1、外文翻译 JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES AT A CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY Job satisfaction has remained as one of the most studied constructsin the area of organizational psychology (Geyer Hartzell, 1988; Howard Tett Varona,1996). Locke (1969) defined job satisfaction as a pleasurable emotional state resulting f
2、rom the appraisal of ones job as achievingor facilitating the achievement of ones values. Job dissatisfactionwas described as the unpleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job as frustrating or blocking the attainmentof ones job values or as entailing disvalues. Cranny et al
3、. (1992) concluded that job satisfaction is a combination of cognitive and affective reactions to the differential perceptions of what an employee wants to receive compared with what he or she actually receives. Unlike workers in the 1970s and 1980s who valued interesting work above everything else,
4、 the results of more current studies (Andrews, Faubion, Jennings, 2000; Karl Roper Starch Worldwide, 2001), and pro-social citizenship behavior, which manifests itself in helping coworkers and customers, and being more cooperative (Bateman work conditions; salary and benefits; personal life; status;
5、 and security. After poor conditions have been cor-rected, it was estimated that most employees would not quit their jobs. At the same time, that correction did not guarantee more productive employees. To motivate employees, it seemed necessary to supply one or more of Herzbergs satisfiers. Those sa
6、tisfiers, also known as moti-vators, included a sense of achievement, recognition, creative or challenging work, responsibility, advancement opportunities, and the possibility to develop and grow as a person and professional. Interesting work, for example, was identified as a major source of job sat
7、isfaction. The two-factor theory was based on extensive empirical inves- tigation, which received both widespread support and criticism (Maidani, 1991). Conflicting evidence was found regarding job satisfaction and its relationship to demographic variables, such as age, gender, education, occupation
8、, and lengths of employment. While Herzberg (1966) stressed that job satisfaction was not dependent on demographics, recent studies have not consistently supported this notion (Brown, 2005; Ma Niehoff, 1995; Oswald Wanous, 1974, Brown, 2005). While Arthur (1987) showed a significant difference regar
9、ding the levels of job satisfaction between room service and other service personnel, Sompong (1990) found significant differ- ences between pastors, educators, and nurses. Mixed support has been found regarding the job satisfaction of administrators. While some researchers suggested that adminis-tr
10、ators had higher levels of extrinsic job satisfaction than other occupational groups (Niehoff, 1995), a study by Blank (1993) found that administrators and staff showed lower levels of dissatisfaction with the extrinsic aspects of their jobs when compared to other professional groups. Olasiji (1983)
11、 revealed that the leading factors for job satis- faction were not the same for faculty and administration, and Sudsawasd (1980) concluded that faculty members should be recognized as generally more satisfied in their positions than those in the industrial sector. Job Satisfaction and Age Dewar and
