RESEARCH STUDY ON THE CORRELATION BETWEEN EMPLOYEE ...

RESEARCH STUDY ON THE CORRELATION BETWEEN EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION AND EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION

Teoh Teik Toe (James Cook University Australia – Singapore Campus) Werner R. Murhadi (Universitas Surabaya, Indonesia) Wang Lin (Anglia Ruskin University, UK)

ABSTRACT In most companies in today's world, motivating employees to perform to their maximum potential in their jobs is one of the key elements in modem Human Resource Management. It is believed that when an employee is motivated, he will be generally satisfied with his job and because that he is happy, he will be able to give his best efforts and contribution to the job assign to him. However, there are various types of motivation to everyone, and usually it may not be the same for each employee in the company or in that particular department. Employee motivation can be varied due to a number of dependent variables like personal needs, external rewards, recognition, self-actualization and self-esteem. This can be found in many previous studies and literatures. In this research study, the researcher reviewed the various motivation factors and examined various employees' demographics like age, gender, education level and job tenure that may link to their level of job satisfaction and as a result achieves better performance in their work. Descriptive analysis using quantitative approach was employed through a survey questionnaire posted to 120 employees in the company chosen. Factors like remuneration, job security, teamwork, relations with clients and bosses, recognition, sense of given authority and autonomy, promotion and fringe benefits, challenging activities and fear of failures are asked in the questionnaire and the results were analyzed to observe the correlation between motivation factors with job satisfaction. Keywords: Motivation, Job Satisfaction, Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, Synergy

1. Introduction With the fast changing world, especially in the last few decades, in modern industries that require higher skill sets and knowledge based industries, employers can hardly continue to exploit workers for maximum output while not offering the appropriate and competitive commensuration accordingly. With improved literacy and the easy access to internet, tapping into unlimited and enormous information through the world almost without boundaries, people can now see and hear for themselves and compare what they are currently working as, the job scope and exposure for advancement and the salary that they are drawing versus what the outside world or other companies may be able to offer. This new globalization reality need to be understood by the employer and in order to maintain competitiveness, attracting and retaining key talents in this highly competitive global markets, the company requires to model and develop the right workforce to excel in their businesses. Few people in this world now will just work contentedly for one company for life if they feel that they can get more elsewhere, whether if it is in terms of money, exposure, job scope enlargement and career advancement. Beck (1983) identified that happy employees tend to be more motivated and will be faithful to a company. They will conduct themselves and work on the assignments assigned to them more enthusiastically and passionately and consequently yielding higher quality output. Field (2008) also observed that company business success is usually tied to having a team of employees who are greatly satisfied with what they are doing and the conditions and environment that the company offers them in their workspace. There were many other studies in the past on this related topic in finding the correlation between employees job satisfaction versus employees motivation and linking that to the impact to company's businesses. According to Beck (1983), there were four basic perspectives that can ignite motivation at a workplace. They were the economic condition of that person, the social relationship he has or desire to have, self-actualization of his aspirations and get recognition and lastly a combination of all the above elements. A rational economic employee placed economic returns above other aspects of the job and his behavior and vigor on the job came from the monetary rewards he gets from his employer for the job. Some organizations who believed that man was rational and economic will emphasize on dishing out aggressive monetary rewards like raising salary and fringe benefits to motivate the employees. The Second theory assumed that the elementary need of a man is the social relationship he desire to have in the society or his circle of friends and colleagues. This kind of man will weigh interpersonal relationships with colleagues, supervisors, customers, suppliers or whoever they he has to interact with in his job as one of the key motivating factor for him. As long as the company create that happy environment for him and he

get together well with others, he is happy and motivated. The third theory was man's self-actualization. He wants to get recognize by his supervisor or the community whenever he contributed to the success of an assignment or project. He aspires to get full credit and recognition in the forms of praises or compliments through non-monetary awards. Organization that believes in this will create a system to reward high performers and celebrate the success of each project no matter how big or small the project is. The last perspective was on a complex person. This person has the emotions, abilities, motives and desires of all above mentioned elements. His emphasis will change from time to time and place to place and is also dependent on the kind of assignment he is put on. He exhibits the behavior of almost wanting everything to come his way and sometimes over estimated his own capabilities. Intrinsic conditions are sometimes more powerful than work related characteristics of a person . Spector (2003) has defined motivation as an inner state of mind of a person that influences him to display s specific type of behavior. There were two types of motivation according to Spector (2003). One kind that motivates a person in the direction of a type of behavior amongst all other behaviors while the second type was that the individual achieves motivation with the strong desire to achieve certain goal. The second type was derived from a person's individual needs and desires. Petri (1996) described that motivation was a force that exerts on an individual to initiate a special behavior and sometimes this behavior can be more intense than others and varies depending on the situation. Under the context of a workplace in an organization, Pinder (1998) regarded work motivation as a set of internal and external forces that triggers behaviors that were work related. He defined work motivation was invisible and created within a person's inner self. Gouws (1995) also established that consciously or unconsciously, motivation originates within an individual self. This kind of intrinsic self-motivation often drives the person to accomplish a particular job with success in mind and any external rewards or awards are not important to him. Sense of selffulfilling and self-accomplishment is all it takes. Niekerk (1987) also stated that the creation of a motivated workplace environment and conditions can exert a strong influence on a person to perform on his own wish, whereby he can attain certain personal goal that satisfies his own needs. Beach (1980) defined motivation as the readiness to use up the energy to attain a target or incentive. These behaviors can be repeated on different assignments or jobs easily with the right incentive but however if the behavior is not duly rewarded or worse still gets punished for the wrong reason, this behavior will diminish over time. Eventually this will be linked to whether a person feels satisfied by performing an activity or just wanting to get involved in the activity. In this study, the researcher regarded employee motivation as an

