Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 210

Abstract

Human Resource Management has played a vital role both in the public and private

sectors. We can say that people, together with their knowledge and skills are the most

important aspects affecting the productivity of an organization. Hence, it has come to the

researchers interest to understand the different factors affecting job satisfaction among the

employees, which we consider a precondition for increasing productivity, responsiveness,

quality, and customer service.

The aim of this study is to identify the significant effect of the factors affecting job

satisfaction of the HR employees of the Human Resource Management and Development

Office of the Iloilo Provincial Capitol, to rank these factors according to its impact and to

know their overall satisfaction towards their job. The theoretical framework used in the

study is Lockes Range of Affect Theory which includes concepts such as job satisfaction

itself, perception, nature of work, rewards, and other people and organizational context.

The empirical part of the study and the survey were created according to the mentioned

concepts. The survey contained questions about the independent variables used in the

conceptual framework which are personal profile, perception, work environment, and

rewards and incentives. Furthermore, a population of 15 respondents answered the said

self-administered questionnaire.

The study showed that only rewards and incentives significantly affect employee

job satisfaction in the HRMDO after conducting t-test and Pearson r correlation, which

resulted to a strong positive correlation of rho = 0.750 (.60<|r|<.79); P<0.05. On the other

hand, other factors such as personal profile, perception, and work environment did not

significantly affect their job satisfaction. Hence, we specifically recommended that the

Iloilo Provincial Government should increase its focus on the employees rewards and

incentives as it would significantly affect their job satisfaction.

i
Acknowledgment
We, the researchers would like to express our sincerest gratitude and deepest

appreciation to: first of all, to the Almighty God for giving us the strength, wisdom,

patience, talents, and knowledge to make this research possible. And also, to our family,

our parents, Delia Tio, Enrico Tio, Germily R. Astorga, Reinerio N. Astorga, Julia Acosta,

Elmer Acosta, Bernardito Calapardo, Monina Calapardo, Arthur Cordova, Jose Bangcaya,

and Ana Maria Bangcaya who willingly supported us financially and emotionally, and

inspired us in doing our research.

To Professor Cheryl Joy J. Fernandez PhD., our educator, for challenging,

encouraging, and guiding us right from the beginning until the end of our research study.

This study will not be as good without her patience and proper guidance.

Thanks also to Maam Maribel Fabales who have helped us in communicating with

the Iloilo Provincial Capitols Human Resource Management and Development Office

(HRMDO) employees, our primary constituents in the said research. Also to the latter, who

have completely permitted, supported, and trusted us in conducting the survey. This

research study would not be possible if not for their cooperation. We will always be grateful

for the wonderful experience we made with these people even just for a very short time.

To Ms. Franzine Glorie Tampus, Ms. Dona Sables, Mr. Edwin Lomo, and Mr.

Harrace Gem Caver, and Ms. Jannet S. Jungco who have further helped us in strengthening

our survey questionnaires and in conducting our pre-test. Also thanks to Ms. Quennie

Zairah Pueblo whom we have consulted with at some point of our study regarding the

statistical tools used.

ii
Special thanks also to Engr. Cris Jonlyn Villalobos, for providing us food and moral

support in the process of conducting this research study. Also, to Agilles Boarding House

and its landlady, Norlyn Vicencio which has provided us a place to do our paper works.

And lastly, to all those who were not mentioned above, who have given us support

in every simple way for us to achieve success in this research study.

iii
Table of Contents

Abstract ................................................................................................................................ i
Acknowledgment ................................................................................................................ ii
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vii
List of Appendices ........................................................................................................... viii
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
Background of the Study .......................................................................................................... 1
Objectives of the Study ............................................................................................................ 7
Hypotheses of the Study ........................................................................................................... 8
Significance of the Study ......................................................................................................... 9
Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................. 11
Assumptions ............................................................................................................................. 12
Definition of Terms................................................................................................................. 13
Review of Related Literature ............................................................................................ 16
Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................................................ 16
Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................................... 21
I. Dispositional Theory .......................................................................................... 21
II. Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) ............................................. 22
III. Job Characteristics Model .............................................................................. 25
IV. Expectancy Theory ......................................................................................... 27
V. Underlying Theory: Range of Affect Theory ..................................................... 28
Foreign Studies on Job Satisfaction ...................................................................................... 40
I. Studies in the Private Sector............................................................................... 41
II. Studies in the Public Sector ................................................................................ 43
Local Studies on Job Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 44
I. Studies in the Private Sector............................................................................... 44
II. Studies in the Public Sector ................................................................................ 47
Job Satisfaction in the HR Department ................................................................................ 49
Conceptual Framework and Methodology........................................................................ 56
iv
Conceptual Framework .......................................................................................................... 56
Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................ 58
I. Personal Profile .................................................................................................. 59
II. Perception ........................................................................................................... 66
III. Work Environment ......................................................................................... 67
IV. Rewards .......................................................................................................... 74
Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 79
I. The Research Design .......................................................................................... 80
II. Research Location and Respondents .................................................................. 81
III. Data Gathering Instrument ............................................................................. 83
IV. Statistical Treatment ....................................................................................... 85
Results ............................................................................................................................... 92
Descriptive Analysis ............................................................................................................... 92
I. Personal Profile .................................................................................................. 93
II. Perception ........................................................................................................... 99
III. Work Environment ....................................................................................... 105
IV. Rewards and Incentives ................................................................................ 109
V. Overall Job Satisfaction ................................................................................... 113
Hypothesis Testing Results .................................................................................................. 125
Correlation Testing ............................................................................................................... 128
Summary of Hypotheses ...................................................................................................... 130
Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 131
Personal Profile of the Respondents ................................................................................... 131
Interpretation of Statistical Findings and Corresponding Implications ......................... 134
I. Personal Profile to the Three Factors (Perception, Work Environment,
Rewards/Incentives) ................................................................................................ 134
II. Personal Profile to Overall Job Satisfaction ..................................................... 135
III. Perception, Work Environment, Rewards/Incentives to Overall Job
Satisfaction .............................................................................................................. 142
IV. Overall Job Satisfaction of Employees ......................................................... 145
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 148
Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 148
Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 152
Appendix ......................................................................................................................... 166

v
List of Tables

Table 1 Subcategories Identified Under Each Factor....................................................... 84


Table 2 t-test Result Interpretation .................................................................................. 89
Table 3 Rho Values and Corresponding Interpretation .................................................... 91
Table 4 Respondents Personal Socio-demographics (N=15) ......................................... 93
Table 5 Likert Scale Range ............................................................................................ 103
Table 6 Perception - Mean, Interpretation ..................................................................... 103
Table 7 Work Environment - Mean, Interpretation........................................................ 107
Table 8 Rewards and Incentives Mean, Interpretation ................................................ 111
Table 9 Significance of the Personal Profile Components Towards Job Satisfaction ... 127
Table 10 Relationship between Personal Profile, Perception, Work Environment,
Rewards/Incentives and Job Satisfaction of HRMDO Employees ................................. 128
Table 11 Hypotheses Testing Results ............................................................................ 130

vi
List of Figures

Figure 1 Herzbergs View of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction ........................................ 22


Figure 2 The Job Characteristic Model ............................................................................ 27
Figure 3 Theoretical Framework...................................................................................... 36
Figure 4 Conceptual Framework...................................................................................... 58
Figure 5 Job Satisfaction According to Age .................................................................... 62
Figure 6 Job Satisfaction Rates Among Employed Individuals Ages 25 and Older, by
Education Level, 2008 ...................................................................................................... 64
Figure 7 Google Maps Showing Iloilo Provincial Capitol .............................................. 82
Figure 8 HRMDO Employees Work-related Socio-demographics Education, Position,
PRC ................................................................................................................................... 97
Figure 9 HRMDO Employees Work-related Socio-demographics Salary, Civil
Service, Tenure ................................................................................................................. 98
Figure 10 Frequency Distribution of Perception............................................................ 101
Figure 11 Respondents' Mean - Perception ................................................................... 104
Figure 12 Frequency Distribution of Work Environment .............................................. 106
Figure 13 Respondents' Mean - Working Environment ................................................ 108
Figure 14 Frequency Distribution of Rewards and Incentives ...................................... 110
Figure 15 Respondent's Mean - Rewards and Incentives .............................................. 112
Figure 16 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Sex ............................ 114
Figure 17 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Marital Status ........... 115
Figure 18 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Age ........................... 116
Figure 19 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Highest Educational
Level ............................................................................................................................... 117
Figure 20 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Job Position .............. 118
Figure 21 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on being a PRC License
Holder ............................................................................................................................. 119
Figure 22 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Civil Service Eligibility
......................................................................................................................................... 120
Figure 23 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Gross Monthly Salary
......................................................................................................................................... 121
Figure 24 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Tenure ...................... 122
Figure 25 Respondents' Mean Satisfaction (Variables and Overall) ............................. 124

vii
List of Appendices
Appendix A HRMDO Pictures .................................................................................. 167
Appendix B Permission Letter ................................................................................... 169
Appendix C Research Questionnaire ......................................................................... 170
Appendix D Codebook ............................................................................................... 175
Appendix E Frequency Distribution Tables............................................................... 185
Appendix E.1 Perception........................................................................................ 185
Appendix E.2 Work Environment .......................................................................... 186
Appendix E.3 Rewards and Incentives .................................................................. 187
Appendix F Overall Level of Satisfaction Based on Ten Factors .............................. 188
Appendix G Independent T-test ................................................................................. 189
Appendix G.1 Independent T-test Grouped by Sex ............................................... 189
Appendix G.2 Independent T-test Grouped by Civil Service Eligibility ............... 190
Appendix H One Way Anova .................................................................................... 191
Appendix H.1 One Way Anova Grouped by Age .................................................. 191
Appendix H.2 One Way Anova Grouped by Marital Status .................................. 192
Appendix H.3 One Way Anova Grouped by Highest Educational Attainment ..... 193
Appendix H.4 One Way Anova Grouped by Position ........................................... 194
Appendix H.5 One Way Anova Grouped by Gross Salary Range......................... 195
Appendix H.6 One Way Anova Grouped by Tenure ............................................. 196
Appendix I SPSS Pearson r Correlation Testing Results ........................................... 197
Appendix I.1 Sex and Job Satisfaction................................................................... 197
Appendix I.2 Marital Status and Job Satisfaction .................................................. 197
Appendix I.3 Age and Job Satisfaction .................................................................. 198
Appendix I.4 Highest Educational Attainment and Job Satisfaction ..................... 198
Appendix I.5 Job Position and Job Satisfaction ..................................................... 199
Appendix I.6 PRC Licensed and Job Satisfaction.................................................. 199
Appendix I.7 Civil Service Eligibility and Job Satisfaction .................................. 200
Appendix I.8 Gross Monthly Salary and Job Satisfaction ..................................... 200
Appendix I.9 Tenure and Job Satisfaction ............................................................. 201
Appendix I.10 Perception and Job Satisfaction ..................................................... 201
Appendix I.11 Work Environment and Job Satisfaction ....................................... 202
Appendix I.12 Sex and Job Satisfaction................................................................. 202
viii
CHAPTER I

Introduction

Background of the Study

Todays society is bombarded with new discoveries that cause a digital shift in

peoples lives. These products of science and technology offer comfort and convenience

however, a remarkable question remains, Are people satisfied? One aspect of this issue

is job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction refers to how well a job provides fulfillment of a need or want, or

how well it serves as a source or means of enjoyment. It is also the degree to which

individuals feel positively or negatively about their jobs (Gautham, 2012). According to

Fogarty (1994), job satisfaction refers to the extent to which employees gain enjoyment

from their efforts at the workplace. When an employee has a high level of job satisfaction,

it means that they have a positive attitude towards his or her job. On the other hand, there

are a number of factors that can affect employees job satisfaction such as satisfaction with:

supervision at work, work itself, pay and conditions, appraisal, promotion practices and

co-workers (Hackman, Oldham 1980). With that, there is a need for the study of job

satisfaction because it plays a vital role to motivate employees to improve their

performance and to achieve their goals which may result to an organizations increased

productivity, less attrition rates, absenteeism, et cetera (Ice M., n.d.).

There were many theories concerning job satisfaction however this study is founded

on the Range of Affect Theory by John Locke (1976) with a main premise that satisfaction

1
is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants and what one has in a job. Little

difference between the two means a high satisfaction and vice versa. This theory also

affirms that employees give priority to one facet of the job that might be different for every

individual. For Locke, these facets could be summarized into four: nature of work, rewards,

other people and organizational context. (Locke, 1976)

Many studies explained the significant effect of job satisfaction to job performance.

One of these is the study of Hsieh (2016) comparing the similarities and differences of the

public, private, and non-profit sector employees across Taiwan though examining the

antecedents and simultaneity of job satisfaction and job performance. A cross-section

survey method was used with a sample of 1,116 employees with 398 working for the public

sector, 502 for the private sector, and 216 for the non-profit sector. After assessing the data

by seemingly unrelated regression, the results revealed that job satisfaction positively

affects job performance in the public, private, and non-profit sector employees with

coefficient of .16, p < .01, .14, 23, p < .001, and .20, p < .01, respectively. Furthermore, it

was concluded that job performance and job satisfaction have significant simultaneous

influences on each other. However, the effect of job satisfaction is stronger than that of job

performance among employees in the three sectors (Hsieh, 2016).

In addition, a local study explained the significance of analyzing the importance of

job satisfaction in job performance. It discusses the different elements an employee needs

that could influence their job satisfaction. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were

used and the data was gathered from 15 employees of the Ajinomoto Philippines

Corporation-Lucena Branch using survey questionnaire and structured interview. The

survey consists of rating job satisfaction in terms of compensation and fringe benefits,

2
working condition, equipment, interpersonal relationship, motivation, and satisfaction with

present job. The four-point Likert scale is used in connection to their responses. After

analyzing the numerical data, results of this study showed that there is a significant

relationship between the factors of job satisfaction and job performance. The manager gave

high ratings to employees who were also satisfied with the way they are being handled by

the management and also in their overall job, (Angeles et. al., 2015).

With the strong effect of job satisfaction to job performance, it is very important to

know the factors that affect job satisfaction. In a related study, it is mentioned that job

satisfaction is affected by the organizational climate in some selected private universities

in Southeast Nigeria. Organizational climate serves as a measure of individual perceptions

or feelings about an organization. Organizational climate includes management or

leadership styles, participation in decision making, provision of challenging jobs to

employees, reduction of boredom and frustration, provision of benefits, personnel policies,

provision of good working conditions, and creation of suitable career ladder for academics

(Nicholson and Miljus, 1992). The result indicated that there is a significant difference

between how the senior and junior staff are satisfied in their work (Adeniji, 2011). Another

study shows an investigation of the level of job satisfaction of superintendents in the state

of Nebraska in relation to gender, age, compensation, experience, degree attainment and

school size. These factors of satisfaction helped predict areas that contributed to the success

of the superintendent and provide valuable information for boards, colleges and

universities in recruiting and retaining superintendents. The outcome signified that the

superintendents in Nebraska are satisfied with their jobs (Unzicker, 2012)

3
As cited in a study by Resheke (2001), it examined job satisfaction among full time

faculty of the College of Human Development at Wisconsin University. A survey was used

as data gathering tool which involves the full-time faculty of the College of Human

Development at UW-Stout as respondents. The survey was used to measure the level of

job satisfaction which indicated in the results that they are satisfied with their current

employment. Measures of group cohesion had a significant relationship with overall job

satisfaction. The study also determined that job autonomy, working with the students and

fellow colleagues and supervisors were the top three best reasons for working here. It was

also determined that pay, having more time and assistance with meeting deadlines and

having equal workloads between colleagues were the three top priorities for improving the

work environment (Resheke, 2001). Moreover, a study of job satisfaction among public

sector employees within South Africa, specifically in the health industry shows that factors

such as poor working conditions, staff shortages, below competitive salaries and lack of

promotional opportunities are some of the major factors contributing to employee

dissatisfaction within the sector (Ellickson & Logsdon, 2002; Herman, 2005; Ting, 1997).

In the Philippine context, there are also studies about the job satisfaction of

employees in different industries as well as the government. Lomoya, Pingo, & Callejas

(2015) research study focused on the contractual workers attitude and behavior towards

their job as employment of these workers become more prevalent in the country. The study

is quantitative in nature which examines job characteristics, rewards and recognition, and

training and development as the three main factors affecting job satisfaction and

organizational citizenship behaviors. 159 agency-hired blue-collar contractual workers

were tested for the study with the result showing that among the three variables, job

4
characteristics, and training and development are the only ones that were concluded as

strong predictors of job satisfaction while job characteristics as well as job satisfaction

predicted organizational citizenship behaviors. Also, the study of Ayon (2009) about job

satisfaction level of technology teacher education graduates of the University of

Southeastern Philippines concluded that there is a significant relationship between job

satisfaction and work-related factors such as promotion opportunities and recognition.

There was also a survey conducted on the job satisfaction of SME employees in

selected cities of Mindanao: Davao, Cagayan de Oro, Valencia and Iligan with results

implying that employees satisfaction are mostly due to social conditions in Mindanao.

This also explains their satisfaction with co-workers, customers, and supervisors. The

environmental conditions in Mindanao are shown to be a factor in positive attitude, with

high ratings given to environment, health, workplace safety, food, and nutrition. Also,

Degracia, Capuyan, & Vizcarra (2015) used a methodological tool called Job Satisfaction

Survey (JSS) for their study entitled Job Satisfaction and Professionalism of Selected

Licensed Customs Brokers in Paraaque City. Their study used nine factors (pay,

promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, co-workers,

nature of work and communication) in assessing the level of job satisfaction of customs

brokers who were classified according to the following: position, salary/income, years of

experience and ports of operation. Results show that in terms of the nine facets enumerated

except for operating procedures, the selected Licensed Customs Brokers were satisfied

while their level of professionalism perception is high. It was also found out that there is

no significant relationship between the level of job satisfaction and the level of

professionalism.

5
Further studies highlighted that servant leadership has a significant effect to the job

satisfaction of government employees in the Province of Romblon, Philippines.

Respondents were randomly selected from the various departments of Romblon provincial

government, totaling to 210 employees. A significant mediating role of work engagement

between servant leadership and job satisfaction was also observed as well as its predicting

role to job satisfaction (Rayan, et. al, 2015). Looking into the Human Resource

Department, a study entitled Human Resources Management in Southeastern Asias Local

Government Case Study: Indonesia, Philippine and Thailand by Maher and Bedawy (n.d.)

focuses on the HR Management experiences in three countries namely Indonesia,

Philippines, and Thailand. This study involves detailed analysis and in depth consideration

of various related literature. It is stated in this study that despite the fact the HR plays a

very important role in every organization, the government offices have missed this fact.

They were not able to give attention on the issues related to the HR department. This study

evaluates the perceptions of human resource managers at the local government level

regarding the importance of several functions and activities related to staffing and

selection, compensation and benefits, performance appraisal, labor relations, and job

design and process to assess the impact of HR functions tied closely to recent reforms at

this level. In addition, it aims to determine if there is positive relationship between the

processes and the performance of the HR employees. The generated processes after

studying the three countries will be suggested to the Egyptian Government as well as in

the global perspective. According to French (2011), as cited in this study, HRM plays a

very crucial role in the operations of government at all levels since this function is charged

with aligning personnel practices and objectives with the mission and goals of the public

6
organization. In addition, HR also had an important role to play in employee

communication, both to employees and upwards from employees to senior managers.

The above-mentioned studies and references gave a glimpse of how job satisfaction

is dealt with in foreign countries as well as in the Philippines among different industries

and also in the government. Generally, the factors identified that affect job satisfaction

were proven true such as job characteristics, rewards and recognition, and training and

development (Lomoya, et al, 2015). These intensive studies on job satisfaction have made

a turning point in many organizations since they were able to identify factors that affect

job satisfaction that they have taken for granted before. The results of the studies presented

above have come to the attention of such organizations and in that way, they could generate

action plans in response to the respective results.

However, there is no study that specifically involved a specific department in a

local government unit in the Philippines based on the exploratory research made. With this

and with the connection that one of the researchers has in the Human Resource

Management and Development Office of the Iloilo Provincial Capitol (HRMDO), the idea

of making their employees as respondents has come to the attention of the proponents.

Thus, this study aims to identify the factors of job satisfaction and if HRMDO employees

at the Iloilo Provincial Capitol are satisfied with their job.

Objectives of the Study

This study aims to determine the factors of job satisfaction of the Human Resource

Management and Development Office (HRMDO) employees of the Iloilo Provincial

Capitol, Iloilo City. Specifically, the researchers intend to achieve the following objectives:

7
1. To determine whether the employees personal profile affects perception, work

environment, and rewards and incentives.

2. To identify and rank the factors based on their impact on job satisfaction:

a. To determine whether personal profile significantly affects job satisfaction.

b. To determine whether employees perception about their job significantly

affects job satisfaction.

c. To determine whether work environment significantly affects job satisfaction.

d. To determine whether rewards and incentives significantly affect job

satisfaction.

3. To determine if the employees are satisfied with their job.

4. To develop various alternatives and generate recommendations based on the results

of the study.

Hypotheses of the Study

1. The employees personal profile has a significant effect on their perception

towards their job.

2. The employees personal profile has a significant effect on perceived work

environment.

3. The employees personal profile has a significant effect on rewards and incentives

received.

4. The employees personal profile has a significant effect on their job satisfaction.

5. The employees perception on their job has a significant effect on their job

satisfaction.

8
6. The work environment has a significant effect on their job satisfaction.

7. Rewards and incentives has a significant effect on their job satisfaction.

8. Rewards and incentives has the most significant effect on job satisfaction.

9. Work environment has the second-most significant effect on job satisfaction.

10. Perception has the third-most significant effect on job satisfaction.

11. Personal profile has the least significant effect on job satisfaction.

12. HRMDO employees of Iloilo Provincial Capitol are satisfied with their job.

Significance of the Study

This study about the factors of job satisfaction of the HRMDO employees at the

Iloilo Provincial Capitol has a lot of benefits. Specifically to:

HRMDO Employees

Undeniably, how a person is satisfied about his job would really affect its

performance. In the case of the HRMDO employees, oftentimes, they tend to overlook the

factors that contribute a lot to their job satisfaction. This study would make the employees

aware of certain factors such as their perception and organizational culture. They will have

the chance to change their mind set towards their job. In addition, they will be able to assess

themselves and decide to have a positive perception towards the things that they do.

Furthermore, the overall benefit of this study to the HRMDO employees is that,

they will be highly informed and made aware of the factors that affect their satisfaction.

With this, they will have an opportunity to work out the areas which they thought they have

shortcomings.

9
Human Resource Management and Development Office

Upon the identification of the factors that will influence the job satisfaction, the

Department Head or the management could check their existing policies and strategies as

well as the entire organization as a whole. In this level, a check-and-balance is possible.

The head could devise ways and strategies that will motivate the employees. One of these

is the rewards and benefits. The person in charge could revisit the salaries or wages that

they are giving to its employees, whether they would increase it or not. Also, they could

redesign their standards as to the promotion process of the department. Add to these, they

could redefine and make clearer the job description of its employees for them to become

more effective and efficient. As a whole, the entire department will be informed and they

will have a prospect of working on certain things to improve its operations.

Iloilo Provincial Government

This study will highly improve the service that the Iloilo Provincial Government

will be giving to its people. It cannot be denied that most of the human related transactions

are handled by the HR Department thus, creating confidence and trust from the people of

Iloilo Province.

Other Related Industries

The results of this study will be a benchmark for other industries to also help their

HR Department and even other functional departments of the organization. It will also

enable their management to check their management systems, internal controls, and

processes to improve their overall performance and even employees job satisfaction. Also,

10
it can be a wakeup call to these organizations to generate action plans that will sustain and

improve their employees job satisfaction.

Public

The public is the reason why many local government units are trying their best to

create and deliver quality service. If the Iloilo Provincial Capitol, specifically the HRMDO,

would be more effective and efficient in their job then, it would result to public welfare.

Scope of the Study

This study was conducted to determine the factors of job satisfaction of the

HRMDO employees of Iloilo Provincial Capitol, Iloilo City. Job satisfaction of the

employees, the dependent variable, will be assessed in terms of four factors namely

personal profile, perception, working environment and rewards and incentives which are

considered as independent variables.

By perception, we will evaluate how the employees regard, understand or interpret

the job itself being an HR employee. Personal profile is a factor which gives an immediate

sense of who the employees are. In this study, areas of personal profile such as age, sex,

marital status, tenure, and salary will be considered, whereas under rewards and incentives,

the opportunities, benefits, salaries, and promotions set by human resources department to

be given to employees in recognition of their service, effort or achievement will be further

taken into account. Additionally, the culture, relationships, work design, organizational

structure, and policies describe the surrounding conditions in which the employees operate,

therefore it will also be assessed to measure the effect of work condition to job satisfaction.

11
This study will be conducted from February 20 to May 2, 2017. The respondents

will include all the employees, the individuals who work part-time or full-time under a

contract of employment and has recognized rights and responsibilities in the Human

Resource Management and Development Office of Iloilo provincial government.

Accordingly, the researchers will use the purposive sampling technique. It is further

assumed that only the Human Resource Management and Development Office of the Iloilo

City Provincial Capitol is studied thus the result and conclusion of this study might not be

100% applicable to any other organization.

Assumptions

This research study assumes that job satisfaction is directly related to job

performance. That is, the higher the employees satisfaction in his job, the more effective

and efficient is his performance at work and the lower the employees satisfaction in his

job, the less effective and efficient is his performance at work, which is in accordance to

the review of related literature. Moreover, only those factors stated in the paper are the

ones tested on the subjects. The effect of any other external factors (aside from those factors

included in the study) to the employees is ignored. It is further assumed that the study is

specifically applied to the Human Resource Management and Development Office of the

Iloilo City Provincial Capitol only thus, the result and conclusion of this research might

slightly differ with other organizations because of certain factors unique to the specific

organization.

12
Definition of Terms

Job Satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the

perception by the individual of his/her job as implementing or giving the opportunity to

realize significant values available in the work, provided that these values are consistent

with his/her needs (Brief, Weiss, 2001, p. 282). In this study, job satisfaction is said to have

an impact on job performance as supported by various studies shown in the related

literature.

Job Performance refers to what people do while at work, the action itself

(Campbell, 1990). In this study, it is what job satisfaction is proven to have an impact on.

Factors are referred to as circumstances, facts, or influences that contribute to a

result or outcome. In this study, it comprises personal profile, perception, work

environment, and rewards and incentives each having an impact or influence on job

satisfaction.

Personal Profile gives an immediate sense of who you are, including the basics of

your name, appearance, interests, influences, and accomplishments. In this study personal

profile is a factor having an impact on job satisfaction and is comprised of ten sub-factors

namely sex, marital status, age, educational level, job position, PRC licensed, civil service

eligibility, gross monthly, salary and tenure.

Perception means a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something. In

13
this study, it is an independent variable affecting job satisfaction, referring to employees

intuitive understanding and insight of his or her work.

Rewards are things that are given in recognition of ones service, effort, or

achievement. In this study, rewards are one of the independent variables that affect job

satisfaction comprising of opportunities, benefits, salaries, recognition and promotions.

