determinant of job satisfaction in public and private ...€¦ · public sector namely state bank...

International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied Sciences

www.ijetmas.com January 2015, Volume 3 Issue 1, ISSN 2349-4476

70 Dr. Prasanta Kumar Padhy, Jasmine Bhuyan

Determinant Of Job Satisfaction In Public And Private Sector:

An Empirical Study

Dr. Prasanta Kumar Padhy1, Jasmine Bhuyan 2

1 Professor in Business Administration,

Berhampur University- 760007, India.

2 Research scholar (UGC-NET (JRF))

Dept- Business administration

Berhampur University

Abstract The present study surveys both the sectors in most of the aspects of analysis. As the current

findings show, jobholders vary regarding the extent of ambivalence experienced with respect to their

attitude toward their job. The current findings also open up opportunities for further research regarding

the consequences of job ambivalence. This paper has been designed with a view to investigate the

satisfaction level of employees of Public Sector and Private Sector Banks, to find out the effect of

various aspects of job satisfaction and difference in the level of job satisfaction between the employees

of Public Sector Banks and Private Sector Banks. Sampling used in this research is simple random

sampling. The survey is conducted on employees of Public Sector Bank and Private Sector Bank. The

target audience was managers, officers and clerks. The diversity of the study is that it involves Bankers

of all age groups and career levels. The study covers four Commercial Banks in all, taking two from

Public Sector namely State Bank of India and Andhra Bank and two from Private Sector, HDFC and

Axis Bank. One hundred and forty employees of selected Banks have been approached to ascertain their

views on job satisfaction. The results indicate that significant differences exists between employees of

Public Sector and Private Sector Banks regarding various aspects of job satisfaction, pays, supervision,

security, acknowledgement. But they are significant in case of the aspects, secure, promotion, relation

with co-workers, employee’s empowerment, supervision, and nature of job.

keywords: : Job Satisfaction, Public Sector Bank, Private Sector Bank, Bank Employees, and

Satisfaction Level, Job Satisfaction Aspects

1. Introduction

Science has worked for years to find out what keeps humans happy and satisfied. Happy people

made a happy world (Agnihotri, 2012). And happiness cannot be bought. It is a feeling that is triggered

by the ‘happy hormones or endorphins which are “natural hormones that your brain releases when you

are relaxed. It is well known that happy workers are assets of an organization. One thing that all

happiness experts agree on is that happiness is not a destination. Rather, it is the result of a range of

activities and feelings.

Happiness triggered from job is termed as job satisfaction. It can also describe as a set of

favorable or unfavorable feelings with which employees view about their work. Job satisfaction

describes how content an individual is with his or her job. A workforce with high job satisfaction leads

to an improvement in work quality and productivity, and leads to satisfied loyal customers. It is a

worker's sense of achievement and success and is generally perceived to be directly linked to

productivity as well as to personal wellbeing. The happier people are happy workers. Job satisfaction

http://www.ijetmas.com/




can be influenced by a variety of factors, e.g., the quality of one's relationship with their supervisor, the

quality of the physical environment in which they work, degree of fulfillment in their work, etc.. Job

satisfaction further implies enthusiasm and happiness with one's work. The most common way of

measurement is the use of rating scales where employees report their reactions to their jobs. Questions

related to rate of pay, work responsibilities, variety of tasks, promotional opportunities the work itself

and co-workers. For the organization, job satisfaction of its workers means a work force that is

motivated and committed to high quality performance. Increased productivity—the quantity and quality

of output per hour worked—seems to be a byproduct of job satisfaction. Satisfaction levels increase

when an employee knows that their issues are being addressed. There is a direct link between employee,

job satisfaction and financial results. The more satisfied your employees are the more motivated and

committed. They will be towards the organization’s success. In this Research paper a comparison of Job

satisfaction between Private and Govt. sector has been made and tried to find out the basic reasons of

dissatisfaction in job.