instinctive force that was molded by a set of personal and workplace characteristics that drive the particular need and motives of the workers. The concept of motivation has great influence on personnel desire to work whole heartedly for the organization and can make significant impact in determining the effectiveness of an organization and company's business success. Thus, it was critical for an organization to focus on the factors that will result in job satisfaction and employee motivation. Managers need to have a good knowledge about different motivational theories and effectively uncover the real desire in each employee or team and adopt the right theory on the person or team to get optimal results. This is a vicious cycle, the more motivated employee will be, the more he / she will be satisfied, and the better he performs, and because he performs well and is a happy employee, the others who work around him will be infected and will also be self-motivated to perform as well and remain happy and satisfied. The morale of the individual, the team and the company will also improve. Motivating employees is considered as one key factor that can create the power in making workers feel satisfied with their jobs. Employer can only motivate workers in the form by creating the conditions and environment that make people feel happy and satisfied t o give their heart and soul to the job and the company. The contributions from the employees are key determinants of any organizational success and it is closely linked to creating highly motivated workforce that encompassing great job satisfaction among the employees. So is this just a perception or is employee job satisfaction really linked to employee motivation whereby employee will be more devoted and intellectually more active in working on his job assignment? In this study, we used statistical measurements to validate this correlation between employee satisfaction and employee motivation. The question for this research was to validate if there was any significant correlation between employee job satisfactions with employee level of motivation. In this study, we was to identify motivation techniques that will enhance job satisfaction and their significance and the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, social relations and employee inner desire have on job satisfaction. This study also extended to look at the possible influence of employee job satisfaction with varying demographics. 2. Literature Review 2.1.Employee Motivation The term motivation is defined as the energy that enables a person in advancing towards in achieving certain goal. Dunnette, Hough and Triandis (1990) stated that motivation is a label for determinants of choice to begin effort on a certain task, the choice to expand a certain amount of effort, and the choice to persist in the efforts over a period of time." Motivation is therefore classified as an individual's behaviour which is the result of some inter-related factors where some of them have to be maintained as constants suck as skills,

abilities and knowledge. Motivation can also be linked to physical and psychological needs of human beings. Examples of physical needs are hunger and safety while psychological needs include the aspiration in attaining a specific goal that may appear to be ideal. Pinder (1998) regarded motivation as "a set of internal and external forces that triggers work related behaviours that determine its form, intensity, direction and duration." This relates to both the influence of environmental forces and personal inherent thoughts on his work behaviour. 2.2.Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction can be defined as the overall effect that one person has towards his job (Arnold and Feldman, 1986) or was a summary of employee attitudes towards a multi-faceted job (Beck, 1983). Sempane, Rieger and Roodt (2002) describes job satisfaction as a relation on one person's own assessment on his job against the matters and concerns that matter to them, and these sentiments and emotions involved will considerably have an influence on this person's work attitude. 2.3.Motivation & Job Satisfaction It was believed that's there was a fundamental correlation between employee motivation that led to employee job satisfaction, resulting higher quality and committed workforce which then led to improved companies performance and profitability. Maslow (1968) stated that the key foundation in building this relationship was largely due on the individual's insight and attitude at the workplace depending on their personal needs and their respective discernment of several aspects that might be related to the job in the organization. In Vroom's (1964) expectancy theory, he suggested that each employee possessed his individual needs, and with the right motivation satisfying his needs, he was able to alter his behaviour and work attitude towards the job or task assigned to him based on his expectancy of a certain outcome. Thus it was important that a company needed to examine this fundamental relationship between motivation and job satisfaction as the empirical study (Herzberg, 1966) that different aspects on individual personal lives ofthe employee could exert a tremendous force to motivate or demotivate an employee towards their work performance, and undoubtedly could be related to the success or failure of the organization. Individual personal motivation should not be seen as the only justification of work behaviours of an employee in isolation, but rather should encompass the combination on company's intervening processes and the surrounding environment (Luthan, 1977). He argued that motivation is a cognitive process and can be determined by the behaviours ofthe individual but could not be associated with the causes of the behaviours.

