factor for the banking professionals

which needed attention so as to achieve the long term goals of the bank. Studies have tested the

hypothesis that income is an important determinant of job satisfaction Nguyen, Taylor & Bradley

(2003). Factors such as pay, the work itself, supervision, relationships with co-workers and

opportunities for promotions have been found to contribute to job satisfaction Opkara (2002).

There is a significant difference in the job satisfaction levels of employees based on their

income. Employees earning the lowest income report significantly lower levels of job

satisfaction relative to the other income groups. Highly paid employees may still be dissatisfied

if they do not like the nature of their job and feel they cannot enter a more satisfying job Luddy,

(2005)

During the literature review various models have been followed by different researchers which

included various theories. Frederick Hertzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory proposes that

intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction and motivation, whereas extrinsic factors are

associated with job dissatisfaction. This theory is not much used by researchers because of its

simplicity as the environment have changed a lot yet many organizations uses their job design

techniques based on this theory. The higher the education level the lower is the job satisfaction

Nguyen, Taylor, & Bradley (2003).

5.2. Employee Job Satisfaction

People hold different attitudes about many aspects of their work and life. From the management

perspective, job satisfaction is one of the most meaningful employee attitudes. The widely used

research definition of job satisfaction is the one by Locke (1976), who defined it as “a

pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job

experiences” (as cited in Saari and Judge, 2004). According to Locke (1976), job satisfaction is

resulted from the interaction of cognition and affect, or thoughts and feelings. Warr (1979)

pointed out that people’s feeling about their work is a function both of that work itself and also

224

of their own personality. Arches (1991) described job satisfaction as a positive emotional state

caused by the appraisal of one’s job situation, and it is related to the characteristics and demands

of one’s work (as cited in Tornblom, 2005). Job satisfaction can be understood as the extent to

which employees like their jobs Heneman, Schwab, Fossum and Dyer (1989).

5.3. Indicators of employee job satisfaction

Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson and Capwell (1957) stated that the term job satisfaction is

multidimensional: “there can be satisfaction with the specific activities of the job; with the place

and working conditions under which the job is performed; or with specific factors such as

economic rewards, security, or social prestige”. Issues such as how to measure job satisfaction,

what does job satisfaction consist of, aroused much interest of different researchers. Smith,

Kendall and Hulin (1969) created the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) to measure employee job

satisfaction. It is a specific questionnaire which measures one’s satisfaction in five facets: pay,

promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the work itself. JDI is

highly regarded and well documented as valid and reliable. According to Kerr (1985), the JDI

“possesses good content validity (including concurrent, predictive, convergent, and discriminate

validities), impressive construct validity, and adequate reliability,” and “very few instruments in

industrial organizational psychology have received the attention of researchers that the JDI has”.

Locke (1976) further adds more facets such as recognition, working conditions, and company

and management. Weiss et al (1967) developed Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire measuring

job satisfaction on twenty aspects including: ability utilization, co-workers, moral values,

achievement, creativity, recognition, activity, independence, responsibility, advancement,

security, supervision human relations, authority, social service, supervision-technical, company

policies, social status, variety, compensation, and working conditions.

Job satisfaction links closely to work motivation. It may be viewed, at one level, as an outcome

of being able to succeed in acting in accordance with one’s motivation Tornblom et al (2005). In

this sense, satisfaction arises not from performance of the job per se, but from the ability to have

a need or motive satisfied. It is assumed that high levels of motivation will have both

psychological and behavioral consequences. The psychological consequences include job

225

satisfaction and organizational commitment; whereas the behavioral effects include higher

output, lower absenteeism and lower likelihood of leaving the job Foster (2000). The close

relationship between work motivation and job satisfaction implied that studying the indicators of

job satisfaction will lead to the understanding of employees’ needs and the factors influencing

their behavior. To test the job satisfaction levels of sample respondents of SBI and ICICI, the

second part of the instrument was used. It contains items that measure job satisfaction, Job

Descriptive Index (JDI) was one of the most commonly used instruments on measuring

employee job satisfaction. Designed by Smith et al. in 1969, JDI evaluates job satisfaction in five

facets namely pay, promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the

work itself.

The questionnaire included questions (Question 1-19) in relation to the employees’ job

satisfaction, measuring with 5-point Likert scale: ranking from One to Five (1 being of “strongly

disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”). The pretest applied to measure reliability and validity.

The collected item total correlation was 0.50, and if deleting the item (questions no 7) increase

Cronbach’s α, the item was deleted. The overall reliability co-efficient of the instrument yielded

an r = 0.73 Cronbach’s alpha.

To study the job satisfaction of the respondent’s factor analysis is adopted. Factor analysis is a

statistical method used to describe variability among observed, Factor analysis searches for such

joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables. The observed variables are modeled

as linear combinations of the potential factors, plus error terms. The information gained about the

interdependencies between observed variables can be used later to reduce the set of variables in a

dataset. Computationally this technique is equivalent to low rank approximation of the matrix of

observed variables.

5.4. Factor Analysis

Factor analysis and principal component analysis were used to identify smaller number of factors

underlying a large number of observed variables. Variables that have high correlation between

them, and are largely independent of other subsets of variables, are combined in to factors. These

226

measures help in developing objective instruments for measuring constructs which are not

directly observable in the real life. 18 items in the questionnaire were analyzed by applying

factor analysis which revealed underlying dimensions of Job Satisfaction.

Exploratory factor analysis is used to explore the underlying dimensions that could have

correlations among the observed variables. Exploratory factor analysis also helps in theory

building. The process of extraction used here is principle component analysis as it helps in

reducing number of variables. Factor analysis produced factor loadings for each combination of

extracted factors and observed variables. Factor loadings were similar to correlation coefficients

between the factors and variables. Higher the factor loading more likely it is that the factor

underlies that variable. Factor loadings help in identifying which variables are associated with a

particular factor. Factor loadings obtained from extraction may not represent a clear picture of

the factor structure of the dataset. After extraction it was known which observed variable load on

different factors. Un- rotated factor loading are difficult to interpret. Rotation helps in arriving at

a simple pattern of factor loadings by maximizing high correlations and minimizing low ones.

Extraction communalities for a variable give the total amount of variation, explained by all

factors. If the communality exceeds 1.0, there is a spurious solution, which may reflect too small

a sample or the researcher has too many or too few factors. Factor analysis was conducted on

the responses of 300 respondents’. The objective is to identify factors which lead to job

satisfaction.

The following table depicts the communalities of job satisfaction. It can be observed from the

following table that the extraction values do not exceed 1.

