Locus Of Control And Job Satisfaction In Semi-Government Organizations

Problem Approach

Discuss about the Locus of Control and Job Satisfaction in Semi-Government Organizations?

The importance of employee’s ‘Job satisfaction’ has been appreciated by many organizations around the world. The understanding of its impact on achieving organizational goals and customer satisfaction has been widely witnessed(Kamery, 2014). Employees are those the one who implement the projects and activities at the operational level to apply the objectives of the management level. Although the goals and objectives vary from organization to another yet employee’s satisfaction is considered to be a single target in all sectors. ‘Job satisfaction’ had taken the broad attention of the literature and researchers reviewed it in different sectors and organizations such as construction industry, IT, health, public services, academic sector, banking sector and much more and further identified factors affecting employees’ satisfaction in these organizations.

An organizational practice that is extremely correlated to performance growing high commitment of the workers (Taylor, 2011). In considering performance, a difference can be composed of in task performance and contextual performance. Task performance is a doing linking to an individual worker’s assigned function and establishes a portion of the ‘Job satisfaction’ (Lyons, Duxbury, & Higgins, 2006). Both extrinsic and intrinsic awards are essential to the motivation of staff in the public sector to increase performance (Qureshi, Shanu, &Kashif, 2009). The managers of ‘X ORGANIZATION’ are more enthusiastic about addressing plan for the motivation and empowerment of their staff to work toward the completion of tasks (DRC, 2014). Ram et al., (2011) claim that plenty of businesses had begun funding substantial money in improving the staff into a very qualified Human Resource. The primary force working behind this vision is the higher financial performance of the organization in the services sector, which is highly dependent upon the satisfaction level of their workforce. If the staff are not satisfied with the enterprise and have the small level of motivation, then their mental complaint will clearly appear in the form of low-quality client services. In this research, the theoretical approach of Hertzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation needs to be examined for the government employees in ‘X ORGANIZATION’ in Muscat region. In Oman, there is a shortage of literature on the ‘Job satisfaction’ of public employees in the government sector. To bridge the gap in knowledge, this study aims at evaluating the ‘Job satisfaction’ at ‘X ORGANIZATION’ in the Omani context by testing the theory (Herzberg’s two-factor).

Purpose of Research

The government sector is perceived as the right hand of the state in giving services to the society. Evolution was tied-in with the development of all country as the demand for services extended and led to an expansion in the recruitment of Omani citizens in different government departments. In 2007, Oman reached the highest rate of employment of national labor in civil service in the GCC at 85.5% and the Oman is on track to reach 95% by 2020 as set out in the Oman Vision 2020 (Ministry of National Economy, 2007). Also, the Diwan of Royal Court and the Royal Court of Affairs, which serve his Majesty, hired approximately 26,000 people of whom 76% were Omani (Ministry of National Economy, 2010).

The well-known reasons for the favorite of Omanis to serve in the public sector are correlated with special salaries, short working hours, higher yearly leave, great job security and other privileges. Inflationary forces in the economy triggered significant pay increases in recent years; public sector pay rose by 15% in 2007 (Gulftalent, 2010). Nevertheless, wages are seen as being moderately higher than the salaries given by the private sector except for the uneducated, skilled and well educated (Mellahi and Budhwar, 2006). For instance, the salary of a new graduate employee is RO 560 per month in the public sector, compared to RO 820 in the private sector. In the past, the public sector faced little competition for labor but the privatization in 1995 opened the doors to the international enterprises; the private sector has become a fierce competitor (Gulftalent, 2010). Not only the salary and pay that has become the “touchstone” between the two sectors, but also other factors have become important for Omanis looking for jobs such as career path, job autonomy, job quality, morale and motivation, healthy working environment etc. The nature of the work in the government sector is bureaucratic emphasizing on routine rather than change. Managements’ attitudes incline towards holding the power, hence towards dictating orders rather than participation in decision-making. Promotion in the public sector is not based on performance rather seniority. Moreover, personal judgment is given emphasize over the merits and performance of the employees during the appraisal (Mellahi and Budhwar, 2006).