Many studies had been made in this area of finding a correlation between employee motivation and employee job satisfaction, and how that could be linked to work performance under different workplace environment and culture and also how that could link to the individual personal life (Fried and Ferris, 1987). Olbert and Moen (1998) had tried to explain the linkage between motivation and job satisfaction and performance of an individual and if only the management team understood that intricate relationships, they could then place the right motivations on specific individuals to enhance their love for the job and would have better results on their performance. Carnige (1985) suggested that human resource was one of the most important aspects to determine the success or failure of a company. As such, the studies on human psychology and characteristics could not be neglected in motivating the employees to achieve the right behaviour for the right results. Lawler (2003) echoed the same and he believed that the employees would eventually be the deciding factor on whether the company would prosper in the long run. Roberts (2005) and Rutherford (2002) also stated independently that organizations that could have a systematic process build into the company's policies or practices, and by creating the environment that constantly promote and apply the right motivational catalyst on the employees, would certainly yield the desired effect on having higher productivity and creativity from the employees. 2.3.1. Effect of Intrinsic Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction Kalleberg (1977) stated that one single greatest effect on employee job satisfaction was he achieved intrinsic satisfaction. Employee that had greater job satisfaction was linked to less employee absence and lower turnover rates which were important to an organization success. Job enlargement, job rotation and job enrichment were also some techniques that a company used to raise employees' intrinsic motivation factors. Job enlargement referred to the designing of the job to increase the work activities and responsibilities to overcome employees being bored at the job or felt overspecialized in his field of work. Job rotation on the other hand offered the employee the opportunity to be exposed to different work areas and responsibilities within an organization to allow them to have a broader perspective of the company (Einhorn & Gallegher, 1976). Job enrichment was defined as fostering the intrinsic motivation through giving the employee higher responsibility tasks in the work situation. Employees usually saw that as an endorsement of their job capability in the eyes of their bosses. Receiving due recognition for the work one individual or team had done was also a key element in intrinsic motivation (Stoner, 1989). Only if the employee felt that he was being recognized and appreciated for the success of the job, he would then be more motivated to quickly wanting to work on the next assignment with great enthusiasm and

energy. Human beings were generally active, inquisitive and curious creatures who usually liked to explore and learn. That natural motivational tendency was an important element in cognitive, social and physical development as it was in ones' interest to grow in knowledge and skills (Ryan & Grolnick, 1986). Intrinsic motivation had been judged whether employees enjoy the selfrated task or volunteer to do job without extrinsic reasons, such like higher pay, incentive or promotion persist. Deci & R y a n ( 1 9 8 5 ) stated that intrinsic motivation relied on employee's self-determination and self-competence. Locke (1976) indicated job satisfaction as "a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from an appraisal of one's job or job experiences". Spreitzer, et.al (2005) thriving at work concept combined the emotions of vigor and enthusiasm with beliefs that individual is studying, developing towards self-value. Bakker and Demerouti (2008) also defined it as: "a positive, Fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and Absorption", and "Vigor is characterized by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working. Dedication referred to being strongly involved in one's work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, and challenge. Absorption was characterized by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one's work, whereby time passes quickly and one had difficulties with detaching oneself from work." Shirom (2003) defined vigor at work as positive emotional experience combined energetic factors like physical strength, positive mental energy and cognitive activeness. Individuals could be characterized by their vigor level since it was a stable person level variable. However, a person's vigor at work may fluctuate due to any reason or anytime, so it should be studied at a transient scenario also.

2.3.2. Effect of Extrinsic Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction Generally extrinsic motivation was defined as when one person was performing a job under the feeling of pressured, tension or anxiety as he wanted to achieve certain desired results (Lindenberg, 2001). Extrinsic motivation would include components like remuneration, working conditions, autonomy, job security, fringe benefits, bonuses and promotion in position (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Extrinsic aspects also referred to as tangible rewards that were given out to employees which were generally materialistic or observable by others (Bellenger et al, 1984). According to those theories, extrinsic motivation played a vital role in harnessing employee job satisfaction. The workplace condition was one key factor affecting employee behaviour or attitude towards the job. The amount of stress level in the job, the leadership and climatic changes surrounding the workplace could affect the mood and energy level of the employee. Employee generally performed better if he was under a more conducive environment with favorable work conditions (Busch and

Bush, 1978). Ritter and Anker (2002) also iterated that job security was one of the other important extrinsic factor that has a direct relationship to job satisfaction. When an employee felt that there were risks in losing his job because of the tasks that he was doing were not adding value to the company, or not being recognized by his boss, he would always be in the worried mode and having that constant concern in his mind, he would not be satisfied with his job and hence had negative impact on his job performance. Promotion and pay also had direct impact on employee job satisfaction. If the employee felt that he was underpay or not getting the appropriate salary, bonuses or fringe benefits compared to others either in the same company of similar job functions or outside of the company, he would not be motivated and satisfied with his job (Rehman et al, 2007). 2.3.3. Synergy or Social Relations on Job Satisfaction There were many researches usually focused on the relationship between job satisfaction with self-autonomy, promotion or incentive system or other external factors. However some of the studies also found that the social factors such like the relationship with customer, colleague or management and surrounding environment also played an important role towards job satisfactions. More frequent communication with other people would have stronger effect on job satisfaction. Employees might not get satisfaction through working autonomy, promotion or other external factors, but through the good social relationship and interaction with surrounding people, the satisfaction level might recover .. "Social support not only predicted satisfaction beyond the task and knowledge characteristics, but it was also unrelated to training and compensation requirements, so it is kind of a no-cost improvement," (Meyers, 2007). Jex (2002) indicated when an individual works with team, a positive attitude towards their job would be generated, especially when his I her work was satisfied by surrounding people, he I her job satisfaction level would be raised. But once the job has been denied by team members, the job satisfaction level would be dropped. Thus a company needed to train its employees to face the social situation positively. In general, all the researchers were in agreement that social factors / environment have strong influence on employee's attitudes and behaviors. There was a Germany company even stated a rules on its employments contract that employees who work for the company could not complain with their job in any reason, they even fired employees who made to many complains (Brian, 2011). 2.3.4. Effects of Challenges in the Job Requirements on Job Satisfaction Locke (1976) argued that employee' value would determine by what able to satisfy them on the job, only the unfulfilled job values that was important to make them unsatisfied. The relationship between job characteristics and

