Examining the relationship between job satisfaction and

customer satisfaction in a South African firm

Name: David Stanford

Student No: 27526692

A research project submitted to the Gordon Institute of Business Science,

University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Business Administration.

13th November 2008

©© UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff PPrreettoorriiaa

ABSTRACT

Employee and customer satisfaction have been widely studied and are

important for business outcomes. Their relationship has primarily been

researched at the organisational and departmental levels within the consumer

type industries where frontline employee interaction with the customer is

important. Research into the relationship at the job characteristic level and

within a business-to-business context is limited and therefore the purpose of the

research is to examine these relationships in a South African firm.

Two data collection instruments, based on the literature review, were used to

obtain the primary data for this research. A self administered job satisfaction

survey was preformed as well as a telephonic customer satisfaction survey was

undertaken. 67 employees and 66 customers responded to the survey.

Descriptive and comparative statistics with a rank order correlation was used to

examining and analyse the data.

Although a weak relationship was observed between the percentages of

satisfied employees and satisfied customers in the survey, a strong and

significant relationship exists between the rank order of the different functions

within the firm, when comparing the employees job and customers satisfaction

results. The results suggest that the job satisfaction levels of the employees in

a business-to-business environment influence to some degree the level of

satisfaction experienced by the customer.

Page ii

DECLARATION

I declare that this research project is my own work. It is submitted in partial

fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business

Administration at the Gordon Institute of Business Science, University of

Pretoria. It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination in any

other university. I further declare that I have obtained the necessary

authorisation and consent to carry out this research.

__________________ 13th November 2008

Signature Date

Page iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

• Jackey-Ann Stanford: For your enduring support through this process.

• Joanne Habig: Statistician and a supporting sister.

• Dave Beaty: Research supervisor

• Karien Loubser: Collection of the customer satisfaction data

• Ayesha Bevan-Dye: Language editing

Page iv

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ii DECLARATION .................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGMENT.......................................................................................iv CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ viii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................... x CHAPTER 1....................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM.......................................... 1 1.1. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM............................................................ 1 1.2. THE MOTIVATION FOR THE RESEARCH ............................................ 2 1.3. THE PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH.................................................... 3 1.4. THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONTEXT......................................................... 3 1.5. THE FOCUS ON JOB SATISFACTION .................................................. 4 1.6. THE RESEARCH PROBLEM.................................................................. 7 CHAPTER 2....................................................................................................... 8 LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 8 2.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................... 8 2.2 JOB SATISFACTION .............................................................................. 8 2.2.1 The causes of job satisfaction.............................................................. 8 2.2.1.1 The cultural and demographic influences......................................... 9 2.2.1.2 The work situation ............................................................................ 9 2.2.1.3 Dispositional influences.................................................................. 11 2.2.2 The positive and negative results of job satisfaction .......................... 12 2.2.2.1 Job performance ............................................................................ 12 2.2.2.2 Organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB)................................... 13 2.2.2.3 Life Satisfaction .............................................................................. 13 2.2.2.4 Withdrawal behaviours ................................................................... 13 2.2.3 The measurement of job satisfaction ................................................. 14 2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION............................................................... 15 2.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN (JS) AND (CS)................................. 17 2.4.1 Early research.................................................................................... 17 2.4.2 Recent research................................................................................. 21 2. 5 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 25 CHAPTER 3..................................................................................................... 27 RESEARCH QUESTION ................................................................................. 27 3.1 RESEARCH QUESTION....................................................................... 27

Page v

CHAPTER 4..................................................................................................... 28 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................ 28 4.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................... 28 4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN............................................................................ 28 4.3 POPULATION AND SAMPLING ........................................................... 29 4.3.1 Population definition........................................................................... 29 4.3.2 Sampling............................................................................................ 29 4.3.3 Response rate ................................................................................... 31 4.3.4 Ethical issues..................................................................................... 31 4.3.5 Research limitations........................................................................... 32 4.4 DATA COLLECTION AND INSTRUMENT DESIGN ............................. 33 4.4.1 The job satisfaction survey (JSS)....................................................... 33 4.4.2 The customer satisfaction survey....................................................... 34 4.5 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 35 4.6 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 36 CHAPTER 5..................................................................................................... 37 RESULTS ........................................................................................................ 37 5.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................... 37 5.2 THE OVERALL JOB SATISFACTION RESULTS ................................. 37 5.3 THE OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION RESULTS.................... 41 5.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN (CS) AND (JS) ................................. 45 5.4.1 Research question ............................................................................. 45 5.4.2 Proportions ........................................................................................ 46 5.4.3 Rank order ......................................................................................... 48 5.5 THE NINE SUB GROUPS OF JOB SATISFACTION............................ 52 5.5.1 Pay..................................................................................................... 53 5.5.2 Promotion .......................................................................................... 54 5.5.3 Supervision ........................................................................................ 55 5.5.4 Benefits.............................................................................................. 56 5.5.5 Contingent rewards............................................................................ 57 5.5.6 Operating procedure .......................................................................... 58 5.5.7 Co-workers ........................................................................................ 59 5.5.8 Nature of the work.............................................................................. 60 5.5.9 Communication .................................................................................. 61 5.6 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 62 CHAPTER 6..................................................................................................... 64 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ........................................................................... 64 6.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................... 64 6.2 REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM........................................... 64 6.3 RESEARCH QUESTION....................................................................... 65 6.3.1 Proportions ........................................................................................ 66 6.3.1.1 Overall satisfaction ......................................................................... 66 6.3.1.2 Overall satisfaction at the functional level. ..................................... 67

Page vi

6.3.2 Rank order ......................................................................................... 71 6.3.3 The nine job sub groups .................................................................... 74 6.4 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 75 CHAPTER 7..................................................................................................... 76 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................... 76 7.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................... 76 7.2 MAIN FINDINGS ................................................................................... 76 7.2.1 Finding 1 ............................................................................................ 76 7.2.2 Finding 2 ............................................................................................ 77 7.2.3 Finding 3 ............................................................................................ 78 7.2.4 Finding 4 ............................................................................................ 79 7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS TO MANAGERS.............................................. 80 7.4 FUTURE RESEARCH........................................................................... 81 7.5 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 82 REFERENCE LIST .......................................................................................... 83 APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 88 Appendix A – The job satisfaction survey ........................................................ 88 Appendix B – The customer satisfaction survey............................................... 91 Appendix C – T-test for independence results ................................................. 93 Appendix D – Job satisfaction – Box Plots ....................................................... 94 Appendix E – Job Satisfaction – sub group distributions.................................. 97

Page vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Norms for the job satisfaction survey (JSS) (Spector. 1997).............. 15

Table 2: Job satisfaction: The overall satisfaction results ................................ 38

Table 3: Job satisfaction: Expected frequencies .............................................. 39

Table 4: Job satisfaction: The overall mean results ......................................... 40

Table 5: Customer satisfaction: The overall satisfaction results....................... 41

Table 6: Customer satisfaction: The overall mean results................................ 43

Table 7: Customer satisfaction: T-test for independence ................................. 44

Table 8: Comparison of functions..................................................................... 50

Table 9: The relationship: rank order. .............................................................. 51

Table 10: The relationship: Spearman-rank correlation ................................... 52

Table 11: Job satisfaction: mean results versus the (JSS) norms.................... 53

Table 12: Job satisfaction: pay......................................................................... 54

Table 13: Pay: expected frequencies ............................................................... 54

Table 14: Job satisfaction: promotion............................................................... 55

Table 15: Promotion: expected frequencies ..................................................... 55

Table 16: Job satisfaction: supervision ............................................................ 56

Table 17: Supervision: expected frequencies................................................... 56

Table 18: Job satisfaction: benefits .................................................................. 57

Table 19: Benefits: expected frequencies ........................................................ 57

Table 20: Job satisfaction: contingent rewards ................................................ 58

Table 21: Contingent rewards: expected frequencies ...................................... 58

Table 22: Job satisfaction: operating procedures............................................. 59

Table 23: Operating procedures: expected frequencies................................... 59

Table 24: Job satisfaction: co-workers ............................................................. 60

Table 25: Co-workers: expected frequencies ................................................... 60

Table 26: Job satisfaction: nature of the work .................................................. 61

Table 27: Nature of the work: expected frequencies ........................................ 61

Table 28: Job satisfaction: communication....................................................... 62

Table 29: Communication: expected frequencies ............................................ 62

Table 30: The nine sub group’s analysis of variance. ...................................... 63

Page viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The service-profit chain....................................................................... 5

Figure 2: The EPSI rating framework. .............................................................. 24

Figure 3: Job satisfaction: Box plot of the overall satisfaction index................. 40

Figure 4: Customer satisfaction: Box plot of the overall satisfaction index....... 42

Figure 5: The relationship: The customer and job satisfaction overall index .... 46

Figure 6: Customer satisfaction: Rank order of the mean satisfaction levels ... 48

Figure 7: Job satisfaction: rank order of the mean satisfaction levels .............. 49

Figure 8: The relationship: rank order .............................................................. 51

Figure 9: The relationship: overall satisfaction ................................................. 67

Figure 10: The relationship: overall satisfaction at the functional level............. 68

Figure 11: The relationship: (CS) overall impression versus (JS) sales

consultants ....................................................................................................... 69

Figure 12: The relationship: sales consultants versus after sales service........ 71

Figure 13: The relationship: rank order ............................................................ 72

Page ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

JSS: The job satisfaction survey

OCB: Organisational citizenship behaviour

EPSI: European satisfaction index

JS: Job satisfaction

CS: Customer satisfaction

Page x

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

1.1. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM

In today’s business climate, why is job satisfaction so important? According to

Robbins and Judge (2007), a recent survey showed that business firms that

scored in the top 25 percent of employee job satisfaction surveys were, on

average, 4.6 percent above their sales targets for the year. This suggests that

there is a positive relationship between employee job satisfaction and the

bottom-line profits of a firm.

Kotler and Keller (2007) describe highly satisfied customers as behaving

positively towards firms in the following ways. They stay loyal by buying more

and are less sensitive to price. They speak positively about the firm. In

comparison to newer customers, they are also less expensive and easier to

serve. Robbins and Judge (2007) indicate that satisfied employees increase

customer satisfaction. This is especially true in the case of frontline employees

working in the consumer sectors who have regular contact with customers.

However, according to Homberg and Stock (2004), even though job satisfaction

and customer satisfaction are important business outcomes and have been

widely studied, the relationship between the two has largely been researched at

the organisational and service level of the firm, with limited research between

the two at the job level and within a business-to-business context.

Page 1

1.2. THE MOTIVATION FOR THE RESEARCH

The motivation of this research is to move beyond the relationship of employee

satisfaction at the organisational level. This study examines the relationship

between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction at the job level

within a South African firm operating in a business-to-business context. The

purpose of the study is to improve the level of understanding of this relationship.

Early research by Schneider (1991), and Tornow and Wiley (1991) support the

existence of a positive relationship between organisational employee

satisfaction and customer satisfaction in both a consumer and business-to-

business context. However, both studies concentrated specifically on the

relationship of the two constructs at the organisational or departmental level of

a business, with limited examination of the relationships at the job level.

Homberg and Stock (2004) add that positive interaction between the supplier

and customer could be highly relevant in a business-to-business setting. They

propose the argument that the nature of the transaction within a business-to-

business context is usually highly technical in nature and the decision process

preceding the transaction is highly rational. Their argument suggests that within

a business-to-business context, limited financial benefits may be gained from

investing in employee satisfaction. Not with standing this argument, their

research did find a positive link between customer satisfaction levels and the

job satisfaction levels of the sales person.

Page 2

1.3. THE PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH

This research study is purposeful in two ways. The research contributes to the

academic understanding of those relationships that drive customer satisfaction

from an employee job level and provides another source of reference examining

the relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction

levels. From a managerial viewpoint, it presents a reference source for those

interested in investing time and effort into understanding and increasing

employee job-satisfaction levels within the firm, with the aim of improving the

overall customer relationship and satisfaction levels in their environment.

1.4. THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONTEXT

On a national level, a clearer understanding of the relationship between

employee attitudes at the job level, and the effects they have on the outcomes

and the overall performance of a firm will assist the South African human

resource professionals in their quest to better equip and develop the

behavioural side of people in a dynamic and highly competitive environment.

The current skills shortage experienced in the majority of South African firms is

seen as one of the “binding constraints” (ASGISA, 2006 p. 16) to the country’s

chances of being globally competitive.

If a causal relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer

satisfaction can be established, then the strategic investment into improving the

job satisfaction levels within firms, with the aim of improving financial

performances and business outcomes, could result in an overall reduction in the

turnover rate of employees. In addition, this could provide a dedicated approach

Page 3

to enhancing and maintaining the high skill levels of employees. This would

improve South African firms’ chances of being competitive within the global

arena, where knowledge people are essential and are seen as a competitive

advantage (Drucker, 2002).

1.5. THE FOCUS ON JOB SATISFACTION

Job satisfaction, according to Robbins and Judge (2007), is a primary

dependant variable and is one which is affected by a number of factors in the

field of organisational behaviour. Owing to its positive relationship with

organisational measures such as employee productivity, job satisfaction has

gained in importance as a dependant variable. Job satisfaction is an important

factor in the field of organisational behaviour and if its relationship with other

facets within the firm such as customer satisfaction can be explained and

predicted, it could lead to controlled benefits for the firm, including increased

profits and improved performance. This is illustrated in Figure 1, which outlines

the service-profit chain as proposed by Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser and

Schlesinger (1994).

Heskett et al. (1994) propose a relationship between profitability, customer

loyalty, and employee satisfaction, loyalty, and productivity. The service-profit

chain was developed by analysing successful service firms, which centred

frontline employee and customer needs as a main management focus. The

rational of the service-profit chain is based on making employees and

customers paramount to organisational performance.

Page 4

Figure 1: The service-profit chain (Heskett et al., 1994)

Heskett et al. (1994) support the need for concentrating on both facets

simultaneously and developing techniques that measure the effects of

employee satisfaction, loyalty, retention and productivity within the

organisational operating strategy, which will result in an increased level of

customer satisfaction and loyalty. This, in turn, will influence the level of

profitability and growth experienced by the firm over time.

