4106221.pdf

8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

1/22

The Relative Importance of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards as Determinants of WorkSatisfactionAuthor(s): Clifford J. MottazSource: The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 3, Special Feature: The Sociology of NuclearThreat (Autumn, 1985), pp. 365-385

Published by: Wileyon behalf of the Midwest Sociological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4106221.

Accessed: 18/06/2013 05:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

WileyandMidwest Sociological Societyare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access

to The Sociological Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.133 on Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:26:02 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=msshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4106221?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4106221?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=msshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

2/22

THERELATIVEMPORTANCEF INTRINSIC

AND

EXTRINSIC

EWARDS S

DETERMINANTS

F WORK

SATISFACTION*

Clifford

J.

Mottaz

University

of Wisconsin-River

alls

This

study nvestigates

he

nature nd

sources

f

overall

work

satisfaction

n

several

occupational

roups.

The effects

of three

ypes

of workrewards

n

work

satisfaction

are assessed.

They

are:

ntrinsic

ask

rewards,

xtrinsic ocial

rewards

ndextrinsic

organizational

ewards.Data

rom

1,385

workers

epresenting

ive

occupational

roups

suggest

that intrinsic

ewards ollowed

by

extrinsic ocial

rewards,

are

powerful

determinantsf

satisfaction

cross

all

occupational

roups.

Extrinsic

rganizational

rewards

ppear

o

emerge

s an

mportant

eterminant

nly

n

lower-level

ccupations.

The

mplications

f

these

indings

or

ob

redesign rograms

re

subsequently

iscussed.

INTRODUCTION

The

concept

of

work

satisfaction

has

occupied

a

prominent

place

in the social

science

literature

or

many years.

A

vast

amount

of researchhas

been conducted

on this

subject,

and

related work

attitudes,

by

both

psychologists

and

sociologists.

In

fact,

Locke

(1976)

reports

that over

3,300

articles have been

compiled

on this

topic

to

date,

and the

number

continues

to

grow.

One of

the main

reasons for the

tremendous nterest

n this

area is the

belief

that

work

satisfaction

affects worker

productivity,

absenteeism,

turnover,

and hence

organizational

effectiveness.

Anotherreason

for

the

popularity

of

the

concept

stems from

the

notion

that work

satisfaction

may

have

serious

consequences

for

the

well-being

of

the individual n terms of physicalandmentalhealth,and satisfactionwith life

in

general.

Despite

years

of

study

and the

current

popularity

of

the

term,

there

is no

single, agreed

upon

definitionof work

satisfaction.How the

concept

is defined

depends

on the

theoretical

*

Direct all

communications

o:

Professor

Clifford

J.

Mottaz,

Department

f

Sociology,

University

of Wisconsin-

River

Falls,

River

Falls,

WI

54022.

The

Sociological

Quarterly,

Volume

26,

Number

3,

pages

365-385.

Copyright

?

1985

by

JAI

Press,

Inc.

All

rights

of

reproduction

n

any

form

reserved.

ISSN: 0038-0253

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

3/22

366

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol. 26/No.

3/1985

slant

of

the

writer.

One theoretical

approach

hat has

shown some

degree

of

promise

in

currentresearch s the social

psychological,

or interactionist,model of worksatisfaction.

From this

perspective,

the

concept

is

commonly

defined

as

a

positive

orientation

oward

work based

upon

a

congruency

between the

worker's

perception

of the work

situation

(along

a

variety

of

work

dimensions)

and his/her work

values

regarding

those same

dimensions

(Smith,

Kendall,

and

Hulin, 1969; Locke,

1969;

Kalleberg,

1977;

Katzell,

1979).

This

view of work

satisfaction

suggests

that

two

types

of

factors

are

operative:

(1)

perceived

work

characteristics,

which

represent

work

rewards;

and

(2)

work

values,

which

represent

he

importance

hat

ndividuals ttach

o

these

perceived

work

characteristics.

In this

sense,

work

satisfaction

represents

a

person-environment

fit.

It

is

a

function

of

the interaction

between

the

worker's

values

and various

aspects

of

the

workplace.

The

advantage

f theinteractionist

erspective

s that t directsattentiono bothworkcharacteristics

(rewards)

and

individual

differences in

the

analysis

of

work

satisfaction,

rather

than

emphasizing

one at

the

expense

of

the other.

WORK

REWARDS

The area of

work

consists of

numerous

nterrelated actors.

Therefore,

efforts

to

improve

the

quality

of

life in the

workplace

require

a

thorough

understanding

of

how

these

dimensions

relate to work

satisfaction.

Organizational

esearchers

have devoted

a

great

deal of

attention

toward this end.

As a

result,

several

important

correlates

of

work

satisfactionhave been

clearly

identified. Some of these factors include the task itself,

salary,

promotions,

style

of

supervision,

cohesiveness

of

work

groups,

security,

fringe

benefits,

and

working

conditions

(Fournet,

Distefano,

and

Pryer,

1966;

Locke, 1976;

Gruenberg,

1979).

These

factors

constitute

potential

sources

of rewardsto the

worker.

In

a recent

article,

Katz and Van

Maanen

1977)

argue

that the various

aspects

of

work

form

three

conceptually

and

empirically

distinct

clusters

or

dimensions

of

work

rewards,

which

they

call the

loci of

work satisfaction.

These

clusters

include

task,

social,

and

organizational

ewards.This

classification

oughly

corresponds

o the distinction

ommonly

made between ntrinsic

nd

extrinsic ewards

Herzberg,

1966;

Wernimont, 966;

Gruneberg,

1979).

The task dimension refers to those intrinsicrewards

directly

associated with

doing

the

job. They

are derived

from the content of

the task itself

and include such

factors

as

interesting

and

challenging

work,

self-direction and

responsibility,

variety,

creativity,

opportunities

o

use one's

skills and

abilities,

and

sufficient

feedback

regarding

the

ef-

fectiveness

of

one's

efforts. The social

dimension

refers to

those extrinsicrewards

derived

from

interacting

with

others on the

job.

They

are

based

on

the

quality

of

interpersonal

relationships

and

include such

factors

as

friendly,

helpful,

and

supportive

co-workers

and

supervisors.

The

organizational

dimension refers to

those

extrinsic

rewards

provided

by

the

organization

or

the

purpose

of

facilitating

or

motivating

task

performance.

They

are

tangible

rewards

that are visible to others and include such

factors

as

pay,

promotions,

fringe

benefits,

security,

and the like. These factors have been

traditionally

referredto

as

instrumentalewards. n

short,

work rewardsareviewedas

resulting

romthe interaction

of

the individualwith the task

itself,

fellow

workers,

andthe

organization.

Katz and

Van


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

4/22

The

Relative

mportance

f

Intrinsic

nd

Extrinsic

ewards

367

Maanen found that

each

reward

type

was related

to

work satisfaction

to some

degree.

