Endogenous factors leading to job satisfaction: Literature review and a

proposal of a conceptual framework

Master Pilar Garcia T., is Regular Associated Professor of University of Piura, Perú

Doctor Ricardo Mateo D., is Accredited Professor of University of Navarra, Spain

Email address:

pilar.garcia@udep.pe

rmateo@unav.es

1

Endogenous factors leading to job satisfaction: Literature review and a

proposal of a conceptual framework

Garcia P., Mateo R.

Abstract

Purpose: This research contributes to the study of endogenous factors as drivers of job

satisfaction of workers within organizations and its relationship to employee engagement.

Methodology: Literature review based largely on publications of the ISI Web of

Knowledge and Web of Science from 2000 to 2013.

Findings: It has been shown that certain endogenous factors leading to job satisfaction are

conditioned by personal factors. In addition, there is a close relationship between employee

engagement and job satisfaction, although it is not yet entirely clear.

Research limitations: This theoretical study requires to be validated quantitatively.

Practical implications: The study provides important information that companies can

implement to improve job satisfaction and engagement of employees.

Social implications: It is important to provide work environments much more focused on

people and so contribute to their happiness at work.

Originality: Understanding personal factors as moderator of the endogenous factors

leading to job satisfaction and employee engagement.

Keywords: job satisfaction, happiness at work, factors, determinants and employee

engagement

1. Introduction

2

It is important to observe and understand the work of the people for its relevant importance

in everyday tasks and the future of the organization. In these times of high performance and

technology in which the person has, more than ever, a major role, our responsibility is to set

the necessary environment in order to make the work compatible with the development and

personal enrichment, and contribute to the wellbeing of the organization.

Several studies have been focused on identifying those attributes that make employees

choose to work in a company, and not another one, depending on the value it brings

personally and professionally. In this context, the present review of the literature shows the

interest in understanding the human dimension of job satisfaction not only in the

terminology used —job satisfaction, wellbeing, happiness at work and thriving— but in the

much more comprehensive analysis of the factors favoring the satisfaction. A more general

view of the concept understanding the person, the work environment and necessary

incentives to foster an environment where the individual can find happiness is proposed.

The study of these concepts provides a reference framework for the relationship between

job satisfaction and employee engagement.

2. Research methodology

Based on the search of papers with the keywords: job satisfaction, happiness at work,

factors, determinants and employee engagement from ISI Web of Knowledge and Web of

Science within the years 2000 to 2013(may), were obtained 2 172 scientific articles. While

polishing the search, these categories were selected: management, business ethics,

industrial relations, corporate finance, public administration, and taking into account the

areas of economics, business and public administration, 361 articles focused on the

business field were obtained.

3

After that, the issues were reviewed, starting with the most quoted and then the most recent.

Abstracts were read, specifically looking for articles that explored the endogenous factors

in business organizations. Finally, 49 articles were selected because they met the above-

mentioned criteria.

3. Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework is aimed to see the various concepts related to job satisfaction,

in order to study the evolution of the concept and the needs of people at work. It is

important to observe and understand the work of people because its strategic importance in

the everyday tasks and the future of the organization.

3.1. From job satisfaction to thriving

Locke (1970) defines job satisfaction as the pleasant state or positive emotional state,

saying that satisfaction is measured by the subjective perception of one's own person: this is

the attitude of the employee, based on the beliefs and values that have on the work carried

out. On their behalf, Iii Lawler and Porter (1967) also argue that job satisfaction is an effect

of the efficient work and not its cause. In addition, it postulates that people compare their

benefits and results with other colleagues of the same position.

A comprehensive model proposed Hulin, Roznowski et al. (1985) who describe job

satisfaction as a function of four factors or psychological processes: contributions to the

work, the framework used to evaluate the results of the work, the subjective utility of

contributions and results of the work itself.

In 1985, Weinert joined the interest of the study of job satisfaction from a psychological

perspective and suggested that this affects positively on satisfaction in everyday life,

emphasizing the psychological aspects as important as the affective and cognitive reactions

4

and how they raise levels of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Weinert, 1985). He

proposed that job satisfaction is made by reactions and feelings that members the

organization have at their work.

