Employees Job Satisfaction in Power Back-Up Industry

An Analytical Approach

A Research Article on

"Employees Job Satisfaction in Power Back-Up Industry"

An Analytical Approach

ABSTRACT:

In this era of frequent corporate restructuring and rapid technological change, successful companies must have employees who are open to innovation and to changing roles, and are able to work together productively. Research shows that employees most likely to be adaptable, cooperative, and productive are those who are satisfied with their jobs. Job Satisfaction is a part of life satisfaction. The nature of one’s environment of job is an important part of life as Job Satisfaction influences one’s general life satisfaction. However, more comprehensive approach requires that many factors are to be included before a complete understanding of job satisfaction can be obtained. Job Satisfaction Studies reveals that the industry might be experiencing some type of a rebirth based on new ways of doing business. This paper is an attempt to measure the level of satisfaction of employees with special reference to power backup industry. The study will help organizations; understand the factors contributing to job satisfaction and their importance.

KEY WORDS:

Job Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, Work Culture

INTRODUCTION:

There are a number of challenges in the Indian industry which require the serious attention. The industry is already under stress on account of persistent problems such as attrition, confidentiality, and loyalty. With these challenges, it is right time for organizations to rethink the ways they manage their people. Managing human resource in the knowledge based industry is a significant challenge for companies as it involves a multi task responsibility.

Job satisfaction is an effective or emotional response towards various facets of one’s job. This means job satisfaction is not a unitary concept. Rather, a person can be relatively satisfied with one aspect of his or her job and dissatisfied with one or more other aspects. The hands-on exercise, for instance, assesses one’s satisfaction with recognition, compensation and supervision.

Traditionally, OB experts have identified low job satisfaction as the main cause of turnover. Employees become dissatisfied with their employment relationship, which motivates them to search for and join another organization with better conditions. Although job dissatisfaction builds over a time and eventually affects turnover.

Satisfied employees are more likely to stay with company and become committed and have more likely to be motivated to provide high level of customer service, by doing so will also further enhance the employee’s satisfaction through feeling of achievement. Enhanced employee satisfaction leads to improved employee retention; and employee stability ensures the successful implementation of continuous improvement and customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction will no doubt lead to corporate success and greater job security. These will further enhance employee satisfaction. Therefore, employee satisfaction is a prerequisite for customer satisfaction.

LITERATURE REVIEW:

Job Satisfaction has been extensively studied since 1930s.One of the biggest preludes to the study of job satisfaction was the Hawthorne studies. These studies (1924–1933), primarily credited to Elton Mayo of the Harvard Business School, sought to find the effects of various conditions (most notably illumination) on workers’ productivity. The work of W.L. Bryan, Walter Dill Scott, and Hugo Munsterberg set the tone for Taylor’s work who argued that ‘Principles of Scientific Management’ was a single best way to perform any given work task.

Robert Hoppock (1935) elaborated on relationship between job satisfaction and other work related factors. Carroll & Blumen (1973) begin with the question, how to define work satisfaction and reviews general research trends and framework of analysis that have been developed. These include the traditional approach which assumed that if the presence of a condition led to satisfaction, the two factor theory which identifies factors related to satisfaction and Maslow’s need-hierarchy based theory. Hasmukh Adhia(2007) made attempt to measure the job satisfaction of Government employees in india correlating among antecedent factors, job satisfaction factors and consequences factor. Jaggi, Bikki (1977) relates Job Satisfaction and Leadership Styles in Developing Countries: The Case of India’.

Research revealed that job satisfaction varied across countries. A study of 9,300 adults in 39 countries identified the percentage of workers who said they were “very much satisfied with their jobs.” The top five countries were Denmark (61%), India (urban middle- and upper class only-55%), Norway (54%), United States (50%) and Ireland (49%). Why do Hungarian employees indicate the lowest job satisfaction? An average monthly salary of $302 and poor labor management relations are two possible causes.
Five predominant models of job satisfaction specify its causes. They are need fulfillment, discrepancy, value attainment, equity, and dispositional/ genetic components. Lockheed Martin uses surveys to assess employee’s job satisfaction.

