Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.

626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

JOB SATISFACTION THEORIES: A REVIEW

Sitora A. Inoyatova
School of Business & Economics,
Westminster International University in Tashkent,
Uzbekistan

ABSTRACT

This paper provides a brief literature review regarding the relevant job satisfaction
theories which explain employee job satisfaction at the workplace.

Keywords: Job Satisfaction, Job Satisfaction theories, Two-factor theory, Work

Adjustment Theory.

Cite this paper: Inoyatova S.A. (2021). Job Satisfaction Theories: A Review. // Journal of
Management Value & Ethics ISSN-2249-9512. Vol 11(4). Oct-Dec. 21.
https://www.jmveindia.com/journal/OCT-DEC%2021%20final%200.pdf

INTRODUCTION
Whether one wants to admit it or not, employee job satisfaction is one of the
important aspects for any organization. Before conducting any job satisfaction related studies,
an organization is advised to review the existing theories of job satisfaction as well as the job
satisfaction indexes and approaches. Widely used indexes and measures of job satisfaction
have been provided by author in a separate paper (Inoyatova, 2021). Current review paper
summarizes the well-known theories used in the studies of job satisfaction to provide a bigger
picture for other researchers, especially those who are new in the research field.

RELEVANT JOB SATISFACTION THEORIES

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory
Herzberg proposed a two-factor theory of job satisfaction which resulted from his
research pertaining job attitudes and motivation where he studied two hundred engineers and
accountants. Based on his findings job satisfactions is comprised of satisfiers
(motivators/intrinsic) and dissatisfiers (hygiene/extrinsic) factors (Herzberg et al., 1959). The
word ‘hygiene’ derives from ‘an analogy to the medical use of the term meaning preventative
and environmental’ (Herzberg, 1976, p.78). These hygiene factors (extrinsic motivation) such
as pay, supervision, security, and working conditions (correspond to Maslow’s lower level
needs) and lead to the job dissatisfaction when are not provided or insufficient. While
satisfiers, also referred to as motivators (intrinsic motivation) such as achievement,
responsibility, recognition, advancement opportunities, and the job itself (correspond to
Maslow’s higher-level needs) lead to the job satisfaction when present / provided in the job.
To sum up, Herzberg (1968) states that presence of satisfiers (motivators) leads to job
satisfaction, while their absence does not lead to the job dissatisfaction, it only fails to create
job satisfaction. At the same time, hygiene factors that are insufficient or not present will lead
to job dissatisfaction, while their presence does not necessarily lead to job satisfaction
(Herzberg, 1968). In simple words, hygiene factors such as pay, security and working
conditions are necessary but not enough to create job satisfaction. However, Gruneberg
(1979) argues that if such hygiene factors have recently been improved, they might lead to
job satisfaction for a short period of time.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698

Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

Herzberg used the critical incident technique for data collection and there were
several studies that support his theory using the same technique, however, there were also
number of studies which fail to confirm Herzberg’s theory because they used different
techniques for data collection, that leads to little empirical support (Gruneberg, 1979).
Nevertheless, Herzberg’s two-factor theory is well known for its pioneering and crucial role
in distinguishing the dissatisfaction from satisfaction at the job (Hassard et al., 2016).

Adam’s Equity Theory

Employees are motivated by more than just meeting their needs, they are seeking
fairness and/or equity in reward system between themselves and other workers. Employees
compare their outcomes and inputs as a ratio with others’ outcomes and inputs.
Inputs - is how much one believes to have contributed to his/her job, such as
education, past work experience, loyalty, time, creativity and job performance.
Outcomes are rewards that are perceived to be received from one’s job, which include
direct pay and bonuses, job security, social rewards, and psychological reward (Wood et al.,
2004).
The equity theory is based on the concept that individuals become less or non-
motivated if according to their perception their inputs (for example effort or commitment) are
greater than their outputs (for example pay and benefits).
Critiques of the equity theory argue that ‘fairness’ and ‘justice’ can be a matter of “the
eye of the beholder” as there is always a possibility that what one thinks or believes may not
reflect the actual situation.