Incentive is an object, item of value or desired action or event that spurs employee

to do more whatever was encouraged by the employer through the chosen incentive. In this

study, incentives together with rewards are factors that leave an impact on job satisfaction.

Work environment is used to describe the surrounding conditions in which an

employee operates. It can be composed of physical conditions, such as office temperature,

or equipment, such as personal computers. It can also be related to factors such

as work processes or procedures. In this study, work environment is one of the factors

affecting job satisfaction which will be measured as to the intensity of its effect.

Employees are defined as individuals who work part-time or full-time under a

contract of employment, whether oral or written, express or implied, and have recognized

rights and duties. In this study, employees are the respondents whose job satisfaction will

be measured in terms of their personal profile, perception, work environment and rewards

and incentives.

14
Government is defined as the organization, machinery, or agency though which a

political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified

according to the distribution of power within it. In this study, government is the sector

where the respondents (employees) are working.

Human resource department is a critical component of employee well-being in

any business, no matter how small. HR responsibilities include payroll, benefits, hiring,

firing, and keeping up to date with state and federal tax laws. In this study, it is this

departments employees from whom job satisfaction will be measured.

Job description refers to the formal account of an employees responsibilities.

15
CHAPTER II

Review of Related Literature

It is the goal of this study to identify and rank the factors of job satisfaction. To

achieve this goal, various literatures were reviewed to obtain a better understanding of the

term job satisfaction, its implications and significance, and the different factors that affect

it. Since the nature of this study is focused on the government employees specifically, from

the Human Resource Management and Development Office, literatures about this topic

will also be examined.

This chapter starts with describing job satisfaction and all the concepts related to it.

Second, the theoretical framework will be presented which shows different theories about

job satisfaction and literatures about its relationship to job performance will also be

provided. Third, different foreign studies about job satisfaction in public and private sectors

will be reviewed. A literature of local studies in public and private sectors will be analyzed

as well. And lastly, studies on job satisfaction among Human Resource employees will also

be presented. From these, the researchers have found gaps and inconsistencies in the

literatures examined and also found significant similarities in the studies that will aid in

understanding job satisfaction and its factors.

Job Satisfaction

Although there is a wide usage of job satisfaction in many researches, especially as

a tool in understanding employee behavior and performance, there is still no clear and

16
specific definition of this term. Job satisfaction is defined in various ways by different

authors. It is important therefore, to define job satisfaction in several viewpoints so as to

establish a clear understanding of its nature and importance in the overall concept of work.

In this section, the definitions which are commonly cited in many studies will be given and

analyzed.

Different researches proved that one the most widely used definition of job

satisfaction is that of Locke (1976). He defined job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive

emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job or job experiences. From this

definition, Luthans (1998) further described job satisfaction as an outcome of employees

perception of how well their job provides those things that are viewed as important.

Robbins (2005) also defined job satisfaction as a positive feeling about a job, resulting

from an evaluation of its characteristics. He also compared the term to employee attitudes

which he believes to be used interchangeably with job satisfaction.

In comparison to Robbins, another definition of job satisfaction is the degree to

which an individual feels positive or negative about a job, towards his/her coworkers and

work environment (Schermerhorn et al, 2005-2012). From this, it can be noted that job

satisfaction does not only refer to the positive feeling but also the negative, the same way

J. Williams (2004) defined job satisfaction in his articles as the extent to which people

like (satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs. He suggested that job satisfaction

is a general or global affective reaction that individuals hold about their job. These

definitions are proof of how there are different views in defining job satisfaction.

With all these definitions and interpretations of job satisfaction, it can be inferred

that in understanding organizational behavior and human resource management, job

17
satisfaction is significant. Luthans (2011) noted satisfaction in itself is already a positive

outcome meaning, job satisfaction is considered to have a positive implication on a

companys overall status. For the organization, it increases productivity and customer

satisfaction, it reduces turnover, recruiting, and training costs, enhances customer loyalty,

results to more energetic employees, improves teamwork, and results to higher quality

products and/or services due to more competent and energized employees while for the

employee, they will care about the quality of their work, they will create and deliver

superior value to the customer, they are more committed to the organization, and their work

is more productive. (Ice M., n.d.) Furthermore, a lack of job satisfaction may be reflected

in counterproductive work behaviors such as purposely performing with low quality,

avoiding work, acting violently at work, or even engaging in workplace theft

(Scherhermorn et al, 2005).

Job satisfaction not only benefits the organization but also the employees

themselves as suggested in Judge and Klingers study that job satisfaction is also an

indicator of subjective well-being. It can be inferred that job satisfaction actually leads to

life satisfaction and their relationship can be described in three ways according to many

researchers, (1) spillover, which means that job experiences spill over onto life experiences

and vice versa; (2) segmentation, which states that job and life experiences are divided and

have little to do with one another; and (3) compensation, where an employee seeks to

compensate the job dissatisfaction experienced by seeking fulfillment and happiness in his

or her nonwork life, and vice versa (Judge & Klinger, 2007). Judge and Watanabe (1994)

concluded in their research study that 68% of the workers belong to the spillover group,

20% in the segmentation and 12% in the compensation group. From this, it is assumed that

18
there is indeed a correlation between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. (Judge and

Watanabe, 1994).

Due to its importance, a lot of studies has been dedicated to job satisfaction. In fact,

job satisfaction is the most widely researched job attitude and among the most extensively

researched subjects in Industrial/Organizational Psychology (Judge & Church, 2000). In

these studies, researchers tried to form a measure of job satisfaction which proved to be

complex. According to Robbins (2005), it requires an intricate summation of many discrete

elements. This is because he described job as more than just the things an employee does

like driving trucks, taking a customers orders or making reports. It also involves the

relationship with coworkers and also working in different atmospheres or conditions

(Robbins, 2005). J. Williams (2004) supported this idea and suggests that it is important to

measure the different facets or dimensions of satisfaction. The examination of such

facets is of use in a careful examination of employee satisfaction with critical job factors

such as co-workers, pay, job conditions, supervision, nature of the work and benefits. Judge

and Klinger (2005) also argued that measuring job satisfaction in different contexts yields

a different result. Some measure job satisfaction as a sum of various facets while others

look at it as global or treated as an overall measure and it was proven that indeed, there is

a different result when job satisfaction is measured as a sum of facets than when it is

measured as a whole (Judge & Klinger, 2005).

In measuring job satisfaction, the use of survey is the one most extensively applied.

Through the years of research in the job satisfaction field, various indices and surveys were

formulated by different researchers. One of the most popular and used by many studies as

an instrument in measuring job satisfaction is Spectors Job Satisfaction Survey (Spector,

19
1997). This is a survey instrument that includes 36 items and covers nine facets of

satisfaction which comprises of pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, operating

conditions, coworkers, nature of work, communication (Watson et al, 2007).

Judge and Klinger (2005) noted that there are two most frequently used validated

employee attitude survey measures. These are the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). JDI measures job satisfaction in five facets

namely: pay, promotions and promotion opportunities, coworkers, supervision, and the

work itself (Bowling Green State University, 1975-2009). In the researches gathered for

the literature review of this paper, it can actually be observed that the JDI survey is the one

most frequently used. On the other hand, MSQ is a 100-item, 20-facet survey instrument

developed by the research department of the University of Minnesota (Weiss, et al, 1996).

And overall, the job satisfaction scale of Brayfield and Rothe is the most widely used. From

this, a five-scale version was formulated by Judge in his other researches (Judge, Bono &

Locke, 2000). The five items are:

1. I feel fairly satisfied with my present job.

2. Most days I am enthusiastic about my work.

3. Each day at work seems like it will never end

4. I find real enjoyment in my work.

5. I consider my job to be rather unpleasant

20
Theoretical Framework

As mentioned above, job satisfaction is the sum of its different factors. In order to

understand what these factors are, several work motivation theories have been studied for

they have corroborated the implied role of job satisfaction. Work satisfaction theories, such

as Maslows (1943) Hierarchy of Needs, Herzbergs (1968) Two-Factor (Motivator-

Hygiene) Theory, Hackman and Oldhams (1976) Job Characteristics Model, Lockes

(1976) Range of Affect Theory, Vrooms (1964) Expectancy Theory, and etc., have tried

to explain job satisfaction and its influence.

I. Dispositional Theory

One of the approaches that can be used in job satisfaction theory is the Dispositional

Theory (or sometimes called the Trait Theory). This theory suggests that job satisfaction

is closely related to personality, making an individual possess a strong predisposition

towards a certain level of satisfaction. Furthermore, it suggests that their dispositions

caused those tendencies toward job satisfaction, regardless of ones job.

Evidence for this approach can be divided into indirect studies and direct studies.

Take for example a significant model that narrowed the scope of the Dispositional Theory

was the Core Self-evaluation Model, proposed by Timothy A. Judge and his colleagues in

1998. Judge argued that there are four Core Self-evaluations that determine one's

disposition towards job satisfaction: self-esteem, general self-efficacy, locus of control and

neuroticism. This model states that higher levels of self-esteem (the value one places on

his/her self) and general self-efficacy (the belief in one's own competence) lead to higher

work satisfaction. Having an internal locus of control (believing one has control over

21
his/her own life, as opposed to outside forces having control) leads to higher job

satisfaction. Finally, lower levels of neuroticism lead to higher job satisfaction. (Judge,

et.al, 1998)

Some research also indicates that identical twins have similar levels of job

satisfaction. Interestingly, a twin based study examined 34 twins whom had been raised

independently of one another. This study found genetic factors accounted for 30% of job

satisfaction levels when assessed in later life. (Staw & Ross, 1985, pp. 469)

II. Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory)

The Two factor theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) as proposed by Frederick

Herzberg (1959) explains satisfaction and motivation in the workplace. This theory states

that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by different factors - motivation and hygiene

factors, respectively as shown below. While the factors in the Disposition Theory is

personal, motivators and hygiene factors are external. Motivating factors are those aspects

of the job that make people want to perform and provide people with satisfaction while

hygiene factors include aspects of the working environment.

Figure 1 Herzbergs View of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

22
Hygiene factors are those job factors which are essential for existence of motivation

at workplace. These do not lead to positive satisfaction for long-term. But if these factors

are absent in a workplace, then they lead to dissatisfaction. In other words, hygiene factors

are those factors which when adequate/reasonable in a job, pacify the employees and do

not make them dissatisfied. These factors are extrinsic to work. Hygiene factors are also

called as dissatisfiers or maintenance factors as they are required to avoid dissatisfaction.

These factors describe the job environment/scenario. The hygiene factors symbolized the

physiological needs which the individuals wanted and expected to be fulfilled. It usually

includes:

Pay - The pay or salary structure should be appropriate and reasonable. It must be

equal and competitive to those in the same industry in the same domain.

Company Policies and administrative policies - The company policies should not

be too rigid. They should be fair and clear. It should include flexible working hours,

dress code, breaks, vacation, etc.

Fringe benefits - The employees should be offered health care plans (PhilHealth),

benefits for the family members, employee help programs (SSS, PAG-IBIG) and

et cetera.

Physical working conditions - The working conditions should be safe, clean and

hygienic. The work equipment should be updated and well-maintained.

Status - The employees status within the organization should be familiar and

retained.

Interpersonal relations - The relationship of the employees with his peers,

superiors and subordinates should be appropriate and acceptable. There should be

23
no conflict or humiliation element present.

Job Security - The organization must provide job security to the employees.

On the other hand, motivational factors yield positive satisfaction. These factors are

inherent to work and motivate the employees for a superior performance. They are also

called satisfiers and are involved in performing the job. Employees find these factors

intrinsically rewarding for the motivators symbolized the psychological needs that were

perceived as an additional benefit. It includes:

Recognition - The employees should be recognized and be given merit for their

accomplishments by the managers.

Sense of achievement - The employees must have a sense of achievement. This

depends on the job. There must be a fruit of some sort in the job.

Growth and promotional opportunities - There must be growth and advancement

opportunities in an organization to motivate the employees to perform well.

Responsibility - The employees must hold themselves responsible for the work.

The managers should give them ownership of the work. They should minimize

control but retain accountability.

Meaningfulness of the work - The work itself should be meaningful, interesting

and challenging for the employee to perform and to get motivated.

An employee's motivation to work is continually related to job satisfaction of a subordinate.

Motivation can be seen as an inner force that drives individuals to attain personal and

organization goals (Hoskinson, Porter, & Wrench, 1998, p.133).

24
While Herzberg's model has stimulated much research, researchers have been

unable to reliably empirically prove the model, with Hackman & Oldham (1970)

suggesting that Herzberg's original formulation of the model may have been a

methodological artifact. Furthermore, the theory does not consider individual differences,

conversely predicting all employees will react in an identical manner to changes in

motivating/ hygiene factors Finally, the model has been criticized in that it does not specify

how motivating/hygiene factors are to be measured.

III. Job Characteristics Model

Bridging the gap between the previous two theories, the Job Characteristics Model

describes the relationship between job characteristic and individual responses to work

(Hackman & Oldham, 1976, 1980). The theory specifies the task condition in which

individuals are predicted to prosper in their work.

Five job dimensions are identified prompting three psychological states that lead to

some beneficial personal and work outcomes. The theory also includes individual

difference variables as moderator of the relationship between the characteristics and the

outcome variables. Hackman and Oldham (1976,1980) define the five job characteristics

as follows:

Skill variety - the degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities in

carrying out the work, involving the use of a number of different skills and talents

of the person.

Task identity - the degree to which the job requires completion of a whole,

identifiable piece of work that is doing a job from beginning to end with visible

25
outcome.

Task significance - the degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives

of other people, whether those people are in the immediate organization or in the

world at large

Autonomy - the degree to which the job provides substantial freedom,

independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in

determining the procedure to be used in carrying it out.

Job feedback -the degree to which carrying out the work activities required by the

job provides the individual with direct and clear information about the effectiveness

of his or her performance.

These five core job characteristics can be combined to form a motivating potential

score (MPS) for a job, which can be used as an index of how likely a job is to affect an

employee's attitudes and behaviors. A meta-analysis of studies that assess the framework

of the model provides some support for the validity of the model (Hackman and Oldham,

1976, 1980).

26
Figure 2 The Job Characteristic Model

IV. Expectancy Theory

Expectancy theory suggests that an individuals behavior can be predicted from the

degree to which the behavior is instrumental for the attainment of outcomes multiplied by

the evaluation of these outcomes (Vroom, 1964). Hence, this theory proposes that work

motivation is dependent upon the perceived association between performance and

outcomes and individuals modify their behavior based on their calculation of anticipated

outcomes (Chen & Fang, 2008). It further provides the idea that an individual's motivation

comes from believing they will get what they desire in the form of a reward. Although the

theory is not all inclusive of individual motivation factors, it provides leaders with a

foundation on which to build a better understanding of ways to motivate subordinates

(AETC, 2008). The theory states that individuals have different sets of goals and can be

27
motivated if they believe that:

There is a positive correlation between efforts and performance.

Favorable performance will result in a desirable reward.

The reward will satisfy an important need.

The desire to satisfy the need is strong enough to make the effort worthwhile

(Lawler, Porter. L., Vroom, 2009).

V. Underlying Theory: Range of Affect Theory

To date, the most widely accepted theory of job satisfaction was proposed by Locke

(1976), who defined job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisal of ones job or job experiences (p.1304). The theory suggests that

satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy between what one wants in a job and what an

employee is getting from the job. A miniature difference sets out job satisfaction as being

high and a huge difference would mean the employee is less satisfied with the job.

Furthermore, this theory also affirms that employees give priority to one facet of the job

that might be different for every individual. Locke summarized them into four facets

nature of work, rewards, other people and organizational context.

Nature of work - This is how workers perform the specified job. It pertains to the

performance on an individual worker if they are satisfied of what they are

performing or not.

Rewards This is usually what a person gets while doing their job. Rewards can

either be monetary or not. For example, rewards can be associated to intangible

things, like the feeling a person might get when doing a job that helps others. It can

28
also be considered a reward when one gets commended for doing a good job.

Other people - The co-workers are also affecting to the job satisfaction of an

employee. They give motivation to be able to be satisfied with the given job.

Organizational context - Organizational commitment will also result to job

satisfaction. The positive indicators of commitment are productivity and health.

The more satisfied an employee is with their job, the more they will produce and

the healthier they will be.

According to Locke (1976), this process becomes even more complex since the

importance of work facets differs as per individual perception. One employee may consider

rewards more important while another would say relationships must be given more value.

To explain the effects of these differences, Locke (1976) put forth the ideas of the range of

affect theory. The hypothesis of this theory is that employees weigh facets differently while

assessing job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). Consequently, this leads to an individual measure

of satisfaction or dissatisfaction when expectations are met or not. For example, when one

receives a good pay, he/she would be positively impacted because the expectations were

met. On the other hand, if its not what an employee gives importance to, a good pay may

not actually satisfy him/her. Hence, when a person values a particular facet of a job, his

satisfaction is more greatly impacted both positively (when expectations are met) and

negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who doesnt value that facet

(Locke, 1976).

The theories mentioned above led us to choosing this particular job satisfaction

model because relative to our study, Lockes Range of Affect Theory parallels the ideas

29
we need to explain and the factors we have identified in our Conceptual Framework (Figure

4).

In recent years, job performance has gained common interest from many

researchers in the field of industrial and organizational psychology. It is considerably of

high importance not only for organizations but for individuals as well. For organizations,

high job performance of an employee indicates efficiency and results to more accomplished

organizational goals. For individuals on the other hand, high job performance gives self-

satisfaction and results to rewards and promotions received from the organization. This is

one of the reasons that captured researchers attention to study job performance.

In 1990, Campbell described the literature on the structure and content of

performance as a virtual dessert (p.704), however recently, the definition and concept of

job performance has received considerable research attention with various authors

providing its definition.

On a very general sense, job performance is defined by Jex (2002, p. 88) as all

behaviors employees engage in while at work. This definition however is vague as

employees, even at work, normally have reasonable amount of non-job related behaviors.

A clearer and most used definition is that of Campbell (1990) which states that job

performance means to reach a goal or set of goals within a job, role, or organization.

Campbell (1993) defined performance as synonymous with behavior which is something

that a person actually does and can be observed. Also, job performance is what the

organization hires one to do, and do well (Campbell et al., 1993, p. 40). Further, Campbell

(1990) affirms that job performance is not a single action but rather a complex activity

(p.704).

30
When conceptualizing performance, authors indeed agree that it has to be

considered as a multidimensional concept. Historically, there have been three approaches

to define the dimensions of job performance (Milkovich et al 1991 p. 48): as a function of

outcomes; as a function of behavior; as a function of personal traits. On the most basic

level however, one has to differentiate between a process or action (i.e., behavioral) aspect

and an outcome aspect of performance (Campbell, 1990; Kanfer, 1990; Borman and

Motowidlo, 1993; Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, and Sager, 1993; Roe, 1999). The majority

of the studies have shifted their focus on defining job performance in terms of outcomes

and behavior, since these are easier and more objective to define and observe than personal

traits (Hersen, 2004, p. 375).

The behavioral aspect refers to something done by an employee while at work, the

action itself (Campbell, 1990) such as attending to customer needs, processing transactions,

encoding data in the computer, employee recruitment, or selling company products.

Campbell (1990) further clarifies that the action does not have to be directly observable

but can consist of mental productions. However, only those that can be scaled, i.e.,

measured and that are goal-oriented can be regarded as performance (Campbell et al.,

1993). In short, only those behavior that can be measured and relevant to the organizational

goals constitute performance.

The outcome aspect on the other hand refers to the result of the employees

behavior. The actions stated above may result to outcomes like hiring of employees in the

case of employee recruitment (Sonnentag & Frese, 2001). As observed, both aspects are

related, however, the outcome aspect is affected by other determinants other than the

behavioral aspect. Although there is agreement among the authors mentioned above to

31
differentiate both aspects, opinions still vary as to which among the two aspects should be

labelled performance

Regarding its use in this study, the behavioral approach of defining job performance

is preferred since it is more relevant in showing the relationship between job satisfaction

and job performance. Therefore, based on the above-mentioned behavioral approach, job

performance in this study is referred to as the employees actions at work which can either

be directly or indirectly observable. Furthermore, they must be relevant and measurable.

Examining job performance as a concept can be done in a number of ways which

include the ability of an employee to achieve their targets and organizational standards

(Eysenck, 1998; Maathis and Jackson, 2000; Bohlander et. al., 2001). Each employee has

a different level of performance. According to Campbell (1990), such individual

performance differences are a function of four main determinants: declarative knowledge

(knowledge about facts, principles, object, etc.), procedural knowledge, and motivation

(combined effect of choice behaviors).

Despite 60 years of study on the topic of job performance measurement, it remained

one of the most puzzling problems in industrial-organizational psychology today (Landy

and Farr, 1983). It is puzzling in the sense that there are many ways to measure job

performance and therefore, it is difficult to determine which is the most appropriate and

which can measure job performance fairly.

The literature has provided methods used to assess job performance which is

broadly classified into organizational records and subjective evaluations (Anderson et. al,

2001). Organizational records are considered to be more objective in contrast to the

subjective evaluations (could either be criterion-referenced or norm-referenced) that

32
depend on human judgement (Anderson et. al, 2001, p 111). Furthermore, organizational

records can be further classified into direct measures of productivity and personal data

(Schmidt, 1980). Direct measures of productivity stress the number of units produced, as

well as measures of quality such as the number of errors, scrap material produced, and so

forth, while personal data indirectly measures productivity like lateness or tardiness,

tenure, absences, accidents, promotion rates, and filing grievances (Anderson et. al, 2001,

p. 111).

Subjective evaluations can be either ratings or rankings of performance (Anderson

et. al, 2001). Ratings are criterion-referenced judgements where an individual is evaluated

without reference to other individuals, while rankings are norm-referenced assessments.

(Anderson et. al, 2001, p 112).

With these numerous studies on job performance, one can tell the significance of

such concept to organizations, as well as to individuals. Every businesss objective is to

maximize profit, therefore to be successful, organizations depend on the high performance

of their employees to meet their objectives (Lado and Wilson, 1994; Dessler, 2011). In

order to achieve their strategic aims and keep their competitive advantage, their employees

must perform at high levels (Lado and Wilson, 1994; Dessler, 2011). High job performance

encourages the employees and leads toward reward. In short, the organizations human

capital is the most valuable resource and the lifeblood of every organization which is

therefore, paramount to achieving its goals and objectives.

There has been a great deal of researches that were conducted about job

performance. Job performance was related to several other concepts such as job

satisfaction, employee engagement, employee commitment, job security, motivational

33
factors, turnover intention, education, work values, etc. The following past studies arrived

at conclusions showing the relationship between job performance and such several factors.

On a global basis, a study by Jaramilloa et al. (2005) and Al Ahmadi (2009) showed that

employees commitment is crucial to their job. Also, there is a strong connection between

being satisfied at their job and their performance (Gu and Chi, 2009), while there is a

negative connection between education and job performance (Beale, 2007 and Ahmadi,

2009), a surprising result. In addition, job security led to greater organizational

commitment and job performance (Ashford et. Al, 1989, Iversion, 1996, Morris et.al, 1993,

Rosenblatt & Ruvio, 1996).

In the Philippines, various job performance studies were also published. One is by

Hechanova et. al (2006) Psychological empowerment, job satisfaction and performance

among Filipino service workers which concluded a positive correlation between job

satisfaction and job performance through conducting a survey on 954 employees and their

supervisors to determine the relationship of empowerment with job satisfaction and

performance of five different service sectors: hotels, food service, banking, call centers,

and airlines. In the public sector, measurement systems for job performance assessment

were implemented such as the Performance Appraisal System (PAS) in Iloilo City local

government where Capadosa (2013) conducted a study on the employees perception about

it.

The abovementioned research studies just proved that much attention was already

invested by researchers on job performance and the related concepts in the past years in

public and private sector, not only in the Philippines but also in foreign countries. It is a

factor that is widely studied by different organization in different industries. Job

34
performance leads to the understanding of an employees behavior in his work. Almost

every organization keeps track of its employees performance in order to maximize the

companys overall operating efficiency and effectiveness. That is why the understanding

of elements that consistently affects a persons performance in his work is widely being

studied by numerous researchers in order to improve the company as whole. According to

many studies, it can be seen that job satisfaction is one of the most studied elements that

affects job performance. The job satisfactions positive correlation with job performance

is the focus of the next section.

Numerous research papers have proven that job satisfaction has an impact on job

performance. In 2011, a paper entitled Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction as

Correlates of Job Performance - A Study Among Women Employed in the Indian Software

Industry revealed that emotional intelligence and job satisfaction has a significant

influence on job performance. After analyzing data using Regression Analysis, emotional

intelligence showed a value of .09 while job satisfaction equated to .86 and thus revealed

an equation: Job Performance= 8.40 + 0.09 (Emotional Intelligence) + 0.86 (Job

Satisfaction). It was concluded that there is indeed a statistically significant positive

relationship between emotional intelligence, job satisfaction and job performance

(Gunavathy and Ayswarya, 2011)

Late in 2011, another study was conducted in University of the Punjab, Pakistan to

establish an understanding regarding the determinants of job satisfaction and its effect on

job performance. The following factors of job satisfaction that were presented in the study

were rewards or pay, promotion, safety and security, working conditions, autonomy,

relationship with co-workers and supervisors, and nature of work. These are considered to

35
be external factors that influence an employees satisfaction. The relationship between the

variable are shown in the figure below for clarity. The factors were tested directly on both

job satisfaction and job performance of the employees. Results show that the factors of job

satisfaction have a positive and significant effect on job performance. Therefore, it was

concluded that job satisfaction and job performance are positively correlated. (Khan, et.

al, 2012).

Figure 3 Theoretical Framework

On the other hand, a local study by Angeles et. al. (2015) explained the significance

of analyzing the importance of job satisfaction in job performance. It aims to prove that an

employees effective performance in the workplace is determined greatly by his/her job

satisfaction which is defined in the study as the gratification that an employee feels when

he/she accomplished the job properly and is appreciated by the superiors. It also discusses

36
the different elements an employee needs that could influence their job satisfaction. Both

qualitative and quantitative methods were used and the data was gathered from 15

employees of the Ajinomoto Philippines Corporation-Lucena Branch using survey

questionnaire and structured interview. The survey consists of rating job satisfaction in

terms of compensation and fringe benefits, working condition, equipment, interpersonal

relationship, motivation, and satisfaction with present job. The four-point Likert scale is

used in connection to their responses. After analyzing the numerical data, results of this

study showed that there is a significant relationship between the factors of job satisfaction

and job performance. The manager gave high ratings to employees who were also satisfied

with the way they are being handled by the management and also in their overall job

(Angeles, et. al., 2015).

In another study, an integrated survey made by Pugno and Depedri (2009) shows

that internal factors of job satisfaction are as important, or even more important as the

external ones in the influence of an employees performance. Economic incentives are not

found to be the main motivations of job performance; in some cases, indeed, they are even

counterproductive. Interest in the job is found to account better for job satisfaction (Pugno

and Depedri, 2009).