They concludedthat attentionmust be

paid

to all threetypes of rewardsfor a thorough

analysis

of work

satisfaction.

Focusing

on

the

task

itself,

Hackman

and

others

(Hackman

and

Lawler,

1971;

Hackman

and

Oldham,

1975,

1979)

have

identified

ive

conceptually

ndependent

ask characteristics

which,

they argue,

can be

applied

to

any job.

These

characteristics

re

skill

variety,

task

identity,

task

significance,

autonomy,

and

feedback.

The

results

of their research

ndicate

that

these

task rewards

are

strongly

related to work

attitudes.

Previous

and

subsequent

studies

tend

to

support

heir

findings

(Blauner,

1964;

Herzberg,

1966;

Kirsch

and

Lenger-

mann,

1971;

Pierce

and

Dunham, 1976;

Sims and

Szilagyi,

1976;

Mottaz,

1981,

1982).'

WORKVALUES

Work

values refers to

the relative

importance

assigned

to

the various

aspects

of work

by

the

individual.

Recently,

researchers

have come to

recognize

that

individuals

may

differ

considerably

in

what

they

are

looking

for

in

work.

Some

assign greater

importance

to

pay

while

others are more

concerned with

interesting

and

challenging

jobs.

Interest

in

individual

differences with

regard

to

work

values

has led

some researchers

o

introduce

background

factors

into

studies of

work

satisfaction.

Some

of

these

factors

are

sex

(Golembiewski, 1977; Weaver,

1977),

age

(Glenn,

Taylor,

and

Weaver,

1977),

education

(King, Murry,

and

Atkinson, 1982;

Gruenberg,

1980;

Glenn and

Weaver, 1982a);

tenure

(Katz,

1978),

maritalstatus

(Seybolt

and

Gruenfeld, 1976;

King

et al. 1982), urban-rural

background

Turner

nd

Lawerence,1965;

Seybolt

and

Gruenfeld,

1976),

andrace

(Weaver,

1978).

Unfortunately,

most

studies have shown that

background

actors account

for

very

little

variance

in

work satisfaction

(Campbell,

Converse,

and

Rogers,

1976;

Weaver,

1977;

King

et

al.,

1982).

Nevertheless,

several

of

the

studies

cited above

suggest

that

background

actors

may

moderatethe

relationship

between work

rewards

and

work

sat-

isfaction,

and

therefore

must be

included

in the

analysis

as control

variables.

Considerable

attention

has

been focused

on

the

relationship

between

work values

and

occupational

evel.

However,

the

findings

n

this area

are

not

entirely

consistent.

A

number

of

surveys

on work

attitudes have found

that

workers

in

both

upper

and lower-level

occupations

tend to

report

relatively high

levels of work satisfaction.

Considering

the

relatively

unrewarding

nature

of

tasks

in

lower-level

occupations,

researchers

have

been

faced

with the

problem

of

accounting

or

these

results.

One

of

the most

prevalent

xplanations

is that

workers

at

different

levels of the

occupational

hierarchy

differ

considerably

in

terms of

work-related values and

hence

utilize

qualitatively

different criteria

in their

assessment of work

(Morse

and

Weiss, 1955;

Friedman

and

Havighurst,

1962; Blauner,

1964; Friedlander,

1965;

Goldthrope

et

al., 1969;

Bacharch

and

Aiken,

1979).

More

specifically,

it is

suggested

that lower-level

workers

have

an

instrumental

orientation

toward work

and

are

mainly

interested

in

extrinsic

rewards.

Consequently,

the

major

determinants f work

satisfactionare

pay, fringe

benefits,

promotions,

andthe like.

Work

itself is

simply

a means to

keep busy

and

earn

a

living.

On the other

hand,

it is

argued

that

higher

level workers

place greater

mportance

on

intrinsicrewards

and thusthe

major

determinantsof work satisfaction

are characteristics

of the

task

itself. Several

studies


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

5/22

368

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol.

26/No.

3/1985

tend to

support

this

argument

Troxell,

1954;

Centers

and

Bugental,

1966;

Friedlander,

1965, 1966; Seeman, 1967; Tausky, 1969; Ronan, 1970; Simonds and Orife, 1976).

Other research

on

the

topic

indicates

a

decline

in

work

satisfaction,

especially

among

lower-level

workers,

and attribute his to

changes

in

work-related

values

(Kirsch

and

Lengermann,

1971;

Sheppard

and

Herrick, 1972;

Aronowitz,

1973;

U.S.

Department

of

Health,

Education,

and Welfare

1973;

Strauss,

1974;

Yankelovich,

Skelly,

and

White,

1977; DeBoer,

1978;

Cooper

et

al., 1979;

Quinn

and

Staines,

1979;

Glenn

and

Weaver,

1982b).

Specifically,

it is

suggested

that

intrinsic

rewards

have

increased

in

importance

for a

large

proportion

of

workers

n

lower-level

occupations

while extrinsic

rewardshave

become

relatively

less salient.

The

general

mplication

s that

workers

n

both

upper-level

and

lower-level

occupations

possess

an

intrinsic

orientation

oward

work and

hence

the

majordeterminantsof work satisfactionare task rewards.Supportfor the argumentcan

be

found in

studies

by

Locke

(1973),

Cooper

et

al.,

(1979)

and

Gruenberg

1980).

As

a

whole,

the

existing

survey

data

in

this area

is

inconsistent

and

confusing,

to

say

the least.

Some

studies have found the

work

orientation

and

the determinants

of

work

satisfaction to

differ

by

occupational

evel,

while

other studies

have failed

to show

any

meaningful

occupational

differenceswith

regard

o

these two

factors.

Clearly,

the research

results do not

permit any

firm

conclusions

to

be

drawn. The

specific

objective

of

this

study

is to

examine the work

orientation

values)

and

the determinants

f work

satisfaction

among

workers

in

upper-level

and

lower-level

occupations,

in order to

hopefully

shed

some

light

on

this

issue.

It

should be

noted,

however,

thatthe

study

is

primarily

oncerned

with assessing the relative importanceof intrinsicand extrinsic rewardsas sources of

work

satisfaction.

Work-related

alues are

analyzed

only

in

terms

of

their

relationship

o

this

concern.

METHODS

Sample

The

data for this

study

were

obtained from

a

large

midwestern

metropolitan

area

during

1979 and

1980. Six

diverse

organizations

participated

n

the

study.

The

organizations

includeda

university,

five

elementary

schools from the same

district,

a

plastics

factory,

an

order-processing

irm,

a

hospital,

and

a

large

law-enforcement

agency.

Within each

organization,

simple

randomor

stratified

andom

sampling

procedures

were used

to ensure

an

adequate

representation

f

workers from

all

major

occupational

groups

that

agreed

to

participate

n

the

study.2

The total

sample

consistedof

1,385

full-time

employees

representing

a

variety

of

occupations.

