Asian J. of Adv. Basic Sci.

: 1(1), 93-104
ISSN (Online): 2347 - 4114
www.ajabs.org

A study on Job Satisfaction of Managers working in Pharmaceutical

Industry in Himachal Pradesh

Ashok Kumar Bansal* and Lekh Raj Verma**

*
Department of Management, Shoolini University, Solan (H.P.) INDIA
Email ID: [email protected]
**
School of Management Sciences, CPU Hamirpur (H.P.) INDIA
(Received 22June, 2013, Accepted 10 August, 2013)

______________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT: This study was oriented to identify the relationship between job satisfaction and its various
variables (which are pay, promotion, the work itself, supervision, & co-workers etc.) among managers
working in Pharmaceutical Industry in Himachal Pradesh. The study was conducted among 281 respondents.
This study has two objectives that to determine the relationship between socio-economic variables and job
satisfaction and to study the impact of organizational variables on job satisfaction. The study revealed that
there was no significant relationship between socio-economic variables and job satisfaction of individuals.
Whereas it was also revealed that there was a positive relationship between job satisfaction and its
organizational variables which were promotion, work itself, supervision and co-workers, pay etc. It proved
that job satisfaction (pay, promotion, work itself, supervision and co-workers) can contribute to increase the
job satisfaction of individuals in the organization.

Keywords: Job satisfaction; socio-economic variables; organizational variables; Pharmaceutical Industry.

______________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION
Present era is of Industrialization when every country is going under the effect of liberalization,
privatization and globalization. In this world job is not only a main source of income but also an
important component of life. Job takes away a large part of each individual’s day and also contributes to
one’s social standing. Warr et al., (1979) [1] referred the term job as “the tasks undertaken in a particular
setting”, whereas work is taken to cover job as “a collection of individual tasks that a worker performs.
Job is the formal link within the organization and an important part in the formation of individual’s work
role”. Because of job’s central role in many people’s life, satisfaction with one’s job is an important
component in overall well-being (Smith, 2007) [2]. According to Wanger & Gooding (1987) [3],
“Employee satisfaction is supremely important in an organization because it is what productivity depends
on”. Job satisfaction is commonly interpreted as the intrinsic sense of accomplishment emerged from
performing tasks while carrying out one’s contractual obligations. Locke (1969) [4] defines job satisfaction
as, “Pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job as achieving or facilitating the
achievement of one’s job values.” The appraisal is based primarily on core job characteristics comprising
skill variety, task identity, working conditions, task significance, and on critical psychological states that
includes experienced meaningfulness of the work and knowledge of actual results of the tasks. These
parameters determine the resultant pleasurable state of the individual (Hackman & Oldham 1976) [5],
however, defined the job satisfaction as, “The level and direction of a worker’s emotion and effect toward
a job and job situation.” This definition points towards measurable nature as well as directional
(positive/negative) character of the construct. They also study its linkage with individual performance and
collective morale of the employees.
Job satisfaction is the outcome of convergence of individual expectations and perceived accomplishments
from different factors of the job. The more equivalence between expectation and actual accomplishments
stemming from a job, the greater is the satisfaction derived from it. When the feeling is stemmed from a