Linking employees’ attitudes to business outcomes is one of the newest areas

of research (Saari and Judge, 2004). A number of current studies linking the

two constructs with customer satisfaction (Dormann and Kaiser, 2002; Homburg

and Stock, 2004) and with market share (Harter, Schmidt and Hayes, 2002),

have helped to demonstrate what impact employee attitudes have on business

Page 5

outcomes. In the process, these studies have aided in identifying the key

drivers that will justify increased investments into the understanding of these

relationships in the aim of improving the working environment of employees.

According to Saari and Judge (2004), from the perspective of research and

practice, job satisfaction is seen as the most focal employee attitude. Job

satisfaction is an attitude that reflects how an employee feels about the major

areas of his or her life. Saari and Judge (2004) highlight that feelings and

thinking are important factors in job satisfaction, and that they are inextricably

linked to one another. Therefore, internal job factors, such as promotional

prospects and rewards, as well as external factors, such as an employee’s

personality and personal problems, can affect the levels of job satisfaction that

the employee experiences.

According to Spector (1997), as firms aiming at being more competitive require

each employee to contribute more, so job satisfaction will become increasingly

more important to employees and firms alike. This is not only because of the

impact dissatisfied employees can have on business outcomes, but also

because, as describe by Spector (1997), firms have a moral responsibility to

treat their employees well.

Page 6

1.6. THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

When measured at the job level, does the level of employee job satisfaction

bear any relation to the satisfaction levels experienced by the customer in a

South African firm?

The research was conducted in a business-to-business context and the

problem was examined at the following levels:

• Employee job satisfaction, in relation to customer satisfaction, is examined

to establish whether any relationship exists between the two constructs.

• The examination of the relationship also takes into account the functional

levels within the firm, for example administration, marketing and sales,

logistics and warehousing, technical service and support, and examines

whether any relationship exists between the customers’ satisfaction levels

and employee satisfaction levels within the same business functions.

• Further examination of the job sub-scales is performed (salary, promotion,

supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, co-

workers, work and communication) to obtain a better understanding of the

possible causes of the relationship.

Page 7

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter reviews the literature regarding job and customer satisfaction.

Separate literature concerning the two constructs is handled up front in this

chapter and concludes with a review of the early and current literature relating

the two constructs to one another.

2.2 JOB SATISFACTION

Robbins and Judge (2007) define job satisfaction as a positive feeling about

one’s job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics. Employees that

have high levels of job satisfaction hold positive feeling about their job, while

dissatisfied employees hold negative feelings about their job. The causes of

employees’ attitudes, according to Robbins and Judge (2007), have

consequences on the workplace that can affect the outcomes of the firm in a

number of ways.

2.2.1 The causes of job satisfaction

Saari and Judge (2004) categorise the causes of job satisfaction into three main

areas: cultural and demographic influences, the work situation, and

dispositional influences, such as personality and prior experience.

Page 8

2.2.1.1 The cultural and demographic influences

Hofstede (1985) found that employee attitudes varied among four distinct cross-

cultural dimensions: (1) Individualism versus collectivism, (2) uncertainty

avoidance versus risk taking, (3) power distance, and (4) masculinity versus

femininity. It was established that certain countries show higher tendencies in

certain dimensions than others and that the culture from which the employee

originates is as good a predictor of employee satisfaction levels as the work

itself (Saari and Judge, 2004).

Age, gender and race have also been considered as facets that have an effect

on the attitudes of employees (Spector, 1997). Brush, Moch, and Pooyan

(1987) indicate that age and job satisfaction are related, but that whether a

curvilinear or linear relationship exists between the two is unclear. A study by

Clark, Oswald and Warr (1996) indicates that the age and gender composition

of a sample may or may not result in a detected pattern. This suggests that

gender might influence the age-job satisfaction relationship. According to

Spector (1997), there is an inconsistency in the results comparing race to

employee job satisfaction.

2.2.1.2 The work situation

Spector (1997) refers to five core job characteristics as the content and nature

of the job and categorises them into (1) skill variety, (2) task identify, (3) task

significance, (4) autonomy, and (5) Job feedback. The theory of job

characteristics states that those who prefer to be continually challenged and

who are interested in their work will be more motivated and satisfied in more

Page 9

complex jobs. However, there are conditions within the job environment that

can influence the performance and well being of such employees (Spector,

1997).

O’Connor, Peters, Rudolf and Pooyan (1982) found correlations between

organisational constraints, which are those conditions that affect the job

performance, and that of five job satisfaction characteristics - co-workers,

supervision, pay, promotion and the work itself. Supervision had the strongest

negative correlation (r = -.42), suggesting that supervisory levels are the largest

organisational constraint, as viewed by the employees or subordinates.

Jackson and Schuler (1985) found correlations between job satisfaction and job

ambiguity and conflict alike. Spector (1997) refers to role ambiguity as the

degree of certainty the employee has about his or her own functions and

responsibilities, and refers to role conflict as the experiences employees feel

when unsuitable demands are made on their functions and responsibilities.

Jackson and Schuler (1985) also found that employees’ levels of satisfaction

with their supervisors had the strongest negative correlation (r = -.36) to both

job ambiguity and conflict.

Work-family conflict also has an effect on job satisfaction. Research by Rice,

Frone and McFarlin (1992) found that the higher the levels of conflict

experienced in the home, the lower the job satisfaction levels of the employee.

In addition, Parasuraman, Greenhaus and Granrose (1992) found that there

Page 10

was a stronger negative correlation between work-family conflict and men (r = -

.40) than women (r = -.02).

When it comes to pay, Bakke (2005) explains that compensation is a reward for

work accomplished and is not a forecaster of happiness. He indicates that pay

is one of the most important rewards an employee receives; however, it does

not have a significant effect on the level of job satisfaction. Saari and Judge

(2004) support Bakke’s (2005) statement by indicating that when employees

were asked to evaluate the jobs according to different characteristics, such as

pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers and the like, the nature of the work was

generally rated as the most important job characteristic, with good wages being

ranked fifth. This suggests that the nature of the work should be seen as a focal

area when trying to improve job satisfactions levels.

Spector (1997) also refers to environmental conditions, such as job stress,

workload, autonomy and work schedules, as having their own influence on the

levels of job satisfaction that employees experience in the work place.

2.2.1.3 Dispositional influences

According to Saari and Judge (2004), early research into the relationship

between a person’s disposition or personality and job satisfaction indicates that

the levels of satisfaction amongst individuals remain stable over long periods of

time and that the satisfaction levels of employees can be partly explained by the

differences in employees’ personality. Judge and Bono (2001) found that one of

the personality traits - core self-evaluation - is related to the employee’s level of

Page 11

job satisfaction, based on the perception of the job itself. Judge, Heller, and

Mount (2002) suggest that other personality traits, such as extraversion and

conscientiousness, can also affect the levels of employee job satisfaction.

2.2.2 The positive and negative results of job satisfaction

The levels of job satisfaction in the work place can impact the firm’s

performance in a number of ways. It can influence the individual, either

positively or negative, in the following ways.

2.2.2.1 Job performance

Employees are more likely to be productive when satisfied, and as you move

away from the individual level to the organisational level so the satisfaction–

performance relationship strengthens (Robbins and Judge, 2007). However,

according Saari and Judge (2004), early research into the relationship between

job satisfaction and performance levels showed an inconsistent relationship

between the two, resulting in practitioners concluding that the relationship

between job satisfaction and performance was unimportant. The findings of

Judge, Thoresen, Bono and Patton (2001) indicate a stronger positive

correlation (r = .30) between job satisfaction and performance when compared

to a review of earlier studies (r = .17) in this regard. The relationship was also

found to be stronger in more complex jobs, like professional services (Saari and

Judge, 2004).

Page 12

2.2.2.2 Organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB)

Employee organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB), as defined by Spector

(1997), is a behaviour exhibited by the employee that is intended to help co-

workers or the firm as a whole. This relationship tends to be stronger when

employees are satisfied (Robbins and Judge, 2007). Spector (1997) refers to

counterproductive behaviour as being the opposite of organisational citizenship

behaviour (OCB), were the employee intentionally hurts the firm through acts of

aggression, sabotage or theft. He highlights that such behaviour is not a typical

reaction to job dissatisfaction but could be of concern in it occurs frequently.

2.2.2.3 Life Satisfaction

Research performed by Judge and Watanabe (1994) suggests that job

satisfaction affects life satisfaction in a spill over effect. This implies that the

reverse is also true, and that life satisfaction influences the employees’ job

satisfaction levels. Saari and Judge (2004) indicate that firms only have so

much power and control over the job satisfaction levels of their employees, as

the levels of satisfaction are, to a certain degree, the result of a spill over effect

from an employee’s life satisfaction level.

2.2.2.4 Withdrawal behaviours

According to Robbins and Judge (2007), absenteeism and employee turnover

are negatively related to employee satisfaction levels and are in the weak

correlation range (r = -.25). Saari and Judge (2004) concur and indicate that job

satisfaction levels have a negative relationship with withdrawal behaviours such

as lateness, unionisation, grievances, drug abuse and a decision to retire. They

Page 13

comment that when such withdrawal behaviours are grouped together, job

satisfaction is a better predictor of the behavioural grouping than of the

individual behaviour alone.

2.2.3 The measurement of job satisfaction

Spector (1985) uses the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) and indicates that

satisfaction is assumed to represent a group of feelings about a job, based on a

number of job characteristics such as salary, promotion, supervision, fringe

benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, co-workers, work and

communication. Spector (1985) comments that although it is not totally

accepted that the overall attitude about a job is the summation or combination

of specific attitudes, adequate empirical evidence exists to consider the overall

satisfaction measure as such.

Spector’s (1997) remarks on the reliability, validity and norms of the JSS

indicate that except for the co-worker subscale, which has a reliability

coefficient alpha of 0.60, the other eight subscales of the survey are higher than

the widely-accepted internal consistency of 0.7, with coefficient alphas ranging

up to 0.91 for some subscales. He adds that the test retest reliability data,

which was obtained from other studies, reflect that the satisfaction levels are

relatively stable over time. Van Saane, Sluiter, Verbeek, and Frings-Dresen

(2003), in their review of job satisfaction instruments, conclude that the JSS

instrument is one of a few instruments that meets several criteria for a high level

reliability and construct validity.

Page 14

The norms for the JSS, based on the scores of a number of employees and

samples, are indicated in Table 1.

Table 1: Norms for the job satisfaction survey (JSS) (Spector. 1997)

2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Kotler and Keller (2007) encourage firms to measure customer satisfaction

regularly. They describe highly satisfied customers as behaving positively

towards firms in the following ways. They are loyal by buying more and are less

sensitive to price than first time buyers. They speak positively about the firm

and its products and are overall less expensive and easier to serve than newer

customers. Kotler and Keller (2007) are also careful to draw attention to

maintaining a key balance between high levels of customer satisfaction and

adequate levels of satisfaction amongst other stakeholders, such as suppliers,

dealers and employees.

Page 15

Frei (2008), on the topic of what firms need to get right in the service industry,

states that firms that fail to link their employees’ management approaches to

the service needs of customers will ultimately find it difficult to honour their

service promises and thus will be unable to compete. He explains that if a firm

relies of heroism and self-sacrifice from their employees to deliver satisfaction

levels of service to the customer, then the firm has a poorly designed process.

He encourages top management to pay careful attention to all facets, including

job design and performance management, which make up employee

management systems. This suggests that in service industries there is a direct

link between job design and employee satisfaction levels on the one hand, and

customer satisfaction and loyalty on the other hand.

Reichheld (2006) refers to a dissatisfied customer as a detractor and explains

that a detractor can cost the firm a great deal more than the mere direct loss of

a sale. Unhappy customers can drive up service costs by reporting numerous

problems. Unhappy customers can damage the firm’s reputation, thereby

reducing its ability to attract the best people in the industry. In addition, unhappy

customers may demoralise frontline employees with the amount of demands

and complaints that they are inclined to make.

Kotler and Keller (2007), Frei (2008), and Reichheld (2006) refer to the

employees’ role in obtaining customer satisfaction, the impact they have on

customer loyalty and on bottom-line profits. This suggests a direct link between

the levels of employee and customer satisfaction.

Page 16

2.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN (JS) AND (CS)

This section reviews the literature relating job satisfaction and customer

satisfaction to one another. The literature is addressed in the following two

ways.

• Early research from 1980 -1999

• Current research from 2000 to date.

2.4.1 Early research

For the most part, research examining the relationship between employees’ and

customers’ attitudes, perceptions or satisfaction has been performed in the

consumer industries or within the service-orientated aspects of the firm. For

example, Schneider, Parkington and Buxton (1980) conducted a study in the

banking sector, Tornow and Wiley (1991) in the software industry, Bernhardt et

al. (2000) in the fast food industry and Schlesinger and Zornitsky (1991) in the

insurance sector. These studies also concentrate specifically on the relationship

between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction at the organisational

or departmental level, with limited examination of the relationship at the job

level.

Schneider, Parkington and Buxton’s (1980) study in the banking sector revealed

that employees’ perceptions of service-orientated procedures and practices

were related to customers’ perceptions of overall service quality, thus

highlighting the opportunity for subsequent research into the relationship

between employees and customers. They indicate that the subsequent focus on

Page 17

the relationship between employees and customers, as a measure of

organisational success, yielded useful data for evaluating branch effectiveness.

Furthermore, a focus on this relationship highlighted areas within the firm’s

practices and procedures that, if addressed, could increase the level of the

customers’ perception of the service quality. This relatively strong relationship

between employee and customer perceptions focused attention on the role of

front line employees in industries such as retail and, in this case, the banking

sector.

In the research conducted by Schneider et al. (1980), a moderate-to-strong

positive correlation of 0.67 was found between the customers’ perceptions of

branch service and the employees’ perceptions of how customers felt about

branch service. This indicates that employees are sensitive to the customers’

needs. This has the added benefit in that it indicates that similar levels of

sensitivity can be present in comparable roles within other firms. However, this

does not suggest that employees in different functions within the same firm

have the same sensitivity.