BANKING SECTOR IN INDIA:

After 1969, commercial banks are broadly classified into nationalized or public sector banks and

private sector banks. The State Bank of India and its associate banks along with another 20 banks are

public sector banks. The private sector banks include a small number of Indian scheduled banks, which

have not been nationalized, and branches of foreign exchange banks. After 1991, the banking scenario

has been changed completely. The impact of globalization and privatization has affected work culture of

both, public sector and private sector banks. These are witness sing a fundamental shift in working

attitude and work style due to open economy and increased competition.

We came a long way from the days of protectionism of Indian banking industries. The entry of

private sector banks and foreign banks has forced public sector banks to adopt a new customer-centric

work environment. A comparison between public and private sector banks would make a significant

contribution to the existing body of knowledge on job satisfaction. This discussion is timely. In India,

the old concept of public sector economy has been completely changed. Since job satisfaction is

considered an important aspect of work culture, public sector and private sector variations seem to

affect the job satisfaction of these organizations. Since public-private sector background is an important

factor in shaping the work culture of an organization, the work culture also seems to have its root in the

culture from which it is generated. Therefore, job satisfaction is likely to be affected by public private

sector differences.

A natural assumption can be made that work culture of public-private sector banks would be

different because such banks have different cultural roots. It has been observed that the work culture of

public sector banks was based on the social economy concept, in which profitability was secondary.

After nationalization, public sector banks used to serve social welfare in terms of social banking

through special employment and poverty alleviation programs. Despite many adverse criticisms and

comments, the Indian government had persisted in using bank funds to finance various social sector

schemes for employment generation and poverty alleviation. On the other hand, private sector banks

work towards profitability. There is a basic work culture difference between public and private sector

banks due to their different objectives. Although after 1991, the working style of public sector banks

has been changing, but the previous impact of social banking policy on work culture of public sector

banks cannot be ignored. Being an important aspect of work culture, job satisfaction level of these

banks should also be different. However, the arguments above are assumptions and there is a need to





verify them. The present study is designed to examine the specific problem whether job satisfaction of

the employees working in public and private sector banks is different.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The major objective of this Paper is to examine parameters of job satisfaction. This was pursued

through a literature review of the more popular theories and models related to job satisfaction. Included

in the review are summaries of Maslow's and Alderfer's need hierarchy theories, achievement

motivation theory, Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory, expectancy theory, job characteristics

theories, equity theory, and studies relating to the clustering of facet satisfactions. Vroom (1964),

need/value fulfillment theory, states that there is negative relationship between individual needs and the

extent to which the job supplies these needs. On the other hand, Porter and Lawler (1968) compare the

influences on job satisfaction in two groups of internal and external satisfactory factors. According to

them, factors such as feeling of independence, feeling of achievement, feeling of victory, self-esteem,

feeling of control and other similar feeling obtained from work are the internal satisfactory factors

whereas external satisfactory factors are not directly related to work itself such as good relationships

with colleagues, high salary, good welfare and utilities. There is abundant literature, especially in social

psychology, which attempts to relate job satisfaction with different qualitative aspects of the job, such

as. Autonomy (Spector, 1997, p. 31), stress (idem, p. 42), usefulness of the work (Manglione and

Quinn, 1975), etc. Schneider et al. (1975) define job satisfaction “as a personal evaluation of

conditions present in the job or outcomes that arise as a result of having job”. Lock (1976) defines job

satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job

experience” These studies have usually found an important degree of correlation between

characteristics of the job and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is simply defined as doing a job one

enjoys, doing it well, and being suitably rewarded for one's efforts. Schneider et al. (1975) define job

satisfaction “as a personal evaluation of conditions present in the job or outcomes that arise as a result

of having job”. Lock (1976) defines job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state

resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience”. Furthermore, it is the degree to which

employees enjoy their jobs (McCloskey and McCain, 1987). And also, it is possible to see a number of

theories developed to understand its nature in literature so, the influences on job satisfaction can be also

divided into work related and employee-related factors (Glisson and Durick, 1988). Carr and

Kazanowsky (1994) showed that inadequate salary was the major factor of employees’ dissatisfaction.