FACTORS EFFECTING JOB SATISFACTION: :

There have been many studies performed to determine factors that affect job satisfaction. Organizational involvement, locus of control, age, identification with role, dual career families, and commitment to organization are some of them (Dodd-McCue & Wright, 1996). Other variable identified are work stress; Type-A behavior, coping strategies, participation in decision making (Bogg & Cooper, 1994), procedural justice, emotional exhaustion, race, and education (Wesolowski & Mossholder, 1997).

Employees understand that physical conditions as important for job conditions. However they may also consider factors such as job security, pay and friendly co-workers (Crouch & Nimran, 1989). An influential theory suggests that an adequate work environment does not substantially enhance job satisfaction, but that substandard environment definitely leads to dissatisfaction (Herzberg, 1966; Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman, 1959). Further, Regional location is identified as correlate of the job satisfaction.

Satisfaction in work is provided through factors of achievement, recognition, etc. Pierce and Newstrom (l982) and Ralston (l989) both found that job satisfaction was higher with flexible work schedules than with fixed working hours. Satisfaction with work itself, satisfaction with promotion, and satisfaction with co-workers were all positively correlated (Smart, 1998). Researches also suggest that commitment strengthens with the individual’s age, years with the organization, sense of job security, and participation in decision making.

The important components of job satisfaction therefore are- compensation and job characteristics. Some studies include perceived low chances of promotion, organizational career opportunities, lack of mentorship, and lack of recognition as contributing factors (Moore, 2000; Igbaria & Seigel, 1993; Igbaria & Greenhaus, 1991). Thomas and Ganster (l995) studied the impact of organizational policies and supervisor behavior on job satisfaction. Their research provides evidence that organizational policies have impact on job satisfaction.

AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF POWER BACK-UP INDUSTRY:

The power backup market in India is lucrative and fast growing primarily due to chronic power shortage. The market comprises of generators or gensets, and batter-based devices like inverters and Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS). Study is conducted in Su-Kam, which is leader in the power back-up industry in India which has created new benchmarks for the industry and upgraded standards for the entire sector.

This study is conducted with the following objectives-

  • To discover the various expectations that determines the satisfaction level of employee.
  • To rank the factors according to the importance in the industry.
  • To measure the level of satisfaction of employees with respect to the surveyed company.

Employee Satisfaction Measurement-

Employee satisfaction is a function of perceived performance and expectations. It is a persons’ feeling of pleasure or disappointment resulting from comparing a products’ outcome to his/her expectations. If the performance falls short of expectations, the employee is dissatisfied and if it matches the expectations, the employee is satisfied.

Technique–

Considering the important attributes which determine the satisfaction level of the employee with respect to the various services catered by the company, a non-structured in-depth interview of employee selected by convenience is carried out. Then, a list of fifteen attributes is finalized keeping in mind their importance and that an attribute once selected is not repeated on being encountered for the second time.

On the basis of attributes which have been identified, a questionnaire is prepared which is analyzed for two parameters separately i.e. satisfaction and importance. To answer each question, a 5 point scale is used for response. In case of component pertaining to satisfaction, the respondent has to respond in terms of highly satisfied, very satisfied, satisfied, not so satisfied and dissatisfied.

In case of component pertaining to satisfaction, the respondent has to give a response in terms of critical, very important, important, not so important and not at all important. Thus, the response for each question is either component of satisfied to dissatisfied and from critical to not at all important, respectively.

Data Collection and Analysis-

Exhaustive list of all the employees is obtained. A sample size of 50 is chosen to be representative of the population (nearly 10%). Sample interval is determined by dividing total no. of employee by the sample size (26.32). Every tenth individual appearing in the exhaustive list is then selected. Samples drawn are used to collect data pertaining to employees’ satisfaction as well as importance towards the 15 attributes listed.

The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important. The results are then categorized on the basis of:

  • Total Respondents.
  • Department wise.
  • Salary Wise.