227

Table No 5.1.Communalities

Initial Extraction

Salary Satisfaction 1 0.73

Fringe Benefits 1 0.753

Working Climate 1 0.67

Promotion

Opportunities 1 0.461

Career Development 1 0.41

Job Content 1 0.678

Recogni3tion by Boss 1 0.607

Self Actualized 1 0.449

Job Security 1 0.375

Social Status 1 0.559

Dignity and Respect 1 0.496

Satisfied with Boss 1 0.729

Satisfied with

Colleagues 1 0.474

Sense of Achievement 1 0.545

Help Customers 1 0.524

Satisfied with Current

Job 1 0.474

Satisfy Customer needs 1 0.687

Choice to Leave 1 0.527

Extraction method: Principal Component Analysis

Primary data analysed using SPSS

Factor analysis helps in summarizing the total variation explained by the useful factors. Here

initial Eigen values give the variance explained by all the possible factors. There are 18 factors,

which are equal to the number of variables entered in to factor analysis.

228

Table No 5.2. Total Variance Explained

Component

Initial Eigenvalues

Extraction Sums of Squared

Loadings

Rotation Sums of Squared

Loadings

Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

%

1 3.894 21.633 21.633 3.894 21.633 21.633 2.755 15.308 15.308

2 3.193 17.74 39.373 3.193 17.74 39.373 2.721 15.119 30.428

3 1.946 10.809 50.182 1.946 10.809 50.182 2.448 13.602 44.03

4 1.117 6.205 56.387 1.117 6.205 56.387 2.224 12.357 56.387

5 0.965 5.358 61.745

6 0.952 5.292 67.037

7 0.866 4.812 71.849

8 0.791 4.395 76.244

9 0.731 4.06 80.304

10 0.674 3.743 84.047

11 0.588 3.269 87.316

12 0.453 2.518 89.834

13 0.419 2.329 92.163

14 0.402 2.232 94.395

15 0.309 1.718 96.112

16 0.285 1.582 97.695

17 0.235 1.304 98.999

18 0.18 1.001 100

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


Total variance is equal to total number of factors or variables. Extractions sums of squared

loadings gives information for factors with eigen values greater than 1. Cumulative % of column

in this part indicates that four extracted factors explain 56. 38 % of the variation. Rotation sums

of squared loadings gives the information on extracted factors after rotation. There are only four

factors with eigen values greater than one, suggesting a four-factor solution. The study

administered the Kaiser criterion which suggests 3-, 4-, and 5-factor solutions discuss each in

terms of their relation to external data and theory. The Kaiser rule is to drop all components with

eigen values under 1.0 – this being the eigen value equal to the information accounted for by an

average single item. The present study extracted 4-factors.

229

Table No 5.3. Component Matrix(a)

Component

1 2 3 4

Salary Satisfaction 0.771

Fringe Benefits 0.814

Working Climate 0.646 0.473

Promotion Opportunities 0.451 -0.403

Career Development 0.566

Job Content -0.55 0.44

Recognition by Boss 0.528 -0.566

Self Actualized 0.552

Job Security 0.412

Social Status 0.592

Dignity and Respect 0.616

Satisfied with Boss 0.611 0.424 -0.419

Satisfied with Colleagues 0.575

Sense of Achievement 0.56

Help Customers 0.472

Satified with Current Job 0.443

Satisfy Cutomer needs -0.585 0.494

Choice to Leave -0.402 0.495


a 4 components extracted. Primary data

analysed using SPSS

230

5.4.1. Rotated Component matrix

It is always difficult to interpret the loadings in the factor matrix. There are many other variable

with high loadings on more than one factor in the factor matrix. Rotation solves this problem.

For a good factor solution, the particular variable should load high on one factor and low on all

other factor on a rotated factor matrix.

The following table depicts the rotated component matrix. Rotation method applied is Equamax

with Kaiser Normalization.

Table No 5.4. Rotated Component Matrix(a)

Component

1 2 3 4

Salary Satisfaction 0.837

Fringe Benefits 0.832

Working Climate 0.784

Promotion Opportunities 0.669

Career Development 0.551

Job Content 0.814

Recognition by Boss 0.596

Self Actualised 0.587

Job Security 0.425

Social Status 0.636

Dignity and Respect 0.54

Satisfied with Boss 0.598

Satisfied with

Colleagues 0.66

Sense of Achievement 0.66

Help Customers 0.659

231

Satisfied with Current

Job 0.575

Satisfy Customer needs 0.809

Choice to Leave -0.717


Rotation Method: Equamax with Kaiser Normalization.

a Rotation converged in 7 iterations.


The study involved 18 variables. After selecting the variables for analysis, variables

corresponding to particular factor were grouped under four factors. Factor 1 comprises of four

variables salary satisfaction, fringe benefits, working climate and satisfied with current job.

When the employees are satisfied with salary, fringe benefits and work environment, logically

they will be satisfied with the current job. Accordingly the variable is labeled as satisfaction from

pay and benefits. Factor 2 comprises of four variables namely, job content, social status, help

customers, and satisfy customer needs. Accordingly the variable is labeled satisfaction from the

job itself. Factor 3 comprises of five variables self actualized, job security, dignity and respect,

satisfied with colleagues and sense of achievement. Accordingly the variables are labeled as

satisfaction and pride. The factor 4 comprises of five variables promotion opportunities, career

development, recognition by boss, satisfied with the boss and choice to leave. The variable

choice to leave is reverse scored due to its polarity. Accordingly the variable is labeled as

satisfaction from career. The Cronbach’s alpha measure of reliability is 0.7369 which satisfies

the levels of construct.

The following table presents the factors grouping

232

Table No 5.5. Factors Grouping

Factor Label/

Name

1 Satisfaction

from Pay

and Benefits

Salary

Satisfaction

Fringe

Benefits

Working

Climate

Satisfied with

Current Job

2 Satisfaction

from Job

Itself Job Content Social Status

Help

Customers

Satisfy

Customer

needs

3 Satisfaction

and Pride

Self

Actualized Job Security

Dignity and

Respect

Satisfied with

Colleagues

Sense of

Achievement

4 Satisfaction

from Career

Promotion

Opportunities

Career

Development

Recognition

by Boss

Satisfied with

the Boss

Choice to

leave

Source: Interpreted based on emerged factor structure

5.5. Independent Samples t-test

The t-test is used to compare the values of the means from two samples and test whether it is

likely that the samples are from populations having different mean values. The t test is used for

analysis as it compares the means between two unrelated groups on the same continuous,

dependent variable. A comparison between the SBI and ICICI bank was conducted to know

whether there is significant difference between job satisfaction and respondents profile.

The respondent’s profile of both SBI and ICICI are compared with the application of t test

(namely banks, gender, job security and shifts) and the results are presented below.

233

5.6. Job Satisfaction in SBI and ICICI Banks

Table No 5.6. Group Statistics of Banks and Job Satisfaction

Variables Banks N Mean

Std.

Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pay and

Benefits

SBI 150

3.1583 0.98963 0.0808

ICICI 150

3.6 0.68297 0.05576

Job itself SBI 150

3.9433 0.78158 0.06382

ICICI 150

3.7867 0.72085 0.05886

Pride SBI 150

3.9987 0.56307 0.04597

ICICI 150

3.748 0.45609 0.03724

Career SBI 150

3.616 0.57394 0.04686

ICICI 150

3.1827 0.71379 0.05828

Source: Survey

As per the analysis the mean values of SBI are higher for job itself, pride and career

opportunities where as pay and benefits are higher at ICICI. This trend shows that sample

respondents of SBI show higher satisfaction than ICICI sample for the job itself, pride and career

options. At ICICI sample showed satisfaction for pay and other benefits.

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in banks and employee job

satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks. The following table depicts the t test results.

234

Table No 5.7.Independent Samples t Test for SBI and ICICI banks

Satisfaction

from

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pay and

Benefits

Equal

variances

assumed 31.3 0

-

4.499 298 0 -0.4417 0.0982 -0.63 -0.248

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

4.499 264.7 0 -0.4417 0.0982 -0.63 -0.248

Job itself Equal

variances

assumed 0.2 0.659 1.805 298 0.072 0.1567 0.0868 -0.01 0.3275

Equal

variances

not

assumed 1.805 296.1 0.072 0.1567 0.0868 -0.01 0.3275

Pride Equal

variances

assumed 0.16 0.692 4.237 298 0 0.2507 0.0592 0.134 0.3671

Equal

variances

not

assumed 4.237 285.7 0 0.2507 0.0592 0.134 0.3671

235

Career Equal

variances

assumed 11.8 0.001 5.794 298 0 0.4333 0.0748 0.286 0.5805

Equal

variances

not

assumed 5.794 284.9 0 0.4333 0.0748 0.286 0.5805

Source: Survey

As viewed in the above Table the following differences are significant at the 95% level with

respect to the sample from both the banks.

Satisfaction from pay and benefits ( p < 0.05)

Satisfaction from pride (p < 0.05)

Satisfaction from career (p < 0.05)

As viewed in the above Table the following differences are not significant at the 95% level.

Satisfaction from job itself (p > 0.05)

As per the t test results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits, pride and

career as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference in

bank and job satisfaction with respect to SBI and ICICI banks.

Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted for factor job itself. It can be concluded that there is

no significant difference with regard to job itself and job satisfaction in both the banks.

236

5.7. Gender and Job Satisfaction

Table No 5.8.Group Statistics of Gender and Satisfaction

Variables Gender N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Pay and Benefits Male 177 3.372 0.8491 0.064

Female 123 3.39 0.9195 0.083

Job itself Male 177 3.915 0.748 0.056

Female 123 3.793 0.7613 0.069

Pride Male 177 3.945 0.5226 0.039

Female 123 3.771 0.5177 0.047

Career Male 177 3.533 0.6801 0.051

Female 123 3.207 0.6396 0.058

Source: Survey

The above analysis reveals that male respondents are more satisfied with the job itself, pride and

career opportunities than female respondents in the both the banks as the mean values are higher.

Female respondents are more satisfied with the pay and benefits. Most investigations on the

subject have found that women are more satisfied with their jobs than men. This is so despite the

fact that women are generally discriminated against in job competition and pay, quite possibly

the reason is that women's ambitions and financial needs are less.

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference between gender and job

satisfaction levels in SBI and ICICI banks. The following table depicts the t test results.

237

Table No 5.9. Independent Samples Test for gender at SBI and ICICI banks

Satisfaction

from

Levene's

Test for

Equality of


F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pay and

Benefits

Equal

variances

assumed 1.48 0.225

-

0.182 298 0.856 -0.0188 0.1031 -0.2217 0.1842

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

0.179 248.858 0.858 -0.0188 0.1046 -0.2248 0.1873

Job itself Equal

variances

assumed 0.539 0.463 1.386 298 0.167 0.1226 0.0885 -0.0515 0.2966

Equal

variances

not

assumed 1.381 259.605 0.168 0.1226 0.0887 -0.0522 0.2973

Pride Equal

variances

assumed 0.16 0.689 2.846 298 0.005 0.1739 0.0611 0.05365 0.2942

Equal

variances

not

assumed 2.851 264.135 0.005 0.1739 0.061 0.05379 0.294

238

Career Equal

variances

assumed 0.094 0.76 4.194 298 0 0.3268 0.0779 0.17347 0.4802

Equal

variances

not

assumed 4.241 272.44 0 0.3268 0.0771 0.1751 0.4786

Source: Survey






Satisfaction from pay and benefits (p > 0.05)


As per the t test results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pride and career as the p

value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference between gender and

job satisfaction with respect to sample in SBI and ICICI banks.

Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted for factors pay and benefits and job itself. It can be

concluded that there is no significant difference between these factors of job satisfaction and

gender in both the banks.

239

5.8. Job Security and Job Satisfaction

Table No 5.10 Group Statistics of security and satisfaction

Variables Job Security Bank N Mean

Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

Pay and

Benefits

Uncertain ICICI 150 3.6 0.68297 0.06

Certain SBI 150 3.1583 0.98963 0.08

Job itself Uncertain ICICI 150 3.7867 0.72085 0.06

Certain SBI 150 3.9433 0.78158 0.06

Pride Uncertain ICICI 150 3.748 0.45609 0.04

Certain SBI 150 3.9987 0.56307 0.05

Career Uncertain ICICI 150 3.1827 0.71379 0.06

Certain SBI 150 3.616 0.57394 0.05

Source: Survey

It can be observed from the above table that the mean values of ICICI sample respondents are

high for pay and benefits which show that the job satisfaction is high compared to SBI sample

employees. Contradictorily the mean values are high for the job itself, pride and career at SBI

than ICICI respondents which means higher satisfaction levels. An average employee will think

of job security first rather than other factors to get settled in life. It has been seen that employees

secured in the job are more satisfied in their jobs. The study proves that SBI sample is satisfied

with the job, pride and career and this might be due to the security of their job.

The importance of pay as a factor in job satisfaction has been greatly overemphasized. Most

studies have found that pay ranks well below security, type of work etc. The relative importance

of pay will probably change with the labour market, economic conditions and with employee’s

beliefs about the job situation. The above analysis shows that ICICI bank respondents are highly

satisfied with pay and benefits as these are based on work performance.

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in security and employee job

satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks. The following table depicts the t test results.

240

The t test results are depicted below

Table No 5.11. Independent Samples Test for security

Satisfact

ion from

Levene's

Test for

Equality of


F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

taile

d)

Mean

Differ

ence

Std.

