Motivation and Job Satisfaction

Management DecisionMotivation and job satisfaction Mark A. Tietjen Robert M. Myers Article information: To cite this document: Mark A. Tietjen Robert M. Myers, (1998),"Motivation and job satisfaction", Management Decision, Vol. 36 Iss 4 pp. 226 - 231 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251749810211027 Downloaded on: 20 March 2015, At: 18:25 (PT) References: this document contains references to 11 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 66075 times since 2006* Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Robert E. Ankli, Ralph Palliam, (2012),"Enabling a motivated workforce: exploring the sources of motivation", Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp. 7-10 Carolyn Stringer, Jeni Didham, Paul Theivananthampillai, (2011),"Motivation, pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction of front-line employees", Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 161-179 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/11766091111137564 Daulatram B. Lund, (2003),"Organizational culture and job satisfaction", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp. 219-236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/0885862031047313 Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 149884 [] For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download. However. or their attitudes. (1959) proposed that an employee’s motivation to work is best understood when the respective attitude of that employee is understood. Florida. Tietjen and Robert M. the internal concept of attitude which originates from a state of mind. By understanding these theories. Herzberg claimed. The other grouping was primarily present when feelings of unhappiness or bad attitude were evident. • job security. Employees will most likely not take any more pride in their work even if they win the weekend getaway for having the highest sales. Each interview was semistructured in nature so that a list of questions was the basis of the survey. In response to the “fragmentary nature” of previous scholarship. The first group he called motivators (job factors): • recognition. the importance of attitude as a starting point of the dualfactor theory of Herzberg. Satisfaction creates confidence. the idiographic view was based on the premise that the F-A-E complex should be studied within individuals. the final question. • factors in personal life. were not directly related to the job itself. is not the simple result of an incentive program. • possibility of growth. this goal has been reached through incentive programs. which do not pertain to the worker’s actual job. and other types of conditional administrative policy. Herzberg et al. That is. though results were quantified at a later point. Motivators refer to factors intrinsic within the work itself like the recognition of a task completed. Myers Palm Beach Atlantic College. This is followed by a brief examination of Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey’s theory on leadership within management and how this art is changing through time. Contrary to the statistical or nomothetic approach which places more emphasis on a group’s interaction with a particular variable. He preferred such an approach over the ranking of pre-written (and assumed) factors compiled and limited by the experimenter. but to the conditions that surrounded doing that job. This paper reviews the literature of motivational theorists and draws from their approaches to job satisfaction and the role of motivation within job satisfaction. is job satisfaction actualized? The instilling of satisfaction within workers is a crucial task of management. were task-related. (1959) developed two distinct lists of factors. but the interviewer was free to pursue other manners of inquiry. • status. West Palm Beach. The purpose of this discussion on attitude was to summarize in short. Herzberg et al. • company policy and administration. 1959). USA The movement of workers to act in a desired manner has always consumed the thoughts of managers. Conversely. 1959). corporate pep talks. as the workers adjust their behaviour in response to one of the aforementioned stimuli. • advancement. should reveal the most pragmatic information for managers with regard to the motivation of workers. • achievement. Motivation and hygiene factors As a result of his inquiry about the attitudes of employees. managers can focus on strategies of creating job satisfaction. In many ways. loyalty and ultimately improved quality in the output of the employed. for Herzberg. The second group Herzberg named hygiene factors (extra-job factors): • salary. • responsibility. Satisfaction. • supervision – technical. Herzberg described his new approach as idiographic (Herzberg et al. which would demonstrate the relationship between attitude and subsequent behavior. . The design of Herzberg’s experimentation was to ask open-ended questions specifically about a worker’s experiences when feelings about his/her job were more positive or negative than usual (Herzberg et al. and these factors. • interpersonal relations – subordinates. • work itself. The method Herzberg used placed emphasis of the qualitative investigation of the F-AE complex over a quantitative assessment of the information. hygienes tend to include extrinsic entities such as relations with co-workers. Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 © MCB University Press [ISSN 0025-1747] [ 226 ] Herzberg and job satisfaction Concept of attitude Herzberg et al. The theories of Frederick Herzberg and Edwin Locke are presented chronologically to show how Locke’s theory was a response to Herzberg’s theory. was particularly important. and these factors. • interpersonal relations – peers.. on the whole. In his approach to studying the feelings of people toward their work. (1959) set out to answer three questions: 1 How can one specify the attitude of any individual toward his or her job? 2 What causes these attitudes? 3 What are the consequences of these attitudes? The order of these questions is empirically methodical and. though. when probed. • working conditions. • interpersonal relations – supervisor. and briefly show his approach to experimentation and research.Motivation and job satisfaction Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Mark A.. One set of factors caused happy feelings or a good attitude within the worker. the combination of the three questions resulted in a single unit of study – the factors-attitudes-effects (F-A-E) complex. Herzberg (1968) concludes that only these factors can have a lasting impression on a worker’s attitude. which states that physical needs (like those of animals) work in conjunction with hygiene factors. Recalling motivator factors. rather. it is probable that most managers will deal less and less with workers utilizing negative physical KITA. workers will be greatly dissatisfied. If motivation includes only those things which promote action over time. if the air-conditioner works throughout the day as expected. If the air conditioner breaks in the middle of a hot summer day. and psychological needs or growth needs (unique to humans) work alongside motivators (Locke. their absence does not provoke a high level of satisfaction. and finally an adjusted view of job satisfaction. as a power trip. • positive KITA. In the same way. also known Locke’s assessment of Herzberg’s two-factor theory can be summarized in brief by the following conclusions about Herzberg’s thinking: 1 Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction result from different causes. then you will receive this bonus. There are three different types of KITA: • negative physical KITA. the opposite of job dissatisfaction is not satisfaction. Tietjen and Robert M. The presence of these motivators has the potential to create great job satisfaction. the following is a list of Locke’s criticisms: • mind-body dichotomy. motivators cause positive job attitudes because they satisfy the worker’s need for self-actualization (Maslow. Furthermore. When the worker receives the bonus on completion of the task. [ 227 ] . 1976). the worker was simply moved temporarily to act. but rather a simple lack of satisfaction. satisfaction and. Locke’s criticism of Herzberg will be the initial discussion. Myers Motivation and job satisfaction Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 The relationship of satisfaction and dissatisfaction The most significant and basic difference between Herzberg’s two factors is the inherent level of satisfaction/dissatisfaction within each factor. but rather “no dissatisfaction”. movement in KITA Integral to Herzberg’s theory of motivation is the difference between motivation and movement. his explanation of job satisfaction is in part. work. Criticisms of Herzberg Motivation vs. • negative psychological KITA. How does Herzberg base this non-bipolar relationship? Job satisfaction (House and Wigdor. workers perform best (Steininger. However. Herzberg says. Though many managers give incentives to motivate. instead they consist of two separate and distinct continua. the primary benefit. 1994) when this stimulation is internal and workrelated. thus. For example. Likewise. no extended effects once the bonus is received. the individual’s ultimate goal. What about positive KITA? Positive KITA can be summarized in one word – reward. 1954). According to Herzberg et al. however. • unidirectional operation of needs. followed by his theory on values. There are. Thus. If you finish this task in one week. or physical contact to initiate action out of an indolent employee. then… ”. is the individual any more motivated to work harder now? Was there a lasting effect because of the conditional bonus? No. Likewise. He compares the two in his discussion of KITA (Herzberg.Mark A. 1967) contains two separate and independent dimensions. (1959). These dimensions are not on differing ends of one continuum. In today’s litigious society. With these propositions as the basis for Locke’s understanding of Herzberg. consider the hygiene factor. Negative psychological KITA is also rather useless in motivating workers. is the feeding of one’s ego. work conditions. Herzberg says that positive KITA is not motivational. 