93
job, the situation as a whole, it is termed as global satisfaction (Francis & Milbourn Jr. 1980:70) [6]. Work,
in occupational context, is a wider concept than job. Job is the formal link with the organization and an
important part in the formation of individual’s work role”. According to Kanungo (1982) [7] “satisfaction
with job is a function of job’s capacity to satisfy one’s present needs, whereas satisfaction with work as a
normative belief about value of work in one’s life and is a function of one’s past cultural conditioning or
socialization”. Janssen et al. (1999) [8] identified four characteristics of work that render satisfaction to the
workers. These are work content, working conditions, labour relations and conditions of employment.
Job satisfaction is a complex phenomenon that has been studied quite extensively. Various literature
sources indicate that there is an association between job satisfaction and motivation, motivation is hard to
define, but there is a positive correlation between job satisfaction, performance and motivation, whereby
motivation encourages an employee, depending on their level of job satisfaction, to act in a certain
manner (Hollyforde, 2002) [9] .
1. Definitions of Job Satisfaction: Job satisfaction is described at this point as a pleasurable or positive
emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience. Job satisfaction results from
the perception that one’s job fulfils or allows the fulfillment of one’s own important job values, providing
that and to the degree that those values are congruent with one’s needs.
Young (1984) [10] defined job satisfaction as “the affective reaction that employees have about their jobs”.
According to Young, job satisfaction has implications for the individual related to physical and mental
health, for the organization related to the acceptance of and good performance on the job, and for society
related to quantity and quality of life.
Job satisfaction is defined as the extent to which employees like their work (Ellickson, 2002) [11]. Even
through several different definitions have been proposed, they all point into the same direction; the
attitude an employee has towards their job.
2. Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction: The factors that are associated with job satisfaction are divided
into two categories named as demographical variables and organizational variables. In the present study
five demographical factors are considered named as department, education, gender, age, experience and
marital status. The studies reviewed related to demographical studies have covered various aspects such
as, gender, age, education, tenure marital status in the context of job satisfaction. It has been found that
gender factor has positive relationship to job satisfaction by Tang and Talpade (1999); Ahmed et al.,
(2003) [12, 13]; educational level has significant relationship to the job satisfaction KhMetle (2003) [14];
whereas tenure is positively related to job satisfaction by Oshagbemi (2003); Mottaz (1988); Clarke et al.
(1996) [15, 16, 17]; whereas age has positively related to job satisfaction by Mottaz (1987) in Oshagbemi
(2003); Greenberg and Baron (1995); Drafke and Kossen (2002); Okpara (2004) [18, 19, 20, 21, 22]; whereas
marital status of individual is another dimension of job satisfaction which is positively related to
individuals job satisfaction by Cimete et al., (2003); Ahmed et al., (2003); Kuo and Chen (2004); Sharma
and Jyoti (2006) [ 23, 24, 25, 26].
Whereas the studies reviewed related to organisational variables have covered the various aspects such as
pay, supervision, working conditions, co-workers, and promotion opportunities, and growth opportunity
and recognition. It has been found that compensation factor has positive relationship to job satisfaction by
Oshagbemi (2000); Brainard (2005) [ 27, 28]; whereas Supervision has significant relationship to job
satisfaction by Packard and Kauppi (1999); Wech (2002) [29, 30]; whereas promotion opportunities are
positively related to job satisfaction by Ellickson and Logsdon (2002) [31]; whereas co-workers aspect of
job satisfaction also has significant impact on individuals job satisfaction by Madison (2000) [32]; whereas
working condition which is another dimension of the study. Scholars has reported that working condition
has positively related to individuals job satisfaction by Cherrington (1994); Bodur (2001) [33, 34]; whereas
growth opportunity and recognition has significant relationship to job satisfaction by Ali-Mohammed
(2004); De Stefano et al (2005) [35, 36].
The literature reviewed provided a piecemeal account of various dimensions of job satisfaction. Very few
studies have completely focused on the subject of job satisfaction and the variables associated with this.
One another major thing which is found during the study of literature that majority of the reviewed
studies were conducted in the foreign countries and on teachers. Therefore, the present study takes into

94
account both variables (demographical and organisational) viz., ability utilization, achievement, activity,
advancement, authority, company policies, compensation, co-workers, creativity, independence, security,
social service, social status, moral values, recognition, responsibility, supervision—human relations,
supervision—technical, variety, working conditions as well as demographic factors to study the job
satisfaction of managers working in pharmaceutical industry. An attempt has also been made to find the
relationship between the aforesaid variables and job satisfaction of the managers in pharmaceutical
industry.

HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Within the broader scope of research scope of research gap as emerged, certain core studies available in
the existing literature lead to the formulation of following hypothesis and objectives for the present study:
Objectives of the present study:
 To determine the relationship between socio-economic variables and job satisfaction.
 To study the impact of organizational variables on job satisfaction.
Hypothesis of the present study:
 H0: 1 Socio-economic variables and job satisfaction have no significant relationship.
 H0: 2 Organizational variables and job satisfaction are not related significantly.

