Investigating Employee Satisfaction: The Impact of Personalities

This report investigates the relationship between employee personality traits and their overall job satisfaction within a company. The study aims to assess the reliability of job satisfaction measures, evaluate employee satisfaction across different experience levels, and construct a model to predict overall satisfaction. Data was collected through questionnaires, and while the initial reliability of the instrument was poor, analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in job satisfaction among employees with varying experience levels. Some personality traits negatively impacted job satisfaction, while others had a positive effect. The regression model constructed did not show statistical significance in predicting job satisfaction. The report concludes that employee personality significantly influences job satisfaction and recommends maintaining positive employee relations. Desklib offers a wide range of study resources, including past papers and solved assignments, to support students in their academic endeavors.

Effects of personalities in employees’ job satisfaction
i

Executive summary
The major reason for this research was to determine the association concerning personality score
and employees’ overall job satisfaction in a company. The following specific objectives had to
be met in line with the main objective; 1) to assess the reliability of overall job satisfaction, 2) to
assess overall employees’ satisfaction with the job among groups of employees and 3) to
construct the model that best determines the overall satisfaction of employees. Data used in
developing this report was collected using questionnaires. Used scale in the instrument was not
reliable thus had unacceptable internal consistency. The results revealed that the difference
among the three groups of employees based on their experience was statistically significant.
Some personalities i.e. personality4 and personality6 had negative impact on employees’ level of
job satisfaction whereas the remaining personalities had positive effect on employees’ job
satisfaction. It was therefore concluded that personality of an employee have either negative or
positive impact on satisfaction employees had towards their jobs. It is therefore recommended
that the management to maintain good relationship with workers and never to demean their
personalities.
ii

Table of Contents
Executive summary.....................................................................................................................................ii
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1
Objectives................................................................................................................................................2
Questions.................................................................................................................................................2
Hypotheses..............................................................................................................................................2
Findings and discussions.............................................................................................................................3
Reliability test..........................................................................................................................................3
Hypothesis test of reliability................................................................................................................4
Comparing overall satisfaction of employees with a job regarding the length of employment....................5
Test of statistical significance difference.................................................................................................5
Regression analysis.................................................................................................................................7
Discussion of the results..............................................................................................................................9
Conclusions and recommendations...........................................................................................................11
List of references.......................................................................................................................................12
Appendices................................................................................................................................................14
iii

Introduction
Business organizations encompass so many individuals with varied personalities from one
employee to another. Each employee would like to be addressed in the most respectful way and
have their ego untouched. Tampering with the employees’ ego and personality may lead to their
demotivation and loss of psychic. Human resource managers in the organizations do try by all
means possible to safeguard the employees to their satisfaction at work. For the organization to
achieve its goals and realize good performance, collective efforts is required from both the
employees and the management of the organizations Wong, C. W., Lai, K. H., Shang, K. C., Lu,
C. S., & Leung, T. K. P. (2012). Researchers have had interest in studying association between
personality of the employees and their jobs’ satisfaction. Through the studies conducted, the
researchers have widely researched on the attitude of the employees in an organization and their
level of job satisfaction Jung, H. S., & Yoon, H. H. (2015). Job satisfaction can therefore be
defined as the response to a job by the employees in a particular work environment Singh, J. K.,
& Jain, M. (2013). Also, it can be defined as the extent of need fulfilment that come from the
experience an employee has had in the job. There are variety of predictors of job satisfaction
varying from personality of an employee, performance productivity subjective to comfort at
work Waqas et al, (2014). The management should emphasize on the importance of being
comfortable at work and thus satisfied. This report was aimed at analyzing aspects of job
satisfaction. Additionally, the report will outline the association between employees’ job
satisfaction and their personalities. Taking satisfaction of employees into consideration and
acting appropriately towards addressing issues affecting job satisfaction paves way for success of
the business organizations. Failure to address issues concerning employees’ job satisfaction may
result to business underperformance and failure.
1

Objectives
Some of the objective that needed to be met in this report were as outline below;
1. To assess the reliability of overall job satisfaction
2. To assess the overall employees satisfaction with the job among groups of employees
3. To construct a model that best determines the overall satisfaction of employees
Questions
1. Is overall job satisfaction reliable?
2. Is there overall satisfaction among the three groups of employees in terms of their
experience?
3. Does the regression model best determine overall satisfaction of employees?
Hypotheses
H0: There is no statistical significance in the reliability of instrument’s scale used in analyzing
the overall job satisfaction items
H1: There is statistical significance in the reliability of instrument’s scale used in analyzing the
overall job satisfaction items
H0: The three groups of employees experience had no statistical significance difference among
them
H1: The three groups of employees’ experience had statistically significant difference among
them
H0: Constructed model has no statistical significance
H1: Constructed model has statistical significance
2