The

respondents

were classified

into five

occupational

categories:

(a)

professional,

consisting

of

university

aculty, registered

nurses,

and

elementary

school

teachers

(N

=

349); (b)

managerial,

ncluding

police

administrators,

ducational

admin-

istrators,

and

factorysupervisors

N

=

235); (c)

clerical,

consisting

of secretaries

(N

=

112);

(d)

service,

consisting

of

police

officers

(N

=

440);

and

(e)

blue-collar,

consisting

of

factory

workers

N

=

249).

Although

this

categorization

ombinessome workersfrom

different

organiations,

an earlier

analysis

of the data

revealed

negligible

differences

in

work

satisfaction or work

characteristicsbetween workers of

the same

occupational


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

6/22

The Relative

mportance

f Intrinsic nd

Extrinsic

ewards

369

category

but

different

organizations.

Thus,

the

occupationalcategories

have been

treated

as homogeneous.

The

questionnaire

administered o

the

employees

in

this

sample

included sections on

demographic

characteristics,

overall

work

satisfaction,

work

rewards

and work

values.

The overall

response

rate

was

74

percent.

Measures

Work

Satisfaction

Overall

work

satisfaction s

defined

as

the worker's

affective

response

to the total

work

situation.

Using

a four

point Likert-typeformat,

this scale

was

constructed

from three

commonly

used

global

items which were

slightly

revised

for the

present

study.

The

items

are as follows:

Generally

peaking,

am

satisfied

with

this

ob.

If I

hadthe

opportunity

o start

over

again,

I

would

choose he

same

ype

of work

I

presently

o.

Taking

nto

consideration

ll

things

about

my

job,

I am

very

satisfied.

The

reliability

of

this

scale was assessed

by

Cronbach's

alpha

which

yielded

a

reliability

coefficient

of

.772.

Concerningvalidity,

a factor

analysis

of

the

items,

along

with

those

of several other work

dimensions,

revealed that the items formeda

clearly

distinctfactor.

Intrinsic

Task

Rewards

Three

intrinsic

rewards associated

with the task

were selected

for the

analysis.

They

are

task

autonomy,

task

significance,

and

task involvement.

Task

autonomy

refers

to the

degree

of

self-direction

in

task

performance.

Task

significance

refers

to the

degree

to

which the

task is

perceived

as a

significant

contribution

to

the

work

process.

Task

involvement

refers

to the

degree

to

which the

task

is

considered

nteresting

and

rewarding

in

itself.

The

scales used to

measure

these

three

factors

were constructed

by

the

author

andreported n a previousarticle(Mottaz, 1981). Eachscale consists of seven four-point

Likert-type

items.

Cronbach's

alpha produced

a

reliability

coefficient

of .917

for the

autonomy

scale,

.790

for the task

significance

scale,

and .875

for the task

involvement

scale.

Validity

was evaluated

through

factor

analysis

which

yielded

distinct factors.

Extrinsic

ocial

and

Organizational

Rewards

Six

extrinsic

rewards

associated

with

the work context

were

included in the

analysis.

The items

used to

measure these factors

were drawn

from several

widely

used

scales

reported

in

Robinson, Athanasiou,

and Head

(1969)

and

slightly

modified for

present

purposes.

Each scale consists of four to

six

four-point

Likert-type

tems. Social

rewards

include two

factors:

(1)

supervisory

assistance-the

degree

to

which

supervisors

are

perceived

as

supportive

and

helpful

in

job

matters;

and

(2)

colleague

assistance-the

degree

to which

colleagues

are

perceived

as

supportive

and

helpful.

Cronbach's

alpha


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

7/22

370 THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol.

26/No.

3/1985

yieldedreliability

oefficients

of

.822 and

.821 for

the

two

scales

respectively.

Organizational

rewards ncludefour factors:(1) adequateworkingconditions the extentto which there

are

adequate

resources,

supplies,

equipment,

time,

and

the

like to do a

good

job;

(2)

pay

equity-the

extent to which

workersfeel

their

salary

is

comparable

o

others

performing

the

same or similar

obs;

(3)

promotional

pportunity-the

extent

to which the

job

provides

opportunity

or

advancement;

and

(4)

adequate ringe

benefits-the

degree

to

which

the

worker eels

the

pension

plan,

medical

coverage,

and the

like are sufficient.

The

reliability

coefficients

reported

for the four

scales

are

.712,

.832, .815,

and .732

respectively.

Validity

was

assessed

through

factors

analysis

which,

again, yielded

distinct

factors.

It should be

noted that

these measures of

work rewards

do

not

represent

objective

properties

of the

workplace,

but

rather

he individuals

perception

of

them.

As Hackman

and Lawler (1971) have pointedout, it is not the objective state of these characteristics

that

affects

work

attitudes,

but

how

they

are

experienced

by

the

worker.

Moreover,

measuresof

perceived

rewards

represent

evaluative

udgments

on

the

part

of the workers

(e.g.,

the

pay

is

good,

the work is

interesting),

and hence

can be viewed as

measuresof

facet

satisfaction.

Work

Values

Respondents

were asked

to

rate each of

the nine work rewards

discussed

above

in

terms

of how

important

t

was to

them.

Responses ranged

from

1

to

10. The

higher

the

score, the greaterthe importance.

Demographic

Characteristics

Five

demographic

factors

possibly

related to work satisfaction

were included

in

the

research.

These factors

included

sex,

age,

educational

evel,

family

income,

and

length

of

time

on

the

job.

PROCEDURE

Earlier

n

the

article,

t

was

suggested

hat

the

variouswork

rewards orm three

conceptually

distinct clusters. Since the presentresearch is based on this conceptualdistinctionit is

necessary

o

demonstrate

he

empirical

ndependence

of the

three

clusters.

For his

purpose,

the

nine

work

rewards

were

subjected

to

factor

analysis employing principle

component

solution

and varimax

rotation.

The results

appear

n

Table

1.

The

data

in

Table

1

show

that the

factor

analysis

produced

hree factors

corresponding

to the

expectations

discussed

above.3 Intrinsic ask rewards

oad

significantly

high

on

the

first

factor,

extrinsic

organizational

rewards on

the second

factor,

and

extrinsic

social

rewards

on the third.

Thus,

the results

strongly

suggest

that the three clusters

of work

rewards are

empirically

independent,

each

tapping

a

relatively

distinct

area

of work.

On the

basis

of

these

findings,

three

scales labeled

intrinsictask

rewards,

extrinsic

organizationalewards,andextrinsicsocial rewardswerecreated or use in the forthcoming

analysis.

This was achieved

by

summing

each

respondent's

scores on each individual

factor

within a

given

cluster and

dividing

by

the number

of

factors

in

that cluster.