12、Werbel (1979), Dennis (1998), and Brown (2005) reported that job satisfaction increases with age. Khillah (1986) found that teachers who were most satisfied with their jobs were in age 50 years or older, followed by teachers between ages 41 and 49 years. Increased overall job satisfaction through ag
13、e was also reported for both males (Gibson Hullin Quinn Perry, 1977; Smith supervision; interpersonal relations with superiors, peers, and students; working conditions; salary; status; and job security. For the purpose of this study Blanks dual continua scale was changed into a single Likert-type sc
14、ale ranging from 1 (highly dissatisfied) to 5 (highly satisfied). Median choices included: 2 (dissatisfied), 3 (neutral), and 4 (satisfied). These adjustments were applied in order to obtain a clearer overall job satisfaction score, and to provide the participants with the choice of a neutral respon
15、se. Additionally, the 5-point Likert-scale provided the respondents with a familiar response format in order to make the participation more attractive and increase the response rate. A reliability test was conducted by Blank (1993) for the instrument using data from a pilot study along with data fro
16、m the full study. The pilot study of 30 student affairs professionals from two different colleges produced a reliability coefficient alpha of .90. A later study of 115 employees from three different universities found an alpha of .83. These correlations indicated a high degree of internal consistenc
17、y for the measured samples. Content validity was judged as high since the PSS items (Blank, 1993) were identical to the 15 motivator-hygiene factors used in Herzbergs original study (Herzberg, Mausner, Cryer Friesen et al., 1983; Gaziel, 1986; Herzberg et al., 1987; Hill,1987, McCarthy, 1997; Nussel
18、 et al., 1988; Olanrewaju, 2002; Rasmussen, 1990). Discussion and Conclusions In agreement with previous investigations this study revealed moderate levels of job satisfaction (between 3 and 4 on a 5-point scale) for university employees (Gannon et al., 1980; McNeece, 1981; Willi Friesen et al., 198
19、3; Gaziel, 1986; Khillah, 1986) in which teachers and university administrators saw their relationships with students or peers as sources of job satisfaction. Although Herzbergs theory had classified interpersonal relationships more as dissatisfiers than satisfiers, there seems to be a rationale for
20、 the motivating power of such relationships in the field of education. Since relationships with students and peers are a significant part of the work in educational settings, it seems more than reasonable that such relationships may have a strong potential to contribute to both intrinsic and extrins
21、ic job satisfaction. Such findings may also point to the existence of a good interpersonal work climate at the university under study. Further findings indicated that the respondents were least satisfied with their salary as well as organizational policies and administration. Due to the fact that th
22、e institution is a small, private university, the organization may have fewer funds available to offer its employees the competitive salaries that could be attained in larger, public institutions. Low levels of satisfaction with policy and administration may include factors such as management, commu
23、nication, resources, and personnel policies. This result is in agreement with data from Watson (2000) who found that information technology staff were least satisfied with management, lack of communication, and internal policies. This investigation found that overall job satisfaction was related to