Statistics of Civil Service show that the civil services created 8400 new appointments in 2008 while 4180 people left the Service. Of the leavers who were Omani nationals, 16.8% were female (12.3% in 2007) (Ministry of National Economy, 2010). Total turnover of expatriates and nationals was therefore around 3.5% of which about 1.5% came from voluntary resignations. The number of Omani nationals resigning in 2008 was up 54% from the previous year. The majorities of leavers were on or around Grade 6, which is equivalent to about RO 500 per month and well educate people.

Research Question and Objectives

A report by the government showed that the rate of turnover among employee has grown to 10% from 2000 to 2014. The reason is unification of salary of public sector employees with the civilian. The selected organization is facing the challenge fo retaining the employees due to high attrition rate in the low level. 

The problem to be marked in this research is that there is limited data about ‘Job satisfaction’ that define the level of satisfaction among Specialists (Brewster & Sparrow, 2007; Sparrow, Hird, Hesketh, & Cooper, 2010). The sample of the study is the approximately 500 civil servants working in ‘X ORGANIZATION’, Oman at Muscat Region. The particular population is the nearly 115-specialistcivil servant working in GDPS, in Muscat, Oman (DRC, 2015).       

The purpose of this descriptive research is to examine the factors in Herzberg theory those influence ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialist employee working in the GDPS, in Muscat, Oman. The results and findings of this research may be utilized by ‘X ORGANIZATION’ decision makers in reducing the decline rate of Omani government specialist employee who working in the ‘X ORGANIZATION’ in Muscat, Oman serving in the ‘X ORGANIZATION’ Units in Muscat or other departments out of capital city.

In this research, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation was used as a model investigates motivation and ‘Job satisfaction’ in the government sector service in Oman. Numerous examination studies have evaluated the soundness of Herzberg’s Theory of Motivation and its correlation to ‘Job satisfaction’ (Gilmore and Vyskocil-Czajkowski, 1992).

Based on the interpretation of the problem, the intentions of the study were identified. These goals guided the process of the research and created the research boundaries. However, a research question was also designed to “scope” the project. The research questions is:

(1) “In utilizing the Herzberg dual- factor theory, which factors define the level of motivation amongst specialist employees in General Directorate of Planning and Studies in ‘x Organization’ atMuscat region in Sultanate of Oman, civil services unit, and how can this knowledge be applied to improve their level of motivation and ‘Job satisfaction’?”

(2) Does ‘Job satisfaction’ level among the specialist employee at GDPS, at Muscat area in Sultanate of Oman vary/differ according to the variables of: gender, years of experience, Educational Level, age?

Accordingly, this aim will be accomplished within the following objectives:

To find out the ‘Job satisfaction’ and Motivational level of GDPS’s employee regarding Hygiene and Motivator factors of Herzberg’s two-factor theory.

To investigate the effect of the fulfillment of Hygiene and Motivator factors on the motivation of employees.

To recommend ways and means to improve the ‘Job satisfaction’ of the PS employee in the ‘X ORGANIZATION’ in Muscat and government field in the same chart rates and region (cultural, developing countries).

In order to fulfill the above objectives and find answer to the research questions, the hypothesis of the study that was stated in chapter one reads as follow:

6.1 Scope of Study

The study is relating government sector; only the selected one unit of ‘X ORGANIZATION’which has more than 10 units with more than 115 specialist employeeworking in GDPS, Muscat. The findings of the study can be generalized to the other parts of ‘X ORGANIZATION’, the government organization of Oman as well in the same and other regions of the country. The study will also provide a guide and the road map for the additional progression in this sector for examination of other determinants of worker motivation and their influence on the ‘Job satisfaction’ in Omani contextual.