satisfaction was based on individual's growth need strength (GNS). GNS means the degree of individual desire for self-development on their career. High level GNS employees were willing to contribute their ideas to the job, and performing challenging and rewarding activities. Another way to measure a person's GNS was by choosing whether "good pay" or "good opportunity to be creative and challenge". High GNS people prefer a job is interesting and innovative which allowed them to develop themselves by achieve goals. The researches established that high GNS employees had higher job satisfaction rate than low GNS employees. But one exception was that for those employees did not want to take any responsibly and only preferred a routine job, if giving them a challenging job, it might decrease their satisfaction(Frye, 1996). The job characteristics model mentioned that the major factor affects employee satisfaction was the intrinsic nature of work. Timothy and Ryan (2003) as cited in Hackman and Oldham (1980) identified that the five major characteristics contribute to employees' challenging and fulfilling their job: (1) Task Identity Enabled employee to perform a job from beginning to the end. (2) Skill Variety - Increased skills for employee to performing better job. (3) Task Significance - Provided work that was important and significant. (4) Autonomy - Increased the degree of decision making, and authority to decide how to conduct own work. (5) FeedbackIncreased the degree of recognition of job performing, and giving feedback. According to above theory, jobs that were enriched by addressing these factors were likely to meet employees' needs for challenging and fulfilling in their job, hence employees might feel more satisfied and motivated. 3. Research Methodology The research approach employed for this study was the deductive approach. This descriptive research design was then selected for this specific research study to understand the ways how employee motivation would relate to job satisfaction using quantitative research and analysis through a survey. IBM was chosen to be the company for this study. This company has a workforce of 40,000 employees, and it is a multi-faceted company that offers a wide range of dynamic hardware and software products. A 120 employees working in this company sample size was decided on this survey. It comprised of employees from top management team, middle management team as well as general staff workers. The 120 employees selected from IBM were distributed across the demographic variables as shown in the table below:

Table 1. Demographic Composition Range Number of Sample Below 30 42 30 – 45 34 Above 45 24 Gender Male 84 Female 36 Years of Service Fresh Graduate/below 5yr 48 experience 5 – 10 years experience 35 Above 10 years 37 Educational level Below College 17 Degree 45 Master 24 Higher than Master 14 A survey was used as the vehicle in collecting this data. The 34 items survey was carefully designed on Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Four questions were targeted to have the variable on demographics (age, gender, working experience & educational level) while 30 questions were on motivating factors that include job requirement, synergy, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, which might the relationship have effect on job satisfaction. To understand between variables use of bivariate analysis is done, where the use of contingency tables, cross tabulations, regression & correlation analysis tests the relationship between two variable. Data analysis in this study would be done using SPSS. Demographic Criteria Age

4. Results, Analysis & Discussion Table 2 show Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient table for all the data range was from 0.54 to 0.851 across all the items. These data were showed that motivation extrinsic & intrinsic factors were much closed with Job satisfaction. Table 2. Motivation Factors Reliability Indicators Cronbach Alpha Job Requirement Activities 0.763 Achievement 0.661 Competition 0.739 Fear of failure 0.851 Synergy Teamwork 0.733

Relationship with managers Ease and security Intrinsic Factors Creativity Work Autonomy Extrinsic Factor Increment Promotion position

0.552 0.693 0.542 0.723 0.669 0.685 0.734

Table 3 was overviewed the raw data have been corrected from the survey and present in deeply that variance samples on the various factors of employee motivation and job satisfaction relationship. Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Motivation Factors Descriptive Statistic (n=118) Activities Achievement Competition Fear of failure

