EMPLOYEES' JOB SATISFACTION AND THEIR WORK PERFORMANCE AS

ELEMENTS INFLUENCING WORK SAFETY

INTRODUCTION

The employee is an essential element in the process of implementing the enterprise's mission and

vision, especially in the production sphere. Employees should meet the performance criteria set

by the organization to ensure the quantity and quality of their work. To meet organizational

standards, employees need a work environment that allows them to work freely without

problems that can stop them from reaching their full potential (Raziq and Maulabakhsh, 2015).

They also need appropriate superior that will provide them with this environment, but above all,

he will motivate them to work in the right way, make them feel satisfied with their work.

Each person has different criteria for measuring own job satisfaction. The factor that influences

it, is the style of management, but also payments, working hours, schedule, benefits, stress level

and flexibility. Job satisfaction is related to productivity, motivation, work performance and life

satisfaction (Abuhashesh et al.,2019), which means that this also applies to the private lives of

employees.

It should be remembered that job satisfaction affects the employee's feeling of security in the

enterprise. A satisfied employee feels better in the company, perform better his work, but above

all feels safe when it comes to his future and work in the enterprise. That is why job satisfaction

is such an important element of the work safety (Wolniak and Olkiewicz, 2019; Niciejewska,

2017).

The aim of the paper was to assess employees' job satisfaction and their work performance with

use of simply survey. In order to achieve this aim, a survey was conducted among employees of

a chosen metallurgical enterprise who were asked to assess level of their job satisfaction. The
survey allowed for indication the general level of employee satisfaction. The study was

conducted in the form of a case study.

BODY

Job satisfaction can be defined as a sense of employee achievements and successes. It is

generally believed that it is directly related to productivity and work performance, as well as to

personal well-being. Job satisfaction means doing the work one likes, doing it well and being

rewarded for own efforts (Kaliski, 2007; Aziri, 2011). People can also have different approach

to various aspects of their work, such as the type of work they are doing, colleagues, superiors or

subordinates and their salary (George and Jones, 2008). Different motivation style and leadership

style can work in different way on every employee, resulting in increased work performance and

job satisfaction. Therefore, job satisfaction is an essential element motivating employees and

encouraging them to achieve better results (Raziq and Maulabakhsh, 2015). Ostroff (1992) says

that employee satisfaction is of great importance not only for employees but also for the entire

organization. Because satisfied employees are usually happy and motivated to work,

consequently the organization can get amazing results from their work, from the other side, those

dissatisfied employees will not be encouraged and will be disturbed by their work routine, they

will run away from responsibility and even avoid work (sick leave, days off etc.) (Judge, et al.,

2001).

Job satisfaction is considered as one of the main factors of the effectiveness and efficiency of

business organizations. In fact, the new managerial paradigm, which insists that employees

should be treated primarily as someone who has their own needs and personal desires, is a very

good indicator of the importance of job satisfaction in modern enterprises. Analyzing job
satisfaction, it can be concluded that a satisfied employee is a happy employee and a happy

employee is successful employee (Aziri, 2011).

The availability of superiors at the time of need, the ability to connect employees, stimulating

creative thinking and knowledge of values, openness in the eyes of employees and the ability to

communicate with employees are basic features of supervision. Various researches have shown

that with good and effective supervisor, the level of employee satisfaction was high, while with

poorer communication skills, the level of employee dissatisfaction was high (Schroffel, 1999;

Raziq and Maulabakhsh, 2015).

Rötze claims that there are four determinants influencing employee satisfaction:

“supervisor/leader”, “job design”, “workplace environment” and “performance pay”. According

to his research the factor supervisor/leader has not a so strong impact on motivation but is crucial

for job-design satisfaction and affects the level of satisfaction with performance pay very much

(Brenninger, 2015).

So it can be claimed that managers can influence employee satisfaction, commitment and

performance through appropriate leadership style. The leadership style can be viewed as a

number of managerial attitudes, behaviors, traits and skills based on individual and

organizational values (Mosadegh Rad and Yarmohammadian, 2006). The manager's influence on

team management is particularly important in manufacturing enterprises, especially in heavy

industry sectors, where men predominate among the employed. The superior leads the employee

team differently, where there are also women, where employees sit in the office more often, and

in different way in the men's team, whose main workplace is the production hall, who behave

differently in men's company than in mixed company.

satisfaction can be achieved through participation motivating leadership style. Participatory

management and participatory planning processes have a positive impact on job satisfaction. It is

important for leaders to know that employee motivation, which is the basis of their results, is

difficult to observe, but it can be developed through active participation in the life of the

organization. It is very important for leaders to be on the same side as their employees (Soonhee,

2002). Unusual results can be achieved when an employee feels that the main impulse of his

supervisor is completely in line with his wishes and observations regarding the staff (Golemann

et al., 2004).