Kerego and Muthupha (1997) describe job satisfaction as feelings of employees about the

environmental factors and organization and people positively influence one another to achieve better

results. He argues that employees in the organization are the role model and because of them

organizations become more successful. Kam, (1998) . Additionally, administrative styles, professional

status and pay are known as important factors influencing job satisfaction recent studies showed that to

increase their employees’ job satisfaction participative (democratic) management style was mostly

preferred by today’s managers (Dogan and İbicioglu, 2004, Knoop, 1991). In other words, it is an

effective response to a job that consequences from the comparison of perceived outcomes with those

that are desired shortly, job satisfaction describes the feelings, attitudes or preferences of individuals

regarding work (Chen, 2008).

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANK Literature indicates that the performance of the private and foreign banks have been stronger

than that of public sector banks (IBA, 2008). A recent study (Selvaraj, 2009) reveals that private





banks are more successful vis-à-vis public sector banks in terms of implementing Total Quality

Management (TQM) initiatives, such as human resource management, customer focus, and top

management commitment. Furthermore, public and private sector banks differ with respect to their

compensation structures, working environments, technology, growth opportunities, and job security

provided to the employees. Public sector banks structure compensation in a way such that there are

lower pay differentials between the employees, long-term tenure is rewarded and there is a high base

pay, whereas in the private sector banks, there are larger pay differentials, fewer rewards for tenure,

and pay for performance (D'Souza, 2002). However, private sector banks do not provide job security

and would lay off their employees in cases of poor performance or adverse market conditions (Jha,

Gupta & Yadav, 2008; Singh & Kohli, 2006; Thakur, 2007). Bajpai and Srivastava (2004) studied

the satisfaction levels of employees of two public sector and two private sector banks in India. The

results indicated that layoff threats, quick turnover, less welfare schemes, and less scope for vertical

growth increased job dissatisfaction. In contrast, secure job environment, welfare policies, and job

stability increased the degree of job satisfaction. In their study, Kumudha and Abraham (2008)

compared 100 managers from 13 public and private sector banks and found that the programs related

to self-development, information about job openings, opportunities to learn new skills and retirement

preparation programs greatly influence the feelings of career satisfaction.

Public and private sector banks also differ with respect to their background and work culture. It has

been observed that the work culture of public sector banks was based on the concept of socio-

economic responsibility, in which profitability is secondary. On the other hand, private sector banks

work towards profitability. Because these differences between the sectors hold an important factor in

shaping the work culture of an organisation, it needs to be explored how they would likely affect job

satisfaction. For the success and sustained growth of Indian banks, it is imperative to create a pool of

committed employees by determining whether they are job satisfied. Their satisfaction would affect

their performance and commitment, which would eventually influence the banks' growth and

profitability.

2. Objectives/Purpose of the study

Primary Objective:-

The main objective of the study is to find the determinant of job satisfaction level of

employees in public and private banks.

Secondary Objectives

To have a depth knowledge of the topic

To assess the extent of job satisfaction of employees in a Public Sector Bank (SBI,Andhra

bank) and a Private Sector (HDFC, Axis bank).

To compare the level of job satisfaction of the Public Sector and Private Sector Bank

employees.

To define the relationships between job satisfaction and the potential variables of pay,

promotion, security, job involvement, potential of rest-day/off-day, relations with co-workers,

health facilities, relations with supervisor, training and education facilities, autonomy,

physical facilities, reconciliation role of supervisor.

To suggest strategies for better job satisfaction of bank employees on the basis of research findings

3. Methodology The present study has been designed with a view to investigate the satisfaction level of Public

Sector Bank employees and Private Sector Bank employees, to find out the effect of various aspects





(pay and fringe benefits, relation with co-workers supervision, employees empowerment, nature of job,

employees participation, performance appraisal and training and development, etc.) on job satisfaction.