Job performance, in this sense, is more influenced by the self-satisfaction,

perception and intrinsic motivations of an employee. In other words, these internal factors

must also be considered aside from using incentives and external controls to improve

employee performance. As opposed to the conclusion made in Khans study, Pugno and

Depedri (2009) concludes that key input to job performance such as work effort is

negatively correlated with job satisfaction. However, job performance as an outcome is

37
positively correlated with each other. This study provides evidence that job satisfaction

affects job performance more than the situation being reversed.

Another research study was conducted by Hsieh (2016) to compare the similarities

and differences of the public, private, and nonprofit sector employees across Taiwan

though examining the antecedents and simultaneity of job satisfaction and job

performance. A cross-section survey method was used with a sample of 1,116 employees

with 398 working for the public sector, 502 for the private sector, and 216 for the nonprofit

sector. After assessing the data by seemingly unrelated regression, the results revealed that

job satisfaction positively affects job performance, and vice versa. Goal ambiguity, leader-

member exchange and the like were also proven to have significant among the three

different sectors. In the public sector, job satisfaction had a significant and positive

influence on job performance (coefficient = .16, p < .01), as job performance has similar

effects on job satisfaction (coefficient = .14, p < .01). In the private sector, Job satisfaction

influences job performance (coefficient = .23, p < .001) more than job performance

influences job satisfaction (coefficient = .11, p < .001). In the nonprofit sector, the Job

satisfaction significantly influenced job performance (coefficient = .20, p < .01), and job

performance led to job satisfaction (coefficient = .16, p < .01). Job satisfaction is the

stronger predictor. Ultimately, it is concluded that job performance and job satisfaction are

significant simultaneous influences on each other. However, the effect of job satisfaction

is stronger than that of job performance among employees in the three sectors (Hsieh,

2016).

In addition to Hsiehs work, another related empirical study on the relationship

between job satisfaction and organizational performance show that there is a clear link

38
between employees job satisfaction and organizational performance in both directions, but

with pretty weak intensity. Job satisfaction determines organizational performance, rather

than organizational performance determining job satisfaction (Bakotic, 2016).

Many studies, including the ones stated so far, support that the factors that influence

job performance would include external factors such as work environment, salary,

promotion, relationship with co-workers, etc.; and internal factors such as motivation, and

perception towards work. It is also taken into consideration that both internal and external

factors are significant in the influence on both job satisfaction and job performance. These

factors are the same elements that affect a persons performance at work. All of these

factors are also proven to have a positive effect on both.

Collective literature review concludes that there is a positive relationship between

job satisfaction and job performance. However, even though job satisfaction is always

being affected by external factors such as pay, promotion, security, working conditions,

etc., these are not enough to drive the employees to be at their maximum potential. There

should always be a feeling of contentment and fulfillment. The literature survey of Pugno

and Depedri (2009) pointed out that job satisfaction influences a persons job performance

more than the other way around. This was also supported by empirical evidences on the

studies of Hsieh (2016), and Bakotic (2016) which established that the effect of job

satisfaction is stronger than that of job performance. Out of all the factors and elements

that affect a persons work performance, the attitude, behavior, and inner feelings have the

most significant impact. These conclusions made the researcher assume in this study that

job satisfaction has a direct and significant effect on employees performance.

39
Foreign Studies on Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction applies to all types of organization and the concept remains the

same no matter the type of organization being studied so the focus is usually in its level

whether employees are satisfied with their jobs or not as well as the reasons for the result

which usually stems from the factors of job satisfaction. Despite the number of researches

across different sectors and geographical locations dedicated to identifying which sector

has more satisfied employees, there is still no clear answer to this question. There are

studies that showed higher job satisfaction on the private sector (Rainey, 1979; Solomon,

1986), there also studies that says otherwise (Akhtar et al., 2010; Mihajlov, S. & Mihajlov,

N., 2016; Nimalathasan, 2012; Danzer, 2013) and still there are studies where the results

vary according to the facet considered and that there is no clear winner (Khalid &

Mahmood, 2011; Barrows & Wesson, 2000). Boski and Jefmaski (2013), who studied

job satisfaction of employees of local government units, proposed that the differences in

results are due to the various external and internal factors of job satisfaction that differs in

every organization. This is in accordance with the earlier finding that the measure of job

satisfaction depends on its individual facets. Compiling the results from other researches,

they made a list of all the factors of job satisfaction for public organizations:

Leadership/ Supervisor/Management Corporate culture


Empowerment participative management Compensation
Salary, recognition, rewards, promotions Job itself
Team work and cooperation Organization as a whole
Training program career development Emotional exhaustion
Working conditions Performance management
Communication Demographics
Family friendly policies Co-workers

40
Among these factors, only leadership, supervisor, salary, recognition, rewards, promotions

are said to be present on researches focusing on private organizations (Boski &

Jefmaski, 2013). In the following review of studies, different factors were indeed

concluded to affect job satisfaction. There are also studies that focus on certain

factor/factors and tries to establish its effect on job satisfaction. The purpose of this review

is to determine possible factors that will be applicable in the research.

I. Studies in the Private Sector

Luddy (2005) studied job satisfaction among the public-sector employees in South

Africa, specifically in the health industry. Research shows that factors such as poor

working conditions, staff shortages, below competitive salaries, a lack of promotional

opportunities are some of the major factors contributing to employee dissatisfaction within

the sector (Ellickson & Logsdon, 2002; Herman, 2005; Ting, 1997). The objective of the

study is to ascertain levels of job satisfaction among the employees and for such, a

quantitative, non-probability convenience sampling design was used. Results show that

employees at the public health institution in the Western Cape are satisfied with their co-

workers and the nature of the work and supervision they receive. Furthermore,

opportunities for promotion emerged as a major factor of satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

With the exception of marital status, the relationship between occupational class, race,

gender, educational level, tenure, age, income and job status with job satisfaction was

found to be significant.

Another study is by Unzicker (2012) which involves an investigation of the level

of job satisfaction of superintendents in the state of Nebraska in relation to gender, age,

41
compensation, experience, degree attainment and school size. The outcome signified that

the superintendents in Nebraska are satisfied with their jobs. The study also determined the

areas which bring the greatest satisfaction to superintendents. Using multiple regression, it

was concluded that Nebraska school superintendents scored highest in the areas of social

service, variety, ability utilization, and activity while they scored the lowest in the areas of

co-workers, advancement, recognition, and authority. The highest area of satisfaction for

Nebraska school superintendents was in social service.

A study was conducted that hypothesized compensation or pay as the number one

factor of job satisfaction. The work of Muguongo, Muguna and Muriithi (2015) entitled

Effects of Compensation on Job Satisfaction Among Secondary School Teachers in Maara

Sub - County of Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya is one of the many studies that prove this

premise because many Kenyan teachers actually complained regarding their low pay. Thus,

it could lead to dissatisfaction of their work. Interviews and questionnaires were the method

of data collection. For the purpose of the research, both financial and nonfinancial

compensation were studied which include basic pay, allowances and working conditions.

After data analysis, results show that these three have correlation with job satisfaction. The

conclusion, therefore, is that the teachers are poorly compensated and that they are not

satisfied with their work.

The paper of Raziq and Maulabakhsh (2015) focused also on one factor with an

objective of analyzing the impact of working environment as one factor of employees job

satisfaction. The method is quantitative in nature and data collection was made through

survey questionnaires. Target population includes academic institutions, banks, and

telecommunication industries located in Quetta City, Pakistan. Simple random sampling is

42
used for collecting data. It is concluded that working environment and job satisfaction has

a positive relationship with each other.

According to the Morrison (2004), studies on workplace relationships are not

enough considering the subjects importance therefore, this study was conducted to add to

the literature. For this research, informal relationships aside from romantic ones will be

investigated to determine their impact on work behavior. A theoretical model was created

to show the relationship of the variables supported by past researches and in this model,

friendship is a factor of job satisfaction. Data were gathered through questionnaires and

data were analyzed using factor and path analysis. Results supported the model created and

that having informal relationships as well as opportunities for friendship would positively

affect job satisfaction.

II. Studies in the Public Sector

In a study by Unutmaz (2014) entitled Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction of

Employees in a Public Institution which aimed to determine significant factors affecting

the job satisfaction of employees of a public institution. Unutmaz (2014) wanted to find

out the extent of which the institution satisfies its employees. Analytic Hierarchy Process

(AHP) Survey and Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) are used on the constituents for data

gathering. AHP was used to determine the different factors for job satisfaction while JSS

is used to find out satisfaction level of these factors that were determined. Then, variance

analysis techniques: ANOVA, MANOVA & Non-Parametric Test, are used to test the

effects of demographic properties of participants. Literature review of the study finds that

main factors affecting job satisfaction include Opportunities, Self-Improvements, Internal

43
Group Dynamics, and Working Conditions. It was concluded that Opportunities is

considered to be the most main important factor.

Another study was made by Boski and Jefmaski (2013) that also aimed to

determine the factors influencing the satisfaction of employees of local government units.

The survey method was used which was conducted through direct questionnaires and was

based on assessment of service attributes such as: reliability, responsibility, confidence,

empathy and tangibility, and assigning weights to them. Though the concept of employee

satisfaction has its complexity as reflected in the variety of methods of its measurement,

still, four factors that can determine the level of satisfaction of local government employees

namely: collaboration in the provision of services, the stability of professional

development, relationship with supervisor, and material working conditions have been

identified. This was made possible through the use of factor analysis.

Local Studies on Job Satisfaction

I. Studies in the Private Sector

A research study by Lomoya, Pingol and Teng-Calleja (2015) entitled

Antecedents of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors among

Agency-Hired Blue-Collar Contractual Workers in the Philippines focused on the

contractual workers attitude and behavior towards their job as employment of these

workers become more prevalent in the country. The study is quantitative in nature which

examines job characteristics, rewards and recognition, and training and development as the

three main factors affecting job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors. 159

agency-hired blue-collar contractual workers were tested for the study. Results show that

44
among the three variables, job characteristics and training and development are the only

ones that were concluded as strong predictors of job satisfaction while job characteristics

as well as job satisfaction predicted organizational citizenship behaviors.

What inspired the researchers Degracia, Capuyan, and Vizcarra (2015) to assess the

level of job satisfaction and level of professionalism of selected Licensed Customs Brokers

in Paraaque City are the circumstances related to trade facilitation and the importance of

the concept of job satisfaction which says that the general mental well-being of a person

can be indicated through his/her job satisfaction and that happiness at work and being

motivated are generally assumed in job satisfaction. A methodological tool called Job

Satisfaction Survey (JSS) was used in assessing the level of job satisfaction of custom

brokers who were classified according to the following: position, salary/income, years of

experience and ports of operation. Results show that in terms of the nine facets enumerated

except for operating procedures, the selected Licensed Customs Brokers were satisfied

while their level of professionalism perception is high. It was also found out that there is

no significant relationship between the level of job satisfaction and the level of

professionalism in contrary to researchers belief.

The studies about job satisfaction also extends further to organizations such as

universities. In a research paper by Ayon (2009) entitled Job Satisfaction Level of

Technology Teacher Education Graduates of the University of Southeastern Philippines,

The researches aimed to find out the job satisfaction level of 63 percent of the total

population of batch 2000 to 2004 using correlation method. Purposive sampling was used

in gathering participants which include employed, under employed, and entrepreneurial

Technology Education graduates. It was concluded that there is a significant relationship

45
between job satisfaction and work-related factors such as promotion opportunities and

recognition. On the other hand, there is no significant relationship between job satisfaction

and other work-related factors such as pay, stress, job security, fellow workers, company

policy and support, attitude toward job, realization of expectation, and achievement. This

is again in contrast to other researches provided in this paper that concluded compensation

as more significant compared to opportunities and recognition.

Aside from the factors abovementioned, other elements looked into are the social

and environmental conditions. A survey was conducted by Tolentino (2007) on the job

satisfaction of SME employees in selected cities of Mindanao: Davao, Cagayan de Oro,

Valencia and Iligan. Results showed that the employees satisfaction was mostly due to

social conditions in Mindanao. This also explains their satisfaction with co-workers,

customers, and supervisors. The environmental conditions in Mindanao are shown to be a

factor in positive attitude, with high ratings given to environment, health, workplace safety,

food, and nutrition.

Job satisfaction on employees working in banks are also examined. One study is

conducted by Ramos (2014) entitled Transformational Leadership and Employee Job

Satisfaction: The Case of Philippines Savings Bank Batangas Branches. The purpose of

the study to test if such transformational leadership relate with their employee satisfaction.

Results show that the employees are satisfied with their job. The most influential factor for

their satisfaction would include compensation and job security. The data also showed that

the transformational leadership style of managers of PS Bank Batangas Branches

significantly affects the employees satisfaction when it comes to their communication with

the employees.

46
II. Studies in the Public Sector

Using job satisfaction as a variable in many research studies has been very evident.

However, when it comes to the Philippine context, the researchers have found relatively

fewer studies compared to other countries especially those that tackles job satisfaction in

the government sector.

Rayan, Wong and Baas (2015) conducted a study entitled Influence of Servant

Leadership among Government Employees in the Province of Romblon, Philippines that

aims to explore the effect of servant leadership to job satisfaction. Respondents were

randomly selected from the various departments of Romblon provincial government,

totaling to 210 employees. Specific objectives of the study include the determining the

level of practice of servant leadership, level of job satisfaction, commitment to supervisor

and work engagement, relationship between servant leadership and the employee

commitment to supervisor, work engagement and job satisfaction, and the mediating role

of employee commitment to supervisor and work engagement between servant leadership

and job satisfaction. The research concluded that there is a positive correlation between the

variables. A significant arbitrating role of work engagement between servant leadership

and job satisfaction was also observed as well as its predicting role to job satisfaction. Their

results were said to be consistent with other researches.

In another study named Predictors of Achievement and Job Satisfaction of Women

Managers in SUC (NCR) which focuses on the job satisfaction among women managers

from various State Universities and Colleges which includes PNU, UP Manila, EARIST

and TUP Manila, Igloso (2016) planned to determine the workers level of achievement

and job satisfaction as well as the factors for such. For this study, the independent variables

47
are woman manager-related factors which include personal profile, personality type and

skills as well as school-related factors comprising of school type and size. The dependent

variables are achievement, which is determined by the participants awards, scholarship,

position, and membership in an organization, and job satisfaction determined by hygiene

and motivation factors. Data from 52 women managers were gathered through a

questionnaire. The research concluded that education, tenure and family income has

significant effect on achievement and job satisfaction. Since all of the participants are

working for big schools, school-related factors were deemed to have no effect. The

researcher also listed factors for organizational success which are professional growth,

possess good leadership qualities, efficient and effective managerial skills.

After examining various literatures of job satisfaction, the researchers have found

out that the most common factors of job satisfaction from research studies reviewed were

work environment, relationships with coworkers, opportunities and rewards or

compensation. There are, however, different views and conclusions as to which has the

most significant influence. Some consider opportunities, while others argue that

compensation affects job satisfaction greatly. However, based on the literature gathered,

it can be remarked that compensation or rewards factor is the most influential followed by

opportunities. Essentially, because of inconsistencies in the results and gaps in the studies

especially in the Philippine sector, more studies are needed to be conducted so as to prove

the importance of job satisfaction in the overall performance of the employees and the

welfare of organization as a whole. Hence, it is expected that the formulation and

interpretation of this paper will contribute to understanding of job satisfaction and its

factors.

48
Job Satisfaction in the HR Department

Behind the production of every product or service there is a human mind, effort and

man hours (working hours). No product or service can be produced without help of human

being. Human being is the fundamental resource for making or constructing anything.

Today many experts claim that machines and technology are replacing human resource and

minimizing their role or effort. However, indeed, machines and technology are built by the

humans; they need to be operated or at least monitored by humans. Maybe because of this

reason, companies have continuously been searching for talented, skilled and qualified

professionals to further develop latest machines and technology, which again have to be

controlled or Monitored by humans to bring out outputs. Thus, this resource should be

properly managed.

Human Resource Management is the process of recruitment and selecting

employee, providing orientation and induction, training and development, assessment of

employee (performance of appraisal), providing compensation and benefits, motivating,

maintaining proper relations with employees and with trade unions, maintaining

employees safety, welfare and health measures in compliance with labor laws of the land

(Mayo, G.E., n.d.). There are three phases of the human resource management process.

These are the establishment phase, maintenance and termination phase. In the first phase

which is the establishment phase, it includes planning which identifies staffing needs,

conducts job analysis (determining the exact nature of the position to be filled) and job

design (determining how the job is to be performed and the material and equipment

required to do the job), recruitment that involves attracting people to apply for the position

in the business, undertaking internal and external recruitment, selection or choosing and

49
hiring the most qualified and employment arrangements and remuneration. The latter

means deciding on the type of employment contract (arrangements) and ways of paying

employees (remuneration). The second phase is maintenance which encompasses induction

or acquainting new employees with the organization and the jobs they will perform,

training and development that involves teaching employees new skills, helping employees

to learn tasks associated with their jobs and to improve their skills, recognition and reward

which can be monetary benefits (rewarding employees efforts through financial

compensation) and non-monetary benefits (rewards such as better conditions, fringe

benefits) and performance management that uses methods to improve both organizational

and individual employee performance. The third or the last phase is the termination phase.

This can be voluntary termination (dealing with employees leaving of their own accord

retirement, resignation) or involuntary termination (dealing with employees being asked to

leave retrenchment, dismissal). It includes also payment of any outstanding benefits,

such as sick or annual leave, and providing support and counseling for dismissed

employees (Stewart, G.L., Brown, K.G., n.d.). The above- mentioned responsibilities can

be implied that these are referring to the employment cycle in an organization. This means

that the HR department is very important since it handles the human force of the company.

Without people or manpower, a certain organization will not be functional. Simply put, it

is essential in achieving the organizations goals.

Analyzing the specific functions of the HR department as explained above, many

implications can be generated regarding the importance of HR. Since this department is

responsible for management development, its contribution to the culture of the organization

is important. The mindset that it has relayed to the employees is significant in the overall

50
operation of the organization. Also, remuneration or compensation is under the function of

the HR. With this, HR provides guidance to managers as they determine the salary ranges

within their organizations. Not everyone loves each other but they need to develop effective

working relationships for contributions and productivity. HR can help by knowing the

players and taking on the necessary role of advocate, coach and/or mediator.

The importance of HR is easily overlooked in the busy day-to-day in the workplace,

but without contributions in each of these areas, the organization would be less successful.

Thus, there are studies and researches that explore the Human Resource Department of

various organizations.

A study about HR Development in Local Government: How and Why does HR

Strategy Matter in Organizational Change and Development? by Bruns, H.J. (2014)

explores the relationships between HR management (HRM) and organizational change

emerging in six German local governments. This paper refers to a resource and capability-

driven approach in order to investigate the changing HRM role and how it is assigned to

strategic change and performance in public service organizations. The analysis used a

multiple case study design to distinguish the formation of HR strategies during accounting

change, which is claimed as one of the most significant and enduring challenges in

modernizing public service delivery. The result of the analysis has emphasized that

strategic HRM practices involved varied throughout a process of HR strategy formation. It

strongly appears that concepts like strategic HR practices enable further insights into the

linkage of institutional pressures, HR (stock) development and capability improvement by

considering the inherent tensions of HR change agency and strategic alignment.

Considering a resource and capability-based approach, the analysis reveals strategic HRM

51
practices as a useful concept to distinguish HR activities and the processes that are

occurring when a HR strategy is performed. It is recommended to explore the

interrelationship between HR (stock) development and capability reconfiguration

considering the variety of public services in local government for better understanding.

This study has determined the factors that affect HR Department in their strategy

formulation and these factors are varied. This means that there are aspects such as culture

or working environment, etc. which in one way or another influence how HR department

function.

In addition, a research study in North Sumatera and Indonesia about human

resources development and performance of government provincial employees gives

emphasis on human resource as a valuable capital in organizations and human resource

development as having significant impact on the improvement of employees ability in

achieving the organizations goals. It attempts to assess the most crucial factors related to

human resource development that is predicted to have an influence on employees/officers

performance at the Provincial Government Office of North Sumatra and then to find the

dominant among the factors assessed. The factors associated on performance assessment

are: recruitment, training, career development, promotion and structural and technical

training, mutation, compensation. These factors are found to have an influence on job

performance which has an impact on the creation of good governance in the North Sumatra

province. Among them, general training and technical specific training are the most

dominant (Muda, I., Rafiki, A., 2014). This entails that, the government needs to foster

human development programs clearly and consistently and build awareness of the

importance of these self-development programs among officers and employees that may

52
be able to help them fulfill their duties effectively and efficiently.

Another study is by Maher A. and Bedawy, R. E. (n.d.) that tackles the Human

Resources Management in Southeastern Asias Local Government Case Study: Indonesia,

Philippine and Thailand. The study focuses on the HR Management experiences in three

countries namely; Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand. This study involves detailed

analysis and in depth consideration of various related literature. It is stated in this study

that despite the fact the HR plays a very important role in every organization, the

government offices have missed this fact. They were not able to give attention on the issues

related to the HR department. This study evaluates the perceptions of human resource

managers at the local government level regarding the importance of several functions and

activities related to staffing and selection, compensation and benefits, performance

appraisal, labor relations, and job design and process to assess the impact of HR functions

tied closely to recent reforms at this level. In addition, it aims to determine if there is

positive relationship between the processes and the performance of the HR employees. The

generated processes after studying the three countries will be suggested to the Egyptian

Government as well as in the global perspective.

According to French (2011), as cited in this study, HRM plays a very crucial role

in the operations of government at all levels since this function is charged with aligning

personnel practices and objectives with the mission and goals of the public organization.

In addition, HR also had an important role to play in employee communication, both to

employees and upwards from employees to senior managers.

The result shows that in Indonesia, both the regional Public Servant

Administration and Public Servant Training act like the central government entity that

53
are responsible for managing the HR in the local government. The regional public

administration designs the local government organizational structure, while the Public

Servant Training recruits and selects candidates to ensure competency criteria in the

selection process. The regional public administration does not refer to the local government

strategic planning for HR needs but they just do it based on the national guidance or taken

as a copy of other regions.

In the Philippines, the chief executive in the local government unit has been

appointed the responsibility of the human resource management and its development under

the civil service body or so called Civil Service Commission (CSC) within the

boundaries of the civil service laws, rules and regulations. Despite the strong process in

written documents, still, no actual compliance with any the HR rules and regulations as

expressed in the data gathered.

For Thailand, the local government was working but with some supervision from

the central government. In addition, the local chief executive or mayor was responsible for

the HRM, administration and budgeting of his local area. This study revealed the most

obvious difference in the HRM policy arrangements in the local government in Indonesia,

Philippine and Thailand. It also revealed the HRM practices in some of the local

governments in the three countries that are carried by the local government but with

supervision, assistance and support by the central government. The result of the study calls

for governments to work on improving the HRM at the Local Government level to improve

their employees performance in rendering a better public service for the citizens at the

local level.

54
The study on the HR of North Sumatra and Indonesia highly affirms the importance

of human resource. It is able to identify general trainings and specific technical trainings

to be dominant in influencing the efficiency and effectiveness of HR employees that

gradually affect their job performance. This is supported also by the comparative study

about Human Resources Management in Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand. Perception

was found to be a factor that affects HR operations. The way how employees value and

understood their job description, the more effective and efficient they become. Given the

studies about HR Department in different areas, it suggests and captures certain points that

need to be affirmed. To address this curiosity, the researchers decided to study the HR

department of the Iloilo Provincial Capitol.

55
CHAPTER III

Conceptual Framework and Methodology

The overall purpose of this study is to determine and rank the factors of job

satisfaction of among employees in the Human Resource Department of the Iloilo

Provincial Capitol. This section will discuss the conceptual framework and methodology,

which are essential in achieving the objective of this study. The conceptual framework

shows the relationships among the variables which were formed based on the review on

related literature of the study. These variables will then be considered and the relationships

between them that were stated in the hypotheses will be tested through selecting the

appropriate method or process that the researchers must implement. Thus, the research

methodology will also be presented in this chapter.

Conceptual Framework

This section examines the different variables involved in the study. Such variables

were developed from the inputs of previous researches in the related literature. The

variables of the study are the job satisfaction and its identified factors.

Job satisfaction is a variable often studied in organizational behavior research.

Traditional models of job satisfaction focus on feelings an individual portray with his/her

job. However, job satisfaction does not always necessarily depend on the nature of the job,

but also on the expectations that individuals are fairly compensated with regards to their

work done. According to researches, a satisfied employee is inclined to be more

56
industrious, inspired, and dedicated to their work.

Previous studies showed that happy workers are the ones who work efficiently.

Having a higher morale of workers affects the efficiency of them. If the worker is satisfied

with his work, he will have a positive mood and have wish for accomplishing his work

(Davis, 1988). Providing workers satisfaction leads to product higher quality goods and

services, and then this will cause the customers satisfaction to increase and finally support

the competition power of the establishment and raise the income (Ttnc, 2001).

Generally, job satisfaction is a difficult concept to grasp due to its individualistic

and situational nature. What one employee desires from work, another may not. For

instance, one employee may put salary in high regard, while another may find autonomy

the most important. Unfortunately, one aspect alone will most likely not affect an

employee's job satisfaction. According to Syptak, Marsland, and Ulmer (1999), there are

numerous aspects of a job through which an organization can manage increase satisfaction

in the workplace such as company policies, salaries or benefits, interpersonal/social

relations, working conditions, achievement, recognition, autonomy, advancement, job

security, and work-life balance.

However, in this study, we narrowed down the concept of job satisfaction as a

function of four factors such as perception, personal profile, rewards, and the work

environment. Common studies show these factors lead to job satisfaction amongst the

employees. A detailed listing of the components of these factors are shown below on Figure

4.

57
Figure 4 Conceptual Framework

An independent variable is one that a researcher manipulates in order to determine

its effects on another variable (Mugenda, & Mugenda, 2003). As shown on Figure 4,

independent variables include; perception, personal profile, rewards and the work

environment. Hence, these factors are vital in determining the direction or the intensity on

how it affects the dependent variable which is the job satisfaction of the employees in the

HR Department of Iloilo City Provincial Capitol.

Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction

Quality Government Employees is the main driving force in an organizations

ability to achieve its vision and mission in this era of globalization. As a competitive

climate exists among public and private organizations in providing service to the

community, it requires an organization to put forth excellence in order to fulfill the

58
demands of fast changing times. It is undeniable that in order for an organization to be able

to compete, it entails employees who are competent and shows satisfaction in their job

(Sancoko, 2010).

According to a study conducted by the Employee Job Satisfaction and Engagement

Report by the Society for Human Resource Management, the number of employees who

said they are satisfied with their job increased by 5% (from 81% to 85%) in a span of a

year (2013-2014). One extrinsic factor we can consider would be the improving world

economy since salaries are boosted, as well as benefits and perks for employees.

Additionally, as the labor market stabilized, it became an advantage for job seekers to gain

opportunities for positions that best fit their skills and interest. Most organizations strive

for employee satisfaction, making it important for Human Resource employees to know

more about it towards their overall success.

Lockes Range of Affect Theory, determined facets affecting job satisfaction of an

employee. However, in this study, we determined specific factors which are of great effect

on a persons satisfaction towards his/her job which are personal profile, perception,

rewards, and work environment.