For each category, the respondents are selected and then averages of satisfaction and importance are computed for each question respectively. Then the product of corresponding averages is computed to give the satisfaction index. The formula computation of satisfaction index is:

Satisfaction Index =Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi

∑i

Table 1: TOTAL STRENGTH OF THE EMPLOYEES

DEPARTMENT 
 MALEFEMALETOTAL

HR & Administration

15621
Accounts152035
Power Division201030
Sales & Marketing20030230
Service35030380
Customer Care150100250
IT & ERP201535
Total7702111231

Table 2: STRENGTH OF THE EMPLOYEES (IN PERCENTAGE)

EMPLOYEE STRENGTHMALEFEMALE
 875441
TOTAL STRENGTH1316
SAMPLE SIZE50
SAMPLE INTERVAL(1231/50) = 24.62

 

HR & Administration employees 1.70 Accounts Dept. employees 2.84 Power Division employees 2.43 Sales & Marketing employees 18.68 Service employees 30.86 Customer Care employees 20.30 IT & ERP employees 2.84

Analysis and Interpretation

  • Listing of Important Attributes
    Using the in depth interview technique, numbers of attributes were determined which affect the levels of satisfaction of employees with respect to the company.
  • Ranking as per Importance
    Ranking is done after analyzing all the attributes for the given sample that which one has more importance and which one is least important.
  • Variation in Satisfaction
    It includes three different ways:
    • Satisfaction level of the total respondents.
    • Department wise analysis of satisfaction level.
    • Salary wise analysis of satisfaction level.

TABLE 1: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.063.447.086
2Convenient Work Location1.684.487.526
3Recognition for the work done2.93.7210.79
4Friendly working environment2.763.910.76
5Opportunities for flexible working2.444.049.858
6Working in dynamic organization2.543.789.601
7Working in reputed organization2.244.069.094
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work2.003.126.24
9Work that gives a sense of achievement2.403.147.536
10Working with young people1.864.27.812
11Job security3.003.7811.34
12Opportunities for personal development2.983.7411.15
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects2.843.811.02
14Fair payment for the work done1.763.345.878
15Good Policies3.163.2410.24
sum  55.78135.931

 

Satisfaction Index =Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 135.931 = 2.436

∑i 55.78

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

Figure 1. SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES

 

ANM Consultants graph1Listing of Important Attributes

  • Working Environment
  • Convenient Work Location.
  • Recognition for the Work Done
  • Friendly Working Environment.
  • Opportunities for Flexible Working.
  • Working in a ‘Dynamic’ Organization
  • Working in a Reputed Organization.
  • Interesting & Enjoyable Work.
  • Work that gives a sense of Achievement.
  • Working with Young People.
  • Job Security.
  • Opportunities for Personal Development.
  • Opportunities for Promotion/Career Prospects.
  • Fair Payment for the Work Done.
  • Good Policies

Ranking as per Importance

After analyzing all the attributes for the given sample, it was found that Work Location is Critically important to all employees (I = 4.48) followed byworking with young people (I = 4.20) working in reputed organization (I = 4.06) and other attributes which are very important are opportunities for flexible working (I = 4.04) Friendly working environment (I = 3.90) followed by opportunities for promotion & career prospects (I = 3.80).

Working in Dynamic organization and Job Security with same is also important (I = 78) followed by opportunities for personal development (I = 74) and recognition for the work done (I = 3.72).

Attributes like working environment (I = 3.44) and fair salary are also more important followed by Good policies (I = 3.24) which are critically important. Work that gives a sense of achievement (I = 3.14) and interesting & enjoyable work (I = 3.12) are also equally important.

Variation in Satisfaction:

    • Satisfaction level of total respondents

The Satisfaction Index for the total respondents is for the total respondents – 2.436 (Table 1 and Figure 1) which indicate that the employees are relatively satisfied with the various services being catered by the company as against their importance. It can be attributed to the fact that the company caters to the various needs of the employees and it tries to provide the more important needed services like Opportunities for promotions, Fair Salary and Good Company Policies as and when needed.

    • Department wise analysis of satisfaction level

Analysis of Table 2 – 8 and a glance of Figures 2 – 8 reveal that employees of Accounts Dept. are most satisfied ( Satisfaction Index = 2.825) followed by employees of Power Division ( Satisfaction Index = 2.822) and the employees of Customer Care Dept. ( Satisfaction Index = 2.666).The Satisfaction level of HR & Adm. Dept. is also good (Satisfaction Index = 2.664) followed by Sales & Marketing Dept. (Satisfaction Index = 2.390) and Employees of Service Dept. (Satisfaction Index = 2.335) and IT & ERP Dept. (Satisfaction Index = 2.106).