Vroom’s Need and Fulfillment Theory / Expectancy Theory

According to the need fulfillment theory, job satisfaction is based partially on the
amount of pay an individual receives for his/her job (Gruneberg, 1979). Vroom’s (1964)
expectancy theory involves satisfaction, job selection, and performance. His theory mostly
known as the Valence, Instrumentality, Expectancy (VIE) theory with Valence showing one’s
desire to receive a reward; Expectancy showing one’s estimate probability about achieving
the successful performance; Instrumentality is when performance leads to rewards.
Employees are motivated by their desire to achieve something and by their belief in
achieving it, which would bring the reward; whether positive or negative. If the reward is
positive, the probability of increase of employee motivation is higher, and vice versa, if the
reward is negative, the probability of decrease of employee motivation is higher (Wood et al.,
2004). As a process of interaction of these three factors, they create motivation to increase
job satisfaction and decrease job dissatisfaction (Vroom, 1964). Vroom’s theory is one of the
most widely accepted theories of motivation which helps to explain how and why people
make decisions (Van Eerde & Thierry, 1996). Critics noted that Vroom’s expectancy theory
is ‘too complicated and over-intellectualized’ (Campbell et al., 1976).
Among the drawbacks of this theory, according to Lawler (1994: p.83) is that:
‘Individual-difference factors suggest that the fulfillment-theory approach to job satisfaction
is not valid, since this approach fails to consider differences in people’s feelings about what
the outcomes they should receive’. That is, an individual expecting more salary to be
received for his/her job is more likely to be dissatisfied than someone who believes he/she is
paid adequately for the job.

Discrepancy Theory, Lawler 1973

Lawler’s (1973) study on discrepancy theory concludes that job satisfaction is an
extent to which what an individual gets from the job is equal to what that individual thinks he
or she should get from that job. According to Lawler (1973), an individual has (a) perceived

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698

Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

amount that should be received such as skill, experience, training, effort, age, seniority,
education, company loyalty, past performance and present performance; as well as perceived
inputs and outcomes of referent others; and (b) perceived amount received such as perceived
outcomes of referent others and actual outcomes received. Hence, when (a) equals (b) –
perceived amount that should be received is equal to the perceived amount actually received,
it leads to the job satisfaction; when (a) is greater then (b) it leads to dissatisfaction; and when
(a) is less then (b) it leads to guilt, inequality, discomfort. For example, an employee would
be satisfied if his or her perceived salary was consistent with the work he or she put into the
job. On the contrary, same employee having compared the salary and tasks (difficulty level)
of others would be dissatisfied when the comparison was unfavorable. This theory is
somewhat based on Adams (1963) theory of inequity.

Locke’s Value-Percept Theory / Range of Affect Theory (1976)

Locke’s (1976) theory concludes that job satisfaction is determined by individual’s
values and job outcomes. According to this theory, if there is a gap between what an
individual has and what wishes to have at the job, dissatisfaction occurs only if that particular
job facet was important to an individual.
The theory is useful in the sense that it highlights that each individual has different
job facets that are important to him or her; for one employee, promotion opportunity may be
very important; while for another, degree of autonomy may be extremely important that meet
his or her expectations, thus, it helps to focus on the facets of the job that need improvement
which will lead to the job satisfaction. Overall job satisfaction is obtained through the sum of
all facets of the job, weighed by their importance to the individual (where the different job
facets are weighted during assessment of their job satisfaction level). How does it work? For
instance, if salary is very important to an employee, and his/her current salary meets his/her
expectations, then it would have an overall positive impact on job satisfaction. At the same
time, if an employee does not value salary as top priority, the fact that his/her expectations
have or have not been met, would have a small impact on overall job satisfaction.

Weitz; Staw & Ross’ Dispositional Approach

As was discussed earlier, the dispositional approach to job satisfaction suggests, that
individual’s job satisfaction is independent of the job itself, because of the general tendency
of each individual to feel negative or positive about his or her different life aspects. All in all,
the dispositional approach claims that employee job satisfaction or dissatisfaction will occur
regardless of the nature of the job or company in which he or she works. Weitz (1952) was
the first researcher to discuss this approach to job satisfaction with the developed gripe scale
measurement instrument, where he wasn’t interested in explaining job satisfaction by
dispositions. His aim was to investigate the relationship between the affective tendencies of
individual with job satisfaction to influence employee turnover.
More popular study on dispositions have become by Staw & Ross (1985), where their
studies revealed that job satisfaction was stable for individuals who changed the company
they worked for as well as their job position, which led to a conclusion that job satisfaction
was partially linked to individual’s personality, i.e. if an individual liked one job, he or she
would more likely to like another job. They measured job attitudes using one-item global
satisfaction measure with 4 response rates (such as highly satisfied to highly dissatisfied)
through the Longitudinal Survey of Mature Men (Staw & Ross, 1985).