Min. Raw Score

Max Raw Score

Mean Raw Score Job Requirement

Mean Sten

Std.Deviation Raw Score

9

36

23.37

3.9

5.291

20

40

32.81

5.1

3.576

14

38

29.71

5.89

4.143

8

36

17.11

3.97

6.615

Synergy Teamwork Relationship with managers Ease and security

18 26

40 40

31.11 35.03

5.52 6.58

4.250 3.586

25

39

33.12

6.1

3.122

Intrinsic Factors Creativity

22

39

32.58

4.8

3.465

Work Autonomy

10

27

19.94

5.1

3.779

Increment Promotion

27

8.65

3.260

position

Extrinsic Factor 40 36.36

24

40

34.86

6.61

3.494

23

39

32.22

6.38

3.794

The raw score scales range was from 8 to 40. Higher score, higher motivational value will be attached to the particular scale represented construct. The mean sten scores in the Job requirement dimension range were from 3.9 to 5.89; those data in the Synergy was from 5.54 to 6.1; intrinsic range was from 4.80 to 5.1; extrinsic dimension was from 4.8 to 8.65. Data showed the lowest score was injob requirement dimension, From the standard deviations indicated for each scale was proved that the variance of scores within the different scales was relatively small. These ranged from 3.122 to 6.615. The variance between the different scales was also low. Regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and motivation and the impact of demographic variable on their relationship, the analysis of variance test (ANOVA) was used on the below raw scores. The impacts of demographic variables on the determination of job satisfaction for each level of employees were related to the findings as discussed in above section. Age, educational background, gender and years of working are factors that would have direct influence on the level of job satisfaction. Table 4. Demografic Factor (Age) and Job Satisfaction Scales: (Age Group – Mean)

Competition Position Relationship with manager Company Profitability

Below 30 (n=64) Raw Score (Sten) 30.761 (6.145) 32.917 (6.718) 12.139 (7.86) 10.812 (6.87)

30 - 45 (n=31) Raw Score (Sten) 27.436 (5.313) 31.531 (6.305) 13.033 (8.29) 11.823 (7.12)

45 & older (n=13) Raw Score (Sten) 29.512 (5.540) 30.122 (5.174) 13.816 (8.79) 11.547 (7.69)

F-value

p value

3.461

0.044

3.931

0.020

4.069

0.025

3.081

0.047

Table 5. Demografic Factor (Gender) and Job Satisfaction Scales: (Gender = Mean)

Fear of Failure Task Characteristics Working environment Creativity Relationship with manager

Female (n=62) Raw Score (Sten) 15.846 (3.612) 43.79 25.512 11.051 (7.436) 13.113 (8.225)

Male (n=54) Raw Score (Sten) 18.419 (4.238) 48.417 27.619 12.211 (8.315) 12.363 (7.691)

F-value

p value

-2.16

0.01

-2.57 -2.05 -2.38

0.01 0.03 0.02

2.238

0.02

Company Profitability Promotion System Work Autonomy Job Security Teamwork

11.465 (7.168) 8.658 (6.365) 8.131 (5.519) 10.776 (4.414) 8.625 (5.603)

10.667 (6.830) 9.217 (7.247) 9.158 (6.328) 12.032 (4.807) 9.649 (6.386)

2.532

0.01

-2.55

0.01

-2.14

0.04

-2.42

0.01

-2.1

0.04

Table 6. Demografic Factor (Working Experience) and Job Satisfaction Scales: (Working Exp. = Mean)

Fear of Failure Creativity Work Autonomy Job Security

Fresh Graduate (n=29) Raw Score (Sten) 20.10 11.59 (7.55) 10.14 (6.72) 10.28 (6.86)

2-5 yr (n=36) Raw Score (Sten) 20.33 11.03 (7.06) 9.17 (6.00) 9.50 (6.39)

5-10 yr (n=22)

23.14 10.36 (6.45) 8.68 (5.68) 8.68 (5.86)

10+ yr (n=10)

26.60 10.60 (6.60) 9.80 (6.30) 8.60 (5.60)

F-value

p value

3.43 3.18

0.011 0.016

2.68

0.035

2.58

0.041

Table 7. Demografic Factor (Educational Level) and Job Satisfaction Scales: (Working Exp. = Mean)

Competition Adaptability Quantity Work Equal Opportunity

Bellow College (n=24)

Degree (n=43)

Raw Score (Sten) 30.58 (6.42) 32.04 (4.42) 11.88 (7.04) 10.88 (6.42)

Raw Score (Sten) 30.40 (6.33) 31.79 (4.00) 12.63 (7.51) 10.53 (6.23)

Master (n=21)

Raw Score 27.43 (4.90) 33.76 (5.52) 13.05 (7.90) 12.48 (7.57)

Higher than Master (n=28) Raw Score 29.64 (5.86) 33.64 (5.29) 13.54 (8.18) 12.29 (7.36)

F-value

p value

2.97

0.035

2.74

0.047

3.04

0.03

4.27

0.01

From above analyze, the researcher found that strong impact on job satisfaction were the age of employees as young aged employees were observed to be more highly satisfied with their jobs than those at old age. Employee with higher educational level such as degree holders would have different view in terms of

