Job satisfaction

Lower job satisfaction is understood in the work psychology, a person's attitude towards work. It manifests itself as an emotional response to a situation and represents several interrelated reference settings. Job satisfaction mainly engaged management theory.

History

Since Herzberg's two-factor theory is the job satisfaction of comprehensive research. According to an estimate by Locke in 1976 approximately 3350 relevant work has already been published.

In Germany settled since the reception of Herzberg observe two waves: one is due to the evaluation scheme of human labor by Rohmert in which the hierarchy executability - tolerability - Reasonableness - was postulated satisfaction. The other was triggered by the EFQM, which aufführte 1994 job satisfaction as " result factor " in their common quality model. While that was changed in the 2000 version, but the interest in job satisfaction was aroused again.

After decades of own research Neuberger came in 1985 in a collection department on the following key messages:

• The more the concept of job satisfaction is approached, the more blurred and meaningless it is.
• It is hard to determine at a satisfaction statement, whether it is actually due to the situation ( " Strength through Joy ... " ) or simply comes from the fact you have learned not to be desired ("... or euphoria in disguise ?")
• A relationship between job satisfaction and job performance, motivation or other relevant business performance factor could not be detected.
• " Humanization of work can not mean to make people happy " (p. 137).

Agnes Bruggemann provides job satisfaction as the result of an internal comparison of one's own needs with the situational options for implementation dar. Thus, on the one hand develop from the external influences an inner experience of the situation. On the other hand, is caused by the upbringing and past of an individual and personal claims a desired target state. Consistency and variations of these two pictures cause after Bruggemann job satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Merit of the model is to have the, qualitatively differentiated to date global satisfaction concept, which was the reality hardly do justice. It distinguishes six forms:

Job satisfaction is thus interpreted as a process and not as a static construct. The resignation forms make it clear that job satisfaction and job satisfaction are not synonymous.

Latest results of satisfaction research by Roedenbeck go the way of combining the two approaches. On the one hand, the quantitative approaches of Neuberger be considered: At work people evaluate different factors or facets in relation to their level of aspiration, and thus create a central component in the development of job satisfaction. On the other hand, however, the qualitative approach of Bruggemann and Andre Bussing and Thomas Bissel is considered. Accordingly, the people of each of them considered a form of quality factor of satisfaction by comparing the level of aspiration and actual state ( and not just for work satisfaction in general). Developed by Roedenbeck complex model of job satisfaction goes even further beyond this differentiation and also explains how the behavior is affected by the different qualities of job satisfaction for each factor.

Current main point of criticism of the new complexes model of job satisfaction is the lack of empiricism. The model has been developed on the basis of a theoretical meta-analysis.