Summary
In their article “Values, Rewards, and Work Conditions as Factors in Job Satisfaction among Men and Women” published in 1987 in The Sociological Quarterly, Janet L. Bokemeier, and William B. Lacy address the issue of increasing the staff’s performance quality by considering the factors that allow increasing the employees’ engagement rates. According to the authors, job satisfaction is a crucial characteristic that must not be overlooked by an organization, and that can be affected by a variety of factors from an occupational status to financial incentives.
The authors used the model suggested by Kalleberg, Griffin, and Loscocco to prove that both the objective nature of the positions that employees take and the subjective interpretations of the staff’s workplace responsibilities constitute the job satisfaction levels (Bokemeier and Lacy 190). Using the theoretical model of satisfaction suggested by Kalleberg et al., Bokemeier and Lacy have singled out four crucial factors that define the satisfaction levels among employees, i.e., rewards, organizational values, workplace conditions, and attitudes of the staff (Bokemeier and Lacy 191).
According to the research outcomes, there are minor dynamics between the positive changes in the financial situation and the engagement levels of the staff. The connection between the job value and the engagement levels, in turn, is more complex. Workplace conditions, reasonably enough, also determine the satisfaction rates to a considerable degree. Particularly, the levels of autonomy shape the degree of satisfaction considerably. As far as the individual attitudes are concerned, the differences in the perception of the social significance of work in men and women define their satisfaction levels extensively (Bokemeier and Lacy 200).The connection between job satisfaction and psychological functioning has been confirmed, as well.
Response
Job satisfaction and the levels of motivation have been viewed as essential constituents of the staff’s performance for a good reason. There is no need to stress the fact that, when experiencing satisfaction from accomplishing a particular professional goal, people are likely to deliver better performance. Bokemeier and Lacy’s research raises a range of questions associated with how individual differences and external factors may affect satisfaction levels. The idea that job values shape the staff’s perception of their position and, therefore, their satisfaction levels can be viewed as dubious, though. The reasons for the controversy around the concept include the fact that job value may stem from the employees’ acceptance of the corporate philosophy, as well as their personal perception of the job.
Thus, the ambiguity that surrounds the concept may require a more extensive analysis of what constitutes job value and how it is determined by the staff and the organization. The concept of the previous experiences defining the staff’s current perception of their jobs triggers a range of important questions that employers need to address in order to enhance performance levels in the company is quite peculiar. On the one hand, it may imply that previous experiences may create the platform for future professional growth and, thus, contribute to the development of lifelong learning skills as the basis for consistent improvement. On the other hand, the idea that previous experiences are essential for meeting the current responsibilities may imply that staff members are limited
in their choice of strategies and responses to a particular situation. Therefore, a further study of the subject matter is necessary to determine the opportunities for professional growth.
Work Cited
Bokemeier, Janet L. and William B. Lacy. “Job Values, Rewards, and Work Conditions as Factors in Job Satisfaction among Men and Women.” The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 2 (1987), pp. 189-204.