Error

Differen

ce

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pay and

Benefits

Equal

variances

assumed 31.28 0 4.49 298 0 0.4417 0.098 0.2485 0.6

Equal

variances

not

assumed 4.49 264.6 0 0.4417 0.098 0.2484 0.6

Job itself Equal

variances

assumed 0.195 0.65 -1.80 298 0.07 -0.157 0.087 -0.328 0

Equal

variances

not

assumed -1.80 296. 0.07 -0.157 0.087 -0.328 0

241

Pride Equal

variances

assumed 0.157 0.69 -4.23 298 0 -0.251 0.059 -0.367 -0

Equal

variances

not

assumed -4.23 285.6 0 -0.251 0.059 -0.367 -0

Career Equal

variances

assumed 11.81 0.00 -5.79 298 0 -0.433 0.075 -0.581 -0

Equal

variances

not

assumed -5.79 284.8 0 -0.433 0.075 -0.581 -0

Source: Survey



Satisfaction from pay and benefits (p < 0.05)





As per the t test results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits, pride and

career as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference

between security and these factors with respect to SBI and ICICI banks.

242

Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted for jobs itself. It can be concluded that there is no

significant difference between job itself and security in both the banks.

5.9. Shifts and job satisfaction

The term shift work means different things to different people. Shift work is popularly regarded

as work in which employees shift schedules on some regular basis from daytime to evening or

nighttime. Many researchers define shift work as employment in which two or more groups of

employees work at different times of a 17-hour or 24-hour time span, including a so-called day

shift. Most discussions consider shift work to be any employment that regularly occurs between

7 p .m. and 7 a.m., the definition used in this study is 24 hour time span. For a significant

proportion of the employees, working after-dark hours may not only reduce satisfaction with

their jobs but may also create troublesome problems for their health, family life, social activity,

and on-the-job safety.

Table No 5.12. Group Statistics of shifts and satisfaction

Variables Shifts N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Pay and

Benefits

Yes 48 3.6615 0.7981 0.11519

No 252 3.3254 0.8827 0.0556

Job itself Yes 48 3.7292 0.7049 0.10174

No 252 3.8909 0.7624 0.04802

Pride Yes 48 3.7458 0.5132 0.07408

No 252 3.8976 0.5267 0.03318

Career Yes 48 3.1875 0.6696 0.09665

No 252 3.4397 0.6782 0.04272

Source: Survey

As per the above statistics the mean values show that the sample employee’s who are working in

shifts, satisfaction is high for variables pay and benefits as well a career. This situation might be

due to shift hours give a wide scope of choice to employees with regard to pay and career

243

options. The mean values of job and pride are high which indicates that satisfaction is high of

sample respondents’ who are not working in shifts.

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in shift working and employee

job satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks. The following table depicts the t test results.

The t test results are depicted below

Table No 5.13. Independent Samples Test for shifts at SBI and ICICI banks

Satisfaction

from

Levene's

Test for

Equality of


F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pay and

Benefits

Equal

variances

assumed

3.153 .077 2.453 298 .015 .3361 .13700 .06646 .60566

Equal

variances

not

assumed

2.627 70.735 .011 .3361 .12791 .08100 .59113

Job itself Equal

variances

assumed

.240 .624 -

1.363 298 .174 -.1617 .11868 -.39526 .07185

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

1.437 69.627 .155 -.1617 .11251 -.38612 .06271

244

Pride Equal

variances

assumed

.088 .768 -

1.837 298 .067 -.1518 .08262 -.31438 .01081

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

1.870 67.246 .066 -.1518 .08117 -.31379 .01021

Career Equal

variances

assumed

.044 .834 -

2.366 298 .019 -.2522 .10659 -.46195

-

.04241

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

2.387 66.685 .020 -.2522 .10567 -.46312

-

.04125

Source: Survey







Satisfaction from pride (p > 0.05)

As per the t test results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits and career

as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference between

shift working and pay and benefits and career with respect to SBI and ICICI banks. Alternatively

the null hypothesis is accepted for pride and jobs itself. It can be concluded that there is no

significant difference between these factors of job satisfaction and shifts in both the banks.

245

5.10. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (Anova)

Anova was employed to determine whether there is a difference in the job satisfaction factors

based on respondent’s profile (namely age, educational background, job experience, annual

salary, designation, working in shifts, working days and working hours).

5.11. Age and Job Satisfaction

One variable which is hypothesized to have a strong relationship to job satisfaction is age.

Herzberg et al. (1957) theorized that age has a curvilinear relationship to job satisfaction. As a

person begins a job, satisfaction is high. Satisfaction declines for several years, and then begins

to rise. This relationship is explained as follows: People receive frequent feedback and rewards

during years spent in formal schooling. After formal schooling is finished, a person enters work

with high expectations of frequent rewards. When these rewards occur less frequently than

expected, the worker becomes disenchanted and less satisfied with the job. Over time, the worker

accepts the lack of rewards as normal, lowers expectations, and becomes more satisfied.

Hulin (1963) found that job satisfaction and age are positively correlated. He disagreed with

Herzberg in that he found the relationship between age and job satisfaction to be linear rather

than curvilinear. Recent studies support the positive, linear relationship between age and

satisfaction.

In a study involving assistant principals in Ohio, Sutter (1994), using the long form of the MSQ,

found that age has a positive linear relationship to job satisfaction. Edison (1992) using the Job

Diagnostic Survey, The Self Efficacy Scale, and the Task Structure Scale surveyed two hundred

sixteen assistant principals in the Detroit School System. He reported that age is a significant

predictor of job satisfaction among assistant principals. Anderson (1982), utilizing a modified

version of the MSQ (Long Form), reported that age has a positive, linear relationship to job

satisfaction. As the age of assistant principals increases the job satisfaction of assistant principals

increases.

246

The above investigations have examined the relationship between age and job satisfaction as

positive linear, negative linear, U-shaped, inverted U-shaped or inverted J-shaped, or no

significant relations. Such conflicting results have left the true nature of the relationship

unresolved. Many studies have found different results in different groups on the relationship of

age to job satisfaction. There was higher intrinsic job satisfaction among older employees, but

lower financial and job status satisfaction among this group. However, different studies reveal

different impact of age related with job satisfaction. Few indicated that there is increase in the

level of satisfaction with age.

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in age and employee job

satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks.

The following table depicts the results of anova to study the differences between age and

satisfaction.

Table No 5.14. Age and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 43.299 36 1.203 1.694 0.01

Within

Groups 186.76 263 0.71

Total 230.06 299

Job itself Between

Groups 25.525 36 0.709 1.288 0.14

Within

Groups 144.76 263 0.55

Total 170.28 299

247

Pride Between

Groups 11.296 36 0.314 1.152 0.26

Within

Groups 71.651 263 0.272

Total 82.947 299

Career Between

Groups 29.182 36 0.811 1.94 0

Within

Groups 109.9 263 0.418

Total 139.08 299

Source: Survey








As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits and

career as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference

between job satisfaction and age. Age influences the satisfaction levels based on the factors pay

and benefits and career. Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted for jobs itself and pride. It

can be concluded that there is no significant difference between these factors of job satisfaction

and age of respondents’ in both the banks.