Personality also fulfills an important role in front of satisfaction. Judge, Heller and Mount

(2002) show five personality characteristics and their influence on satisfaction:

extraversion, openness to experience, responsibility, kindness and emotional instability or

neuroticism. The result of the research showed a direct relationship between personality

traits and the level of satisfaction of people at work. Behaviorally, emotionally stable,

extroverted and responsible employees seem to be happier at work because they are more

likely to achieve effective results when doing it (Judge, Heller et al., 2002).

(Hamermesh, 2001) studied the impact of job satisfaction in the United States and Germany

and found that satisfaction was higher for workers with a high level of income and was

lower for those with low incomes. These studies were the subject of many subsequent

investigations about the impact of wages on job satisfaction.

Ellickson and Logsdon (2002) account for various factors that promote job satisfaction,

differentiating them into two areas: environmental background and personal characteristics.

Environmental backgrounds are, for example, promotional opportunities, salary, benefits,

adequate work teams and resources, physical work environment, safety, appropriate

training, adequate distribution of the workload, good relations with the immediate

supervisor, performance evaluation and bonding; while personal characteristics refer to the

attributes such as gender and age.

5

Another approach to job satisfaction would be from the study of well-being, understood as

the overall quality of the experiences of an employee. In this sense, we speak of a

psychological well-being, which refers to the subjective experiences of a person, a physical,

health-related and social well-being, which refers to the relational experiences (Grant,

Christianson et al., 2007). This is perhaps the most comprehensive and ambitious vision to

aim the well-being of the person in his life.

Another way to approach the concept is happiness at work. Fisher (2010) defines it as a

personal state that is influenced by events and environmental circumstances surrounding

the person, personality traits, interaction between the person and the situations experienced

and the will to act that inspires happiness. Fisher understands happiness at work at three

levels: transitory, personal and group. The transitory level focuses on the real time and

happy events at work, mood and emotions that the individual may feel because of them

(flow). On a personal level, they are studied specific aspects of people at work, their

commitment, humor in the workplace, prosperity, positive feelings. Meanwhile, at the

group level the happiness of the team is described as a collective moral, the affective tone

that the group shows, good humor, commitment and group satisfaction are described.

Finally, Spreitzer, Porath and Gibson (2012) published their research on the concept of

thriving, which involves developing employees who are not only satisfied and productive,

but making them participate in creating the future of the company. Both the joint

experience of vitality, and learning at work, and report high levels of prosperity in their

personal life indicate thriving.

Thus, we have seen the various concepts related to job satisfaction, representing the

evolution of the concept to meet the needs of people at work and in their personal life.

6

(figure 1) The responsibility of business is to pay attention to this reality and social

demand.

Figure 1. Authors on job satisfaction according to their orientation

3.2. Job satisfaction and employee engagement

In 1990, Kahn described the engagement as the use of members of the organization of their

own work roles: in the engagement, people use and express themselves physically,

cognitively, emotionally and mentally during the development of their roles (Kahn 1990).

The engagement is defined as a positive relationship of oneself with his work, characterized

by a sense of meaning, competence and impact. (Macey and Schneider,2008) propose a

framework for study to understand employee engagement as trait, state and behavior; even

7

Hamermesh (2001)Ellickson and Lodge (2002)

Grant, Christianson et al (2007)C.Fisher (2010)

Spreitzer, Porath and Gibson (2012)

Factores endógenos

Lawler and Porter (1967)Locke (1970)

Hulin ,Roznowski et al (1985)Weinert (1985)

Ellickson and Logsdom (2002)Judge, Heller and Mount (2002)Grant, Christianson et al (2007)

C.Fisher (2010)Spreitzer,Porath and Gibson (2012)

La persona

more, show that job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement and feelings

of empowerment have great relevance in the study of employee engagement. The

engagement could be a result of the conditions in the workplace, as well as personal traits,

and both interact.

There are many similarities between employee engagement and job satisfaction, since both

concepts are developed in the person and facing certain factors mostly related to work. For

example, the proposal of job satisfaction by Weinert (1985) states that satisfaction is the set

of reactions, sensations and feelings of a member of the organization because of their work.

One could argue that there exists a direct relationship between the two phenomena, since

both concepts are developed when the person is doing the work at the same time.