Lofquist and Dawes’ Work Adjustment Theory

The theory of work adjustment was first published in 1964 by Dawis, England, and
Lofquist, which was revised in 1968, resulting in the book publishing in 1969 (Lofquist &

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698

Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

Dawis, 1969). The theory is based on the “continuous and dynamic process by which the
individual seeks to achieve and maintain correspondence with the work environment is called
work adjustment” (p.55). “The process by which the individual (with his unique set of
abilities and needs) acts, reacts, and comes to terms with his work environment is called work
adjustment” (Dawis et al., 1964: p.8).
The wоrk аdjustment theory suggests that an individual interacts with his or her
envirоnment, where each has requirements of the other. Every work envirоnment demands
set of specific tasks to be completed, and each individual exhibits skills to complete those
tasks. In return, an individual requires to be paid for the completion of the tasks, together
with safe envirоnment, comfоrtable place, friendly colleagues, good supervisor, and
achievement opportunity. When the requirements of both the individual and work
envirоnment are met, their interаction remains to be adequate; on the contrary, when the
requirements of both sides are not met, either an individual leaves his/her work, or an
envirоnment terminates to work (contract per se) with that individual.
There are two main indicators of work adjustment: 1) individual’s satisfaction with
the work environment; and 2) work environment’s satisfaction with the individual
(Individual’s satisfactoriness). These two indicatоrs are the requirements for an individual to
stay and be retained on the job. Another indicator of work adjustment is tenure. For example,
authors argue that an individual can leave his or her work environment under two conditions
or indicators: first, when an individual is no longer satisfactory (fails to demonstrate
appropriate behavior) and as a result is fired; and second, when an individual is no longer
satisfied with his or her current work; therefore “the state of the individual’s work adjustment
at any given time may be defined by his concurrent levels of satisfactoriness and satisfaction”
(Dawis et al., 1964: p.8).
The theory offers a framework with which a) one can describe the continuous process
of interаction between an individual and his/her work environment (the interаctiоn model),
and b) one can predict the results of the match between and individual and his/her work
envirоnment (the prеdictive mоdel).
Dawis and Lofquist (1984) propose that this theory can be used during the career
counselling sessions, where the job satisfaction and career should be one of the main goals
and outcomes of the counselling session. Authors also note, that before any counselling takes
places, it is vital to assess each individual’s case/situation, through the survey assessment
instrument known as Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) as a measure of jоb
satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

This paper provided a literature review regarding the theories used in job satisfaction
related studies namely: Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory; Adam’s Equity Theory; Vroom’s
Need and Fulfillment Theory / Expectancy Theory; Discrepancy Theory; Locke’s Value-
Percept Theory / Range of Affect Theory; and Work Adjustment Theory. It provides a bigger
picture for other researchers, especially those who are new in the research field.

REFERENCES

Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, 67(5), 422-436.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698

Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measures of well-being. American Psychologist, 31(2), 117–

124. [CrossRef] [Accessed 4 Oct 2020].

Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1964). A theory of work adjustment.
Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation (No. XV), 1–27. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center.

Dawis, R. V., Lofquist, L. H., & Weiss, D. J. (1968). A theory of work adjustment (revision).
Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation (No. XXIII), 1–14. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center.

Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Gruneberg, M. M. (1979). Understanding job satisfaction. New York: McMillan.

Hassard, J., Teoh, K., & Cox, T. (2016). Job satisfaction: Theories and definitions. Available
at: [CrossRef] [Accessed 4 Oct 2020].

Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business
Review, 46, 53-62.

Herzberg, F. (1976). The motivation-hygiene theory. In M. Weir (Ed.), Job satisfaction:

Challenge and response in modern Britain (pp. 75-81). Glasgow, Scotland: William
Collins.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Inoyatova, S. (2021). The Job Satisfaction: A Review of Widely Used Measures &
Indexes. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology, 18(2), 456-464.
Retrieved from [CrossRef] [Accessed 10 Oct 2021].

Lawler, E. E. (1994). Performance Management: The Next Generation. Compensation &

Benefits Review, 26(3), 16–19. [CrossRef] [Accessed 10 Oct 2020].

Lawler, E.E. (1973) Motivation in Work Organizations (Monterey, CA, Brooks/Cole).

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.)
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (p. 1297-1349). Chicago:
Rand McNally.

Lofquist, L. H., & Dawis, R. V. (1969). Adjustment to work. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.

Staw, B.M., & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach to
job attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70,469-480.

Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s expectancy models and work-related criteria:
A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 575-586.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698

Oct-Dec. 21 Vol. 11 No. 04 SJIF 7.607 & GIF 0.626 ISSN-2249-9512 Journal of Management Value & Ethics

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Weitz, J. (1952). A neglected concept in the study of job satisfaction. Personnel Psychology.
5, 20 1-205.

Wood, J., Wallace, J., Zeffane, R., Chapman, J.,Fromholtz, M., Morrison, V. (2004)
Organisational Behaviour: A global perspective. 3rd edition. Milton: John Wiley &
Sons Australia.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3994698