While


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

8/22

The

Relative

mportance

f

Intrinsic

nd Extrinsic

ewards

371

Table

1

Results of a Factor

Analysis

of the Nine Work

Rewards

Used

in the

Study

Factors

Work

Characteristics I

II

III

Task

Autonomy

.883*

.022 .079

Task

Significance

.643

.082

.293

Task

Involvement

.840

.093

.256

Working

Conditions

-.138

.600

.279

Pay

.157

.862

-

.017

Promotions

.256

.632

.205

FringeBenefits -.066 .734 .096

Co-workers

.089

.049 .796

Supervisors

.084 .292 .739

Note:

*

Loadings

f

.40 or

greater

reconsidered

ignificant.

N

=

1,385)

this

procedure

may

mask

the

contributionsof each

individual

factor,

the

objective

of this

study

is

to

assess

the

relative

impact

of

intrinsic and extrinsic rewards

as clusters or

sets

on

overall work

satisfaction.

The

intercorrelations

mong

the nine work

value

items

were

then

subjected

to

factor

analysisemployingprinciplecomponentsolution and varimaxrotation.The datain Table

2 show

that

the

factor

analysis

produced

three

values

factors

that

correspond

with the

three

types

of

work

rewards

previously

discussed.

Therefore,

three

scales

labeled intrinsic

task

values,

extrinsic

organizational

alues,

and extrinsic

social values were

formed.

This

was

accomplished

in the

same

manner as the reward

scales.

Since the

forthcoming

analysis

is

heavily

dependent

upon

the

use

of

multiple

regression

techniques,

zero-order

correlation

coefficients were

calculated

among

the

potential

in-

Table

2

Results

of a

Factor

Analysis

of the Nine Work-

Related

Values

Used

in

the

Study

Factors

Work-RelatedValues

I

II

III

Task

Autonomy

.608* .149 .192

Task

Significance

.692

.085 .156

Task

Involvement

.776

.127

.134

Working

Conditions

.027

.608 .181

Pay

.161

.778

.221

Promotions

.124

.698 .188

Fringe

Benefits

-

.099

.761 .042

Co-workers .010 .072 .701

Supervisors

.146 .102

.734

Note:

*

Loadings

f .40 or

greater

reconsidered

ignificant.

N

=

1,385)


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

9/22

372

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol.

26/No.

3/1985

dependent

variables in

order to test for

multicollinerarity.Any

large

correlations

among

these variables would tend to make the results unreliable. The results revealed that

multicollinearity

was

a serious

problem

n two

cases.

First,

age

and

years

employed

were

highly

correlated

r

=

.73).

Age

was selected

for the

analysis

because

previous

research

has

found this

variable to be

important

n

studies

of

work satisfaction

(Glenn,

Taylor,

and

Weaver,

1977).

Second,

as

might

be

expected,

education

and

occupational

evel

were

highly

correlated

r

=

.71).

In

orderto deal

with

this

problem,

the

forthcoming

analysis

was

conducted for each

occupational

evel

separately.

This

procedure

would

seem to

be

justified

since the

purpose

of

the

study

is

to

assess the

work orientationand

sources

of

work

satisfaction

in

different

occupational

groups.

Finally,

some caution

is warranted n

interpreting

he

research

results

in

the

sections

to follow.

Survey

data based on

self-reports

always

involves some risk of

response

bias

or

social

desirability

bias

(Phillips,

1973;

Orpen,

1976).

This

refers

to the

tendency

for

people

to

agree

with

statements that are

socially

desirable

or

disagree

with

statements

that

are

socially

undesirable.

For

example,

some

workers

may

be reluctant

to

say

they

are

dissatisfied with work

or that their

job

is not

very

interesting.

Response

bias

affecting

two or

more variables

n

the

same

way

will

tend

to inflate

the

relationship

between

these

variables and hence

distort the results.

The

possibility

of

a

differential

response

bias across

occupational

evels

may

exist with

regard

to some

key

research variables. For

example,

it

may

be

that workers

in

upper

level

occupations

are more

inclined,

than

workers

in

lower

level

occupations,

to

report

that

they

are more

intrinsically

rewarded or more satisfied with work than

they

really

are,

simply

because

they

feel

they

should be.

This

response

bias

would tend

to

produce

spurious

relationshipsamong

the

variables

nvolved.

In

the

present

study

efforts

have

been

made

to

minimize

response

bias

by:

(1)

assuring

anonymity;

2)

stressing

hatthereare no

right

or

wrong

answers;

3)

the use

of

multiple

item

scales;

(4)

the

use

of

direct and

indirect

statements;

5)

wording

items

in

a

simple

and

straightforward

manner;

and

(6)

random

ordering

of items.

Moreover,

the distribution

of

raw

scores

on

the work

satisfaction,

reward,

and

value

scales

did not

appear

to be

highly

skewed

in

either a

positive

or

negative

direction.

Nevertheless,

one

cannot

be

certain

that the data

is free

of

response

bias.

A

potentially

more serious

methodological problem

is

sample

selection bias. This

refers

to

the

systematic

exclusion of

a

subset of

the

population

(Berk,

1983).

According

to

Berk,

a

large

bias

may jeopardize

both

internaland

external

validity. Sample

selection

bias

tends to occur when

the

population

under

study

is

not

closed. Since the

U.S.

work

force

is a

relatively

open population

with

people

continually

moving

in

and

out,

sample

selection bias

characterizesmost research

in

the area of

work. Glen

(1981)

argues

that

this is

especially problematic

n

the

study

of

work

satisfaction.

Some

degree

of

sample

selection

bias

may

exist

in

the

present

analysis

because all

of

the

workers

sampled

are

employed

in a

limited number

of

occupations,

and

the

method

of recruitmentnto

(and

exclusion

from)

those

occupations

may

havecreated

relationships

among

variables

quite

unlikethosefound n a different

ample

of

occupations.

Unfortunately,

it

is

not

possible

to determine

the size of this bias. This

imposes

limitations on what

one

can

infer from

the

data. One

way

of

reducing

this

problem

would be to

perform

the


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

10/22

The Relative

mportance

f Intrinsic

nd

Extrinsic

ewards

373

analysis

on

a

national

sample

of

workers.

However,

even

this

procedure

would

not

completely

eliminate

sample

selection bias. In

sum,

given

the

possibility

of some

degree

of both

response

bias

and

sample

selection bias

the

forthcoming

results

must be

viewed

with

caution

and

any

conclusions

must be considered

tentative.

RESULTS

Overall Work

Satisfaction

Table 3

presents

the

mean

scores,

standard

deviations,

and

one-way

analysis

of

variance

results for

overall

work satisfaction

by

occupational group.

As

might

be

expected,

the

findings

show thatwork satisfaction ncreases

significantly

romblue-collar o

professional

occupations.

Additionally,

the

workers in

the

sample report

can

best

be

described as

moderate to

modestly

high

levels

of

work

satisfaction.

Work-RelatedValues

Using

multiple

regression

techniques,

an

exploratoryanalysis

was conducted

in

order

to

assess the effects

of the various

background

actors and

occupational

evel on the

three

types

of

work values

(data

not

shown).

