Background
Significance of job satisfaction
Prior research
Author(s) | Job Satisfaction Instrument | Number of Items | Number of Response options (Anchors used) | Job Satisfaction Domains | Sample Size and Setting | Analyses Used | Significant Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Parsons and associates (2003) [3] | Modified from Herzberg (1966) | 35 | 5 (strongly disagree – strongly agree) | Personal opportunity Supervision | 550 NAs in 70 facilities in Louisiana | Ordinary Least Squares Regression | Most dissatisfied with pay, benefits, and recognition |
Benefits | |||||||
Coworker support | |||||||
Social rewards | |||||||
Task rewards | |||||||
Moyle and associates (2003) [39] | N/A | N/A | N/A | Workplace flexibility | 27 RNs and NAs in one facility in Australia | Content analysis of focus group data | Satisfaction was linked to workplace flexibility, residents, team environment, and better resident care |
Team environment | |||||||
Optimal resident care | |||||||
Chou, Boldy, & Lee (2002a, b) [7, 19] | Measure of Job Satisfaction (MJS) | 22 | 5 (very dissatisfied – very satisfied) | Professional support | Seventy facilities with 610 nursing home staff and 373 hostel care staff in Australia | Structural Equation Modeling | Job satisfaction is associated with professional support |
Personal satisfaction Workload | |||||||
Training | |||||||
Team spirit/co-workers | |||||||
Will and Simmons (1999) [33] | Job Descriptive Index (JDI) | NG | NG | Work on present job | 423 NAs in 29 nursing homes in Ohio | Means | Satisfied most with work and least with pay |
Pay | |||||||
Opportunities for promotion | |||||||
Supervision | |||||||
Co-workers | |||||||
Job in general | |||||||
Atchison (1998) [20] | Job Diagnostic Survey | 14 | 5 (extremely dissatisfied – extremely satisfied) | Satisfaction | 283 NAs in 24 nursing homes | Chi square | Job satisfaction lowest for security, growth/development, socialization, and challenges |
Job security | |||||||
Coworkers | |||||||
Sense of accomplishment | |||||||
Helping other people | |||||||
Dissatisfaction | |||||||
Pay/benefits | |||||||
Potential for job growth | |||||||
Management | |||||||
Autonomy | |||||||
Kiyak, Namazi, & Kahana (1997) [27] | Job Descriptive Index (JDI) | NG | NG | Work on present job | 308 nursing home and community agency staff | Ordinary Least Squares Regression | Higher dissatisfaction associated with turnover |
Pay | |||||||
Opportunities for promotion | |||||||
Supervision | |||||||
Co-workers | |||||||
Job in general | |||||||
Gillies, Foreman, & Pettengill (1996) [22] | Index of Work Satisfaction (IWS) | 44 | 7 (not given) | Autonomy | 44 nurse directors and nurse educators working in long-term care facilities | Repeated Measures ANOVA | Job satisfaction highest for interactions, autonomy, and professional status |
Interaction | |||||||
Agency policies | |||||||
Pay | |||||||
Professional status | |||||||
Task requirement | |||||||
Grieshaber, Parker, & Deering (1995) [1] | Work environment | Two nursing homes | |||||
Job content | |||||||
Irvine & Evans (1995)+ [40] | N/A | N/A | N/A | Routinization | Meta-analyses with combined sample size of 5,352 | Meta-analyses | Work content and work environment are more strongly associated with job satisfaction than economic variables |
Autonomy | |||||||
Feedback | |||||||
Role conflict | |||||||
Role ambiguity | |||||||
Work overload | |||||||
Coward and associates (1995) [29] | Modified Stamps and Piedmonte (1986) scale [IWS] | 18 | 5 (strongly disagree – strongly agree) | Professional status | 281 RNs and LPNs from 26 nursing homes | Multivariate regression analysis | Five factors associated with job satisfaction (race, income, supervisor, initial intent to stay, current intent to leave) |
Task requirement | |||||||
Autonomy | |||||||
Interactions with other nurses | |||||||
Pay | |||||||
Monahan & Carthy (1992) [41] | N/A | N/A | N/A | Attachment | 75 NAs at 7 nursing homes | Content analysis | Attachment most related to retention of NAs |
Gratification | |||||||
Demands | |||||||
Monetary needs | |||||||
Decision-making | |||||||
Grau and associates (1991) [42] | Combined several scales | 44 | 5 different scales | Job process | 219 NAs in one nursing home | Hierarchical regression analysis | Social atmosphere and job benefits associated with institutional loyalty |
Attitudes toward administration | |||||||
Social atmosphere | |||||||
Job benefits | |||||||
Job tasks | |||||||
Anderson, Aird, & Haslam (1991) [43] | NG | 12 | 5 (strongly disagree – strongly agree) | None | 212 nursing staff in 6 nursing homes | Means | Nursing staff have high levels of satisfaction, but is associated with absenteeism |
