Download - CHAPTER 3 Organisational Climate and Job satisfaction - A

CHAPTER 3

Organisational Climate and

Job satisfaction

- A Theoretical Frame work

3.1 Introduction

Organisations are so omnipresent that it is hard to imagine that life ever

existed without them. The term organisation refers to a mechanism that enables

men to live together. Men could not survived as individuals. The early men joined

together to meet their basic needs. This in turn gave rise to organisations. Now or-

ganisation is an inseparable part of our lives. “We are born in organisations, educated

by organisations and most of us spend much of our lives working for organisations"

[49]. The company that employs us, the institutions that impart education to many

of us; the super bazaar that supply groceries to us; the post office that handles our

mail; the police agencies and government that give us cradle-to-grave security-are

all organisations. Most of what we eat, what we do, where we go, our lives, hopes

and dreams are products, is a part of organisations that surround us, invade us and

shape our destinies [16]. Study of organisations is very important since the progress

of our society depends on successful organisations. The success of any organisation

depends solely on effectively using its human resources. Individual differences in em-

ployees’ interest, values, needs and personal traits have relevance in understanding

37

CHAPTER 3. ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE AND JOB SATISFACTION - A THEORETICAL FRAME WORK

both the differential worth of the individual to the organisation and the worth of the

organisation to the individual employee.

3.2 Organisation: Meaning and Nature

According to Mooney and Reily [51] organisation is the form of every human

association for the attainment of a common purpose. Barnard [8] describes organ-

isation as a system of consciously co-ordinated activities or forces of two or more

persons. Brown [6] has stated that organisation defines the part which each member

of an enterprise is expected to perform and the relations between such members to

the end that their concerted endeavours shall be most effective for the purpose of

the enterprise. According to Allen [2] organisation is the process of identifying and

grouping the work to be performed, defining and delegating the responsibility and au-

thority and establishing relationship for the purpose of enabling people to work most

effectively together in accomplishing objectives. As per Etzioni [17] organisations

are social units (or human groupings) deliberately constructed and reconstructed to

seek specific goals. Sehein [60] defined organisation as the planned co-ordination of

activities of a number of people for the achievement of some common explicit pur-

pose or goal, through division of labour and function, and through a hierarchy of

authority and responsibility. In the words of Khandwalla [38] an organisation is a

collectivity set up to pursue specific purpose by means of formal structure. According

to Daft [10] organisation is a social entity which is goal-directed deliberately struc-

tured activity system with an identifiable boundary. White and Bednar [71] defined

organisation as the activity of a group of persons pursuing a common goal through

certain formalized structures and process. According to Robbins [58] Organisation

is a consciously co-ordinated social unit, composed of two or more people, that func-

tions on a relatively continuous basis to achieve a common goal or set of goals. The

fundamental elements of an organisation can be divided into four [3]. They are

i. Co-ordination: When several people co-ordinate their efforts they

achieve much more than what would have been possible by individuals

working in isolation.

ii. Common Goals: These are necessary to make people work as a team

and co-ordination fruitful.

38


iii. Division of Labour: This increases the efficiency of work through

departmentalization.

iv. Integration: This is necessary to ensure that different people dis-

charging different functions lead to accomplishment of common goals.

The management scholars and practitioners have developed certain princi-

ples from time to time to guide managers in designing the organisation and making

it an effective instrument of meeting business goals. These principles or theories have

considerable influence on management thought and practice. The different theories

may be grouped under three broad categories namely, Classical Theory, Neo-Classical

theory and Modern Theory.

The classical writers have viewed organisation as a machine and human

beings as different components of that machine. It has its origin in the writings

of Taylor. However the main ideas of this theory have been developed by Mooney,

Breech, Allan and Urniek. According to Classical approach, where organisation is

treated as machine, the efficiency of the organisation can be increased by making

each individual efficient in it. The emphasis is more on specialization or performance

and co-ordination of various activities. This theory completely ignores the human

aspects of organisation and deals exclusively with the formal structure that should

be in an organisation.

The neo classists introduced the human relation’s approach in the classical

theory of organisation. According to the neoclassical approach

(a) The organisation in general is a social system composed of several inter-

acting parts,

(b) The social environments on the job affect people and are also affected by

them,

(c) Besides formal organisation, informal organisation also exists and it affects

and is affected by formal organisation,

(d) Integration between organisational and individual goals is a must,

(e) Man’s behaviour can be predicted in terms of social factors at work

39


(f) Man is diversely motivated and socio-psychological parts are important,

(g) Man’s approach is not always rational,

(h) Team work is essential for co-operation and sound organisational function-

ing and

(i) Effective communication is necessary for sound organisation.

The modern theory views the organisation as a system and studies it in

its totality as a complex of human interrelationships [59] . The modern view on

organisation emphasizes that organisation and environment are interdependent and

dynamic interaction of parts of the organisation with each other, with other organisa-

tions and with the environment is necessary. The organisation has to be adaptive to

changes in the environment. The modern definition of the organisation given by Hicks

and Gullet [31] considers organisation as a structured process in which individuals

interact for objectives.

Sehein [37] defines organisation as an open complex system in dynamic

interaction with multiple environments, attempting to fulfill goals and perform tasks

according to many levels and in varying degrees of complexity, evolving and develop-

ing as the interaction with changing environment forces new internal adaptations.

According to Kast and Rosenzweig [37] an organisation is a part of the

environmental super system and consists of the following subsystems as shown in the

Figure 3.1.

1. Goal and value subsystem (ie goal oriented people with a purpose)

2. Technical subsystem (ie Techniques, equipment, process and facilities used in

transforming inputs into outputs

3. Structural subsystem which determines the ways in which the tasks of the

organisation are divided (ie differentiation) and co-ordination of these activities

(ie integration))

4. Psychological subsystem which consists of individual behaviour and motivation,

status and role relationships, group dynamics, and influence network;

40


5. Managerial subsystem, which co-ordinates the subsystems within the organi-

sation and relates the organisation to its environment. Each one of the above

mentioned subsystems interact amongst themselves and with the environmental

super system and influence each other to give the organisation, its characteris-

tics of a sentient ‘living’ and social-relational system.

Figure 3.1: The Organisation System

Environmental Super System

Management

Subsystem

Structural Subsystem

Technical Sub system

Psychological Subsystem

Goals and ValuesSystem

Source : Kast and Resenzweig [37]

3.3 Organisational Climate: Meaning and Nature

Organisational climate is a commonly experienced phenomenon and de-

scribes the organisational personality. Multidimensional in nature, it represents con-

ceptually integrated synthesis of organisational characteristics. Behaviour of the

people in an organisation is significantly affected by its climate. For the attainment

41


of ultimate organisational goals, organisational climate plays the most significant role

and its study is very important.

Organisations become dynamic and growth oriented if people are dynamic

and pro-active. Organisation can not survive beyond a point unless they are contin-

uously alert to the changing environment and continuously develop their employees

to meet this changes. The organisational climate has a tremendous impact on its

success. It plays a very important role in developing, maintaining and improving the

competency, motivation, morale and growth of its employees. Motivated employees

are the biggest asset of an organisation. No matter how much technology and equip-

ment an organisation has, these things can not be fully utilized until people who have

been motivated guide them.