Schneider and Bowen (1985) replicated and added to this research and found

that customers reported higher service quality amongst those employees that

described their work positively; that is, employees who had positive work

attitudes. According to Schneider and Bowen (1985), employees were less

likely to resign where customers reported higher levels of service quality, with

the reverse relationship also having merit. This provides a level of predictability

Page 18

regarding employee turnover rates and supports the positive relationship

between employee job satisfaction levels and customer satisfaction levels.

According to Schlesinger and Zornitsky (1991), the relationship between

employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction increases with employees’

years of service. They found that customer satisfaction levels dropped from 75

percent to 55 percent when workers decided to leave the firm. However,

according to the findings of Heskett et al. (1994), job satisfaction levels are

influenced primarily by the service employees’ perceptions of their ability to

meet customer needs, indicating that employees who felt they could meet

customers needs showed higher job satisfaction levels than those who thought

they could not. Heskett et al. (1994) add that this resulted in general

management trying to improve job-related skills and reduce the turnover level of

employees in frontline positions in service firms.

Schneider (1991) concludes that research to date indicates that employee and

customer satisfaction levels were positively correlated, but have been overly

simplistic with regards to the link between employee and customer attitudes and

profits. Schneider (1991) goes on to explain that by taking certain contingencies

into account, even satisfaction levels and profits can be related. He notes that

the relationship between employees’ perceptions of service quality are more

strongly and consistently related to the customers’ perception of service quality,

when compared to employees’ perceptions of the human resource practices

under which they operate. This suggests that a weaker relationship exists

between employee satisfaction at a job level and customer satisfaction levels.

Page 19

This note is also relevant to the work undertaken by Schlesinger and Zornitsky

(1991).

The findings of Tornow and Wiley (1991), and Wiley (1991) support this. A

strong relationship was found between employee satisfaction and customer

satisfaction when the service facets of the firm were measured. In contrast,

when the employee satisfaction levels were measured using human resource

facets; that is, at the job level of the firm such as pay and benefits, a weak

relationship was found between the two.

Heskett et al. (1994) developed the service-profit chain from a case analysis of

successful service firms and propose that the service-profit chain establishes

the relationships between profitability, customer loyalty and employee

satisfaction, loyalty and productivity. Heskett et al. (1994) suggest that the value

of the services provided to the customer influences the level of satisfaction

experienced by them, and that it is through loyal, productive and satisfied

employees that this value is created. Heskett et al. (1994) also refer to internal

quality as the concept that contributes the most to employee satisfaction. They

go on to describe internal quality as a measure of the employees’ feelings

towards their job, firm and co-workers. Furthermore, they indicate that the main

contributor to the level of satisfaction amongst employees is the perception of

their ability to meet customers’ needs with regards to the service level aspects

of the firm.

Page 20

Hallowell, Schlesinger and Zornitsky (1996) identified elements within a firm

that can affect customer satisfaction. They refer to eight components of internal

service quality in this respect and suggest that by measuring these

components, managers might be able to be proactive and control the outcomes

of customer satisfaction. They propose that internal service quality is important

because it relates job satisfaction to customer satisfaction and could begin to

explain why job satisfaction, while not leading directly to customer satisfaction,

is present in most firms that experience it. Hallowell et al. (1996) do not support

the direct relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction, but

did iterate that service firms hardly ever succeed in delivering customer

satisfaction without having satisfied employees.

2.4.2 Recent research

Bernhardt et al (2000), in their longitudinal analysis of satisfaction and

profitability, point out that although their results indicate a positive relationship

between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction in any given time

period, there is no relationship between employee satisfaction and profit/sales,

and customer satisfaction and profit/sales. This relationship only emerges over

longer timeframes. They suggest that any relationship between job satisfaction

and customer satisfaction is not time period dependant and, if present, should

show up in any one time period study.

Dormann and Kaiser (2002), in one of the few studies measuring job conditions

and customer satisfaction, found similar findings as the literature (for example,

Tornow and Wiley, 1991; Bernhardt et al., 2000). They found that job

Page 21

dissatisfaction reduces customer satisfaction and emphasise that human

resource activities should concentrate as much on job design as on selection

and training. They highlight that one of the major shortcomings in the research

on the relationship between job conditions and customer satisfaction is the

limited empirical analyses at the organisational or branch level and indicate that

although their findings are encouraging, they still did not know much about the

mechanisms through which job conditions may effect customer satisfaction.

Harter, Schmidt and Hayes (2002) conclude in their meta-analysis that overall

employee satisfaction levels are more strongly correlated (0.32) to business

outcomes such as customer satisfaction and loyalty. The turnover of employees

and employee safety were negatively correlated (-0.36 and -0.20 respectively)

with productively and profitability, showing positive correlations of (0.20 and

0.15) towards the business outcomes of customer satisfaction and loyalty. The

strongest correlations were found in the facets of employee turnover and

customer satisfaction and loyalty. Their research was performed at the business

unit level and measured employee satisfaction levels using a Gallup Workplace

Audit instrument. They comment that further understanding into the nature of

the satisfaction levels at a business unit level can be explored by measuring

facets which are important to the employees and which managers can influence

on a day-to-day basis.

More recently, Homburg and Stock (2004) conducted a study in a business-to-

business context that concentrated on examining the relationship between a

salesperson’s job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. Their approach was

Page 22

based on evidence by Anderson and Narus (1999) that salespeople are still the

primary point of contact for the customer, despite the increasing importance of

customer service in a business-to-business setting, and thus have the highest

influence in the purchasing decisions of the buyer.

Their findings show that salespeople’s job satisfaction has its own effect on

customer satisfaction, namely emotional contagion. Homburg and Stock (2004)

also acknowledge that customers interact with more than just the salespeople in

a business-to-business context, for example with customer service personnel

and technical experts. However, they limited their examination in this instance

to the relationship arising from the salesperson-customer interaction.

Homberg and Stock (2004) add that the positive interaction between supplier

and customer could be highly relevant in a business-to-business setting.

However, they point out that the nature of transactions within a business-to-

business setting is usually highly technical in nature and the decision process

preceding the transaction is highly rational. This suggests that the relevance

and benefits experienced between employee satisfaction and customer

satisfaction in consumer industries could be low or neglected all together in the

business-to-business context. Their argument suggests that limited financial

benefit could be gained from investing in employee job satisfaction in a

business-to-business context. Their results did find a positive link between

customer satisfaction and the sales person in a business-to-business context

Page 23

Eskildsen, Kristensen, Juhl and Østergaard (2004) mention that while many

studies focus on customer satisfaction, little research has been done on the

drivers of customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Figure 2: The EPSI rating framework. (Eskildsen et al., 2004)

The European satisfaction index (EPSI) rating framework, as shown in Figure 2,

proposes that perceived value, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty are

driven by facets such as the firm’s image, customer expectations, product

quality and service quality. Using the EPSI rating framework, Eskildsen et al.

(2004) found that product quality is important in all transactions between

customers and service providers, but that this is not the case with service

quality, which includes the facet of employee job satisfaction,.

Eskildsen et al. (2004) mention that in environments where there is higher

degrees of personal interaction between the customer and the service provider,

Page 24

service quality is more important, but in environments where little interaction

occurs between the two, service quality is of a lesser importance. The argument

that Homberg and Stock (2004) raise regarding the relevance and benefits of

employee satisfaction levels and customer satisfaction levels in the business-to-

business context could be challenged in this respect, given the number and

different functional interactions experienced in this context.

2. 5 CONCLUSION

The early work performed in this field by Schneider et al. (1980), Schneider and

Bowen (1985), Tornow and Wiley (1991) and Wiley (1991) all offer support for

the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction, but

generally focus on the consumer and service industries. Their research

concentrates specifically on the relationship between employee satisfaction and

customer satisfaction at the organisational or departmental levels, taking the

service level aspects of the firm into account.

There is limited research into the relationship between customer satisfaction

and job satisfaction at the job characteristic level and across different functions

within the firm. Hallowell, Schlesinger and Zornitsky (1996) refer to the internal

service quality of the firm and its relationship with customer satisfaction and job

satisfaction but indicate little support for the direct relationship between the two

constructs.

Homburg and Stock (2004) also researched the relationship between employee

job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a business-to-business context and

Page 25

argue that the importance of employee job satisfaction levels on customer

satisfaction at functional levels, other than the sales function, is questionable.

A better understanding into this relationship will add to the limited research

currently available in this field.

Page 26

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH QUESTION

3.1 RESEARCH QUESTION

Is there a relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a South African firm?

The relationship will be examined in a business-to-business context and will be

performed at the following levels:

• An examination of the overall employee job and customer satisfactions

levels of the firm. The examination will also take into account the functional

satisfaction levels within the firm, for example administration, marketing

and sales, logistics and warehousing, technical service and support in

relation to the customer.

• Further examination of the job subscales will be performed (salary,

promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating

procedures, co-workers, work and communication) to obtain a better

understanding of the possible causes of the relationship.

Page 27

CHAPTER 4

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

A survey method was employed to find out what employees and customers

think or feel about certain facets of a job, product or service offering. According

to Zikmund (2003), the survey method is a quick, inexpensive, efficient and

accurate way of assessing information about a population. The case study

method was used, whereby one South African firm was selected for the study.

Two groups of respondents were targeted within the firm: employees and

customers.

4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

A survey method was used to gather the primary data for both the job

satisfaction and customer satisfaction samples. According to Zikmund (2003), a

survey is defined as a method of gathering primary data, based on the

communication with a representative sample of individuals and attempts to

describe what is happening or to learn the reasons for a particular activity.

The primary data requirements for this study were as follows:

• Primary data set 1. Job satisfaction data from employees.

• Primary data set 2. Customer satisfaction data from customers.

Page 28

Two independent surveys, one measuring the job satisfaction levels of the

employees and the other the satisfaction levels of the customers, were

employed.

Descriptive statistics and proportions were used to examine the relationship

between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. A rank order of the

functional satisfaction levels was performed and the positive relationships were

examined at the job level.

4.3 POPULATION AND SAMPLING

The population definition and sampling methods used during the research is

covered in this section. The response rates, ethical issues as well as any

research limitations have also been discussed.

4.3.1 Population definition

For the job satisfaction survey, the population comprised all employees

employed at South African firms operating in the business-to-business context.

For the customer satisfaction survey, the population consisted of all of the

customers of South African firms operating in the business-to-business context.

4.3.2 Sampling

A census of employees from the employee database of a selected South

African firm was used for the job satisfaction survey. For this survey, 123

Page 29

employees were requested to take part. A total of 67 employees responded,

yielding a response rate of 54 percent.

The sampling frame for the customer satisfaction survey comprised all

customers who had formal accounts and whose accounts had been active

during the last four years at the same firm selected for the job satisfaction

survey. The customer satisfaction survey’s primary sample unit (PSU) was

those customer accounts that had been active at any time during the past four

years.

The sample unit was sub-divided into two subgroups or strata (Zikmund. 2003).

The first stratum included those customers whose accounts had been active

continuously during the past four years (2004-2007). The second stratum

included those customers whose accounts had been active during the past four

years (2004-2007), but which had been inactive for longer than 12 months and

those customers who had closed their accounts all together during this period.

The reason for the stratified sample was to include customers that had possibly

been lost to the competition due to unsatisfactory service during this period.

The stratified sample reduces any selection bias in favour of satisfied

customers. For the customer satisfaction survey, 170 customers were

contacted to take part in the survey, with 85 being randomly selected from each

stratum. Of these 170 customers, 66 responded, yielding a response rate of 39

percent.

Page 30

Two units of analysis were measured. Firstly, the employees’ levels of job

satisfaction were measured from a minimum level of one to a maximum level of

six. Secondly, the customer satisfaction levels were measured from a minimum

level of one to a maximum level of four.

4.3.3 Response rate

A self-administered questionnaire, delivered via e-mail, was used as the data

collection instrument for the job satisfaction survey. According to Zikmund

(2003), the response rate can be as low as 15 percent with this type of method.

Following Zikmund’s (2003) suggestion of including a cover letter outlining the

usefulness of the study, together with making periodic follow ups, the response

rate for the job satisfaction survey was improved to 54 percent.

The customer satisfaction survey was conducted via the telephone interview

method. This ensured a higher level of cooperation from the respondents. The

customers were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with the different

facets presented. According to Zikmund (2003), the cooperation of respondents

in telephone interviews is fairly good, with the added advantage of being

relatively low cost. For the customer satisfaction survey, 66 customers took

part, which constituted a response rate of 39 percent.

4.3.4 Ethical issues

Permission to conduct a job satisfaction survey was requested from the

selected firm. All the employees were requested to take part and were informed

of the purpose of the survey. The decision to take part was voluntary and no

Page 31

personal details were requested. No individual satisfaction levels were made

available or included in this research report. The employees were also

requested to indicate which function they performed within the firm and it was

established that no functional group consisted of less than seven members. The

response rate from the smallest group amounted to five respondents, yielding a

response rate of 71 percent. The aggregated results of the job satisfaction

survey are made available within this research report.

Each customer was informed of the nature and purpose of the customer

satisfaction survey. The decision to take part was voluntary and no customer

details were requested or noted during the survey. No enticement or reward

was offered to any employee or customer to take part or to improve the

response rate of the survey.

4.3.5 Research limitations

This research was limited to a single firm in South Africa. The firm selected is a

highly technical supplier of capital equipment operating in the business-to-

business context. Therefore, any generalisation of the research findings to the

broader industry has its limitations.

During the job satisfaction survey, employees were also requested to indicate

which of the following work functions they performed: administration, marketing

and sales, logistics and warehousing, or technical service and support. Other

functions do exist within a firm but were not examined in this study.

Page 32

In the job satisfaction survey, the administration function had a response rate of

71 percent. This constituted a response from five employees. Owing to the

small sample size and response rate, the measured job satisfaction levels of

this group and the rank order position of the administration function in relation to

the customers’ satisfaction levels may not provide a true reflection of the actual

situation.

