 Evans and laseau (1950) have studied various job factors in relation to

components of job satisfaction and identified eleven such factors which were
reported by more than 30% of respondents. These factors in their order of
preference were found to be as follow: income, interesting and important job,
pride in company, fellow workers immediate boss, management, working
conditions, security, chance to get ahead, benefit plans and safety and facilities.
 Ganguli (1957) examine that the existence of three morale dimensions including
workers satisfaction with the total organization and the benefits derived from it,
and two morale dimensions relating to satisfaction with supervision. In another
study Ganguli provided norms for answering the question “what percentage of
Indian employees can be considered as satisfied with their jobs”? We concluded
that nearly 34% employees for made the dissatisfied group whereas only 22%
formed the satisfied group.
 Davis(1957) Herzberg, Mausner and Synderman (1959) Friedman (1961),
Chris Argyris (1964) and Blauner (1964) have studied the consequence of work
simplification on consequent routine and repetitive tasks. They have shown that
simple, routine and un challenging jobs often lead to high employee
dissatisfaction this studies examined the relationships among the characteristics of
job and the attitudinal responses for repetitive work, work and monotony,
monotony and satisfaction, job size and satisfaction etc. These efforts led to the
formulation of a theory of job enlargement. It says that the large jobs are rich in
terms of variety of operation to be performed and therefore lead to higher job
satisfaction and better work motivation.
 Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson and Capwell (1957) have studied more than 150
such studies and listed various job aspects in ten different categories, each aspects
in ten different categories, each representing one job components of job
satisfaction these job factors are briefly defined as follows intrinsic aspects of job,
supervision, supervision, as a factor generally influences job satisfaction, working
condition, wages, and opportunities for advancement, security, company and
management, social aspects of the job, communication and benefits.
 Zaleznik, Cristenson and Rothlisberger (1958) have examined the components
of job satisfaction. They concluded form study that six factors as given below
should be taken into account for various degree of job satisfaction intrinsic
 characteristics of the job, the extended featured of the job, supervisor and his
associates at work, the company and the union.
 Sinhaand Nair (1958) studied that job satisfaction among office and manual
workers and analysed the causative impacts on satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
‘Interesting work’, ‘social status’ and ‘boss’ were found to be crucial factors
contributing to salary and lack of security were regarded as important. Clerical
employees were found to be lower in their satisfaction to what is usually observed
i.e., increase in occupational level.
 Sirota (1959) examined that medium amounts of information about management
philosophy, goals and operations procedures were more highly associated with
employee satisfaction and advancement than were the large or small amounts of
information. The results were interpreted as casting doubt on the assumption that
maximum satisfaction of ego needs results in the highest degree of employee
management harmony.
 Herzberg, Mausner and Synderman (1959) job attitudes are the first factors –
attitudes –effects (F-A-E) complex was studied us interview individuals were
asked to think and report about the times. When they felt most happy with their
jobs (high) and when they felt most unhappy about their jobs (low). These “Nar
rational data” were subjected to rigorous analysis for identifying the potential
satisfiers and dissatisfies. About zoo interviews with accounts and engineers form
nine steel and engineering companies provided data for the study.
 Porter (1961) reporting on the differences between tow managerial levels using a
questionnaire designed to job satisfaction of Maslow’s hierarchical classification
of needs the result indicated that management personnel differ in their need
satisfaction, although the patterns of need satisfaction are similar. Porter’s study
reports significant inter- group differences unlike the Rosen’s findings.
 Sinha and Singh (1961) studied on the job satisfaction and absenteeism. They
selected random samples of 50 high absentee and 50 low absentee workers from
varies departments of Tisco, Jamshedpur. A job satisfaction questionnaire
consisting of items off our components of job satisfaction was administered to
them. These four items were nature of work, wages and security, supervisors and
supervision and company‘s overall personnel policy. They foun1Qd that a simple
 analysis to test the differences in averages using t-test showed that low absentees
were significantly more satisfied with their job than high absentees.
 Sinha and Sharma (1962) studied on attitude and job satisfaction. They
randomly selected 100 workers from a light engineering factory around Culcutta.
The factory had a single recognized union affiliated to all India Trade Union
Congress. The union membership consisted of nearly 97% of the total workforce.
They were administered questionnaire. The results of the product moment
correlation showed a coefficient value of 0.47 between the two, which is
statistically significant. It suggested that the greater the job satisfaction, the less
favourable was the attitude towards the union.
 Harrell’s (1964) studied a long list of the determinants of job satisfaction by
grouping them into three broad factors. Each factor was identified as being
composed of a number of job aspects. These are as follows, personal factors,
factors inherent in the job and factor controlled by management.
 Vroom (1964) pointed out that “There is a causal relationship between some
characteristic work role and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction in environmentally
determined. However besides environmental variable having effect on job
satisfaction personality of the workers also has an effect on job satisfaction.
Persons laho are satisfied with their jobs are assumed to differ systematically in
their personalities from those who are dissatisfied”.