Human behaviour has a strong influence on working environment of an or-

ganisation. It is capable of making the organisation flourish or perish. Money and

perks can be used to attract people to a company, but they can not be used to keep

them there. A good organisational climate helps people to apply their abilities for

their benefits and for that of others. A healthy climate characterized by the values of

openness, enthusiasm, trust, mutuality and collaboration is essential for developing

human resources. Human resources constitute the most important and indispensable

factor in any economy. Their uniqueness renders it practically impossible to substi-

tute them with any other factor however important it might be as nothing can match

the human mind in working out unprecedented marvels at times.

According to Forehand and Gilmer [20] organisational climate is the set of

characteristics that describe an organisation and that

(a) distinguish one organisation from another

(b) are relatively enduring over a period of time and

(c) influence the behaviour of people in the organisation.

Korman [39] has classified that organisational climate is not the same as

job satisfaction and the two are not related to the same variables. He has described

the climate of an organisation as the extent to which it is seen by those inside or out-

side the organisation as ego-supporting, hierarchial, ambiguous , conflict-prone and

42


routinized to cite just a few of the descriptive terms used. Climate represents the in-

ternal environment of the organisation and greatly influences the Quality of Working

Life (QWL) [70] in the organisation. Hellriegal and Slocum [28] have defined the

organisational climate as a set of attributes which can be perceived about a partic-

ular organisation and /or its subsystems deal with their numbers and environment.

Lafollette [19] compared the organisational climate as the internal or psychological

environment of the organisation which acts upon its human resources.

Every organisation operates in terms of a set of policies, norms and pro-

cedures and members in the organisation perceive and make sense of organisational

policies, practices and procedures in psychological meaningful terms [34]. These

policies, practices and procedures are considered to be existing in lasting patterns.

In course of time, these policies, practices and procedures acquire an enduring quality

and result in creating unique organisational culture or climate. As defined by Baum-

gartel, organisational climate is a product of leadership practices, communication

practices and enduring and systematic characteristics of working relationship among

persons and decisions of any particular organisation [4]. Each organisation has its

unique identity or personality, which exerts directional influences on behaviour.

The focus of climate research and even the definition of climate research

has evolved over the past thirty years. Early researchers were of the opinion that

individual behaviour could be more meaningfully understood if it was related to the

behavioral environment as perceived and reacted to by the members, ie the climate

was defined as an enduring organisational or situational characteristic that organisa-

tional members perceived.

The following years marked a shift in the thinking of researchers. They

began to give more attention to individual perceptions than to organisational char-

acteristics. Schneider and Hall (1992) noted that perceptions are important and

discussed information processing as the mechanism by which perceptions are formed.

They viewed perceived organisational climate as a phenomenon that represents an

interaction between personal and organisational characteristics.

The subsequent years of research resulted in loosing the importance of in-

tegrationist view. In place of that the individual differences received more attention.

43


During the mid sixties the interactionist view again gained importance in climate

research.

Within a short span of time the importance of organisational characteristics

regained importance among researchers. According to Payne and Pugh (1976) the

traditional concern of studying organisational behaviour from the point of view of

the individual are getting transformed into the study of organisational environmental

setting as this can influence both individual and group behaviour [56].

During the last three decades, there have been intensive and diverse efforts

to conceptualize, measure and utilize the organisational climate construct, which has

been concerned with a description of the forms or styles of behaviour in organisation.

The number of different opinions referred above shows that the term ‘cli-

mate’ is conceptualized in different sense by different researchers. Some researchers

have treated organisational climate as a dependent variable which is being influenced

by factors like leadership, technology etc. Dieterly and Schenider [14] treated organ-

isational climate as a dependent variable which is being influenced by organisational

structure and management assumptions and practices. George and Bishop, Lawler,

et al [22, 41] also studied climate as a dependent variable. They failed to prove that

different sets of procedures and practices create different climates.

Litwin and Stringer [44] treated climate as an independent variable which

influence employees’ satisfaction, performance etc and manipulated organisational

practice and procedures. It found different kinds of behaviour for different climate.

Climate has been analysed as an intervening variable especially between

leadership styles and employee performance or satisfaction. Hall and Schneider [25],

Mc Greger [23], Likert [42] studied climate as an intervening variable.

Diversity and variety in organisational environment make it impossible for

any one to understand it fully. However, every member in an organisation has some

knowledge about employee which is bound to vary from one person to another since

each member perceives organisational climate from his own position and point of view.

This perception, a member has about his organisation is a measure of organisational

44


climate. This perception, in turn, influences a person’s motivations and behaviour

within the organisation [1].

3.4 Organisational Climate : Definitions

Friedlander and Margulies [21] defined organisational climate as a relatively

stable or ongoing property of the organisation which may release, channel, facilitate

or constrain an organisation’s technical as well as human resources.

Taylor and Bowers [67] defined organisational climate as the perceived traits

of organisational stimuli which become a group property through interpersonal inter-

actions which modify the behaviour of people with in the organisation.

Litwin and Stringer [44] defined organisational climate as a set of measurable

properties of the work environment perceived directly or indirectly by the people who

live and work in that environment, which influences their motivation and behaviour.

Taiguri and Litwin [66] defined organisational climate as a relatively endur-

ing quality of the internal environment that is experienced by its members, influences

their behaviour and can be described in terms of values of particular set of charac-

teristics of the organisation.

Forehand and Gilmer [20] defined organisational climate as a set of charac-

teristics that

1. describe the organisation and distinguish it from other organisations

2. are relatively enduring overtime and

3. influence the behaviour of people in the organisation.

Georgepoules [22] defined organisational climate as a normative structure

of the attitudes and behavioural standards which provide a basis for interpreting the

situations and act as a source of pressure for directing activities.

Payne [55] defined organisational climate as a moral concept, reflecting the

content and strength of the present values, norms, attitudes, behaviour and feelings

45


of the members of a social system, which can be operationally measured through the

perceptions of the members of the system or by other objective means.

Hellriegal and Slocum [28] defined organisational climate as a set of at-

tributes which can be perceived about a particular organisation and or its subsystems

and which may be induced from the way that organisation deals wit its members.

The following are the salient features of the construct of the organisational

climate according to D. Hellriegel and J.W. Sloeum Jr [29] .

1. Perceptions being sought from individuals are primarily descriptive rather than

evaluative.

2. Perceptions being sought are primarily macro rather than micro.

3. Perceived attributes being sought are primarily those of the organisation or

department rather than of specific individuals.

4. Differences in perceived organisational climate could have varying consequences

for individual motivation, productivity, organisational innovation or change and

the like.

Litwin, Hamphrey and Wilson [45] described the organisational climate

(Figure 3.2) as a set of measurable properties of a given environment, based on the

collective perception of the people who live and work in that environment and demon-

strated to influence their motivation and behaviour. They viewed the organisational

climate as a system comprising the following elements

(a) Determinants - there are three major forces affecting organisational climate

as given below.

i. Management systems

ii. Individual manager practices and

iii. Norms and values of the work group

(b) Climate profile - this is represented by a set of the following six statistically

validated dimensions. They are the following

46


i. Clarity (ie individuals degree of understanding of organisational goals

and policies

ii. Commitment (ie dedication to goal achievement )

iii. Standards (ie management’s emphasis on high standards of perfor-

mance)

iv. Responsibility (ie the degree to which employees feel personally re-

sponsible for their work)

v. Recognition (ie feeling that people are recognized and rewarded for

good work)

vi. Team work (ie feeling of belonging to the organisation characterized

by cohesion, mutual warmth and support, trust and pride)

(c) Consequences - these are the three primary results of the organisational

climate

i. Motivational Arousal (or the creation of particular psychological sta-

tus that pre-dispose an individual to behave in certain ways)

ii. Employees’ Health and Retention

iii. Organisational Performance and Development

It is important to note that environmental measures of organisational per-

formance, such as profitability or returns on investment are only lagging indicators of

organisational achievement, which show the results long after they have occurred. On

the other hand, organisational climate is the current indicator of the organisational

performance.