I. Personal Profile

In this study, an employees personal background such as their relationship status,

educational background and overall personality are considered variables affecting their

satisfaction towards job. Studies have shown, that indeed, some individual experiences and

past achievements have affected how one behaves in their job and how an employee can

be easily satisfied with the job or not. Furthermore, Bluedorn (1982) highlighted

59
demographic characteristics such as age, education and payment that affect job

expectations and environmental opportunities, which ultimately influence job satisfaction.

Demographic variables (eg. age, tenure, and sex) are often included in job satisfaction

models (Agho, Mueller, and Price, 1993). Age, tenure and nonwork roles (one's gender and

family structural position) affect what one wants from work. The basic and most consistent

finding in research on age differences in job satisfaction is that older workers are more

satisfied with their job than are young workers. However, there is less consensus on the

specific form of the positive relationship between age and job satisfaction. Previous studies

have found evidence to support the validity of cohort explanations which suggest that

different birth cohorts have different socialization experiences and therefore have diverse

conceptions of what is desirable with respect to work. There is also evidence to support life

cycle explanations related to work careers, which purport that older workers have better

jobs (Kalleberg and Loscocco, 1983).

A. Age

Research shows that motivation was much stronger for older than for younger

employees. So, to remain motivated, older employees seem more in need of intrinsic

challenging and fulfilling jobs. On the other hand, career opportunities and motivation was

much stronger for younger employees than for older employees. This means that,

especially, younger workers' motivation increases as they are offered more career

opportunities. Careful career mentoring by the supervisor as part of an aging policy can

contribute to the maintenance of workers of any age.

For the HR employees as respondents in this study, age is to be considered also in the

60
survey under the personal profile of every employee. Ages will be grouped according to

generations in which they belong in order to understand some behavior they show in the

workplace.

Generation can be defined as an identifiable group that shares birth, years, age,

location and significant life events at critical development stages. For each generation,

there are particular experiences that mold specific preferences, expectations, beliefs and

work style. Different values, beliefs and attitudes can mean misunderstandings,

miscommunications and mixed signals impacting work culture, morale and productivity.

In this study, the sample group was subdivided into three categories Baby boomers (BB)

born between 1946 - 1964, Generation X (X) born between 1965 - 1980 and Generation Y

(Y) born between 1981 - 2000. Understanding differences and similarities between these

generations are fundamental in building successful multigenerational workplace.

(Universal Journal of Management 4(9): 500-507, 2016 501). Hence, this information is

considered because age could be a significant aspect of the personal profile which could

be a factor on the satisfaction level of the HR employees towards their job.

Furthermore, a study by Jennifer Robison in 2002 (See Figure 5) showed that a vast

majority of all workers are satisfied with their jobs. The youngest workers are least

satisfied, while few workers of any age are completely satisfied with their jobs. Overall job

satisfaction increases slightly with age, but fails to register above 49% with any age group.

However, workers in the oldest group are seen to be more satisfied with their jobs.

61
Figure 5 Job Satisfaction According to Age

B. Sex

Some researchers have examined relationships between job satisfaction and gender

(Mason, 1995). However, some results have been contradicting such as a study by Ward

and Solane (1998) found women to be more satisfied than men, while Forgionne and Peters

(1982) found men to be more satisfied than women. With this, sex will be considered also

as part of the personal profile in order to measure the level of satisfaction of the HR

employees. This is important to know since the HR department at Iloilo Provincial Capitol

is mainly comprised with women. This may explain why is this so, or what is indeed the

difference between mens satisfaction versus that of women in terms of their job.

C. Relationship Status

Another demographic variable that might have bearing on job satisfaction is the

relationship status of the employees which we divided into groups between single, married

62
with and without kids, and those who are separated or widowed. However, there are not

enough studies to draw any conclusion about the effect of marital status on job satisfaction

but the limited research conducted on this area consistently indicates that married

employees are more satisfied with their jobs than are their unmarried coworkers (Austrom

et. al. 1988; Federico et. al. 1976; Garrison and Muchinsky 1977; Watson 1981). The study

inferred that marriage imposes increased responsibilities that may make a steady job more

valuable and important making job satisfaction a requirement to achieve it. Many, in such

cases, strive to adjust them with the facets they are dissatisfied with.

The highlighted function of the HR department is focused mainly on handling

people. The proponents have identified relationship status as an area to be considered under

the personal profile of the HR employees. Their relationship status may have an influence

on how they are satisfied with their job. In addition, a specific task could be somehow

better addressed by someone belonging into a specific status as affected by his or her

experiences, though this may not be absolute.

D. Educational Background

Studies have shown that education increases job satisfaction. The provision of

training will foster an increase in professionalism and further exploitation of management

methods, whereas a lack of training can cause frustration and lack of job satisfaction

(Wright and Davis, 2003). Well-trained individuals know the scope expectations and depth

of their jobs and will be able to add building blocks to their professionalism as they progress

through their careers (Priti, 1999).

63
According to a study by the National Opinion Research Center in 2008, individuals

with higher educational attainment are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs and to

report that the most important job characteristics for them are that their work seems

important and gives them a sense of accomplishment.

In Figure 6, it is shown that about 58% of college graduates and individuals with

some college education or an associate degree reported being very satisfied with their jobs,

while 50% of high school graduates and 40% of individuals without a high school diploma

reported being very satisfied. Also, a total of 44% of those who reported being very

satisfied with their jobs also reported being very happy, while 23% of those who reported

being moderately satisfied with their jobs and 15% of those who reported being dissatisfied

with their jobs reported being very happy (National Opinion Research Center, 19722008;

calculations by the authors).

Figure 6 Job Satisfaction Rates Among Employed Individuals Ages 25 and Older,
by Education Level, 2008

64
So, as another information to be included in their profile, the educational background of

every HR employee is also important in determining the level of their job satisfaction. The

kind of background in their undergraduate education can affect the way how someone does

his or her specific task that will in one way or another influence HR employees job

satisfaction.

E. Tenure

Riketta (2005) found in his meta-analysis that age and tenure significantly related

to organizational identification. As tenure increases, employees adapt to organizational

values (Riketta, 2005). In another study, it is found that tenure had a positive effect on job

satisfaction. While job tenure comprises the total time an employee performs the job,

organizational tenure comprises the time an employee works in a particular organization

(Natarajan & Nagar, 2011).

The tenure or the length of time of an HR employee holding office as defined in

this study in the HR department is being considered in its personal profile. The period of

stay of an employee in the HR department can be a determinant also of how he or she is

satisfied in the nature of work he does. Generally, people who work for the government

stay long in their job because the longer they stay, the more the workplace become their

comfort zone, the more they become satisfied with their work, not to mention the benefits

they will be receiving upon retirement with a specific number of years in work.

65
II. Perception

Perception has been defined as the process by which individuals organize and

interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning to their environment (Robbins,

n.d.). What one perceives can be substantially different from what another person

perceives, and both can be very different than the actual objective reality. In fact, behavior

is based on ones perception of what reality is, not reality itself (Robbins, n.d.).

An employees behavior in the workplace is based on peoples perception of the

workplace. There are many factors that influence how something is perceived. For instance,

factors pertaining to the perceiver can involve the persons attitudes, motives, interests,

experience and expectations. Thus, research has shown that employee perception towards

their work influences their productivity the most. Therefore, to influence productivity, it is

necessary for employers to assess how workers perceive their jobs.

In the case of the HR employees at Iloilo Provincial Capitol, their perception

towards their job will be evaluated whether it influences their job satisfaction or not.

Regardless of the background of each HR employee, it is still important to know whether

they have positive attitude towards what they do. There are also different stimuli that can

influence the employees perception. Usually, the HR Department tend to really know how

to manage and deal with people. With that, if someone new in the department does not

have a positive perception towards what he or she does, other employees could help change

the perception by encouraging the new entrant. Other than that, there are many other factors

that could affect the perception towards their job.

66
III. Work Environment

McGregor (1960) and Bass (1965) argue that job satisfaction lies in the need-

satisfying potential of the job environment. Employees are concerned with their work

environment for both personal comfort and better performance. If the working condition is

good, the personnel will find it easier to carry out their job. In other words, if things are

good, there may not be any job satisfaction problem. Otherwise, the likeliness of job

dissatisfaction increases (Luthans, 1998). Studies demonstrate that employees prefer

physical surroundings that are not dangerous or uncomfortable. In addition, most

employees prefer working relatively close to home, in clean and relatively modern

facilities, and with adequate tools and equipment (Locke 1976).

Since the HR department is an arm of the provincial government with regards to

people, the office is situated in the same building with the other departments. This aspect

could be of significance also in measuring the level of satisfaction of an HR employee. In

addition, because the provincial government is centralized, the organization structure of

the HR department is rooted also from the office of the Governor. How the rules and

regulations together with the policies are communicated can be a factor also on how an HR

employee become satisfied with his or her work. See Appendix A for pictures of the

HRMDO work environment.

A. Organizational Culture

In organizational analysis, culture describes the influence and interaction among

employees and between employees and the specific institution, organization or service they

work in. Hence, contemporary organizations and companies are considered to be social

67
groups, and in this way their function should be studied and promoted. Studying an

organizations specific culture is fundamental to the description and analysis of

organizational phenomena (Tharp, 2009).

As Hofstede (1991) has noted, the employees behavior in their workplace is

influenced by three different cultures: their national, their occupational and their

organizational culture. More specifically, an individuals attitudes and beliefs toward his/

her occupation are chiefly influenced by his/ her personal values and ideals, which have

been achieved in the frame of family during his/ her earlier development. Secondly, a

persons specific views, perceptions and ambitions are formed during school and

professional life and belong to the occupational culture shared among partners. Finally,

organizational culture is a product of occupational relations among employees and between

employees and customers, thus it is likely to reform and adapt to the institutions goals and

strategies. Therefore, an organizations internal culture should be studied and measured as

part of its employees national culture, demographic characteristics and individual features.

Oftentimes, employees in the HR department share a common culture. This

includes the behavior and attitude as well as practices in the office. In the case of the HR

department, they are expected to have an active communication in the office since they are

the ones facing and talking to people. Also, they may be the busiest department among

others. This culture is often influenced by the culture of all the employees in the provincial

government. This is being investigated in this study to assert how the culture in the

government office specifically in the HR department would contribute to an employees

satisfaction of its job.

68
B. Relationships

As employees spend a large portion of their lives at work, interpersonal

relationships and friendships between/among employees at work are often formed.

According to a Gallup survey, about 30% of employees in the U.S. responded that they had

a best friend in their workplace (Rath, 2006). Further, the survey reported that slightly

over half (51%) of those who responded that they have a best friend at work reported that

they work with passion and feel a profound connection to the company, compared with

only 10% of those who have no best friend.

With this, we can say that good workplace relationships positively affect

employees attitudes and behavior towards work which in turn improves department

outcomes. People may gain help, assistance, guidance, advice, feedback,

recommendations, or information from workplace friends on a variety of work-related

matters such as completing jobs, performing tasks, and handling issues with co-workers,

subordinates, supervisors, and/or clients (Hamilton, 2007).

Relationship meant in this study is how an HR employee regards or behaves toward

his co-worker, supervisor, and other people in the office. It can be implied on how the

employees treat each other or the way they converse. Usually, for a government or even in

other organizations, the relationship can be strengthened by having teambuilding activities

and outings. For the HR employees, they could often build friendship with each other

especially if they are given a group task or they would go together to reach out or visit a

certain community. Also, the relationship of the employees outside the office is important.

Some of them would eat out together or they could meet for some other time sharing with

their personal lives. Of course, the way how the department head treat an employee on and

69
off duty is essential. He or she should maintain a high level of professional behavior to

avoid conflict of interests. This entails a need for the relationships to be considered.

C. Work Design and Organizational Structure

Job Design typically refers to the way that a set of tasks, or an entire position, is

organized. Various psychological literatures on employee motivation claim that changes

in job design can be expected to produce better employee job performance and job

satisfaction Lawler (1969). Attention has also been drawn to the theory that the re-design

of work and jobs as a strategy for organizational change is expected to enhance employees

motivation and performance. However, modern behavioral scientists like Argris, Maslow,

McGregor, Likert, Herzberg and others firmly believe that work should be challenging,

complex, varied and meaningful so that the higher order needs of employees are satisfied.

Hence, a job should be designed in such a way that it provides satisfaction of higher order

needs.

Parvin (2011) stated the purpose of job design is to increase the level of job

satisfaction which shall ultimately cause the good performance of the employee. Job design

may include job rotation, job enlargement and job enrichment.

The effect of job design on job satisfaction should never be underestimated. Any

attempt to assume that job design is irrelevant to productivity and performance is hazardous

to the good name and long term survival of any organization because absenteeism, high

turnover of labor and low performance will each take its toll on the organization. Job design

has been one of the most effective tools used for optimizing an employee's performance

(Ben Akpoyomare Oghojafor, 2012). It can be defined as changing the content and

70
processes of a job to increase an employees satisfaction, motivation and productivity

Knapp and Mujtaba, (2010) An effective job design brings involvement of an employee in

work related activities which clearly forecasts employee output, departmental productivity

and organizational success (Bates, 2004; Harter, 2002; Bauru, 2004). Herzbergs' claim was

that the job should be designed or assigned in such a way that it aids in enhancing their

growth in competence, achievement, advancement, recognition and responsibility.

In order for an employee to effectively and efficiently work, it is very important to

know the design of its work. This refers to the specific and clear job description and the

nature of the job of an HR employee. It is indeed a challenge for the HR department to

fully define the tasks and responsibilities of every employee to avoid duplication of work

and conflicts. After defining the jobs, it is very essential also to communicate these

responsibilities to each HR employee. How an employee understands his or her job would

really contribute to how he or she will become productive.

Relative to the job design is the organizational structure. With the appropriate

organization structure, it is believed that employees tend to be more effective. Organization

structure refers to the arrangement of tasks, departmental relations and authority levels to

achieve organizational goals, as well as the delegation of authority and effective

communication along the scalar chain of command. In short terms, it is the hierarchical

relationship among members of the organization.

Because the provincial government is centralized, the organization structure of the

HR department is rooted also from the office of the Governor. This includes the flow of

responsibilities or tasks from the people on the top of the structure. It encompasses the

overall government policies and protocols, rules and regulations and other special

71
responsibilities. The organizational structure helps the employees to know the process in

the transaction authorization as well as the people accountable for a certain decision. This

is important also because it determines the way how communication is disseminated in the

entire department. It is expected from the HR employees also to develop a straightforward

employee handbook or manual to address the basics including job descriptions, attendance

expectations, e-mail communication etiquette, payment methods and more. How the rules

and regulations together with the policies are communicated can be a factor also on how

HR employees become satisfied with his or her work.

D. Physical environment

While studies of stress in the work environment tend to focus on psychosocial

inuences in the environment where work is performed, it could be asserted that another

important inuence on work performance results from physical features of the work

environment. Evidence is accumulating that the physical environment in which people

work affects both job performance and job satisfaction (Brill, Margulis, & Konar, 1985;

ClementsCroome, 2000; Davis, 1984; Dolden & Ward, 1986; Newsham, Veitch, Charles,

Clinton, Marquardt, Bradley, Shaw, & Readon, 2004; Vischer, 1989, 1996).

Office employees spend a lot of their time inside a building, where the physical

environments influence them personally as it directly influences their work performance

and productivity. In the workplace, it is often assumed that employees who are more

satisfied with the physical environment are more likely to produce better work outcomes.

Factor such as temperature, air quality, lighting and noise conditions in the office affect the

work concentration and productivity. Numerous studies have consistently demonstrated

72
that characteristics of the physical office environment can have a significant effect on

behavior, perceptions and productivity of employees.

The tasks workers perform in modern ofce buildings are increasingly complex and

depend on sophisticated technology; and companies whose occupancy costs are increasing

generally seek to reduce them without adversely affecting the workers. Such workspace

decisions aspire to create an investment in employees quality of life, the argument being

made that measurable productivity increases will result. In addition, researchers are

increasingly nding links between employee health and aspects of the physical

environment at work such as indoor air quality, ergonomic furniture and lighting (Dilani,

2004; Milton, Glencross, & Walters, 2000; Veitch & Newsham, 2000).

Since the HR department is an arm of the provincial government with regards to

people, the office is situated in the same building with the other departments. Physical

design focuses mainly on the tangible schemes in the office. This comprises of the spaces

for each employee, the placement of the tables and other facilities, and other factors.

Another thing also is the availability of an area for group discussions or for formal meetings

within the department. This is important since it contributes to the conduciveness of the

office to work as well as the comfort of the employees that will affect how they will be

satisfied.

E. Policies

These are the basic principles that will guide the provincial government of Iloilo in

achieving its goals and objectives as a whole. The general policies established by the

government should be evident and observed in every department including the HR

73
department. Also, the said department has generated its own guiding principles that will

enable them to execute their tasks and responsibilities effectively and efficiently. A policy

entails code of conduct and standard procedures concerning a certain transaction. The

policies should be communicated clearly also so that the employees will be vigilant in

abiding those policies. These policies will promote discipline and proper conduct in the

department, making it important in determining the HR employees satisfaction on their

job to get security, but without fulfilling their other needs. If security doesn't return they

will fulfill their needs elsewhere or burn out.

IV. Rewards

Wages and salaries are recognized to be significant but cognitively complex

(Carraher and Buckley, 1996) and also multidimensional factor in job satisfaction (Judge,

1993). Money not only helps people fulfill their basic needs but also is instrumental in

providing upper-level needs satisfaction. Employees often see pay as a reflection of how

management views their contribution to the organization (Luthans, 1998).

Job satisfaction is a function of how fairly an individual is treated at work.

Employees want pay system and promotion policies to be just, fair, unambiguous, an in

line with their expectations. Their perceived fairness of pay and promotion were found

significantly correlated with job satisfaction (Witt and Nye, 1992). When pay is seen as

fair based on job demands, individual skill level, community pay standards, satisfaction is

likely to result (Locke, 1976). About fringe benefits, Luthans (1998) argues that they are

important but not very influential.

74
Promotional opportunities seem to have a varying effect on job satisfaction. This is

because promotions take a number of different forms and have a variety of accompanying

rewards (Luthans, 1998). Promotions provide opportunities for personal growth, more

responsibilities and increased social status. Individual who perceives that promotion

decisions are made in a fair and just manner, are likely to experience satisfaction (Witt and

Nye, 1992).

In the context of the HR employees, the rewards that they are receiving might also

affect how they will be satisfied with their job. Their salary as well as the benefit that they

get is relative to other government employees. The process how they will be promoted is

promulgated also by the overall policy of the provincial government.

A. Opportunities

In this study, we refer to opportunities as the likelihood of the employees to expand

their network or connection through their job. Being in the HR department, they get to

know different people who are from different fields and with that, being involved in

worthwhile external affairs would be easy in which they can improve their skills as they

use it for their advancement. Opportunities could also be referred to as the trainings that

the job would require them so as it enables them to broaden their knowledge and learn

more for their advantage. The Iloilo Provincial Capitol usually assigns the HR department

in different activities that most of the time involves community outreaches and immersions.

Hence, it can be considered as one of the sub-factors for which might affect the job

satisfaction of the employees in the HR Department.

75
B. Benefits

People tend to prioritize working in a government as long as there is an opportunity,

especially if they are looking forward for long-term benefits. The benefits being referred

to in this study is the advantage or the profit received by an HR employee on the top of its

salary. It includes 13th month pay which is usually called as bonus. Also, the employee

who renders overtime will be given additional compensation equivalent to his regular wage

plus at least 25% premium. Overtime pay for holiday or rest day shall be paid an additional

compensation from the rate of the first eight hours on a holiday or rest day plus at least

30%. On a Special Non-Working day, or rest day, an additional compensation of 30%

premium will be paid in addition to the rate of the first eight hours on holiday or rest day.

In addition, there are leave benefits, maternity and other special benefits. On top of these,

there are mandatory benefits also because it is a government office. First is the Social

Security System (SSS) benefits to help workers who encounter work-related illnesses or

injury resulting in disability or death. This includes compensation for: medical services,

appliances, and supplies in an accredited hospital; rehabilitation services, including

medical, surgical, and hospital treatment; and income cash benefit. Second, the Pag-IBIG

benefits entitle employees to avail of a Housing Loan, Calamity Loan, and Multi-Purpose

Loans that aim to provide financial assistance to their needs. Lastly, the PhilHealth benefits

which provide financial assistance for inpatient and outpatient hospitalization, as well as Z

Benefit Packages for patients undergoing prolonged hospitalization and expensive

treatments and suffering from Millennium Development Goal (MDG)-related illnesses. It

is evident in the governmental employment that the benefits given to its employees are

good plus the retirement premiums. Thus, be included under the rewards.

76
C. Salaries

Salary is defined in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary as fixed compensation

paid regularly for services. A more specific description can be seen in the Philippines

Official Gazette website:

Basic salary shall include all remunerations or earnings paid by an employer to an

employee for services rendered, but does not include allowances and monetary benefits

which are not considered, or integrated, as part of the regular, or basic, salary, such as the

cash equivalent of unused vacation and sick leave credits, overtime, premium, night

differential and holiday pay. Basic salary includes cost-of-living allowances. (n.d.)

Many researches would show that salary is correlated with job satisfaction

(Fogleman, et al., 1999; Odunlade, 2012; Malik, et al., 2012). There are even studies that

show that the relationship is causal wherein the higher the salary, the greater the satisfaction

(Muguongo, et al., 2015; Yaseen, 2013). However, Clark and Oswalds (1995) study would

contend that satisfaction depends on relative income, which is income in comparison to

others, rather than absolute income. In this study, 70% of those earning the lowest set of

reported incomes said to have a high job satisfaction while the same is true for only 57%

of those earning the highest set of reported incomes.

Salary in this studys context means the fixed regular basis an HR employee gets.

The salary that the HR employees get is relative to other government employees. This will

depend on the position they hold and the nature of work they are assigned to. They tend to

receive a regular salary twice a month.

77
D. Promotions

Promotion was defined by H.T. Graham as shifting from lower designation to high

designation within an organization and usually increases in pay package (as cited in

Yaseen, 2013). Promotion is important to employees primarily, but not only, because of

the increase in salary but also because of the increase in authority as well as gaining other

perks like a bigger office or access to otherwise restricted areas or information. Promotion

showed a positive relationship with job satisfaction (Yaseen, 2013; Khan and Mishra,

2013; Kosteas, n.d.). Parvin and Kabir (2011) even said it to be the most important factor

in satisfaction of employees. Even the prospects of promotion have an effect to job

satisfaction (Mustapha & Zakaria, 2013; Kosteas, n.d.). Kosteas (n.d.) studied promotion

for the past 2 years and stated that the effect in job satisfaction is almost equal to that of

69% increase in hourly wage but in the case of older promotions, the effect is lingering

but fading.

The process how HR employees will be promoted is promulgated also by the

overall policy of the provincial government. The promotion defined in this study is the

levelling up or for a certain employee to sit in a higher position as compared to its current

task. There are certain standards or qualification to be met in order to be promoted or it

may depend also to the vacancy of a certain position.

E. Recognition

Zeb, et al. (2016) defined recognition as the sense which is given to an individual

that he or she is a valued person of an organization which is either in monetary form or

not. They also found out that the best way for recognition to motivate employees is to

78
receive it from their superior. For Danish and Usman (2010) recognition describes how

the work of an employee is evaluated and how much the appreciation he receives in return

from the organization. They believe that a reward and recognition program should make

the employees understand that the reward is a result of their performance. The system

should be fair at all times and the reason for recognition should be related to work

(Tessema, et al., 2013). It is also interesting to note that even informal conversations about

the personal life of the employee counts is a form of recognition Danish and Usman (2010)

recommends. Because of its high motivational effects, a lot of studies concluded its positive

effect on job satisfaction (Abdullah, et al., 2016; Ali & Ahmed, 2009; Danish & Usman,

2010; Tessema, et al., 2013; Zeb et al., 2016).

In every accomplished task of the HR employees, usually, their colleagues headed

by the Department head initiate a celebration party. In this way, they were able to recognize

the effort of their co-worker. Also, every year, the Office of the Governor gave specific

awards to the employees who performed excellently.

Methodology

After understanding the conceptual framework, a concrete research process can

now be formed in testing the relationship among the variables. This section will describe

the research methodology used, explain the respondents and location of the study, describe

the procedures used in designing the instrument of gathering the data, and lastly, explain

statistical tools used in data analysis.

79
I. The Research Design

This study took on a descriptive approach in research with the use of survey

questionnaire and published documents. There are two types of data that were gathered in

this study, the primary data which was originated from the answers of the respondents in

the survey questionnaire and the secondary data, which comprise the literature or the

published documents gathered in relation to this study. After conducting a literature review,

different factors of job satisfaction were gathered and such can also be supported by the

theories explained in this paper. Furthermore, various papers from the related literature

have also proven the positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance.

From all these related literatures, the researchers structured the conceptual framework for

the study. The various identified factors from recent studies were narrowed down into four

by the researchers which includes: rewards and incentives; second, work environment;

third, perception and the least significant, the personal profile.

As stated in the objectives, the researchers aim to know whether the employees are

satisfied with their job and to determine and rank the factors affecting job satisfaction. It

was then hypothesized that: the employees are satisfied with their job; the factors identified

have a positive impact on job satisfaction; and that the ranking of the most significant to

the least significant factor is as follows: first, rewards and incentives; second, work

environment; third, perception and the least significant, the personal profile. To certify that

these hypotheses are correct, it was agreed that a survey will be conducted. A survey is

described by Scheuren (2004) as a method of gathering information from a sample of

individuals. Furthermore, a survey can also be a research strategy of systematically

collecting quantitative information from a relatively large sample of a population (de

80
Leeuw et al, 2008). A survey is a tool in understanding how people influence, or are

influenced by, their environment and other different factors. Surveys are usually very

essential in understanding variables such as customer expectations and satisfaction levels

(Angeles, 2015). Because of this, the researchers chose the survey method in gathering the

data. Once the survey is finalized, it will be subject to a pre-test to know the potential

problems and make revisions or improvements. More of this will be discussed in the later

part of this section.

Data analysis will then follow once the actual survey has been finalized. Since this

paper is aiming to establish a relationship among variables: the employees job satisfaction

and its factors- whether such factors determined are indeed significant influences of job

satisfaction, the use of quantitative method is appropriate wherein measurements,

numerical data and statistical analysis will be used to achieve the objective of determining

whether the employees are indeed satisfied with their job and identifying and ranking the

factors affecting their satisfaction level . the results of the quantitative data analysis will

also confirm the correctness of the hypotheses stated in the study.

II. Research Location and Respondents

The survey will be conducted in the Human Resource Management and

Development Office, located on the third floor of Iloilo Provincial Capitol building which

is situated at Bonifacio Drive, Iloilo City, Philippines (Figure 7). The respondents of the

study will be composed of all the employees (individuals who work part-time or full-time

under a contract of employment and has recognized rights and responsibilities), male or

female, from the Human Resource Management and Development Office of Iloilo

81
Provincial Capitol. The respondents ages range from 20 years old to 60 years old.

Particularly, the respondents are those employees of Iloilo Provincial Capitol who issue

service records and certificate of employment. For this purpose, a letter seeking approval

was sent to the HRMDO Head, Maam Alma P. Ravena (see Appendix B).