248

5.12. Designation and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in designation and employee job


Table No 5.15. Designation and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 6.049 5 1.21 1.588 0.16

Within

Groups 224.01 294 0.762

Total 230.06 299

Job itself Between

Groups 9 5 1.8 3.281 0.01

Within

Groups 161.28 294 0.549

Total 170.28 299

Pride Between

Groups 5.268 5 1.054 3.988 0

Within

Groups 77.679 294 0.264

Total 82.947 299

Career Between

Groups 11.037 5 2.207 5.068 0

Within

Groups 128.04 294 0.436

Total 139.08 299

Source: Survey

249




Satisfaction from job itself (p < 0.05)



Satisfaction from pay and benefits (p > 0.05)

As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to career, job itself and pride

as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference between job

satisfaction and designation with respect to SBI and ICICI banks. Alternatively the null

hypothesis is accepted for pay and benefits. It can be concluded that there is no significant

difference between pay and benefits and designation in both the banks.

5.13. Education Levels and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in education and employee job


Table No 5.16. Education Levels and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and benefits Between

Groups 10.847 2 5.424 7.348 0

Within

Groups 219.21 297 0.738

Total 230.06 299

250

Job itself Between

Groups 11.379 2 5.69 10.634 0

Within

Groups 158.9 297 0.535

Total 170.28 299

Pride Between

Groups 1.367 2 0.683 2.488 0.09

Within

Groups 81.58 297 0.275

Total 82.947 299

Career Between

Groups 0.048 2 0.024 0.052 0.95

Within

Groups 139.03 297 0.468

Total 139.08 299

Source: Survey







Satisfaction from career (p > 0.05)

As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits and jobs

itself as the p value is less than .05. It can be concluded that there is significant difference

between education and these factors with respect to SBI and ICICI banks. Alternatively the null

hypothesis is accepted for pride and career. It can be concluded that there is no significant

difference between these factors of job satisfaction and education in both the banks.

251

5.14. Job Experience and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in job experience and employee

job satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks.

Table No 5.17. Job Experience and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 15.062 5 3.012 4.119 0.001

Within

Groups 214.996 294 0.731

Total 230.057 299

Job itself Between

Groups 8.322 5 1.664 3.021 0.11

Within

Groups 161.961 294 0.551

Total 170.283 299

Pride Between

Groups 4.453 5 0.891 3.335 0.006

Within

Groups 78.494 294 0.267

Total 82.947 299

Career Between

Groups 9.552 5 1.91 4.336 0.001

Within

Groups 129.528 294 0.441

Total 139.08 299

Source: Survey






252



As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits, pride and

career as the p value is less than .05. Inference can be drawn that there is significant difference in

satisfaction and factors such as pay and benefits, pride and career. Alternatively there is no

difference between experience and job itself.

5.15. Annual Salary/ Income and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is statistically no significant difference in salary and employee job


Table No 5.18. Annual Salary and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 7.898 4 1.974 2.622 .035

Within

Groups 222.159 295 .753

Total 230.057 299

Job itself Between

Groups 7.200 4 1.800 3.256 .012

Within

Groups 163.082 295 .553

Total 170.283 299

Pride Between

Groups .952 4 .238 .856 .490

Within

Groups 81.994 295 .278

Total 82.947 299

253

Career Between

Groups 1.867 4 .467 1.004 .406

Within

Groups 137.213 295 .465

Total 139.080 299

Source: Survey

As viewed in the above Table the following differences are not significant at the 95% level with








As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits and job

itself which shows that there is significant difference between salary income and job satisfaction

variables. Alternatively there is no significant difference between salary income and pride and

career.

5.16. Working days and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is no significant difference in working days and employee job


The following table depicts the results of anova to study the relationship between working hours

and satisfaction.

254

Table No 5.19 Working Days and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 4.979 1 4.979 6.592 0.01

Within

Groups 225.07 298 0.755

Total 230.057 299

Job itself Between

Groups 0.0832 1 0.083 0.145 0.70

Within

Groups 170.19 298 0.571

Total 170.2825 299

Pride Between

Groups 0.146 1 0.146 0.609 0.43

Within

Groups 71.42 298 0.23

Total 71.5712 299

Career Between

Groups 0.072 1 0.072 0.341 0.55

Within

Groups 63.22 298 0.212

Total 63.2932 299

Source: Survey









As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits which

shows that there is significant difference between working days and job satisfaction variables.

255

Alternatively there is no significant difference between working days and job itself, pride and

career.

5.17. Working hours in a day and Job Satisfaction

Null Hypotheses: There is no significant difference in working hours in a day and employee job


The following table depicts the results of anova to study the relationship between working hours

and satisfaction.

Table No 5.20 Working Hours in a day and Job Satisfaction

Satisfaction

from Anova

Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Pay and

benefits

Between

Groups 7.898 4 1.974 2.622 .035

Within

Groups 222.159 295 .753

Total 230.057 299

Job itself Between

Groups 7.200 4 1.800 3.256 .012

Within

Groups 163.082 295 .553

Total 170.283 299

Pride Between

Groups .952 4 .238 .856 .490

Within

Groups 81.994 295 .278

Total 82.947 299

Career Between

Groups 1.867 4 .467 1.004 .406

Within

Groups 137.213 295 .465

Total 139.080 299

Source: Survey

256









As per the anova results the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits and job

itself which shows that there is significant difference between working hours and job satisfaction

factors. Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted for pride and career. Inference can be drawn

that there is statistically no significant difference between working hours and pride and career.

5.18. Motivation and Job Satisfaction

The earlier parts of the study focused to show the variations between motivation and

respondent’s profile, job satisfaction and profile of the respondents, now it is proposed to study

the relationship between motivation and job satisfaction of the employees’. There has been a lot

of study in the area of ‘Motivation and Job Satisfaction’ still it remains unexplored to some

extent and yet a general understanding has not been developed when it comes to studies

conducted at different times and in different work environment.

Motivation is the key to organizational effectiveness and is a predictor for performance and job

satisfaction. The gurus of workplace motivation vouch for motivators beyond money; money is

not what makes the world go. It is the realization of personal need satisfaction. Man works to

satisfy his needs and he wants the needs to be recognized and satisfied. All employers want their

people to perform to the best of their abilities and they take great pains in ensuring that they can

provide all the necessary resources and a good working environment in order to keep their

employees’ motivated. Yet motivation remains a difficult factor to manage because employee’s

aspirations and targets do not always match with what their employers can provide.

257

People do not change changing places; they remain same individuals whether at work place or at

home. So understanding individual person related needs can give better insight to managing

human motivation. Job satisfaction and motivation reinforce each other, strengthen each other

and promote each other. If the employee is satisfied on job performance he tends to be motivated

and vice-versa. Frankl (1984) suggests that motivation reflects people’s search for meaning and

that job satisfaction may reflect the degree to which people have found meaning in their work.