MATERIAL AND METHODS (RESEARCH DESIGN

The present study is evaluative cum diagnostic in nature as it tries to find the type of relationship between
job satisfaction and various dependent and independent variables and stresses upon the aspects that affect
this relationship. The following steps were taken to make the study effective and accurate:
1. Sample Size Design: Managers working in to fifteen pharmaceutical companies in Himachal Pradesh
have been selected as respondents for the sample. There are 383 managers in the top fifteen
pharmaceutical companies. All the mangers were approached for collection of data but finally 281
questionnaires were found back. So the response rate for the present study was approx 73 percent.
2. Data Collection: The data had been collected from primary as well as secondary sources. The primary
data was supplemented by secondary data available from the published reports, manuals, circulars,
notification, publication and literature related to the topic under study.
3. Instruments for Data Collection: One of the most popular measures of job satisfaction, Minnesota
Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) will be used as a research instrument. In this questionnaire Likert’s five
point scale had been used to measure the job satisfaction namely very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, neutral,
satisfied and very satisfied. On the General Satisfaction scale, the coefficients varied from .87 to .92.
Besides, the demographic profile items, the questionnaire contains100 statements of twenty dimensions
named as ability utilization, achievement, activity, advancement, authority, company policies,
compensation, co-workers, creativity, independence, security, social service, social status, moral values,
recognition, responsibility, supervision—human relations, supervision—technical, variety, working
conditions.

Results and Discussions:

1. Measurement of Job Satisfaction:
1.1. Departmental Profile of Sample: For the present study six departments were taken into
consideration namely as HR, Finance, Production, Sales & Purchase, Marketing, and I.T. With respect to
department factor following table shows that majority of the respondents i.e. 27.4 percent comes from
production department where as minority of the respondents i.e. 10.3 percent respondents comes from
sales and purchase department. Because there is not much difference between the samples number taken
for the study, so it indicates that the sample taken for the present study is representative of the whole
population.

95
 Table No. 1: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Department
Category Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
HR 49 17.4 17.4
Finance 48 17.1 34.5
Production 77 27.4 61.9
Sale & Purchase 29 10.3 72.2
Marketing 35 12.5 84.7
I.T 43 15.3 100.0
Total 281

1.2. Educational Profile of Sample: For the present study purpose education factor is taken into
consideration to check its impact on the individual’s job satisfaction and their job performance. Three
categories were taken into consideration namely as Graduate, Post Graduate and others. Here, other
includes the courses like diplomas in the respective fields. The table no. 2 demonstrates education wise
characteristics of the total sample. The following table displays that majority of the respondents i.e. 63.3
percent are post graduate. It indicates that the people hired by the companies are highly qualified whereas
only 2.8 percent respondents have other qualification.
Table No. 2: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Education
Category Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Graduate 95 33.8 33.8
Post Graduate 178 63.3 97.2
Others 8 2.8 100
Total 281

1.3. Gender Profile of Sample: For the present study purpose gender factor is taken into consideration to
check its impact on the individual’s job satisfaction and their job performance. This also seems to support
the pharmaceutical industry for equal opportunity for qualified candidates for qualified female applicants
for vacant jobs. Of the 281 managers that completed the survey 74.0 percent were male i.e. majority of
the respondents and remaining 26.0 percent were female respondents. The response rates from both
groups were sufficient to conduct statistical analysis. The table below depicts the gender profile of the
sample.
Table No. 3: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Gender
Gender Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Male 208 74.0 74.0
Female 73 26.0 100.0
Total 281

1.4. Age Profile of Sample: The table no. 4 shows age profile of the total sample. It is revealed from the
following table that 48.8 percent respondents come under the age group of more than 30 years whereas
minority i.e. 24.2 percent belongs to the age group of 25-30 years. The following table shows that there is
not vital difference among the age profile of the total sample. So it revealed that the sample taken was
representative of the whole population. This also seems to support the pharmaceutical industry for equal
opportunity for qualified candidates for vacant jobs. The table and figure below depicts the gender profile
of the sample.