2 The two-factor theory is parallel to the dual theory of man’s needs. Locke’s theory on job satisfaction Locke’s composite theory of job satisfaction is the product of many other concepts which he has developed through study and research on related topics such as goalsetting and employee performance. in the absence of motivators. though malicious. however. The relationship is “if…. Positive KITA. 1968) – the polite acronym for a “kick in the —— ”. the opposite of job satisfaction is not dissatisfaction. moves or stimulates movement. have the potential to cause great dissatisfaction. Similarly. the workers will not be particularly satisfied by taking notice and being grateful. agent/event factors. According to Herzberg (1968). then motivators are the factors that promote long-running attitudes and satisfaction. dissatisfaction does not occur. a response to some of Herzberg’s proposals. hygiene factors. which simply “move” (cause temporary action). while blaming others such as supervisors. Herzberg et al. With regard to finding satisfaction in one’s job. The correlation lacks a clear line of distinction. 1976). Herzberg’s use of frequency data placed emphasis on the number of times a particular factor was mentioned. The third criticism which pertains directly to the previous two. furthermore. needs) Locke defers to Rand’s (1964) definition of value as “that which one acts to gain and/or keep”. hunger. Distinguishing values from needs. and even policy. The two are of dual nature and function apart. so too are physical and psychological needs (Locke. A new company policy (hygiene) may have a significant effect on a worker’s interest in the work itself or his/her success with it. Locke notes there is no justification for this conclusion. Locke’s critique of Herzberg’s classification system (Locke.Mark A. and the intensity attribute. On the contrary. 1976) of the two is found in Table I. this does not necessarily imply that this factor is a significant problem or even irritates a worker as much as an infrequent problem which causes a greater level of dissatisfaction. Concurrent with the previous criticism. the situation takes the label of supervision-technical. A comparison (Locke. The content attribute answers the question of what is valued. Therefore. 1976). Locke suggests the measurement of intensity rather than frequency (Locke. experienced similar difficulties. physical and psychological needs. the distinction between a need and value must be discerned. the study deprives them of that which makes them distinct from others. in itself. since individuals have unique values and do not place the same importance on money or promotion. as the scope of 203 accountants and engineers was narrow. • denial of individual differences. how much is valued. Locke’s concept of values (vs. It is through the mind that the human discovers the nature of his/her physical and psychological needs and how they may be satisfied. For instance. For example. the employee who . is simply the lack of a parallel relationship between the two groupings of factors and needs (Locke. The twofactor theory merely splits the spectra of satisfaction into two sections. claims that the twofactor theory is. is only reached through the use of the mind. as evidenced in his response to Herzberg’s theory. Herzberg’s view of man’s nature implies a split between the psychological and biological processes of the human make-up. have the most significant impact on emotional response to one’s job. if an employee is given a new task (which is deemed a motivator) this is considered responsibility. Locke proposes that the mind and body are very closely related. he writes that acts like eating can serve not only as aversions of hunger pangs. 1976) is a further criticism of Herzberg’s work. • the use of frequency data. From this definition. subordinates. Locke (1970) contends that they have more in common with goals. The phenomenon of defensiveness (Locke. for example. though unique. for example. However. Locke (1976) concedes that though an individual’s needs may be similar. Both values and goals have content and intensity characteristics. Tietjen and Robert M. Values. Their relation is hazy and overlapping in several instances. Even though. Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) According to Locke’s (1976) first critique. However. • defensiveness. Locke suggests the proof that the basic need for survival. Values are of crucial importance in Locke’s theory of job satisfaction. the denial of individual differences pertains to the incorrect minimization of diversity within the sample. it can be inferred that the first set are unidirectional. Locke does not feel that Herzberg addressed this fallacy sufficiently for the importance it has in assessing validity of his results. Myers Motivation and job satisfaction Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 • lack of parallel between man’s needs and the motivation and hygiene factors • incident classification system. Locke states that the breakup of one element (like responsibility) into two different types of factors results from the confusion between the event and the agent. inconsistent in categorizing factors of satisfaction. a dissatisfying factor is recorded numerously. if a manager will not delegate the duty. 1976). Providing the example of the physical need. common to the preceding criticism. for dissatisfying situations. (1959) concludes that those most listed are the most satisfying or dissatisfying. it is likely that many workers. With regard to Herzberg’s correlation between hygienes. whereby the employees interviewed [ 228 ] tend to take credit for the satisfying events such as advancement or recognition. motivators. not related to one another. 