“The most popular theory and measure of engagement in the literature is the Utrecht Work

Engagement Scale (UWES; Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002). In this measure, engagement

is conceptualized as a positive, fulfilling state at work that is defined by vigor, dedication,

and absorption. Vigor is the abundance of energy such as mental resilience and persistence

despite difficulties (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Dedication, the second aspect of

engagement, is exemplified by a sense of significance, enthusiasm, challenge, pride, and

inspiration (Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002). Last, absorption is characterized by intense

concentration and engrossment with one’s work. When an individual is absorbed, time

passes by quickly, and it is difficult to disconnect from one’s work. (Alarcon and Lyons,

2011).

The employee engagement refers to the time when the person performs, doing his various

tasks, it does not contemplate attitudes or perceptions about the work he does, though, it

could be said that these situations affect the employee commitment to an intimate level

8

(Shuck, Ghosh et al., 2013). In addition, when the employee engagement is studied, it must

be considered that the commitment involves a decision that the employee performs to

invest their resources and efforts in his work. Moreover, it is in this point that coincides

with the proposal of Kahn (2010), who states that the employees choose to engage when

they feel they can make a difference, change the mindset, add value or be part of something

bigger than they are. Also, «the term “employee engagement” is highlighting the “person”

and the act of being engaged rather than a relationship with the organization» (Claxton,

2013, p.1).

The study made by Yeh (2013) shows that there is evidence that workers engaged in work

are more willing to experience job satisfaction: highly committed employees had high

levels of job satisfaction. It seems that the employee engagement is previous and promotes

job satisfaction. Thus, the people involved have a disposition to feel satisfaction with the

work done, and it will be important to identify what endogenous factors favor the

commitment of employees.

4. Endogenous factors influencing job satisfaction

Work variety. There are direct relations with the satisfaction between the work conditions

and the professional development perspectives (Roelen, Koopmans et al., 2008). The

variety of work refers to the various tasks and requirements that represent the

implementation of different skills and talents by the worker. Direct relationships to

satisfaction with working conditions and professional development prospects can be

appreciated (Roelen, Koopmans et al., 2008).

9

The variety of the work can be conceptualized in different ways, depending on the

hierarchical position of the employee in the company. In managerial workers, job variety is

meant as a component of the complexity of the tasks because it involves a challenge,

requiring employees or managers who put their diverse skills to succeed. However, the

operating worker tends to develop more routine and monotonous jobs he has specific orders

guiding him; therefore he has less room to make changes in his work and therefore this is

less varied. (Hu, Kaplan et al., 2010).

The work itself. The work itself is a good predictor of the job satisfaction (Spagnoli,

Caetano et al., 2012). However, other academics argue that there are variables that can

change this factor as antiquity in the position. A more seniority in office, less important is

the work itself, apparently people end up bored. (Katz, 1978)

The determinant design of the work is important, particularly having sufficient resources

and enjoying a high level of autonomy at work and suitable salary (Garrido et al., 2005;

Wood, Van Veldhoven et al., 2012). Thus, job satisfaction with the work itself implies

confidence in their skills and abilities for managers, and the opportunity for professional

development for employees. The demands of work itself, the relationship with the boss,

social support and working conditions influence in job satisfaction. (Schyns and Croon,

2006).

Personal goals and organizational commitment. This is a well-known factor but little

studied in recent years. The study of Maier and Brunstein (2001) about job satisfaction of

new workers shows a relationship between commitment to the achievement of personal

objectives and the facilities to achieve them by the company in the first month of work,

when there is a perception of support from chiefs and a partial control of their work. This,

10

influence in the commitment and job satisfaction. New workers try to assess if they have

possibility of personal development since the first months of employment. The level of

support and delegation from heads directly influences the alignment of personal goals.

Relationship with co-workers. Social support provided by the co-workers has two forms

of expression: one through affection, also known as emotional support, and the other by

instrumental support, understood as providing material support given by peers (Ducharme

and Martin, 2000). It can be said that workers feel satisfied when they receive adequate

emotional support: positive relationship between workers and the adequate resources or

assistance they receive from the company or their co-workers, which might be called

instrumental support. (Ducharme and Martin, 2000).