The study covers four Commercial Banks in all, taking two from Public Sector namely State Bank of

India and Andhra Bank and two from Private Sector, HDFC and Axis Bank. One hundred forty

employees of selected Banks located at various parts of southern Orissa have been approached to

ascertain their views on job satisfaction. Primary data has been collected from one hundred ten

respondents of different age group, education level, income and designation. The coverage is adequate

keeping in view the nature of the study and limited resources at the disposal of the respondents.

Sampling used in this research is simple random sampling. The survey conducted on employees of

Public Sector Bank and Private Sector Bank. The target audience was managers, officers and clerks.

The diversity of the study is that it involves Bankers of all age groups and career levels. A semi-

structured questionnaire has been used with a number of variables related to job satisfaction. The

following five point likert scaling technique has been used for obtaining response on each question:

Analysis of determinants of job satisfaction and criteria for coping patterns of employees is the primary

focus of this research. Given the nature of the data and findings of the study, the statistical tools used

were percentage method, discriminate analysis.

POPULATION

The population selected for this particular study is employees of public & private sector of different

service sectors.

SAMPLING

The sampling population of this research includes 140 employees of public & private sector of different

service sectors. This research followed the random sampling method representative population.

TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

The primary data for present study is collected by using a structured questionnaire, while the researcher

has referred to various books, journals and periodicals as the vital source of secondary data.

DATA ANALYSIS

Analysis of data has been made in this study by employing descriptive statistics. The

collected data has been fed into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-Version 19.0) for

computation. To report demographic data, the descriptive statistics included frequency measures

such as percentage, mean and standard deviation

The final sample consisted of 140 employees. According to the data, 70.3%respondents are

male and 29.7% are female. In terms of age, the members are generally dominated by the age in 33-

41 age range (50.0% respondents). The employees between age group 25-32 is 20.3% and employees

between the age group more than42 is 29.7%.40-1%respondents are with a work experience less

than 7 years .20.3%respondents are with a work experience ranging from 7 years to 9years.39.6%

respondents are having work experience more than 10 years.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

Reliability of the questionnaire was validated with computation of Cronbach alpha (Cronbach,

1951). For all 11 items, Cronbach alpha was 0.819. According to Hair et al. (2007), this coefficient

(0.819) indicates good reliability as it exceeds minimum acceptance level of 0.7. Further, Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy has proven good (0.762) which proves the

construct validity. Face and content validity was judged through internal check and discussion with

the experts. Exploratory factor analysis was carried out through SPSS version 15 to purify and

reduce the data into meaningful form with principal component analysis along with orthogonal

rotation procedure of Varimax for summarizing the original information with minimum factors and





optimal coverage. As the study was explorative in nature the statements with Eigen values less than

1.0 were ignored for the subsequent analysis (Bagozzi & Phillips, 1991).

DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS

Discriminant analysis is done in order to find out which independent variables are relatively better in

discriminating job satisfaction in public and private sector. Various determinants such as salary,

promotion, security, appreciation etc are taken as indicator of job satisfaction. These determinants

affect a potential job seeker or existing employees overall job perception or job satisfaction.

Note: In the spss data sheet, public sector employee is coded as 1, whereas private sector is coded as

2

Table -1 indicates that the mean score for job security for the public sector is 4.37,whereas the

private sector, it is 3.5.all other determinants of job satisfaction show comparatively similar mean

score only in case of job security it shows significant difference.