4.4 DATA COLLECTION AND INSTRUMENT DESIGN

The job and customer satisfaction data collection instruments are discussed in

detail in this section.

4.4.1 The job satisfaction survey (JSS)

The collection of the job satisfaction data was performed using a self-

administered survey questionnaire. A slightly modified version of the JSS was

used as the data collection instrument. The JSS, a multidimensional instrument,

was developed for the social services but can be used in other sectors as well

(Spector. 1985). The JSS assesses nine subscales: salary, promotion,

supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, co-

workers, work and communication, as well as the overall satisfaction levels.

The response format was a six-point Likert scale ranging from “disagree very

much” (1) to “agree very much” (6). Van Saane, Sluiter, Verbeek, and Frings-

Dresen (2003), in their review of job satisfaction instruments, conclude that the

Page 33

JSS instrument is one of a few instruments that meets several criteria for a high

level reliability and construct validity.

The JSS scale contains four questions for each of the nine subscales

mentioned above, totalling 36 items in all. It uses a summated rating scale

format. According to Spector (1997), this is the most popular for job satisfaction

scales and the format of the JSS makes it relatively easy to modify.

The final job satisfaction questionnaire consisted of 32 questions of the original

JSS (Spector. 1985). The nine subscales consist of the following number of

related questions: pay (4), promotion (3), supervision (4), benefits (4),

contingent rewards (4), operating procedures (4), co-workers (3), nature of the

work (3) and communication (3).

Each of the questions is either a statement that is positively or negatively

related to the aspect of the job. Owing to the number of question associated

with each of the nine subscales, the final summation of the employees’

responses was divided by the number questions in order to maintain a

representative satisfaction response between one and six. The design of the

questionnaire is included in Appendix A – The job satisfaction survey.

4.4.2 The customer satisfaction survey

In developing the customer satisfaction survey, reference was made to

Kristensen, Kanji and Dahlgaard’s (1992) procedures for implementing a

customer satisfaction system. Informal interview sessions were conducted with

Page 34

senior management to determine, in their view, the total set of quality

characteristics that created customer satisfaction. These included the areas of

administration, delivery, products, sales consultants, after sales service and the

overall impression of the firm. The quality characteristics were reduced to a

manageable size of six functions and a maximum of three questions per

function was decided on. The response format was a four-point Likert scale

ranging from (1) “very dissatisfied” to (4) “very satisfied”.

The customer satisfaction scale consists of three questions per the six quality

characteristics, totalling 18 items in all. By combining the responses of the three

items and dividing by three, a customer satisfaction rating between one and

four for each of the six quality characteristics was obtained. The design of the

questionnaire is included in Appendix B – The customer satisfaction survey.

4.5 DATA ANALYSIS

The survey questionnaire allows various descriptive forms of statistical

measurement. The data were captured into an electronic database to be used

with a statistical programme.

Descriptive statistics were used to examine the relationship between job

satisfaction and customer satisfaction in this research. Box plots, frequency

tables with a Pearson’s Chi-square test for significance were performed on the

job satisfaction data with proportions and percentages examining the level of

customer satisfaction.

Page 35

This research consists of two primary samples measuring two concepts and

varying in scales. A rank order analysis of the level of job satisfaction and

customer satisfaction was performed and, with the use of a Spearman-rank

correlation, an analysis was conducted to determine if a statistical relationship

exists between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction levels. The need to

answer the research question guided the analysis approach.

4.6 CONCLUSION

The data collected during the two surveys samples was analysed and the

results are presented in the following section, namely chapter 5.

Page 36

CHAPTER 5

RESULTS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the results of the research data which focused on the

relationship between job and customer satisfaction levels. The findings are

based on a total of 67 job satisfaction survey respondents, as well as the 66

customer satisfaction survey respondents. The findings are represented in the

following way:

• The overall job satisfaction results (JS)

• The overall customer satisfaction results (CS)

• The relationship between (CS) and (JS)

• The nine sub groups of job satisfaction.

5.2 THE OVERALL JOB SATISFACTION RESULTS

The overall employee’s job satisfaction results, including the satisfaction levels

of the marketing and sales, technical services and support, logistics and

warehousing, and the administration functions are presented in this section.

A six-point Likert scale ranging form one to six was used to indicate the levels

of satisfaction in the survey. The mid-level value on the Likert scale of 3.5 was

used to categorise the respondents’ overall satisfaction level into either

Page 37

unsatisfied or a satisfied ratings. Levels ≥ 3.5 were deemed satisfied and levels

< 3.5 unsatisfied.

Table 2: Job satisfaction: The overall satisfaction results

Count 5 21 26Row Percent 19.23% 80.77%Count 20 5 25Row Percent 80.00% 20.00%Count 8 3 11Row Percent 72.73% 27.27%Count 3 2 5Row Percent 60.00% 40.00%Count 36 31 67Row Percent 53.73% 46.27%

All Groups

Logistics & Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services & Support

Marketing & Sales

Function Overall Index Unsatisfied

Overall Index Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Overall Index (2)

Frequency counts were used to calculate the actual percentage of satisfied or

unsatisfied employees and these results are represented in Table 2 above.

Of the 67 respondents who took part in the survey, 36 were deemed

unsatisfied. This represents 54 percent of all respondents as being unsatisfied

to some degree. The marketing and sales function obtained the highest level of

satisfaction with a rating of 81 percent. A majority of 21 of the 26 respondents

taking part in the survey from this function were deemed satisfied and

representing the only function in the firm to have scored a majority satisfaction

rating in the survey.

Technical services and support, logistics and warehousing, and administration

showed a majority of unsatisfied employees, representing 80 percent, 73

percent and 60 percent respectively. It must be noted that the number of

Page 38

respondents who took part in the survey from the administration, and logistics

and warehousing functions were relatively small and may not necessarily

representative a reliable sample.

Table 3: Job satisfaction: Expected frequencies

14 12 2613 12 256 53 2

36 31 67All Groups

Logistics & WarehousingAdministration

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 21.0631, df=3, p=.000102

Function Overall Index Unsatisfied

Overall Index Satisfied

Row Totals

115

The expected frequencies in Table 3 shows with a p value of less than 0.05 that

the current job satisfaction levels of the employees within the firm are

significantly different and dependant on the specific functional in which the

employee works.

Figure 3 graphically presents the overall job satisfaction distributions of each of

the four functional areas, namely marketing and sales, technical services and

support, logistics and warehousing, and administration.

Administration together with the marketing and sales function, experience

higher mean satisfaction levels than the firm’s overall average mean value. This

is supported by the results described in Table 2. The employees in the

technical services and support function have the lowest mean satisfaction levels

within the firm.

Page 39

Figure 3: Job satisfaction: Box plot of the overall satisfaction index

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Ove

rall

Inde

x

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Both the logistics and warehousing, and technical services and support

functions indicate lower mean satisfaction levels than the firms overall average.

The mean overall satisfaction levels are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Job satisfaction: The overall mean results

Technical Services & Support 3.02Logistics & Warehousing 3.32Overall Job Satisfaction 3.48Administration 3.59Marketing & Sales 3.97

Function Overall Index means

On the whole, more employees were deemed unsatisfied than satisfied.

Page 40

5.3 THE OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION RESULTS

The firm’s overall customer satisfaction results, including the results for each of

the functional areas surveyed, namely sales consultants, after sales service,

delivery, administration, and products are presented in this section.

A four-point Likert scale ranging from one to four was used to indicate the levels

of satisfaction in the survey. A mid-level value on the Likert scale of 2.5 was

used to categorise the respondents’ overall satisfaction results into unsatisfied

or a satisfied ratings. Levels ≥ 2.5 were deemed as satisfied and levels < 2.5

unsatisfied. Table 5 represents the frequency counts, as well as the calculated

percentages, of the satisfied customers as opposed to those deemed

unsatisfied. Of the 66 customer responses to the overall impression of the firm,

48 of them were deemed satisfied. This represents approximately 73 percent of

all customers surveyed as being satisfied with the overall impression of the firm.

Table 5: Customer satisfaction: The overall satisfaction results

Count 43 23 66Row Percent 65.15% 34.85%Count 13 53 66Row Percent 19.70% 80.30%Count 7 59 66Row Percent 10.61% 89.39%Count 10 56 66Row Percent 15.15% 84.85%Count 24 42 66Row Percent 36.36% 63.64%Count 18 48 66Row Percent 27.27% 72.73%

After sales service

Overall impression

Summary Frquency Table (Coded Customer satisfaction David.stw)

Function Row Totals

Administration

Delivery

Overall Index Satisfied

Overall Index Unsatisfied

Product

Sales consultants

Page 41

On average, the product, sales consultants and delivery functions had higher

satisfactory levels compared to the other functions. This is indicated by

customer satisfaction levels of 89 percent, 85 percent and 80 percent

respectively.

The after sales service function showed lower customer satisfaction levels than

the average customer overall impression of the firm, with only 64 percent of the

customers deemed satisfied. The administration function had by far the majority

of unsatisfied customers with 65 percent unsatisfied.

Figure 4: Customer satisfaction: Box plot of the overall satisfaction index

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Adm

in

Del

iver

y

Pro

duct

s

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s

Afte

rmar

ket &

Ser

vice

s

Ove

rall

Impr

essi

on

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

Figure 4 graphically presents the overall customer satisfaction distributions of

each of the four functional areas, namely administration, delivery, sales

consultants and after sales service. Two additional measures, products and

Page 42

overall impression of the firm, were included as separate facets within the

customer satisfaction survey.

The overall satisfaction levels with regards to customers, is deemed satisfied.

Whether the results observed can be interpreted as moderate or high levels of

satisfaction is unsubstantiated. It does however indicate that the customers are

to some degree satisfied. The overall mean satisfaction levels of each of the

functions are shown in Table 6. The overall impression of the firm is indicated

by the mean value of 2.95

Table 6: Customer satisfaction: The overall mean results

After sales service 2.67Administration 2.78Overall impression 2.95Delivery 3.06Sales Consultant 3.10Products 3.21

Function Overall Index means

Table 7 shows a T–test for independence between the different functions in the

firm. This test also includes the product and the overall impression results. It

indicates which of the customer satisfaction responses, in respect to the rated

function, are significantly different from each other.

Page 43

Table 7: Customer satisfaction: T-test for independence

Administration vs Delivery 2.7828 3.0606 -2.4198 130 0.01691 0.6955 0.6213 1.2532 0.3653

Administration vs Products 2.7828 3.2071 -3.6329 130 0.00040 0.6955 0.6452 1.1620 0.5467

Administration vs Sales Consultants 2.7828 3.1010 -2.5895 130 0.01071 0.6955 0.7160 1.0599 0.8153

After sales service vs Delivery 2.6717 3.0606 -3.4078 130 0.00087 0.6881 0.6213 1.2266 0.4125

After sales service vs Products 2.6717 3.2071 -4.6108 130 0.00001 0.6881 0.6452 1.1374 0.6053

After sales service vs Sales Consultants 2.6717 3.1010 -3.5119 130 0.00061 0.6881 0.7160 1.0829 0.7492

Overall Impression vs Products 2.9545 3.2071 -1.9384 130 0.05475 0.8390 0.6452 1.6908 0.0360

After sales servcie vs Overall impression 2.6717 2.9545 -2.1176 130 0.03612 0.6881 0.8390 1.4866 0.1125

T-test for independence Samples (Spreadsheet 162)Note: Variables were treated as independent samples

Std.Dev. Group 1

Std.Dev. Group 2

F-ration Variance

p Variance

Group 1 vs Group 2Mean

Group 1Mean

group 2 t-Value df p

The functions that indicate significant differences in the satisfaction responses

of the customers are identified in Table 7 and explained in the following section.

• The customer satisfaction results were significantly lower in the

administration function compared to the delivery, the products and the

sales consultants functions, with a tested significance values of p =

0.01691, p = 0.00040 and p = 0.01071 respectively.

• The customer satisfaction results were significantly lower in the after sales

service function compared to the delivery, the products, the sales

consultants and the overall impression of the firm, with tested significance

values of p = 0.00087, p = 0.00001, p = 0.00061 and p = 0.03612

respectively.

• The results in respect to the overall impression of the firm, although not

significantly lower compared to the products, were relatively close with a

Page 44

tested significance value of p = 0.05474. It was therefore included in the

results.

Not all the T-tests showed significance results and were therefore not included

in this section. The full T-test results are available in Appendix C – T-test for

independence results.

5.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN (CS) AND (JS)

This section provides data and results that will assist in answering the research

question.

5.4.1 Research question

Is there a relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction

in a South African firm?

The results of the job satisfaction and customer satisfaction surveys have been

compared to determine if a relationship exist between the two constructs. The

research consists of two primary samples measuring two concepts and varying

in scales. The data is therefore compared as follows.

• Using percentages to compare the proportions of overall job satisfaction

and customer satisfaction responses and examining the relationship

between the two.

Page 45

• A same comparison as described above is preformed on the following

functions, namely administration, logistic and warehousing, marketing and

sales, and after sales services. The product responses have been omitted

in this comparison.

• Using a rank order comparison of the mean satisfaction levels obtained

during the job and customer satisfaction surveys and performing a

Spearman-rank correlation to determine the strength of the relationship.

5.4.2 Proportions

This section examines the relationships between the overall customer and

employee satisfaction results. A comparison of the functional satisfaction results

also examined for relationships.

Figure 5: The relationship: The customer and job satisfaction overall index

73%

35%

80%85%

64%

46%

40%

27%

81%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Prop

ortio

n of

sam

ple

that

was

rank

ed s

atis

fied

CS Index

JS Index

CS Index 73% 35% 80% 85% 64%

JS Index 46% 40% 27% 81% 20%

Overall impression

Administration Delivery Sales consultants

After sales service

Page 46

Figure 5 compares the four functions in respect to the overall customer and job

satisfaction results. One other facet, namely overall impression of the firm has

also been included in the comparison.

Similar percentages of satisfied customers and satisfied employees were found

in the following two cases.

• Administration: 35 percent of the customers were satisfied with this

function of the firm compared to 40 percent of the employees, who worked

in this function, reporting being satisfied with their job conditions.