Humphris & Turner (1989) [44] | Porter (1962) scale | 13 | 6 (extremely satisfied – extremely unsatisfied) | Working conditions | 84 nurses at a unit for the elderly severely mentally infirm | Chi square | Low satisfaction was associated with turnover from unit |
Emotional climate | |||||||
General | |||||||
Mullins and associates (1988) [45] | Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) | 36 | NG | Pay | Heads of departments (n = 439) from 46 nursing homes | Regression analyses | Most satisfied when individual efforts are rewarded |
Promotion | |||||||
Supervision | |||||||
Benefits | |||||||
Rewards/appreciation | |||||||
Working conditions | |||||||
Coworkers | |||||||
Nature of job | |||||||
Communication | |||||||
Deckard, Hicks & Rountree (1986) [46] | Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) | NG | NG | Skill variety | 340 nurses from a nursing home chain | Means | Job satisfaction was similar to norms in other occupations |
Task identity | |||||||
Task significance | |||||||
Autonomy | |||||||
Job feedback | |||||||
Waxman and associates (1984) [47] | Minnesota Satisfaction Scale | 20 | 5 (very dissatisfied – very satisfied) | Job Satisfaction Scale | 234 NAs in 7 facilities, uses 20 questions for overall job satisfaction score | Kendal's Rank Order Correlation | Positive association between job satisfaction and turnover |
Bergman et al. (1984) [2] | None | 19 | 4 (none – very much) | Job | 12 long-term care facilities and 432 RNs, LPNs, and NAs | ANOVA | Descriptive results provided |
Knowledge, skill, and attitudes | |||||||
Autonomy | |||||||
Stress |
Methods
Overview
Job satisfaction scale
Wave 1 | Wave 2 | Wave 3 | Wave 4 | Wave 5 | Unique Individuals | |
(n = 124) | (n = 106) | (n = 115) | (n = 113) | (n = 115) | n = 251 | |
Age (mean; [sd]) | 41.6 [10.7] | 40.9 [11.2] | 42.2 [11.3] | 41.5 [10.9] | 40.6 [11.9] | 38.8 [11.8] |
Gender (% Male) | 8.1 | 5.7 | 8.7 | 7.1 | 7.0 | 10.4 |
Race (% African American) | 39.5 | 41.5 | 44.4 | 44.3 | 47.0 | 47.0 |
Marital status (% Married) | 38.7 | 41.5 | 44.4 | 43.4 | 40 | 37.1 |
Job category (% Nurse Aides) | 59.7 | 64.2 | 60.0 | 59.3 | 61.7 | 61.4 |
Fulltime (%) | 85.5 | 84.0 | 82.6 | 71.7 | 68.7 | 75.7 |
Tenure: | ||||||
Less then 1 year | 33.1 | 34.0 | 26.1 | 31.0 | 36.5 | 52.2 |
1 to 5 years | 29.8 | 37.7 | 43.5 | 42.5 | 37.4 | 24.3 |
Over 5 years | 37.1 | 28.3 | 30.4 | 26.6 | 26.1 | 23.5 |
Perceived High Quality | 54.0 | 43.4 | 57.4 | 52.2 | 60.0 | 55.8 |
Factor Loadings | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Items (Original JDI domain) | Item Mean (SD)^
| Rank+
| Pay (Positive) | Management (Negative) | Work (Positive) |
Positively Worded Items: | |||||
After a day's work, I really feel like I have accomplished something (w) | 5.39 (1.58) | 1 | 0.54 | ||
Working for this Facility is like being part of a family (w) | 4.13 (1.96) | 6 | 0.58 | ||
I am paid fairly for the work I do (c) | 3.31 (2.01) | 11 | 0.70 | ||
Salary and wage increases are given to those who do a good job (c) | 2.80 (1.91) | 13 | 0.52 | ||
My pay is better than that for similar jobs in other nursing homes (c) | 3.15 (1.83) | 12 | 0.63 | ||
My chances for getting ahead in this facility are good (p) | 3.85 (1.90) | 7 | 0.44 | ||
The people I work with are stimulating (cw) | 4.25 (1.63) | 5 | 0.48 | ||
Negatively Worded Items: | |||||
I just hate to get up in the morning to go to work (w) | 3.49 (1.90) | 3 | -0.31 | ||
I am in a "dead end" job (p) | 3.60 (1.98) | 4 | -0.40 | ||
My opportunities for getting promoted in this facility are somewhat limited (p) | 4.50 (1.87) | 9 | 0.33 | ||
The people I work with are unpleasant (cw) | 3.30 (1.90) | 2 | -0.39 | ||
Management is quick to criticize poor performance (m) | 4.63 (2.01) | 10 | 0.65 | ||
Management is hard to please (m) | 4.35 (1.89) | 8 | 0.67 |
Independent variables
Analytic approach
Results
Pay (+) | Management (-) | Work (+) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coef. | Std. Err. | P > |Z| | Coef. | Std. Err. | P > |Z| | Coef. | Std. Err. | P > |Z| | |
Age
| 0.010 | <0.001 | <0.001 | -0.010 | <0.001 | 0.060 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.360 |
Gender (Male)
| -0.030 | 0.120 | 0.830 | -0.040 | 0.120 | 0.720 | -0.250 | 0.110 | 0.030 |
Race (African American)
| 0.070 | 0.060 | 0.300 | 0.010 | 0.070 | 0.840 | 0.190 | 0.060 | <0.001 |
Marital status (Married)
| -0.160 | 0.070 | 0.020 | 0.010 | 0.070 | 0.840 | -0.140 | 0.060 | 0.040 |
Job category (Nurse Aide)
| -0.110 | 0.070 | 0.090 | 0.030 | 0.070 | 0.710 | 0.250 | 0.060 | <0.001 |
Employment (Full-time)
| -0.270 | 0.080 | <0.001 | 0.040 | 0.080 | 0.580 | 0.190 | 0.070 | 0.010 |
Tenurea | |||||||||
1 to 5 years
| -0.320 | 0.080 | <0.001 | 0.200 | 0.080 | 0.010 | -0.140 | 0.070 | 0.050 |
> 5 years
| -0.240 | 0.090 | <0.001 | 0.290 | 0.090 | <0.001 | -0.120 | 0.080 | 0.150 |
Perceived High Quality
| 0.420 | 0.060 | <0.001 | -0.210 | 0.070 | <0.001 | 0.590 | 0.060 | <0.001 |