Summary

The chapter can be summarized saying that employees’ satisfaction is the standard process for evaluating the working condition in the companies. The chapter one has tried to emphasize on the problem in the Omani government companies regarding ‘Job satisfaction’ of the employees. Therefore, the chapter provides the information on the problems in the government companies of Oman as well as discusses the background of the research. Further, this chapter encompasses the objectives as well as the research questions for conducting the research in a suitable manner.

Chapter Two †Literature Review

In this chapter accessible academic paper and other official documents is critically examined linking to worker ‘Job satisfaction’, with the purpose of drawing out a depth perception of the existing arguments. The aim of this literature review is to examine, contrast, and locate any gaps in the literature.  This critical study of the literature is more meant to give further justification for the research and a deeper contextual framework for the research.  In this chapter, an evaluation has been performed of studies that have been undertaken with the aim of examining the Herzberg factors operators of ‘Job satisfaction’.

2.1 ‘Job satisfaction’

Numerous researchers have described ‘Job satisfaction’, although the definitions diversify. According to Green (2013) a ‘Job satisfaction’ is a job-related emotional response and this reaction can be an indication of an employee’s emotional healthiness It can be influenced by an employee’s behavioral impacts. Safran, Miller, and Beckman in (2006) affirmed, “The links between workplace quality – particularly the presence of a positive, collaborative culture – and staffing outcomes (including burnout, turnover, and staff satisfaction) have been more widely studied than other organizational outcomes” (Hameed, Soormo& Hameed, 2012). Additionally, to understand the meaning of a form like ‘Job satisfaction’, it looks logical to see how it is interpreted in the literature (Cf. Wallace D. Boeve, 2007). 

‘Job satisfaction’ is a certain feeling of one’s job resulting from an evaluation of its features (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Arnold and Feldman (1986) have stated that the result of overall positive attitudes that persons have towards their works. Locke (1976) determines ‘Job satisfaction’ as an emotional entertainment situation emerging from the evaluation of one’s job or job practices. Corresponding to Robbins (1996), ‘Job satisfaction’ is the difference between some rewards employees receive and the amount they believe they should receive. Again Mobey and Lockey (1970) pointed out ‘Job satisfaction’ and dissatisfaction are function of the recognized relationship between what individual demands and gets from one’s job and how much value one associates to it.

There have been disagreements among researchers about whether ‘Job satisfaction’ has multiple dimensions. Researchers like Porter (1961) defines ‘Job satisfaction’ as a one-dimensional contract; that is, one is satisfied or dissatisfied with the individual ‘s job. In opposition, Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1969) claim that ‘Job satisfaction’ is multi-dimensional; that is person may be more or slight satisfied with his/her supervisor, salary or workplace. Spector (1997) determines ‘Job satisfaction’ as the extent to which workers love their job and its elements. According to him there are two methods to the study of ‘Job satisfaction’: the global approach and the faceted way. The global strategy estimates ‘Job satisfaction’ as a single, overall feeling towards the job while the faceted approach concentrates on various determinants of ‘Job satisfaction’ such as pay and the work conditions. Fraser (1983) says that ‘Job satisfaction’ is not a unitary determinant. He says it is potential that a person could be satisfied with a unit factor of the work, such as job, but be dissatisfied with different determinant, like pay. According to Mitchell and Lasan, (1987), it is recognized in the organizational behavior area that ‘Job satisfaction’ is the most critical and frequently studied approach. Luthan (1998) posited that there are three important dimensions in ‘Job satisfaction’: emotion, consciousness and reward on basis of performance.

2.2 Important of ‘Job satisfaction’

Prior research showed three reasons to explain the sense of ‘Job satisfaction’. First, organizations can be managed by human values and based on these values they will endeavor to treat their employees fairly and with regard. Further, ‘Job satisfaction’ evaluation can then assist as an indicator of the extent to which workers are dealt with efficiently (Hameed, Soomro&Shakoor, 2012). Second, organizations can take on a functional condition in which employees’ behavior would affect organizational services according to the employees’ level of ‘Job satisfaction’. Indeed, ‘Job satisfaction’ can be revealed through positive reactions and job dissatisfaction through negative responses (Hameed, Butt, Soomro&Shakoor, 2012). Third, ‘Job satisfaction’ can be a sign of organizational developments. Hence, appraisal of ‘Job satisfaction’ might distinguish the various degree of satisfaction amongst organizational units and, accordingly, be instrumental in determining which one need improvement. (Blanchar&Onton, 2005).