Work team. A work team, whose members have good interpersonal relationships, allows

acting with dynamism, its influence is positive on job satisfaction and affects the

organizational productivity. Job satisfaction in organizations structuring their tasks from

teams will be greater than in those organizations that do so individually.

Work teams when they are newly created, tend to avoid conflicts and reinforce the group

cooperation, since they require security to develop and have not yet learned to well manage

the threats that may cause the disagreements among members (Aritzeta and Ayestarán,

2002). As team members are learning to work together, a tendency to integrate the

competitive behavior with cooperative behavior will be observed. Once those teams have

been united and achieved a good performance, departmental pride is generated; it refers to

the degree of satisfaction feeling the members to belong to a team. This departmental pride

positively influences in job satisfaction team (Ellickson and Logsdon, 2002).

11

The group satisfaction would be related to the individual level of satisfaction within the

group, the quality of group processes and group performance. All this will predict the

viability of the group (Mason and Griffin, 2002).

Management style. Various management strategies that promote job satisfaction were

identified, such as autonomy, confidence, empowerment, work and family balance,

supervisor evaluation and thriving building.

Autonomy. The study of Griffin, Patterson et al. (2001), finds that effective leaders, who

provide feedback on the functions and positively enhance the experience of autonomy,

determine satisfaction in a positive way.

Confidence. Confidence in the chiefs is a highly positive factor for job satisfaction and the

influence they exert on their workers (Goris, Bobby et al., 2003). The scholars describe the

confidence within organizations such as mutual security that no party in a transaction will

take advantage of the vulnerabilities of the other. Leaders who manage to influence their

workers have earned their confidence (Braun, Peus et al., 2013).

Empowerment. The level of delegation that chiefs have in the organization, influence to the

working environment. It has a strong and positive influence on empowerment, which

positively affects job satisfaction. The meaning or sense of the delegated task and the

ability or aptitude with which workers have to successfully fulfill their tasks, are dominant

and important factors for empowerment (Carless, 2004).

Work and family balance. When workers feel that the company understands the obligations

and family responsibilities, they develop a greater job satisfaction, showing a good balance

between work and family (Hsu, 2011). Employees appreciate the family responsible

12

policies, such as reduced hours, work at home, nursery and part-time work (Saltzstein,

Yuan et al., 2001).

Supervisor evaluation. The actions of the bosses can unbalance the level of well-being;

therefore, they must be attentive to evaluate the impact of their own actions on the welfare

of their workers and must be motivated and encouraged to evaluate the impact of their

actions on well-being (Grant, Christianson et al., 2007).

Thriving. A thriving task force is one where employees are not only satisfied and

productive, but “involved in creating the future of the company”. The study of Spreitzer,

Porath and Gibson (2012) found that workers who fulfill their description of “prospering”

showed a higher percentage of general performance at the job and less fatigue than their

peers. They were also more committed to the organization and job satisfaction (Spreitzer,

Porath et al., 2012).

Involvement. Participation in decisions has a positive effect on job satisfaction when

organizational policies are very representative (Witt, Andrews et al., 2000). Workers

understand in a better way the situation of the company, so the uncertainty is reduced;

improving the understanding of some issues and the sharing of information involves

sharing power and control. On their behalf, the leadership style of managers positively

affects satisfaction, promoting the participation of workers in the growth plans of the

company (Soonhee, 2002). Job satisfaction is positively related to high involvement

practices, such as suggestion programs, teams and quality circles (Mohr and Zoghi, 2008).

Work ethics. The work ethics program refer to the set of values that companies promote

among its employees and affect job satisfaction, especially through the organizational

13

climate and promotes organizational commitment (Schwepker Jr., 2001). Living ethics in

the organization is a task encouraged by the managers (Grojean, Resick et al., 2004). Job

satisfaction is connected positively by the presence of codes of ethics, code of ethics’

communication, training programs in this field and social corporate responsibility, because

all this demonstrates the emphasis of living ethically in business (Vitell and Singhapakdi,

2008; Valentine and Fleischman, 2008).

Distributive justice and procedural justice are directly related to daily job satisfaction (Loi,

Yang et al., 2009). In addition, ethical values perceived in the organization and creativity

groups are positively associated with job satisfaction. (Valentine, Godkin et al., 2011).