• Sales consultants: 85 percent of the customers were satisfied with this

function compared to 81 percent of the employees, who worked in this

function, reporting being satisfied with their job conditions.

Dissimilar percentages of satisfied customers and satisfied employees were

found in the remaining three cases.

• Overall impression: 73 percent of the customers were satisfied with the

overall impression of the firm as opposed to 46 percent of the employees

reporting satisfaction levels with the firm’s job conditions respectively.

• Delivery: 80 percent of the customers were satisfied with this function as

opposed to 27 percent of employees, who worked in this function,

reporting being satisfied with their job conditions.

Page 47

• After sales service: 64 percent of the customers were satisfied with this

function as opposed to 20 percent of employees, who worked in this

function, reporting being satisfied with their job conditions.

5.4.3 Rank order

This section examines the relationships between the rankings of the mean

customer satisfaction results compared to the ranking of the mean job

satisfaction results in the firm.

Figure 6 graphically represents the ranking order of the mean customer

satisfaction results from lowest to highest.

Figure 6: Customer satisfaction: Rank order of the mean satisfaction levels

2.67 2.782.95 3.06 3.10 3.21

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

After salesservice

Administration OverallImpression

Delivery Sales Consultants Products

Ave

rage

leve

l of c

usto

mer

sat

isfa

ctio

n

The results indicate that the customers are on average satisfied with the

functional performances of the firm. A mean value of ≥ 2.5 is deemed to be

Page 48

satisfied. The after sales service and administration functions have lower mean

satisfaction levels compared to the overall impression of the firm.

The delivery functions as well as the sales consultants score higher mean

satisfaction results compared to the overall impression of the firm. This

indicates that customers are on average are more satisfied with these functions

compared to the after sales service and administration functions of the firm. The

Product scored the highest mean satisfaction level with a mean value of 3.21

compared to the mean overall impression of the firm of 2.95. Reference is made

to section 5.3 on page 41 and Table 6 for more information on the customer

satisfaction results.

Figure 7 representative the ranking of the mean employee job satisfaction

levels in each function from lowest to highest.

Figure 7: Job satisfaction: rank order of the mean satisfaction levels

3.023.32 3.48 3.59

3.97

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Technical Servicesand Support

Logistics andWarehousing

Overall JobSatisfaction

Administration Marketing and Sales

Ave

rage

leve

l of j

ob s

atis

fact

ion

Page 49

A mean value ≥ 3.5 is deemed to be satisfied in this case. These results differ

slightly from the customer satisfaction results in as far as only two functions,

namely administration and the marketing and sales function that indicate job

conditions that the employees rate satisfactory.

The technical services and support, and logistics and warehousing functions

scored the lowest in the mean job satisfaction results with values of 3.02 and

3.32 respectively. The overall mean employee job satisfaction level in the firm

as well as the levels in the technical services and support, and logistics and

warehousing functions are deemed dissatisfied.

For the ease of comparison the customer satisfaction functional titles have been

used throughout the rest of this section. The customer satisfaction functions

have been compared to the following job satisfaction functions as shown in the

in Table 8.

Table 8: Comparison of functions CS functional titles JS functional titles

Overall impression = All groups

Administration = Administration

Delivery = Logistics and warehousing

Sales consultants = Marketing and sales

After sales service = Technical service and support

A ranking of the firm’s job and customer satisfaction results in respect to each

of the functions are indicated in Table 9. The rank order value “1” represents

Page 50

the lowest mean satisfaction level. The product, due to its general association

with the sales consultants, has been grouped together with this function for the

purpose of the rank order.

Table 9: The relationship: rank order.

Administration 2 3Delivery 4 2Product 6 5Sales Consultants 5 5After sales service 1 1Overall impression 3 4

Job Satisfaction

Function Customer Satisfaction

Figure 8 graphically represents the rank order of the functions as shown in

Table 9 respectively.

Figure 8: The relationship: rank order

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Ranked Customer Satisfaction where 1 = lowest level of satisfaction

Ran

ked

Job

Satis

fact

ion

whe

re 1

= lo

wes

t lev

el o

f job

sa

tisfa

ctio

n

After sales service

Overall impression

Delivery

Administration

Products

Sales Consultants

Page 51

A Spearman-rank correlation preformed on the two constructs indicates a

strong rank order correlation existing between the two constructs at this level.

The results of the Spearman-rank correlation are indicated in Table 10 and the

81 percent correlation with a significance value of p = 0.049858 suggests that a

significant relationship exists between the rank order of the job satisfaction

levels compared to the customer satisfactions levels of the same function.

Table 10: The relationship: Spearman-rank correlation

1.000000 0.8116790.000000 0.0498586.000000 6.0000000.811679 1.0000000.049858 0.0000006.000000 6.000000

Job Satisfaction

Spearman-Rank Correlation Customer Satisfaction

Job Satisfaction

Customer Satisfaction

5.5 THE NINE SUB GROUPS OF JOB SATISFACTION

This section represents the job satisfaction results of the nine job sub groups

i.e. pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating

procedures, co workers, nature of the work and communication.

Table 11 shows the mean results obtained from the firm’s job satisfaction

survey as compared to the (JSS) mean norms for this type of survey and

indicated in Table 1. Refer to section 4.4.1 on page 33 for further explanation.

Red values indicate the levels of satisfaction within the firm that are on average

below the (JSS) norms obtained from 8113 individuals and 52 samples. On

Page 52

average, except for the results concerning co-workers, the employee’s job

satisfaction levels were on average lower than the norms for this type of survey.

The marketing and sales was the only function to score satisfaction levels

higher or equal to the average norm values in Table 11.

Table 11: Job satisfaction: mean results versus the (JSS) norms

Administration

2.95 2.70 3.61 2.11 2.80 2.04

3.00 2.70 3.50 2.00 2.46 2.41

4.80 4.40 4.63 4.31 4.55 4.35

3.50 3.10 3.83 2.81 4.25 2.33

3.42 3.00 3.82 2.65 3.10 2.38

3.37 3.15 3.50 3.56 3.10 2.62

4.50 4.50 4.25 4.93 4.26 4.62

4.80 4.51 4.85 4.45 4.33 4.20

3.60 3.34 3.90 3.33 3.53 2.72

3.79 3.48 3.97 3.32 3.59 3.02

Communication (mean)

Overall Index

Co workers (mean)

Nature of work (mean)

Contingent rewards (mean)

Operating procedures (mean)

Supervision (mean)

Benefits (mean)

Pay (mean)

Promotion (mean)

Summary of mean job satisfaction levels per sub group compared to the industry norms

Sub Group Mean values

JSS mean norms

All groups overall

Marketing and sales

Logistics and warehousing

Technical service and support

5.5.1 Pay

Table 12 shows the job satisfaction results concerning pay. The results indicate

that approximately 72 percent of the employees in the firm are unsatisfied with

the pay. Although the marketing and sales function indicated the highest levels

of satisfaction with 46 percent, no functional area indicated a majority level of

satisfaction with this sub group.

The technical services and support function indicated the lowest satisfaction

levels with 16 percent of the employee deemed satisfied with pay.

Page 53

Table 12: Job satisfaction: pay

Count 14 12 26Row Percent 53.85% 46.15%Count 21 4 25Row Percent 84.00% 16.00%Count 9 2 11Row Percent 81.82% 18.18%Count 4 1 5Row Percent 80.00% 20.00%Count 48 19 67Row Percent 71.64% 28.36%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Pay (2)

Function Pay Unsatisfied

Pay Satisfied

Row Totals

Table 13 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning pay are not significantly dependant on the function in which the

employee performs.

Table 13: Pay: expected frequencies

19 7 2618 7 258 34 1

48 19 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Function Pay Unsatisfied

Pay Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 6.66478, df=3, p=.083393

115

5.5.2 Promotion

Table 14 shows the job satisfaction results concerning promotion. The results

indicate that 67 percent of the employees in the firm are unsatisfied with

promotional opportunities. The marketing and sales function indicates the

majority of satisfied employees with this sub group, namely 54 percent. The

logistics and warehousing function indicate the lowest satisfaction levels with 9

Page 54

percent of the employees deemed satisfied with the promotional opportunities

within the firm.

Table 14: Job satisfaction: promotion

Count 12 14 26Row Percent 46.15% 53.85%Count 19 6 25Row Percent 76.00% 24.00%Count 10 1 11Row Percent 90.91% 9.09%Count 4 1 5Row Percent 80.00% 20.00%Count 45 22 67Row Percent 67.16% 32.84%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function Promotion Unsatisfied

Promotion Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Promotion (2)

Table 15 shows with a p value less than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning the firms promotional opportunities are significantly dependant on

the functions in which the employee performs.

Table 15: Promotion: expected frequencies

17 9 2617 8 257 43 2

45 22 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 9.27495, df=3, p=.025855

Function Promotion Unsatisfied

Promotion Satisfied

Row Totals

115

5.5.3 Supervision

Table 16 shows the job satisfaction results concerning supervision. The results

indicate that approximately 78 percent of the employees in the firm are satisfied

with their supervisors. All functions showed high percentages of satisfied

employees with the supervision in the firm.

Page 55

Table 16: Job satisfaction: supervision

Count 5 21 26Row Percent 19.23% 80.77%Count 7 18 25Row Percent 28.00% 72.00%Count 3 8 11Row Percent 27.27% 72.73%Count 0 5 5Row Percent 0.00% 100.00%Count 15 52 67Row Percent 22.39% 77.61%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function Supervision Unsatisfied

Supervision Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Supervision (2)

Table 17 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning supervision are not significantly dependant on the function in which

the employee performs.

Table 17: Supervision: expected frequencies

6 206 192 91 4

15 52 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 2.19565, df=3, p=.532809

Function Supervision Unsatisfied

Supervision Satisfied

Row Totals

2625115

5.5.4 Benefits

Table 18 shows the job satisfaction results concerning the firm’s benefits. The

results indicate that approximately 66 percent of all employees in the firm are

unsatisfied with the firm’s benefits. 60 percent of the employees in the

administration function showed satisfied levels with this sub group. The logistics

and warehousing function indicates the lowest satisfaction results with

approximately 82 percent of employees in this function unsatisfied with their

benefits.

Page 56

Table 18: Job satisfaction: benefits

Count 14 12 26Row Percent 53.85% 46.15%Count 19 6 25Row Percent 76.00% 24.00%Count 9 2 11Row Percent 81.82% 18.18%Count 2 3 5Row Percent 40.00% 60.00%Count 44 23 67Row Percent 65.67% 34.33%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function Benefits Unsatisfied

Benefits Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Benefits (2)

Table 19 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning benefits are not significantly dependant on the function in which the

employee performs.

Table 19: Benefits: expected frequencies

17 9 2616 9 257 43 2

44 23 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 5.52952, df=3, p=.136891

Function Benefits Unsatisfied

Benefits Satisfied

Row Totals

115

5.5.5 Contingent rewards

Table 20 shows the job satisfaction results concerning the firm’s contingent

rewards. The results indicate that 64 percent of the employees in the firm are

unsatisfied with the firm’s contingent rewards. Approximately 54 percent of the

employees in the marketing and sales function showed satisfied levels. The

administration function indicated the lowest satisfaction level with 20 percent of

the employees satisfied with this sub group.

Page 57

Table 20: Job satisfaction: contingent rewards

Count 12 14 26Row Percent 46.15% 53.85%Count 19 6 25Row Percent 76.00% 24.00%Count 8 3 11Row Percent 72.73% 27.27%Count 4 1 5Row Percent 80.00% 20.00%Count 43 24 67Row Percent 64.18% 35.82%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function C-Rewards Unsatisfied

C-Rewards Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Contingent Rewards (2)

Table 21 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning contingent rewards are not significantly dependant on the function in

which the employee performs.

Table 21: Contingent rewards: expected frequencies

17 9 2616 9 257 43 2

43 24 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 6.08811, df=3, p=.107408

Function C-Rewards Unsatisfied

C-Rewards Satisfied

Row Totals

115

5.5.6 Operating procedure

Table 22 shows the job satisfaction results concerning the firm’s operating

procedures. The results indicate that approximately 72 percent of the

employees in the firm are unsatisfied with the firms operating procedures. All

the functions indicated unsatisfied levels with regard to this sub group with the

technical services and sales having the lowest level of 88 percent unsatisfied

employees.

Page 58

Table 22: Job satisfaction: operating procedures

Count 16 10 26Row Percent 61.54% 38.46%Count 22 3 25Row Percent 88.00% 12.00%Count 6 5 11Row Percent 54.55% 45.45%Count 4 1 5Row Percent 80.00% 20.00%Count 48 19 67Row Percent 71.64% 28.36%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehouse

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function O-Procedure Unsatisfied

O-Procedure Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Operating Procedure (2)

Table 23 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning the firms operating procedures are not significantly dependant on

the function in which the employee performs.

Table 23: Operating procedures: expected frequencies

19 7 2618 7 258 34 1

48 19 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 6.35362, df=3, p=.095625

Function O-Procedure Unsatisfied

O-Procedure Satisfied

Row Totals

115

5.5.7 Co-workers

Table 24 shows the job satisfaction results concerning co-workers in the firm.

The results indicate that approximately 90 percent of the employees in the firm

are satisfied with their co-workers. No functional area showed major levels of

dissatisfaction is this regard.

Page 59

Table 24: Job satisfaction: co-workers

Count 3 23 26Row Percent 11.54% 88.46%Count 4 21 25Row Percent 16.00% 84.00%Count 0 11 11Row Percent 0.00% 100.00%Count 0 5 5Row Percent 0.00% 100.00%Count 7 60 67Row Percent 10.45% 89.55%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehouse

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function Co-Workers Unsatisfied

Co-Workers Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Co-workers (2)

Table 25 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning co-workers are not significantly dependant on the function in which

the employee performs.