Sylvia and Hutchinson (1985) view that true job satisfaction is derived from the gratification of

higher- order needs i.e. social relations, esteem, and self actualization rather than lower- order

needs.

Review of a number of studies on motivation, concluded that for supervisors and middle- level

managers, promotion is an important incentive as well as a dissatisfier. Recognition is another

job factor causing both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Reasons which contribute to

dissatisfaction are lack of adequate organizational policy and administration, lack of technically

competent and sympathetic supervision, unfriendliness of superior and lack of opportunity for

growth. First line supervisors value income, promotion, job security and working conditions

most. Middle level managers value advancement, type of work and earnings. Senior managers,

on the other hand value feeling of worthwhile accomplishment, recognition of good work done

and decision making authority.

Motivators, or satisfiers, are those factors that cause feelings of satisfaction at work. These

factors motivate by changing the nature of the work. They challenge a person to develop their

talents and fulfill their potential. Motivators are those that come from intrinsic feelings. In

addition to responsibility and learning opportunities also recognition, achievement, advancement

and growth are motivating factors. These factors don’t dissatisfy if they are not present but by

giving value to these, satisfaction levels of the employees will increase.

According to Bogardus (2007) when hygiene factors are maintained, dissatisfaction can be

avoided. When these are not maintained, dissatisfaction is most probable to occur and motivation

can’t take place. Hygiene factors, or dissatisfiers, are those that the employee expects to be in

good condition. As motivators are those if present cause satisfaction, hygiene factors are those

258

that don’t cause satisfaction but if they are lacking, it causes job dissatisfaction. Salaries or

wages must be equivalent to those salaries that other people in the same industry or geographical

area get. The status of the person must be recognized and maintained. Employees must feel that

their job is as secure as it is possible in the current economical situation. The working conditions

should be clean, sufficiently lit and safe in other way. Sufficient amount of fringe benefits like

health, pension and child care must be provided and compensation in general equivalent to the

amount of work done. Policies and administrative practices such as flex hours, dress code,

vacation schedules and other scheduling affect workers and should be run efficiently. These

factors relate to the content of the work and if they are in proper form, it tends to eliminate job

dissatisfaction Ellis (2005).

Crites (1985) has aptly distinguished between job satisfaction and job attitudes. He observes that

if the specific aspects of the job such as duties and tasks or working conditions are specified then

the concept which is defined would be job attitudes. If it is the overall job in which the individual

is presently employed, then the concept would be job satisfaction. According to Keith Davis

(1996) job satisfaction is a set of favorable or unfavorable feelings and emotions with which

employees view their work. It is an affective attitude a feeling of relative like or dislike towards

something. Cook et al (1981) examined the relationship of organizational learning culture, job

satisfaction, and organizational outcome variables with a sample of information technology (IT)

employees in the United States. It is found that learning organizational culture is associated with

IT employee job satisfaction and motivation to transfer learning. Turnover intention was found to

be negatively influenced by organizational learning culture and job satisfaction.

According to research done by Ilies et al (2004) on job satisfaction, people who tend to be

positive and cheerful most of the time do indeed tend to express higher job Satisfaction than ones

who tend to be down and gloomy. They also added that job satisfaction depends primarily on the

match between the outcomes individuals’ value in their jobs and their perceptions about the

availability of such outcomes especially for those facets of the job that are highly valued.

Boudreau et al (2001) have given the concept of ‘Honeymoon Effect’ and ‘Hangover Effect’ in

relation to Job Satisfaction. According to them, Honeymoon effect is the tendency to enjoy high

level of satisfaction on new jobs that they have taken in response to dissatisfaction with their old

259

jobs, while hangover effect is the tendency for people’s level of satisfaction to drop over time

from when a position is brand new to when one gains more experience with it.

Moynihan and Pandey (2007) examined the effects of individual attributes, job characteristics,

and organizational variables on three aspects of work motivation: job satisfaction, organizational

commitment, and job involvement. They found that managers have varying degrees of influence

over these different aspects of work motivation, with greatest influence over job satisfaction and

least influence over job involvement. A number of variables are important for work motivation,

including public service motivation, advancement opportunities, role clarity, and group culture.

Motivation basically has two dimensions one being making employees work better, more

efficiently and effectively and the other being in the view of managers, enabling employees to do

their jobs in the best way with enjoyment and desire. In fact, there are ways of increasing

employees’ work motivation and satisfaction other than monetary tools Moncrief (2010).

Yasemin Oraman (2011) worked to evaluate the effective dynamics of work motivation and job

satisfaction of textile employees. He analyzed the effectiveness of psycho-social, economic,

organizational and managerial tools over individuals’ motivation. He came out with the

conclusions that economic tools are positively and significantly related to the level of motivation.

5.19. Motivation and Job Satisfaction of the respondents

In the present study, Motivation has been treated as an independent and Job Satisfaction as

dependent variable. The objective is to examine the relationship between the perceived

motivation and employee perceived satisfaction in SBI and ICICI Banks. To study the nature of

relationship correlation has been adopted. As the coefficient of correlation tells only that there is

a relationship between the two variables but it does not clarify the kind of relationship existing

between the two variables. Therefore, regression analysis was carried out to examine the kind of

relationship existing between Motivation and Job Satisfaction.

Hypothesis: There is no relationship between perceived motivation and perceived job

satisfaction of employees working at SBI and ICICI banks.

260

Table No 5.21. Correlations

Motivation Job Satisfaction

Motivation Pearson Correlation 1 0.474**

Sig. (2-tailed) . .000

N 300 300

Job Satisfaction Pearson Correlation 0.474** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .

N 300 300

** Correlation coefficient significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed)

Table No 5.22. Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

1 0.4740459 0.224719541 0.22211793

a Predictors: (Constant), Motivation

To understand the extent and the nature of relationship between the variables i.e., Motivation and

Job Satisfaction the Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation was calculated, the value of r is

0.474; it is evident from the Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation that there is a weak to

moderate degree of positive correlation between the Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Though it

is significant at 0.01 levels it indicates that there is not much correlation (linear relationship)

between motivation of employees and job satisfaction of employees. Further the regression

model reveals that r Square is 0.22 which is 22%. Thus 22% of the variation in the value of

Motivation is accountable to Job Satisfaction and the rest may be depending on some other

factors which are not considered in the present study. The study confirms a positive correlation

though weak relationship between the dependent and independent variables. The study finds that

though motivation and job satisfaction are the important concepts which influence employees’

behavior at work job satisfaction does not always lead to motivation and vice-versa.