Table-2: tests of equality of group means

Table 1 :Group Statistics

Group Mean Std. Deviation

Valid N (list wise)

Unweighted Weighted

1 Sal 3.69 .726 78 78.000

Promo 3.68 .830 78 78.000

Secure 4.37 .584 78 78.000

workhour 3.54 .893 78 78.000

authority 3.45 .847 78 78.000

Counsel 2.69 .827 78 78.000

Share 4.22 .714 78 78.000

Appre 3.45 1.015 78 78.000

phywork 3.29 1.070 78 78.000

decision 2.63 .839 78 78.000

Acknow 3.60 .493 78 78.000

2 Sal 3.82 .666 62 62.000

Promo 3.69 .822 62 62.000

Secure 3.45 .645 62 62.000

workhour 3.13 1.032 62 62.000

authority 3.23 .638 62 62.000

Counsel 2.71 .837 62 62.000

Share 4.23 .734 62 62.000

Appre 3.45 1.019 62 62.000

phywork 3.29 1.077 62 62.000

decision 2.66 .848 62 62.000

Acknow 3.60 .495 62 62.000





One way ANOVA was carried out to find out significant difference between the mean of two groups,

where each of the predicted determinants is treated as independent variable and the group (public or

private) is treated as dependent variable. It is observed from the table -2 that the significant

difference in the mean exists for the job security, for which p value is 0.000, which is less than

assumed level of significance. All other determinants does not seen to be any significant difference

as the p value is greater than 0.005

Table-3:Pooled Within-Groups Matrices

Sal

Prom

o

secur

e

workho

ur

authorit

y

couns

el

shar

e

appr

e

phywor

k

decisio

n

ackno

w

Sal 1.00

0

.588 -.137 .188 .221 .329 -

.247

-

.064

-.026 -.168 -.272

promo .588 1.000 -.016 .439 .443 .536 -

.258

.059 .089 .044 .078

secure -

.137

-.016 1.00

0

.022 .135 -.113 .055 -

.148

-.151 -.123 .092

Workho

ur

.188 .439 .022 1.000 .172 -.043 -

.272

-

.056

.164 -.249 -.339

Authorit

y

.221 .443 .135 .172 1.000 .490 .345 .477 .378 .302 .358

counsel .329 .536 -.113 -.043 .490 1.000 .112 .445 .368 .393 .269

Share -

.247

-.258 .055 -.272 .345 .112 1.00

0

.622 .326 .393 .516

Appre -

.064

.059 -.148 -.056 .477 .445 .622 1.00

0

.594 .680 .508

phywork -

.026

.089 -.151 .164 .378 .368 .326 .694 1.000 .494 .361

decision -

.168

.044 -.123 -.249 .302 .393 .393 .680 .494 1.000 .401

Wilks'

Lambda F df1 df2 Sig.

Sal .991 1.196 1 138 .276

Promo 1.000 .010 1 138 .920

Secure .638 78.264 1 138 .000

workhour .956 6.324 1 138 .013

authority .979 2.956 1 138 .088

Counsel 1.000 .015 1 138 .902

Share 1.000 .004 1 138 .949

Appre 1.000 .000 1 138 .987

phywork 1.000 .001 1 138 .980

decision 1.000 .053 1 138 .818

Acknow 1.000 .005 1 138 .945





Table-3:Pooled Within-Groups Matrices

Sal

Prom

o

secur

e

workho

ur

authorit

y

couns

el

shar

e

appr

e

phywor

k

decisio

n

ackno

w

Sal 1.00

0

.588 -.137 .188 .221 .329 -

.247

-

.064

-.026 -.168 -.272

promo .588 1.000 -.016 .439 .443 .536 -

.258

.059 .089 .044 .078

secure -

.137

-.016 1.00

0

.022 .135 -.113 .055 -

.148

-.151 -.123 .092

Workho

ur

.188 .439 .022 1.000 .172 -.043 -

.272

-

.056

.164 -.249 -.339

Authorit

y

.221 .443 .135 .172 1.000 .490 .345 .477 .378 .302 .358

counsel .329 .536 -.113 -.043 .490 1.000 .112 .445 .368 .393 .269

Share -

.247

-.258 .055 -.272 .345 .112 1.00

0

.622 .326 .393 .516

Appre -

.064

.059 -.148 -.056 .477 .445 .622 1.00

0

.594 .680 .508

phywork -

.026

.089 -.151 .164 .378 .368 .326 .694 1.000 .494 .361

decision -

.168

.044 -.123 -.249 .302 .393 .393 .680 .494 1.000 .401

acknow -

.272

.079 .092 -.339 .358 .269 .516 .508 .361 .401 1.000

Table-3 indicates that the correlation between any pair of variables does not exceed 0.75, therefore,

there does not seem to be any serious problem of multicolliniary.