The results indicated

that

occupational

evel

was

by

far the

most

powerful

predictor

of all three

types

of

work-related

values.4

Table 4

presentsthe meanscores andone-way analysisof varianceresultsforwork-relatedvalues

both

between and

within

occupational

groups.

An

inspection

of

Table

4

reveals

that

a

very

similar

hierarchy

of work-relatedvalues

emerges

within each

occupational

group.

Specifically,

the

findings

suggest

that workers

in

both

upper-level

and

lower-level

occupations

assign

the

greatest

mportance

o

intrinsic

task

rewards,

followed

by

extrinsic

social and

organizational

rewards,

respectively.

At

the

same

time,

the

data indicate

that some

importantoccupational

differences

exist.

It

appears

hat workers

n

upper-level

occupations

end to

assign

significantlygreaterweight

to

intrinsic

task

rewards

than

their

counterparts

n

lower-level

occupations.

In

contrast,

the

latter

end

to

place

significantly

greater mportance

on

extrinsic

organizational

ewards

thanthe former. No distinguishablepatternemerges for the valuationof social rewards

by

occupational

group.

Table 3

Means,

Standard

Deviations,

and

Analysis

of VarianceResults

For Work

Satisfaction

by

OccupationalGroup

Occupational

Group

Professional

Managerial

Clerical Services Blue-Collar

F

P

Mean

3.18

3.06 2.99

2.87

2.58

46.66

.000

SD .47 .54 .54 .53 .58

N

349

235

112 440 249

The

possible

ange

or mean

cores s between

and4.

The

higher

he

score

he

higher

he

work atisfaction.


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

11/22

Table

4

Mean

Scores

and

Analysis

of

Variance Results

for

Work-

Values

Both

Within and

Between

Occupational

Grou

Professional Managerial

Clerical

Service

Work-RelatedValues

(N

=

349)

(N

=

235) (N

=

112) (N

=

440)

Intrinsic

Rewards 7.76* 6.87 6.57 6.22

Extrinsic

Organizational

Rewards 3.82 4.01

4.17

4.47

Extrinsic Social

Rewards 5.39 5.49

5.80

5.35

F 140.26 43.30 33.23

72.23

P

.000 .000 .000

.000

The

possible ange

or

mean cores

s

between

1

and 10.

The

higher

he

score,

he

greater

he

importance.

w

-ph


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

12/22

8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

13/22

Table 5

Multiple

Regression

of

Background

and Work

Rewards

on

Work Satisfactio

Occupational

Group


Clerical

(N

=

349) (N

=

235) (N

=

112)

Characteristics B b

B b

B b

Sex .013

.012 .022

.035

- -

Age

.045

.002

.076

.005 .075 .004

Education -.110

-

.061 .043

.032

-

.003

-

.002

Income

.040

.014 .041

.019 -.059

-

.027

Intrinsic Rewards

.505

.610*

.568

.679*

.489

.619*

Extrinsic

Organizational

Rewards .004 .004

.053

.045 .144

.176*

Extrinsic

Social

Rewards

.375

.381

.266

.356* .344

.421

R2

=

.610 R2

=

.631 R2

=

.691

F =

60.19*

F

=

55.40*

F

=

39.09*

Note:

*

Significant

t the .05

level

or

better.

twa

u,


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

14/22

Table

6

Mean

Scores

and

Analysis

of

Variance Results For

Work

Sa

and

Availability

of

Work

Rewards

by

OccupationalGr

Occupational Group


Clerical

Service

(N

=

349)

(N

=

235) (N

=

112) (N

=

440)

Work Satisfaction

3.18 3.06

2.99

2.87

Intrinsic Rewards

3.21 3.00

2.93 2.86

Extrinsic

Rewards-Organization

2.32

2.35

2.46 2.22

Extrinsic

Rewards-Social

3.06 2.87

3.07

2.76

Note:

The

possible ange

or

mean cores s between

1

and

4. The

higher

he

score,

he

greater

he

valueof the variable.

4


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

15/22

378

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol. 26/No.

3/1985

Extrinsic social

rewards

also

emerge

as a

fairly

powerful

predictor.

The data

in Table

5

suggest

thatthis factorhas a

significant

and

positive

impact

on work satisfaction n all

occupational

groups.

This

finding

should

not

be

too

surprising.

After

all,

it seems self-

evident

that

friendly

and

supportive

relationships

with co-workers

and

supervisors

would

be an

important

source

of

satisfaction in

any

type

of

work

setting.

Finally,

the

results

reported

n

Table 5

suggest

that

extrinsic

organizational

rewards

have a

significant

and

positive

effect,

but

only

in lower-level

occupations.

It

appears

hat

clerical,

service,

and

blue-collar

workers are more sensitive

to

pay,

fringe

benefits,

promotions,

and

working

conditions n

their

overall

assessment

of work than

professional

or

managerial

workers.

This

finding

ends

to

support

he

position

hatextrinsic

organizational

rewards are

a

stronger

predictor

of

work

satisfaction in

lower-level than

in

upper-level

occupations.

It is

important

to note,

however,

that in each of the three lower-level

occupations, organizational

ewards

account for a

considerably

smaller

proportion

of

the

variance

in

overall

work

satisfaction than

either the intrinsic

or social rewards.

In

sum,

the results

seem to

suggest

that

ntrinsic

ewards

arethe

most

critical

determinant

of

work

satisfaction

across all

occupational

groups,

accounting

for

a

greaterproportion

of

the

explained

variance than both

extrinsic

rewards

combined.

Regarding

extrinsic

rewards,

social

rewards

appear

to

be a

fairly strong

predictor

in

each

group,

while

organizational

rewards seem to

have

a

much

smaller effect

and

emerge

as

a

significant

predictor

in

lower-level

occupations exclusively.

Thus,

there

appears

to be a

strong

correspondence

between work-related

values and the determinants

of work

satisfaction.

This

finding

provides

some

support

for the interactionist

argument

that workersassess

their

jobs

in

terms of

what

they

consider

to be

important

n work.

On

the

basis of

the

findingspresented

above,

one would

expect

occupations

hat

provide

greater

opportunities

or

intrinsic rewards

to

be characterized

by

higher

levels

of

work

satisfaction. The

data in

Table 6

appear

to

support

his notion.

The

results

suggest

that

the

availability

of

intrinsic

rewards

has a

strong

inear

relationship

with

work

satisfaction,

while the

availability

of

organizational

and

social rewards

have a

considerably

weaker,

nonlinear

relationship.

As

might

be

expected,

workers in

higher-level

occupations

tend

to

have

greater

access to

intrinsic

rewards and

report

higher

levels

of work satisfaction

than

workers

in

lower-level

occupations.

INTERPRETATION

F

RESULTS

The

foregoing analysis

indicatesthatthe

determinants

f work

satisfactionare

very

similar

across

occupational

groups.