Findings and discussions
This section of the report will show the results as obtained from exploration of the provided data,
interpretation and discussion of the results.
Reliability test
Table 1: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alphaa
Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Standardized
Itemsa
N of Items
-2.526 -2.638 3
a. The value is negative due to a negative
average covariance among items. This violates
reliability model assumptions. You may want to
check item codings.
From reliability test of overall job satisfaction for the provided three items with seven point
Likert scale, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient tested to be (α = -2.526) which indicated that the
instrument used had very poor and unacceptable internal consistency. That was the result that
was obtained in the first run of reliability testing process.
Table 2: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Standardized
Items
N of Items
.155 .155 2
The internal consistency of the instrument used in the data collection in this report could be
improved by deleting item number 3 i.e. (Job satisfaction 3). Upon deletion of job satisfaction 3,
the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient improved from being a negative value to positive value (α =
0.155). This value of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient still indicated that that the internal
3

consistency of the instrument used was very poor and unacceptable. As a result therefore, this
report’s instrument’s reliability was unacceptable since the Cronbach’s alpha was less than 0.7.
No further improvements could be made on the reliability of the instrument used since further
deletion of items from the list of items would only worsen the reliability since they will give
negative Cronbach’s alpha.
Hypothesis test of reliability
H0: There is no statistical significance in the reliability of instrument’s scale used in analyzing
the overall job satisfaction items
H1: There is statistical significance in the reliability of instrument’s scale used in analyzing the
overall job satisfaction items
Table 3: ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig
Between People 329.037 240 1.371
Within People
Between Items .008 1 .008 .007 .933
Residual 277.992 240 1.158
Total 278.000 241 1.154
Total 607.037 481 1.262
Grand Mean = 4.76
In the test of the above made claim, ANOVA was used by the researcher where from the results
i.e. (F = 119.967, df = 240, p = 0.000 < 0.05), the value of the Cronbach’s alpha and the general
internal consistency of the scale used was unacceptable since the test indicated that the scale was
statistically insignificant since the null hypothesis was not rejected. The conclusion was therefore
made that there was no statistical significance in the reliability of the research scale used in
testing the overall job satisfaction.
4

The means and standard deviation of the scale used was as in the below table;
Table 4: Mean and standard deviation
Mean Std. Deviation N
job_satisfaction1 4.77 1.111 241
job_satisfaction2 4.76 1.139 241
job_satisfaction3 3.20 1.108 241
Mean of the scale used in measuring the level of job satisfaction 1 was 4.77 which when rounded
off to the nearest whole number would be 5 showing that the employees were somewhat
satisfied. The values in the scale were varied from the mean by 1.112 as indicated in the standard
deviation. Item 2 job satisfaction 2 had the mean value of 4.76 which would also get to 5 when
rounded off to the nearest whole number thus the respondents were also somewhat satisfied with
the variation from the mean of 1.137. For the item 3 job satisfaction 3, the posted mean was 3.20
which when rounded off to the nearest whole number would give 3 which from the scale
corresponded to somewhat happy with the variation from the mean of 1.110.
Comparing overall satisfaction of employees with a job regarding the length of employment
Test of statistical significance difference
In comparing the overall satisfaction of the employees with a job considering their years of
experience, this report tested on the following hypothesis;
H0: The three groups of employees experience had no statistical significance difference among
them
H1: The three groups of employees’ experience had statistically significant difference among
them
5

Table 5: Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
job_satisfaction1
Equal variances
assumed 19.246 .000 13.342 239 .000 1.659 .124 1.414 1.904
Equal variances
not assumed 15.867 153.596 .000 1.659 .105 1.453 1.866
job_satisfaction2
Equal variances
assumed .291 .590 7.459 239 .000 1.128 .151 .830 1.425
Equal variances
not assumed 7.752 114.110 .000 1.128 .145 .839 1.416
job_satisfaction3
Equal variances
assumed 23.275 .000 -
12.701 239 .000 -1.609 .127 -1.858 -1.359
Equal variances
not assumed
-
15.247 157.162 .000 -1.609 .106 -1.817 -1.401
Independent t-test was used to test for the impact of employees’ job experience on their
satisfaction towards their jobs. In that regards, t = 15.867, df = 239 and p = 0.000 < 0.05
indicated that the results were statistically significant since we rejected the null hypothesis and
concluded that that the three groups of employees’ experience had statistical significance
difference for the job satisfaction1 item. For job satisfaction2 item, the results t = 7.459, df =
239 and p = 0.000 < 0.05 indicated that there was statistically significance difference in the level
of satisfaction of the employees considering their level of experience at work. We rejected the
null hypothesis and concluded that the three groups of experience of employees indeed had an
impact on employees’ job satisfaction level. The effect tested was the same for item 3 too.
6