Table 25: Co-workers: expected frequencies

3 233 221 101 47 60All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 2.72344, df=3, p=.436263

Function Co-Workers Unsatisfied

Co-Workers Satisfied

Row Totals

2625115

67

5.5.8 Nature of the work

Table 26 shows the job satisfaction results concerning the nature of work. The

results indicate that approximately 91 percent of the employees in the firm are

satisfied with the nature of their work. All function showed high satisfied levels

amongst the employees in is regard.

Page 60

Table 26: Job satisfaction: nature of the work

Count 1 25 26Row Percent 3.85% 96.15%Count 4 21 25Row Percent 16.00% 84.00%Count 1 10 11Row Percent 9.09% 90.91%Count 0 5 5Row Percent 0.00% 100.00%Count 6 61 67Row Percent 8.96% 91.04%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function N of Work Unsatisfied

N of Work Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Nature of work (2)

Table 27 shows with a p value more than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning the nature of the work are not significantly dependant on the

function in which the employee performs.

Table 27: Nature of the work: expected frequencies

2 242 231 100 56 61All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 2.84619, df=3, p=.415957

Function N of Work Unsatisfied

N of Work Satisfied

Row Totals

2625115

67

5.5.9 Communication

Table 28 shows the job satisfaction results concerning communication within

the firm. The results indicate that approximately 54 percent of the employees in

the firm are unsatisfied with the firm’s communication. The administration and

the marketing and sales functions showed higher than average satisfaction

percentages with values of 60 percent and 65 percent respectively. The

logistics and warehousing function showed the highest unsatisfied level with 72

Page 61

percent of employees in this function unsatisfied with the communication levels

in the firm.

Table 28: Job satisfaction: communication

Count 9 17 26Row Percent 34.62% 65.38%Count 17 8 25Row Percent 68.00% 32.00%Count 8 3 11Row Percent 72.73% 27.27%Count 2 3 5Row Percent 40.00% 60.00%Count 36 31 67Row Percent 53.73% 46.27%

All Groups

Logistics and Warehousing

Administration

Technical Services and Support

Marketing and Sales

Function Communication Unsatisfied

Communication Satisfied

Row Totals

Summary Frquency Table (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Table: Function (4) x Communication (2)

Table 29 shows with a p value less than 0.05 that the satisfaction levels

concerning communication are significantly dependant on the function in which

the employee performs.

Table 29: Communication: expected frequencies

14 12 2613 12 256 53 236 31 67All Groups

Logistics and WarehousingAdministration

Marketing and SalesTechnical Services and Support

Summary Table: Expected Frequencies (Coded JS in WB1 David.stw) Pearson Chi-square: 7.84482, df=3, p=.049336

Function Communication Unsatisfied

Communication Satisfied

Row Totals

115

5.6 CONCLUSION

Two of the nine sub group’s results, namely promotional opportunities and

communication indicate that the satisfaction results regarding these facets are

significantly dependant on the function in which the employee performs.

Page 62

An analysis of variance of the nine sub groups in Table 30 indicates that the job

satisfaction levels of the employees in each of the functions, namely marketing

and sales, technical services and support, logistics and warehousing and

administration are significantly different with a p value less than 0.05 in respect

to the following 6 of the 9 job satisfaction sub groups.

• Pay

• Promotion

• Benefits

• Contingent rewards

• Operating procedures

• Communication

The box plots can be viewed in Appendix D – Job satisfaction – Box Plots

Table 30: The nine sub group’s analysis of variance.

Pay 36.48100 3 12.16033 90.7093 63 1.43983 8.445671 0.000085Promotion 24.01755 3 8.00585 102.0289 63 1.619506 4.943389 0.003809Supervision 1.35009 3 0.45003 98.0902 63 1.556987 0.289039 0.833146Benefits 36.31630 3 12.10543 90.4692 63 1.436018 8.429859 0.000086Contingent Rewards 28.60438 3 9.53479 95.0952 63 1.509448 6.316741 0.000816Operating Procedure 12.14304 3 4.04768 47.1014 63 0.747641 5.413937 0.002232Co-Workes 4.33607 3 1.44536 47.5213 63 0.754306 1.916142 0.136021Nature of work 5.75831 3 1.91944 50.5435 63 0.802278 2.392484 0.076825Communication 17.87629 3 5.95876 109.5665 63 1.739151 3.426249 0.022335Overall Index 11.93081 3 3.97694 37.4233 63 0.594021 6.694938 0.000540

SS Error df Error MS Error F pVariable

Analysis of variance (Spreadsheet2 in WB1 David JS.stw)Marked effects are significant at p < .0.5000

SS Effect df Effect MS Effect

A discussion and interpretation of the results will be handled in chapter 6.

Page 63

CHAPTER 6

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This section discusses the findings presented in the previous chapter to the

research problem discussed in chapters 1 and 3 and reviewed in chapter 2.

6.2 REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

When measured at the job level, does the level of employee job satisfaction

bear any relation to the satisfaction levels experienced by the customer in a

South African firm?

The early work performed in this field by Schneider et al. (1980), Schneider and

Bowen (1985), Tornow and Wiley (1991) and Wiley (1991) all offer support for

the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction, but

generally focus on the consumer and service industries. Their research

concentrates specifically on the relationship between employee satisfaction and

customer satisfaction at the organisational or departmental levels, taking the

service level aspects of the firm into account. There is limited research into the

relationship between customer satisfaction and job satisfaction at the job

characteristic level and across different functions within the firm.

Dormann and Kaiser (2002) highlight that one of the major shortcomings in the

research on the relationship between job conditions and customer satisfaction

Page 64

is the limited empirical analyses at the organisational or branch level and

indicate that although their findings are encouraging, they still did not know

much about the mechanisms through which job conditions may effect customer

satisfaction. Owing to its positive relationship with organisational measures

such as employee productivity, job satisfaction has gained in importance as a

dependant variable and could lead to controlled benefits for the firm, including

increased profits and improved performance.

A better understanding into this relationship at a job characteristic and

business-to-business level will add to the limited research currently available in

this field.

6.3 RESEARCH QUESTION

Is there a relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction

in a South African firm?

The relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction are

discussed in this section and in the following way.

• The relationships comparing the overall results between the employee and

customer satisfaction levels using proportions. The same relationships will

be compared and discussed at the functional level, namely administration,

delivery, sales consultants and after sales services.

Page 65

• Discussing the results of the rank order relationship between functions

within the firm.

6.3.1 Proportions

The results are discussed at two levels, firstly comparing the firms overall

customer and job satisfaction levels and secondly comparing the overall

satisfaction levels within the functional areas of the firm.

6.3.1.1 Overall satisfaction

Figure 9 graphically compares the overall satisfaction results of the surveys and

shows little relationship between the overall percentages of satisfied employees

and the overall percentages of satisfied customers. 73 percent of the

customers, representing the majority of the customers sampled, were satisfied

with the firms performance whereas only 46 percent of the employees in the

firm were deemed satisfied with their job conditions. This represents the

minority of employees sampled.

The results in Figure 9 indicate a weak to no relationship existing between the

overall job satisfaction levels of the employees and the overall satisfaction

levels of the customers within a business-to-business context.

The results support the work performed by Schneider (1991), Tornow and Wiley

(1991) and Wiley (1991) in as much as when the employee satisfaction levels

were measured using human resource facets; that is, at the job level of the firm

such as pay and benefits, a weak relationship was found between the two.

Page 66

Figure 9: The relationship: overall satisfaction

73%

46%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Prop

ortio

n of

sam

ple

that

was

rank

ed s

atis

fied

CS Index

JS Index

CS Index 73%

JS Index 46%

Overall impression

6.3.1.2 Overall satisfaction at the functional level.

Two relationships occurring in the administration and the sales consultant’s

functions were observed. Similar proportions of satisfaction levels were

observed between the customer and employee job satisfaction levels in both

these functions. The remaining two functions, namely delivery and after sales

service, showed dissimilar proportions of satisfaction levels relationships as

discussed in the previous chapter on the overall satisfaction levels of the firm.

Figure 10 graphically shows the two observed relationships within the

administration and sales consultant’s functions compared to the other functional

areas within the firm.

Page 67

Figure 10: The relationship: overall satisfaction at the functional level

35%

80%85%

64%

40%

27%

81%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Pr

opor

tion

of s

ampl

e th

at w

as ra

nked

sat

isfie

d

CS Index

JS Index

CS Index 35% 80% 85% 64%

JS Index 40% 27% 81% 20%

Administration Delivery Sales consultants After sales service

The administration relationship shows 35 percent of customers satisfied with

administration compared to 40 percent of employees satisfied with the job

conditions in this function. The low number of survey respondents from the

administration function, namely five, may not give the true reflection of the job

satisfaction levels within this function.

The relationship with respect to the sales consultant’s indicates that 85 percent

of customers are satisfied with the sales consultant’s performance compared to

81 percent of employees satisfied with the job conditions in this function. This

seems to support Homburg and Stock (2004) findings that sales persons job

satisfaction levels do influence the level of customer satisfaction in their own

specific way. The level of influence is explained by Homburg and Stock (2004)

at two levels, namely emotional contagion and the way sales consultants

Page 68

interact with the customers. Anderson and Narus (1999) consider sales

consultants as the primary point of contact for customers in a business-to-

business context. This phenomenon could possibly explains the similar high

levels of employee and customer satisfaction results observed in this function

as well as the results between the customers overall impression of the firm. The

results suggest that the sales consultants, as the primary point of contact, may

have more of a collective influence over the overall satisfaction levels of the

customer than the other functions within the firm. Figure 11 shows the similar

levels of satisfied sales consultants at the job level and satisfied customers with

the overall impression of the firm.

Figure 11: The relationship: (CS) overall impression versus (JS) sales consultants

73%

81%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

(CS) Overall impression versus (JS) Sales consultants

Prop

ortio

n of

sam

ple

that

was

rank

ed s

atis

fied

CS Index

JS Index

The influences of product on the customer satisfaction levels have not been

mentioned until now. Eskildsen et al. (2004) found that the product facet played

an important roll in all transactions between the customer and service providers

Page 69

in a business-to-business environment, but which was not the case when it

came to service quality which included the facet of employee job satisfaction.

These findings suggest that the product has a larger influence over the overall

satisfaction levels experienced by the customers than any employee job

satisfaction level did. The product in this sample obtained a mean customer

satisfaction score of 3.21, with satisfaction levels in approximately 90 percent of

the customers surveyed.

To credit the moderate to high customer satisfaction levels directly to the high

percentages of satisfied sales consultant’s without taking into account the

influences the product and the quality thereof may have on the results, would

be unfound at this stage.

Eskildsen et al. (2004) mentions that service quality, which includes the job

satisfaction facet, is also important in environments where higher degrees of

personal interaction exist between customers and employees. Figure 12

compares two functions namely sales consultants and after sales service where

equally high levels of interaction between employees and customers exist. The

results indicate that the low job satisfaction results observed in the after sales

service functions do not result in similar low and proportional customer

satisfaction levels.

This would suggest that employee job satisfaction levels do not affect the

customer satisfaction levels proportionally in this instance.

Page 70

Figure 12: The relationship: sales consultants versus after sales service

85%

64%

81%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Pr

opor

tion

of s

ampl

e th

at w

as ra

nked

sat

isfie

d

CS Index

JS Index

CS Index 85% 64%

JS Index 81% 20%

Sales consultants After sales service

Although the job satisfaction results of the sales consultants indicate a high

proportional relationship with the overall satisfaction levels of the customer,

enough data suggests that low percentages of satisfied employees in their jobs,

do not result in equally low percentages of satisfied customers. To conclude

that a moderate to strong relationship exists between the proportions of

satisfied employees and satisfied customers, in the case of the sales

consultants, is therefore unsubstantiated.

6.3.2 Rank order

The results in section 5.4.3 of page 48 indicate that a strong and significant

relationship exists between the ranked order of the different functions when

comparing the employee job and customer satisfaction results. An 81 percent

correlation with a significance of p = 0.049858 is observed.

Page 71

The ranked order results do not however indicate causation or even similar

levels of satisfaction between the two constructs, but does suggest that the rank

order of the employee’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction levels are strongly related

to the rank order of the satisfaction experienced by the customer.

The results supports the findings by Schneider and Bowen (1985), who found

that higher service quality was reported by customers amongst those

employees that described their work more positively. The results also indicate

that a positive relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer

satisfaction levels does exist as shown in Figure 13.

Figure 13: The relationship: rank order

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Ranked Customer Satisfaction where 1 = lowest level of satisfaction

Ran

ked

Job

Satis

fact

ion

whe

re 1

= lo

wes

t lev

el o

f job

sa

tisfa

ctio

n

7

Products

Sales Consultants

Overall impression

Delivery

Administration

After sales service

Page 72

The strong rank order correlation in the results supports the work by Dormann

and Kaiser (2002), Tornow and Wiley (1991) and Bernhardt et al (2000) in as

far as employee job dissatisfaction levels reduce customer satisfaction levels in

the consumer industry and indicate that when the employee job satisfaction

levels are significantly different within the different functions of the firm, for

example in the case of the after sales service, the customer satisfaction results

for this function correlated in a rank order fashion to the level of job satisfaction

experience by the employees.

It’s worth noting that when the employee job satisfaction levels in the different

functions of the firm were significantly different from one another, the customer

satisfaction levels were significantly different in some instances, following a

similar trend from the lowest to highest as indicated in Figure 13.

Significant differences in the customer satisfaction results were found in the

following instances and described in section 5.3 on page 41.

• The customer satisfaction results were significantly lower in the

administration function compared to the delivery, the products and the

sales consultants functions, with a tested significance values of p =

0.01691, p = 0.00040 and p = 0.01071 respectively.

• The customer satisfaction results were significantly lower in the after sales

service function compared to the delivery, the products, the sales

consultants and the overall impression of the firm, with tested significance

Page 73

values of p = 0.00087, p = 0.00001, p = 0.00061 and p = 0.03612

respectively.

• The results in respect to the overall impression of the firm, although not

significantly lower compared to the products, were relatively close with a

tested significance value of p = 0.05474. It was therefore included in the

results.