However, ethical codes do not bring job satisfaction; actions of managers do it. (Wang and

Hsieh, 2012).

Salary. The salary represents a motivating effect on workers, but provides a temporary

satisfaction, depending on the motivational quality of each individual. Today it can be seen

that the performance-related pay, has a motivating effect, specifically it has a positive

influence on job satisfaction when it rewards the extra effort at work (McCausland,

Pouliakas et al., 2005). On the other hand, not necessarily the highest paid professionals

find satisfaction in their work; on the contrary, those who earn less and work in

volunteerism and social responsibility are more satisfied (Wyld, 2011). However, other

workers with great skill, risk-tolerant, prefer payment of salary according to performance

(Cornelissen, Heywood et al., 2011).

Fringe benefits. Fringe benefits play a fundamental role in job satisfaction, but studies

show that it is necessary to know very well the reality of workers to give them the benefit

that meets their specific needs. Flextime, pensions, paternity license are highly appreciated

14

among workers, unionized or not. The childcare (kindergarten) is not valued by unmarried

or by those whose spouse does not work. Generally, workers with children (Benjamin,

2010) best value fringe benefits.

Human Resources Department. Proper management of human resources and the level of

personal adaptation are positively related to job satisfaction and to the identification with

the company (Stevens, Oddou et al., 2006). Workers value lifelong learning, since it is

understood that the organization invests in it because it relies on the qualities of the

employee and expects a return by improving the work. It is a commitment of trust in

people. In addition, a more highly skilled labor will be better equipped to meet the rapid

change in technology, tastes and organizations, which are a characteristic in modern

economies (Petrescu and Simmons, 2008).

(Georgellis and Lange, 2007), shows how job satisfaction is different between genders.

Man prefer most trainee, and women value flexible hours, as they feel the responsibility of

family and children care.

Unions. A study of Canadian workers shows that there is a negative relationship between

unionism and job satisfaction; but this relationship disappears when adequate control of

working conditions applies (Renaud, 2002). In this sense, it is not crucial that unionization

affects satisfaction, but rather this is considered by bosses care as regards working

conditions. It is expected that unionized workers, because of their negotiations, show some

appreciation for their economic achievements and security. (Hammer and Avgar, 2005).

If the work condition is good and more labor and syndical experience is gained, more

satisfaction is evidenced (Artz, 2012). However, due to other factors such as job contents,

15

salary, work environment, they do not necessarily feel satisfied at work, because they yearn

for better labor opportunities as those nonunionized. In short, it is not enough for the job

satisfaction to have salary, benefits and security provided by unions (Hammer and Avgar,

2005). The authors also identified certain personality traits that predispose union members

feel less satisfied with their jobs and join the union as others. If the work situation is good

and more labor and union experience is gained, a greater satisfaction is evidenced (Artz,

2012).

5. Discussion

After the study and analysis of this group of factors we call endogenous to the work

environment, we observed that these are moderated by personal factors as long as the

general policies adopted by organizations do not cause the same impact on job satisfaction

of each employee. The differences between people are a reality to take into account; they

can be grouped into objective and subjective traits: the former refers to externally

observable characteristics such as gender, age, marital status, etc., while the latter have a

less obvious character and a more psychological and social component, such as personality

traits, attitudes, emotions, etc.

Considering the subjective aspects of each worker, Hulin, Roznowski et al. (1985) highlight

the personal assessment, the result of their experiences, contributions, environment and

personal aspirations, as a powerful aspect that defines the level of satisfaction. This

confirms the initial assumption of Locke stating that job satisfaction is a subjective

function, although its reference measure is not only the individual, but also the surrounding

comparison. It would interesting to study this relationship according gender and age.

16

Moreover, the contribution of Judge, Heller et al. (2002) helps to understand the important

role of personality traits in job satisfaction. Therefore, we must consider that the person in

its context and with its particular traits decisively contributes to the endogenous factors and

job satisfaction.

Self-control, motivation, personal values, combined with the evaluation criteria and

personality traits can lead a person, even with all the best working conditions, not to be

satisfied. On the contrary, others in adverse conditions but with a high level of self-

motivation can find satisfaction with the work done. This personal reality cannot be ignored

and close managers have the ability to know this aspect of their workers and act

accordingly, understanding the motivations of their staff.