According to Brenninger (Brenninger, 2011) for getting satisfied employees and good results

supervisors have to adapt their leadership style in a way that employees get more involved in the

decision making processes to get a higher level of commitment for the enterprise's goals.

Supervisors have to involve as many employees as possible. They have to support individual and

team effort and share information through the company for motivating employees. Good

supervisors do not work only vertically they also work horizontally, which means they have to

manage cross-functional processes, projects, time and resources.

Bakker, Albrecht and Leiter (2011) point out that our emotional experiences can be characterized

by a continuum of low excitement - high excitement and sadness - pleasure. It is possible to

inscribe the majority of human experiences in this twodimensional grid. Therefore, with this

model, one can describe commitment as a pleasant state of mind with a fairly high excitement,

with its level lying between enthusiasm and happiness.

With similar reasoning, satisfaction can be placed within a pleasant state, but with insignificant

excitement. With classic approach presented by Locke (1976), job satisfaction results from the
perception of person’s own activity as one that allows for the achievement of important values,

with these values being consistent with the needs and helping meet basic human needs.

Furthermore, Wexley and Youkl (1984) defined job satisfaction as feelings and attitudes of the

employee towards work. Specific factors should be controlled in order to induce contentment in

an employee. The factors that lead to a prolonged satisfaction are called "motivators" by

Herzberg. This satisfaction can generate achievement, recognition, work itself and responsibility

(Herzberg, et al., 1959).

The subject literature indicates a strong correlation between employee satisfaction and the effects

of the organization's activities (Pietroń-Pyszczek, 2010). Among the widely researched and

verified relationships are the impact of job satisfaction on commitment to work (Sadler, 1997;

Shepherd and Mathews, 2000), and thus on effectiveness, as presented by Yalabik et al. (2013) in

their model: "Job satisfaction" influences "Commitment to work" which influences "Work

performance".

Employee efficiency and work performance have always been an important issue for

organization managers (Kelidbari et al., (2011). Employees who are very committed to their

organization ensure a high level of the services' or products' quality, maintenance, productivity

and generate higher profits. Employees have more than job satisfaction, are happy that they can

serve and are promoters of products and brands. There is evidence that employee involvement

increases work performance and overall productivity, creates a better and more productive work

environment, reduces employee absence and work leaving (Bin Shmailan 2016).

The research took the form of a questionnaire. It was filled in by 47 employees of the chosen

metallurgical enterprise.
The research enterprise belongs to metallurgical industry. It should be remembered that this is a

very specific industry (heavy industry). In such enterprises, men are most often employed,

women rather only in office and for organizational work. Therefore, this may be reflected in the

results. Men have different approach to surveys than women. Not only that, they create different

bonds, different atmosphere (employeeemployee and employee-supervisor) than women (here

feelings, conflicts play a large role). They often have different requirements for working

conditions.

The survey concerned employees' job satisfaction. Employees were expected to refer to 20

statements describing employees' job satisfaction in the enterprise studied. The list of these

statements was presented in Table 1. Employees were supposed to evaluate these statements on a

scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means ‘I completely disagree’ and 10 denotes ‘I totally agree’, in

similar way like in Parker scale used in the Servqual method (Babakus and Boller, 1992).

Table 1

Statements of the survey on job satisfaction

No Statement

1. Form of employment is satisfying.

2. Current level of salary is satisfying.

3. Social package offered by the company is satisfying.

4. Physical working conditions in the company are satisfying.

5. Current job description is appropriate.

6. I know who my direct supervisor is.

7. In my work I use my existing qualifications.

9. My direct supervisor knows my job well.

10. Atmosphere in the company is friendly.

11. The level of employment stability in the company is satisfying.

12. Way of promotion of employees is appropriate.

13. Way how the company get rid of the employee is appropriate.

14. The trainings offered by the company are well done.

15. The company has a respect and understanding for my family responsibilities.

16. I did not observe or I did not experience discrimination.

17. My effort and commitment are appreciated by my direct supervisor.

18. I have a feeling that I am a part of the company.

19. I am informed about the plans of the company.

20. I would recommend to a friend employment in the research company.

Source: (Dziuba and Ingaldi, 2016)

The results of the part of the survey are presented in the form of bar charts, with individual bars

referring to the average assessments of individual statements.

Furthermore, in the second part of the questionnaire, the same employees were asked to assess

three items that allow to determine their job satisfaction:

 Overall satisfaction with working conditions.

 Relations with the superior.

 Satisfaction with salary.