A strong and significant relationship exists between the rank order of the

different functions within the firm, when comparing the employees job and

customers satisfaction results. It does not however indicate equal or even

similar levels of satisfaction between the two constructs, but does suggest that

the employee’s satisfaction or dissatisfaction levels influence the level of

satisfaction experienced by the customer within the different functions of a

business-to-business firm.

6.3.3 The nine job sub groups

The results of the nine sub groups indicate that two of the nine were

significantly dependant on the functional area in which the employee worked.

The two sub groups were promotion and communication respectively.

A variance analysis of the nine sub groups is shown in Table 30 on page 63. It

reveals that the satisfaction levels of the employees were significantly different

in six of the nine sub groups thus substantiating the cause for the significantly

Page 74

different levels of job satisfaction experienced in the different functions of the

firm. Supervision, co-workers and the nature of the work show similar levels of

satisfaction within the different functions of the firm.

Whether the rank order relationship would exist, as described in section 6.3.2

on page 71, without significantly different job satisfaction levels amongst the

firm’s functions is unknown. The results do indicate however, that if the

employees from different functions within the same firm significantly view their

job conditions differently, then the satisfaction levels of the customer in respect

to each of the functions will be influenced accordingly and in some cases

significantly.

6.4 CONCLUSION

Although a weak relationship was observed between the percentages of

satisfied employees and satisfied customers in the survey, a strong and

significant relationship exists between the rank order of the different functions

within the firm, when comparing the employees job and customers satisfaction

results. This research consists of two primary samples measuring two concepts

and varying in scales. It was determined that a rank order would be a suitable

method to observe a relationship in this respect. The results suggest that the

job satisfaction levels of the employees in a business-to-business environment

influence to some degree the level of satisfaction experienced by the customer.

Page 75

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSIONS

7.1 INTRODUCTION

This section summarises the research findings and presents recommendations

for those interested in investing time and effort into understanding and

increasing employee job-satisfaction levels within the firm and in the process

improving the overall customer relationship and satisfaction levels in their

environment.

7.2 MAIN FINDINGS

The research provides supports for a positive relationship between employee

job satisfaction and customer satisfaction levels within a South Africa firm and

in a business-to-business context.

7.2.1 Finding 1

At the organisation level, no relationship is observed when comparing the

overall percentages of satisfied employees with their job conditions and the

overall percentages of customers satisfied with the firm’s performance. The

overall satisfaction results were obtained from the summation of the different

functions within the firm.

Page 76

The results indicate that a majority of 73 percent of the customers were deemed

satisfied with the firms performance compared to a minority of 46 percent of the

employees satisfied with their job conditions. The results suggest that the

overall employee job satisfaction percentages has no or little bearing on the

overall satisfaction results experienced by the customer in the firm.

7.2.2 Finding 2

At the functional level, similar percentages of employees and customers were

observed between the job satisfaction results of the sales consultants and the

customer satisfaction results in respect to this function. The strength of the

relationship is inconclusive.

The results indicate that 85 percent of the customers surveyed were satisfied

with the sales consultant’s performance compared to 81 percent of the sales

consultant function surveyed were satisfied with the job conditions. Eskildsen et

al. (2004) mentioned that service quality, which includes the job satisfaction

facet, was important in environments where higher degrees of personal

interaction existed between customer and employees. This is true in the case of

the sales consultants function.

The observed relationship suggests that the sales consultant’s job satisfaction

levels have a bearing to some degree the overall satisfaction levels of the

customer. Anderson and Narus (1999) view that sales consultants are

considered the primary point of contact for customers in a business-to-business

Page 77

context could explain this moderate to high relationship between customer

satisfaction and employee job satisfaction results

Comparing two functions, namely sales consultants and after sales service,

where equally high levels of interaction between employees and customers

exist as described by Eskildsen et al. (2004), indicate that low job satisfaction

results present in the after sales service do not result in similar low customer

satisfaction results of equal proportion. Enough data suggests that low

percentages of satisfied employees in their jobs, do not result in equally low

percentages of satisfied customers. It does however suggest that additional

drivers are present in maintaining moderate to high customer satisfaction levels

than just the job satisfaction levels of the employees.

An overall weak relationship exists between the job satisfaction results of the

different functions compared to the satisfaction results of the customer.

7.2.3 Finding 3

The results indicate that a strong and significant relationship exists between the

ranked order of the different functions when comparing the employee job and

customer satisfaction results. An 81 percent correlation with a significance of p

= 0.049858 is observed.

The strong correlation primarily supports the work by Dormann and Kaiser

(2002), Tornow and Wiley (1991) and Bernhardt et al (2000) in as far as

employee job dissatisfaction levels reduce customer satisfaction levels in the

consumer industry.

Page 78

It can be concluded that a strong and significant relationship exists in this case,

but that equal or even similar levels of satisfaction between the two constructs

exist, is unsubstantiated.

7.2.4 Finding 4

The results reveal that when employee job satisfaction levels in the different

functions of the firm are significantly different from one another as described in

section 5.2 on page 37, the customer satisfaction levels in respect to the

specific function were significantly different in some instances.

Significant differences in the level of customer satisfaction were found in

respect to the administration function. The results showed significantly lower

levels of satisfaction compared to the delivery, products and the sales

consultants function.

Significant differences in the level of customer satisfaction were found in

respect to the after sales service function. The results showed significantly

lower levels of satisfaction compared to the delivery, products, sales

consultants and the overall impression of the firm. The overall impression of the

firm, although not significantly lower from the products, was close with a tested

significance value of p = 0.05474.

The results suggest that a customer can experience significantly different levels

of satisfaction, depending on which function the customer decides to interact

Page 79

with and if the employee’s job satisfaction levels between the different functions

are significantly different.

7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS TO MANAGERS

The research supports the positive relationship between employee job

satisfaction and customer satisfaction levels. The first recommendation is

addressed to senior managers who have an influence across the entire firm.

Work actively towards maintaining a similar level of job satisfaction through out

the firm. The results suggest that significantly different job satisfaction levels

contribute to an array of different customer satisfaction experiences when

interacting at the functional level. A consistent and similar customer satisfaction

experience, throughout the firm, would be difficult to maintain when internal job

satisfaction levels were significantly different and dependant on the function in

which the employee performed.

The positive relationship between the two constructs suggests that more

attention should be focused on the employee’s job design, with regards to the

nine sub groups, in improving this facet. Human resource practitioners and

managers are recommended to view job design with the same importance as

job selection and employee training and development.

The results indicate that customer satisfaction levels are higher in those

functions where employees described their work more positively. Line

Page 80

managers should be aware of the trend and actively pursue a job satisfaction

level amongst employees. Gain an understanding to the causes, the positive

and negative results as well as the measurement of job satisfaction levels within

a firm and develop an environment conducive to employee satisfaction as a

minimum. A brief review of the literature on job satisfaction is available in

chapter 2 of this report.

Schneider and Bowen (1985) found that those employees who described their

work more positively were less likely to resign. In this globally competitive

environment and were skills shortage is seen as one of South Africa’s “binding

constraints” (ASGISA, 2006 p. 16) to achieving global competitiveness, job

satisfaction tied in to employee turnover levels is recommended as a business

outcome measurement, not to mention a duty to the employees.

7.4 FUTURE RESEARCH

The research examines whether a relationship exist between employee job

satisfaction and customer satisfaction levels in a business-to-business context

and the results do suggest that such a relationship indeed exists in the South

African firm. An interesting investigation would be to apply the same research

methodology and extend the research over a number of similar firms within

South African environment to determine the reliability and validity of these

results.

Page 81

An investigation into whether significantly similar job satisfaction levels

throughout the firm have the same effects on the customer’s satisfaction levels

as significantly different job satisfaction levels within different function of the

firm.

Eskildsen et al. (2004) found that product quality was important in all

transactions between the customer and service providers, but which was not

the case with service quality, which included employee job satisfaction. The

results in this research indicate high levels of customer satisfaction with the

sales consultants as well as with the product and quality thereof. It would be

interesting to investigate how much on an influence sales consultants job

satisfaction has on the customer satisfaction levels compared to the product

performance and quality.

7.5 CONCLUSION

It is evident from the results in chapter 5 that a strong and significant

relationship exists between the ranked order of the different functions when

comparing the employee job and customer satisfaction results within a South

African firm. Although this research is small and isolated to a single firm, the

results suggest that the job satisfaction levels within the firm could have in

some cases a significant effect on the overall satisfaction levels experienced by

the customer in a business-to-business context.

Page 82

REFERENCE LIST

Anderson, J.C. and Narus, J.A. (1999) Business marketing management:

understanding, creating, and delivering value. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice

Hall.

Bakke, D.W. (2005) Joy at work: a revolutionary approach to fun on the job.

Seattle.

Bernhardt, K.L., Donthu, N. and Kennett, P.A. (2000) A longitudinal analysis of

satisfaction and profitability. Journal of Business Research, 47, 161-171

Brush, D.H., Moch, M.K., and Pooyan, A. (1987) Individual demographic

differences and job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8, 139-155.

Clark, A., Oswald, A., and Warr, P. (1996) is job satisfaction u-shaped in age?

Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 69, 57-81

Dormann, C. and Kaiser, D.M. (2002) Job conditions and customer satisfaction.

European Journal of work and organisational psychology, 11(2), 257-283

Drucker, P.F. (2002) they’re not employees, they’re people. Harvard Business

Review, February, 70 – 77

Eskildsen, J., Kristensen, K., Juhl, H.J. and Østergaard, P. (2004) The drivers

of customer satisfaction and loyalty. The case of Demark 2000-2002. Total

Quality Management, 15 (5-6), 859 - 868

Frei, F.X. (2008) the four things a service business must get right. Harvard

business Review, April, 70 -80

Page 83

Harter, J.W., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-level

relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and

business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (2),

268 - 279

Hallowell, R., Schlesinger, L.A. and Zornitsky, J. (1996) Internal service quality,

customer and job satisfaction: linkages and implications for management.

Human Resource Planning, 19 (2), 20-31

Hernon, P., Nitecki, D.A. and Altman, E. (1999) Service quality and customer

satisfaction: an assessment and future directions. The Journal of Academic

Librarianship, 25 (1), 9-17

Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser, W.E. and Schlesinger, L.A.

(1994) Putting the Service-Profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review,

March - April, 164 -174

Hofstede, G. (1985) The interaction between national and organisational value

systems. Journal of Management Studies, 22, 347 – 357

Homburg, C. and Stock, R.M. (2004) the link between salespeople’s job

satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a business-to-business context: A

dyadic analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (2), 144-158

Jackson, S.E. and Schuler, R.S. (1985) A meta-analysis and conceptual critique

of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organisational

Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 36, 16 -78

Judge, T.A. and Bono, J.E. (2001) Relationship of core self-evaluation traits –

self esteem, generalised self – efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability

– with job satisfaction and job performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 86, 80 – 92

Page 84

Judge, T.A., Heller, D. and Mount, M. K. (2002) Five-factor model of personality

and job satisfaction. a meta–analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530 –

541

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K (2001) the job

satisfaction-job performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review.

Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376 – 407

Judge, T.A. and Watanabe, S. (1994) Individual differences in the nature of the

relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and

Organisational Psychology, 67, 101 - 107

Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L. (2007) A framework for marketing management. Upper

Saddle River, New Jersey.

Kristensen, K., Kanji, G.K. and Dahlgaard, J.J. (1992) On measurement of

customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management, 3 (2), 123 -128

O'Connor, E.J., Peters, L.H., Rudolf, C.J., and Pooyan, A. (1982) Situational

constraints and employee affective reactions: a partial field replication. Group

and Organisational studies, 7, 418 – 428

Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J.H., and Granrose, C.S. (1992) Role stressors,

social support, and well-being among two-career couples. Journal of

Organisational Behaviour, 13, 339 – 356

Reichheld, F. (2006) The ultimate question: driving good profits and true

growth. Boston, Massachusetts.

Rice, R.W., Frone, M.R., and McFarlin, D.B. (1992) Work-nonwork conflict and

the perceived quality of life. Journal of applied psychology, 75, 386 - 393

Page 85

Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T.A. (2007) Organisational behaviour. Upper Saddle

River, New Jersey.

Saari, L.M. and Judge, T.A. (2004) Employee attitudes and job satisfaction.

Human Resource Management, 43 (4), 395 - 407

Schlesinger, L.A. and Zornitsky, J. (1991) Job satisfaction, service capability

and customer satisfaction: an examination of the linkages and management

implications. Human Resource Planning, 14(2), 141-149

Schneider, B. (1991) Service quality and profits: can you have your cake and

eat it too? Human Resource Planning, 14 (2), 151-157

Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.E. (1985) “Employee and customer perceptions of

service in banks: replication and extension.” Journal of applied psychology, 70,

423-433

Schneider, B., Parkington, J.J. and Buxton, V.M. (1980) “Employee and

customer perceptions of service in banks.” Administrative Science Quarterly,

25, 252-267

South African Government information (2008) Key issues - accelerated and

shared growth initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA).

http://www.info.gov.za/asgisa/ (accessed 15/8/2008)

Spector, P.E. (1985) Measurement of human service staff satisfaction:

development of the job satisfaction survey. Am J Community psycho, 13, 693 -

713.

Spector, P.E. (1997) Job Satisfaction, application, assessment, causes and

consequences. Thousand Oaks, London.

Page 86

Tornow, W.W. and Wiley, J.W. (1991) Service quality and management

practices: a look at employee attitudes, customer satisfaction, and bottom-line

consequences. Human Resource Planning, 14, 105 -115

Van Saane, N., Sluiter, J.K., Verbeek, J.H.A.M. and Frings-Dresen, M.H.W.

(2003) Reliability and validity of instruments measuring job satisfaction – a

systematic review. Occupational Medicine, 53, 191-200.

Wiley, J.W. (1991) Customer satisfaction: a supportive work environment and

its financial cost. Human resource planning, 14 (2), 117-127.

Zikmund, W.G. (2003) Business research methods. Southern Western,

Thomson Learning TM.

Page 87

APPENDICES

Appendix A – The job satisfaction survey

Introductory letter – Survey Questionnaire

To Whom It May Concern:

I am currently conducting academic research, the purpose of which is to examing therelationship between Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction in a South African Firm.Theresearch will foucs on the overall satisfaction levels in question and will not focus on anyindividual in specific.