job satisfaction. Motivation factors such as level of commitment, competition and challenges connected with their tasks had shown a trend of high job satisfaction for the more educated employees. Different results were also displayed with the two scales of gender. Male employees were observed to be more satisfied than their female colleagues in term of job satisfaction from different motivation factors. The last demographic variable was years of working. From the data, it was seen that employees who had a longer number of years working with the company are gaining more job satisfaction that those who had less years of working. In this section, the researcher will use SPSS to input the various Motivation Factors affecting employee Job satisfaction that were designed in the survey questionnaire to analyse the key hypothesis of each motivating factor whether they had any effect on employee job satisfaction. 1. Effect of Intrinsic Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction Psychological rewards such as giving a recognized status, authorization in decision making and recognition of one’s effort would generate high job satisfaction. According to SPSS analysis, we found that T test = 7.496 and F test 6.936 showed that we can accept the alternate hypothesis, that is there is a correlation between employee recognition and employee job satisfaction. 2. Effect of Extrinsic Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction In the literature review section, we propose that extrinsic motivation such as employee salary, job security, and employee benefit p ackage that would contribute to job satisfaction. According to SPSS analysis, we found that T test = 1.753 and F test = 2.1478 showed that we can’t reject the null hypothesis, that is there is no a correlation between employee salary and employee job satisfaction. But we found there is positive correlation between employee benefit package and employee job satisfaction with T test value 5.389 and F Test 6.246. For the job security, we found that T test = 5.384 and F test 6.891 showed that we can accept the alternate hypothesis, that is there is a correlation between job security and employee job satisfaction. 3. Synergy or Social Relations on Job Satisfaction The relationship with management level and team work were also another influencing factors on job satisfaction extracted from the aspect of synergy. According to SPSS analysis, we found that T test = 5.762 and F test 6.178 showed that we can accept the alternate hypothesis, that is there is a correlation between employee relationship with Manager and employee job satisfaction. 4. Effects of Challenges in the Job Requirements on Job Satisfaction From the aspect of working environment such as enthusiasm, vigor, & fear of failure; and achievements were factors would determine the job satisfaction level of an employee. According to SPSS analysis, we found that T test = 4.762 and F test 5.178 showed that we can accept the alternate hypothesis, that is there is a correlation between working environment and employee job satisfaction. For self

achievement, we found that T test = 8.846 and F test 8.284 showed that we can accept the alternate hypothesis, that is there is a correlation between employee slef achievement and employee job satisfaction. The theories from the existing literature had obviously stated that the key influencing factor that affected the employees' performance is their job satisfaction level. What type of employee will be beneficial to an organization? Organization wanted loyal employees who were committed and able to contribute to the growth and what was deemed as loyal are employees who had great satisfaction with their jobs. Usually, the resulting factor that mainly why an employee quitted was because he/she was not satisfied with the jobs. As such, job satisfaction was an essential factor and to keep a low turnover rate, employees must be satisfied with their jobs. Not only that, a continuing energetic and devoted workforce was also preserved. To recruit employees with great competence level and the basis to retain them for a long term became an argument factor. Employers should possess the knowledge of employees' motivation factors and job satisfaction level based on individual characteristic and capability as empirical data revealed that work commitment and challenges are easily achieved with high level of motivation and job satisfaction. Upon comparing the empirical data in review with the existing literature, the findings had mostly matched with the secondary data that validate with the study of this research. Motivation was a complicated matter and is viewed as an individual thing influenced by many factors. There were many changes in individuals and are conflicting in terms of expectations and needs which involve in many different ways for them to be satisfied. The factors extracted from the aspect of extrinsic motivation were job security, promotions and remunerations that would contribute to job satisfaction. Another influential factor in determining job satisfaction was intrinsic motivation. Psychological rewards such as giving a recognized status, authorization in decision making and recognition of one's effort would generate high job satisfaction. Management should introduce intrinsic motivation as many employees were found to be highly satisfied through the recognition for what they do and this will just enhance an employee to perform even better. Nobody wanted to take challenges and usually the worry from the employee was because of not able to accomplish unattainable goals. Employees should be assigned with challenging tasks which were attainable with the opportunity to progress further. In general, employees were satisfied with their jobs unless they can foresee that there was progression. What you sowed determines what you reaped. An opportunity to progress further will result in high job satisfaction.

The relationship with management level and teamwork were also another influencing factors on job satisfaction extracted from the aspect of synergy. With regards to that, it did not derive that people were very much satisfied by having connection with the big names in an organization. However, the result from empirical data showed that people were highly motivated if they have connection with those big names at their workplace and that contradicted from the findings. From the aspect of enthusiasm and vigor, achievements and fear of failure were factors that would determine the job satisfaction level of an employee. However, working in a competitive environment was something that many people would like to avoid and this has something to do with age. Old age people were the majority among those who dislike competition. It was thus suggested that old age employees should avoid working in a competitive level and employees with younger age should be assigned with more aggressive tasks and higher competitive level. 5. Conclusion & Recommendations The conclusions driven by the results of this research that demographic variables did play a significant role on impacting the level of job satisfaction for each individual. From the research, it was observed that age has contributed a big impact on the job satisfaction level of an employee. The trend had shown that old age employees are less satisfied with their jobs. Factor such as competitive jobs did not favor the older age employees and would not enhance their job satisfaction level. In addition, motivation factor such as commitment and having connection with the organization would have an influencing role on job satisfaction level for old age employees. As such, organization should consider such factors in old age employees. A great level of commitment should be introduced to this scope of employees because that would boost their job satisfaction level so that the assigned tasks will be accomplished. Another factor extracted from the demographic variable was the academic background which also related to the employees job satisfaction level. A comparison with staff that had lower qualification in terms educational level, the results displayed that staff with high educational level were less satisfied with their jobs. This was derived from motivation factor such as competition, challenges and level of activity being assigned to them. Highly educated employees would rather prefer tasks with greater responsibility. It was a fact from the results that this scope of employees was more satisfied with tasks that were challenging and competitive which will became a motivation factor. Employers should then plan and consider when assigning task to the various level of employees with different educational background. The other significant factor exhibit from the demographic variable that has impact on the level of job satisfaction was gender. In terms of satisfactory level, male staffs were seems to be less satisfied as compared to their female