2.3 Personal characteristics and ‘Job satisfaction’

The most important demographic variable that gets a large concentration in ‘Job satisfaction’ study is gender. Some empirical investigations on ‘Job satisfaction’ have proposed that female workers have the lower grade of ‘Job satisfaction’ than their male because male administrators dominate most of the public organizations (Vecchio, 2000). Another common demographic variable studied is educational level (Hameed &Soomro, 2014). Most of the researches on the relation between education level and ‘Job satisfaction’ yield regular findings (Iqbal, Hameed & Devi, 2012). Particularly Griffin, Dunbar & McGill (1978) observed that staff with higher educational level would tend to be more satisfied than under educational level. The third usually distinguished variable in the study on demographic characteristics is age. Staff’s age has been found to have a negative influence on staff’s ‘Job satisfaction’ (Buzawa, 1984). For instance, a recent research results revealed that college graduates were more satisfied with their jobs when these were compatible with their university programs than when these fell external their areas of interest (Vandenberg & Lance, 1992). 

2.4 Herzberg’s Two- Factor Theory

The study of ‘Job satisfaction’ became more advanced and sophisticated with the introduction of Herzberg’s (1966) Motivator- Hygiene Theory. This theory examines the work itself as a principal source of ‘Job satisfaction’ as contrasted with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Iqbal, Hameed &Ramzan, 2012). The motivators pertain to job content or the work itself and include achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, and advancement. The hygiene relates to employment context or the work environment and involves company policy and administration, supervision, salary, interpersonal relations, and working conditions (Soomro, Hameed &Kaimkhani, 2012; 2013). As shown in following figure (for more details about the Herzberg factors see Appendix A).

Source: Mathis & Jackson, (2004).

The Motivator-Hygiene Theory is an important foundational theory on the study of ‘Job satisfaction’. The intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions of ‘Job satisfaction’ based on motivators and hygiene is allowed for the conceptual understanding of work and how it motivates and provides satisfaction for employees (Donald Gary Goff, 2004). However, the attractive point is that pay can be a hygiene factor or a motivator, according to the meaning of itself. If salary does not have any meaning other than ‘buying power’, it should be just considered a hygiene factor (Daft, 2003).  On the contrary, the salary could be a motivator if it represents a symbol of achievement at work (Daft, 2003).

Adverse Maslow, who gave insufficient data to assistance his concepts, Herzberg and others have done substantial empirical indication of strengthening the motivation hygiene theory, despite their attempt has been criticized on methodological areas. However, some researchers have supported the theory i.e., Schmidt (1976) while others have contradicted the theory ( Brenner, Carmack& Weinstein (1971) Hill (1986). Critics of Herzberg’s theory argue that the results he obtained are artificial and criticize his methodology in gathering the data. It is natural for people to attribute positive events to internal causes and negative events to external forces (Vecchio, 2000).  Also, Herzberg’s research was conducted among supervisors and middle management. Therefore its applicability to other areas of work or workers of a different culture is questionable (Fraser, 1989). Nevertheless, this research has been replicated across other populations and included different occupation levels. So, the results of these such studies still may support Herzberg’s theory. Hence, it can be decided that Herzberg’s theory apply to other cultures and other occupations like Omani context and PS employee in DRC.

According to Vecchio, (2000) Herzberg’s theory also influenced job redesign, and Robbins (2001) states that the popularity of vertically extending jobs to provide workers more responsibility can be attributed to Herzberg’s research. Despite criticisms, Herzberg’s theory has been widely read, and its popularity is maintained over the past 30 years for holding ‘Job satisfaction’.