96
 Table No. 4: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Age
Category Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Below 25 Years 76 27.0 27.0
25-30 Years 68 24.2 51.2
More than 30 Years 137 48.8 100.0
Total 281
1.5. Experience Profile of Sample: The table no. 5 shows experience profile of the total sample. It is
revealed from the following table that majority of the respondents i.e. 42.3 percent has less than 5 years
working experience whereas only 21.4 percent respondents has 5-10 years experience. Again there was no
much variation among the number of the respondents taken for the present research as per their working
experience. The table and figure below depicts the gender profile of the sample.
Table No. 5: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Experience
Category Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Below 5 Years 119 42.3 42.3
5-10 Years 60 21.4 63.7
More than 10 Years 102 36.3 100.0
Total 281 100.0

1.6. Marital Profile of Sample: The table no. 6 demonstrates the marital profile of the total sample. It is
revealed from the following table that majority of the respondents i.e. 65.8 percent were married and
remaining 34.2 percent of respondents were unmarried. The table and figure below depicts the gender
profile of the sample.
Table No. 6: Respondents’ Distribution by Their Marital Status
Category Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Married 185 65.8 65.8
Unmarried 96 34.2 100.0
Total 281 100.0

2. Demographical variable of job satisfaction:

2.1. Job Satisfaction and Department: Department is one of the variable amongst variables of the
present study. This variable is taken into consideration to measure whether it is associated with job
satisfaction or not?
In general it appears that the satisfaction level of person varies from the person to person who is working
in other department. It is also revealed from the following table that the satisfaction of the people differ
department wise.
The following table shows department wise analysis of job satisfaction. It is revealed that majority of the
people i.e. 13.9 % of the total population i.e. 281 is highly satisfied and these respondents belong to
production department whereas minority of the respondents i.e. 1.1% was dissatisfied and these
respondents belong to Information Technology department.
Table No. 7: Department wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Department Total
HR FINANCE PROD. S&P MKT. I.T Score
Dissatisfied Count 7 5 14 5 7 3 41
Percentage 17.1% 12.2% 34.1% 12.2% 17.1% 7.3% 100%
% Total 2.5% 1.8% 5.0% 1.8% 2.5% 1.1% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 12 18 24 8 10 13 85

97
 Percentage 14.1% 21.2% 28.2% 9.4% 11.8% 15.3% 100%
% Total 4.3% 6.4% 8.5% 2.8% 3.6% 4.6% 30.2%
Highly Count 30 25 39 16 18 27 155
Satisfied Percentage 19.4% 16.1% 25.2% 10.3% 11.6% 17.4% 100%
% Total 10.7% 8.9% 13.9% 5.7% 6.4% 9.6% 55.2%
Total Count 49 48 77 29 35 43 281
Percentage 17.4% 17.1% 27.4% 10.3% 12.5% 15.3% 100.0%
X2 = 6.536 df=10 P > NS 0.05

Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=6.536) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
18.307, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that department factor is not significantly
associated with the job satisfaction.
After applying the Chi-Square test it is found that department factor is not significantly associated with
job satisfaction. The results of present study vary from above mentioned studies. This variation between
the results of the reviewed studies may be due to the cultural, demographical differences.
2.2. Job Satisfaction and Education: The second variable of the present study is Education. This
variable is taken into consideration to measure whether it is associated with job satisfaction or not?
Education can bring some positive changes in one’s knowledge, skills and attitude and these aspects plays
a vital role in one’s job satisfaction. Generally, it is assumed that as education of the person’s increases it
bring some positive changes in his or her satisfaction. But sometime it may be negative or it may be
neutral impact on satisfaction.
The following table outlined the education wise analysis of job satisfaction. It is clear from the table that
majority of the respondents i.e. 33.1% respondents were highly satisfied and these respondents were post
graduate. Whereas minority of respondents i.e. only 4% of total sample were dissatisfied; these
respondents has other qualifications.
Table No.8: Education wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Education Total Score
Graduate Post Graduate Others
Dissatisfied Count 17 23 1 41
Percentage 41.5% 56.1% 2.4% 100%
% of Total 6.0% 8.2% .4% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 20 62 3 85
Percentage 23.5% 72.9% 3.5% 100%
% of Total 7.1% 22.1% 1.1% 30.2%
Highly Count 58 93 4 155
Satisfied
Percentage 37.4% 60.0% 2.6% 100%
% of Total 20.6% 33.1% 1.4% 55.2%
Total Count 95 178 8 281
Percentage 33.8% 63.3% 2.8% 100.0%
X2 = 6.016 df=4 P > NS 0.05

Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=5.942) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
9.487, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that education factor is not significantly
associated with the job satisfaction.

