Employees' Job Satisfaction and Personality: A Statistical Report

This report examines the relationship between employees' job satisfaction and their personalities. The study aimed to assess the reliability of the scale used to measure overall job satisfaction, determine the impact of employee experience on job satisfaction, and evaluate the importance of a constructed regression model. The findings revealed that the scale used was not reliable, and employee experience did influence job satisfaction. The regression model, however, lacked statistical significance. The report also found that certain personality traits had negative impacts on job satisfaction. Recommendations include considering employee personalities in all interactions. The report includes statistical analysis, including reliability tests using Cronbach's alpha, t-tests and ANOVA, and discusses the implications of these findings for human resource management and organizational well-being.

Employees’ job satisfaction and personalities
i

Executive summary
This report was developed to meet the following three objectives 1) to evaluate the reliability of
scale used in investigating the overall job satisfaction, 2) to determine the effect of employees’
experience on overall job satisfaction and 3) to evaluate the importance of constructed regression
model in determining job satisfaction. Three research questions were constructed to be answered
towards meeting the objectives which were as follows; was the scale used in investigating the
overall job satisfaction reliable? What are the effects of employees’ experience on overall job
satisfaction? And is the constructed regression model important and effective in determining job
satisfaction? From the reliability test of research instrument scale, the results confirmed that the
scale was not reliable and had internal inconsistency. Level of experience was found to have had
effect on the level of employees’ job satisfaction and finally, constructed regression model had
no statistical significance in determining job satisfaction. Additionally, some personalities were
revealed to have had negative effects on job satisfaction as others had positive effects. It was
therefore recommended that personalities of employees to be approached with care at all times.
ii

Table of Contents
Executive summary.....................................................................................................................................ii
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1
Research Objectives................................................................................................................................2
Research questions..................................................................................................................................2
Hypotheses..............................................................................................................................................2
Findings and discussion...............................................................................................................................3
Evaluating reliability of the research instrument scale in the investigation of overall job satisfaction....3
Discussion...........................................................................................................................................6
Effects of employees’ experience on overall job satisfaction..................................................................6
Discussions..........................................................................................................................................7
Constructed regression model in determining job satisfaction.................................................................8
Hypothesis...........................................................................................................................................8
Discussion.........................................................................................................................................10
Regression analysis strategic guides.......................................................................................................11
Conclusion and recommendations.............................................................................................................12
References.................................................................................................................................................13
Appendices................................................................................................................................................15
iii

Introduction
Job satisfaction has for a long time been vital subject researchers have been researching about
due to its contribution to the welfare of organizations. Due to the correlation it has with
employees’ personalities such as behaviors and attitudes, it has been given much attention as it
also affects employees’ performance at work Lange, T. (2012). It is vital for the organization’s
management to understand the personalities of their employees since the knowledge would help
them to evaluate what duties to assign to variety of employees they have in their organizations
Gould‐Williams et al, (2014). Better understanding of individuals’ personalities assists the
human resource managers to know and consider the feelings of various employees in different
situations Shahab, M. A., & Nisa, I. (2014). Relevant aspects of personality can best be described
in psychology by big five models. The big five factors in regards to employees personalities
include agreeableness, openness to experience, extraversions, conscientiousness and neuroticism.
Organizations are in better place to achieve their objectives from good performance of
employees only when the organizations work collectively as a unit with all its subjects Wong, C.
A., & Laschinger, H. K. (2013). Due to the fact that better performance of the employees can be
improved by nurturing their personalities, the management should give all effort they can to
avoid inducing negative impacts on their personalities. Interfering with the ego of employees
may demoralize and demotivate the employees which might result to their reduced work rate and
low performance. Employees’ low performance at work have negative effect in the growth and
development of the organizations which might lead to losses Kovjanic, S., Schuh, S. C., & Jonas,
K. (2013). In response to that therefore, it is beyond just improving the products’ quality and
advertising the products produced to maximize the profits. Employees’ personalities need to be
preserved to ensure that they are satisfied. Human resource managers need to give the employees
1

time to adjust to their working environments and gain enough experience to enable them curb the
challenges that come with their duties at different job stages. That helps in improving the
employees’ job satisfaction since the level of satisfaction varies with experience and years of
work an employee has worked. This report will therefore assess the relationship and impact of
employees’ personalities on job satisfaction. Satisfaction of employees is linked with success of
business organizations and therefore failure to observe it leads to downfall of the business.
Research Objectives
1. To evaluate the reliability of scale used in investigation the overall job satisfaction
2. To determine the effect of employees’ experience on overall job satisfaction
3. To evaluate the importance of constructed regression model in determining job
satisfaction
Research questions
1. Was the scale used in investigating the overall job satisfaction reliable?
2. What are the effects of employees’ experience on overall job satisfaction?
3. Is the constructed regression model important and effective in determining job
satisfaction?
Hypotheses
H0: Reliability of research instrument scale used in the investigation of overall job satisfaction
was statistically insignificant
2