2.4.1 Empirical studies on motivation and application of Herzberg’s theory

There have been various studies in support of this theory. Focused on work motivation in Hyderabad Industries of roofing products in India, Shahid (2013) illustrates how financial incentives, performance appraisal system, good relationship with co-workers, promotional opportunities in the present job, and employee empowerment largely affects the level of employee motivation. His study did not, however, score the varying importance of these factors to motivation. His sample size was only 50 respondents limiting wide generalization of his findings. The researcher proposes to carry out a similar investigation in an agricultural research setting and with a bigger sample size. Shahid (2013) also recommends continued studies on motivation over time as these factors may vary their motivation roles with time. Chien (2013) tested the validity of Herzberg’s two-factor theory and found it to be plausible for studying ‘Job satisfaction’ among employees in a Chinese chemical fiber company. He proposed to management areas of improvement as workforce planning, succession planning and clarity of performance standards. The sample, however, excluded all foreign laborers in the company who faced similar motivational challenges as citizens and, therefore, tended to bias results. Job rotation that he identified as an important hygiene factor is not common in agricultural research where there is high professional specialization. Kwasi and Amoako (2008) in Ghana justified for application of this theory to Ghanaian worker in particular and Africa in general that the study intends to undertake in Uganda.

Numerous other researchers questioned the two-factor theory. However, they showed very different results. Some of the factors declared by Herzberg (1966) as hygiene factors are motivators in their research. The results of Herzberg’s theory can be different if the test is conducted for different industries. The differences are due to the intensity of the labor requirement, and the duration of the employment (Nave, 1968).

2.4.2 Studies criticizing the theory:

Smerek and Peterson (2007) examined the two-factor theory on 2700 employees at a large public university. Their findings the factor of the work itself acted by Herzberg’s conceptualization. Dunaway (2009) studied nurse ‘Job satisfaction’ utilizing the two-factor theory. Again, these results did not support Herzberg’s findings in any area except that the work itself has an impact on employee satisfaction.

One of the critiques of Herzberg’s methodology is the trend for people to present socially desirable replies in their answers, appearing in factors that affect dissatisfaction as being connected to external factors rather of internal factors. Wall and Stephenson studied the existing literature utilizing this criticism as a frame of reference. They detected that Herzberg’s findings is a result of this tendency and is, consequently, unsound as a description of job attitudes (Wall & Stephenson, 2007).

Schroder (2008) applied the two-factor theory as the theoretical framework for a research of 835 university workers to realize the influence of demographical factors on ‘Job satisfaction’. The researcher discovered that overall ‘Job satisfaction’ was linked to age and educational degree in Herzberg’s conclusions (Schroder, 2008).

2.4.2 Studies supporting the theory:

In 2008, a research by Sharp (2008) practiced the two- factor theory as the theoretical framework to check the potential relationships between ability utilization, compensation, co-workers, and ‘Job satisfaction’ among psychiatric nurses. The conclusions confirmed the two-factor theory by giving moderate correlations amongst nurses’ ability, utilization, achievement, and ‘Job satisfaction’.

Furthermore, an application was further done to implement Herzberg’s motivational and hygiene factors to hiring technical personnel at a U.S Department of Energy section (Tamosaitis&Schwenker, 2002). Agreeable with the two-factor theory, the authors found that hygiene factors are dominant factor determining turnover and that the work itself presents ‘Job satisfaction’, however they too found an importance in hygiene as a recognition factor that was incompatible with Herzberg’s theory. Besides correlating to the theory to recognition, Udechukwu (2009) studied turnover among correctional officers using the two-factor theory as the frame of reference. This field suffers from a high level of turnover, and the scholar proposes that it is due to conditions on the job, influencing hygiene factors among these workers (Udechukwu, 2009). The researcher concluded that because of these hygiene factors, the field would be troubled always by high turnover ratio, which can only be combated with deliberate and aggressive attempts to create defined career paths and feasible promotional opportunities for its officers (Udechukwu, 2009).