We can forget that exist endogenous and exogenous factors, and both influence to people,

and depend on it, the person will be satisfied or not. So, is important to understand this

dynamic. Besides, the person in general also seem to influence the above factors and this

relationship should be studied further. (Figure 2)

Figure 2. Job satisfaction conceptual model

17

The person

Endogenous factors

Exógenous factors

Job Satisfaction

Within the group of endogenous factors presented, it appears that is important to pay

attention to the way them affects to people. Maybe a holistic vision about the satisfaction of

employees, but the relationship with bosses and colleagues are very important.

Within personal goals, the organization, through their heads, assumes a great challenge to

maintain personal goals of their employees aligned with those of the company, promoting

organizational commitment. Performance evaluation would be a measurement tool.

However, deepening this topic is an additional issue.

Support from colleagues is another major factor and should be seen not only as an

instrumental but also as an emotional support (Ducharme and Martin, 2000). When this

relationship is favored, the organization achieves the formation of integrated and motivated

work teams; they get good results for the company. This contributes to develop a sense of

belonging with joy and pride for the team, which leads to commitment.

Finally, is needed to develop new ways to provide to employees, the opportunity to reach a

good level of satisfaction at work, paying attention to the psychological traits, emotional

states, and the relationship with endogenous and exogenous factors.

Given the relationship with commitment, seems to be further study on the relationship with

job satisfaction and well understood as maintain a happy and prosperous person committed

or, as suggested Spreitzer, Porath and Gibson.

This brings us to think about the need to understand the reality of each of our employees to

define actions and policies that fit their needs.

6. Conclusions

18

Based on the results of the study and the observed endogenous factors, these questions

remain: what is the role to be played by the manager to promote the job satisfaction of their

employees? What management skills must develop to achieve it? What other concepts

about job satisfaction should be cared? Now we see that the employee engagement is very

important if we want to build thriving in business.

We can indicate that managers should ensure challenging and varied work environments to

meet the expectations of workers. One way is paying attention to the 12 factors discussed

above and, especially, knowing their workers. To encourage the engagement, it has been

determined that the work itself, the ethics at work, to encourage participation and

understand what the personal goals of their workers are, engagement and job satisfaction

can be promoted.

Considering that, chiefs manage many of these factors, a working relationship based on

knowledge and confidence will boost the impact that they have on the job satisfaction of

their employees. One of the core competencies of a leader is the communication to know

their workers and then generate confidence through his exemplary action.

Leaders must understand that their actions can unbalance the level of satisfaction and,

therefore, have to be attentive to measure the impact of their actions on the welfare of their

workers but, above all, should be encouraged to evaluate the impact of their actions on

well-being (Grant, Christianson et al., 2007). This leads us to ask whether the organizations

consider that evaluation and monitoring of the boss is a similar or more important priority

than that of the worker, by the level of influence. Is it more important to measure the level

of job satisfaction of workers, or the performance of managers, since they are factors that

influence on the satisfaction of their employees?

19

Researches in the field of satisfaction deepened on working conditions, the role of the chief,

the worker psychology, but a need to understand the nature of the human being and the

interpersonal relationship in his workplace, is seen, facing the challenges of the labor

situation now. However, another important aspect to be investigated lies in the personal

assessment of endogenous factors. This issue deserves additional studies. How does the

personal component in job satisfaction concern in view of the influence of endogenous

stimulus?

There is a relation between the engagement and job satisfaction; we can conclude on the

need to study deeper this relationship, because studying job satisfaction as the unique

concept in relation with the person, is not enough to understand the complex interaction of

employees into the job.

A company with a humanistic vision is concerned of endogenous and exogenous factors,

but especially of the welfare of the person in all its dimensions and will design

organizational practices that actively respond to this reality.

References

Alarcon, G. M. and J. B. Lyons (2011). "The Relationship of Engagement and Job Satisfaction in Working Samples." Journal of Psychology 145(5): 463-480.

Aritzeta, A. and S. Ayestarán (2002). Utilidad de los equipos de trabajo para incrementar la participación, autogestión, interdependencia, satisfacción e integración de conductas cooperativas y competitivas / Aitor Aritzeta, Sabino Ayestarán, Valencia : Red CIRIEC, 2002.