counterparts. Mainly, female have more concern regarding job security, develop better relationship among colleagues and bosses, high sense on fear of failure and higher authority in an organization which were factors that was suggesting why female employees were more satisfied. Women usually disliked challenges and do not wish to assign with jobs which require high commitment and these were factors which tell why female employees were unsatisfied. As mentioned, due to the high sense on fear of failure from male employees, they should be assigned with more challenging task as that could motivate them to put extra effort because they would not want to fail their mission and besides, when the task was accomplished, a sense of achievement will increase their job satisfaction level. As shown from the data of this research, different number of working years also had an impact on employees' job satisfaction level. Usually at start, employees tended to have higher level of job satisfaction and that was always at the very first year. With the increased in years of working with an organization, that level started to decrease. To keep staff from quitting and to preserve their job satisfaction level, especially staff who had worked after the first or second years, employers should keep a lookout on these staff behavior and ample attention should be provided in terms of their needs and necessities. Motivation factor like creating a more competitive working environment which would give the employees a sense of achievement and at the same time they could also assess and understand their level of performance. The job satisfaction level for this scope of employees would be raised through a competitive and achievement based environment. The research work has the following constraints and was described as follows: the sample taken or used for this research study was only from one organization and on top of that, sample size was very limited if compared to the population of a company. If there were more samples taken in terms of sample size and from more than one organization, then the results attained will be more specific. This study can be further researched to extend the findings in the following areas: 1) Extend the research to other companies in other companies of different size and different global presence. This was to test if the hypothesis that employee motivation factors do indeed affect job satisfaction. And 2) This study can also be extended to include the correlation of motivation factors to employee job satisfaction and how this will vary in different corporate cultures. REFERENCES Arnold, H.J. & Feldman, D.C. (1986). Organizational Behavior. New York: McGrawHill Baron, H., Henley, S., McGibbon, A. & McCarthy, T. (2002).Motivation Questionnaire Manual and User’s Guide. Sussex: Saville and Holdsworth Limited.

Bickman, L., & Rog, D. (2009).The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE. Beach, D. (1975). Personnel: The Management of People at Work (3d ed.). New York: Macmillan. Beck, R. (1983).Motivation: Theories and Principles (2nded.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Bellenger, D., Wilcox, J. & Ingram, T. (1984).An Examination of Reward Preferences for Sales Managers. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 4(2), 1-6. Balsley, H., (2006). Research for Business Decisions: Business Research Methods (4th Edition). Gordon & Breach: Bristol. Bechhofer, F., (2007). Principles of research design in the social sciences (5th Ed.). Routledge: London Brian, F., (2011). Work Attitudes and Job Motivation. Pennstate. [Accessed 30, April 2012] Bainbridge, C., (2012). Definition of Intrinsic Motivation: What is Intrinsic Motivation? Gifted Children. [Accessed 26, April 2012] Busch, P. & Bush, R., (1978). Women Contrasted To Men In The Industrial Sales Force: Job Satisfaction, Values, Role Clarity, Performance and Propensity To Leave. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(3),438 - 448. Dunnette, M., Hough, L., & Triandis, H., (1990).Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2nded.). Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting Psychologists Press. Cohen-Rosenthal, E., & Cairnes, L., (1991).Doing the Best Job. Journal for Quality and Participation, 14(3),48 - 53. Coster, E., (1992).The Perceived Quality of Working Life and Job Facet Satisfaction. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 18, 6-9. Clark, A. (1997). Why Are Women So Happy at Work? Labor Economics, 4,341-72. Deci, E., & Ryan, R., (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum. Doering, M., Rhodes, S.,& Schuster, M., (1983). The Aging Worker. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Du Plessis, S. (2003). Purpose is Alive and Well and Living Inside You Key Feature. Career Success, 3(1), 1 - 2. Einhorn, H., & Gallagher, W., (1976).Motivation Theory and Job Design. The Journal of Business, 49(3),358-373. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Lowe, A., (2007).Management Research: An Introduction (4thed). Sage Publication: London.