1976). but also as pleasures for the body. his or her values are not. peers. a biological need. an employee could mention a time when he or she succeeded or failed and rank its level of intensity. Tietjen and Robert M. The closer the expected is to the outcome. An agent refers to that which causes an event to occur (Locke. Life-cycle theory To this point. reevaluating that role in the 1990s. in Herzberg’s terms. Agents. Whereas some attitudes were clearly better than others. 1976. selling. the event categories include both positive and negative possibilities for satisfaction. In reassessing their joint discovery of the life-cycle theory. 1976) which results from the appraisal of one’s job experiences. Maslow. or condition. 1976). 1976). Events. An adjusted view of job satisfaction/ dissatisfaction Defined as a positive emotional state (Locke. Blanchard and Hersey’s clarification of leadership style provides a stepping stone for all managers dealing with a new and diverse [ 229 ] . Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Table I Comparison of needs and values Needs Values Needs are innate.Mark A. the employee will be satisfied. are motivators. For example (Maslow. becomes a function of the perceived discrepancy between intended and actual performance. a posteriori Needs are the same for all humans (Locke. conversely. 1976). In drawing attention to the two-faceted focus of managers – that is task and relationships – the life-cycle theory was very effective in explaining what was referred to as the “superior/subordinate” relationship. or the degree to which one’s performance is discrepant with one’s set of values. are comparable to hygiene factors.. and delegating. 1976) Values are subjective: they are acquired through conscious and sub-conscious means Needs confront man and require action Values ultimately determine choice and emotional reaction Agent/event factors An event. this particular attitude can be expressed through numerous different leadership styles depending on the manager. therefore. 1975). and the greater the achievement of one’s values. the following section presents Locke’s conceptualization of values in contrast to needs. The theory helped managers to see how they should adjust according to the level of maturity within each worker. they have assigned descriptors to quadrants of high and low task and relationship behaviors. the higher the yield of satisfaction (Locke. a priori Values are acquired. since their important 1969 article “The life-cycle theory of leadership” (Maslow. They are discussed in Table II (Locke. 1954). Blanchard and Hersey renamed the theory of leadership “Situational Leadership”. Since the original theory was posed. all managers should have the attitude that both production and people are very important. 1976). for instance. It also portrayed the dynamics of high and low propensities of task and relationship-oriented managers when mixed with differing circumstances as well as diverse groups of employees. 1962) Needs are objective: they exist apart from knowledge of them Values are unique to the individual (Locke. The four quadrants are telling. the role of the leader played by each manager directly influences in what manner the employee will be motivated and find satisfaction. and each inherently displays the respective balance a manager uses in his or her balance of task and relationship behavior. As long as the aforementioned agents can be viewed as facilitators in the attainment of the worker’s goals and the acknowledgment of the worker’s values. However. Whereas Herzberg’s factors limit the chance of equal outcomes for positive and negative results. is that which causes an employee to feel satisfaction (Locke. satisfaction (Locke et al. Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey have revisited the role of the manager as leader. As values are a point at which Locke’s theory of job satisfaction begins to separate from the theory of Herzberg. focus has been placed on the factors that influence employees to be either motivated or merely moved. Additionally. then. The role of leadership in motivation The life-cycle theory was developed to illustrate the important relationship between task and relationship-oriented dimensions of management. no one leadership style is best. which then causes a feeling of satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Though Locke’s discussion continues into more technical areas. Conditions such as success/failure or responsibility motivate workers and have the potential to evoke satisfaction or dissatisfaction. participating. so too are agent and event factors a source of divergence between the two theorists. the customer or supervisor. Implied in the newer title was an emphasis on “task behavior” and “relationship behavior” rather than attitude. Myers Motivation and job satisfaction Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 performs adequately on the job is the individual who decides to pursue his or her values. However. causes an event. 