Nayler, Prichard and Ilgen [53] , viewed the climate as the judgment process

involved in attributing a class of human like traits to entity outside the individual

where these entities may be a work group or even an entire organisation. For under-

standing the climate, the organisation can be dealt with at three different levels.

1. Actual environmental characteristics that constitute the basis for psychological

climate dimension.

2. Individual perceptions of the degree to which these specific environmental at-

tributes actually exist, and

47


Figure 3.2: Organisational Climate System

Individual Manager Practices

Climate Profile

Motivation Arousal

Needs Tasks

Employee Health and Retention

Organizational Performance and

Development

Management System

Norms and Values

Source : Litwin, Hamphrey and Wilson [45]

3. Perception by the individual of the amount of a particular psychological char-

acteristics possessed by the organisation that is based upon the individuals’

perception of environmental attributes.

Pareek [54] has described organisational climate as the result of interaction

between the five components of an organisation which are as follows.

1. Structure (ie work - division into units with inter-unit linkage)

2. Systems (ie ways of managing major functions)

3. Culture (ie accepted behaviour pattern), values and traditions

4. Leader behaviour

5. Employees’ psychological needs

48


3.5 Measurement of Organisational climate

Organisational climate has been developed by most authors as a descrip-

tive concept. Some authors have used it for classifying organisations into categories.

Likert [43] proposed four types of climate: exploitive, benevolent, consultative and

participative. Litwin and Stringer [44] however proposed a frame work of organisa-

tional climate based on its effect on motivation of its members. They simulated three

different climates fostering achievement, affiliation and power motives and monitored

the effect of these climate on productivity. Pareek [54] has developed a frame work

of organisational climate to facilitate analysis of relationship between organisational

climate and motivation, employing the following six motives.

1. Achievement: Concern for excellence with emphasis on achieving goals

2. Expert influence: Concern for achieving goals or things good for the organi-

sation through expertise

3. Extension: Urge to be relevant to other persons, groups and society

4. Control: need for personal aggrandizement and consolidation of one’s own

power.

5. Dependency: urge to maintain relationship based on the other persons ’ ap-

proval

6. Affiliation: Concern for friendly, warm and affectionate personal relationships

3.6 Dimensions of organisational climate

Even after long years of research work researchers are not in a position to

reach an agreement regarding a common set of dimension for organisational climate

for different situations. Climate researchers have indeed assessed the specific climate

in which they are interested rather than to develop some omnibus measures [61].

Likert [43] proposed six dimensions of organisational climate: Leadership,

motivation, communication, decisions, goals and control. According to Litwin and

49


Stringer [44] organisational climate has seven dimensions: confirmity, responsibility,

standards, rewards, organisational clarity, warmth and support. Litwin, Humphery

and Wilson [45] followed the work done by Litwin and Stringer [44] and redefined

the dimensions of organisational climate as clarity, commitment, standards, respon-

sibility, recognition and team work. The first three of these have been classified by

them as “Performance Dimensions” and the last three as “Development Dimensions”.

According to Forehand and Glimer [20] the dimensions of organisational climate are

1. Structure: Deals with structure of authority and relationships among persons

and groups

2. Size: Deals with the position of the individual in the organisation

3. Complexity: Deals with the number of components and number and nature

of interaction among the systems employed by the organisation.

4. Leadership style: Deals with the personality measure of individuals in lead-

ership positions

5. Goal direction: deals with organisational goals and the relative weight placed

on main and subsidiary goals

As per Newton Margulies [47] the dimensions of organisational climate are

1. Disengagement: Degree to which a group is not in gear with task at hand

2. Hindrance: Degree to which feelings of being burdened with routine duties

exist when work is not being facilitated

3. Esprit: Degree to which social needs are being satisfied, degree to which one

enjoys a sense of task accomplishment

4. Intimacy: Degree to which social needs are being satisfied, but not associated

with the task accomplishment

5. Aloofness: Degree to which the leader’s behavior is formed and impersonal

6. Production emphasis: Degree to which there is close supervision

50


7. Thrust: Degree to which there are efforts on the part of the leaders to get the

organisation moving

8. Consideration: Degree to which there is an inclination to treat members as

human beings.

Schneider and Bartlett [62] divided organisational climate dimensions broadly

into two namely Managerial factors and Agent factors.

1. Managerial Factor:

(a) Managerial support: Degree to which managers take an active interest

in the progress of their agents and the degree to which they back up the

actions of their agents

(b) Managerial structure: Degree to which manager is riding hard on his

agent to be effective

(c) New Employee concern: Degree to which concern is shown to the new

employee In terms of selecting, hiring and training

2. Agent Factor:

(a) Intra-agency conflict: Degree to which agents understand managerial

authority and degree to which they overstate and exaggerate their accom-

plishments

(b) Agent independence: Degree to which they go out and run their own

business.

(c) General satisfaction: Degree to which agents were satisfied, both on

and off their jobs.

Cambell , Dunnette , Lawler and Weich classified [9] it as

1. Structure: Degree to which superiors established and communicated a job’s

objectives and the methods for accomplishing them.

51


2. Consideration/ warmth/ support: degree to which there exists managerial

support and nurturing of subordinates.

3. Autonomy: Degree to which an individual can be his own boss and reserve

considerable decision making power for himself; degree to which there is a lack

of constant accountability to higher management.

4. Reward: Degree to which there is a promotion achievement orientation.

Taylor and Bowers [67] considered the following factors as the dimensions

of organisational climate.

1. Decision making: Deals with the level at which decisions are made.

2. Human resource primacy: Deals with the extent to which work is organized

in a way that shows concern for people.

3. Motivational conditions: Deals with the way conflicts are hurdled; the pres-

ence of factors which encourage hard work.

4. Communication flow: Deals with the extent to which information flows eas-

ily.

House and Rizzo [33] put the following as the dimensions of organisational

climate.

1. Timely decision making: Degree to which there are consistent guidelines for

work, degree to which decisions are made quickly, clearly and accurately.

2. Upward information requirement: Degree to which amount of detailed

technical and administrative information is required.

3. Top management receptiveness: Degree to which top management shows

an interest and evaluates subordinate’s ideas.

4. Induction and or promotion of those outside the organisation: Degree

to which promotion is done form outside rather than from within.

52


5. Formalization: Degree to which there are job-descriptions, standards of per-

formance etc.

6. Selection criteria based on ability: Degree to which promotions are based

on performance.

7. Job-pressure: Degree to which amount of work assigned and time required.

8. Subordinate development: Degree to which superiors are interested in

subordinates’ career development.

9. Team work: Degree to which individuals work together and accept change.

10. Inter group co-operation: degree to which there are provisions for and co-

operation among work groups in performance of work.

11. Chain of command: Degree to which there are direct orders from one’s

immediate supervisor only.

12. Information distortion and suppression: Degree to which information is

distorted or withheld regarding the necessity of proposed work.

13. General communication: Degree to which general communication is avail-

able and accurate.

14. Definition of work: Degree to which work is defined, interrelated jobs are

co-ordinated and progress of work is feedback to individuals or work groups.

Pareek [54] has brought out the twelve dimensions of organisational climate

as follows.