Employee motivation and job satisfaction cannot be isolated, but they complement each other

and respond to different organizational variables. Employees’ and job satisfaction depends on

people’s insight and behavior at the work place which is driven by a set of intrinsic, extrinsic

261

needs and by their view of numerous job-related and organization related attitudes. Literature

review finds that the relation between motivation and job satisfaction exists but the results are

not significant for all the studies. Khalid and Irshad (2010), in their comparative study of job

satisfaction in public and private sector banks concluded that the relationship between dependent

and independent variables is causal as the regression value r is 0.38. (38%)

Saleem, Mahamood and Asif (2010), in their study effect of work motivation on job satisfaction

in telecommunication services concluded that there was a positive relationship between the

motivation and job satisfaction and overall the employees were quiet satisfied with their jobs and

had their interest in their job. The conclusions were arrived though the p-value is less than 0.05

(0.042) and the value of R square is too low (0.069) the value of beta (0.264) which is showing

the positive relationship between the dependent and independent variables but not a strong

relationship.

According to the results of a study there is a positive relationship between work motivation and

job satisfaction though r value is less (r=.563). These findings are consistent with previous

researches such as Brown and Shepherd (1997) who reported that motivation improves workers’

performance and job satisfaction. The result also agrees with Vinokur et al (1994), who reported

that certain motivational factors contribute to the prediction of job satisfaction. Results suggest

that managers feel motivated by a good work environment, colleagues, interesting assignments,

feedback as well as compensation as money can satisfy basic needs such as food and security but

also more sophisticated needs such as the need for recognition and influence Locke (1999).

Therefore, financial compensation is assumed to play a significant part when people choose jobs,

stay in jobs and are motivated in jobs. The possible explanations of these findings are when the

managers basic and higher order needs are fulfilled at work, the employee will have a positive

attitude towards job that will eventually lead to job satisfaction.

Most of experts consider that the issue of motivation is essential for human activity and also for

understanding and explaining behaviour and especially organizational behaviour. Therefore, this

issue is frequently addressed. Due to the complexity of the phenomenon, some aspects cannot be

captured or explained exactly. Employees are always the vital resource of the organization and at

262

times, they are often neglected at their jobs which lead to their failure to perform. Thus the

organizations need to understand what motivates people and how they get satisfied from their job

that leads to organizational performance. Based on the above contributions on motivation and

job satisfaction and highlighting the results of the study it can be concluded that motivation and

job satisfaction are positively related but the relationship varies significantly depending upon

number of factors.

Summary

Job Satisfaction is the buzz word in today’s corporate era. Since the transformation of personnel

into HR, and its inception in the industry new concepts related to human capital has been

emerging day by day. A decade ago this concept was not practiced or applied and the employees

were very loyal to their organizations and used to start and end their career in the same

organizations. Apart from the bread and butter the organization used to act as their sanctuary and

no one was much concerned about the job itself or job satisfaction. Over the period of time

employees have witnessed several eras in modern business history and the concept of treating

humans as assets of the organization has flourished and has done wonders around the world in

terms of growth of companies.

The concept of job satisfaction has emerged and now there are several factors contributing to it

which are monetary and non-monetary. Job satisfaction is the favorableness or un-favorableness

with which employees view their work and it is affected by both the internal and external

environment of the organization. Job design affect the job satisfaction, as jobs that are rich in

behavioral elements such as variety autonomy, task unimportance and feedback contribute to

employee’s satisfaction. Job satisfaction links closely to work motivation. It may be viewed, at

one level, as an outcome of being able to succeed in acting in accordance with one’s motivation.

In this sense, satisfaction arises not from performance of the job per se, but from the ability to

have a need or motive satisfied. It is assumed that high levels of motivation will have both

psychological and behavioral consequences: the psychological consequences include job

satisfaction and organizational commitment; whereas the behavioral effects include higher

output, lower absenteeism and lower likelihood of leaving the job.

263

The paradigm of the banking sector changed with the emergence of plastic money and online

transfers etc. Thus the technological pay and breakthroughs affected the banking sector and

numerous career opportunities were created in this sector in all disciplines. The paradigm shifted

from a financial sector to a services sector where providing quality service to the customer

became the ultimate goal of the bank. Due to heavy inflow of multinational banks, a new culture

in the banking sector is emerged which is based on performance, rewards and compensations.

This has brought higher employment opportunities, increases in income level, and changes in

consumption pattern and consequently there emerges a competitive environment in the industry.

To study the job satisfaction of the respondent’s factor analysis is adopted. Factor analysis is a

statistical method used to describe variability among observed. Factor analysis searches for such

joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables. The job satisfaction as per factor

analysis comprises of four factors, salary satisfaction, fringe benefits, working climate and

satisfied with current job. When the employees are satisfied with salary, fringe benefits and work

environment, logically they will be satisfied with the current job. Accordingly the variable is

labeled as satisfaction from pay and benefits. Component 2 comprises of four factors namely, job

content, social status, help customers, and satisfy customer needs. Accordingly the variable is

labeled satisfaction from the job itself. Component 3 comprises of five factors, self actualized,

job security, dignity and respect, satisfied with colleagues and sense of achievement.

Accordingly the variables are labeled as satisfaction and pride. Component 4 comprises of five

factors, promotion opportunities, career development, recognition by boss, satisfied with the boss

and choice to leave. The factor choice to leave is reverse scored due to its polarity. Accordingly

the variable is labeled as satisfaction from career.

The respondent’s profile of both SBI and ICICI are compared with the application of t test

(namely banks, gender, job security and shifts). Anova was employed to determine whether there

is a difference in the job satisfaction factors based on respondent’s profile (namely age,

educational background, job experience, annual salary, designation, working in shifts, working

days and working hours).

264

The study finds from the t test results that, the null hypothesis is rejected and there is significant

difference between job satisfaction and pay and benefits, pride and career in SBI and ICICI

banks. The study also finds that there is significant difference between gender, job satisfaction

and pride and career. Similarly there is significant difference between job satisfaction, Security

and pay and benefits and career with respect to SBI and ICICI banks. The null hypothesis is also

rejected and concluded that there is significant difference between job satisfaction, shifts and

career. Alternatively the null hypothesis is accepted and there is no significant difference

between job itself and satisfaction in SBI and ICICI banks. There is no significant difference

between gender, satisfaction and pay and benefits and job itself. Similarly there is no difference

between job satisfaction, security and pride and job itself.

The anova results show that the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to age and pay and

benefits and career, which shows that there is significant difference between job satisfaction and

age. The study also draws the conclusion that there is significant difference between job

satisfaction, education and pay and benefits and jobs itself. The findings of the study depict that

the null hypothesis is rejected with respect to pay and benefits, pride and career. It indicates that

and there is difference between experience and job satisfaction. As per the anova results the null

hypothesis is rejected with respect to salary income and job itself which shows that there is

significant difference between salary income and job satisfaction variables. There is significant

difference between working days and benefits.

Alternatively the findings depict that there is no difference between job satisfaction, age and jobs

itself and pride. There is also no difference between pride and career and educational background

of respondents as well as experience and job itself. Income levels and benefits, pride and career

are independent which draws conclusion that there is no difference between these variables. The

study finds that there is no significant difference between working days and job itelf, pride and

career.