1954). The clarification of factors which motivate versus the means through which the motivation occurs leads to an adjusted view of job satisfaction/dissatisfaction. satisfied or dissatisfied. Therefore. or worker was criticized. the situational theory of leadership serves to aid management in its balance of task and relationship. thanked. Indeed. did not receive special assignment 7. Task activity – employee can enjoy or not enjoy work 1. or worldview. Physical working conditions pleasant/unpleasant – temperature. – worker was promoted. or the atmosphere was unpleasant where people got along poorly 10. buyers Nonhuman Agent – nature. they do not act alone. In seeking to create specific boundaries and clarification of his categories. hours of work were pleasant and manageable. What Herzberg offers in his distinguishing between motivation and movement is applicable for all management. weather. or not promoted. 1996) exhort that “leadership is done with people. Amount of work – amount of work is just right. 4. 2. Though Locke’s response places the event factors on the same spectrum. drawing attention to the integral role that management has in cultivating satisfaction within workers. However. managers must acknowledge both the significance of attitudes and values to the actions of the worker. or 2. Murphy’s law. machinery. Responsibility – responsibility was increased. [ 230 ] Agents Self – the respondent Supervisor – superior of respondent Co-worker – colleague or peer at same level Subordinate – person at lower level Organization. or responsibility was not increased as desired. the authors (Blanchard and Hersey. or he/she failed to finish or reach a goal 5. Success/failure – employee finished task. Smoothness – work went smoothly. draws more practical application to the way factors at work contribute to the experience of the worker as understood through satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Verbal recognition of work/negative verbal 7. Locke’s clarification of that which motivates and the means through which someone is motivated in the agent/event theory. a worker carries into the job form the foundation by which attitudes develop. Herzberg’s concept of attitude as a force powerful in determining output has been complemented by Locke’s formulation of value and its importance to work goals and subsequently job satisfaction. the amount is too much or too little 3. Interpersonal atmosphere – there was a pleasant atmosphere where people got along well. or policies – no particular person(s) Customer – includes students. The values. “Attitude is everything”. attitudes can be impacted or influenced much more easily. Emphasizing this change. 8. Myers Motivation and job satisfaction Events work force as compared to that of the 1970s and 1980s. or poor outcome to a union election Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Mark A. or unclassifiable However. Promotion/demotion or lack of promotion 5. a 6. blamed. or not thanked 8. characterized by interruption and distraction 4. Tietjen and Robert M. machinery. goes the familiar phrase. whereas the values are much more subjective to the worker and have developed over the individual’s life. Conclusion and implications In the manager’s search for knowledge on motivation of employees or the enhancement of job satisfaction. Additionally. to be sure. patients. or work was 3. Money – worker received monetary raise or bonus.Table II Agent/event factors Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 1. However. complimented. management. recognition of work – worker was praised. “God” No Agent – luck. or did not receive desired raise or bonus 9. special assignment was given. A kick in the pants gets the job done. the dual-factor findings of Herzberg are significant in that they pioneered a new way of thinking. or there was an accident. or they were unpleasant 11. Herzberg noted that factors which cause extreme satisfaction and extreme dissatisfaction were not identical for the most part. it . Uncodable or other – there was a good outcome of a union election. though he/she expected promotion 6. completed problem. attitudes serve as the bottom line in specifying behavior. not to people”. Herzberg. pp.Mark A.R. McGraw-Hill.J. Chicago. Toward a Psychology of Being. Human Resource Management. New York. F. This new definition deals primarily with an adjustment in performance as a function of an adjustment in the work of the employee. “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”. Motivation and Personality.. January. W. and Wigdor. the task of the employee should be altered in such a way that the fulfilment gained from doing the job is expected daily. Heath and Company. (1968).H. Managing for Accomplishment. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 464-73. Signet. does management often confuse agent and event factors? 4 Is management doing its job in balancing the task with relationships? [ 231 ] . P. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. New York.A. Vol. Locke. IL. in Dunnette. B.A. Cooper. M.. both theories point to the work itself as containing the most potential for causing satisfaction. “The objectivist ethics”. New York.. “The supervisor as ‘motivator’: his influence on employee performance and satisfaction”.M. R. 33 No. Enhanced. Although aspects of one’s personal life as well as non-job factors at work influence the behavior and eventually the satisfaction of the worker.D. “Herzberg’s dual-factor theory of job satisfaction and motivation: a review of the evidence and a criticism”.A. NY. Likewise. Rand. Washington. 