1. Orientation: This refers to the main concern of the organisational members.

If the main concern is to excel the climate is characterized by achievement. On

the other hand, if the main concern is to maintain friendly relation, the climate

is characterized by affiliation.

2. Inter personal relationships: These are reflected in the way informal groups

are formed in the organisations. When informal groups are formed around

53


experts, climate is characterized by expert influence. If cliques are formed to

protect personal interest control climate prevails.

3. Supervision: When supervisors focus on developing subordinates, the climate

is characterized by extension. On the other hand, dependency climate results

supervisors prefer that their subordinates should depend on their instructions

and suggestions.

4. Problem management: When problems are taken as a challenge, achieve-

ment climate prevails. When problems are referred to supervisors, climate is

characterized by dependency.

5. Management of mistakes: When experts help in analyzing and preventing

mistakes, experts influence the climate is the result. Climate is characterized by

dependency when subordinates expect guidance from supervisors in correcting

or preventing mistakes.

6. Conflict management: When experts are consulted to resolve conflicts, ex-

pert influence climate prevails. On the other hand, if conflicts are avoided or

smoothed over to maintain friendly relations, the climate is characterized by

affiliation.

7. Communication: When relevant information is freely available to all those

who need it for achieving higher performance, achievement climate prevails.

When people hold back crucial information, climate is characterized by control.

8. Decision making: When decisions are made mainly by those who have

demonstrated high achievement, climate is characterized by achievement. On

the other hand, if special efforts are made to maintain cordial relations while

making decisions affiliation climate prevails.

9. Trust: When experts are highly trusted, expert influence climate is the re-

sult. When only a few people are trusted by the management the climate is

characterized by control.

10. Management of rewards: Experts influence climate results when knowledge

and expertise are recognized and rewarded. When loyalty is rewarded more

than analyzing also, climate is characterized by dependency.

54


11. Risk taking: When calculated risks are taken for achieving the results, achieve-

ment climate is the result. If discipline and obedience are emphasized in risky

situations, climate is characterized by control.

12. Innovation and change: Expert influence climate prevails when experts ini-

tiate innovation or change. When innovation or change is primarily ordered by

top management, control climate is the result.

On the basis of explanations given by different experts on organisational

climate an attempt is made to categorize the dimensions into three broad categories.

1. Organisational Structure: The structure of an organisation is the basic

frame work that conditions the organisational climate. It refers to the charac-

teristics of the total organisation or of the sub - organisational units in terms

of size, span of management, degree of decentralization, line-staff structure,

number of levels in organisational hierarchy and the shape of organisational

structure etc.

2. Leadership functions: The leadership style prevailing in the organisation

influences the climate a lot, or the leader has a role in conditioning organisa-

tional climate. Leadership style refers to the formal actions of the executive of

a company that are intended to motivate the employee, including the system

of reward and punishment, employee benefit programme, incentive pay plans,

level of supervision, exercised by the middle and lower levels of the managerial

hierarchy etc.

3. Individual behaviour: Organisational climate is affected by the behaviour of

the individuals, since the members themselves, are the makers of the organisa-

tional climate. Individual behaviour refers to the attitude and the feelings of

employee about fellow employees, job experience and the organisation etc.

3.7 Organisational Climate Instruments

A number of instruments have been developed for measurement of organi-

sational climate. The number of items in these instruments ranges from one [13] to

55


two hundred and fifty four [57]. Bulk of these instruments consists of 20-80 items.

Most of these instruments are for general applications to any type of business organ-

isations. Nineteen climate instruments have been reported by Hellriegel and Sloeum

[28], Litwin, Humphrey and Wilson [45] have refined instruments developed by Litwin

and Stringer [44] and brought out what they called as a fourth generation climate

instrument.

Latest work on organisational climate instrument done by Pareek [54] is

very significant. His instrument: Motivational Analysis of Organisational Climate,

popularly known as MAOC has 72 items representing the six motives for each of the

twelve dimensions defined earlier in this chapter.

3.8 Job Satisfaction: Meaning and Nature

The traditional model of job satisfaction depicted satisfaction as the total

body of feelings that an individual has about his job. An individual is satisfied

when the sum total of the influences give rise to feelings of satisfaction and he is

dissatisfied when the sum total of influences give rise to dissatisfaction. What makes

a job satisfying or dissatisfying does not depend only on the nature of job, but on the

expectations that individuals have of what their job should provide. The expectations

that an individual has about his job may be different for different people.

Job satisfaction is the result of perception of many factors some related

and some not. Perception is an individual’s unique pattern of organizing stimuli in

order to give understanding of and meaning about environment. This means that

perception is not the same for all people. Different people feel exactly the situation

in a completely different way.

Job satisfaction is the most important and frequently studied subject in

organisational behaviour field. Etymologically, job satisfaction is a combination of

two words, job and satisfaction. ‘Work’, ‘occupation’, ‘job’ and ‘position’ have gen-

erally been used interchangeably. According to Miller and Form [50] ‘work’ is a

“general activity centering around substance and the specific routines of this activity

as occupations”. Shartle [63] defines ‘occupation’, ‘job’ and ‘position’ as follows.

56


Occupation:“An occupation is a group of similar jobs found in several establish-

ments".

Job: “A job is a group of similar positions in a single plant, business establishment,

institution or other work place".

Position:“A position is a set of tasks performed by a person. There are as many

positions as there are workers; but there may be one or many persons employed in

the same job".

Satisfaction is related to fulfillment of needs. ‘Need’ is defined as “a condi-

tion by feelings of lack or want of something or of requiring the performance of some

action" Drever [15]. The goals or purpose to which needs are directed are techni-

cally termed incentives. Needs are fulfilled by attainment of incentives. Fulfillment

accompanies a simple feeling state, known as satisfaction. According to Drever [15]

“satisfaction is the end state in feeling accompanying the attainment by an impulse of

its objectives". Thus “job satisfaction may be a resultant feeling of satisfaction which

the employee achieves by gaining from the job what he expects from it to satisfy his

needs. It may be a function of the need strength or expectation and the potentialities

of the job to provide for the fulfillment of needs" [64].

Job satisfaction refers to an individual’s complex reaction towards his job.

It is a pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job values.

Hoppoek [32] defines job satisfaction as “any combination of psychological, physi-

ological and environmental circumstances that causes a person truthfully to say, I

am satisfied with my job”. He has summarized the dimensions of job satisfaction as

follows.

1. The way individuals react to unpleasant situation

2. The facility with which he adjusts himself to other persons.

3. His relative status in the social and economic group with which he identified

himself.

4. The nature of work in relation to his abilities, interests and preparations.

57


5. Security

6. Loyalty.

3.9 Job Satisfaction: Definitions

The following are some well known definitions for Job satisfaction.

Blum [5]:- Job satisfaction and commitment to work is the result of various attitude

the employee holds towards his job, towards related factors and towards life in

general.

Bullock [7]:- Considers job satisfaction as an attitude which results from a balancing

and summation of many specific likes and dislikes experienced in connection

with the job .

Davis [12]:-Observes job satisfaction as the favorableness or unfavorableness with

which employees view their work .

Smith [65]:- Suggests that job satisfaction is the employee’s judgment of how well

his job on the whole is satisfying his various needs.

Morce and Porter [52]:- Job satisfaction is a function of discrepancy between needs

and outcome.

Vroom [69]:- The positive orientation of an individual towards all aspects of the

work situation. It is the resultant of a host of orientations to specific aspects

of the job.

Locke [46] :-Job satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisal of ones job or job experience.