H1: Reliability of research instrument scale used in the investigation of overall job satisfaction
was statistically significant
H0: Employees experience has no effect on the overall job satisfaction
H1: Employees experience has effect on the overall job satisfaction
H0: Constructed regression model has no statistical significance effect in determining job
satisfaction
H1: Constructed regression model has statistical significance in determining job satisfaction
Findings and discussion
This is the section of the report that will outline the results and discussion of the results as from
the collected data.
Evaluating reliability of the research instrument scale in the investigation of overall job
satisfaction
Table 1: Reliability Statistics for all satisfaction
items
Cronbach's Alphaa Cronbach's Alpha
Based on
Standardized Itemsa
N of Items
-2.534 -2.639 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.
Reliability of the instrument used in collection of data was tested using Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient. From the results, scale for measuring the overall job satisfaction had the Cronbach’s
alpha of (α = -2.534). This showed that the instrument scale for measuring the employees’ level
3

of job satisfaction had an unacceptable internal consistency in the first run of reliability test.
Acceptable internal consistency of an instrument range from α >= 0.7. The test result from the
first run lead to thoughts of improving the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.
Table 2: Reliability Statistics after deleting item job
satisfaction3
Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha
Based on Standardized
Items
N of Items
.141 .141 2
Second reliability test was conducted where some items were deleted. Job satisfaction 3 was
deleted with the aim of improving the coefficient score where after the deletion, the Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient became (α = 0.141). Though this coefficient value was still below the
acceptable limit alpha score i.e. (α >= 0.7), it was an improved value of the first run test which
gave negative score. The alpha score still gave an indication that the instrument scale used in
measuring level of job satisfaction had an unacceptable internal consistency. Further deletion of
the remaining items would not have improved the alpha score instead they would worsen the
reliability of the used scale.
Test of reliability
H0: Reliability of research instrument scale used in the investigation of overall job satisfaction
was statistically insignificant
H1: Reliability of research instrument scale used in the investigation of overall job satisfaction
was statistically significant
4

Table 3: ANOVA test of significance
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig
Between People 326.975 240 1.362
Within People
Between Items .033 1 .033 .028 .866
Residual 280.967 240 1.171
Total 281.000 241 1.166
Total 607.975 481 1.264
Grand Mean = 4.7676
Significance of reliability of the instrument scale used was tested using ANOVA. The ANOVA
test results (F = 0.028, df = 240 and p = 0.866 > 0.05), being that the p-value was greater than the
significance value and held no statistical significance, we failed to reject the null hypothesis and
concluded that reliability of the research instrument scale used in the investigation of the overall
job satisfaction was statistically insignificant.
Means and standard deviation of items 1, 2 and 3.
Table 4: Item Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
job_satisfaction1 4.7759 1.11411 241
job_satisfaction2 4.7593 1.13659 241
job_satisfaction3 3.1867 1.11168 241
Mean and standard deviation for job satisfaction 1, job satisfaction 2 and job satisfaction 3 was
calculated as in the above table. Job satisfaction1 had the mean of 4.7759 which can be rounded
off to the nearest whole number to get 5. From the scale used, 5 equaled somewhat satisfied. This
therefore showed that the respondents were somewhat satisfied in their jobs. The responses of
the respondents were deviated from the mean by 1.11411 for job satisfaction 1. Job satisfaction 2
posted the mean of 4.7593. This mean value when rounded off to the nearest whole number
would get to 5. This as well indicated that the respondents were somewhat satisfied with their
jobs. The responses of respondents to this particular question varied from the posted mean value
5

by 1.13659. Finally, job satisfaction 3 posted a mean of 3.1867 which when rounded off to the
nearest whole number gets to 3 thus indicating that the respondents were somewhat unsatisfied
with their jobs in regards to that question. The responses of the employees varied from the mean
by 1.11168.
Discussion
The research instrument’s scale used was not reliable since the test confirmed the value of
Cronbach’s alpha less than 0.7 thus terming an instrument with such alpha score to have had
unacceptable internal consistency Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Item 3 never showed to
have good correlation with other items and thus was deleted to improve the score of Cronbach’s
alpha. The alpha score increased from negative value to a weak positive value (α=0.141) which
was still less than the acceptability limit i.e. 0.7. Further deletion of other items would never
improve the alpha score but rather make it worse.
Effects of employees’ experience on overall job satisfaction
The effect of the number of years worked by employees was evaluated in comparison to the level
of job satisfaction of employees. The effect was tested using independent t-test testing the below
hypothesis;
H0: Employees experience has no effect on the overall job satisfaction
H1: Employees experience has effect on the overall job satisfaction
6

