Conceptual and operational problems in the measurement of various aspects of job satisfaction.

Abstract

Some of the various concepts and operations that have been suggested for the measurement of job satisfaction are introduced. An effort is made to explore the conceptual and operational relationships between overall job satisfaction, level of aspiration, level of attainment, and level of importance. In particular, note is taken of inappropriate ways in which these three latter concepts have been combined. Finally, a conceptual framework is suggested as a guide to the most appropriate methods of combination. The concept of job satisfaction is a manyfaceted one. Although some students see it as a generalized affective orientation to all aspects of the work situation (Vroom, 1964, p. 99), it is clear that such a view expresses the resultant of a whole host of orientations to specific aspects of the job. The respondent, in filling out a measure of general attitude (such as the Brayfield-Rothe, 1951, scale) or in taking an action such as terminating his employment with the organization, is balancing in some complex way the pros and cons of his present job. Students have been quick to realize this and have developed measures that tap various aspects of the job (work itself, supervision, peers, working conditions, and so on). In addition, some have gone further to try to tap the more basic dimensions of a worker's responses about his level of satisfaction of various psychological needs (physiological, safety, social, ego, and self-actualization). At the outset, some of the different aspects of job satisfaction should be denned in an attempt to provide a consistent vocabulary for use in this paper. 1. The measurement of overall satisfaction. As suggested above, this represents a generalized affective orientation to all aspects of