It is the function of perceived relationship between what one expects and

obtains from one’s job and how much importance or value one attributes to it. Thus

job satisfaction is highly subjective and it is feeling of the benefits derived from the

job. Clearly it is a variable linked to perception.

58


Perception can be defined as a process by which individuals organize and

interpret their sensory impression in order to give meaning to their environment.

Perception is essentially a psychological process and one of the important cognitive

factors of human behaviour. A persons’ definition of reality will never be identical

to an objective assessment of reality. Two different person’s definition of reality

will be different and individual perceptions influence behaviour exhibits in a given

situation. In the case of job satisfaction it depends on individual’s perception of job

characteristics, supervision and organisation as a whole and job satisfaction will be

positive only if perception is positive. Perceptional errors lead to low job satisfaction,

morale and organisational effectiveness.

What employees deem important and how well job provides these things

determine job satisfaction. There are three important dimensions to job satisfaction.

1. Being an emotional response to a situation it can only be inferred.

2. It is often determined by how well outcome meets and exceeds expectations.

3. Job satisfaction represents several related attitudes.

There are several factors influencing job satisfaction. They are

1. The actual job

2. Pay

3. Promotion

4. Supervision

5. Work group and

6. Working condition.

Some of the most important ingredients of a satisfying job include interesting

and challenging work, a work that is not boring, and a job that provides status. Wages

and salaries are also recognized to be a significant but complex multidimensional

59


factor in job satisfaction. On the job promotion, participative climate created by

the supervisor, nature of work groups and working conditions are the other factors

influencing job satisfaction.

Katz and Van Mannen [40] have suggested that work satisfaction is related

to job properties, interaction contexts and organisational policies referring them as

“Loci of satisfaction"

In the above model job properties refer to characteristics of every day task

process involved in a partial time of work. Interaction context refers to the character-

istics of the day to day interpersonal environment in which the person carries out his

or her work and the organisational policies refer to the general rule and standards,

which are enforced in the work place. All the above three components job properties,

interaction context and organisational policies are very important determinants of

job satisfaction. From the very beginning of industrial psychology, the relationship

between dissatisfaction and performance has been a matter of continued concern and

there have been no simple answer. Korn Hauser, Bray field and Crocke and Vroom

[18, 27, 69] established a positive trend of very weak relationship between the two.

Psychologist believing in human relationship approach, holds the view that satisfied

worker is a more productive worker. There is also considerable debate whether job

performance leads to satisfaction or satisfaction leads to peofrmance. Keith Davis

[11] in his book “Human Behaviour at Work" states “one of the surest signs of deterio-

rating conditions in an organisation is low job satisfaction". In its more sinister forms

it is behind wild cat strikes, slowdowns, absences and employee turn over. It also may

be a part of grievances, low performance, disciplinary problems and other difficulties".

High job satisfaction on the other is the hall mark of a well managed organisation

and cannot be bought or urged into existence. It is fundamentally the result of ef-

fective behaviour management. Researchers report that highly satisfied employees

have better mental and physical health, learn new job related tasks quickly, have

fewer grievances and have fewer on-the-job accidents. Satisfied employee also exhibit

prosaical citizenship behaviour and activities. A study of job satisfaction is of value

to the organisation’s overall health and effectiveness.

60


3.10 Job Satisfaction: Difference in Terminology

A classification of the concept of job satisfaction also demands classification

of confusion between job satisfaction and a number of competing and similarly used

terms like job attitudes, job attraction and morale. Although in many ways they are

used by the social scientists interchangeably, they must not be treated as synonyms.

Job satisfaction and job attitude are used interchangeably. However, these

terms can be clearly differentiated from each other. The term attitude can be defined

as a kind of mental state or as a state of readiness to be motivated. An attitude of

an employee can be considered as readiness to act in one way rather than another

in connection with specific factors related to a job. Job satisfaction is the result

of various attitudes the employee holds towards life in general. The attitude may

contribute to job satisfaction because it involves numerous attitudes. Job satisfaction

has been defined as a general attitude which an individual has as a result of several

specific attitudes in three areas including job factors, individual adjustment and group

relationship outside the job.

Job satisfaction, likewise, differs from job attraction also. Job satisfaction

strictly speaking, applies only to outcome already possessed or experienced by an

individual. Truly speaking satisfaction is primarily a “hedonism of the past” where

as attraction or valence is primarily hedonism of the future.

Although job satisfaction may contribute to morale, it is not the same

Morale has been used both as an individual and group phenomenon. Guion [24]

defines morale from the individual stand point as “the extent to which an individual’s

needs are satisfied and the extent to which the individual perceives that satisfaction

as stemming from his total job satisfaction. When an individual has few frustrations,

he seems to possess high morale and that when he possesses relatively numerous

frustrations or intense frustrations; he appears to have low morale.

Blum [5] considers morale as a group concept involving four elements such

as group solidarity, group goal, observable progress towards the goal and individual

participation in accomplishing the goal. In this aspect morale involves interactions

61


among group members and is akin to the common concept of team spirit. Miller and

Form [50] present three definitions of morale.

Morale refers to the total satisfaction which the individual (or group mem-

bers) acquires as a result of his membership and involvement in an organisational

setting.

It relates to the state of motivational drives through which the individual

(or group members) tend to accomplish goals and face the future challenges.

It is the consensus or “espirit de corps" revealed by a group while making

efforts towards the accomplishment of its goals.

Group morale can be measured by measuring the morale of each group

member. Kahn and Katz [36] consider morale as a combination of attitudes towards

the company, job and immediate supervisor. The morale and satisfaction differ from

each other on at least two dimensions. The first may be defined as the “individual

Vs group dimension" and the second as the “content dimension". Job satisfaction or

dissatisfaction with various segments of one’s job life. Morale stands for a general

attitude of workers which may be taken as an index of their regard for the organisation

which employs them. Job satisfaction is an important ingredient of morale. Morale

is collective phenomenon and job satisfaction is a distributive one.

Thus though job satisfaction, morale, job attitudes, job attraction have

been used interchangeably in many studies, it would be erroneous to consider them

synonymous.

3.11 Determinants of Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is a complex of different attitudes, possessed by an indi-

vidual. These attitudes relate to several aspects of the job such as opportunity for

advancement, job security, opportunity to use ideas, opportunity to learn a job, op-

portunity for public service, steadiness of employment, supervision, pay, co-workers,

working conditions, cleanliness, working hours, ease at work, company, benefits, com-

munications and allied factors. Tiffin and McCornick [68] says that the satisfaction

which an individual obtains in his job is largely the result of the extent to which

62


different aspects of his work situations are relevant to his job related value systems.

In addition to these job related factors individual adjustments and group relation-

ship outside the job also form major determinants of job satisfaction. Obviously, job

satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two separate dimensions.

Harred [26] on the basis of numerous studies classifies determinants of job

satisfaction in three groups including personal factors, factors inherent in the job,

and factors controlled by the management. Personal factors relating to the job satis-

faction are sex, number of dependants, age, time on job, intelligence, education and

personality.

Usually, women are more satisfied than men in their jobs. It is perhaps

because of the fact that they have less ambition and financial needs than their coun-

terpart. Job dissatisfaction increases with the increasing number of dependants.

Presumably, increased financial stress leads to greater dissatisfaction in job.

Older individual in white collar jobs have greater intrinsic, job satisfaction

but less financial and job status satisfaction. However, the relationship between job

satisfaction and age is uncertain. Job satisfaction is relatively high at the start and

at the end of the job duration and low in the mid of the time on the job.