Nevertheless,

some distinct

differences exist.

The

critical

difference is that

extrinsic

organizational

rewards

emerge

as

a

significant predictor

of

work

satisfaction in

lower-level

occupations

but

not in

upper-level

occupations.

The

rationale

behind

this

finding

s

not

entirely

clear. One

possible

explanation

s

that

t

reflects

a

differential

n

opportunities

or

organizational

ewardsbetween

occupations.

It

may

be

argued

hat

lower-level

workers,

in contrast o

higher-level

workers,

have lower

incomes,

less benefits, lower status, etc. and hence are less satisfiedwith this areaof work. As a

result,

lower-level workers are more

responsive

to increases

in such factors as

pay

or

promotions

in their

overall assessment of work.

Support

for

this

argument

s not found


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

16/22

The Relative

mportance

f

Intrinsic

nd Extrinsic

ewards

379

in

the

present

data.

No

significant

difference was

found between

workers in

higher

and

lower-level

occupations

in

regard

to satisfactionwith

organizational

rewards

(F

=

.14,

P

=

.712).

Another

possibility

is that

the

importance

of

organizational

rewards

as a source

of

satisfaction

among

lower-level

workers

represents

an accommodation

on their

part

to

an

intrinsically

mpoverished

work

situation

Argyris,

1957;

Gruenberg,

1980).

Specifically,

it

may

be that

organizational

ewards end to increase

n

salience

among

workers

n lower-

level

occupations

as a

result of

limited

opportunities

or

intrinsically

rewarding

work.

Unfortunately,

the

nature

of

the

present

research

does

not

permit

a definitive

test of this

argument.

Nevertheless,

it is

possible

to make a

tentative assessment

using

the

data

at

hand.

Data

pertinent

o

this

argument

are

presented

n Table 7.

The results show that the

availability

of intrinsicrewardsis much

greater

in

higher-

level

occupations

han in

lower-level

occupations.

Additionally,

n

higher-level

occupations

the

importance

assigned

to intrinsic

rewards,

while

initially

fairly

high,

tends

to increase

among

workers who

have been at

their

jobs

for

longer periods

of

time.

Organizational

rewards are

considerably

less

important

for these

same

workers

and

no variation is

observed with

regard

o

job

longevity.

At the same

time,

a

much

different

pattern

merges

for

workers in

lower-level

occupations.

The

importance given

to intrinsic

rewards

is

moderately

high

initially

but

then decreases

considerably

among

workers

with

greater

ob

longevity,

while

organizational

ewardsshow a

significant

ncrease.

This does

not

mean,

however,

that

lower-level

workers

do not continue

to value

intrinsically

rewarding

work.

On the

contrary,

the data in Table 7 show that the mean score for the

importance

of

intrinsic

rewards

is

greater

than the mean score

for the

importance

of

organizational

rewards

irrespective

of

job longevity.

These

findings suggest

that

the

importance

of

organizational

rewards

as

a

source

of work satisfaction

in

lower-level

occupations

is

a

function of

the

availability

of

intrinsic

rewards.

Thus,

the results

provide

conditional

support

for

the

accommodation

hypothesis

and further

emphasize

the

importance

of

intrinsicrewards

or all

classes

of workers.

Nevertheless,

additional

esearch

s

necessary.

It

may

be that

longitudinal

researchor cohort

analysis

can

provide

useful

supplementary

information

regarding

he

validity

of

this

hypothesis.

It

is

possible

that other

demographic

actors

such as

age

or

education,

which tend

to

be related to both

job

tenure and work

values,

may

accountfor these

findings. Again

it

is not

possible

to

make

a definitive

choice

among

these alternative

xplanations,

but

some

clues can be

obtained

from

the data at hand. Partialcorrelation

echniques

were used to

assess the

relationship

between

job

tenureand work values

among

workers

n

lower-level

occupations.

Controlling

for

the

effects of

age

and

education,

the correlations

between

job

tenure and

intrinsic

and

extrinsic values were

-

.12 and .26

respectively.

Although

these

coefficients are

quite

modest,

they

are

statistically significant,

and are

consistent

with the results

in

Table

7.

Of

course,

these results

are tentative

to

say

the least.

As a

word of

caution,

the results of

the

present

research should

not be

interpreted

o

mean that

organizational

rewards

are of little or no concern

to

workers;rather,

it

seems

self-evident that these factors are an essential

aspect

of work satisfaction.

Few,

if

any,

workers

would

continue

to

work

on

job

for

very long

if

organizational

rewards were

completely

inadequate.

Moreover,

several researchershave indicatedthatdeficiencies

in


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

17/22

Table

7

Mean

Scores and

Analysis

of

Variance Results For the

of

Intrinsic Rewards

and

the

Importance

of Intrinsi

Organizational

Rewards

By Occupation

and Job

Lon

Job

Longevity

(years)

Occupational

Rewards 0-3 3-10 1

Professional

and

Managerial

Occupations

Availability

of Intrinsic

Rewards

3.06*

3.10

Importanceof Intrinsic Rewards 7.03** 7.31

Importance

of

Organizational

Rewards

4.44**

4.73

(N

=

139) (N

=

153) (N

Clerical, Service,

and Blue-Collar

Occupations

Availability

of Intrinsic Rewards 2.69

2.75

Importance

of

Intrinsic

Rewards 6.44 6.24

Importance

of

Organizational

Rewards 5.04

5.22

(N

=

278) (N

=

302) (N

Notes:

*

The

possible

ange

or mean

cores

s

between and

4. The

higher

he score

he

greater

he

availabi

**

The

possible

ange

or mean

cores

s

between

1

and

10. The

higher

he score he

greater

he

import

0

(JJ

C


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

18/22

The

Relative

mportance

f

Intrinsic

nd Extrinsic

ewards

381

organizational

ewardscan

impede

task

performance

nd

hence reduce

he

level

of

intrinsic

returns and work satisfaction(Locke, 1976; Oldham, 1976). The present findings and

those

of severalother

recent studies

seem to

suggest

thatall classes

of workers

are

presently

demanding something

more

from

their

work than the traditional

rewards

of

good

pay,

safe and

comfortable

conditions,

and

opportunities

or

getting

ahead.

In

addition

o these

traditional

rewards

they

appear

to

be

looking

for

autonomy,

meaning,

and

challenge

in

work. This

suggests

that

organizational

rewards

have an

upper

limit in

terms

of their

effect

on

work

satisfaction. At

the

same

time,

few

would

deny

their basic

importance.

DISCUSSION

Clearly, the most significantfindingof this studyis the strongrelationshipbetweenwork

satisfactionand

intrinsically

ewarding

work.

Workers,

rrespective

of

occupational

group,

tend

to

assign greater

weight

to

intrinsic

rewards

than to either

social or

organizational

rewards

n

their

overallassessment f work.

These

findings

would seem to be of

considerable

practical importance

or

those

designing

programs

o

increase

worker

satisfaction.