TABLE 2: SATISFACTION LEVEL FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF HR & ADMIN DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment3.764.0015.04
2Convenient Work Location3.002.758.25
3Recognition for the work done2.7538.25
4Friendly working environment1.802.644.752
5Opportunities for flexible working2.001.833.66
6Working in dynamic organization1.453.254.712
7Working in reputed organization2.151.904.085
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work1.993.787.522
9Work that gives a sense of achievement3.163.2410.238
10Working with young people3.204.1213.184
11Job security2.843.8010.792
12Opportunities for personal development2.543.789.601
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects4.102.158.815
14Fair payment for the work done1.053.844.032
15Good Policies4.362.6711.641
sum  46.75124.574

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

∑SXi = 124.574 = 2.664

∑i 46.75

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 2: SATISFACTION INDEX-HR & ADMINISTRATION
ANM Consultants graph14

TABLE 3: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.403.007.20
2Convenient Work Location1.192.502.975
3Recognition for the work done3.691.003.69
4Friendly working environment2.904.2012.18
5Opportunities for flexible working3.334.1513.819
6Working in dynamic organization1.501.972.955
7Working in reputed organization4.452.8712.771
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work3.234.0212.984
9Work that gives a sense of achievement2.591.764.558
10Working with young people1.483.795.609
11Job security4.393.5715.672
12Opportunities for personal development3.504.1914.665
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects2.254.6910.552
14Fair payment for the work done2.053.306.765
15Good Policies3.102.908.99
sum  47.91135.385

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 135.385 = 2.825

∑i 47.91

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 3: SATISFACTION INDEX -ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT
ANM Consultants graph3

TABLE 4: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF POWER DIVISION

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment3.584.2515.21
2Convenient Work Location1.502.353.52
3Recognition for the work done3.201.595.08
4Friendly working environment1.391.381.91
5Opportunities for flexible working2.464.039.91
6Working in dynamic organization4.623.2715.10
7Working in reputed organization3.001.283.84
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work1.383.815.25
9Work that gives a sense of achievement2.854.1911.94
10Working with young people1.112.592.87
11Job security3.671.987.26
12Opportunities for personal development1.293.083.97
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects2.871.785.10
14Fair payment for the work done3.404.4515.13
15Good Policies4.254.7820.31
sum  44.81126.47

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 126.4736 = 2.8224

∑i 44.81

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 4: SATISFACTION INDEX -POWER DIVISION
ANM Consultants graph4

TABLE 5: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF SALES & MARKETING DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment1.7693.4236.05
2Convenient Work Location2.7693.5779.90
3Recognition for the work done2.9233.61510.56
4Friendly working environment3.0003.80811.42
5Opportunities for flexible working2.4233.5778.66
6Working in dynamic organization1.9624.2318.30
7Working in reputed organization2.3082.8856.65
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work2.3464.0779.56
9Work that gives a sense of achievement3.1153.0779.58
10Working with young people2.4623.9629.75
11Job security1.7313.4625.99
12Opportunities for personal development2.0003.4236.84
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects2.6153.92310.25
14Fair payment for the work done1.9233.8857.47
15Good Policies2.5773.6159.31
sum  54.54130.35

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 130.359 = 2.390

∑i 54.54

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 5: SATISFACTION INDEX – SALES & MARKETING DEPARTMENT
ANM Consultants graph5

TABLE 6: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF SERVICE DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.253.417.68
2Convenient Work Location1.664.587.63
3Recognition for the work done3.164.0812.93
4Friendly working environment2.834.1611.81
5Opportunities for flexible working2.54.3310.83
6Working in dynamic organization2.54.0010.00
7Working in reputed organization2.164.169.02
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work1.833.336.11
9Work that gives a sense of achievement2.53.087.70
10Working with young people2.333.257.58
11Job security2.414.2510.27
12Opportunities for personal development2.164.419.56
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects1.414.165.90
14Fair payment for the work done2.254.169.37
15Good Policies3.084.0012.33
sum  59.41138.7

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 138.774 = 2.335

∑i 59.417

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 6: SATISFACTION INDEX – SERVICE DEPARTMENT
ANM Consultants graph6