98
 After applying the Chi-Square test it is found that education factor is not significantly associated
with job satisfaction. The results of present study vary from above mentioned studies. This variation
between the results of the reviewed studies may be due to the cultural, demographical differences.
2.3. Job Satisfaction and Gender: The next variable of the present study is gender. This variable is
taken into consideration to measure whether it is associated with job satisfaction or not?
To some extent gender factor also affects the job satisfaction of individuals like night shifts, long working
hours, manual work, decision making, field work etc. Ahmed, Raheem and Jamal (2003).
The following table demonstrates gender wise analysis of job satisfaction. It is clear from the table that
majority of the respondents i.e. 40.2% highly satisfied and these respondents were male, whereas only
3.6% female respondents were dissatisfied.
Table No. 9: Gender Wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Gender Total Score
Male Female
Dissatisfied Count 31 10 41
Percentage 75.6% 24.4% 100%
% of Total 11.0% 3.6% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 64 21 85
Percentage 75.3% 24.7% 100%
% of Total 22.8% 7.5% 30.2%
Highly Count 113 42 155
Satisfied
Percentage 72.9% 27.1% 100%
% of Total 40.2% 14.9% 55.2%
Total Count 208 73 281
Percentage of Total 74.0% 26.0% 100.0%
X2 = .226 df= 2 P > NS 0.05

Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=.226) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
5.991, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that gender factor is not significantly associated
with the job satisfaction. The result of present study is not supportable to the study conducted by Ahmed,
Raheem and Jamal (2003). This variation among the results of the present study and studies conducted by
different authors may be due to sector differences or may be due to cultural, demographical or
psychological characteristics of the respondents.
2.4. Age wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction: The next variable of the present study is age. This variable
is taken into consideration to measure whether it is associated with job satisfaction or not?
Age also plays an important role in individual’s job satisfaction. This factor may have a positive, negative
or may be neutral impact on job satisfaction.
According to Greenberg and Baron (1995); Drafke and Kossen (2002); Okpara (2004) reported that there
is a significant relationship between age and job satisfaction. Researchers have conducted these studies in
overseas countries. In the present study this factor is considered to find whether the same results appear
in Indian concern or not.
The following table outlined the age wise analysis of job satisfaction. It is found from the table that
majority of the respondents i.e. 25.6% were highly satisfied and these respondents were of more than 30
years old and only 2.5% respondents were dissatisfied and these respondents were of 25-30 years old.

99
 Table No. 10: Age wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Age Total Score
<25 Years 25-30 Years >30 Years
Dissatisfied Count 11 7 23 41
Percentage 26.8% 17.1% 56.1% 100%
% of Total 3.9% 2.5% 8.2% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 22 21 42 85
Percentage 25.9% 24.7% 49.4% 100%
% of Total 7.8% 7.5% 14.9% 30.2%
Highly Count 43 40 72 155
Satisfied
Percentage 27.7% 25.8% 46.5% 100%
% of Total 15.3% 14.2% 25.6% 55.2%
Total Count 76 68 137 281
27.0% 24.2% 48.8% 100.0%
X2 = 1.735 df=4 P > NS 0.05

Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=1.735) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
9.487, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that age factor is not significantly associated
with the job satisfaction.
The result of present study is not supportable to the study conducted by Greenberg and Baron (1995);
Drafke and Kossen (2002); Okpara (2004). This lack of correspondence among the results of the present
study and studies conducted by above mentioned authors may be due to geographical, sector differences
or may be due to cultural, demographical characteristics or psychology of the respondents.
2.5. Job Satisfaction and Experience: The next variable of the present study is age. It’s a contradictory
statement that experience and job satisfaction is significantly related to each other or not. The literature
reviewed revealed that according to Oshagbemi (2003), Mottaz (1988), Clarke et al. (1996), reported that
there is significant relationship between experience and job satisfaction. This variable is taken into
consideration to measure whether it is associated with job satisfaction or not?
The following table displays the experience wise analysis of job satisfaction. After applying the
percentage method on collected data, it is found that majority of the respondents i.e. 24.9% were highly
satisfied and these respondents has less than five years experience and only 3.9% respondents are
dissatisfied and they has 5-10 years working experience.
Table No. 11: Experience wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Experience Total Score
<5 Years 5-10 Years >10 Years
Dissatisfied Count 14 11 16 41

Percentage 34.1% 26.8% 39.0% 100%

% of Total 5.0% 3.9% 5.7% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 35 19 31 85

Percentage 41.2% 22.4% 36.5% 100%

% of Total 12.5% 6.8% 11.0% 30.2%
Highly Count 70 30 55 155

100
 Satisfied Percentage 45.2% 19.4% 35.5% 100%
% of Total 24.9% 10.7% 19.6% 55.2%
Total Count 119 60 102 281

Percentage 42.3% 21.4% 36.3% 100.0%

2
X = 1.987 df=4 P > NS 0.05
Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=1.987) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
9.487, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that experience factor is not significantly
associated with the job satisfaction.
The result of present study is differing to the study conducted by the above mentioned
researchers. This disparity among the results may be due to geographical, sector differences or may be
due to cultural, demographical characteristics or psychology of the respondents.
2.6. Job Satisfaction and Marital: The next variable of the present study is marital status. This variable
is taken into consideration to measure whether it is associated with job satisfaction or not?
Studies conducted on the relationship between the level of education and job satisfaction showed no
sound pattern. The impact of this factor on job satisfaction may be positive, negative or may be neutral.
Cimete, Gencalp and Keskin (2003), Ahmed, Raheem and Jamal (2003), Kuo and Chen (2004), Sharma
and Jyoti (2006) researchers are of opinion that marital status has an impact on job satisfaction. Most of
the reviewed studies were conducted in the foreign countries, so there may some variation in the results
due to some factors like cultural, demographical characteristics etc.
The following table shows the marital status wise analysis of job satisfaction. It is revealed from the
following table that majority of the respondents i.e. 36.7% were highly satisfied and they were married
respondents and only 6.0% of respondents are dissatisfied and they were unmarried respondents.
Table No. 12: Marital Status wise Analysis of Job Satisfaction
Score Category Marital Status Total Score
Married Unmarried
Dissatisfied Count 24 17 41
Percentage 58.5% 41.5% 100%
% of Total 8.5% 6.0% 14.6%
Satisfied Count 58 27 85
Percentage 68.2% 31.8% 100%
% of Total 20.6% 9.6% 30.2%
Highly Count 103 52 155
Satisfied
Percentage 66.5% 33.5% 100%
% of Total 36.7% 18.5% 55.2%
Total Count 185 96 281
Percentage 65.8% 34.2% 100.0%
X2 = 1.215 df=2 P > NS 0.05

Since, the calculated value of X2 (X2=51.215) is less than table value of X2 at 0.05 significance level i.e.
5.991, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that experience factor is not significantly
associated with the satisfaction.
The result of present study is differing to the study conducted by Cimete, Gencalp and Keskin (2003),
Ahmed, Raheem and Jamal (2003), Kuo and Chen (2004), Sharma and Jyoti (2006). This lack of
correspondence to the reviewed studies may be due to geographical, sector differences or may be due to
cultural, demographical characteristics or psychology of the respondents.