You have been requested to participate in this research to aid in the understanding of theabovementioned releationships between Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction. Thequestionnaire should take no more than 20 minutes to complete. Your participation isvoluntary, and you can withdraw at any time without penalty. All data will be kept confidentialand your participation in the survey will be conducted in an anonymous way. The overallresearch results will be made available in the form of a research report and will be madepublically available for review.

By completing the questionnaire, you indicate that you voluntarily participate in this research.If you have any queries or concerns regarding the research, please feel free to contact me.My details are listed below.

David Stanford (Researcher)david.stanford@za.atlascopco .comCell 0836312429

Page 88

Tick where appropriate

AdministrationLogistics and WarehouseMarketing and SalesTechnical service or support

Questions1 2 3 4 5 6

1 I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do.

2 There is really too little chance for promotion in my job

3 My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job

4 I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive

5 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 I like the people I work with

8 I sometimes feel my job is meaningless

9 Communication seems good within this organisation

10 Raises are too few and far between

11 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 My supervisor is unfair to me.

13

1 2 3 4 5 614 I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated

15 My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by red tape

16 1 2 3 4 5 6

17 I like doing the things I do at work

18 The goals of this organisation are not clear to me.

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY (JSS)

Which function do you perform

Response choices are 1 = Disagree very much, 2 = disagree moderately, 3 = disagree slightly, 4 = agree slightly, 5 = agree moderately, 6 = agree very much

When I do a good job, I recieve the recognition for it that I should receive

Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult

Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance od being promoted

The benefits we receive are as good as most other organisations

I find I have to work harder at my job than I should because of the incompetenace of the peole I work with

Page 89

19 1 2 3 4 5 6

20 People get ahead as fast here as they do in other places

21 1 2 3 4 5 6

22 The benefit package we have is equitable

23 There are few rewards for those who work here

24 I have too much to do at work

25 I enjoy my co workers

26 1 2 3 4 5 6

27 I feel a sense of pride in doing my job

28 I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases

29 There are benefits we do not have which we should have

30 I like my supervisor

31 I have too much paperwork

32 I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be

I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organisation

I feel unappreciated by the organisation when I think about what they pay me

My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of subordinates

Page 90

Appendix B – The customer satisfaction survey

Introductory letter – Survey Questionnaire

To Whom It May Concern:

I am currently conducting academic research, the purpose of which is to examing therelationship between Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction in a South African Firm.Theresearch will foucs on the overall satisfaction levels in question and will not focus on anyindividual business in specific.

By completing the questionnaire, you indicate that you voluntarily participate in this research.If you have any queries or concerns regarding the research, please feel free to contact me.My details are listed below.

David Stanford (Researcher)david.stanford@za.atlascopco .comCell 0836312429

Page 91

Response choices are 1 = Very Dissatisfied, 2 = Dissatisfied, 3 = Satisfied, 4 = Very Satisfied.

Questions

1 2 3 41

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Overall Impression

16

17

18

Aftermarket and service

How satisfied are you with the quality of our repair and workmanship

How satisfied are you with the aftermarket support and waiting time

How satisfied are you with our aftermarkets willingness to assit and solve your problem

Sales consultants

How satisfied are you with our sales teams with regards to product knowledge

How satisfied are you with our sales teams integrity and delivery on what was promised

How satisfied are you with our sales teams willingness to assist

Products

How satisfied are you with our ability to offer a total product solution

How satisfied are you with our products with regards to quality and reliability

How satisfied are you with the quality of our documentation

Delivery

How satisfied are you with our delivery with regards to the number of errors

How satisfied are you with our delivery with regards to equipment being delivered damaged

How satisfied are you in using us as your first choice of purchase

How satisfied are you in refering us and our services to a friend

How satisfied are you overall

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Administration

How satisfied are you with our telephone etiquette in respect of professionalism, transfering and time taken to be assisted.

How satisfied are you with the easy of doing business with us

How satisfied are you with our ability to keep you informed and up to date

How satisfied are you with our delivery with regards to being on time.

Page 92

Appendix C – T-test for independence results

T-te

st fo

r Ind

epen

dent

Sam

ples

(Spr

eads

heet

162)

Not

e: V

aria

bles

wer

e tre

ated

as

inde

pend

ent s

ampl

es

Gro

up 1

vs.

Gro

up 2

Mea

nG

roup

1M

ean

Gro

up 2

t-val

uedf

pV

alid

NG

roup

1V

alid

NG

roup

2S

td.D

ev.

Gro

up 1

Std

.Dev

.G

roup

2F-

ratio

Var

ianc

esp

Var

ianc

esA

dmin

vs.

A

dmin

Adm

in v

s. D

eliv

ery

Adm

in v

s. P

rodu

cts

Adm

in v

s. S

ales

Con

sulta

nts

Del

iver

y vs

. A

dmin

Del

iver

y vs

. Del

iver

yD

eliv

ery

vs. P

rodu

cts

Del

iver

y vs

. Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

sP

rodu

cts

vs.

Adm

inP

rodu

cts

vs. D

eliv

ery

Pro

duct

s vs

. Pro

duct

sP

rodu

cts

vs. S

ales

Con

sulta

nts

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s vs

. A

dmin

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s vs

. Del

iver

yS

ales

Con

sulta

nts

vs. P

rodu

cts

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s vs

. Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

sA

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

vs.

Adm

inA

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

vs. D

eliv

ery

Afte

rmar

ket &

Ser

vice

s vs

. Pro

duct

sA

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

vs. S

ales

Con

sulta

nts

Ove

rall

Impr

essi

on v

s.

Adm

inO

vera

ll Im

pres

sion

vs.

Del

iver

yO

vera

ll Im

pres

sion

vs.

Pro

duct

sO

vera

ll Im

pres

sion

vs.

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s

2.78

2828

2.78

2828

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.69

5510

0.69

5510

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

3.06

0606

3.20

7071

-1.3

2842

130

0.18

6367

6666

0.62

1300

0.64

5206

1.07

8435

0.76

1744

3.06

0606

3.10

1010

-0.3

4624

130

0.72

9719

6666

0.62

1300

0.71

6043

1.32

8234

0.25

5142

3.20

7071

3.20

7071

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.64

5206

0.64

5206

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

3.20

7071

3.10

1010

0.89

396

130

0.37

2997

6666

0.64

5206

0.71

6043

1.23

1631

0.40

3230

3.10

1010

3.20

7071

-0.8

9396

130

0.37

2997

6666

0.71

6043

0.64

5206

1.23

1631

0.40

3230

3.10

1010

3.10

1010

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.71

6043

0.71

6043

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

2.67

1717

2.78

2828

-0.9

2262

130

0.35

7912

6666

0.68

8098

0.69

5510

1.02

1662

0.93

1421

2.95

4545

3.06

0606

-0.8

2534

130

0.41

0691

6666

0.83

8979

0.62

1300

1.82

3470

0.01

6636

2.95

4545

3.20

7071

-1.9

3836

130

0.05

4747

6666

0.83

8979

0.64

5206

1.69

0848

0.03

5971

2.95

4545

3.10

1010

-1.0

7877

130

0.28

2686

6666

0.83

8979

0.71

6043

1.37

2853

0.20

4124

2.78

2828

3.06

0606

-2.4

1976

130

0.01

6914

6666

0.69

5510

0.62

1300

1.25

3154

0.36

5343

2.78

2828

3.20

7071

-3.6

3294

130

0.00

0402

6666

0.69

5510

0.64

5206

1.16

2011

0.54

6724

2.78

2828

3.10

1010

-2.5

8952

130

0.01

0706

6666

0.69

5510

0.71

6043

1.05

9913

0.81

5262

3.06

0606

2.78

2828

2.41

976

130

0.01

6914

6666

0.62

1300

0.69

5510

1.25

3154

0.36

5343

3.06

0606

3.06

0606

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.62

1300

0.62

1300

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

3.20

7071

2.78

2828

3.63

294

130

0.00

0402

6666

0.64

5206

0.69

5510

1.16

2011

0.54

6724

3.20

7071

3.06

0606

1.32

842

130

0.18

6367

6666

0.64

5206

0.62

1300

1.07

8435

0.76

1744

3.10

1010

2.78

2828

2.58

952

130

0.01

0706

6666

0.71

6043

0.69

5510

1.05

9913

0.81

5262

3.10

1010

3.06

0606

0.34

624

130

0.72

9719

6666

0.71

6043

0.62

1300

1.32

8234

0.25

5142

2.67

1717

3.06

0606

-3.4

0782

130

0.00

0872

6666

0.68

8098

0.62

1300

1.22

6583

0.41

2547

2.67

1717

3.20

7071

-4.6

1077

130

0.00

0009

6666

0.68

8098

0.64

5206

1.13

7373

0.60

5349

2.67

1717

3.10

1010

-3.5

1192

130

0.00

0612

6666

0.68

8098

0.71

6043

1.08

2873

0.74

9215

2.95

4545

2.78

2828

1.28

011

130

0.20

2786

6666

0.83

8979

0.69

5510

1.45

5105

0.13

3143

T-te

st fo

r Ind

epen

dent

Sam

ples

(Spr

eads

heet

162)

Not

e: V

aria

bles

wer

e tre

ated

as

inde

pend

ent s

ampl

es

Gro

up 1

vs.

Gro

up 2

Mea

nG

roup

1M

ean

Gro

up 2

t-val

uedf

pV

alid

NG

roup

1V

alid

NG

roup

2S

td.D

ev.

Gro

up 1

Std

.Dev

.G

roup

2p

Var

ianc

esF-

ratio

Var

ianc

esA

dmin

vs.

Afte

rmar

ket &

Ser

vice

sA

dmin

vs.

Ove

rall

Impr

essi

onD

eliv

ery

vs. A

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

Del

iver

y vs

. Ove

rall

Impr

essi

onP

rodu

cts

vs. A

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

Pro

duct

s vs

. Ove

rall

Impr

essi

onS

ales

Con

sulta

nts

vs. A

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

Sal

es C

onsu

ltant

s vs

. Ove

rall

Impr

essi

onA

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

vs. A

fterm

arke

t & S

ervi

ces

Afte

rmar

ket &

Ser

vice

s vs

. Ove

rall

Impr

essi

onO

vera

ll Im

pres

sion

vs.

Afte

rmar

ket &

Ser

vice

s

2.78

2828

2.67

1717

0.92

262

130

0.35

7912

6666

0.69

5510

0.68

8098

1.02

1662

0.93

1421

2.78

2828

2.95

4545

-1.2

8011

130

0.20

2786

6666

0.69

5510

0.83

8979

1.45

5105

0.13

3143

2.67

1717

2.67

1717

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.68

8098

0.68

8098

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

Ove

rall

Impr

essi

on v

s. O

vera

ll Im

pres

sion

3.06

0606

2.67

1717

3.40

782

130

0.00

0872

6666

0.62

1300

0.68

8098

1.22

6583

0.41

2547

3.06

0606

2.95

4545

0.82

534

130

0.41

0691

6666

0.62

1300

0.83

8979

1.82

3470

0.01

6636

3.20

7071

2.67

1717

4.61

077

130

0.00

0009

6666

0.64

5206

0.68

8098

1.13

7373

0.60

5349

3.20

7071

2.95

4545

1.93

836

130

0.05

4747

6666

0.64

5206

0.83

8979

1.69

0848

0.03

5971

3.10

1010

2.67

1717

3.51

192

130

0.00

0612

6666

0.71

6043

0.68

8098

1.08

2873

0.74

9215

3.10

1010

2.95

4545

1.07

877

130

0.28

2686

6666

0.71

6043

0.83

8979

1.37

2853

0.20

4124

2.67

1717

2.95

4545

-2.1

1758

130

0.03

6115

6666

0.68

8098

0.83

8979

1.48

6625

0.11

2492

2.95

4545

2.67

1717

2.11

758

130

0.03

6115

6666

0.83

8979

0.68

8098

1.48

6625

0.11

2492

2.95

4545

2.95

4545

0.00

000

130

1.00

0000

6666

0.83

8979

0.83

8979

1.00

0000

1.00

0000

Page 93

Appendix D – Job satisfaction – Box Plots

Administration Administration

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Pay

Pro

mot

ion

Sup

ervi

sion

Ben

efits

Con

tinge

nt R

ewar

ds

Ope

ratin

g P

roce

dure

Co-

wor

kers

Nat

ure

of w

ork

Com

mun

icat

ion

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

Logistics and warehousing Logistics & Warehousing

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Pay

Pro

mot

ion

Sup

ervi

sion

Ben

efits

Con

tinge

nt R

ewar

ds

Ope

ratin

g P

roce

dure

Co-

wor

kers

Nat

ure

of w

ork

Com

mun

icat

ion

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Page 94

Technical services and support

Technical Services & Support

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Pay

Pro

mot

ion

Sup

ervi

sion

Ben

efits

Con

tinge

nt R

ewar

ds

Ope

ratin

g P

roce

dure

Co-

wor

kers

Nat

ure

of w

ork

Com

mun

icat

ion

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Marketing and sales Marketing & Sales

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Pay

Pro

mot

ion

Sup

ervi

sion

Ben

efits

Con

tinge

nt R

ewar

ds

Ope

ratin

g P

roce

dure

Co-

wor

kers

Nat

ure

of w

ork

Com

mun

icat

ion

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Page 95

Page 96

Appendix E – Job Satisfaction – sub group distributions

Pay

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Pay

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Promotion

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Pro

mot

ion

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Page 97

Supervision

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Sup

ervi

sion

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Benefits

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Ben

efits

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Page 98

Contingent rewards

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Con

tinge

nt R

ewar

ds

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Operating procedure

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Ope

ratin

g P

roce

dure

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Page 99

Co Workers

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Co-

wor

kers

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Nature of work

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Nat

ure

of w

ork

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Page 100

Communication

Marketing & SalesTechnical Services & Support

Logistics & WarehouseAdmin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Com

mun

icat

ion

Median 25%-75% 1%-99%

Page 101