Table-4:Eigenvalues

Function Eigenvalue % of Variance Cumulative %

Canonical

Correlation

1 1.033a 100.0 100.0 .713

a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions were used in the analysis.

Table-4 indicates the eigenvalue for the above estimated discrinminant function is 1.033.further the

value of canonical correlation is 0.713, which mean 50.8[(0.713)2] per cent of the variance in the

discriminating model between groups due to change in the variable or determinant

Table-5:Wilks' Lambda

Test of

Function(s)

Wilks'

Lambda Chi-square df Sig.

1 .594 68.960 11 .000





Table -5 indicates the value of wilk’s lambda is 0.594.the statistical test of significance for wilk’s

lambda was carried out with the chi-squared transformed statistic, which is 68.960 with 11 degrees

of freedom and a p value of 0.000

Table -6 gives the standardized discriminate function coefficient; it indicates that the job security is

the most important characteristics, which discriminates between job satisfaction of public and private

sector.

The structural coefficients obtained from structural matrix presented in table-7 also show that the

variable job security is the most important characteristics in discriminating between two groups

having discriminating score0.911

The value of the function at group centroid given in table-8 can be used for discriminating between

two groups

4. Result/Findings

It has been observed that degree of job satisfaction of private sector banks was found to be

comparatively slightly lower than in public sector banks. The main reasons for job dissatisfaction in

Private sector bank were job security, salary not at par with experience, not much value or credit was

given for the tasks accomplished and monotonous nature of job. Employees of private sector banks

perceive that their jobs are not secure. In fact, the effect of an open economy, globalization, and

privatization can be seen more easily in private sector banks than in public sector banks. In private

sector banks, the environment in highly competitive and job security is based on performance and

various other factors. Though it is true that this environment provides a challenging job profile, it

also creates a less secure environment. Industriousness, dedication, devotion, and commitment are

not enough to secure a job. The high level of performance of an individual is also based on various

factors. These may be market situation, existence of competitor, and government policies. Where

these factors are adverse in nature, performance automatically suffers. During this period, employees

feel insecure, this reduces overall job satisfaction.

It was found that even people with much lesser experience had salaries at par with those who

were highly experienced. On further probing it was found that the bank promoted increments based

Table-6:Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function

Coefficients

Function

1

Sal .162

Promo -.524

Secure .974

workhour .516

authority -.020

counsel .247

Share -.272

Appre .301

phywork -.240

decision .151

acknow .132





on merit rather than number of years of service. In public sector banks, welfare policies are clearly

defined and legally enforced. Retirement, pensions, gratuity, and other related welfare policies are

effectively executed. So there is no problem with social security. In private sector banks, welfare

activities are neither well planned nor well executed. Employee turnover is very high and job

security is very low.

5. Discussion

STRATIGIES FOR IMPROVING LEVEL OF JOB SATISFACTION IN BOTH THE BANKS

Training and development programmes must be provided to the employees at regular

intervals to update their knowledge and skills.

Salaries to the employees must be given in accordance to their experience in the job.

table-7:Structure Matrix

Function

1

Secure .911

Workhour .259

Authority .177

Sal -.113

Decision -.024

Counsel -.013

Promo -.010

Acknow .007

Share -.007

Phywork .003

Appre -.002 Pooled within-groups correlations between discriminating

variables and standardized canonical discriminant functions .

Table-8:Functions at Group Centroids

group

Function

1

1 .731

2 -.920

Unstandardized canonical discriminant functions evaluated at group means





The kind of work given to employees should be according to his/her abilities and knowledge

and their efforts for doing a particular task must be valued by giving appreciations and

rewards to the employees for their hard work so that their level of motivation increases.