In

a

general

sense,

strategies

to

improve

the

quality

of

life in the

workplace

have been

based on one

of

two

opposing

perspectives

of human nature

and

motivation,

which

McGregor

(1960)

calls

Theory

X

and

Theory

Y.

Theory

X

is

based on the

assumption

that work is

an

unpleasantnecessity,

and therefore

people

dislike

to

work and

will avoid

it

if

possible.

Workersare

motivated

to

do

a

good

job by

extrinsic rewards.

Theory

Y,

in contrast,assumes thatpeople like to work, enjoy doing a good job, and aremotivated

primarily

by

intrinsic rewards.

In

most

cases,

attempts

at

improving

the

workplace,

by

both

management

and labor

unions,

have

been

extrinsically

rientated.

Traditionally,

hese

efforts,

especially

as

applied

to

lower-level

occupations,

have

been based on

the

cynical

view of

work and the

carrot-

and-stick

approach

characteristicof

Theory

X. One

strategy

used

to

improve

inherently

unpleasant

work

has been to reduce

it

by

having

a shorter

work

week,

more

holidays

and

longer

vacations.

Another

strategy

has been to increase

economic

incentives

by providing

higher

wages,

overtime

pay,

pension

plans,

medical

plans,

and

bonuses.

Efforts

have

also

been directed

at

improvingworking

conditionswith

respect

to

such

features

as

safety,

noise, and cleanliness. On the social side, humanrelationstrainingfor supervisorsand

a host

of

employee-centeredprograms

have been utilized.

Unfortunately,

the available

data

suggest

that

increases

in

extrinsic rewards

such

as

these are

not

likely

to

raise

the

level of work

satisfaction

significantly.

The

results of

the

present study

are much

more in line with

those who

advocate

job

redesign

as

a

means

of

enhancing

work satisfaction.

This

strategy,

congruent

with

Theory

Y,

emphasizes

the

potential

richnessof the work

experience

and the

importance

f intrinsic

rewards.Job

redesign nvolving ob enlargement

nd

ob

enrichment

s aimedat

constructing

more

meaningful,

challenging,

and

interesting obs,

and

thereby

increasing

the

level

of

intrinsicreturns. The

weight

of

the researchhas indicated

thatsuch

programs

have been

generallysuccessful in terms of increasedwork satisfactionandalso productivity.Taking

into

account the

findings

of this

and

other recent studies

regarding

the

importance

of

intrinsic

rewards

among

workersand the

problems

associated

with work

dissatisfaction,


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

19/22

382

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol. 26/No.

3/1985

job

redesign

programs

warrant

erious

consideration

by

those

concerned

with

improving

the

quality

of life in the

workplace.

In

conclusion,

the

findings

of

this

study

mustbe viewed as tentative.

Additional

research

on a wider

variety

of

occupations

is

required

o

conclusively

demonstrate heir

validity.

Furthermore,

since the data are

based on

verbal

reports,

one cannot be sure that the

measured

relationships

are not

somewhat

inflated due to

response

bias,

although

efforts

have been made

to

avoid this

problem.

Sample

selection

bias due to the

local nature

of

the

sample may

also be a

problem.

However,

this bias

would

appear

to be

relatively

small as

the

findings

of

this

study

are

very

similar to other

studies based

on

a national

sample

(Cooper

et

al.,

1979;

Gruenberg,

1980).

Finally,

longitudinal

data

or

cohort

analysis

may

be

a

useful

supplement

to the

existing

cross-sectional data

by providing

additionalnformationor

testing

the accommodation

ypothesis.

Nevertheless, hisresearch

has

attempted

o

provide

additional

nsight

into

the natureand

sources

of

work satisfaction

and some

suggestions

for future

research.

NOTES

1.

For an

excellent

review

of the effects of

task rewardson

work

satisfaction,

see

Gruneberg

1979).

2.

Of the

various

occupationalgroups

represented

n

the

six

organizations,

only

hospital

administrators

nd

physicians

declined

to

participate

n the

study.

3. A

factor

analysis

of all

the individual

reward

items

produced

ten

factors,

but

only

the

first nine were

interpreted.These factorscorresponded o the nine workrewarddimensionspreviouslydiscussed. Nine scales

were

then

formed

from

the

corresponding

tems. The

intercorrelations

mong

the nine

work

rewards scales

were

then

factor-analyzed

n

an

attempt

to

identify any higher-order

dimensions,

which

produced

the

results

in

Table

1.

4. Of

course,

one

should

not conclude that

occupation

n

itself is

the

only

factor

effecting

work

values,

as

all

the

variables

relevant to

this issue

have not

been

controlled.

5.

When the

same

regression

was

calculated

for

the entire

sample

both

age

and education

emerged

as

significantpredictors.

The

data

suggested

that

work

satisfaction

s

positively

related

to

age

but

inversely

related

to

education.

Nevertheless,

the

four

background

characteristics

accounted

for

less than four

percent

of the

explained

variance.

REFERENCES

Argyris,

Chris

1957

Personality

and

Organization.

New

York:

Harper

Torchbooks.

Aronowitz,

Stanley

1973

False

Promises: The

Shaping

of American

Working

Class

Consciousness.

New

York:

McGraw-Hill.

Bacharach,

Samuel B. and

Michael

Aiken

1979 The

impact

of

alienation,

meaninglessness,

nd

meritocracy

n

supervisor

nd subordinateatisfaction.

Social

Forces

57:

853-870.

Berk,

Richard

A.

1983 An

introduction o

sample

selection bias

in

sociological

data. American

Sociological

Review

48:

386-398.

Blauner,Robert

1964 Alienation

and

Freedom.

Chicago:

University

of

Chicago

Press.

Campbell,

A.,

P.

E.

Converse,

and

W.

L.

Rogers

1976

The

Quality

of

American

Life:

Perceptions,

Evaluations,

and

Satisfactions,

New York:Russell

Sage.


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

20/22

The

Relative

mportance

f

Intrinsic

nd Extrinsic ewards

383

Centers,

R. and D. E.

Bugental

1966 Intrinsicand extrinsic motivationsamong differentaspects of the workingpopulation. Journalof

Applied

Psychology

50:

193-197.

Cooper,

M.

R.,

B.

S.

Morgan,

P. M.

Foley,

and

L.

B.

Kaplan

1979

Changing

employee

values:

deepening

discontent?

HarvardBusiness

Review

24:

117-125.

DeBoer,

Connie

1978 The

polls:

attitudes oward work.

Public

Opinion

Quarterly

42: 414-423.

Fournet,

Glenn

P.,

M. K.

Distefano, Jr.,

and

Margaret

W.

Pryer

1966

Job

satisfaction: ssues and

problems.

Personnel

Psychology

19:

165-183.

Friedlander,

Frank

1965

Comparative

work

value

systems.

Personnel

Psychology

18:

1-20.