101
 Table No. 13: Job Satisfaction Correlation with Organisational Variables
Descriptive Statistics
Dimensions Mean Std. Correlation with Job Satisfaction Sample
Deviation satisfaction
Ability 17.32 3.893 0.8952 281
Achievement 17.35 3.902 0.8840 281
Activity 17.64 4.031 0.8916 281
Advancement 17.37 3.774 0.8688 281
Authority 17.51 3.727 0.8853 281
Company Policy 17.19 4.050 0.8827 281
Compensation 17.30 4.000 0.8486 281
Co-workers 17.64 3.785 0.8781 281
Creativity 17.35 3.865 0.8560 281
Independence 17.43 3.574 0.8798 281
Moral 17.53 3.552 0.8704 281
Recognition 17.47 3.871 0.8998 281
Responsibility 17.54 3.865 0.8998 281
Security 17.38 3.799 0.8847 281
Social service 17.29 3.627 0.8690 281
Social Status 17.54 3.799 0.9123 281
Supervision HR 17.56 3.907 0.8862 281
Supervision Tech 17.60 3.777 0.8753 281
Variety 17.66 3.484 0.8589 281
Working Condition 17.50 3.624 0.8712 281

The above table shows the descriptive statistics of various variables which are associated with job
satisfaction of individuals. It is clear from the above table that organizational variable of the present study
named as ability utilization, achievement, activity, advancement, authority, company policies,
compensation, co-workers, creativity, independence, security, social service, social status, moral values,
recognition, responsibility, supervision—human relations, supervision—technical, variety, working
conditions are highly associated with job satisfaction of individuals. Because the minimum correlation of
organizational variables to job satisfaction is 0.84863 and maximum correlation which is found is
0.912352.
Since the Pearson’s Correlation value is vary between 0.848 to 0.912, so the hypothesis of present study
is rejected that there is no significant relationship between organizational variables and job satisfaction.

102
Now it is concluded that there is a high degree of correlation between organizational variables and job
satisfaction. This is due to some reason that these are variables which provide individual’s favourable
environment, healthy work culture, comfort and working conditions etc. These variables may encourage
people to perform well at his or her job and be happy with job. If these variables seen through theoretical
point of view then it also come true that these variables are associated with individual’s job satisfaction.
CONCLUSION
First, the study has highlighted some positive aspects of the work life. Those include continuing high
levels of autonomy, creativity, sense of achievement, job itself and working conditions. These motivating
core job characteristics satisfy the manager’s need for engaging on meaningful work activities. The job
characteristics like autonomy and flexibility clearly stand out as the most important factors for job
satisfaction as revealed by Bellamy, Morley and Watty too (2003). The association of selected variables
with job satisfaction in the present study varies between 0.84863(minimum) and 0.912352 (maximum)
correlations which are found after the data analysis. Among the socio-economical variable department,
gender, age, education, marital status and experience has not significant impact on job satisfaction of
manager’s working in pharmaceutical industry in Himachal Pradesh.
An overall review of the paper reveals that managers’ satisfaction is more affected by the organizational
variables whether socio-economical variables have neutral or moderate impact on their job satisfaction.
1. Strategic Actions for Improving Job Satisfaction: Although the managers working in
pharmaceutical industry in Himachal Pradesh are highly satisfied with all the dimensions of job
satisfaction but following are certain aspects which should be looked into:
2. Appropriate Recognition: Everyone appreciates getting credit when it is due. The occasion to share
the success of employees with others is almost limitless. The work of leading managers should be given
due recognition in the form of financial and non-financial rewards. Socialising and interacting at personal
level could enhance the bonding. This will act as motivating factor for managers to keep on giving good
performance and enhance their level of job satisfaction.
3. Right Follow-up of Promotion Policy: Although promotion happen through HR policy but the
procedure sometimes takes quite long time and mangers get frustrated because there is not more age
difference of the mangers. It is found that there are majority of the managers who are younger and the
youngest people require growth as fast as can. So that the formalities should begin quite in advance so
that the managers are promoted at right time.
4. Better Package: If the industry wants to attract more competent people to its organisation, it will have
to offer them lucrative compensation and more of financial incentives so that they do not think they are
underpaid. The recommendation of sixth pay commission should be implemented. This will improve their
overall level of job satisfaction as well as life satisfaction.
5. Advancement: If the industry wants to retain or attract more competent people to its organisation, it
will have to offer them better career advancement opportunities. Because of this existing people can be
retained and new comer can be attract.
6. Security: In the present era employees feel unsecure for their job. So employees can be retained or
attract if industry provide job security. This will definitely leads to their job satisfaction and respectively
their performance.
7. Working Conditions: The working conditions of a industry has a significant impact on one’s job
satisfaction. In the present study it is found that managers are satisfied with their present working
condition. But it’s of greater importance that it should be maintained in future also.
8. Implications: Through analysis of different elements of job satisfaction reveal the importance of job
characteristics like autonomy, advancement, supervision, authority, working conditions and job itself etc.
of job for enhancing the manager’s job satisfaction. Before appointing an individual it should be stressed
upon that his/her expectations and values match with that of the job. Lesser the discrepancy higher would
be the level of job satisfaction. Further research, could explore the relationship between the socio-
economical variables with job satisfaction in some other industries or fields.