Employees were asked to evaluate the above mentioned elements on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1

meant complete dissatisfaction whereas 10 meant full satisfaction. The results of this survey are
presented in the form of a bar chart, where bars indicate the average rating of an element in

relation to the maximum rating that this element could obtain (satisfaction index).

RESULTS

Figure 1 shows the mean results of assessment of the statements that define employee

satisfaction.

6.00

5.00
Assessment

4.00

3.00

2.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

No of statement

Fig. 1. Comparison of obtained averages of individual statements (own study)

Employees rated on average the statements affecting their job satisfaction at the level of 3.88.

This means that they were satisfied with their work to a medium level. However, analysis of

Figure 1 reveals that the assessments of individual statements varied and often differed from the

average.

Employees indicated that the most important factors of their job satisfaction, e.g. "the trainings

offered by the company are well done" (statement 14). This is very important for a person who
starts working for the enterprise. Such training explains exactly what and how to do but also

often raise employees' awareness of what the enterprise is doing. It can therefore be concluded

that the enterprise’s supervisors are aware of the need for various types of training and that it

affects the effective work of employees. The introduction of new technologies, new solutions,

but also new techniques and methods of production management not only in enterprises of the

metallurgical industry requires continuous training and new skills so training are necessary.

Other highly rated statements were: "I know who my direct supervisor is" (6) and "atmosphere in

the company is friendly" (10). Every employee must know who his or her immediate superior is,

because this is the person who assigns specific tasks and gives instructions to the employee, and

the person who is approached by the employee in case of any problems. Especially that work in a

metallurgical enterprise is rather hard and not too safe. This is also important from the standpoint

of building an appropriate communication system in the enterprise. With friendly atmosphere at

work, employees are willing to come to work, are not afraid of the requirements they have to

meet, are more willing to perform their assignments, and are motivated to develop and act for the

benefit of the enterprise, despite the effort they have to put into it. The lowest rating was given to

the statement that "the level of employment stability in the company is satisfying" 11, "way of

promotion of employees is appropriate" 12, "I am informed about the plans of the company" 19.

These are statements related to the development of employees and the enterprise itself. Perhaps

employees do not feel safe in the enterprise, they are not sure about its future and thus their own

future, which is related to the overall rotation of employees in the market. A worrying statement

concerned the way of promotion. The employee needs to know what their promotion path is and

what needs to be done to improve their status in the enterprise. Such ignorance has a negative

impact on motivation, as the employee is not sure whether his or her work will be noticed, and
above all appreciated by superior. This may also be related to the abovementioned

characteristics of the supervisor, when employees indicated that, on the other hand, the

employees said that their supervisor does not asks staffs about advice connected to correct

processes and does not allow to improve work independently. Employees have no chance of

participating in the improvement of the enterprise, which also affects their morale and

satisfaction, at first of all their motivation.

9 out of 20 statements were rated below the average. These were statements that would need to

be looked at more closely in order to improve the job satisfaction of employees and thus their

work performance, because satisfied employees are efficient and willing to work.

Figure 2 shows satisfaction indices based on the ratings given by respondents.

Satisfaction with

salary

Relationship with

superiors 0 20 40 60 80
Value of theindices

Overall satisfaction with working conditions

Fig. 2. Satisfaction index (own study)

satisfactory result. Most employees are satisfied with their working conditions. The lowest level

of satisfaction was found for salaries. The mean satisfaction is close to the mean assessment of

relations with superiors.

This result may be due to the superior traits that were previously analyzed, especially those

negative. Employees are not asked for advice on processes used in the enterprise, nor do they

improve them, they do not feel responsible for the enterprise, and the behavior of their superiors

does not motivate them to self-development and striving for success. The unsatisfactory

employment safety also negatively affected the general level of satisfaction. If an employee does

not see his or her future in the enterprise, does not see the possibilities of his or her development,

and is not properly motivated, they perform their assignments less accurately and do not pay

sufficient attention. Sooner or later they will look for a new job and the enterprise will have to

look for new employees. All this leads to low work performance.

CONCLUSION

In the research the employees of chosen metallurgical company were supposed to assess their job

satisfaction. Their job satisfaction results in their work safety. Happy and satisfied employee

performs better his duties, becomes more responsible, feels part of the enterprise. The employees

defined their job satisfaction by referring to 20 statements describing this satisfaction and

evaluating three factors that were used to compute the satisfaction index.

Of course, the research is not without limitations. The survey was created on the basis of the

authors' experience and found references. Some important factors could be omitted due to the

subjectivity of authors who looked at the problem from the engineer's point of view. Survey itself

was quite long so some respondents could feel bored and filled it up without any will or at
random. The research was conducted in cooperation with the management of the research

enterprise, which could also have an impact on the results because the employees knew that

results would be available to the management so they could be afraid to answer honestly.