The relationship between job satisfaction and intelligence is a function of

the nature of work. Intelligent individuals in less challenging and repetitive work are

found to be dissatisfied. Education has dubious relationship with job satisfaction.

Individuals with high education are likely to be satisfied with their jobs depending

upon advancement policies and opportunities in relation to education in the company.

Personality forms a major determinant of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction. It has

been shown that neurotic tendency causes job dissatisfaction in jobs of ‘greater’

strength and that there is high positive relationship between general satisfaction.

It is likely to occur because of personality characteristics which cause dissatisfaction

outside the work situation. In general, the personality maladjustments is a significant

source of job dissatisfaction.

The job satisfaction factors inherent in the job itself relate to the nature

of work, skill required, occupational status, geographical location and size of the

organisation.

63


The nature of work determines job satisfaction. Usually, varied work cause

more job satisfaction than repetitive work. Obviously the factory workers are found

to be less satisfied than professionals. However, the relation between job satisfaction

and nature of work is confused by the involvement of other factors such as skill, pay

and status.

The job satisfaction is mainly determined by skill required in the job. Factors

such as conditions of work or wages assume significance when satisfaction in skill

declines.

Occupational status as perceived by the individual himself and others whose

opinion he values forms a factor in job satisfaction. Frequently white-collar jobs are

rated high, although there may be variations in the prestige, value of the occupa-

tions from community to community. It has been indicated that individuals are less

satisfied in jobs which have lower social status and prestige.

Geographical locations are related to job satisfaction. Usually, individuals

in the mountain areas are found to be the least satisfied with their jobs. Likewise,

individuals in large cities have less job satisfaction than those in small cities.

Size of the organisation is also a factor in job satisfaction. In smaller organ-

isations, individuals are more satisfied than in large ones. This is because of the fact

that the former involves greater participation and personal relations than the later.

Job satisfaction factors controlled by the management includes security,

pay, fringebenefits, opportunity for advancement, working conditions, co-workers,

responsibility, supervision and downward flow of information.

Steady employment or job security is a determinant of job satisfaction,

although its importance varies in terms of marital status and number of dependants.

Explicitly job security is a great source of satisfaction for individuals with several

dependants than single individuals.

Pay is considered as a significant source of job satisfaction although its

significance varies in terms of the labour market, economic conditions and allied

factors. Fringe benefits are also an important factor in job satisfaction.

64


Opportunity for promotion is a significant determinant of job satisfaction,

especially for sales, clerical and skilled personnel. It has been indicated that it is

more important for younger individuals than older ones.

The working conditions are related to job satisfaction. Poor working condi-

tions are found to cause low job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction increases with increasing responsibility, although relation-

ship is confused because of involvement of other factors.

Downward flow of information about different issues in the company exerts

marked impact on job satisfaction. The management may take several measures to

be placed on jobs where their personal factors help them in obtaining job satisfac-

tion. Care should be taken to take into account the geographical locations while

building a plant, size of the organisation while planning for expansion and measures

to minimize repetitiveness in jobs while laying out the manufacture of a product. In

addition, efforts may be made to give a feeling to the individuals that their jobs are

important and that they are making significant contributions towards the attainment

of organisational goals.

Job security can be enhanced as much as financially feasible and measures

can be taken to provide opportunity for advancement based on merit and seniority.

Work teams can be formed on the basis of sociometric patterns and supervisors can

be trained to provide effective leadership.

Employees can be given adequate information regarding their work situa-

tions, the company and allied factors. This is likely to minimize the adverse effects

of wrong information received from the grapevine. It should be recognized that the

attitudes of employees can be stable and that the job dissatisfaction may exist even

if several factors are corrected. Therefore, the management should not expect im-

mediate returns from these measures in the form of improved job satisfaction and

decreased job dissatisfaction.

65


3.12 Job Satisfaction and Job Characteristics

The job itself has certain characteristics which may be rewarding for the

individual employee. Overall job satisfaction itself be a function of individual response

to these job characteristics, for job satisfaction as a match between job characteristics

and one’s need. Relationship between characteristics of job and employees’ attitude is

a continuing concern of researchers. A great deal of controversy rests on the influence

of specific job characteristics on overall job satisfaction. But this does not undermine

the importance of studying the effect of specific job characteristics on job satisfaction

of an employee, rather several common dimensions of job satisfaction and similar job

characteristics have emerged in several studies.

By job characteristics we mean all those aspects of job which are associated

with the several dimensions of job situations. Jobs are the means by which an em-

ployee is linked to his organisation. The job may be the major determinant of such

characteristics or factors as the amount and types of rewards available to the job

holder or the role incumbent, degree of intrinsic motivation associated with the task

to perform role related duties on the job, and nature of interpersonal relations which

are the relations arising out of the job situation itself and so on. In other words,

more specifically these job characteristics may be

1. related to the economic and non-economic rewards that the job provides. eg:-

Pay, security (economic), prestige, power (non-economic) etc.

2. related to the taste structure of job eg:- Use of skills, autonomy etc. and

3. related to the social relations area eg:- Social contact, peer relations and au-

thority relations etc.

Job satisfaction can be measured in terms of perception of specific job char-

acteristics by the employees. Hence it is necessary to give explanation of varying

levels of job satisfaction for different jobs.

While interpreting job satisfaction, along with the perceived assessment of

job characteristics, it is also suitable to analyze employees aspiration or expectation

of these job characteristics, i.e., how much he would like them in his profession. It

66


is suggested that job satisfaction is a function of discrepancy between employees’

expectation/aspiration and extent of these characteristics in the job. Greater the

discrepancy, greater the dissatisfaction.

A more rational approach is that satisfaction with the job is not only a

function of absolute job characteristics but also of the expectations / aspirations the

individual employees have from the job. There are certain job characteristics which

may seem to be more important to the workers, for they have the potential to satisfy

his personal needs. Therefore, he would like to have more of them in his job satis-

faction. These contribute to the satisfaction (dissatisfaction) while there are other

factors which do not substantially contribute to their satisfaction (dissatisfaction)

with the job. Expectancy theory points to the aspirations or expectations in job sat-

isfaction. For an employee who has high expectations that his job should provide him

more economic rewards, a failure of the job to meet these expectations will lead to

job dissatisfaction. On the other hand even if the job does not provide the economic

reward, but at the same time the employee does not expect more in terms of these

rewards, but finds his expectations regarding prestige or autonomy in job is fulfilled

to greater extent, he will develop a positive attitude towards the job.

However an individual’s expectations from the job may vary due to a large

number of reasons. For eg:- expectations that an individual has about his job may be

different for younger or older employees, for males or females, for officers, clerks or

subordinates staff and so on. However it may be argued that whatever the moderating

factors may be, when the expectations/aspirations regarding major job characteristics

are in harmony with actually perceived characteristics, it may be expected that job

satisfaction will also be higher. If the jobs perceived potential to satisfy the needs is

weaker the worker feels frustrated and dissatisfied.

Jargans [35] (1948) found three groups of job characteristics in order of

importance.

1. ‘Security’, ‘advancement’ and type of work.

2. ‘Supervision’, ‘co-workers’, pay and company pride.

3. ‘Hours’, ‘working conditions’ and ‘benefits’ cluster being the least important.

67


3.13 Theories of Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction has been treated as a complex set of variables. There

have been attempts to explain job satisfaction differently. A brief resume of some

important theories related to the dynamics of job satisfaction will not be out of place.