103
 REFERENCES
[1] Warr, Cook, and Wall, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 129, (1979).
[2] Smith, “Job Satisfaction”: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences, (Thousand Oaks. CA:
Sage, 2007).
[3] Wanger & Gooding, Academy of management Journal, 30, 524, (1987).
[4] Locke, Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 4, 309, (1969).
[5] Hackman & Oldham, Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 259, (1976).
[6] Francis & Milbourn Jr., Human Behaviour in the Work Environment: A Managerial Perspective,
(Goodyear Publishing Co. Inc, California: Santa Monica1980:70).
[7] Kanungo, Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 341, (1982).
[8] Janssen, Journal of Advance Nursing, 29, 1360, (1999).
[9] S. Hollyforde & S. Whiddett, The Motivation Handbook. (London: CIPD, 2002).
[10] B.S.Young, S.Worchel, & W.D.J. Woehr, Personnel Journal, 27, 339, (1984).
[11] M.C. Ellickson, & K. Logsdon, Public Personnel Management, 31,343 (2002).
[12] T.L.Tang, & M. Talpade, Personnel Journal, 27, 5, (1999).
[13] N. Ahmad, A. Raheem, and S. Jamal, The Educational review, 7, (2003).
[14] M. Kh Metle, The Journal of Management Development, 22, 603, (2003).
[15] T. Oshagbemi, International Journal of Social Economics, 30, 1210, (2003).
[16] C.J. Mottaz, Hospital and Health Services Administration, 33, 57, (1988).
[17] A. Clark, A. Oswald, & P. Warr, Journal of Occupational and organizational Psychology, 69, 57,
(1996).
[18] C.J. Mottaz, Hospital and Health Services Administration, 33, 57, (1988).
[19] T. Oshagbemi, International Journal of Social Economics, 30.1210, (2003).
[20] J. Greenberg, & R.A. Baron, Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human
side of work (5th edition). (Trenton: Prentice-Hall International, Inc., 1995).
[21] M.W. Drafke, & S. Kossen, The human side of organizations, (8 New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.th
edition, 2002).
[22] J.O. Okpara, Information Technology & People, 17, 327, (2004).
[23] G. Cimete, N.S. Gencalp, & G. Keskin, Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 18, 151, (2003).
[24] N. Ahmad, A. Raheem, and S. Jamal, The Educational review, 7, (2003).
[25] Y.F. Kuo, & L.S. Chen, International Journal of Management, 21, 221, (2004).
[26] Sharma & Jeevan Jyoti, Journal of Services Research, 9, 51, (2010).
[27] T. Oshagbemi, The International Journal of Educational Management, 14, 31, (2000).
[28] J. Brainard, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 51, 21, (2005).
[29] S.H. Packard, & D.R. Kauppi, Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 43, 5, (1999).
[30] B.A. Wech, Business and Society, 41, 353, (2002).
[31] M.C. Ellickson & K. Logsdon, Public Personnel Management, 31, 343, (2002).
[32] D. Madison, (2000). Can your job make you sick? Retrieved November 3, 2004, from:
http://www.keepmedia%20%20Psychology20Today
[33] D.J. Cherrington, Organizational behavior (2nd ed.), (Boston: Allyn, 1994).
[34] S. Bodur, Occupational Medicine Journal, 52, 353, (2002).
[35] A. Mohammed, Journal of General Management, 34, 51, (2004).
[36] T.J. De Stefano, H. Clark, M. Gavin, & T. Potter, Rural Mental Health, 30, 18, (2005).

104