Rogers (2005) applied the two-factor theory to aid educational institutions in identifying potential future leaders. Rogers (2005) reviewed the existing literature and hypothesized that Herzberg’s model is relevant to characterizing leadership aspiration and potential since elements in the model can distinguish leaders from non-leaders.

The authors found consistency in the views of some employee motivation factors between managers in Korea and Japan, but these views were not always compatible with Herzberg’s view (Usugami& Park, 2006).


Sachau (2007) called for a resurrection of the two-factor theory. However, by following the progression of the theory, the number of publications based on the theory since the mid-1990s, and the various methods of applying the theory throughout the last five decades, I argue that the theory never died.

2.6 ‘Job satisfaction’ in government sector

A survey conducted in 2003 in U.S. public sector employee that concentrated on investigating the influence of working environment on ‘Job satisfaction’. Especially, through the study of Wright & Davis (2003), it was remarked that seven factors that develop the working environment of public officials change the insight of ‘Job satisfaction’. Specifically, three of them focused on the job content  and four (4) focused on the job characteristics. Three (3) were found to directly affect the formation of ‘Job satisfaction’, and all three are related to job characteristics. More specifically, work routine – associated with the degree of predictability in employment tasks – seems to have a direct and negative impact on ‘Job satisfaction’ of the employee. The second job characteristic, which was found to have positive, with clear definition of the role and the responsibilities of the employee. The third and final characteristic identified to exert a direct influence in increasing ‘Job satisfaction’ is the development of better opportunities offered by the organization to its employees with respect to their education.

Markovits, Davis & Dick (2007), conducted a survey to examine the relationship between organizational commitment, dedication and work satisfaction among employees in Greek public and private sector. The results of the research showed that civil servants show significantly higher levels of intrinsic satisfaction compared to the extrinsic satisfaction. According to Taylor & Westover (2011) the stronger predictors of government employee’s ‘Job satisfaction’ for most countries which took part on the research were intrinsic workplace attributes and work relations with managers. These findings support ‘Job satisfaction’ literature on the influence of the nature of work (Glisson and Durick 1988) and organizational environment (Mikkelsen et al. 2000) on employees’ satisfaction.  Kim (2009) conducted a study on ‘Job satisfaction’ of Information Technology Employees in the Public Sector and the study used data from a 2003 survey of IT employees working in the central IT departments of 38 state governments in the United States. He used mostly Hackman and Oldham’s (1976) Job Diagnostic Survey instrument. The results of the research show that job clarity, effective communications with management, a participatory management approach, and organizational support of career development, along with family-friendly policies are all significant variables affecting ‘Job satisfaction’ among state government IT employees.

However, previous studies consider single or multiple factors as the predictors of ‘Job satisfaction’. Ting (1997) studied ‘Job satisfaction’ of 56,767 full-time federal government employees. According to him, three groups are job characteristics, organizational characteristics, and individual characteristics. Job characteristics were defined as pay satisfaction, task clarity, skill utilization and work contribution. Organizational characteristics referred to relationships with co-workers and supervisors. Individual components were variables describing the employees themselves. Interesting results were related to pay. Even if the salary was revealed to increase ‘Job satisfaction’ at all levels of workers, the effect of remuneration diminished as the pay level increased. In terms of this result, Ting (1997) insisted extrinsic factors (pay) were less significant motivators than intrinsic rewards (making contributions to the organization) for ‘Job satisfaction’ as employees advanced to higher levels of position.