Friedman,

E. A.

and R. J.

Havighurst

1962 Work and

retirement.

Pp.

41-55 in

S.

Nosow and

W. H. Form

(eds.),

Man,

Work,

and

Society.

New York:Basic Books.

Glenn,

Norval D.

1981

Age,

birth

cohorts,

and

drinking:

an

illustration

f

the hazardsof

inferring

effects from cohort data.

Journalof

Gerontology

36:

362-369.

Glenn,

Norval

and

Charles

N.

Weaver

1982a

Further

vidence

on

education

and

job

satisfaction. Social Forces

61:

46-55.

1982b

Enjoyment

of work

by

full-time workers

in the United

states, 1966,

and 1980. Public

Opinion

Quarterly

46:

459-470.

Glenn,

Norval

D.,

Patricia A.

Taylor,

and

Charles

N. Weaver

1977

Age

and

job

satisfaction

among

males

and females: a

multivariate,

multisurvey

survey.

Journal

of

Applied

Psychology

62:

189-193.

Golembiewski,

Robert B.

1977 Testing some stereotypes about the sexes in organizations:differential satisfaction with work?

Human

Resource

Management

16: 30-32.

Goldthrope,

John

H.,

David

Lockwood,

Frank

Bechofer,

and Jennifer

Platt

1969 The

Affluent Worker n

the Class

Structure.London:

CambridgeUniversity

Press.

Gruenberg,

Barry

1980

The

happy

worker: an

analysis

of

educational and

occupational

differences

in determinantsof

job

satisfaction.

American

Journalof

Sociology

86: 247-271.

Gruneberg,

Michael M.

1979

Understanding

Job

Satisfaction. New

York:

Wiley.

Hackman,

RichardJ.

and Edward E.

Lawler III

1971

Employee

reactions to

job

characteristics. Journalof

Applied

Psychology Monography

55: 259-

286.

Hackman, RichardJ. and Greg R. Oldham

1975

Development

of

the

job

diagnostic

survey.

Journalof

Applied

Psychology

60: 159-170.

1979

Work

Redesign. Reading,

MA:

Addison-Wesley.

Herzberg,

Frederick

1966 Work

and the

Nature of Man.

Cleveland,

OH: World.

Kalleberg,

Arne L.

1977

Work

values and

job

rewards:a

theory

of

job

satisfaction. American

Sociological

Review 42: 124-

143.

Katz,

Ralph

1978 Job

longevity

as a

situational actor in

job

satisfaction.

AdministrativeScience

Quarterly

23: 204-

223.

Katz,

Ralph

and John

Van Maanen

1977 The loci of work satisfaction: ob interaction,and policy. Human Relations 30: 469-486.

Katzell,

Raymond

A.

1979

Changing

attitudes

oward

work.

Pp.

35-57 in

C.

Kerr

and J. M. Rosow

(eds.),

Work

n

America,

New York:

Van Nostrand.


8/10/2019 4106221.pdf

21/22

384

THE

SOCIOLOGICAL

UARTERLY

ol. 26/No.

3/1985

King,

Michael,

Michael

A.

Murry,

and

Tom

Atkinson

1982

Background,

personality,

job

characteristics,

and

satisfaction

with work in

a national

sample.

Human

Relations 35:

119-133.

Kirsch,

Barbara

A.

and

Joseph

J.

Lengermann

1971

An

empirical

test of Robert

Baluner's ideas on

alienation

in work

as

applied

to

different

type

jobs

in a

white-collar

setting.

Sociology

and Social Research

56:

180-194.

Locke,

Edwin A.

1969 What is

job

satisfaction?

Organizational

Behavior

and Human

Performance

4:

309-336.

1973 Satisfiers nd

dissatisfiers

mong

white-collar

ndblue-collar

mployees.

Journal f

Applied

Psychology

58: 67-76.

1976 The natureand

consequences

of

job

satisfaction.

Pp.

1297-1349

in M.

D.

Dunnette

ed.),

Handbook

of Industrialand

Organizational

Psychology.

Chicago:

Rand

McNally.

McGregor,

Douglas

1960

The

Human

Side

of

Enterprise.

New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Morse,

Nancy

and Robert

Weiss

1955 The

function

and

meaning

of

work

and the

job.

American

Sociological

Review

20:

191-198.

Mottaz,

Clifford

1981 Some

determinants

of

work

alienation. The

Sociological Quarterly

22:

515-529.

1983

Alienation

among

police

officers. Journalof

Police

Science and

Administration

11: 23-30.

Oldham,

Greg

R.

1976 Job

characteristics

and internal

motivation:

the

moderating

effect

of

interpersonal

and

individual

variables. Human Relations

29:

559-569.

Orpen, Christopher

1976 Social

desirability

s

a moderator f

the

relationship

etween

ob

satisfaction

nd

personal

adjustment.

In

Michael

Gruneberg

ed.),

Job

Satisfaction.

New York:

Halsted.

Phillips,

Derek L.

1973

Abandoning

Method.

San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Pierce,

Jon L.

and Randall B.

Dunham

1976 Task

design:

a

literature

review.

Academy

of

Management

Review

1:

83-97.

Quinn,

Robert P. and

GrahamL. Staines

1979 The

1977

Quality

of

Employment

Survey.

Ann

Arbor,

MI: Institute

for

Social Research.

Robinson,

J.

P.,

R.

Athanasiou,

and K.

Head

1969

Measures

of

Occupational

Attitudes

and

Occupational

Characteristics.

Ann

Arbor,

MI:

University

of

Michigan

Press.

Ronan,

W. W.

1970 Relative

importance

of

job

characteristics.

Journalof

Applied

Psychology

54:

192-200.

Seeman,

Melvin

1967

On the

personal

consequence

of

alienation

n

work.

American

Sociological

Review

32: 273-285.

Seybolt,

John

W. and

Leopold

Gruenfeld

1976 The

discriminant

alidity

of

work

alienation

and work satisfactionmeasures. Journal

f

Occupational

Psychology

49:

193-202.

Sheppard,

Harold L.

and

Neal

Q.

Herrick

1972 Where Have All

the Robots

Gone?

New

York:

The Free Press.

Simonds,

Rolin H. and

John N. Orife

1976 Workerbehavior

versus enrichment

heory.

AdministrativeScience

Quarterly

20: 606-612.

Sims,

Henry

P.

and

Andrew D.

Szilagyi

1976

Job

characteristic

elationships:

ndividual

and structuralmoderators.

Organizational

Behavior

and

Human

Performance 17:

211-230.

Smith, P.,

L.

Kendall,

and C. Hulin

1969 The

Measurementof

Satisfaction in

Work and

Retirement.

Chicago:

Rand

McNally.

Tausky,

Curt

1969

Meanings

of

work

among

blue-collar men.

Pacific

Sociological

Review

12:

49-55.


4106221.pdf

Documents

Transcript of 4106221.pdf