57-67. this means that when a worker’s performance steadily declines.A. pp. 15. Instead. The Virtue of Selfishness. The Motivation to Work. (1996). NY. DC. References Blanchard. E.L. NY. E. Myers Motivation and job satisfaction Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) Management Decision 36/4 [1998] 226–231 affects no lasting positive change within the worker. “Studies of the relationship between satisfaction. Herzberg. (1994). Training and Development. E. 53-62. House. Maslow. and Porter. (1975). goal-setting and performance”. “One more time: how do you motivate employees?”. B. it is the work itself which brings fulfilment and Maslow’s higher order of needs into being. p. A. in Steers. (1964). but the basic duty assigned in the job description and all those intrinsic feelings that produce positive attitudes about that duty. (1967). Maunser. and Haas. C. M. L.). such that attitude does not become a factor which leads to dissatisfaction? 2 Does recent company policy reflect an attempt to move employees through reward/punishment conditions or motivate employees through the enhancement and even reconfiguration of tasks within a job? 3 In diagnosing problems experienced by employees and pinpointing their sources. (Eds).H. (Ed. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. “Great ideas”. pp. Locke. D. Maslow. For management. and Knerr. (1959). F. pp.. (Ed. A. NY. R. A. in Bass.S.A. Harvard Business Review. 1297-349. New York. it is not due to a lack of perks or enforcement on the part of management. 42-7. K. New York. (Eds). B. Steininger. Personal Psychology.H. Cartledge. (1954). pp. Harper & Row Publishers. Locke. Application questions 1 How is it possible to affect the attitudes of employees in your organization. and Snyderman. J. “Why quality initiatives are failing: the need to address the foundation of human motivation”. Rand McNally. Motivation and Work Behavior.). 601-16. Tietjen and Robert M. 4. pp. A. (1970). (1976). pp. NY. and Hersey. (1962). 369-89. N. sustained performance on the job results not so much from the fully furnished office or the temperature of the work environment. in Rand.J. This is not a call to cancel incentive programs but to encourage consideration of a refined definition of motivation. Martin Gächter. [CrossRef] 14. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 21. The impact of comparative state-directed development on working conditions and employee satisfaction. Khairunnisa Hamid. 2012. 2010. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 6. 408-439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 18. MOHSEN BAZARGAN.Social and Behavioral Sciences 29. Aleksandra Pop‐Vasileva. Anna Gudmundson. Westover. Journal of Targeting. 467-485. 2011. Azizah Raja. 11-22. Jonathan H Westover. Rong Ma. Prominent demotivational factors influencing the productivity of construction project managers in Qatar. 1715-1724. 2012. 479-503. 1070-1090. 537-554. Tommy D. David G. Retaining the thin blue line. The Impact of Comparative State-Directed Development on Working Conditions and Employee Satisfaction. Jihyang Choi. 813-823. Westover. Work. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 7. 2011. David A. Journal of Nursing Management 20:10. 2014. [CrossRef] 21. Culture. Journal of Management & Organization 19. Job satisfaction among Iranian hospital-based practicing nurses: examining the influence of self-expectation. Susanna Kultalahti. TAYEBE MIRZAEI. International Journal of Social Economics 39:7.issue-4. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 10. Roziana Shaari. Adzei. [CrossRef] 17. Assessment of teacher motivation. Angelos Pantouvakis. 2011. Journal of Health Organization and Management 26:4. Leading Techies. Ishak Mad Shah. 2011. 890-899. Tourism Management 30. Roger A. Odília Maria Rocha Gouveia. Public Management Review 13. 589-607. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 2. Sufficient challenges and a weekend ahead – Generation Y describing motivation at work. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management 8:2. 2012. Atinga. [CrossRef] 5. [CrossRef] 8. Maria de Lourdes Machado. 2012. Lourdes Canós‐Darós. 2010. Jonathan H. [CrossRef] 11. Paul Theivananthampillai. International Journal of Social Economics 40:5. 272-297. pay satisfaction. Jeannette Taylor. Jeni Didham. Jasna Auer Antoncic. 604-608. Steven Westlund. [CrossRef] 4. Francis A. Motivation and retention of health workers in Ghana's district hospitals. Virgílio Meira Soares. Measurement and Analysis for Marketing 19. THE GLOBAL JOURNALIST IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. Savage. 569-582. Auditing & Accountability Journal 24:4. 334-346. Recruiting across cultures: A value-based model of recruitment. Fang Yang. [CrossRef] 13. 2012. Thomas Lange. Vijay Kumar Shrotryia. Carolyn Stringer. Weaver. [CrossRef] 22. Jonathan H Westover. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory of work motivation tested empirically on seasonal workers in hospitality and tourism. and job satisfaction of front‐ line employees. An algorithm to identify the most motivated employees. Liu Wuyi.20110401. Procedia .20. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals 2:10. Jonathan H. Employee satisfaction. Kevin Baird. Jarkas. Comparative welfare state impacts on work quality and job satisfaction. Benno Torgler. Procedia . 2013. Motivation. The impact of comparative state-directed development on working conditions and employee satisfaction. 2009. [CrossRef] 9. Milan Radosavljevic. Bill Blair. José Brites Ferreira. David H. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 63:8. Hamidah Abdul Rahman. Christine Lundberg. [CrossRef] 23. A Look to Academics Job Satisfaction and Motivation in Portuguese Higher Education Institutions. Job Satisfaction in The Public Service.Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) This article has been cited by: 1. 498-518. Siti Aisyah Panatik. Accounting. Industrial Management & Data Systems 111:4. 2438-2451. Gail Pacheco. School Leadership & Management 30. 503-525. 2009. Andersson. 2012.1111/jonm. Human Resource Management Review 19. ZOHRE VANAKI. social interaction and organisational situations. Feyyat Gokce. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 15. 487-499. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 12. 161-179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 16.Social and Behavioral Sciences 40. Journalism Practice 7. ALI RAVARI. 731-751. Jonathan H Westover. Chinese Management Studies 5:3. Rui Brites. intrapreneurship and firm growth: a model. 2013.4018/jhcitp. 2013. Bostjan Antoncic. Employees Contentment in an Organization. Lars Willnat. [CrossRef] 20. Journal of Organizational Change Management 27:4. Management Decision 51:4. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 19. Journal of Management & Organization 1971-2006. University corporatisation. 2011. Riitta Liisa Viitala. [CrossRef] . motivation and personal characteristics: an in‐depth study of six organizations in Ningbo. 163-183.2012. Journal of Management & Organization 18. 522-533. Internal service quality and job satisfaction synergies for performance improvement: Some evidence from a B2B environment. 2011. Allen. [CrossRef] 24. 2013. Abdulaziz M. 1-15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 3. industrialisation and multiple domains of employees' job satisfaction: a case for HR strategy redesign in India. 2014. 2011. 2013. Job motivation and satisfaction: Unpacking the key factors for charity shop managers. Complexity theory and organization procedure design. Journal of Business Research 62. 1096-1107. 2009. The relationships of age and length of service with job satisfaction: an examination of hotel employees in Thailand. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 31. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 19. Brodbeck. Taxonomy for integrating scheduling theory and human factors: Review and research opportunities. Miles. Emmett J. Nick Bontis. 2008. Alexander Serenko. [CrossRef] 35. Adelina Broadbridge. Carmel Herington. [CrossRef] 30. Theodore Metaxas. 4-11. 2006. 2009. Johnson. 1934-1954. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18:7. Business Process Management Journal 8:4. Geiger. Sally Sledge. Realising potential: the new motivation game. [CrossRef] . Attractive Investment Images in Southeastern Europe: the Case of Varna. 745-758. 2006. Pilar Pérez. 377-402. 53-69. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 16. Thomas Lange. María José Garrido. 135-153. EuroMed Journal of Business 2:2. Xiaochun Jiang. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 36. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 39. Elizabeth Parsons. 1667-1682. Christopher D. [CrossRef] 34. [CrossRef] 29. 2008. Human resource challenges confronting the Cyprus hospitality industry. Anastasios Zopiatis. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13. 2005. Determinants of sales manager job satisfaction. The Health Care Manager 25. Carmen Antón. 2001. The Implications of Herzberg's "Motivation-Hygiene" Theory for Management in the Irish Health Sector. on-the-job training and the impact on job satisfaction: longitudinal evidence from the German labour market. Lodree. Chris Gee. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 27. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 18. An analysis of Spanish industrial firms. 2002. Firm–employee relationship strength—A conceptual model. 2009. 2007. Yannis Georgellis. [CrossRef] 32. Maria E. Parkpoom Chinmeteepituck. South East European Journal of Economics and Business 3. 121-131. [CrossRef] 28. Management Decision 39:2. Panikkos Constanti. 2003.Downloaded by Concordia University At 18:25 20 March 2015 (PT) 25. Participation in continuous. [CrossRef] 33. Bulgaria. [CrossRef] 26. . [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 38. Angela K. 131-137. 39-51. Samuel Coppage. A causal model of human capital antecedents and consequents in the financial services industry. Steven WestlundLeading Techies 200-215. 2007. Don Scott. Journal of Intellectual Capital 10:1. What role does culture play? A look at motivation and job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil. Shah Jalal Sarker. Lester W. Alf Crossman. 969-985. Michael Byrne. Peter W. Burke. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] 37.