24、age and educational level. Intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction was related to occupational area and educational level, with extrinsic job satisfaction also being related to age. Consistent with previous findings (Armstrong, 1971; Arthur, 1987; Sompong, 1990; Wanous, 1974) this study found that
25、the levels of intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction were not the same for different occupational groups. In agreement with Niehoff (1995), this study demonstrated that administrators had significantly higher levelsof satisfaction with the extrinsic aspects of their job than their counterparts who
26、 were faculty, hourly staff, or salaried staff. A comparison of the mean scores for the extrinsic job-satisfaction factors reveals that university administrators seem to be more satisfied than all other occupational subgroups with their job security, relations with superiors, status, and working con
27、ditions. Since the university may not be able to offer salaries competitive to public educational institutions, administrators may feel relatively safe in their positions with less fear of being replaced than in the corporate sector. At the same time administrators may enjoy their status at the inst
28、itution (e.g., titles such as Dean or Vice President). They may also appreciate better working conditions than other employees, such as better office space or having the availability of support staff. Further, university administrators seem to be on top of the command chain at the institution, and m
29、ay, therefore, appreciate more freedom at work and fewer restrictions from superiors. Consistent with Sudsawasd (1980) and Latham (1998), it was found that faculty had significantly higher levels of intrinsic job satisfaction than employees who were salaried staff. A comparison of the mean scores fo
30、r the intrinsic job-satisfaction factors reveals that university faculty seems to be more satisfied than all other occupational subgroups with their work and professional growth.Considering the nature of teaching and research, it could be reasoned that faculty may experience their work as more inter
31、esting, varied, and meaningful than other employees at the university. In addition, faculty seems to have more chances to participate in professional or personal growth and learn something new. Contrary to the expectations, no significant difference was found for overall job satisfaction between the
32、 occupational subgroups. However, there were somewhat higher, non-significant mean scores for administrators. Previous investigations (Dennis, 1998; Dewar Gibson Hullin Hunt Gannon et al., 1980; Haynes, 1983; McNeece, 1981; Quinn Quinn et al., 1971; Smith McNeel, 1984). This study was in agreement w
33、ith a third set of findings (Blank, 1993; Hullin Iiacqua Quinn et al., 1974; Sauser Smith Khillah, 1986; Niehoff, 1995) have found different levels of job satisfaction based on the length of employment, this study did not show significant differences in the levels of overall, intrinsic, and extrinsi
34、c job based on length of employment for university employees. No explanation was found for these results. Length of employment may not have a significant impact on the levels of job satisfaction at the institution. Future research on this topic may benefit from the inclusion of open-ended questions