REFERENCES

Abuhashesh, M., Al-Dmour, R., Masa’deh, R., 2019. Factors that affect Employees

Job Satisfaction and Performance to Increase Customers’ Satisfactions, Journal of Human

Resources Management Research, 23, Article ID 354277, DOI:

10.5171/2019.354277.

Aziri, B., 2011. Job satisfaction: a literature review, Management Research And Practice, 3(4),

77-86.

Babakus, E., Boller, G.W., 1992. An Empirical Assessment of the Servqual Scale. Journal of

Business Research, 24(3), 253-68.

Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L., Leiter, M.P., 2011. Work engagement: Further reflections on the

state of play, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 74–88.

Bin Shmailan, A.S., 2016. The relationship between job satisfaction, job performance and

employee engagement: An explorative study, Issues in Business Management and Economics,

4(1), 1-8, DOI:10.15739/IBME.16.001.

Brenninger, H.-J., 2011. Company Value and Employee Satisfaction: Development of

Theoretical Framework, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia.

Brenninger, H-J., 2015. Employee satisfaction and its impact on company value, Doctoral thesis.

University Of Latvia, Faculty Of Economics and Management, Riga Latvia.

Element Influencing Quality of Finished Products, 25th Anniversary International Conference

on Metallurgy and Materials, Tanger, Ostrava, 1769-1775.

George, J.M., Jones, G.R., 2008. Understanding and Managing Organizational behaviour,

Pearson/Prentice Hall, New Yersey, USA.

Golemann, D., Boyatzis, R., McKee, A., 2004. Emotionale Führung, Ullstein Buchverlage

GmbH, Berlin, Germany.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Snyderman, B., 1959. Motivation to Work. Granada, London, UK

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., Patton, G.K., 2001. The job satisfaction–job

performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review, Psychological Bulletin,

127(3), 376-407, DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376

Kaliski, B.S., 2007. Encyclopedia of Business and Finance, Thompson Gale, Detroit, USA.

Kelidbari, H. R., Dizgah, M. R., Yusefi, A., 2011. The relationship between organization

commitment and job performance of employees of Guilan Province social security

organization, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(6), 555.

Mosadegh Rad, A.M., Yarmohammadian, M.H., 2006. A study of relationship between

managers’ leadership style and employees’ job satisfaction, Leadership in Health Services,

2(19), 11–28.

Nieciejewska, M., 2017. Difficulties in work safety management in a company producing steel

flat bars, Production Engineering Archives, 17, 28-31, DOI: 10.30657/pea.2017.17.06

Ostroff, C., 1992. The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An

organizational level analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 963-974,

DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.77.6.963.
Pietroń-Pyszczek, A., 2010. Satysfakcja pracownicza w zmieniającym się przedsiębiorstwie -

możliwości i bariery jej kształtowania, In Lewicka D., Zbiegień-Maciąg L., Wyzwania dla

współczesnych organizacji w warunkach konkurencyjnej gospodarki. Wyd. AGH, Kraków,

Poland, 491-499.

Raziq, A., Maulabakhsh, R. 2015. Impact of Working Environment on Job Satisfaction. Procedia

Economics and Finance, 23, 717-725, DOI: 10.1016/S22125671(15)00524-9.

Sadler, P., 1997. Zarządzanie w społeczeństwie postindustrialnym, Wyd. WPSB, Kraków, Poland

Schroffel, A., 1999. How Does Clinical Supervision Affect Job Satisfaction?. The Clinical

Supervisor, 18(2), 91-105.

Shepherd, J.L., Mathews, B.P., 2000. Employee commitment: academic vs practitioner

perspectives, Employee Relations, 22(6), 555-575.

Soonhee, K., 2002. Participative Management and Job Satisfaction: Lessons for Management

Leadership, Public Administration Review, 62(2), 231-241, DOI: 0.1111/0033-3352.00173.

Wexley, K.N., Yukl, G.A., 1984. Organizational Behavior and Personnel Psychology, Richard

D. Irwin Inc., Homewood, IL, USA.

Wolniak, R., Olkiewicz, M., 2019. The Relations Between Safety Culture and Quality Culture,

System Safety: Human - Technical Facility - Environment, 1(1), 10-17, DOI: 10.2478/czoto-

2019-0002.

Yalabik, Y.Z., Popaitoon, P., Chowne, J.A., Rayton, B.A., 2013. Work engagement as a

mediator between employee attitudes and outcomes, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 24, 2799-2823.

A Project output

Submitted to

Mr. GARGAR S. ALFONSO

Central Philippines State University

Hinoba-an Campus
 In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

_____________________________________________________________________________

JERASEL L. BATILLER

October 30, 2021