Given the departments small population size, 100% percent testing, the

examination of the entire population (Salosagcol et. al, 2014) is possible. Therefore,

sampling procedures will no longer be necessary.

Figure 7 Google Maps Showing Iloilo Provincial Capitol

82
III. Data Gathering Instrument

The factors determined by the researchers will be tested by using the survey

method. The researchers designed a structured survey that contains questions formulated

based on the four factors identified: the rewards/incentives, work environment, perception,

and personal profile. These factors were then further divided into subcategories. The

questionnaire contains two parts: (1) personal profile and (2) survey proper. In determining

personal profile, this simply contains the information about the employees such as age, sex,

tenure, range of salary, educational attainment, and relationship status. Refer to Appendix

C for the research questionnaire used in this study.

Since the personal profile factor is already recognized in the first part of the survey.

The survey proper, which is the second part of the questionnaire, explored the three

remaining factors. As mentioned above, each factor has underlying variables that must be

considered. The researchers make certain that each variable is included in the statements

in the questionnaire. The statements formulated in the survey are based on the hypothesis

of the study and those used by other studies in the related literature. The five-point Likert

scale is used to determine the degree of agreement or satisfaction for each statement. The

basis for the formulation of the questionnaire can be summarized in the table below.

83
Table 1 Subcategories Identified Under Each Factor

Rewards and
Personal Profile Perception Work Environment
Incentives
Sex General Organizational Culture Opportunities
Perception about
Marital Status Relationship Benefits
Rewards
Perception About Work Design and
Age Salaries
Work Environment Organizational Structure
Educational Level Physical Environment Promotions
Job Position Policies Recognition
Gross Monthly Salary Organizational Culture Opportunities
Tenure
PRC Licensed
Civil Service Eligibility

Table 1 shows the different variables of each factor. Under perception, there are

questions that will be about perception in general, and also the employees perception about

the other two factors: rewards and work environment. For the work environment, it has

five elements: the culture, relationships, work design and organizational structure, physical

environment, and policies. And lastly, under rewards and incentives, the researchers

identified the following components: opportunities, benefits, salaries, promotion, and

recognition.

The second section under the survey proper is where the overall satisfaction of the

employee will be asked. The respondent will rate the level of satisfaction for each variable

under each factor from a range of 1-10 with 1 as the lowest and 10 as the highest. This is

to answer the objective of determining whether employees are satisfied or not. This will

also aid in confirming whether the answers of the employees in the 30-item questionnaire

correspond with the ratings they gave for each factor on its influence on job satisfaction.

A pre-test will be conducted to examine the practicality and effectiveness of the

84
survey questionnaire. This will also help the researchers know if there are the lapses in the

questionnaire and make revisions to come up with an improved one for the actual survey.

Once the actual survey is already conducted and accomplished, the data gathered will be

analyzed using different statistical tools.

IV. Statistical Treatment

Five statistical tools are to be used to analyze data. This include percentage,

weighted mean, Likert Scale, Microsoft Excel 2016, and Statistical Package for Social

Sciences. These are commonly used by different studies reviewed and they are mostly

patterned on the study of Angeles et. al (2015) on their analysis on the job satisfaction and

performance level of employees of Ajinomoto Philippines- Laguna branch.

A. Percentage

Frequency and percentage are to be used in analyzing and quantifying the

respondents personal profile which includes their age, sex, relationship status, and tenure.

A percent is a rate, number, or amount in each hundred (Oxford, 2016). The percent

formula is as follows:

This formula is to be used in each factor stated above and a percentage frequency

distribution will be made to visualize the overall result. The results are to be compared and

analyze its relationship to the respondents level of satisfaction.

85
B. Likert Scale

Likert Scale is the most commonly used quantitative tool for measuring employees

performance level. Likert scale items are used to measure the attitude of the HR

Department employees of the Provincial Capitol to a particular question or statement.

Likert-type data is only a ranking or ordinal data wherein you can only know that one is

higher than another but you cannot know the distance between them. This is used by

different studies such as that of Angeles (2015), Khan (2011), Bakotic (2016), and other

different studies compiled by Hsieh (2016).

This is also the tool that would be used in surveying the respondents. The 5-point scale is

to be used which consists of the following:

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2- Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

In this scale, Strongly Agree has the highest level of satisfaction while Strongly

Disagree will have the lowest. Only a 5-point scale is used for higher efficiency and

effectiveness. A scale lower than five would not be enough for the researchers to analyze

the data while a scale higher than that could leave the respondents uninterested or even

undecided as to the intensity of his choice. The survey reflects the three remaining major

determinants of job satisfaction which are the perception, rewards, and work environment.

86
C. Mean

In order to assess the respondents level of satisfaction, the HR department

employees feedback on their satisfaction, and the efficiency and effectiveness of the

survey, the weighted average mean and ranking are to be used. Weighted Mean or average,

according to Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics (2010), is an average of quantities to

which have been attached a series of weights in order to make proper allowance for their

relative importance. In this study, the different factors of satisfaction that would be tested

on the respondents will be given appropriate weights before their mean is to be calculated.

The following formula is to be used:

+ + + +
=

Where:

fSA= Frequency of Strongly Aagree

fA= Frequency of Agree

N= Neutral

fD= Frequency of Strongly Agree

fSD= Frequency of Strongly Disagree

The weighted average mean is to be used on the factors under perception, rewards,

and work environment which are the rest of the independent variables of the study.

D. Microsoft Excel 2016

For the first objective of this paper, which is to determine whether personal profile

affects the three factors such as perception, work environment and rewards and incentives,

87
ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and independent T-test will be used. Since the number of

respondents is only fifteen, the researchers opted to use Microsoft Excel in generating the

results for ANOVA and T-test.

1. Independent T-test

The Independent t-test is used to evaluate the difference between the means of two

independent or unrelated groups. That is, we evaluate whether the means for two

independent groups are significantly different from each other. Hence, this test is used for

groups with only two possible choices (e.g. male or female, yes or no).

The formula for t-test is:

1 2 where 1 = mean of sample 1


= 2 = mean of sample 2
2 2
+ 2
1 1 = number of subjects in sample 1
1 2
2 = number of subjects in sample 2
(1 1 )2
12 = variance of sample 1 =
1

(2 2 )2
22 = variance of sample 2 =
2

The Data Analysis tool in excel was used in order to generate more accurate results

with an alpha value of .05. The said test will not only show the t-value but also critical

values and other statistically related results. A more comprehensive and complete set of

results will be shown on Table 9 in the succeeding pages.

As a point of comparison on how to come up with the decision to accept or reject

the hypotheses, it is imperative to look at each components significant effect towards the

employees job satisfaction. Simply put, a factor is significant when its t-value is less than

the p-value of 0.05.

88
Table 2 t-test Result Interpretation

If Then

test statistic > critical value


Reject the null hypothesis
(i.e. t> tcrit)

test statistic < critical value


Cannot Reject the null hypothesis
(i.e. t< tcrit)

p value < a Reject the null hypothesis

p value > a Cannot Reject the null hypothesis

2. One-Way Analysis of Variance

On the other hand, the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to determine

whether there are any statistically significant differences between the means of three or

more independent (unrelated) groups. ANOVA or the analysis of variance is a method of

splitting the total variation of data into meaningful components that measure different

sources of variation (Walpole, 2002). This method is widely used in many research studies

since it determines whether there is a statistical difference between the means of three or

more independent variables.

Due to the complexity of the test, the data were also processed through MS Excel Data

Analysis tool in order to generate a comprehensive result showing not only the F value and

the critical values, but also variances and other statistical results. F value must be greater

than the F critical value in order to know whether a factor has a significant effect.

89
E. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) is a statistical software produced by

SPSS Inc. and was bought by IBM in 2009. It is used by researchers from different fields

to gather and interpret results from the data collected. This software uses powerful model-

building, evaluation, and automation capabilities. It usually includes descriptive statistics,

bivariate statistics, prediction for numerical outcomes, and prediction for identifying

groups (Angeles, 2015). Through SPSS, the results to be analyzed for the objective of

identifying and ranking variables will be generated using Pearson r correlation. To

effectively use SPSS, a codebook was prepared containing the variables to be used, their

corresponding type, a short description for each as well as their values (see Appendix D).

1. Pearson r Correlation

Pearson r correlation measures the strength of the relationship between personal

profile and job satisfaction, perception and job satisfaction, work environment and job

satisfaction, and rewards or incentives and job satisfaction, as well `as the significance of

the relationship. In describing the strength of the correlation, the guide that Evans (1996)

suggests will used. In correlation testing, the correlation coefficient is represented by the

symbol rho, wherein such values will determine the strength of correlation between the

variables. Table 3 summarizes the interpretation of the values of rho.

In describing the strength of the correlation, Evans (1996) suggests that the absolute

value of rho will be used where: .00 - .19 means very weak, .20 - .39 means weak, .40

- .59 means moderate, .60 - .79 means strong, and .80 1.0 means very strong.

Furthermore, positive values of rho (symbol for parameter) denote a positive linear

90
correlation, which means that as one variable increases, the other variable will likely

increase also; negative values of rho denote negative linear correlation which signifies an

inverse relationship or an increase in one variable will likely decrease the other variable;

and a value of 0 implies no linear correlation which indicates that one variable does not

have the likelihood to increase or decrease even if the other value changes.

Table 3 Rho Values and Corresponding Interpretation


Values of Rho Strength of Correlation
.00 - .19 Very Weak
.20 - .39 Weak
.40 - .59 Moderate
.60 - .79 Strong
.80 1.0 Very Strong

91
CHAPTER IV

Results

We conducted the survey last April 6, 2017, at the Human Resource Management

and Development Office of the Iloilo Provincial Capitol and was able to collect responses

from a total of 15 employees, comprised of 12 regulars and 3 job hires. The survey was

conducted in order to identify the significant effect of the identified factors towards the job

satisfaction of the HR employees, rank them according to their impact to job satisfaction,

and the employees overall satisfaction towards their job. All data is collected through the

questionnaires and Microsoft Excel 2016 and SPSS were used to generate the results of the

survey. An independent t-test with unequal variances and Pearson r were used to identify

the significant effect of personal profile, perception, work environment, and rewards and

incentives towards job satisfaction, when certain variables are considered as parameters.

The results of the analysis, including variance analysis, will be explained in the following

parts in this chapter.

Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive statistics are used in describing the basic features of the data in the

study. It is used to summarize the data gathered and the measures. Together with simple

graphical analysis, this section will not only present descriptive statistics for the

demographics (personal profile), but also show mean values and standard deviations of the

92
questionnaire items as well as the variables perception, work environment, and rewards

and incentives.

I. Personal Profile

Knowing the respondents personal profile is very significant in this research study

since it is believed to influence each respondents giving of response to every question

asked of them. This section presents the statistics on the respondents profile in terms of

personal socio-demographics which is composed of sex, marital status, age and work-

related socio-demographics such as education level, job position, PRC license holder, civil

service eligibility, gross monthly salary and tenure. Below is a table showing the data in

frequencies and percentages of the personal socio-demographics of the respondents.

Table 4 Respondents Personal Socio-demographics (N=15)

Respondent Characteristics Frequency Percentage


Based on Sex
Female 10 66.67%
Male 5 33.33%
Based on Marital Status
Single 6 40.00%
Married with children 8 53.33%
Married without children 0 0.00%
Widowed 0 0.00%
Separated 1 6.67%
Based on Age Category (in years)
Below 20 0 0.00%
20 30 3 20.00%
31 40 6 40.00%
41 50 1 6.67%
51 60 4 26.67%
Over 60 1 6.67%

93
Table 4 shows that out of fifteen total HRMDO employees, ten or 66.67% are

female while the remaining 33.33% are male. Therefore, we can say that the department is

composed mostly of female employees which is twice as much the number of male

employees.

Also, it is clearly shown from the table that most of the respondents 53.33% are

married with children, followed by 44% of them who are single and the remaining 6.67%

who is separated. Interestingly, none of them are married without children nor widowed.

In addition, the above table presents the personal characteristics of the respondent

HRMDO employees in terms of their age category. No employee ages below 20 years old.

Of all the fifteen respondents, 20% belongs to 20 to 30 years old range. There are 6

employees representing 40% of the total number of employees who are in the range of 31

to 40 years old. Only one or 6.67% ages within 41 to 50 years old while 26.67% have ages

in between 51 to 60 years old. Lastly, only one respondent ages over 60 years, the oldest

among the employees.

Therefore, the data indicates that the workforce comprising the HRMDO mostly

comes from the 31 to 40 years old category. Relevant to this is the most evident marital

status of half of them which is married with children.

A. Work-Related Socio-demographics of Respondents

Similar to the data presented above, the respondents socio-demographic

characteristics related to work is also significant since it is known to have profound effects

on perception, work environment and rewards and incentives, as well as the overall

satisfaction of the respondents. Work-related socio-demographics involved in this study

94
are education level, job position, PRC licensed, civil service eligibility, gross monthly

salary and tenure.

Figure 8 shows that an overwhelming number of respondents, about 73.33%

graduated college. A considerate percentage of 20% attained masters degree and the

remaining 6.67%, is a high school graduate. It can be concluded that almost all of the

employees of the HRMDO graduated college and three of them even earned masters

degree.

Figure below presents the percentage of positions possessed by the respondents. It

is to be noted that the position composing the largest percentage is the job hire which is

about 20% of those who have answered, some were promoted to Administration Aide II,

Administration Aide VI, Administration Officer II, Administration Officer IV and

Administration Officer V. The specific item is a string question and some of the

respondents were not able to answer or chose not to. Almost three-fourths of the

respondents are college graduate. Comparatively, nearly two-fifths are administration

officers.

Meanwhile, it is displayed in Figure 8 that only one or 6.67% of the respondents is

a Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) holder. The remaining percentage of

employees are non-holders of PRC license.

Figure 9 also tells that 80% of the respondents are civil service eligible which

means that he or she obtains a passing grade in a civil service examination or is granted a

civil service eligibility. The remaining 20% therefore are not eligible. So even if nearly all

of the employees of the HRMDO are non-PRC license holders still, a large number of them

are civil service eligible.

95
Moreover, a look at Figure 9 shows that 40% of the respondents are middle income

earners based on the given salary range, earning salaries from PhP 15,000 to PhP 25,000

whereas 26.67% earn less than PhP 15,000. There are 13.33% employees earning salaries

within the range of PhP 25,001 to PhP 35,000 while another 20% earns more than PhP

35,000. Only few employees earn high income and on majority, employees earn PhP

15,000 to PhP 25,000.

It is evident from Figure 9 that two ranges garnered the same percentage of thirty-

three point 33.33%, those having a tenure of less than 3 years and those having a tenure of

16 to 20 years. The remaining percentage was distributed to 3 to 7 years-range making up

the twenty percent 20% of all the employees, to 13 to 15 years and above 20 years, each

having six point sixty-seven percent 6.67%.

This shows that most of the employees of the HRMDO are either newly-hired

(worked in HRMDO for less than 3 years) or have worked in the department for 16 to 20

years already.

96
Level of Education of Respondents
Job Positions of Respondents in the HRMDO

Respondents who are PRC Licensed

Figure 8 HRMDO Employees Work-related Socio-demographics Education, Position, PRC


97
Civil Service Eligible Respondents

Respondents' Salary Range

Respondents Tenure

Figure 9 HRMDO Employees Work-related Socio-demographics Salary, Civil Service, Tenure


98
II. Perception

In presenting the results for the perception variable, the data is analyzed in two

ways: first, in terms of the statements in the survey and second, in terms of the respondents.

Thus, the means and interpretations were generated for each statement and for each

respondent.

The results for the ten items about perception will be discussed in this section

wherein the frequency of respondents for each level of agreement will be presented and

also the mean for each item. The item with the highest mean is about the employee being

proud to work in the HR department and the lowest mean is about the fair treatment of the

supervisor towards the employees.

Figure 10 shows the number of respondents for each level of agreement. For the

items about perception in general, as seen in the diagram, majority of the respondents are

proud to work in the HRMDO with a frequency of 8 and a mean of 4.27 selecting strongly

agree. Only one strongly disagreed and one remained neutral. When it comes to liking the

nature of their job, seven employees agreed and six strongly agreed. Almost similar results

were generated for the next two statements which is about the goals and objectives and the

meaningfulness of their job with a mean of 4.07. Six employees strongly believe that the

goals and objectives of the department do not contradict with their principles. However,

there were two who were neutral and one who strongly disagreed. For the meaningfulness

of their job, one person strongly disagreed that their job is meaningless, seven people

disagreed, two remained neutral and one person agreed.

For the perception about the work environment, the variables were the

organizational structure, relationships with colleagues, and treatment of supervisor. For the

99
organizational structure and relationship with colleagues, data analysis showed quite

similar results with a mean of 3.87 and 3.67, respectively. This is due to the fact that more

chose to be neutral and agreed, and only two to three people checked strongly agree. A

negative statement about the unfair treatment of supervisor resulted to a mean of 3.13

which means that 6 people actually agreed to this statement, followed by 5 people who

disagreed and 4 employees who strongly disagreed. There is one respondent who chose not

to check any of levels. (For the frequency distribution table, refer to Appendix E.1.)

100
Figure 10 Frequency Distribution of Perception

101
The last three statements were about the employees perception about rewards and

incentives. Similar to work environment, the range of the level of agreement is between

neutral and agree. There are two negative statements under this, the item which states that

there is no opportunity to move to a better job and the dissatisfaction towards the training

provided by their jobs. The results were quite parallel for the two items, one respondent

did not answer and also one strongly agreed for the two statements. Five employees were

neutral about having no opportunity to move to a better job and one agreed. However, four

strongly disagreed in this statement. When it comes to the training provided, most

respondents strongly disagreed since this is negatively stated. Lastly, nine employees are

strongly satisfied with the compensation they receive and only one strongly disagreed with

this statement.

In the following sections of the chapter, we would be using the table below as a

basis in determining whether the mean values we have computed indicates the respondents

satisfaction or dissatisfaction over a certain survey statement in the variables mentioned in

the framework. Furthermore, it is also used to determine the satisfaction level of each

respondent as a whole according to each variable perception, work environment, and

rewards and incentives (Table 5). The values range from 1 to 5, with 1-1.599 as strongly

dissatisfied, 1.6 2.599 as dissatisfied, 2.6 3.599 as neutral, 3.6 4.599 as satisfied, and

4.6 5 as very satisfied.

102
Table 5 Likert Scale Range

Rate Meaning Range Interpretation


5 Strongly Agree (SA) 4.6 5.0 Very Satisfied
4 Agree (A) 3.6 4.599 Satisfied
3 Neutral (N) 2.6 3.599 Neutral
2 Disagree (D) 1.6 2.599 Dissatisfied
1 Strongly Disagree (SD) 1.0 1.599 Strongly Dissatisfied

Furthermore, Table 6 below shows the corresponding mean and the interpretation

for the ten statements regarding the perception variable.

Table 6 Perception - Mean, Interpretation

Statement Mean Interpretation


1. I am proud to work in HR department at
4.27 Satisfied
Iloilo Provincial Capitol.
2. I like the nature of my job 4.13 Satisfied
3. The goals and objectives of HR
department do not contradict with my 4.07 Satisfied
principles.
4. I sometimes feel my job is meaningless. 4.07 Satisfied
5. I think the organizational structure in my
3.87 Satisfied
department is effective.
6. I feel that my immediate supervisor does
3.36 Neutral
not deal with all employees fairly.
7. I need to be friends with my colleagues in
order for me to work efficiently with 3.67 Satisfied
them
8. I feel there is no opportunity for me to
move to a better job within the 3.71 Satisfied
department.
9. I am not satisfied with the training that
3.64 Satisfied
my job is giving me.
10. I am satisfied with the compensation I
4.20 Satisfied
received from my job.
Average 3.9 Satisfied

103
From the table above, the results infer that on average, the respondents are satisfied

in terms of their perception on their job with a mean of 3.9. Nine out of ten statements

resulted to weighted means that belong to the satisfied range. And only one statement

generated a mean that lies in the neutral range which is equal to 3.36. This is a negatively-

stated item that is about the employees perception regarding the fair treatment of their

supervisor.

On the other hand, Figure 11 summarizes the mean and its corresponding

interpretation for each respondent about perception:

6
5
5 4.7 4.6
4 4.1 4 4 4.2
3.71 3.7 3.9
4 3.5 3.5
3.3 3.2
Mean

3
3

Average
3

9
1
2

4
5

7
8

12

15
10
11

13
14

Respondents
Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Figure 11 Respondents' Mean - Perception

In terms of the respondents means, the results show that overall, the employees

perception show that they are satisfied with their job. The means show that 3 employees

are very satisfied, 7 are satisfied, and 5 remained neutral. The highest mean equaled to 5.00

and the lowest is 3.00.

104
All in all, it can be concluded that employees are satisfied when it comes to their

general perception, perception towards work environment and perception towards rewards

and incentives. However, the items about general perception have higher satisfaction

scales, followed by the rewards and incentives and lastly, the work environment.

III. Work Environment

Now, we would be looking at the work environment that the HRMDO has, through

looking at the responses of the employees on how it affects their job satisfaction as we

consider the sub-factors involved work culture, relationship with co-workers, work

design and organizational structure, its physical environment and the policies that the

organization has. Figure 12 on the next page would show that they are satisfied with their

job because they can express their opinions to their supervisors without fear, while they

disagree in the part that says the policies are not administered well, which implies they

believe the policies are administered well as it affects also their job satisfaction. (For the

frequency distribution table, refer to Appendix E.2.)

105
Figure 12 Frequency Distribution of Work Environment

106
For more basis for the implications above, Table 7 below shows that the HR

employees responded that they receive cooperation from their co-workers if the situation

requires it which has the highest mean of 4.27. On the other hand, in terms of good

communication within the department, the HR employees are neutral with a mean of only

3.20, which is the lowest among the statements. Overall, if the 10 statements are

considered, the mean is 3.743 which implies that the HR employees are satisfied in terms

of their work environment.

Table 7 Work Environment - Mean, Interpretation

Statement Mean Interpretation


1. I receive cooperation from co-workers if the situation
4.27 Satisfied
requires it.
2. There is a healthy work competition within the
3.47 Satisfied
department.
3. I can express my professional opinion with my
4.06 Satisfied
colleagues and/or immediate supervisor without fear.
4. I prioritize applicants whom I know. 3.80 Satisfied
5. Communication seems good within the department. 3.20 Neutral
6. I feel that I do not know what is going on with the
3.43 Neutral
department.
7. Each of us is provided with enough space to work
3.73 Satisfied
effectively.
8. I rarely hang out with my colleagues. 3.77 Satisfied
9. The provincial government policies are not fairly
3.5 Neutral
administered in my department.
10. Our office has good ventilation. 4.2 Satisfied
Average Mean 3.743 Satisfied

In addition, when we look at the mean values of the respondents towards their job

satisfaction, we also see somewhat similar results. Figure 13 shows that the individual

responses of the respondents to the 10 statements about work environment. It can be

107
derived from the table that only one respondent is very satisfied with the work environment,

with a mean of 4.6. However, there are 8 out of 15 respondents who are neutral in terms of

work environment.

5 4.6
4.5 4.2 4.3 4.2
4
4 3.7 3.8 3.65
3.38 3.4 3.3 3.3
3.5 3.1 3.2 3.2
3
3
Mean

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Average
7
1
2
3
4
5
6

8
9

14
10
11
12
13

15
Respondents
Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Figure 13 Respondents' Mean - Working Environment

To further explain, the five variables under the work environment factor have nearly

similar means that range from 3.21-3.88. Thus, in general, the employees are neutral in

terms of their work environment. However, in this factor, the variable which the employees

are most satisfied with is the physical environment with a mean of 3.88, which lies on the

satisfied range. The work design and organizational structure is the variable that resulted

to the lowest mean of 3.21 which lie

s on the neutral range. Overall, the work environment factor has a mean of 3.56.

108
IV. Rewards and Incentives

Lastly, we will be looking at the rewards and incentives received by the HR

employees as another independent variable affecting their satisfaction towards their job.

Hence, we are presented with the figure below showing the frequency of the responses per

statement in the questionnaire regarding their job satisfaction in relation to the rewards and

incentives. (For the frequency distribution table, refer to Appendix E.3)

Figure 14 shows the number of respondents with their respective responses as to

their level of agreement to each statement representing the sub-factors of the rewards and

incentives variable. Hence, we can clearly see that the area with the most number of people

agreeing to be a reason for their satisfaction towards their job is that they can broaden their

connections because of their job. It is then followed by their disbelief that they are not

being paid for the amount of job they do thus, they are satisfied by the salary they receive

as compared to the tasks they perform.

109
Figure 14 Frequency Distribution of Rewards and Incentives

110
To further illustrate how the respondents generally answered the statements and

support the above information, the table below is presented together with its corresponding

mean values. Responses gathered indicate that they are satisfied with their job as it enables

them to broaden their connections, having a mean value of 4.14. On the other hand, a mean

value of only 2.87 was calculated in terms of their job satisfaction as to the benefits they

do not receive which they think they must have. Overall, they scored an average mean of

3.58 which indicates neutrality to the responses in the survey statements.

Table 8 Rewards and Incentives Mean, Interpretation

Statement Mean Interpretation


1. My job gives me a chance to broaden my connections. 4.14 Satisfied
2. I feel I am not being paid a fair amount for the work I do. 4.07 Satisfied
3. The benefits we receive are better than private
3.87 Satisfied
organizations.
4. The department does not provide sufficient and effective
3.38 Neutral
training courses to develop employee performance.
5. There is little chance for promotion on my job. 3.25 Neutral
6. The HRMDO recognizes outstanding employees. 3.77 Satisfied
7. I feel that the work I do is not appreciated. 3.38 Neutral
8. The salaries provided by the provincial government do not
3.6 Satisfied
meet my needs.
9. There are benefits we do not have which we should have. 2.87 Neutral
10. We are promoted based on our performance. 3.46 Neutral
Average Mean 3.58 Neutral

Looking at a different perspective, we also solved for the mean values of each

respondent on how they answered the 10 statements assessing their job satisfaction through

rewards and incentives. The results show that a majority of 10 respondents were satisfied

with their job, 4 were neutral, while 1 of them was dissatisfied, which are all based on the

rewards and incentives they have. (See Figure 15 below.)

111
5
4.4
4.5
4 4 3.9 4 4 4
4 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6
3.5 3.22 3.2 3.1
2.9
3
Mean
2.44
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Average
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

15
Respondents
Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Figure 15 Respondent's Mean - Rewards and Incentives

In summary, when the calculated means as the survey statements were grouped

according to the sub-factors under the rewards and incentives variable the data given would

result that the two sub-factors with the highest value are Salaries (mean=3.84) and

Opportunities (mean=3.76), hence indicating satisfaction with their job in those two areas.

However, the other three sub-factors scored below 3.6 which means they are neutral in

those areas.