A reflection on theories will point out that in these discussion it becomes difficult to

consider motivation as separate and apart from job satisfaction, although there are

both theoretical and practical difference between the two concepts. However it must

be noted that the two are closely related and the analysis of procedures used in work

motivation are remarkably similar to those used in studies of job satisfaction. Some

of the important theories are discussed below which will help in understanding the

dynamics of job satisfaction.

Perhaps the most widely discussed theory related to motivation and job

satisfaction is Abraham Maslow’s need hierarchy theory. The theory suggests the

following order of priority of fundamental needs.

1. The physiological needs:- These are the basic needs of organisation such as

food, water etc.

2. The safety needs: - Once the physiological needs are met, then emerges a new

set of needs generally related to protection against danger, threat etc.

3. Social needs:- These are the needs for affectionate relations with other individ-

uals like need for association, peer relations, for love etc.

4. The esteem needs or age needs: - Next in hierarchy are the needs of stable-

reputation, status and recognition.

5. The self-actualisation needs:- Highest in the hierarchy of needs, are the needs

for self-fulfillment, the need to achieve one’s full capacity for doing.

Abraham Maslow’s [48] hierarchy theory states that the behaviour of any

person is dominated and determined by the most basic needs which are unfulfilled.

Since the physiological needs are classified as primary, they are ofcourse given first

priority. If a person is starving, only food occupies the mind. As soon as one need is

68


reasonably well satisfied, a second need becomes apparent, the person forgets that he

or she was starving and now starts to be concerned about a need that was formerly

of less significance. Once the basic need is satisfied the need for safety and security

attains importance. Human beings are motivated by unsatisfied needs and not by

those that have been satisfied. People are never completely satisfied at any need level,

but a reasonable amount of satisfaction of first priority needs must be forthcoming if

they are to perceive a lower priority need. Maslow suggests that an average citizen

might be 80 percent satisfied in physiological needs, 70 percent in safety needs, 50

percent in love needs, 40 percent in self esteem category and 10 percent in self-

actualization needs.

Once the necessities for continued existence have been met the higher order

needs of lower priority comes into prominence. The social needs include need for love,

need for affection and the desire for association with others. The need for esteem

includes the desire for social approval, self-assertion and self-esteem. Gratification of

the need for esteem contributes to a feeling of self confidence, worth and capability.

The final need ie self-actualization, refers to the desire for self fulfillment and achieve-

ment. A person desires actualization in the need in which he or she has capabilities.

This is the highest level need and has been completely satisfied. These jobs which

are able to satisfy more of the Maslow’s need would be jobs, which would result in

greater satisfaction on the part of the employees.

Victor H. Vroom[69] developed a job satisfaction theory in 1964. It is pop-

ularly known as Vroom’s Expectancy theory.

Expectancy theory represents a comprehensive, valid and useful approach

to understand job satisfaction. Vroom tries to answer the question concerning the

specificity Vs. generality of job satisfaction. It views people as having their own

needs and expectation of what they desire from their work. They use these to decide

on which company to join and how hard to work on the job. The theory assumes that

people are decision makers who choose among alternative by selecting the one that

appears most desirable at the time. Vroom equates job satisfaction with valence of

a work role to its occupant. There can be different valence associated with different

properties of work roles. The general valence of the work role is useful in predicting

behavior in relation to the total work role. This will indicate whether the total

69


work role is attractive enough (positive valence) to lead an individual towards it or

has a negative valence and leads an individual away from it. In Vroom’s model job

satisfaction reflects valence of the job to its incumbent. Thus, satisfaction should be

negatively related to turnover and absenteeism.

No theory of job satisfaction has received as much attention and has been

subject to as much criticism as the theory proposed by Herzberg[30] and his as-

sociates. This theory is popularly known as the ‘two factor theory’. The theory

originally was derived by analyzing ‘critical incidents’ written by 200 engineers and

accountants in nine different companies in Pittsburgh area, U.S.A. They interviewed

each person individually and asked him to describe in detail, times when he felt ex-

ceptionally good or bad about his job. The content analysis then indicated that the

factors associated with high satisfaction were somewhat different from the factors

associated with low satisfaction.

Herzberg proposes that human beings have two basic needs, the need to

avoid pain and survive and the need to grow, develop and learn. Thus the analysis of

employees’ job satisfaction would result in the formation of two separate continuums

rather than the traditional one of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. The first continuum

ranging from dissatisfaction to no-dissatisfaction would be affected by environment

factors of which the employee has limited influence. Typical of these, “hygiene factors”

are pay, interpersonal relations, supervision, company policy and administration,

working condition, status and security. Herzberg indicates that these factors do

not serve to promote job satisfaction, rather their absence or deficiency can create

dissatisfaction.

The second class of factors, referred to as “motivators" make up a contin-

uum leading from no job satisfaction to satisfaction. Example from this class are

work itself, recognition, achievement, possibility of growth and advancement. All of

these as concerned with the work itself rather than its surrounding, physical, ad-

ministrative, social and environment factors. These factors are called “motivators"

because they gave rise to job satisfaction. The absence of the motivators will not

cause dissatisfaction.

70


Thus the two groups of factors (motivator and hygiene factors) act differ-

ently in producing satisfaction and dissatisfaction. The factors giving rise to job

satisfaction are separate and distinct from those which lead to dissatisfaction. Satis-

faction and dissatisfaction appear to be somewhat independent. They are not viewed

as symmetrical items on a single scale, rather, they are viewed as attributes of dif-

ferent scales. Satisfaction is affected by motivators and dissatisfaction by hygiene

factors.

Herzberg’s theory has been criticized by some as being method bound,

based on faulty research, it oversimplifies the relationship between motivation and

satisfaction and is inconsistent with past evidence.

Herzberg’s theory seems to be more true of jobs which are not monotonous.

In semiskilled and unskilled jobs motivators cannot play any significant role. In such

jobs, monetary incentives are more important. The question of motivators is more

applicable to creative jobs in which the question of hygiene ceases to be crucial.

To sum up, the theories of job satisfaction emphasis the need to identify

and study its constituent factors for they may not be universally true to every job

satisfaction.

71

REFERENCES

[1] Alexander P., An inquiry into the Organisatioanl Climate viz the Labour Man-

angement, Ph.D. thesis, University of Madrass (1998).

[2] Allen L., Management and Organisation (McGraw Hill , Singapore, 1958).

[3] Aswathappa K., Management and Organisation (Himalaya , Bombay, 1991).

[4] Baumgartel H., The Penetration of modern Management Technology and or-

ganisational practices in Indian business organisations, Indian Administrative

and Management Review, vol. 3, (1971) 22–28.

[5] Blum M.L., Industrial Psychology and its Social Foundations

(Harper ,Newyork, 1956).

[6] Brown A., Organisation - A formulation of Principles (Hibbert Printing Com-

pany , Newyork, 1945).

[7] Bullock R.P., Position,Function and Job Satisfation in Social system of a mod-

ern hospital, Nursing Research, (1953) 35–46.

[8] Burnard C., The functions of the executive (Harward University Press , Cam-

bridge, 1938).

[9] Campbell, Managerial Behavoiur, Performance and Effectiveness (Mc

GrawHill , Newyork, 1970).

[10] Daft R., Organizational Theory and Design (West , U.S.A, 1983).

72


[11] Davis K., Human Behaviour at work (Mc Graw Hill , Newyork, 1979).

[12] Davis L.E., Job Satisfaction research: The PostIndustrial view, Industrial Re-

lations, (1953) 213–225.