Regression analysis
In building of the linear regression model, overall satisfaction was engaged as predicted variable
also known as dependent variable (DV) whereas all the six personality items were treated as
independent variables (IVs). The overall satisfaction was computed by taking the average of the
three level of satisfaction items since the mean will be representative of all the values in the
items. With the overall satisfaction as the predicted variable and all other personalities as the
predictor variables, the resulted model took the following general format.
y=b0 +b1 x1+ b2 x2 +b3 x3+ b4 x4 +b5 x5 +b6 x6+ εi
y=b0 +b1 personality 1+b2 personality 2+b3 personality 3+b4 personality 4+b5 personality 5+b6 personality 6 +εi
The following hypothesis was therefore tested for the construction of linear regression model
Hypothesis
H0: Constructed model has no statistical significance
H1: Constructed model has statistical significance
Table 5: ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression .444 6 .074 .469 .831b
Residual 36.930 234 .158
Total 37.375 240
a. Dependent Variable: overall_satisfaction
b. Predictors: (Constant), personality6, personality3, personality4, personality5, personality1,
personality2
From the ANOVA test of significance of the constructed model, the results indicated that F =
0.469 and p = 0.831 > 0.05 resulting to failure in the rejection of null hypothesis and conclusion
7

made that the model had no statistical significance. The model would not best predict the
employees’ job satisfaction. The model would be resulted to as below.
Table 6: Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1
(Constant) 4.003 .246 16.279 .000
personality1 .007 .032 .017 .209 .835 .612 1.633
personality2 .026 .071 .077 .367 .714 .096 10.372
personality3 .024 .035 .057 .703 .483 .649 1.541
personality4 -.003 .069 -.009 -.042 .966 .097 10.259
personality5 .010 .017 .044 .615 .539 .822 1.216
personality6 -.007 .029 -.019 -.260 .795 .818 1.222
a. Dependent Variable: overall_satisfaction
The model resulted to from the dependent variable (overall job satisfaction) and predictor
variables all levels of personalities was;
y=4.003+0.007 personality 1+0.026 personality 2+0.024 personality 3−0.003 personality 4+0.01 personality 5
From the above model, a slight change in employees’ personality1 would result to the general
positive change in the overall job satisfaction by 0.007. Slight change in personality2 of
employee would result to general change of overall job satisfaction by 0.026 positively. Slight
change in employees’ personality3 would result to general positive change by 0.024 while a
slight change in the employees’ personality4 would result to negative impact in the general
overall job satisfaction by (-0.003). a slight change in employees’ personality 5 would result to
8

positive change in overall employees’ job satisfaction and finally, a slight change in employees’
personality6 would lead to a negative change in the overall job satisfaction of employees by (-
0.008).
Similarity between the predictor variables was tested and investigated using multi-collinearity
where the test confirmed that only two independent variables had multi-collinearity i.e.
personality2 and personality4 since they showed the VIF values of 10.372 and 10.259
respectively which were all greater than VIF of 10. This showed that the two predictor variables
were highly inter-correlated with one another. Other predictor variables had VIF values of 1.633,
1.541, 1.216 and 1.222 for employees’ personality1, personality3, personality5 and personality6
respectively. Being that the VIF values of those four predictor variables was in between 1 and
10, they therefore showed to have had no multi-collinearity thus not inter-correlated.
Discussion of the results
From the results in the test of reliability, the Cronbach’s coefficient was a negative value (α = -
2.526) way much less than 0.7 making the internal consistency of the scale in the measure of job
satisfaction regarded unacceptable Mohamad, M. M., Sulaiman, N. L., Sern, L. C., & Salleh, K.
M. (2015). Corrections are always important in improving the reliability of the instrument used.
Instrument to be deleted from the list of items are those which showed deviations in terms of
their correlations thus deleting them from the list of items boosts the value of the Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient Bolarinwa, O. A. (2015). In regards to that therefore, item number 3 i.e. (job
satisfaction3) was deleted from the list of items where the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
improved to a positive value of (α = 0.155). This value did not still meet the threshold i.e. (α >=
0.7) for which the internal consistency of an instrument can be termed acceptable Neimeyer, R.
A. (2015). Further deletion of the remaining items never resulted to improved results and
9