2.6.1 ‘Job satisfaction’ in the Public Sector in Oman

The job satisfaction in Omani semi government firms were assessed by (Hans, Asra Mubeen & Al Ghabshi, 2015). In this research paper, they tried to find out the job satisfaction of the middle level managerial positioned employees. It also tried to find out the relationship with locus of control in managerial level and ‘Job satisfaction’. The research found that overall middle level managers are not satisfied with their job. The male employees in this category are much satisfied with the locus of control in their hand in their office. However, the women employees were satisfied moderately with the centre of power is provided to them in their job. Satisfaction among the male employees was poor for their responsibilities performed in the office. The satisfaction of the middle-aged employees was much higher for enjoying the controlling power possessed by them in the offices. However, overall satisfaction of the employees decreased by increasing with their age.

The research based on the private telecommunication sector by Wright & Davis (2003), showed some special characteristics. The paper was devoted to find the satisfaction level of the employees of this sector after privatization from government sector. It was found that employees were much satisfied due to performance-linked benefits in the private sectors. It was also analyzed that employees thought a better working environment in the private sector rather government organization. However, satisfaction by means of employees’ job security was poor as 90% participants made it as a significant move due to privatization. The privatization had made the employees to be unsecured to about their job majority.   

2.7 Conceptual Model

According to Colwell, (2002) approach of research to be chosen is equivalently critical as the selection of valuable research topic is. If the researcher is unable to formulate the right strategy to cope with the research then there is high probability of getting un-appropriate results and the research will not make any valuable addition to the existing Literature (Colwell, 2002). The author has designed following model for the research base on the construct used in this empirical study is Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory:

2.7.1 Hypotheses

To accomplish the objectives of this research study, the following hypotheses will be examined.

Hypothesis 1

H₁: There exists a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: ‘Job satisfaction’ and factors of hygiene has no positive relationship.

Hypothesis 2

H₁: There exists a positive relationship between each motivation factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: There exists no positive relationship between each motivation factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

Hypothesis 3

H₁: Hygiene and Motivation Factors significantly explain the variance in ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: Hygiene and Motivation Factors does not explain the variance in ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

Hypothesis 4

H₁: ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS will diversify depending on the education and career experience details of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS will not diversify depending on the education and career experience details of specialists at GDPS.

Summary

The chapter can be summarized saying that it has explained the job satisfaction of the employees. Further, this chapter has explained carefully the importance of job satisfaction of the employees. In addition to this, this chapter has explained and reviewed the Herzberg’s motivational theory. The factors of the motivation as well as the hygiene factors are explained well. The review has been made from the past researches to explain the importance carefully. The chapter has examined the past review carefully and has proposed the research hypotheses to conduct the research.

Chapter Three: Research Methodology

This study addressed the question that motivation factor was more significant for the ‘Job satisfaction’ in the selected units in GDPS in ‘X ORGANIZATION’ in Oman, Muscat region by using the Questionnaire. This investigation also considered the dimensionality of Herzberg’s two-factor construction of ‘Job satisfaction’ factors. Identifying the impact of demographics data on the civil servant at GDPS ‘Job satisfaction’ was another principal goal of this study.

An evaluation of the current levels of satisfaction of Omani civil servants who is working with the Ministry of Diwan in Muscat, Oman, is intended as part of this research. In the design of this study, a descriptive approach is visualize, since the factors that define ‘Job satisfaction’ of Omani civil servants has not yet been actually investigated from a research viewpoint, based on the research initiated by the researcher.

Research philosophy:

The choice of research method can be demonstrated through research philosophy.  Indeed, the research is type of empirical deductive approach since this study looking for a precise answer to a question (Does the application of Herzberg theory factors demonstrate the high level of a civil servant in GDPS). Thus, to respond to this question was based on people’s opinions and by adapting questionnaire. From the viewpoints of Matveev (as cited in Robinson, 2007), numbers are applied to define the size of a phenomenon under study.  The quantitative method is deemed to be appropriate in this study since it is conducted by a functional or positivist paradigm (Mishler, 2006).  Similarly, Morgan and Mircich (as cited in Mishler, 2006) explain that this line of thinking is based on the assumption that social life can be assessed objectively because individuals are representative that respond to an objective environment.  Miller (2008) further states that the quantitative method of research is one that is made up of calculations and statistical test performance on quantifiable data.