Artz, B. (2012). "DOES THE IMPACT OF UNION EXPERIENCE ON JOB SATISFACTION DIFFER BY GENDER?" Industrial & Labor Relations Review 65(2): 225-243.

20

Benjamin, A. (2010). "Fringe benefits and job satisfaction." International Journal of Manpower 31(6): 626-644.

Braun, S., et al. (2013). "Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust." The Leadership Quarterly 24(1): 270-283.

Carless, S. A. (2004). "Does Psychological Empowerment Mediate the Relationship between Psychological Climate and Job Satisfaction?" Journal of Business and Psychology 18(4): 405-425.

Claxton, J. (2013). Gaugin Engagement. UFHRD Conference 2013- Brighton 2013.

Cornelissen, T., et al. (2011). "Performance pay, risk attitudes and job satisfaction." Labour Economics 18(2): 229-239.

Ducharme, L. J. and J. K. Martin (2000). "Unrewarding Work, Coworker Support, and Job Satisfaction." Work and Occupations 27(2): 223-243.

Ellickson, M. C. and K. Logsdon (2002). "Determinants of Job Satisfaction of Municipal Government Employees." Public Personnel Management 31(3): 343.

Fisher, C. D. (2010). "Happiness at Work C.D. Fisher Happiness at Work." International Journal of Management Reviews 12(4): 384-412.

SGarrido, M. J., et al. (2005). "Determinants of sales manager job satisfaction. An

analysis of Spanish industrial firms." International Journal of Human Resource Management 16(10): 1934-1954.

Georgellis, Y. and T. Lange (2007). "Participation in continuous, on-the-job training and the impact on job satisfaction: longitudinal evidence from the German labour market." International Journal of Human Resource Management 18(6): 969-985.

Goris, J. R., et al. (2003). "Effects of Trust in Superiors and Influence of Superiors on the Association between Individual-Job Congruence and Job Performance/Satisfaction." Journal of Business and Psychology 17(3): 327-343.

Grant, A. M., et al. (2007). "Happiness, Health, or Relationships? Managerial Practices and Employee Well-Being Tradeoffs." Academy of Management Perspectives 21(3): 51-63.

21

Griffin, M. A., et al. (2001). "Job Satisfaction and Teamwork: The Role of Supervisor Support." Journal of Organizational Behavior 22(5): 537-550.

Grojean, M. W., et al. (2004). "Leaders, Values, and Organizational Climate: Examining Leadership Strategies for Establishing an Organizational Climate regarding Ethics." Journal of Business Ethics 55(3): 223-241.

Hamermesh, D. S. (2001). "The changing distribution of job satisfaction." Journal of Human Resources 36(1): 1-30.

Hammer, T. H. and A. Avgar (2005). "The Impact of Unions on Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, and Turnover." Journal of Labor Research 26(2): 241-266.

Hsu, Y. R. (2011). "Work-family conflict and job satisfaction in stressful working environments The moderating roles of perceived supervisor support and internal locus of control." International Journal of Manpower 32(2): 233-248.

Hu, X., et al. (2010). "An examination of blue- versus white-collar workers’ conceptualizations of job satisfaction facets." Journal of Vocational Behavior 76(2): 317-325.

Hulin, C. L., et al. (1985). "Alternative opportunities and withdrawal decisions: Empirical and theoretical discrepancies and an integration." Psychological Bulletin 97(2): 233-250.

Judge, T. A., et al. (2002). "Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis." Journal of Applied Psychology 87(3): 530-541.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). "PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITIONS OF PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT AND DISENGAGEMENT AT WORK." Academy of Management Journal 33(4): 692-724.

KATZ, R. 1978. Job Longevity as a Situational Factor in Job Satisfaction. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 204-223.

Lawler III, E. E. and L. W. Porter (1967). "The Effect of Performance on Job Satisfaction." Industrial Relations 7(1): 20-28.

Locke, E. A. (1970). "Job satisfaction and job performance: A theoretical analysis." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 5(5): 484-500.

22

Loi, R., (2009). "Four-factor justice and daily job satisfaction: A multilevel investigation." Journal of Applied Psychology 94(3): 770-781.