TABLE 7: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF CUSTOMER CARE DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment1.753.756.56
2Convenient Work Location1.754.758.31
3Recognition for the work done3.003.5010.50
4Friendly working environment2.754.5012.38
5Opportunities for flexible working2.754.2511.69
6Working in dynamic organization1.53.55.25
7Working in reputed organization2.53.759.37
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work3.253.7512.19
9Work that gives a sense of achievement4.754.0019.00
10Working with young people2.54.511.25
11Job security3.003.009.00
12Opportunities for personal development1.853.205.92
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects1.53.55.25
14Fair payment for the work done4.03.9015.60
15Good Policies3.04.012.0
sum  57.85154.28

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 154.281 = 2.666

∑i 57.85

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 7: SATISFACTION INDEX – CUSTOMER CARE DEPARTMENT
ANM Consultants graph7

TABLE 8: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF IT & ERP DEPARTMENT

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.003.376.75
2Convenient Work Location1.254.55.62
3Recognition for the work done2.8753.7510.78
4Friendly working environment2.53.7510.78
5Opportunities for flexible working2.53.757.50
6Working in dynamic organization2.123.757.96
7Working in reputed organization1.53.375.06
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work2.753.629.96
9Work that gives a sense of achievement1.754.257.43
10Working with young people3.003.009.00
11Job security2.373.257.719
12Opportunities for personal development2.123.878.23
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects1.873.877.26
14Fair payment for the work done2.123.507.43
15Good Policies1.753.876.78
sum  55.5116.90

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 116.906 = 2.106

∑i 55.5

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 8: SATISFACTION INDEX – IT & ERP DEPARTMENT
ANM Consultants graph8

TABLE 9: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP A ( less than equal to 75,000 p.a)

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.073.467.17
2Convenient Work Location1.644.467.33
3Recognition for the work done3.173.1711.81
4Friendly working environment1.822.103.92
5Opportunities for flexible working2.073.006.21
6Working in dynamic organization2.751.784.91
7Working in reputed organization2.222.004.45
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work2.713.509.50
9Work that gives a sense of achievement1.852.153.99
10Working with young people1.713.215.51
11Job security3.033.3510.19
12Opportunities for personal development1.631.782.92
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects3.534.2815.16
14Fair payment for the work done2.644.0010.57
15Good Policies2.773.9611.01
sum  46.25114.67

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 114.679 = 2.479

∑i 46.271

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 9: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP A (less than equal to 75,000 p.a)
ANM Consultants graph9

TABLE 10: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP B ( 75,000 – 5,00,000 p.a)

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.103.417.18
2Convenient Work Location1.864.488.34
3Recognition for the work done2.933.5810.51
4Friendly working environment2.653.8610.25
5Opportunities for flexible working2.344.039.46
6Working in dynamic organization2.173.176.88
7Working in reputed organization2.583.067.93
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work3.503.0010.50
9Work that gives a sense of achievement1.752.496.89
10Working with young people3.593.197.93
11Job security3.404.1214.01
12Opportunities for personal development2.723.9610.80
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects2.443.518.60
14Fair payment for the work done2.313.558.20
15Good Policies3.993.8915.55
sum  53.35143.09

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 143.092 = 2.682

∑i 53.351

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

FIGURE 10:SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP B (75,000 – 5,00,000 p.a)
ANM Consultants graph10

TABLE 11:SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP C ( more than 5,00,000 p.a)

S.NoQuestionsAverage Satisfaction (S)Average Importance(i)Sxi
1Working Environment2.003.416.82
2Convenient Work Location1.354.476.04
3Recognition for the work done2.943.9411.59
4Friendly working environment2.883.8211.02
5Opportunities for flexible working2.524.0010.12
6Working in dynamic organization1.883.005.64
7Working in reputed organization1.473.945.79
8Interesting and Enjoyable Work2.113.006.35
9Work that gives a sense of achievement2.823.239.13
10Working with young people3.113.7011.55
11Job security3.993.5214.10
12Opportunities for personal development1.523.234.94
13Opportunities for Promotion/career Prospects3.724.1015.28
14Fair payment for the work done4.004.3517.40
15Good Policies3.994.0015.99
sum  55.74151.82

Satisfaction Index = Sum of Average Satisfaction(S) x Average importance (i)

Sum of Average Importance (i)

= ∑SXi = 151.823 = 2.723

∑i 55.744

Note: The satisfaction scale ranges from a score of 5 for ‘Highly Satisfied’ to a score of 1 for ‘Dissatisfied’. ‘Importance’ scale ranges from a score of 5 for critically important to a score of 1 for not at all important.