35、regarding satisfying and dissatisfying factors related to job satisfaction in order to gather more specific data and allow for more accurate conclusions about specific reasons for presented responses. In addition, job satisfaction and its intrinsic and extrinsic facets could be studied in their rela
36、tionships to other, less investigated, variables, such as communication, meaning, pay and promotion rules, as well as the opportunity to have an impact on the organization. 对基督教大学职员工作满足感的调查 工作满足感在组织心理学领域被广泛研究。学者洛克将工作满意度定义为人们通过工作实习自身价值而得到的一种愉悦的心理状态 。相对的工作不满足感即位不愉快的心理状态。上个世纪七八十年代，员工最看重的是工作的趣味性。然后最近的研究
37、表示，当代员工很重视的是外在的东西，比如说高薪，悠闲生活方式以及良好工作保障。由于上个世纪九十年代由于政治经济和科技发展的不稳定，导致了大量工人下岗。同时生活保障成本的不断增加也是造成人们将外在因素视为工作满足感中最重要因素的原因。然而， 2001 年的 911 事件使很多人不得不重新审视他们对生活和工作需要。 911事件发生后，各行各业的人们开始不求回报的帮助别人。 尽管一方面来说员工对工作中得到满足感很重 要，然而从另一方面来说公司也想得到满足。因为员工罢工，员工的流动都会对他们产生深刻影响。据调查显示，在公立学校的教师的年流动率是相对比较高的。 94 年至 95 年的流动率高达 14.3
38、%，而在 01 年的时候已经达到了 17%。 由于工作满意度不仅会影响员工的工作表现还会影响其留职或者离开，因此本文探讨的是影响基督教大学员工工作满意度的潜在影响因素。 理论框架 本文是的理论框架是以弗雷德里克赫茨伯格的双因素理论为基础。赫茨伯格认为影响工作满意度有两个因素 ：外在因素和内在因素。内在因素可以增加工作满意度，而外在因素却会减少工作满意度。因此，外在因素可认为是不满足因子，就好比不纯净的水或是被污染的空气，会使员工离开他们的岗位。内外因素即为满足因子，能给人一种满足感，责任感和认同感。双因子理论的研究基于大量和广泛的调查。 相关文献 工作满足感与职业的关系 双因子理论的评论家认为
39、工作种类的不同会导致人们获得工作满足感的程度不同。桑普发现牧师，教师和护士三种职业获得的工作满足感的程度存在巨大的差异。多数人都赞 同管理人员的工作满足感最高，因为他们有相对较高的外在的工作满足感。 工作满足感和年龄的关系 丹尼斯等学者认为工作的满足感随着年龄的增加而上升。比如说老师，当他们 50 岁之后，工作满足感最好。然而最近的研究表明，随着年龄的增加工作满足感是呈现 U字型的。学者库克博表明年轻和年长的教师获得的工作满足感比中年教师多。 工作满足感和性别的关系 关于工作满足感和性别关系的研究得出了五花八门的结论。学者亚瑟认为男员工获得的工作满足感比女员工多。相反，麦克米兰认为女教师更能从
40、她们的工作中获得满足。更有甚者，舒马锲认为工作满足 感和性别没有显著的关系。 工作满足感和工作经验的关系 学者依拉发现以前没有工作经验的老师获得工作满足感的程度最高，而有着一到三年工作经验的老师的工作满足感最低。教师工作了四年之后，工作满足感的程度会有所上升。 工作满足感和教育程度的关系 舒马锲等学者表明工作满足感和教育程度没有很大关系。 研究方法 本文旨在解答一下两个问题： 第一，大学员工，教职工，管理人员，小时工和领薪金的职员工作满足感处于什么程度？ 第二，工作满足感是否与职位类型，年龄，性别，工作经验和教育程度有关系？ 基于赫兹伯格的双因素理论，假设工作满足感程度与各个人口统计变量无显著
41、关系。而本文的因变量包括人口统计变量如职位类型，年龄，性别，工作经验和教育程度。应变量为总体，外在和内在的工作满足感。 研究人群和样本 本文样本包括 基督复临安息日会教友大学的全职和兼职员工，但学生员工没有包括在内。研究人数为 835人，其中 32名是管理人员， 384，名是教职工， 280名是小时工还有 123 名是领薪金的职工。管理人员包括校长，副校长，各学院的院长以及一些有行 政职位的教师。教职工有几种类型：一年工作 11 到 12 个月的教职工，一年工作 9到 10个月的教职工，合同教职工和临时教职工。小时工的工作是按小时计算。带薪工作人员是学校雇佣，有固定工资，包括经理，会计，出纳等
42、。 研究步骤和方法 首先将调查问卷发给这所学校的 835 位员工。问卷里面列出了各种程度的工作满足感。这份调查中还包括了关于 15项满意的职业范围作为补充。问卷题目是五分制，答者选 1 分即为非常不满意，选 2 即为不满意，选 3 即为中等，选 4 即为满意，选 5 的话即为非常满意。此外， 口统计变量如职位类型，年龄，性别，工作经验和 教育程度是该研究的一部分。最终，对问卷获得的数据进行系统的研究和分析。 探讨和结论 本文关于大学员工对工作满足感的调查与以前的研究得出相似的结果，其员工工作满足感处于中等和满意之间。大学员工将人际关系包括与同事和学生的关系视为影响其工作满足感的重要因素。同样大
43、学管理人员及教职工都认为与同事和学生的关系会影响到工作满足感。这些发现与迪纳尔等学者研究的结论一致。尽管赫兹伯格的理论更多地认为人际关系是不满足因子，但在教育领域这却成是否有工作满足感的根本原因。 进一步的 发现表明，答者最不满意的是他们的工资以及学校的组织和管理政策。由于学费较低，该学校无法向公立大学一样提供那么令人满意的工资。对学校组织和关系政策不满意应包括管理水平，缺乏交流，资源不足以及人事政策不力等。 本文的调查还发现，总体的工作满足感与年龄和教育程度有关。外在和内在的工作满足感均与职业类型和教育程度有关，此外外在的工作满足感会受到年龄的影响。这些发现与阿姆斯特朗等人认为不同职业类型获
44、得的外在和内在的工作满足感不同一说是一致的。本文还得出管理人员对外在的工作满意程度比教职工，小时工要高。与其他被研究人员 相比，管理人员对其工作保障更为满意。由于该大学无法支付像公立大学一样高的工资，因此管理人员对职位感觉相对安全，很少担心其职位被取代。同时他们的拥有相对较好的工作环境，比如说更好的办公室等。由于他们处于整个大学命令链的顶端，因此他们拥有更多的自由。 本文发现，教职工内在工作满足感要远远高于领薪金的员工。教职工对他们工作和职业发展性的满意程度比其他的员工高。因此，教职工的工作相比其他员工来说，更有趣及更有意义。此外，教职工还有更多自我提高和学习新知识的机会。 丹尼斯等人的研究和
45、本文在年龄对工作满足感存在影响看法 是一直的。本文发现，年长的员工在总体和外在的工作满足感方面比年轻的员工高。同时， 50 岁以后的员工对其工作最为满意。其实这也非常合理，因为当员工 50岁以后，他必定有着更好的外在的工作满足感。在此年龄段的员工很可能取得了相对较高的地位和稳定的收入。另一个方面，工作保障对于 50多岁的员工来说也是非常重要的。因为他们退休想要找到新工作非常困难。 而不同的年龄层的员工在内在的工作满足感方面却没有明显的不同。我们不难发现内在的工作满足感对人一生来说都非常重要。 本文研究后得出结论，性别和工作满足感没有非常明显的关系。这 可能说明，在大学里不论男女享有平等的工作环境。 与学者布兰科研究成果一样，本文发现员工的教育背景不同与其在总体，内在的工作满足感方面有着显著的不同。有博士学位的员工，对其工作最为满意，不论在总体的满足感，内在和外在的满足感方面。而拥有其他学位的员工在总体和内在公共满足感方面无明显差异。尽管前人研究认为，工作满足感与工作经验有关系，然而这一点并没有从本文的数据中得以体现。 以后关于影响工作满足感的因素研究可以借鉴本文开放式的问题来得出更具体的结论。同时此文为以后的研究提供了研究丰富的基础。