Macey, W. H. and B. Schneider (2008). "The Meaning of Employee Engagement." Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice 1(1): 3-30.

Maier, G. W. and J. C. Brunstein (2001). "The Role of Personal Work Goals in Newcomers' Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: A Longitudinal Analysis." Journal of Applied Psychology 86(5): 1034-1042.

Mason, C. M. and M. A. Griffin (2002). "Group task satisfaction - Applying the construct of job satisfaction to groups." Small Group Research 33(3): 271-312.

McCausland, W. D., et al. (2005). "Some are punished and some are rewarded: A study of the impact of performance pay on job satisfaction." International Journal of Manpower 26(7/8): 636-659.

Mohr, R. D. and C. Zoghi (2008). "HIGH-INVOLVEMENT WORK DESIGN AND JOB SATISFACTION." Industrial & Labor Relations Review 61(3): 275-296.

Petrescu, A. I. and R. Simmons (2008). "Human resource management practices and workers' job satisfaction." International Journal of Manpower 29(7): 651-667.

Renaud, S. (2002). "Rethinking the union membership/job satisfaction relationship - Some empirical evidence in Canada." International Journal of Manpower 23(2): 137-150.

Roelen, C. A. M., et al. (2008). "Which work factors determine job satisfaction?" Work 30(4): 433-439.

Saltzstein, A. L., et al. (2001). "Work-Family Balance and Job Satisfaction: The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies on Attitudes of Federal Government Employees." Public Administration Review 61(4): 452.

Schwepker Jr, C. H. (2001). "Ethical climate's relationship to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in the salesforce." Journal of Business Research 54(1): 39-52.

Schyns, B. and M. A. Croon (2006). "A model of task demands, social structure, and leader-member exchange and their relationship to job satisfaction." International Journal of Human Resource Management 17(4): 602-615.

23

Shuck, B., et al. (2013). "The Jingle Jangle of Employee Engagement: Further Exploration of the Emerging Construct and Implications for Workplace Learning and Performance." Human Resource Development Review 12(1): 11-35.

Soonhee, K. (2002). "Participative Management and Job Satisfaction: Lessons for Management Leadership." Public Administration Review 62(2): 231.

Spagnoli, P., et al. (2012). "Satisfaction with job aspects: Do patterns change over time?" Journal of Business Research 65(5): 609-616.

Spreitzer, G., et al. (2012). "Toward human sustainability: How to enable more thriving at work." Organizational Dynamics 41(2): 155-162.

Stevens, M. J., et al. (2006). "HR factors affecting repatriate job satisfaction and job attachment for Japanese managers." International Journal of Human Resource Management 17(5): 831-841.

Valentine, S. and G. Fleischman (2008). "Ethics Programs, Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and Job Satisfaction." Journal of Business Ethics 77(2): 159-172.

Valentine, S., et al. (2011). "Corporate Ethical Values, Group Creativity, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention: The Impact of Work Context on Work Response." Journal of Business Ethics 98(3): 353-372.

Vitell, S. J. and A. Singhapakdi (2008). "The Role of Ethics Institutionalization in Influencing Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Esprit de Corps." Journal of Business Ethics 81(2): 343-353.

Wang, Y.-D. and H.-H. Hsieh (2012). "Toward a Better Understanding of the Link Between Ethical Climate and Job Satisfaction: A Multilevel Analysis." Journal of Business Ethics 105(4): 535-545.

Weinert, A. B. (1985). Manual de psicología de la organización : la conducta humana en las organizaciones. Barcelona, Herder.

Witt, L. A., et al. (2000). "The Role of Participation in Decision-Making in the Organizational Politics-Job Satisfaction Relationship." Human Relations 53(3): 341-358.

24

Wood, S., et al. (2012). "Enriched job design, high involvement management and organizational performance: The mediating roles of job satisfaction and well-being." Human Relations 65(4): 419-445.

Wyld, D. C. (2011). "Does More Money Buy More Happiness on the Job?" Academy of Management Perspectives 25(1): 101-103.

Yeh, C. M. (2013). "Tourism Involvement, Work Engagement and Job Satisfaction among Frontline hotel employees." Annals of Tourism Research 42(0): 214-239.

25