Along with healthy environment, healthy relationship should also be maintained in an

organization.

The bank should provide certain benefits to their employees, so that they can perform well to

achieve organizational goals.

The job should be interesting enough, so that it must create enthusiasm among the employees.

Enough freedom must be given to the employees to take important decisions

CONCLUSION

The result of the study indicates that layoff threats, quick turnover, less welfare schemes, and less

scope for vertical growth increase job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, secure job environment,

welfare policies, and job stability increase the degree of job satisfaction. Efficient human resource

management and maintaining higher job satisfaction level in banks determine not only the

performance of the bank but also affect the growth and performance of the entire economy. So, for

the success of banking, it is very important to manage human resource effectively and to find

whether its employees are satisfied or not. Only if they are satisfied, they will work with

commitment and project a positive image of the organization

References

1. Avtgis T, (2000). "Unwillingness to communicate and satisfaction in organizational

relationships". Psychological Reports, 87(1), 82-84.

2. Feldman D & H Arnold, (1985). "Personality types and career patterns: Some empirical

evidence on Holland's model". Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, 192-210.

3. Foels R, J Driskell, B Mullen, and E Salas, (2000). "The effect of democratic leadership on

group member satisfaction: An Interaction. Small Group Research, 31(6), 676-701.

4. Holland J, (1985). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personality and

Work Environments (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice Hall.

5. Johnson G & W Johnson, (2000). "Perceived over qualification and dimensions of job

satisfaction: A longitudinal analysis". Journal of Psychology, 134(5), 537-555.

6. . Jonge J, F Dollord, C Dormann, & P Le Blance, (2000). "The demand-control model:

specific demands, specific control and well-defined groups". International Journal of Stress

Management, 7(4), 269-287.

7. Kallenberg I & A Mastekaasa, (2001). "Satisfied movers, committed stayers: The impact of

job mobility on work attitudes in Norway". Work and Occupations, 28(2), 183-209.

8. Katzell R, D Thompson, & R Guzzo, (1992). "How job satisfaction and job performance are

and are not linked", in CJ Cranny, PC Smith, and EF Stone (eds), Job Satisfaction. New York:

Lexington Books, 1992, 195-217.





9. Lall Madhurima,(2008). “A comparative evaluation of job-satisfaction in private-sector and

public sector bank employees”, Samadhan: a peer reviewed journal, Vol. 11, Jan-June 2008,

pp 3 24

10. Blum L Milton & Naylor C James. Industrial psychology: its theoretical and social

foundation . New Delhi: CBS publisher. 1st edition. pp 364-380

11. Chandan S Jit. (2005). Oranizational behavior. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House pvt.Ltd.

3rd edition.pp 83-85

12. Gupta CB. (2003).Human resource management. New Delhi: Sultan Chand and Sons.pp 786-

796

13. Gupta SP. (2000).Statistical methods. New Delhi: Sultan Chand and Publication 29th

edition.pp 316-319

14. Singh Harpreet & Kaur Harneet. (2008). Concepts and practices of research methodology.

New Delhi: Kalyani publisher. 2nd edition

15. Robbins P Stephen,Judge A Timothy & Sanghi Seema.(2005). Oranizational behavior. New

Delhi: Prentice Hall Publication. 12th edition.pp 89-103

16. Schermerhon K John, Hunt G James Jr. & Osborn N Richard. (1998). Basic organizational

behavior: John and Sons, Inc. Newyork.2nd edition.pp 188-190

17. Sing Nirmal. (2005). Motivation: theory and practical application. New Delhi: Deep and

Deep Publication.pp 765-780

18. Tripathi PC (1997).Human resource development: theories and correlates of job satisfaction.

New Delhi Chand Sons.pp 37 -39


determinant of job satisfaction in public and private ...€¦ · public sector namely state bank...

Documents