 Portar and Lowler (1965) examine that provide additional data and report that
higher order needs accounted for more significant relationships than lower order
needs. Therefore it can be stated that job satisfaction increases at each higher level
of management and the patterns of need satisfaction are similar across different
organizational levels within the managerial rank. But they did not report
correlations between these need and performance. Therefore, no evaluation can be
made between satisfaction and performance.
 Centers and Bugental (1966) examine that distinguished between intrinsic and
extrinsic factors intrinsic factors like self-expression, autonomy etc., are important
at determinates of job satisfaction at higher occupational levels which extrinsic
factor like pay, security, co-workers etc., are important at lower occupational
levels.
 Lahiri and Srivastava (1967) studied the applicability of Hertzberg’s two-factor
theory. They found that for middle level managers, responsibility, domestic life
 accomplishment, job and the job were found to be motivational factors whereas,
organisational policy and administration promotion, salary, superior and growth
were dissatisfies.
 Lawler and Porter (1967) attempted to correlate satisfaction of managers needs
with performance all correlations were significant, but we concluded that
satisfaction of higher order needs was more closely related to performance than
satisfaction of lower’s orders need’s, but they failed to test statistical differences
between correlations, but Lawler’s study (1973) mentioned “Job satisfaction is
one measure of the quality of line in the organization and is worth understanding
and increasing”. Therefore, must be understood for improving the quality of life at
workplace.
 Anjaniyulu (1968) studied the Job satisfaction of secondary school teachers and
its effectiveness on student‘s education. He had included 1000 teachers of
Secondary School of Andhra Pradesh. Sample was selected through Random
Sampling Method. Mean, Median and Standard Deviation was found for the
procedure of data analysis. He had concluded through this research that 37%
teachers were not satisfied with their job. The responsible factors for this
dissatisfaction were lake of accommodation facility, lake of parental co-operation
and lake of physical facility.
 Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1969) defined that the theory of job satisfaction
neither could be tested fairly not can be modified and improved so long as the
concept of job satisfaction is not adequately explained and measured. They
developed a set of attributes pertaining to job satisfaction there are different
feelings corresponding to different aspects of job. There are also some conditions
such as the details of remuneration the nature of promotion opportunities the
characteristics of co-workers in the job, which exert major influence on the
feelings of satisfaction.
 Smith (1969) studied job satisfaction as “the extent to positive orientation an
employee expresses towards his or her job”. Many empirical studies have been
done mostly in the industrialized world, which examined various aspects of
academics satisfaction with their job. The Herzberg’s two factor theory has got
considerable attention from researchers around the globe. The Herzberg’s dual
factor theory concept has been studied and tested in variety of contexts to date.
 Massive research has been done on the academics in order to analyze its
significance and validity to this context as well.
 Wild’s (1970) examined various aspects of job on 2150 female workers and 236
female ex-workers and using a forced-choice questionnaire and unstructured
interview. His results show that 21.03% of current employees were dissatisfied
with their job compared to 35.6% of the previous employees. The extent of
dissatisfaction among various biographical groups, clearly establishes that the
younger current employees were more dissatisfied than the previous employees.
Job satisfaction was also prevalent among those with shorter length of service
with the company. Both overall satisfied and overall dissatisfied current
employees placed the financial need in the first position of the need hierarchy,
which is in confirmation and with traditional expectation and in they also placed
social need in the second position, but overall dissatisfied workers gave
comparatively more importance to the need for a personally satisfying job.
Overall satisfied ex-employees placed the social need first followed by the need of
adequate ways, a personally satisfying job and security. The result further status
that voluntary turnover is positively related with previous job dissatisfaction. And
further more relationship of labour indicated that in the first six months of service,
the turnover rate is higher than in the months that follow.
 Jawa (1971) studied the anxiety and job satisfaction. He collected data on 70
semi-skilled workers. They first filled out an anxiety scale and depending upon
their scores was divided into three groups of high, average and low anxiety. This
st nd rd
classification was made on the basis of distribution of 1 , 2 , and 3 quartile. In
addition, the workers also filled a satisfaction questionnaire. The following
distribution gives the average satisfaction scores and standard deviations for the
three groups ‘low, average and high. The results indicate a trend of increasing
satisfaction with decreasing anxiety level.
 .M. Pestonjee (1973) studied that sets of factors consist of two subjects or areas,
which are again, composed of many intent-wined job aspects. Job and
management areas also include on the job (Orientrinsic) factors. Likewise
personal adjustment and social relational areas covers off the job factors. It is
important to note that off the job components of job satisfaction, though not
directly connected with the job, are presumed to have a bearing on job
 satisfaction. These four areas with their related ‘aspects’ area are Job area,
Management area, personal adjustment and Social relations.
 Lawler’s (1973) examined, “Job satisfaction is not directly related to
performance. However, job satisfaction is one measure of the quality of life in the
organization and is worth understanding and increasing”. Therefore, must be
understood for improving the quality of life at workplace.
 Costelle and Sang (1974) studied that164 professional employees using a
questionnaire measuring five need categories security, social needs, esteem
autonomy and self-actualization. Their findings were that 20% professionals
showed satisfaction with their social and security need and they also reported lack
of satisfaction among the higher order needs.