Overall, the perception factor generated the highest mean of 3.90 followed by the

work environment which has a mean of 3.65 and lastly, the rewards and incentives with a

mean of 3.6. The means for the three factors implies satisfaction relative to the Likert scale

range interpretation presented in Table 5.

112
V. Overall Job Satisfaction

A groups demographics have, in certain ways, an influence about the organization

as a whole. Thus, each employees individual profile was asked and tested if there could

be certain relationship or trend in them that could show similarities and differences in each

subgroups satisfaction level based on the different factors that could probably affect it.

The figures below show a radar of the overall satisfaction level of the HRDMO employees

segregated into their personal profile subgroups. The radar shows the mean of each factor

and it shows the comparison of each subgroup in every factor under the personal profile

variable. In the legend on the right side of the figure, the overall satisfaction level of each

personal profile subgroups is shown beside them. Each factor is to be discussed in the

following section.

113
A. Sex

Figure 16 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Sex

As it can be seen in the figure above, it is concluded that the male population is

generally more satisfied than the female except in their salaries and benefits. In salaries

category, the female population generally has mean of 8.43 level of satisfaction while that

of the male only has 8.40. As with the benefits, females are generally more satisfied having

also a mean of 8.43 as compared to that of the male with 7.8 mean level of satisfaction.

Also, the female population has a mean level of satisfaction of around 6-7 in almost all of

the factors except in salaries and benefits which indicates that they are, in overall

moderately satisfied. However, when it comes to their salaries and benefits, they are very

satisfied. As with the male, their level of satisfaction ranges from 7-8 indicating that they

are mostly satisfied except with the salaries wherein they are very satisfied. Both of the

male and female population has the highest level of satisfaction in their salaries while they

have the lowest satisfaction level on promotions.

114
B. Marital Status

Figure 17 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Marital Status

In the figure above, the ones with the highest satisfaction level are those who are

married with children having an overall mean of 7.50 and is followed by those who are

single which has a mean satisfaction level 7.22 indicating that they are mostly satisfied

with their job. As can be seen, the one who is least satisfied is the Separated with an overall

level of 5.20 indicating that they are only slightly satisfied. It can also be seen in the figure

that he has the least satisfaction level in all of the ten factors. It is also seen that the

satisfaction level of those who are single and married without children does not differ

much. In the radar, it is visibly shown that even though those who are married with children

are the ones who have the highest satisfaction level, those who are single still has higher

satisfaction level when it comes to recognition, work culture, work design and

organizational structure, and policies. Their mean level however, does not differ much.

115
Consistently, those who are separated has the lowest satisfaction level in every aspect.

Again, it is also very visible that salaries and benefits have the highest satisfaction level.

There are no employees who are married without children or widowed resulting in a mean

of zero.

C. Age

Figure 18 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Age

Under the age group, there are no employees that are below 20 years old and the

only one who is above 60 years old has missing data so the focus on this discussion will be

on those who are 20-60 years old. Taking a look on their total average mean of the figure

above, the group with the highest satisfaction level are those ranging from 20-30 years old

with a level of 8.70 (very satisfied) followed by those who are 41-50 years old with a

satisfaction level of 8.00 indicating that they are mostly satisfied. Even with this result,

116
those who are in the 41-50 age bracket are still the most satisfied when it comes to their

relationship with co-workers, salaries, and benefits. They are then followed by those who

are 51-60 and 31-40 years old with which indicated that people from these age bracket are

6.60 and 6.42 respectively indicating that they are moderately satisfied. Those who are at

the bracket age of 31-40 consistently has the lowest satisfaction level except on such factors

as promotions, recognition, salaries, and benefits wherein those who are 51-60 years old

had the lowest satisfaction level. People aging from 60 and above had missing data. As

seen in the figure, the Salaries and Benfits are still the two factors that gives high

satisfaction level to everyone.

D. Highest Educational Attainment

Figure 19 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Highest Educational Level

When it comes to their educational attainment, the ones with the highest level of

117
attainment are those who are high school graduate (8.20= very satisfied) followed by those

who have masters degree (7.90= mostly satisfied), and lastly by those who are college

graduate (6.76= moderately satisfied). They have highest satisfaction level with salaries

and lowest satisfaction level with promotion. In their work culture, everyone has almost

the same level of satisfaction. high school graduates are extremely satisfied with their

salaries and relationship with co-workers. As can be seen in the radar, even though high

school graduates has the highest satisfaction level, those with masters degree still has the

highest level of satisfaction when it comes to their benefits, policies, and physical

environment. Consistently, those who have college degree has the lowest satisfaction level.

Also, there are no employees in the HRMDO who have PhD.

E. Job Position

Figure 20 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Job Position

When it comes to job position, the ones with the lowest satisfaction level are the

118
Admin Aide II followed by Administrative Aide IV who are slightly dissatisfied. Third in

line are the Administrative V and II who are only moderately satisfied. As for the Staff,

they have a 7.80 satisfaction level and the ones with the highest level of satisfaction are the

Asset Department Head and Job Hire who are very satisfied with their position.

F. PRC License Holder

Figure 21 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on being a PRC License Holder

The figure above shows the satisfaction level of PRC License Holder employees

compared to those who are not. Generally, PRC license holders are less satisfied (only

slightly satisfied) than those who are not (wherein they are mostly satisfied). However,

when it comes to promotions and recognition, PRC license holders are more satisfied.

119
G. Civil Service Eligibility

Figure 22 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Civil Service Eligibility

It can be seen in the figure that civil service exam passers are only moderately

satisfied as compared to those who are not civil service eligible which has a satisfaction

level of 8 (mostly satisfied). Although this may be so, it can still be seen that when it comes

to benefits, those who are civil service exam passers are slightly more satisfied than those

who are not.

120
H. Gross Monthly Salary

Figure 23 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Gross Monthly Salary

According to their monthly salary, the ones with the highest satisfaction are those

having less than P15,000 who are generally very satisfied. This is followed by those having

a salary range of P15,000 to P25,000 anf those having more than P35,000 who are only

mostly satisfied, and lastly those who have salaries ranging from P15,000 to P25,000 who

are only slightly satisfied. Although those who have gross monthly salary of less than

P15,000 has the highest satisfaction level, when it comes to benefits, those who have salary

range of P25,001 to P35,000 and more than P35,000 still has higher satisfaction level. Also,

when it comes to salaries, those who have salary range of P25,001 to P35,000 are the most

satisfied followed by , those who have salary range less than P15,000 and thirdly by those

who have salary range more than 30,000. Consistently, those with salaries ranging from

P15,000 to P25,000 has the lowest level of satisfaction in all aspects.

121
I. Tenure

Figure 24 HRMDO Employees' Level of Satisfaction Based on Tenure

Based on the number of years that they have been working on the Provincial Capitol

HRMDO, the ones with the highest satisfaction level are those that are already more than

20 years in the department. It can be seen that it also has the highest satisfaction level when

it comes to almost every factor except in the work culture, relationship with co-workers,

and work design and organizational structure. They are even extremely satisfied when it

comes to promotion, salaries, and benefits. Even with that, those with tenure of 12 to 15

years and less than 3 years are still more satisfied when it comes to work culture and

relationship with co-workers. Also, when it comes to work design and organizational

structure, those who are working less than 3 years in the department are the most satisfied.

The ones with the lowest satisfaction level are those who are working for around 16 to 20

years in the department. They consistently have the lowest level in all aspects.

122
Taking every aspect into consideration, results (see Appendix F) show that the one

with the highest level of satisfaction would be the salaries with an average mean of 8.42

indicating that they the employees are very satisfied when it comes to this aspect. This is

followed by benefits with a mean of 8.17, policies (7.80), physical environment (7.00),

recognition and relationship with co-workers (6.92), opportunities, work culture, and work

design and organizational structure (6.83), and promotions having the lowest mean of 6.67.

With this result, the constituents are considered moderately satisfied in the following

factors of satisfaction: work culture, relationships, work design and organizational

structure, physical environment, opportunities, promotions, and recognitions. The

employees are then mostly satisfied with regards to the departments policies and they are

very satisfied with benefits and salaries that they receive. Overall, the factors had 7.17

weighted average mean which indicates that the employees are mostly satisfied with their

job in HRMDO in relation to these 10 factors of job satisfaction. The diversity in the

satisfaction level of the employees in some of the factors above might be due to their

demographics and other factors.

Finally, looking at the overall satisfaction of the employees where they were asked

to indicate their level of agreement towards how satisfied they are with their job from

Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Hence, we present Figure 25 below showing a

comparison of the respondents mean value satisfaction for the variables perception, work

environment, and rewards and incentives with the overall satisfaction (as indicated by the

black color).

123
Perception Work Environment Rewards and Incentives Overall Job Satisfaction

5
5
5

5
4.7
4.6

4.6

4.42
4.4

4.3
4.2

4.2
4.2
4.1
3.9

3.9
3.71

3.8
4
4

4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

3.65
3.7

3.7

3.7
3.6

3.6

3.6
3.5

3.5
3.36

3.4
3.22

3.3
3.3

3.3
3.2
3.2

3.2

3.2
3.1

3.1
MEAN

2.9
3

3
2.44
RESPONDENTS

Figure 25 Respondents' Mean Satisfaction (Variables and Overall)

124
The figure shows that the overall mean of the job satisfaction is 4.42. This means

that the HR employees are very satisfied with their job at Iloilo Provincial Capitol. Fifty

percent of the respondents rated their job satisfaction as perfect.

On the other hand, looking closely to the independent variables, it can be implied

that the means for each variable is relatively low as compared to the overall job satisfaction

of the HR employees. This could mean that even if the respondents are not perfectly

satisfied with the specific variables, when it comes to the overall job satisfaction,

limitations are compensated.

Hypothesis Testing Results

In order to decide whether to accept or reject the hypothesis presented in Chapter

I, two statistical tests were done in order to determine the significant effect of the

independent variable Personal Profile towards their job satisfaction as we consider how it

also affects the other three independent variables perception, work environment, and

rewards and incentives.

One of the two statistical tests was the Independent t-test used to evaluate the

difference between the means of two independent or unrelated groups. That is, we evaluate

whether the means for two independent groups are significantly different from each other.

Hence, this test is used for groups with only two possible choices (e.g. male or female, yes

or no).

However, for the purpose of this study, the Data Analysis tool in excel was used in

order to generate more accurate results with an alpha value of .05. The said test will not

only show the t-value but also critical values and other statistically related results.

125
As a point of comparison on how we can come up with the decision to accept or

reject the hypotheses, we need to look at each components significant effect towards the

employees job satisfaction. Simply put, we can only consider a factor significant when its

t-value is less than the p-value of 0.05 (refer to Table 2).

On the other hand, the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to determine

whether there are any statistically significant differences between the means of three or

more independent (unrelated) groups. Due to the complexity of such test, the data were

also processed through MS Excel Data Analysis tool in order to generate a comprehensive

result showing not only the F value and the critical values, but also variances and other

statistical results. In order to know whether a factor has a significant effect, we only need

to see that the F value is greater than the F critical value (see Appendix G and H).

Table 9 below generally shows that personal profile components resulted

insignificant in majority, except for their position when used as a measurement of their job

satisfaction in relation to their work environment. Hence, the result implies that the

employees personal profile does not affect at all the satisfaction they have towards their

job, may it be in the aspect of perception, work environment, or rewards and incentives.

126
Table 9 Significance of the Personal Profile Components Towards Job Satisfaction

127
Correlation Testing

Pearson r correlation was used to measure the strength of the relationship between

personal profile and job satisfaction, perception and job satisfaction, work environment

and job satisfaction, and rewards or incentives and job satisfaction, as well as the

significance of the relationship between two variables. Positive values of rho (symbol

for parameter) denote positive linear correlation, negative values of rho denote negative

linear correlation, and a value of 0 denotes no linear correlation. In describing the strength

of the correlation, the guide that Evans (1996) suggests for the absolute value of rho was

used .00 - .19 means very weak, .20 - .39 means weak, .40 - .59 means moderate,

.60 - .79 means strong, and .80 1.0 means very strong.

Table 10 Relationship between Personal Profile, Perception, Work Environment,


Rewards/Incentives and Job Satisfaction of HRMDO Employees

Pearson
Personal Profile p Interpretation
rho
very weak negative correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
Sex - 0.022 0.946
P>0.05 Not Significant
moderate negative correlation (.40<|r|<.59);
Marital Status -0.508 0.092
P>0.05 Not Significant
very weak negative correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
Age -0.079 0.808
P>0.05 Not Significant
very weak positive correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
Education Level 0.039 0.904
P>0.05 Not Significant
weak positive correlation (.20<|r|<.39); P>0.05
Job Position 0.204 0.524
Not Significant
weak positive correlation (.20<|r|<.39); P>0.05
PRC Licensed 0.196 0.541
Not Significant
Civil Service very weak positive correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
0.058 0.857
Eligible P>0.05 Not Significant
Gross Monthly very weak negative correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
- 0.161 0.617
Salary P>0.05 Not Significant

128
very weak negative correlation (.00<|r|<.19);
Tenure -0.139 0.668
P>0.05 Not Significant
moderate positive correlation (.40<|r|<.59);
Perception 0.539 0.071
P>0.05 Not Significant
Work moderate positive correlation (.40<|r|<.59);
0.570 0.053
Environment P>0.05 Not Significant
Rewards and strong positive correlation (.60<|r|<.79); P<0.05
0.750 0.005
Incentives Significant

Table 10 evidently shows the computed Pearson correlation (rho) and the p

(significance level) values which are used in determining the relationship between job

satisfaction and the respective identified variables personal profile, perception, work

environment, rewards/incentives. There are five negative correlations namely sex, marital

status, age, gross monthly salary, and tenure, while the rest are positive correlations.

Furthermore, in terms of strength, sex, age, education level, civil service eligibility, gross

monthly salary, tenure are very weak correlations; job position, PRC licensed are weak

correlations; marital status, perception and work environment are moderate correlations;

and rewards/incentives are strong correlations.

Using the guide that Evans (1996) suggests, all the factors are ranked based on the

strength of the correlation. As seen in Table 10, rewards and incentives ranked first given

a strong correlation of 0.750, second is work environment with a moderate correlation of

0.570, third is perception having 0.539 moderate correlation and last is personal profile

with an average of 0.156 rho value interpreted as very weak.

More importantly, the results also show that the all the above factors affecting job

satisfaction are not significant at 0.05 level of probability since their values fall above 0.05,

except for rewards or incentives. (For the detailed Pearsons r correlation testing results

using SPSS, see Appendix I)

129
Summary of Hypotheses

Among the 12 hypotheses formulated in this paper, three are accepted and the

remaining nine are rejected. These three statements are about the significant effect of

rewards and incentives and such being the most significant since this also the only factor

proven to have a significant effect. And the last hypotheses that states employees are

satisfied with their job is also accepted based on the results presented previously.

Table 11 Hypotheses Testing Results

Hypotheses Accept/Reject
1. The employees personal profile has a significant
Reject
effect on their perception towards their job.
2. The employees personal profile has a significant
Reject
effect on perceived work environment.
3. The employees personal profile has a significant
Reject
effect on rewards and incentives received.
4. The employees personal profile has a significant
Reject
effect on their job satisfaction.
5. The employees perception on their job has a
Reject
significant effect on their job satisfaction.
6. The work environment has a significant effect on
Reject
their job satisfaction.
7. Rewards and incentives has a significant effect on
Accept
their job satisfaction.
8. Rewards and incentives has the most significant
Accept
effect on job satisfaction.
9. Work environment has the second-most
Reject
significant effect on job satisfaction.
10. Perception has the third-most significant effect on
Reject
job satisfaction.
11. Personal profile has the least significant effect on
Reject
job satisfaction.
12. HRMDO employees of Iloilo Provincial Capitol are
Accept
satisfied with their job.

130
CHAPTER V

Discussion
This section involves discussions of the results which were presented in Chapter 4

of this research paper. The succeeding discussions will also tackle the implications of the

resulting effects of the variables - personal profile, perception, work environment, and

rewards and incentives - to the job satisfaction of HRMDO employees. Furthermore, we

aim to determine whether to accept or reject our alternative hypotheses based on the

previously presented results.

Personal Profile of the Respondents

The result shows that one-third of the respondents are male and two-thirds are

female. This fraction also reflects the overall composition of the employees at the Iloilo

Provincial Capitol based on the secondary data gathered. This would imply that the level

of job satisfaction that is studied would incline to the point of view of women. In addition,

it can be assumed that more or less, the job satisfaction of other departments employees

will reflect more about the side of women.

Also, 8 out of the 15 respondents are married with children. Six of them are single

while only one is separated. Looking at their relationship status, more than half of the

HRMDO employees would somehow need more finances to support their families. These

respondents could be expected to demand higher salaries as compared to single employees.

In addition, this could also mean that the priorities of the married ones compared to single

respondents are indeed different. These could lead to dissimilarities in their job satisfaction

131
that will be discussed further in the later portion of this chapter.

Taking into account the classification of the respondents based on their age, most

of the HRMDO employees age from 30 to 40 years old, which is 40 per cent of the total

respondents. Respondents belonging in this age range are somehow establishing stability

in their work and even planning for setting up pension funds. Also, the employees are

holding significant positions or responsibilities. In addition, there are four respondents

aging 50 to 60 years old. Basically, these employees have worked in a long period of time.

Undeniably, some of them may find their work tiring, otherwise, have loved their job so

much that rewards and incentives do not matter anymore as long as they accomplish their

tasks.

On the other hand, there are respondents who belong in 20 to 30 years old. They

are those who may be more physically fit for the job, willing to perform the work for less

money, and able to acquire the practical experience of the mature worker in a relatively

short period of time. Throughout most of the 20th century, the typical job required physical

stamina and practical knowledge. But the 21st century occupations demand more than just

physical abilities and practical knowledge. In today's rapidly changing workplace

environment, even a 30 year-old employee who graduated from a university a mere 8 years

ago may already need to upgrade his/her skills in order to meet the evolving occupational

demands. Thus, age is also considered in determining the job satisfaction of HRMDO

employees.

Looking into the educational background of the respondents, most of them are

college graduates, which is 73.33%. This shows that the Iloilo Provincial Government is

really hiring those who have attained an at least four-year course. However, only 6.67% of

132
them are PRC licensed that are professionals in a sense. Despite this, 80% of the

respondents are civil service eligible. With this, even though not majority of the employees

are technically professional but most of them have passed the civil service examination,

which in one way or another, entails competency. This information implies also that the

nature of the work in the HRMDO does not primarily require an employee to be PRC

licensed and it can be assumed that the job descriptions and responsibilities are not very

complex.

Moreover, results show that 38.46% of the respondents are administration officers,

which means that they are already regular employees of the Iloilo Provincial Capitol. Also,

23.08% are administration aides which serve as assistants to the administration officers.

The data reflect that HRMDO is mostly composed of regular employees which have a

positive indication. This means that most of the employees also are receiving the

standardized benefits given by a government office which they could enjoy as compared

to those from private organizations. Add to this, the employees are more secured also given

that most of them have worked for 16-20 years at HRMDO. In fact, 7% of the respondents

have worked for more than 20 years. With this length of time, there is a positive signal that

the employees have significant reasons upon staying that long in the job.

Furthermore, the data gathered revealed that 40% of the employees earn from

P15,000 -P25,000 and 20% of them receive more than P 35,000 as compensation. This is

relatively high given the fact that only few of them are professionals. This supports also

what the literature reveals that government offices have higher compensation given to its

employees compared to private organizations. This could be one of the reasons also why

HRMDO employees chose to stay in their job.

133
Overall, the categories wherein the respondents are classified are investigated and

tested whether these variables do really affect the job satisfaction of the HRMDO

employees. Further discussions on the relationship of the personal profile to other variables

and to job satisfaction are presented below.

Interpretation of Statistical Findings and Corresponding Implications

In this section, interpretations of the findings are discussed, their corresponding

implications and how they relate to the literature, theory and practice. The flow of

discussion will be patterned on the objectives. Thus, the discussion will start by interpreting

the results relating to the tests (T-Test, ANOVA, and Pearson r Correlation) performed in

the previous chapter to determine whether the personal profile has a significant effect with

the other three factors (Perception, Work Environment and Rewards/Incentives), then to

determine whether personal profile has a significant effect to job satisfaction, and lastly the

impact of the three factors (Perception, Work Environment and Rewards and incentives)

to overall job satisfaction of HRMDO employees.

I. Personal Profile to the Three Factors (Perception, Work Environment,

Rewards/Incentives)

With the results we have generated from the independent t-test and one way

ANOVA from the previous chapter, only one personal profile component resulted to

significant effect (F value = 5.57; F critical value = 4.88, where F value > F critical value)

towards the level of job satisfaction factors which is the HR employees position in relation

to their work environment. The rest of the components resulted to an insignificant effect,

134
whether be it in their perception, work environment, or rewards and incentives. Hence,

since the majority of the test results indicated insignificance, the hypotheses regarding the

significant effect of personal profile towards their perception; the significant effect of

personal profile towards their perceived work environment; and the significant effect of

personal profile towards rewards and incentives are all rejected.

II. Personal Profile to Overall Job Satisfaction

The paragraphs below tackle the different factors of personal profile and their

individual relationship with the HRMDO employees level of job satisfaction. Whether

this relationship is significant or not is identified through the interpretation of the Pearson

Correlation Test conducted. An implication regarding the result is also discussed and

inference regarding the hypothesis is presented.

A. Sex

Pearsons Correlation test result on the relationship between sex and job satisfaction

shows that there is a very weak negative correlation between them. There is also weak and

insignificant relationship between HRMDO employees sex and their job satisfaction.

Thus, alternative hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that being a male or female does

not affect a persons job satisfaction. Therefore, when it comes to work, regardless of your

sex, you can still be as satisfied or dissatisfied with your job. The result of this test may be

linked to HRMDOs nondiscriminatory policies between male and female. Recall in the

comparison of results between sexes in Figure 16 that even though generally, the males are

more satisfied than the female population, the average level of their satisfaction does not

135
differ much. Also, the fact that the female ones are more satisfied when it comes to benefits

might be because of additional compensation that they receive such as maternity leave pay.

This point of view matters in the female population since 53.33% of them are married with

children thus most of them surely has availed of those benefits. This, however, does not

imply inequality between the two sexes in the overall situation of their job as the male

population also shows similar level of satisfaction when it comes to other factors in their

job.

B. Marital Status

Results show that there is a moderate negative relationship between marital status

and job satisfaction since its r is equal to -0.0508. With a p-level of 0.092, it can be

concluded that a persons marital status does not affect a persons job satisfaction in

HRMDO. With this, alternative hypothesis is rejected. It goes to show that regardless of an

employees relationship status, it has no significant effect in their performance in the

department. This may be because the factors of satisfaction used in this study are fixed and

are not affected by the employees marital status. For example, their work design and

organizational structure are already set per government standards and is obviously not

affected by a persons marital status. This is similar to physical environment and other

factors which are dictated by externalities.

C. Age

There is a very weak and negative correlation between an employees age and his

job satisfaction. Thus, as a persons age increases, his or her satisfaction level has a

136
tendency to decrease. A possible reason is the theory of marginal utility wherein age entails

exhaustion of skills and knowledge in terms of job responsibilities. With this, the older the

employees get, the less excited they are for their job which could lead to less satisfaction

in the environment that they are overly familiar with. As shown in Figure 18, people aging

20-30 has the highest satisfaction level of 8.70. Since most of them are fresh hire, they are

looking forward into having their first job and people of this age are more aggressive in

getting higher position. However, those who are 51-60 years old have the lowest

satisfaction level of 6.60. This may be due to them being tired and bored of their work.

People of this age group are usually looking forward to their retirement.

The p-value of 0.808 however indicated that age has no significant effect on a

persons job satisfaction. Therefore, even though there is a correlation between age and job

satisfaction, its chance of manifesting is very low so alternative hypothesis is rejected. This

means the persons age has nothing to do with his satisfaction level in his work. So,

employees have equal chances in every aspect of work. This could also mean that

discrimination is not prevalent and indeed, equality manifests among employees.

D. Highest Educational Attainment

As to the persons educational attainment, Pearsons r test shows that it has a

positive correlation with his job satisfaction. This indicates that as a persons highest

educational attainment increases, his job satisfaction has a tendency to also increase. This

could mean that the more skills and knowledge an employee has acquired, the more excited

and motivated he or she is in applying those to his or her job, which will make him or her

more satisfied.

137
However, the correlation between the two is very weak. Its high p-value of 0.904

also indicates that the persons educational attainment does not significantly affect his or

her job satisfaction. Thus, alternative hypothesis is rejected. It implies then, that an

employee in the HRMDO can still be highly satisfied regardless of whether they are high

school graduate, a college degree holder, or a masters degree holder. This is actually

evidenced in Figure 19, in which a high school graduate has an even higher satisfaction

level than those with masters degree. Knowing that a persons satisfaction is introspective,

this result may be due to different reasons. One is that in this country, it is quite rare for a

person, let alone a high school graduate, to land a job in the government. Thus, this group

of people might already be satisfied with the job they have and the incentives and

relationship they get from the department, giving them a high satisfaction level. On the

other hand, people with masters degree have the second highest level of satisfaction.

Having higher degree usually implies having higher position and benefits. However, Figure

19 shows that high school graduates are actually more satisfied in the following factors:

salaries, promotion, recognition, relationship with co-workers, work design and

organizational structure, and opportunities. This could imply that those with higher degrees

believe that they deserve higher salaries and more recognition than they already have. This

may also be linked with their position and the responsibilities that are in correlation with

it, wherein they think that their contribution to the government does not justly reflect what

they actually receive. It cannot be denied however, that those with masters degree are still

the most satisfied when it comes to benefits received.

138
E. Job Position

Results show that there is a positive but weak correlation between a persons job

position and his job satisfaction. Although it can be implied that the higher the employees

position, the higher is his satisfaction in his job, it may not be the case all the time. As for

example, the survey shows that one job hire is actually highly satisfied with his or her job

even though he or she has a lower position. Furthermore, having a higher position also

means higher responsibilities and expectations which could lead to a lower satisfaction. It

is to be noted an employees job position is also associated with his age, educational

attainment, and tenure. The Pearson p-value is at 0.524. This indicates that a job position

has an insignificant relationship with his satisfaction level. Therefore, we reject the

alternative hypothesis.

F. PRC Licensed

Being a PRC license holder or not has also been tested with regards to a persons

job satisfaction level. Results show that there is a positive but weak correlation between

the two variables. Those who do not hold PRC license are in overall more satisfied with

their job as compared to those who do. However, the p-value indicates that being a PRC

license holder or not has no significant effect in a persons level of job satisfaction.

Therefore, alternative hypothesis is rejected. This conclusion simply shows that the

employees work satisfaction and competency is not solely based on him/her being a board

exam passer. It can also be deduced that in HRMDO, equal opportunities or treatment are

given to employees regardless whether they are PRC licensed or not. This may be one of

139
the many reasons why this factor has no significant effect in an employees satisfaction

level when it comes to his job.