[13] Dewhirst D., Impact of Organisational Climate on the desire manage among

Engineers and Scientists, Personal journal, vol. 6, (1971) 77 – 78.

[14] Dieterly D. and Sehnieder B., The effect of organisational enviornment on perv-

ceived power and climate: A laboratory study, Organisational Behavior Research

and Human Performance, vol. 11, (1974) 316 – 337.

[15] Drever J., A Dictionary of Psychology (Penguin books , Middlesex, 1964).

[16] Drucker P., The Practice of Management (Allied publishers,NewDelhi, 1975).

[17] Etzoni A., Modern Organization (Prentice Hall , NewDelhi, 1990).

[18] Field B. and Crocke, Employee Attitude and Performanc, Psychology Bulletin,

vol. 52.

[19] Follette W., How is the climate in your organisation?, Personal Journal, (1975)

p.433.

[20] Forehand G. and Gilmer B.V.H., Enviornmental variations in studies of or-

ganasiational behavior, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 62, (1964) 361 – 382.

[21] Freddlander F. and Margulies N., Multiple impact of organisational and indi-

vidual value systems upon job satisfaction, Personal Psychology, vol. 22, (1969)

171 – 183.

[22] George and Bishop, Relationship of organisational structure and teacher person-

ality characteristics climate, Administrative Scienec Quaterly, vol. 16, (1971)

467 – 475.

[23] Gregor D., The Human Side of Enterprise (McGraw Hill , Newyork, 1960).

[24] Guion R.M., Some definitions of morale , Personal Psychology, (1958) 59 – 61.

[25] Hall D. and Sehneider B., Organisational Climates and carriers - The work

lives of priests (Newyork seminar Press, 1973).

73


[26] Harred T., Industrial Pychology (Oxford & B H Publishing Co. , NewDelhi,

1967).

[27] Hauser A.W.K., Mental Health of Industrial workers- A Detroit study (Willey ,

Newyork, 1965).

[28] Hellriegel D. and Jr J.S., Organisational Climate:Measures , Research and con-

tingencies, Academy of Management journal, vol. 17, (1974) 255 – 280.

[29] Hellriegel D. and Jr J.S., Organisational behaviour: Contingencies (West ,

U.S.A, 1976).

[30] Herzberg F., Mansner B. and Synderman B., The motivation to work (Willey ,

Newyork, 1959).

[31] Hicks H. and Gullet C., Organizations,Theory and Behavior (McGraw Hill ,

Singapore, 1975).

[32] Hoppocke R., Job Satisfation (Harper , Newyork, 1935).

[33] House R. and Rizzo J., Towards the Measurement of Organisational Practices:

Scale Development and validatioon, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 56,

(1972) 388–396.

[34] James L., Psychological Climate:Implications from cognitive, social learning

theory and interactional psychology, Personal Psychology, vol. 31, (1978) 781–

813.

[35] Jergense C.E., What job applicants look for a company, Personal Psychology,

(1948) p.433.

[36] Kahn R.L. and Katz D., Leadership Practice in relation to productivity and

morale (Rour Peterson , Newyork, 1953).

[37] Kast F. and Rosenzweig J., Organization and Management (McGraw Hill ,

Singapore, 1979).

[38] Khandwalla P., Organizational Designs for Excellence (McGraw Hill ,

NewDelhi, 1992).

74


[39] Korman A., Organsational behavoir (Prentice Hall , NewDelhi, 1978).

[40] Kutz R. and Mannen J., Personal Goals and work Design (Willey , Newyork,

1976).

[41] Lawler, Hall and Oldiham, Organisational Climate:Relationship to organisa-

tioanl structure,process and Performance, Organisational Behavior Research

and Human Performance, vol. 2, (1974) 139 – 155.

[42] Likert R., New Patterns of Management (McGraw Hill , Newyork, 1961).

[43] Likert R., The Organisations (McGraw Hill , Newyork, 1967).

[44] Litwin and Stringer, Motivation and Organisational Climate (Harward Univer-

sity Press, Cambridge, 1968).

[45] Litwin G., Humphrey J. and Wilson T., Organisational climate:a proven tool

for improving performance, in: W.W. Bruke, ed., The edge Current Theory

and Practice in Organisation Development (University Associates, California,

1978), 187 – 205.

[46] Locke E., The nature and causes of Job satisfacton:Handbook of industries and

Organisational Psychology (Rand McNally , Chicago, 1976).

[47] Margulies N., A study of organisational culture and the self-aentalising process

(1965), Unpublished Ph.D Thesis(University of California).

[48] Maslow A.H., A Theory of Human Motivations, Psychological Review, (1943)

370–396.

[49] McFarland D., Management (Macmillion, Newyork, 1979).

[50] Miller D. and Form W., Industrial Sociology: The Sociology of Work Organisa-

tions (Harper ,Newyork, 1964).

[51] Mooney J. and Reily A., The Principles of Organisations (Harper and Brother ,

Newyork, 1945).

[52] Moree N. and Porter L., Satisfaction in the white collar job, Ph.D. thesis (1953).

75


[53] Nayler J., Pritchard R. and Ilgen D., A Theory of Behaviour in Organisations

(Academic Press , Newyork, 1980).

[54] Pareek U., Motivational Analysis of Organisational Climate(MAO-C), in:

J. Pfeiffer, ed., The 1989 Annual:Developing Human Resources (University As-

sociates , California, 1989), 161–180.

[55] Payne R., Organisational Climate: The concept and some research findings

(Cok ,Prakselogia, 1971).

[56] Payne R. and Pugh S., Organisational Structrure and Organisational Climate -

Handbook of Industrial and organisational psychology (Rand McNally Chicago,

1976).

[57] Poyne R. and Pheysey D., G.G .Stern’s Organisational Climate Index: A recon-

ceptualisation and Application to Business Organisation, Organisational Behav-

ior and Human Performance, vol. 6, (1971) 77–78.

[58] Robbins S., Organizational Behavior , Concepts , Controversies and Applica-

tions (Prentice Hall , NewDelhi, 1989).

[59] Saksena S., Principles and Practice of Management (Sahitya Bhavan , Agra,

1988).

[60] Sehein E., Organizational Psychology (Prentice Hall , NewDelhi, 1985).

[61] Sehneider, Organasitional Climate: An Essay, Personal Psychology, vol. 28,

(1975) 447–479.

[62] Sehneider and Bartlett, Individual Differences and Organasitional Climate:The

Research plan and Questionner Development, Organisational Behavior and Hu-

man Performance, (1971) 323–334.

[63] Shartle C.L., Occupational Information (Prentice Hall , NewJersy, 1969).

[64] Sinha A.K., Job Satisfaction:A study of the bank Employees (Janaki

Prakashan ,Patna, 1988).

[65] Smith H., Psychology of Industrial Behaviour (Mc Graw Hill , Newyork, 1974).

76


[66] Tagiuri R. and Litwin G., Organisational Climate:Explorations of a concept

(Harward University Press, 1968).

[67] Taylor J. and Bowers D., The Survey of Organisation, Ph.D. thesis (1970).

[68] Tiffin J. and Cormick M., Industrial Pychology (Prentice Hall , India, 1974).

[69] Vroom, Work and Motivation (Willey ,Newyork, 1978).

[70] Walton R., Quality of working life.What is it?, Sloan Management Review,

vol. 15(1), (1973) 11–21.

[71] White D. and Bednar D., Organizational Behavior (Allyn and Ba-

con ,Massachures, 1986).

77

Download - CHAPTER 3 Organisational Climate and Job satisfaction - A

Top Related