Fried, Y. & Ferris, G., (1987). The Validity of the Job Characteristics Model: A Review and Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287 ~322. Field, J. (2008). Job Satisfaction Model for Retention. TalentedApps. [Accessed 26, April 2012] Gouws, A.(1995). The Relationship Between Motivation and Job Satisfaction of a Group of Information Specialists. Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg. Hair, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19 (2),139-151. Hackman, J., & Oldham, G., (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley. Hadebe, T., (2001). Relationship Between Motivation and Job Satisfaction of Employees at Vista Information Services. M. A. dissertation, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg. Herzberg, F., (1966).Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World Pub, Co. Hoole ,C. & Vermeulen, P. (2003). Job Satisfaction Among South African Pilots. South African Journal ofIndustrial Psychology, 29 (1),52 -57. Hinton, M., &Biderman, M. (1995). Empirically Derived Job Characteristics Measures and The Motivating Potential Score. Journal of Business Psychology, 9, 355-364. Hull, C., (1943). Principles of Behavior, an Introduction to Behavior Theory. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co. Ishikawa, K., (1976). Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo: Asian Productivity Organization. Jernigan, 1., Beggs, J., & Kohut, G., (2002). Dimensions of Work Satisfaction as Predictors of Commitment Type. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(7),564 - 579. John, W., & Peter, N., (1975).The Relationship of Age, Tenure, and Job Satisfaction in Males and Females. The Academy of Management Journal, 18,690-702. Jex, S., (2002). Organizational Psychology: A Scientist-Practitioner Approach. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kalleberg, A., (1977). Work Values and Job Rewards: A Theory of Job Satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42, 124-143. Ketchen, D., & Bergh, D., (2004). Research Methodology in Strategy and Management. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Lawler, E., (2003). Reward Practices and Performance Management System Effectiveness. Organizational Dynamics,32(4), 396. Locke, E., (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. Chicago: Rand Mcnally. Luthans, F., (1977). Organizational Behavior (2nded.). New York: McGraw Hill. Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A.,(2009). Research Methods for Business Students

(stiIed.). Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Locke, E., & Henne, D., (1986). International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chichester: Wiley. Maslow, A., (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. Marczyk, G., (2010). Essential of Research Design and Methodology. London: David Fulton. Myers, J., and Well, A., (2006).Research Design and Statistical Analysis (6th Ed.).Bolton: Mosby Yearbook. McClelland, D.,(1987). Human Motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McGregor, D., (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGrawHill. Meyer, J., (2002). A Comparison between the Performance Motivation Levels of Different Population and Gender Groups. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 28 (3) 8 -14. Meyers, L., (2007). Social Relationships Matter in Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38(4), 14. Newstrom, J., (2011). Organizational Behavior: Human Behavior at Work (13thed.). Boston: McGfaw -Hill/Irwin. Olbert, P.,& Moen, P., (1998). Men's and Women's Definitions of 'good' Jobs: Similarities and Differences by Age and Across Time.Work and Occupations, 25 (2), 169-194. Peti ,R., (1996). Motivation: Theory, Research and Applications (4thed.). New York: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Pinder ,C., (1998). Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, N J: Pretice - Hall. Porter, L., Lawler, E., & Hackman, J., (1975). Behavior in Organizations. New York: McGraw- Hill. Priti, L, (1999). On-the-Job Training: A key to Human Resource Development. Library Management, 20(5), 283-294. Price, J., & Mueller, C., (l986).Absenteeism and Turnover of Hospital Employees. Greenwich, COIUl.Johnson Associates Inc. Press. Ryan, R., & Grolnick, W., (1986). Origins and Pawns in the Classroom: SelfReport and Projective Assessments of Individual Differences in Children's Perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 550-558. Roberts, R., (2005). The Relationship Between Rewards, Recognition and Motivation at an Insurance Company in the Western Cape. South Africa: University of the Western Cape. Rutherford, D., (2002). Hotel Management and Operations (3rded.). New York: Wiley.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (Srded.). Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall Schultz, D., & Schultz, S., (1998). Psychology and Work Today: an Introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (7thed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Shirom, A, (2003). Feeling Vigorous at Work? The Construct of Vigor and the Study of Positive Affect in Organizations. Research in Organizational Stress and Well-Being, 3,135-165. Spector, P., (2003). Industrial and Organizational Psychology - Research and Practice (3rded.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Stoner, C. R. (1989). The foundations of Business Ethics: Exploring the Relationship Between Organizational Culture, Moral Values and Actions Advanced Management Journal, 54,38 - 43. Spreitzer, G., Sutcliffe, K., Dutton, J., Sonenshein, S. and Grant, AM. (2005). A Socially Embedded Model of Thriving at Work. Organization Science, 16, 537-549. Sempane, M., Rieger, H., & Roodt, G. (2002).Job Satisfaction In Relation To Organizational Culture. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 28, 2. Schultz, D. & Schultz, S" (1998). Psychology and Work Today: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology (ihed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Sing, Y., (2007). Research Methodology: Techniques and Trends (ih Edition). USA: The MIT Press. Sloane, P., & Williams, H. (1994).Job Satisfaction, Comparison Income and Gender Differences in Earnings. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen, Dept. of Economics. Timothy A., & Ryan, K. (2003).The Blackwell Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behaviour.Blackwell Reference Online. [Accessed 26, April 2012] The Pennsylvania State University. (2010). Job Satisfaction: Do I Like My Job? Work Attitudes and Motivation. The Pennsylvania State University; World Campus. Visser ,P., Thierry, H., Breed, M.,& Van Breda, R., (1997). Employee Satisfaction: A Triangular Approach. Journal ofIndustrial Psychology, 23 (2),19 - 24. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley. Wright, B., and Davis, R,(2003).

Job Satisfaction in the Public Sector - the

Role ofthe Work Environment American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 70-90 White, R.,(1959).

Motivation

Reconsidered:

The Concept

of Competence.

Psychological Review, 66,297-333. Zikmund, W., (2010).Business Research Methods (sthed.). Mason, OR: SouthWestern Cengage Learning.