G. Civil Service Eligibility

Just like with the previous factor, civil service eligibility also has positive but with

an even weaker correlation. The test result also shows that being a civil service exam passer

has no significant effect in an employees level of job satisfaction. Thus, alternative

hypothesis is rejected. Recall in Figure 22 that those who have passed the civil service

exam are generally less satisfied than those who have not. This means that the provincial

government reasonable application requirements in reference with any position. Hence, the

nature of the job in HRMDO is not that complex. That is, it does not matter whether you

are civil service eligible or not because the same opportunity or treatment may be given to

each employee which thus it does not contribute to a persons satisfaction level.

H. Gross Monthly Salary

Pearson result has indicated that there is a very weak and negative correlation

between a persons salary and his job satisfaction. It can be inferred from the result that the

gross monthly salary alone of an employee has no significant effect on his job satisfaction

level. This may be due to the fact that every person has his/her own needs and wants. For

example, an employee receives P 30, 000 gross monthly salary and married with children

therefore, his demands to sustain a living are high. His satisfaction is relatively similar with

a single employee receiving P20, 000 whose needs are much fewer. However, this is not

applicable in all circumstances. Thus, alternative hypothesis is rejected.

140
I. Tenure

When it comes to the number of years it has served in the department, results show

that it has a very weak negative correlation with the job satisfaction. This means that the

longer the years you have spent in the department, the lower your satisfaction level may

be. This might be due to the same set-up, almost the same colleagues/co-workers, same

policies and structure which are governed by the central administration of the government.

With this, an employee might get tired or be overfamiliar with these things. The p-value

also implies that employees tenure has no significant effect on a persons job satisfaction

level. Therefore, alternative hypothesis is rejected. Five of the personal profile factors are

negatively correlated naming sex, marital status, age, gross monthly salary, and tenure

while the rest of the factors are positively correlated with job satisfaction. In terms of

strength, only marital status has a moderate, negative correlation. Those with very weak,

negative correlation with satisfaction are the age, gross monthly salary, tenure, and sex.

Furthermore, job position and PRC licensure has a weak positive correlation. Educational

attainment and civil service eligibility is also the same except that it has an even weaker

correlation.

In comparison to the reviewed literature, most findings (such as Ellickson &

Logsdon, 2002; Herman, 2005; Ting, 1997) suggest that age is positively correlated with

satisfaction but the result of this paper tend to be inconsistent with previous researches.

After using Pearson correlation r, the test lead to a weak negative correlation and an

insignificant result which means that age groups do not have a significantly affect job

satisfaction. The same also goes for tenure, education level and monthly salary range, most

studies proved that these have positive and significant relationships with job satisfaction.

141
However, in this paper, the results show very weak negative correlations.

When it comes to the sex of respondents, the results showed an insignificant effect

also. This is quite sensible since opposing results were gathered in the related literature

about this topic. Some studies prove that men are more satisfied than women while some

vice versa. This implies that much study is still needed on this relationship.

All of the factors under Personal Profile variable have no significant effect on the

employees job satisfaction level. Thus, it is concluded that Personal Profile, as a whole,

has no significant effect on the overall satisfaction of the employees. Relatively, the

alternative hypothesis is rejected. Possible reason for this insignificant relationship is

because most these characteristics are factors that are innate to individuals themselves.

Each individual is unique and so, their characteristics should not hinder them from attaining

a certain level of satisfaction. In the same way, having certain characteristics will not

guarantee that a person will be satisfied or dissatisfied with their jobs. Therefore, in

attaining satisfaction, the main focus should not be on changing these factors of an

individual. However, these findings are in contrast with the reviewed literature wherein

they indicated that personal profile significantly affects job satisfaction so this paper brings

another view about the matter.

III. Perception, Work Environment, Rewards/Incentives to Overall Job

Satisfaction

As shown from the results, perception is positively correlated with job satisfaction

which implies that as perception towards overall work, work environment and rewards and

incentive becomes more positive (indicated by higher level of agreement for perception

142
questions), job satisfaction increases. The strength of that relationship can be described as

moderate having a correlation value between 0.40 and 0.59. Even with that however, results

show that there is no significant difference between perception and job satisfaction.

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis is rejected and we can say that the HRMDO

employees perception on their job has no significant effect on their job satisfaction.

Based on related literature, an employees perception on how their jobs provide the

things that are important to them affects job satisfaction. Judge & Bono (2001) and Judge,

Locke, Durham, & Kluger (1998) for example found that one of the primary causes of the

relationship was through the perception of the job itself. The outcome of this study however

shows the contrary. From the outcome, it can be inferred that job satisfaction is not

impacted by how employees look at their job, their impressions on the work environment,

and on their expected salary. So evidently, the innate aspect of an individual does not

significantly affect job satisfaction.

Same as perception, work environment has a moderate positive relationship with

job satisfaction. Hence, we can say that as the satisfaction for the work environment

increases, so also is the job satisfaction. Likewise, the work environment has no significant

effect on employees job satisfaction, so we reject the alternative hypothesis.

In a paper by Raziq and Maulabakhsh (2015), it was proven that working

environment and job satisfaction have a positive relationship with each other. This could

also be backed up by another study by Morrison (2004) where relationships, which is

considered as a variable of the work environment factor, could also positively affect job

satisfaction. The difference however from these studies is that the population includes

academic institutions, banks and telecommunications. This could be a reason why there are

143
different results in this relationship. Moreover, some of the sub-factors of work

environment (Organizational Culture, Relationship, Work Design and Organizational

Structure, Physical Environment, and Policies) might have a significant effect on job

satisfaction but that effect might have been overpowered by the other sub-factors.

Another similar positive relationship is that of rewards or incentives and job

satisfaction which indicates that as the former increases job satisfaction also increases.

Nevertheless, contrary to perception and work environment, the strength of the relationship

between rewards or incentives and job satisfaction is strong. It is also to be noted that

among all the variables that were identified, only rewards and incentives has a significant

effect on job satisfaction. In this case, we accept the alternative hypothesis.

In comparison to the underlying theory in this paper, the findings on the effect of

rewards or incentives to job satisfaction is in agreement with that of the theory chosen for

this paper which is John Lockes Range of Affect Theory where a good pay is an indicator

that a person is more satisfied with his job. Thus, the higher the salary, the more satisfied

an employee feels. The same result was also generated in this paper. Rewards and

incentives factor is proven to have a have a strong positive correlation with job satisfaction.

Additionally, the result for rewards and incentive is also coherent with the related

theories used as basis of this paper like Herzbergs Two-Factor Theory. It can be recalled

that the variables under the rewards and incentives factor are opportunities, benefits,

salaries, promotion and recognition. Salaries and benefits are under the hygienic factors

that could cause dissatisfaction if employees expectations are not met. This is consistent

with the Pearson correlation result where if salaries and benefits are lower than expected,

there will also be a corresponding decrease in satisfaction since it yielded a strong positive

144
correlation. Promotion, recognition and opportunities are under the motivation factors,

which is just similar to hygienic except that they cause satisfaction if given to the

employees.

The significance of rewards and incentives is also backed up by various literatures

that considers variables such as pay and opportunities as the most important factor of job

satisfaction. (Unutmaz, 2014; Lomoya, Pingol and Teng-Calleja, 2015)

Bottom line, among all the identified factors Personal Profile, Perception, Work

Environment, Rewards and Incentives, only Rewards and Incentive leaves a significant

effect on job satisfaction which is consistent with various theories and researches that were

discussed the earlier chapters. The following discussion includes the determination of the

overall job satisfaction of employees.

IV. Overall Job Satisfaction of Employees

Our final hypothesis is HRMDO employees of Iloilo Provincial Capitol are

satisfied with their job and based on the mean result of overall satisfaction (x = 4.42),

which signifies that they are very satisfied. We therefore accept this alternative hypothesis.

Basing on the previous result of rewards and incentives having a strong and significant

effect on job satisfaction, we can justify this finding because government employees do

have high salaries and comprehensive benefits, and most employees enter the public sector

just to enjoy these incentives.

On a general sense, among all the relationships that were tested in this study, only

rewards and incentives was found to have a significant effect on the job satisfaction of

HRMDO employees. The emerging results would simply mean that rewards and incentives

145
overpower personal profile, perception, and work environment in terms of the respondents

job satisfaction source. This implies that regardless of the background of the respondents,

the way they perceive their work, and what their work environment is, it is what they

receive in return for their work that matters.

If we compare the findings to the related literature in Chapter 2, it is noticeably

different such that majority of the literature tells that personal profile, perception, work

environment and rewards and incentives significantly affect job satisfaction, whereas in

this study only the latter has a significant effect. With this, it is just imperative to consider

some other factors such as limitations.

Even though this research has achieved its objectives, there are unavoidable

limitations for its results. First, this study explored only four facets of job satisfaction.

There may be other factors, explicit or implicit, that also impacts job satisfaction however,

they are outside the scope of this study and future studies could expound on these other

factors. Another limitation is the presence of missing data from the respondents survey.

Even though 100% sampling was used, the population size is very small (i.e. 15

respondents) therefore missing data could have significant effect on the results of the study

and the result might be different had there been no missing data. In relation with this,

insignificant results do not mean that it is absolute. Insignificance can be attributed to the

small sample size of the study. Finally, the study is population-specific and may not be

applicable to non-HR employees, HR employees in private organizations or employees

outside Iloilo.

Setting aside the said limitations, the unique findings may be derived from the fact

that this research study tackles an area quite dissimilar from those focused by previous

146
researchers, thus arriving to a considerably different result. Given this, the importance of

this study could be established and could be the subject of future researches for the existing

local literature on job satisfaction which is limited.

Furthermore, results show that the HRMDO employees are satisfied with their job.

Knowing that only rewards and incentives significantly affects job satisfaction, we can say

that the government provides more than enough of these incentives to make their

employees very satisfied of their jobs. This likewise supported by the notion that working

in the government entails more benefits and opportunities, which became one of the

reasons for an employee to desire a job in the government office. To prove, a typical HR

employee would receive only a salary that ranges from 13,500 to 15,000 (Castriciones, M.

2016). This is relatively below the actual compensation received by the HRMDO

employees at Iloilo Provincial Capitol.

Rewards and incentives as the sole factor affecting job satisfaction could actually

be viewed positively on the part of the Iloilo local government since it already has a good

salary policy and whenever changes happen, rewards and incentives can be more easily

modified as compared to the other factors. On the other side, this is a substantial reason for

the local government to periodically check its schemes concerning rewards and incentives

in order to sustain and even increase the job satisfaction of its HRMDO employees.

Recommendations for the HRMDO and the local government will deliberately be

discussed in the next chapter.

147
CHAPTER VI

Conclusion

Upon thorough scrutiny of the results, it can be concluded that the HRMDO

employees are satisfied with their job at Iloilo Provincial Capitol with an overall mean of

4.42. It is found out also that only rewards and incentives have a significant effect to the

job satisfaction. This is supported by the Range of Affect Theory (Locke, 1976), the

underlying theory used in this study stating that satisfaction is determined by a discrepancy

between what one wants in a job and what an employee is getting from the job. This means

that there is just a very small difference between the expectations of the HRMDO

employees and what they get. Basically, based on secondary information from the

HRMDO employees, they opt to be employed in a government office primarily because of

the compensation and benefits which the HRMDO had met. Thus, only the hypothesis

asserting that rewards and incentives significantly affect job satisfaction of HRMDO

employees is accepted.

Recommendations

Based on the results of this study, it is highly recommended for the Iloilo Provincial

Government headed by the Governor to revisit its rewards and incentives schemes. Despite

the fact that the HRMDO employees are already satisfied with their job, it is still a

challenge on how to sustain and even increase their satisfaction. Given that the

compensation grades are centralized which comes from the national level government

148
office, this can be hard to alter or modify. What the provincial government could do is to

focus on other sub-factors of rewards and incentives other than salaries and benefits. This

means that recommendation will be made to improve the opportunities, recognition, and

promotion.

First, for the opportunities, in order to give the employees equal chances, they

should be scheduled and appointed to attend seminars and other external activities for

exposure, which will not be limited only for those in the higher position. In addition, the

provincial government could conduct regular seminars that tackle various topics that will

be of great help for the employees to be more effective and efficient in their work.

Specifically, these could be done once for every two months depending on the resources

available. However, it is to be noted that these trainings or seminars should be applicable

to the certain level of job assignment of the employees. This promotes relevance of the said

programs for the specified employees depending on the nature of the job they have and

their job descriptions. In order to be more sustainable, the MAWLS (Model, Assist, Watch,

Leave, Stay in touch) process could be done. Concepts and principles needs to be modelled

first to the trainees so that they will grasp the gist. They need to be assisted also in applying

those principles and in order to empower them, watching them do the task is important.

For them to learn more, giving feedbacks is of essence.

As mentioned above, evaluation and feed-backing are important for the employees

to be more aware of how they perform in their job. These will fall under the recognition as

one of the sub-factors of rewards and incentives. It is highly suggested that within the

department, they should establish some criteria in determining the outstanding employee(s)

of the month. The list may be made known to the department and even in the entire

149
provincial capitol. This can be a motivation for the employees to perform well in their job.

On top of that, bonuses or treats could be given as incentives to those who excel. On the

other hand, a negative reinforcement could be enforced also to those who have not done

their part for the specific period. This is not to discourage them but just to be fair and

equitable to those who have accomplished their task based on the standards.

Moreover, it is suggested also that there should be a healthy competition or an

ambiance of competency inside the department. This can be achieved by setting specific

goals maybe weekly that are applicable and specific to every level of position in the office.

Also, at the end of the year, there are special awards coming from different organizations

recognizing public employees. These should be communicated well to the employees so

that somehow, they will be more motivated to do their specific tasks in the office.

For the promotion, the department should be very clear on the criteria that they set.

If there are vacant positions to be filled or posts for promotions, the potential candidates

need to be screened based on the standards set. And if possible, these will be communicated

at least to those who desired for the position. This will enhance the transparency within the

office and others should not question why a certain employee is chosen over others. Add

to these, the promotion should not be primarily based on seniority so that the vacancy will

be made available to everyone.

For further researches about job satisfaction specifically that will be in the

government office, it is recommended that the research design will not only be quantitative

but should be mixed with qualitative information. This will enhance the results and even

explain the reasons behind of the employees satisfaction. In addition, future researchers

could look and consider other possible variables that would affect job satisfaction since

150
personal profile, perception, and work environment have no significant effect to job

satisfaction based on the result in this study. Also, the job satisfaction in the government

offices can be compared to private organizations in order to identify the discrepancies and

to improve both work places.

Indeed, this research study about factors affecting job satisfaction of HRMDO

employees at Iloilo Provincial Capitol is a revitalization of HRMDO and serves as a

springboard for further researches.

Behind all the recommendations we made, we, the researchers, believe that what

truly defines a person's satisfaction towards his/her is greatly dependent on how much you

love the job itself. Many internal and external factors would affect satisfaction, but with

how we are willing to sacrifice, and do our jobs well is a mirror of our love and satisfaction

towards a job. Reality would show us that it's all about rewards. But a hidden facet weighs

more - and that's what's unique to each individual and the things they can be satisfied with.

Beyond that, it must be remembered that when an employee is satisfied, it also reflects

satisfaction towards the people he/she serves - and that's what we think, is the most

important above all.

151
Bibliography
Abdullah, N., Shonubi, O. A., Hashim, R., & Hamid, N. (2016). Recognition and

Appreciation and its Psychological Effect on Job Satisfaction and Performance in

a Malaysia IT Company: Systematic Review. IOSR Journal of Humanities and

Social Science,21(09), 47-55. doi:10.9790/0837-2109064755

Adeniji, A. (2011). Organizational Climate and Job Satisfaction Among Academic Staff

in Some Selected Private Universities in Southwest Nigeria (Master's thesis,

Covenant University, Ogun, Nigeria). Retrieved from

http://theses.covenantuniversity.edu.ng/bitstream/handle/123456789/105/Full%20

Thesis.pdf?sequence=1

Akhtar, S. N., Hashmi, M. A., & Naqvi, S. I. (2010). A Comparative Study of Job

Satisfaction in Public and Private School Teachers at Secondary Level. Procedia -

Social and Behavioral Sciences,2(2), 4222-4228.

doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.668

Ali, R., & Ahmed, S. (2009). The Impact of Reward and Recognition Programs On

Employees Motivation And Satisfaction: An Empirical Study. International

Review of Business Research Papers,5(4), 270-279. Retrieved March 10, 2017.

Angeles, V. N. P. (2015). Job Satisfaction and Performance Level of Employees of

Ajinomoto Philippines Corporation-Lucena Branch. LPU- Laguna Business and

Accountancy Journal, 61-103.

Ayon, J. G. (2009). Job Satisfaction Level of Technology Teacher Education Graduates

of the University of Southeastern Philippines. Southeastern Philippines Journal of

Research and Development, 18(2), 123-129. Retrieved February 12, 2017.

152
Balzer W.K., , Kihm J.A., , Smith P.C., , Irwin J.L., , Bachiochi P.D., , Robie C., ,

Parra L.F. (1997). Users manual for the job descriptive index (JDI; 1997

Revision) and the job in general scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State

University

Barrows, D., & Wesson, T. (2000). A Comparative Analysis of Job Satisfaction Among

Public and Private Sector Professionals. The Innovation Journal: The Public

Sector Innovation Journal,5(1), 1-20. Retrieved March 5, 2017.

Bartlett, B. (2015, March 31). What Is the Meaning of Personal Profile? Retrieved from

https://www.techwalla.com/articles/what-is-the-meaning-of-personal-profile

Berghe, J. V. (2011). Job satisfaction and job performance at the workplace (Degree

thesis, Arcada). Retrieved from

https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/28669/Vanden_Berghe_Jae.pdf?se

quence

Bin Shmailan, A. S. (2015). The relationship between job satisfaction, job performance

and employee engagement: An explorative study. In Issues in business

management and economics (pp. 1-8). ISSN 2350-157X. Retrieved from

http://www.journalissues.org/IBME/ http://dx.doi.org/10.15739/IBME.16.001

Boski K., & B. Jefmaski, Determinants of Satisfaction of the Employees of Local

Government Units, Economics & Sociology, Vol. 6, No 2, 2013, pp. 158-170.

DOI: 10.14254/2071-789X.2013/6-2/14

Brief, A., P., Weiss, H., M. (2001), Organizational behavior: affect in the workplace,

Annual Review of Psychology, No. 53.

153
Bruns, H. (2014). HR Development in Local Government: How and Why does HR

Strategy Matter in Organizational Change and Development? Business

Research, 7(1), 1-49. doi:10.1007/s40685-014-0002-z

Campbell, C. H., Ford, P., Rumsey, M. G. and Pulakos, E. D. (1990) 'Development of

multiple job performance measures in a representative sample of jobs', Personnel

Psychology, 43: 277-300.

Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and

organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook

of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 687732). Palo Alto:

Consulting Psychologists Press.

Capadosa, P. B. (2013). The employees' perception of the Performance Appraisal System

(PAS) of the Local Governemnt of Iloilo City, Philippines (Master's thesis,

Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University). Retrieved from http://r-

cube.ritsumei.ac.jp/bitstream/10367/5885/1/51211625.pdf

Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1995, August). Satisfaction and Comparison Income

[PDF].

Danica Bakoti (2016). Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Organisational

Performance, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraivanja, 29:1, 118-130, DOI:

10.1080/1331677X.2016.1163946

Danish, R. Q., & Usman, A. (2010). Impact of Reward and Recognition on Job

Satisfaction and Motivation: An Empirical study from Pakistan. International

Journal of Business and Management,5(2), 159-167. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v5n2p159

154
Danzer, N. (2013, September). Job Satisfaction and Self-Selection into the Public or

Private Sector: Evidence from a Natural Experiment [PDF]. IZA.

Degracia, D. B., Capuyan, N. C., & Vizcarra, D. R. (2015, March). Job Satisfaction and

Professionalism of Selected Licensed Customs Brokers in Paraaque City,

Proceedigns of the DLSU Research Congress, Vol. 3. EBM-II-014

Employee. BusinessDictionary.com. Retrieved February 11, 2017, from

BusinessDictionary.com website:

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/employee.html

Esveritt, B. S., & Skrondall, A. (n.d.). Weighted Average [Def. 1]. In The Cambridge

Dictionary of Statistics (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1-480). Cambridge, England:

Cambridge University Press.

Fogleman, S. L., Milligan, R. A., Maloney, T. R., & Knoblauch, W. A. (1999, April).

Employee Compensation and Job Satisfaction on Dairy Farms in the Northeast

[PDF]. New York: Cornell University.

Gautham, R. (2012, November 1). Job Satisfaction [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from

http://www.slideshare.net/rajeshvcetmca/job-satisfaction-seminar

Government. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2017, from https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/government

Graham, H.T. (1986). Human Resources Management (5th ed.). London: Pitman

Publishing.

Gunavathy, J. S., & Ayswarya, R. (2011). Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction as

Correlates of Job Performance - A Study Among Women Employed in the Indian

Software Industry. Paradigm, 58-65.

155
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of

a theory. OrganizationalBehavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-

Wesley.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship

between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A

meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268-279. doi:

10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268.

Heathfield, S. M. (2016, August 26). What Are Incentives at Work?. Retrieved from

https://www.thebalance.com/what-are-incentives-at-work-1917994

Henne, D., & Locke, E. (1985). Job dissatisfaction: What are the consequences?

International Journal of Psychology, 20(2), 221.

Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business

Review, pp. 52-62.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York,

NY: John Wiley.

Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M. and Weitzman, M. (2001), Finding an Extra Day a

Week: The Positive Influence of Perceived Job Flexibility on Work and Family

Life Balance. Family Relations, 50: 49--58.

Howard, A., & Bray, D. (1988). Managerial lives in transition: Advancing age and

changing times. New York: Guilford Press.

156
Hsieh, J. Y. (2016). Spurious or True? An Exploration of Antecedents and Simultaneity

of Job Performace and Job Satisfaction Across Sectors. Public Personnel

Management, 90-118.

Human Resources. (n.d.). In Entrepreneur. Retrieved from

https://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/human-resources

Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and performance: A meta-

analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251-273.

Ice, M. (n.d.). A Study on Job Satisfaction among Employees Job Satisfaction. Retrieved

from

https://www.academia.edu/9419101/A_STUDY_ON_JOB_SATISFACTION_A

MONG_EMPLOYEES_JOB_SATISFACTION

Igloso, G. A. (2016). Predictors of Achievement and Job Satisfaction of Women

Managers in SUC (NCR). International Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic

Research, 4(3), 6-26. Retrieved from http://www.multidisciplinaryjournals.com/

Ironson, G., Smith, P., Brannick, M., Gibson, M., and Paul, K.(1989). Construction of a

job in General Scale: A comparison of global, composite and specific measures.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 193-200.

Jex, S. M. (2002). Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach. New

York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Jex, S. M., & Spector, P. E. (1989). The generalizability of social information processing

to organizational settings: A summary of two field experiments. Perceptual and

Motor Skills, 69, 883-893.

157
Johns, G. (1997). Contemporary research on absence from work: Correlates, causes, and

consequences. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of

industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 115-173). Chichester, UK:

Wiley.

Jones, M.D. (2006). Which is a better predictor of job performance: Job satisfaction or

life satisfaction. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 15(6), 77-97.

Judge T. A., & Locke, E.A., The Effect of Dysfunctional Thought Processes on

Subjective Well-Being and Job Satisfaction (1992). CAHRS Working Paper

Series. Paper 296. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/296.

Judge, T. A., & Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice. In C. L.

Cooper & E. A. Locke (Eds.), Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking

theory with practice (pp. 166-198). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2008). Affect, satisfaction, and performance.

In N. M. Ashkanasy & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Research companion to emotion in

organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Judge, T. A., & Klinger, R. (2007) Job satisfaction: Subjective well-being at work. In M.

Eid, & R. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 393-413). New

York, NY: Guilford Publications.

Judge, T. A., & Larsen, R. J. (2001). Dispositional affect and job satisfaction: A review

and theoretical extension. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 86(1), 67-98.

Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction

relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 939-948.

158
Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1994). Individual dif- ferences in the nature of the

relationship be- tween job and life satisfaction. Journal of Oc- cupational and

Organizational Psychology, 67, 101107.

Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., & Locke, E. A. (2000). Personality and job satisfaction: The

mediating role of job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 237

249.

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-

job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review.

Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376-407.

Khalid, S., Irshad, M. Z., & Mahmood, B. (2011). Job Satisfaction among Academic

Staff: A Comparative Analysis between Public and Private Sector Universities of

Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management,7(1), 126-

136. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v7n1p126

Khan, A. H., Nawaz, M. M., Aleem, M., & Hamed, W. (2012). Impact of job Satisfaction

on Employee Performance: An Empirical Study of Autonomous Medical

Institutions of Pakistan. African Journal of Business Management Vol. 6, 2697-

2705.

Khan, T., & Mishra, G. (2013). Promotion as Job Satisfaction, A Study On Colleges Of

Muscat, Sultanate Of Oman. European Journal of Business and

Management,5(5), 56-62. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from http://www.iiste.org

Kosteas, V. D. (n.d.). Job Satisfaction and Promotions [PDF]. Cleveland: Cleveland State

University.

159
Locke, E. (1975). Personnel attitudes and motivation. Annual Review of Psychology, 457

-480.

Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance, 4, 309-336.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.),

Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago,

IL: Rand McNally.

Lomoya, M. G., Pingol, M. B., & Calleja, M. T. (2015). Antecedents of Job Satisfaction

and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors among Agency-Hired Blue-Collar

Contractual Workers in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 48(1),

1-27. Retrieved February 11, 2017.

Luddy, N. (2005). Job Satisfaction amongst Employees at a Public Health Institution in

the Western Cape (Master's thesis, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town,

South Africa). Retrieved from

http://etd.uwc.ac.za/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11394/1418/Luddy_MCOM_2005.p

df?sequence=1

Luthans, F. (1998). Organisational Behaviour. 8th ed. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hillside

Maher, A., & Bedawy, R. (2014). Human Resources Management in Southeastern Asias

Local Government Case Study: Indonesia, Philippine and Thailand. International

Journal of Recent Advances in Organizational Behaviour and Decision Sciences,

1(2), 133-147. Retrieved from http://globalbizresearch.org

160
Malik, M. E., Danish, R. Q., & Munir, Y. (2012). The Impact of Pay and Promotion on

Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Higher Education Institutes of Pakistan.

American Journal of Economics,2(4), 6-9. doi:10.5923/j.economics.20120001.02

Mihajlov, S., & Mihajlov, N. (2016). Comparing Public and Private Employees' Job

Satisfaction and Turnover Intention. MEST Journal,4(1), 75-86.

doi:10.12709/mest.04.04.01.08

Morrison, R. (2004). Informal Relationships in the Workplace: Associations with Job

Satisfaction, Organisational Commitment, and Turnover Intentions. New Zealand

Journal of Psychology, 33(3), 114-128. Retrieved from

http://www.psychology.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/NZJP-Vol333-2004-1-

Morrison.pdf

Muda, I., & Rafiki, A. (2014). Human Resources Development and Performance of

Government Provincial Employees: A Study in North Sumatera, Indonesia. In

Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 152-162. 2220-

6140. Retrieved from http://www.ifrnd.org/Research%20Papers/J6(2)7.pdf

Muguongo M., M., Muguna, A., & Muriithi, D. (2015). Effects of Compensation on Job

Satisfaction among Secondary School Teachers in Maara Sub - County of

Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. Journal of Human Resource Management, 3(6),

47-59. doi:10.11648/j.jhrm.20150306.11

Mustapha, N., & Zakaria, Z. (2013). The Effect of Promotion Opportunity in Influencing

Job Satisfaction among Academics in Higher Public Institutions in Malaysia.