Employee motivation is an innate force shaped and maintained by a set of highly individualistic

factors that may change from time to time, depending on the particular needs and motives of an

employee. Findings show that the factors that motivate employees are the same ones that

265

contribute towards their satisfaction in the workplace and subsequently conclude that motivated

employees are generally also satisfied with their work. The study finds that there is a weak

positive relationship between motivation and job satisfaction of employees of SBI and ICICI

banks.

266

REFERENCES

Anderson, W. T. (1982). Job satisfaction among school psychologists. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,

VA.

Arches, J. (1991) Social structure, burnout, and job satisfaction. Social work, 36, pp.193-

272.

Bogardus, Anne M. (2007). PHR/SPHR: Professional in Human Resources certification

study guide. Indianapolis. Wiley Publishing, Inc.

Boudreau, J. W., Boswell, W. R., Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. Jr. (2001). Personality and

cognitive ability and predictors of job search among employed managers. Personnel

Psychology, 54, 25-50.

Brown, J. & Sheppard, B. (1997). Teacher librarians in learning organizations. Paper

Presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association of School

Librarianship, Canada. Au.

Cook, John D., Susan J. Hepworth, Toby D. Wall, and Peter B. Warr. (1981). The

experience of work. London: Academic Press.

Crites, J. 0. (1985). [Review of the Job Descriptive Index]. In J. V. Mitchell (Ed.), The

ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 753-754). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute.

Edison, E. L. (1992). Career assistant principals: Job satisfaction, self efficacy, and

perceptions of task structure. An unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State

University, Detroit, MI.

Ellis.W.Carol (2005). Management skills for new managers. USA. AMACOM.

267

Foster, J. J. (2000) Motivation in the workplace. In Chmiel, N. (Ed.), Introduction towork

and organizational psychology: a European perspective (pp.302-326). Oxford: Blackwell

Publishers Inc.

Frankl, V. (1984), .Man.s Search for Meaning (3rd edition, translated)., New York:

Simon & Schuster.

Heneman, H. G., Schwab, P. P., Fossum, J. A. and Dyer, L. D. (1989) Personnel/Human

Resource Management. Homewood: IRWIN.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R. O., & Capwell, D. F. (1957). Job attitudes:

Review of research and opinion. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychological Service of Pittsburgh.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R. O., & Capwell, D. F. (1957). Job attitudes:

Review of research and opinion. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychological Service of Pittsburgh.

Hulin, C. L. (1963). A linear model of job satisfaction. Authorized facsimile of an

unpublished doctoral dissertation (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,1963) Ann Arbor, MI:

University Microfilms Limited.

Ilies R. And Judge T.A (2004). On the heritability of Job Satisfaction: the mediating role

of personality Journal of applied psychology, 88, 750-759.

Keith Davis and J.W.Newstrom (1996), Organisational Behaviour; Human Behaviour at

work, Tata Mc Graw Hill Publishing company Limited, New Delhi 9th edition.

Kerr, B. A. (1985) Review of The Job Descriptive Index. In Mitchell, J. V. (Ed.), The

ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp.754-756). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute.

Khalid Salman, Irshad Zohaib Muhammad, (2010), Job Satisfaction among employees in

Punjab, Pakistan: A Comparative Study, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 17.

268

Locke E. A. (Eds.), (1999).Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking theory with

practice (pp. 166–198). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.),

Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: Rand

McNally.

Luddy,N. (2005). Job Satisfaction Amongst Employees at a Public Health institution in

the Western Cape, University of the Western Cape.

Mahmood Azeem, Mahmood Asif,Saaleem Rizwana. (2010).Effect of Work Motivation

on Job Satisfaction in Mobile Telecommunication Service Organizations of Pakistan,

International Journal of Business and Management Vol. 5, No. 11, Canadian Center of

Science and Education.

Moncrief L (2010). 5 Powerful Tools To Improve Employee Motivation And Job

Satisfaction Without Money, http://www.articledashboard.com/Article/5-Powerful-Tools-

to- ImproveEmployee-Motivation-and-Job-Satisfaction-Without- Money/1526591

Moynihan Donald P. and Pandey, Sanjay K. (2007), Finding Workable Levers over Work

Motivation: Comparing Job Satisfaction, Job Involvement and organizational

Commitment. <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm.

Nguyen, A. N., Taylor, J., & Bradley, S. (2003). Relative pay and job satisfaction: some

new evidence. http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/1382 , 01 (43).

Opkara, J. O. (2002). The impact of salary differential on managerial job satisfaction: a

study of the gender gap and its implications for management education and practice in a

developing economy. The Journal of Business in Developing Nations , 65-92.

http://www.articledashboard.com/Article/5-Powerful-Tools-to-%20ImproveEmployee-Motivation-and-Job-Satisfaction-Without-%20Money/1526591

http://www.articledashboard.com/Article/5-Powerful-Tools-to-%20ImproveEmployee-Motivation-and-Job-Satisfaction-Without-%20Money/1526591

269

Oshagbemi, T. (1999). Overall job satisfaction: how good are single versus multiple-item

measures? Journal of Managerial Psychology , 388-403.

Saari L.M. and Judge T. A., 2004 “Employee Attitude and Job Satisfaction” HRM,

Winter, Vol.43. No. 4, pp 395-407.

Saker, AH, Crossman, A and Chinmeteepituck, P. (2003). The relationships of age and

and length of service with job satisfaction: An examination of hotel employees in

Thailand. Journal Managerial Psychology, p. 18, pp. 745-58.

Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in

work and retirement. Rand McNally & Company: Chicago, IL.

Sutter, M. R. (1994). Job and career satisfaction of secondary school assistant principals.

An unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio.

Sylvia, R.D., and Hutchinson, T. (1985), .What makes Ms. Johnson teach? A study of

teacher motivation., Human Relations, 38, 841-856.

Vinokur, K.D., Jayaaratne, S., Chess, W.A. (1994). Job satisfaction and retention of

social workers in public agencies, non-profit agencies and private practice: The impact of

work place conditions and motivators. Administration in Social Work 18 (3) 93-121.

Warr, P., Cook, J., Wall, T. (1979) ‘Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes

and aspects of psychological well-being’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 52:

129-148 186.

Weiss, D.J. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction Questionnaire. Minnesota

Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, XXII. University of Minnesota.

William B. Werthe, JR. Keith Daris (2000), Human Resources and Personnel

Management, USA: McGraw-Hill-Inc.

270

Yasemin Oraman, (2011), Work motivation and job satisfaction dynamics of textile

employees, African Journal of Business Management Vol. 5(8), pp. 3361- 3368, 18 April,

2011

chapter v job satisfaction analysis: a comparative study ... · job satisfaction analysis: a...

Documents