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
overall_job_
satisfaction
Equal variances
assumed 1.063 .304 7.485 239 .000 .39259 .05245 .28927 .49592
Equal variances
not assumed 7.974 119.872 .000 .39259 .04923 .29511 .49007
Effect of experience of employees in a particular job on how satisfied they were to their jobs was
tested and from the results, t = 7.485, df = 239 and p = 0.000, the value of p = 0.000 < 0.05
indicated that the results were statistically significant leading to the rejection of null hypothesis.
The test of results therefore led to the conclusion that employees’ experience had effect on the
overall job satisfaction. It therefore showed that the number of years an employee has worked
counted on the determination of how much they were satisfied with their jobs.
Discussions
The independent t-test revealed that the number of years an individual has work in a certain
organization acted as a determinant of how much they would be satisfied with their jobs. The
results from the test led to the rejection of null hypothesis favoring the alternative hypothesis and
the conclusion made that employees’ experience had effect on the overall job satisfaction of the
employees. Earlier researches showed that the number of years worked and therefore the
experience earned by an employee contributed to their level of job satisfaction Zhao, X. R.,
Ghiselli, R., Law, R., & Ma, J. (2016); Taylor, J. (2014). This research then affirmed with those
earlier research results since different career stages from the time and employee was employed
7

gave them better chances to adjust to the changes and thus their level of job satisfaction too.
Roles of employees change with time which also add to the effect on their levels of job
satisfaction. Commitments of employees become a little bit simpler and easier as they gain more
experience and this improves their efficiency and the rate of work which was seen as motivation
to the employees and corresponding to the improved level of job satisfaction Valaei, N., &
Rezaei, S. (2016). Furthermore, employees’ approach to different challenges at work improved
with time as they gained more experience.
Constructed regression model in determining job satisfaction
Regression model was aimed to be built so that the available personalities in this research could
be used to predict the level of overall job satisfaction. In the process of building the regression
model, the dependent variable (DV) also known as the predicted variable was overall job
satisfaction of the employees and the predictor variables also known as the independent variable
(IV) were personalities of employees. Personalities were used to determine or predict the job
satisfaction of the employees. From the three items of job satisfaction, the overall job satisfaction
was obtained from the mean of the three items of job satisfaction. The general expected model
was as below;
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
Hypothesis
H0: Constructed regression model has no statistical significance effect in determining job
satisfaction
H1: Constructed regression model has statistical significance in determining job satisfaction
8

Table 6: ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression .520 6 .087 .550 .769b
Residual 36.855 234 .157
Total 37.375 240
a. Dependent Variable: overall_job_satisfaction
b. Predictors: (Constant), personality6, personality3, personality4, personality5, personality1,
personality2
ANOVA was used to check whether the model constructed was statistically significant or not.
The results from the test F = 0.55 and p = 0.769 > 0.05 indicated that the model was not
statistically significant therefore we failed to reject the null hypothesis and concluded that the
constructed regression model had no statistical significance effect in determining job satisfaction
level. The independent variables did not therefore suitably predict the overall job satisfaction as
they were expected to predict.
Table 7: Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1
(Constant) 4.010 .248 16.178 .000
personality1 .011 .032 .028 .337 .737 .618 1.619
personality2 .028 .071 .083 .397 .692 .097 10.319
personality3 .018 .035 .042 .521 .603 .656 1.525
personality4 -.002 .069 -.005 -.023 .982 .098 10.217
personality5 .012 .017 .052 .729 .467 .823 1.215
personality6 -.008 .029 -.021 -.296 .768 .823 1.215
a. Dependent Variable: overall_job_satisfaction
Overall job satisfaction was predicted using personalities to give the following model;
y=4.01+0.011 personality 1+0.028 personality 2+0.018 personality 3−0.002 personality 4+ 0.012 personality 5−
9