ANM Consultants graph11
FIGURE 11: SATISFACTION INDEX FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF INCOME GROUP C (more than 5,00,000 p.a)
    • Salary wise analysis of Satisfaction Level

Tables and Figures 9 – 11 indicates that employees pertaining to Category ‘C’ (income group (more than 5, 00,000) are the most satisfied (Satisfaction Index = 2.72) followed by the employees of category ‘B’ (income group 75,000 – 5, 00,000; Satisfaction Index = 2.68) and the employees of category ‘A’ (income group less than 75,000; Satisfaction Index = 2.47) are least satisfied.

CONCLUSIONS:

Research shows that satisfied, motivated employees will create higher customer satisfaction and in turn positively influence organizational performance. Convenient work location, working with young people, opportunities for promotion and career prospects, fair salary, good policies, job security and dynamic working environment are few attributes which are critically important from the view point of most of the employees.

Employees have an overall satisfaction index of 2.43 which indicates that the employees are relatively satisfied with their Job.

It is imperative from the analysis that employees of Accounts Department are almost as satisfied as Power Division, Customer Care, Human Resources & Administration, Service Department, however IT & ERP Department are more dissatisfied.

Employees falling in ‘C’ category of the income group (Rs.5, 00,000 and more p.a.) are the most satisfied than the other categories of income. Therefore, a comprehensive Employee Satisfaction process can be a key to a more motivated and loyal workforce leading to increased customer satisfaction and overall profitability for the organization.

REFERENCES
  • Adhia Hasmukh (2007), Reinventing Government through HRM Strategies, ICFAI University Press, pp. 1-10
  • Bell Paul A, Greene, Fisher & Baum (2005), Environmental Psychology, 5, illustrated, Routledge, pp. 446
  • Caroll Bonnie & Blumen Mary W. (1973), Job satisfaction: a review of the literature, Issue 3 of Key issues series, New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, pp. 1-15
  • Cranny, Smith & Stone, (1992) cited in Weiss, H. M. (2002), Deconstructing job satisfaction: separating evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 12, pp.173-194
  • Fields Dail L. (2002), Taking the measure of work: a guide to validated scales for organizational research and diagnosis, SAGE Publication, pp.23
  • Griffin W Ricky (2006), Management, 9th Ed. Illustrated, Cengage Learning, pp.414
  • Hoppock Robert (1935), Job satisfaction, Publication of the National Occupational Conference, Harper; the University of California, pp. 127
  • Jaggi, Bikki (1977). ‘Job satisfaction and leadership styles in developing countries: the case of India’, International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, pp. 230-235
  • Kinicki Angelo & Kreitner Robert (2009), Organizational Behavior- Key Concepts, skills & Tata McGraw-Hill, pp. 162-163
  • Locke (1976), cited in Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2001). Organizational behavior: affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279-307, p. 282
  • Luthans Fred (1992), Organizational behavior, 6th Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1992, pp.122
  • McShane Steven L, Glinow & Sharma (2008), Organizational Behavior, Tata McGrawhill, 3rd Edition, pp.133-135
  • Sapru R.K. (2008), Administrative Theories and Management Thought, 2nd Ed. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd., pp. 223
  • Shayo Conrad & Igbaria Magid (2004), Strategies for managing IS/IT personnel, illustrated Ed. Idea Group Inc (IGI), pp. 25-26
  • Spector Paul E (1997), Job satisfaction: application, assessment, cause, and consequences, Volume-3 of advanced topics in organizational behavior, illustrated, SAGE Publication, pp. 46
  • Weiss, H. M. (2002), Deconstructing job satisfaction: separating evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 173-194, p. 174
  • Wiedmer Stacey M (2010), An Examination of Factors Affecting Employee Satisfaction, Department of Psychology, Missouri Western State University, http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/
  • Wolfbein Seymour L. (1974) Temple University, School of Business Administration, Journal of Economics and Business, The University of Virginia, Volumes 27-28, North Holland, pp. 48-52

Authors:

  • Nishant Saxena (HR Consultant)
  • Dr. J. H. Vyas (Professor)