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,3(3).

Retrieved March 9, 2017.

161
Nimalathasan, B. (2010). Job Satisfaction of Academic Professionals: A Comparative

Study between the Public and Private Universities in Bangladesh. Information

Management,12, 130-134. Retrieved March 9, 2017.

Odunlade, R.O., "Managing Employee Compensation and Benefits for Job Satisfaction in

Libraries and Information Centres in Nigeria" (2012). Library Philosophy and

Practice (e-journal). Paper 714. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/714

Oxford. (2016). Percentage [Def. 1]. In English Oxford Living Dictionaries. Retrieved

March 12, 2017, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/percentage

Parvin, M. M. & Kabir, M.M (2011). Factors Affecting Employee Job Satisfaction of

Pharmaceutical Sector. Australian Journal of Business and Management

Research, Vol.1 No.9, 113-123.

Philippines. (2014, November 14). Official Gazette. Retrieved March 9, 2017, from

http://www.gov.ph/2014/11/14/q-a-on-13th-month-pay/

Pugno, M., & Depedri, S. (2009). Job Performance and Job Satisfaction: An Integrated

Survey. Trento, Italy: University of Trento.

Rainey, H. G. (1979) Perceptions of Incentives in Business and Government:

Implications for civil service reform. Public Administration Review. 39, 440-448.

Ramos, N. P., MBA. (2014). Transformational Leadership and Employee Job

Satisfaction: The Case of Philippines Savings Bank Batangas Branches. Asia

Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(6), 6-14. Retrieved February 2,

2017.

162
Rayan, A., Wong, J. P., & Baas, J. P. (2015). Influence of Servant Leadership among

Government Employees in the Province of Romblon, Philippines. International

Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 2(12), 73-81. Retrieved

from https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ijhsse/v2-i12/11.pdf

Raziq, A., & Maulabakhsh, R. (2015). Impact of Working Environment on Job

Satisfaction. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 717-725. doi:10.1016/s2212-

5671(15)00524-9

Resheske, M. G. (2001). A Descriptive Study of Job Satisfaction and its Relationship with

Group Cohesion. Retrieved from University of Wisconsin-Stout website:

http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2001/2001resheskem.pdf

Salary. (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2017, from https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/salary

Schermerhorn, J. R., Osborn, R., & Hunt, J. G. (2005). Organizational behavior. New

York: Wiley

Solomon, E. (1986). Private and public sector managers: An empirical investigation of

job characteristics and organizational climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71,

247-259.

Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2001). Performance concepts and performance theory. In

Psychological management of individual performance. Retrieved from

http://ebme.uni-

giessen.de/wps/pgn/dl/down/open/ebme_de/e492d7b25184301eb974c5c8e85d658

4698f1b986c8046129e1af4bdcf605f793c07249e716d1774a7af94a53839c5cf/Perf

ormance_concepts_and_Performance_Theory.pdf

163
Sonnentag, S., Volmer, J., & Spychala, A. (2008). Job performance. In Sage handbook of

organizational behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 427-447). Retrieved from http://kops.uni-

konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/10386/sonnentag.volmer.spychala.2008

_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause and consequences.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause and consequences.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Retrieved from

http://books.google.com/books?id=nCkXMZjs0XcC&printsec.

Tessema, M. T., Ready, K. J., & Embaye, A. B. (2013). The Effects of Employee

Recognition, Pay, and Benefits on Job Satisfaction: Cross Country Evidence.

Journal of Business and Economics,4(1), 1-12. Retrieved March 12, 2017, from

http://www.academicstar.us

Tolentino, M. M. (2007). Job Satisfaction of SME Workers in Select Cities of Mindanao.

Philippine Journal of Labor and Industrial Relations, 27(1&2), 42-55. Retrieved

February 12, 2017.

Unutmaz, S. (2014). Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction of Employees in a Public

Institution (Unpublished master's thesis). Middle East Technical University.

Unzicker, T. L. (2012). A Study of the Job Satisfaction of Nebraska School

Superintendents (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1111&context=cehse

daddiss

164
Walpole, R. E. (2002). Introduction to Statistics (3rd ed.). Jurong, Singapore: Macmillan

Publishing Co., Inc.

Watson, A. M., Thompson, L. F., & Meade, A. W. (2007, April). Measurement

Invariance of the Job Satisfaction Survey Across Work Contexts.

Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). An effective events approach to job satisfaction.

In B.M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior

(Vol. 18, pp. 1-74). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Wigdor, A. K., & Green, B. F. (1991). The evaluation of alternative measures of job

performance. In Performance assessment for the workplace: volume ii (pp. 75-

126). Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/read/1898/chapter/5

Williams, J. (2004). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment, a Sloan Work and

Family Encyclopedia entry.

Work Environment. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.money-

zine.com/definitions/career-dictionary/work-environment/

Yaseen, A. (2013). Effect of Compensation Factors on Employee Satisfaction- A Study

of Doctors Dissatisfaction in Punjab. International Journal of Human Resource

Studies,3(1), 142-157. doi:10.5296/ijhrs.v3i1.3351

Zeb, A., Rehman, S. U., Saeed, G., & Ullah, H. (2016). A Study of the Relationship

between Reward and Recognition and employees Job Satisfaction: A Literature

Review. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences,7(2), 278-291. Retrieved March 10,

2017.

165
Appendix

166
Appendix A HRMDO Pictures

167
168
Appendix B Permission Letter

April 3, 2017

Alma P. Ravena
Department Head, HRMDO
Provincial Government of Iloilo

Dear Maam:

Business Research is a course offered at the University of the Philippines in the Visayas that requires
students in this course to conduct any research study of the students interest. I am currently a fifth
year B. S. in Accountancy student and is currently taking Business Research subject. In connection
with this, I would like to ask for your permission to allow us to conduct our research in your good
office. The objective of the said research study is to determine the factors affecting job satisfaction of
HRMDO employees. I, together with my group will conduct a survey to the most convenient time
that the employees in your department are available.

Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me through
cathcycordova@gmail.com or 09109634739.

Upon completion of the study, I undertake to provide you with a bound copy of the research
study.
Your permission to conduct this study will be greatly appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

CATHRYN CYRA I. CORDOVA


Researcher

169
Appendix C Research Questionnaire

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this survey measuring job satisfaction of the Human
Resource Management and Development Office (HRMDO) of the Iloilo Provincial
Capitol. Today, we will be gathering your insights and opinions regarding your job
satisfaction as an HR employee. This survey will only take 15-30 minutes to complete.
Rest assured that all answers you provide will be kept with strictest confidentiality.

PERSONAL PROFILE

Please tell us just a bit about yourself


Name
(optional):_____________________________________________________________
Sex
Female Male

Age (in years)


Below 20 31-40 51-60
20-30 41-50 Over 60

Marital Status
Single Married without Separated
children
Married with children Widowed

Highest Educational Attainment


High School Graduate Masters Degree
College Graduate Doctorate

Are you a PRC License Holder?


Yes No

If no, are you civil service eligible?


Yes No

170
SURVEY

Please take a few minutes to tell us about your level of agreement to the statements
below. Check the circle that corresponds best to your answer.

Tell us about your perception towards your job in the HRMDO.

1. I am proud to work in the HRMDO of Iloilo Provincial Capitol.


Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Neutral Agree Agree

2. I like the nature of my job.


Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
3. The goals and objectives of HRMDO do not contradict with my principles.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Neutral Agree
Agree
4. I sometimes feel my job is meaningless.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
5. I feel there is no opportunity for me to move to a better job within the department.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
6. I am not satisfied with the training that my job is giving me.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
7. I am satisfied with the compensation that I receive from my job.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
8. I think the organizational structure in my department is effective.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
9. I feel that my immediate supervisor does not deal with all employees fairly.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
10. I need to be friends with my colleagues in order for me to work efficiently with
them.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree

171
Now, please tell us about the work environment in your office.
1. I receive cooperation from co-workers if the situation requires it.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
2. There is a healthy work competition within the department.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
3. I can express my professional opinion with my colleagues and/or immediate
supervisor without fear.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
4. I prioritize applicants whom I know.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
5. Communication seems good within the department.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Neutral
Agree Agree
6. I feel that I do not know what is going on with the department.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
7. Each of us is provided with enough space to work effectively.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
8. I rarely hang out with my colleagues.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
9. The provincial government policies are not fairly administered in my department.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
10. Our office has good ventilation.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree

Next, please tell us what you think about the rewards and incentives
offered in your department.
1. My job gives me a chance to broaden my connections.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree

172
2. I feel I am not being paid a fair amount for the work I do.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
3. The benefits we receive are better than private organizations.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
4. The department does not provide sufficient and effective training courses to develop
employee performance.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Neutral Agree Agree
5. There is little chance for promotion on my job.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
6. The HRMDO recognizes outstanding employees.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral Agree Agree
7. I feel that the work I do is not appreciated.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree
8. The salaries provided by the provincial government do not meet my needs.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree
Agree
9. There are benefits we do not have which we should have.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral
Agree Agree
10. We are promoted based on our performance
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree

Were almost done. Tell us more about your job


What is your position in the HRMDO?
______________________________________________

How many years have you worked in the HRMDO? (rounded off to the nearest year)
Less than 3 8-12 16-20
3-7 13-15 Over 20
Gross Monthly Salary Range (in PhP)
Less than 15,000 25,001-35,000
15,000-25,000 More than 35,000

173
The Overall Rating of Job Satisfaction
How satisfied are you of your job in terms of the following factors?
Rate each term on a scale of 1 (not at all satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Work Culture

Relationship with
Work Culture
Co-workers
Work Design &
Relationship with
Organizational
Co-workers
Structure

Physical
Work Design &
Environment
Organizational

Structure
Physical
Policies
Environment
Policies
Opportunities
Opportunities
Benefits
Benefits
Salaries

Promotions
Salaries
Promotions
Recognition
Overall, I am satisfied with my job.
Recognition
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree

Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this survey. Your input is valued and
very much appreciated!

174

Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this survey. Your input is valued and
very much appreciated!
Appendix D Codebook

Codebook for Job Satisfaction Survey


Question Variable Name Variable Type Variable Label Value Value Label
Personal Profile
name of the respondent
NAME String (optional)
SEX sex of the respondent Missing
Numerical
(Dichotomous) 1 Female
2 Male
AGE_GRP Numerical age of respondent in years Missing
1 below 20
2 20-30
3 31-40
4 41-50
5 51-60
6 Over 60
marital status of
M_STAT Numerical respondents missing
1 single
2 married with children
married without
3 children
4 widowed
5 separated
HGST_EDU Numerical missing
highest education attained
by the respondent 1 high school graduate
2 college graduate
3 master's degree
4 doctorate
PRC_HLDR Numerical missing
Is the respondent a PRC
holder or not? 1 yes
0 no
NO_CSE Numerical missing
If no, is the respondent civil
service eligible? 1 yes
0 no
Respondents' position in
POSTN String HRDMO
TNUR Numerical missing
1 less than 3

175
number of years the
respondent had worked in
HRDMO 2 3 to 7
3 8 to 12
4 12 to 15
5 16 to 20
6 more than 20
SLRY Numerical missing
gross monthly peso salary
range of respondent 1 less than 15,000
2 15,000-25,000
3 25,001-35,000
4 more than 35,0000
Perception
1 PROUD Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "I am proud to
2 disagree
work in the HRMDO of
Iloilo Provincial Capitol." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
2 JB_NATURE Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly disagree
statement "I like the nature
of my job." 2 disagree
3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
3 GOAL_OBJ Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
statement "The goals and 1 strongly disagree
objectives of HRMDO do
2 disagree
not contradict with my
principles." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
4 MNGLESS Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly agree
statement "I sometimes
feel my job is meaningless." 2 agree
3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
5 NO_OPRTY Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree

176
statement "I feel there is no 2 agree
opportunity for me to move
to a better job within the 3 neutral
department."
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
6 TRNING Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "I am not
2 agree
satisfied with the training
that my job is giving me." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
7 CMPENSTN Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "I am satisfied
2 disagree
with the compensation that
I receive from my job." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
8 ORG_STRCT Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
statement "I think the 1 strongly disagree
organizational structure in
2 disagree
my department is
effective." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
9 SPERVSOR Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
statement "I feel that my 1 strongly agree
immediate supervisor does
2 agree
not deal with all employees
fairly." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
10 CLEAGUE Numerical missing
respondent's level of 1 strongly disagree
agreement to the
statement "I need to be 2 disagree
friends with my colleagues
3 neutral
in order for me to work
efficiently with them." 4 agree
5 strongly agree
Work Environment
1 COOPRATN Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly disagree
statement "I receive
cooperation from co- 2 disagree

177
workers if the situation
requires it." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
2 WRK_COMP Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "There is a
2 disagree
healthy work competition
within the department." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
3 PROF_OPI Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "I can express
my professional opinion 2 disagree
with my colleagues and/or
3 neutral
immediate supervisor
without fear." 4 agree
5 strongly agree
4 HIRING Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly agree
statement "I prioritize
applicants whom I know." 2 agree
3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
5 COMM Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "Communication
2 disagree
seems good within the
department." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
6 LOST Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "I feel that I do
2 agree
not know what is going on
with the department." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
7 WRK_SPCE Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "Each of us is
2 disagree
provided with enough
space to work effectively." 3 neutral

178
4 agree
5 strongly agree
8 HNG_OUT Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly agree
statement "I rarely hang
out with my colleagues." 2 agree
3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
9 UN_PLCS Numerical missing
respondent's level of 1 strongly agree
agreement to the
statement "The provincial 2 agree
government policies are
3 neutral
not fairly administered in
my department." 4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
10 VENTLATN Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
1 strongly disagree
statement "Our office has
good ventilation." 2 disagree
3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
Rewards and Incentives
1 CONNECT Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "My job gives
2 disagree
me a chance to broaden my
connections." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
2 PAY Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "I feel I am not
2 agree
being paid a fair amount for
the work I do." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
3 BET_BNFT Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "The benefits we
2 disagree
receive are better than
private organizations." 3 neutral
4 agree

179
5 strongly agree
4 TRNGCRSE Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "The 2 agree
department does not
provide sufficient and 3 neutral
effective training courses to
4 disagree
develop employee
performance." 5 strongly disagree
5 NO_PROMOTN Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "There is little
2 agree
chance for promotion on
my job." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
6 RECOG Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "The HRMDO
2 disagree
recognizes outstanding
employees." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
7 APPREC Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
statement "I feel that the 1 strongly agree
work I do is not
appreciated." 2 agree
3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
8 SALARIES Numerical respondent's level of missing
agreement to the
statement "The salaries 1 strongly agree
provided by the provincial
2 agree
government do not meet
my needs." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree
9 BNFT_EXT Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly agree
statement "There are
2 agree
benefits we do not have
which we should have." 3 neutral
4 disagree
5 strongly disagree

180
10 PRFRMNCE Numerical missing
respondent's level of
agreement to the 1 strongly disagree
statement "We are
2 disagree
promoted based on our
performance." 3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree
Overall Rating of Job Satisfaction
CULTURE Numerical missing
respondent's level
1 extremely dissatisfied
satisfaction on with the
culture in HRDMO 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
RELTNSHP Numerical missing

respondent's level of 1 extremely dissatisfied


satisfaction on his/her
2 very dissatisfied
relationships with
colleagues and supervisors 3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
WD_OS Numerical missing
respondent's level of
satisfaction on the 1 extremely dissatisfied
department's work design
2 very dissatisfied
and organizaitonal
structure 3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied

181
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
PHY_ENVI Numerical repondent's level of missing
satisfaction with the
1 extremely dissatisfied
HRDMO physical
environment 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
PLCS_SAT Numerical missing
respondent's level of
1 extremely dissatisfied
satisfaction regarding
HRDMO's policies 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
OPRTY Numerical missing
respondent's level of
1 extremely dissatisfied
satisfaction on the
opportunities available 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied

182
10 extremely satisfied
BNFT_SAT Numerical missing
respondent's level of
1 extremely dissatisfied
satisfaction on the benefits
received 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
SALARIES Numerical missing
respondent's level of
1 extremely dissatisfied
satisfaction on the salaries
received 2 very dissatisfied
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
PRMTN_SAT Numerical missing

respondent's level of 1 extremely dissatisfied


satisfaction with regards to
2 very dissatisfied
the promotion process of
the department 3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
RECOG Numerical missing
respondent's level of
satisfaction regarding the 1 extremely dissatisfied

183
recogntion of his/her work 2 very dissatisfied
performance
3 mostly dissatisfied
moderately
4 dissatisfied
5 slightly dissatisfied
6 slightly satisfied
7 moderately satisfied
8 mostly satisfied
9 very satisfied
10 extremely satisfied
Overall Satisfaction
STISFCTN Numerical respondent's overall level 0 misisng
of satisfaction with his/her
job 1 strongly disagree
2 agree
3 neutral
4 agree
5 strongly agree

184
Appendix E Frequency Distribution Tables

Appendix E.1 Perception

Frequency Distribution (N=15)


Statement
SD D N A SA N/A
1. I am proud to work in HR department at
1 0 1 5 8 0
Iloilo Provincial Capitol.
2. I like the nature of my job 1 0 1 7 6 0
3. The goals and objectives of HR department
1 0 2 6 6 0
do not contradict with my principles.
4. I sometimes feel my job is meaningless. 0 1 2 7 5 0
5. I think the organizational structure in my
1 0 1 7 6 0
department is effective.
6. I feel that my immediate supervisor does
1 0 2 6 6 1
not deal with all employees fairly.
7. I need to be friends with my colleagues in
0 1 2 7 5 0
order for me to work efficiently with them
8. I feel there is no opportunity for me to
1 0 5 4 4 1
move to a better job within the department.
9. I am not satisfied with the training that my
1 2 3 3 5 1
job is giving me.
10. I am satisfied with the compensation I
0 1 0 9 5 0
received from my job.

SD Strongly Disagree; D Disagree; N Neutral;


A Agree; SA Strongly Agree; N/A No Answer

185
Appendix E.2 Work Environment

Frequency Distribution (N=15)


Statement
SD D N A SA N/A
1. I receive cooperation from
0 6 0 5 3 1
co-workers if the situation requires it.
2. There is a healthy work competition within
1 0 5 6 3 0
the department.
3. I can express my professional opinion with
my colleagues and/or immediate supervisor 0 0 1 9 5 0
without fear.
4. I prioritize applicants whom I know. 2 6 4 3 0 0
5. Communication seems good within the
0 0 2 10 3 0
department.
6. I feel that I do not know what is going on
5 5 2 3 0 0
with the department.
7. Each of us is provided with enough space to
1 2 6 5 1 0
work effectively.
8. I rarely hang out with my colleagues. 2 5 4 3 0 1
9. The provincial government policies are not
1 10 3 1 0 0
fairly administered in my department.
10. Our office has good ventilation. 1 4 5 3 0 2

SD Strongly Disagree; D Disagree; N Neutral;


A Agree; SA Strongly Agree; N/A No Answer

186
Appendix E.3 Rewards and Incentives

Frequency Distribution
Statement
SD D N A SA N/A
1. My job gives me a chance to broaden
0 0 2 8 4 1
my connections.
2. I feel I am not being paid a fair
5 6 4 0 0 0
amount for the work I do.
3. The benefits we receive are better
0 0 5 7 3 0
than private organizations.
4. The department does not provide
sufficient and effective training
1 7 1 4 0 2
courses to develop employee
performance.
5. There is little chance for promotion
1 5 4 3 0 2
on my job.
6. The HRMDO recognizes outstanding
0 0 4 8 1 2
employees.
7. I feel that the work I do is not
2 5 2 4 0 2
appreciated.
8. The salaries provided by the
provincial government do not meet 2 7 2 3 0 1
my needs.
9. There are benefits we do not have
0 5 3 7 0 0
which we should have.
10. We are promoted based on our
0 3 2 7 1 2
performance.

SD Strongly Disagree; D Disagree; N Neutral;


A Agree; SA Strongly Agree; N/A No Answer

187
Appendix F Overall Level of Satisfaction Based on Ten Factors

Level Of Satisfaction
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wa
Factors Extremely Very Mostly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Mostly Extremely
Missing Data
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Satisfied Mean
F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
Work Culture 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 2 17% 2 17% 2 17% 4 33% 0 0% 1 8% 6.83
Relationship with Co-
3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 2 17% 1 8% 0 0% 2 17% 3 25% 1 8% 2 17% 6.92
workers
Work Design and
Organizational 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 3 25% 2 17% 1 8% 2 17% 2 17% 1 8% 6.83
Structure
Physical Environment 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 2 17% 0 0% 1 8% 2 17% 3 25% 1 8% 2 17% 7.00
Policies 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 3 25% 0 0% 2 17% 3 25% 2 17% 1 8% 7.08
Opportunities 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 25% 1 8% 1 8% 1 8% 3 25% 2 17% 1 8% 6.83
Benefits 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 0 0% 2 17% 5 42% 1 8% 3 25% 8.17
Salaries 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 0 0% 2 17% 3 25% 2 17% 4 33% 8.42
Promotions 3 20% 0 0% 1 8% 0 0% 2 17% 0 0% 2 17% 3 25% 1 8% 1 8% 2 17% 6.67
Recognition 3 20% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 2 17% 0 0% 2 17% 2 17% 1 8% 2 17% 2 17% 6.92
Overall Weighted Average Mean: 7.17

188
Appendix G Independent T-test

Appendix G.1 Independent T-test Grouped by Sex

Perception Female Male


Mean 3.901429 3.9
Variance 0.234941 0.61
Observations 10 5
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 6
t Stat 0.003745
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.498567
t Critical one-tail 1.94318
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.997133
t Critical two-tail 2.446912

Work Environment Female Male


Mean 3.6075 3.72
Variance 0.306674 0.197
Observations 10 5
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 10
t Stat -0.42501
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.339916
t Critical one-tail 1.812461
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.679833
t Critical two-tail 2.228139

Rewards and Incentives Female Male


Mean 3.566667 3.68
Variance 0.369657 0.137
Observations 10 5
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 12
t Stat -0.44671
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.331518
t Critical one-tail 1.782288
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.663036
t Critical two-tail 2.178813

189
Appendix G.2 Independent T-test Grouped by Civil Service Eligibility

Perception Yes No
Mean 3.85119 4.1
Variance 0.267809 0.73
Observations 12 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 2
t Stat -0.48274
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.338477
t Critical one-tail 2.919986
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.676955
t Critical two-tail 4.302653

Work Environment Yes No


Mean 3.622917 3.7333333
Variance 0.221302 0.5633333
Observations 12 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 2
t Stat -0.24315
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.415278
t Critical one-tail 2.919986
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.830555
t Critical two-tail 4.302653

Rewards and Incentives Yes No


Mean 3.538889 3.8666667
Variance 0.264837 0.3733333
Observations 12 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
Df 3
t Stat -0.85633
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.227384
t Critical one-tail 2.353363
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.454768
t Critical two-tail 3.182446

190
Appendix H One Way Anova

Appendix H.1 One Way Anova Grouped by Age

Perception
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
1.263966 5 0.252793 0.691424319 0.642716 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 3.29051 9 0.365612

Total 4.554476 14
Work Environment
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.651865 5 0.130373 0.399320063 0.837688 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 2.938385 9 0.326487

Total 3.59025 14
Rewards and Incentives
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
1.602636 5 0.320527 1.246060073 0.363991 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 2.315093 9 0.257233

Total 3.917728 14

191
Appendix H.2 One Way Anova Grouped by Marital Status

Perception
Source of
SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between Groups 0.568821 4 0.142205 0.356792963 0.833713 3.47805
Within Groups 3.985655 10 0.398565

Total 4.554476 14
Work Environment
Source of
SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between Groups 0.461995 4 0.115499 0.369211238 0.825337 3.47805
Within Groups 3.128255 10 0.312826

Total 3.59025 14
Rewards and Incentives
Source of
SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between Groups 0.086926 4 0.021731 0.056728275 0.993042 3.47805
Within Groups 3.830802 10 0.38308

Total 3.917728 14

192
Appendix H.3 One Way Anova Grouped by Highest Educational Attainment

Perception
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
1.065991 2 0.532996 1.833446 0.201925 3.885294
Groups
Within
3.488485 12 0.290707
Groups

Total 4.554476 14
Work Environment
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.148432 2 0.074216 0.258756 0.77621 3.885294
Groups
Within
3.441818 12 0.286818
Groups

Total 3.59025 14
Rewards and Incentives
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.226034 2 0.113017 0.367366 0.700082 3.885294
Groups
Within
3.691695 12 0.307641
Groups

Total 3.917728 14

193
Appendix H.4 One Way Anova Grouped by Position

Perception
Source of Variation SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 2.787195 7 0.398171 1.202315 0.43437 4.875872
Within Groups 1.65585 5 0.33117

Total 4.443046 12
Work Environment
Source of Variation SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 2.787195 7 0.398171 1.202315 0.43437 4.875872
Within Groups 1.65585 5 0.33117

Total 4.443046 12
Rewards and Incentives
Source of Variation SS Df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 2.034601 7 0.290657 0.847458 0.594578 4.875872
Within Groups 1.714877 5 0.342975

Total 3.749478 12

194
Appendix H.5 One Way Anova Grouped by Gross Salary Range

Perception
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 0.90468 3 0.30156 0.908862 0.468015 3.587434
Within Groups 3.649796 11 0.3318

Total 4.554476 14
Work Environment
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 1.042698 3 0.347566 1.500745 0.268631 3.587434
Within Groups 2.547552 11 0.231596

Total 3.59025 14
Rewards and Incentives
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 1.002481 3 0.33416 1.260876 0.335319 3.587434
Within Groups 2.915247 11 0.265022

Total 3.917728 14

195
Appendix H.6 One Way Anova Grouped by Tenure

Perception
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.720218 5 0.144044 0.338108 0.877466 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 3.834259 9 0.426029

Total 4.554476 14
Work Environment
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.15075 5 0.03015 0.078892 0.993949 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 3.4395 9 0.382167

Total 3.59025 14
Rewards and Incentives
Source of
SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between
0.568593 5 0.113719 0.305591 0.897563 3.481659
Groups
Within Groups 3.349136 9 0.372126

Total 3.917728 14

196
Appendix I SPSS Pearson r Correlation Testing Results

Appendix I.1 Sex and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.2 Marital Status and Job Satisfaction

197
Appendix I.3 Age and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.4 Highest Educational Attainment and Job Satisfaction

198
Appendix I.5 Job Position and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.6 PRC Licensed and Job Satisfaction

199
Appendix I.7 Civil Service Eligibility and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.8 Gross Monthly Salary and Job Satisfaction

200
Appendix I.9 Tenure and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.10 Perception and Job Satisfaction

201
Appendix I.11 Work Environment and Job Satisfaction

Appendix I.12 Sex and Job Satisfaction

202