Cone and Foster (2006) confirm that the positivist paradigm view the world as a something that can be quantified, measured, and explained the process of scientific inquiry.  The quantitative paradigm is concerned with reliability, validity, and generalizability of process and result (Creswell, 2009).  This may be effective, given the fact that the basic issue is the measurement of behavioral trends in the most scientific manner possible.

Research Design:

According to Burns and Grove (2005 p. 40) represent a research design as the ‘blueprint for the conduct of a study that maximizes control over factors that could interfere with the study’s desired outcome. It would likely ensure a more objective set of conclusions, testing the theory, and in determining the issues of causality (Mackey &Gass, 2005). For the purpose of this empirical investigation, a descriptive study design will utilize to test how Herzberg’s theory of ‘Job satisfaction’ fit into GDPS employee of in Muscat region. The variables considered for this study are centered on the main factors according to the literature review related to the study, namely, job motivators and hygiene factors due Herzberg theory. This method is chosen in order to compare and describe ‘Job satisfaction’ phenomena as exist in the real situation and it is relatively economical in terms of time and resource(Lu et al., 2006). Furthermore, this design is appropriate since the variables cannot easily distinguish, and the existing situation does not yield to the application of an experimental design of study.

Research Method

A quantitative methodology was utilized for this study. The scientific nature of the method developed the likelihood of adoption. Tewksbury (2009) asserted that quantitative method is scientific in nature with the deployment of particular definitions together with careful operationalization of specific concepts and the meaning of associated variables. This method was in accordance with the paradigm being adopted above. Quantitative methodology encourages the participation of numerous respondents and the findings are objective and based on the scientific pattern of findings (Christensen et al., 2011).

Figure 4.1: The Quantitative method approach used in this study.

Based on Creswell and Plano Clark (2011, p. 118).

3.1. Data Resources:

The case study is commonly deemed to be a qualitative study. By the style of desk research, it is conceivable to cite it in the pattern of published stuff, online databases (Malhotra, Birks,& Wills, 2012). Therefore, the researcher reviewed available studies in the subject of public ‘Job satisfaction’ in term of Herzberg factors by accessing published documents (objectives 1&2). Despite, this approach is particularly helpful to getting high quality from previous researchers (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012), there are some drawbacks to utilizing secondary data. Previous scholars for precise goals that cannot suit or answer the research questions might do it (Malhotra et al., 2012). However, by helping from large groups of secondary data can construct a conceptual framework to respond to the research question. On the other hand, According to Saunders et al., (2002), whenever secondary data do not present adequate information to satisfy research objections, primary data must be collected then. Then, primary data is necessary when a researcher cannot find the needed data in secondary data. Since there is a lack in the literature and information base on opinion that cover the civil servant ‘Job satisfaction’ due to the Herzberg theory in Omani context the researcher decided to gather primary data from selected on public organization (GDPS) in Oman to helping answer the research question adequately.

Commentary:

However, it is recognized that there is no fitting way that should be attended. Either qualitative or quantitative approaches have their powers and flaws that a researcher needs to regard. Thus, precise appraisal of research questions showed a quantitative research in nature would be suitable for the research questions involving the testing of particular theory. This is the principal purpose of the empirical perspective of this outline: to examine the theory in a government unit mainly to endeavor civil servants’ perspectives from GDPS in preparing for test the theory and meet the research question. However, to know the application of Herzberg theory and to investigate explanations demands an in-depth searching that is more than just the collection of data. It is has been expected that mixing both quantitative and qualitative ways, will aid in recognizing the issues developed in the part of ‘Literature Review’ by presenting a ‘thick information’ (Geertz, 1973) of the Herzberg theory and civil servant satisfaction means met in the Case Study (GDPS). According to Davies and Hughes (2014), studies employing quantitative approaches can be more readily replicated opposed to those utilizing qualitative way.

Population and sample:

Sampling is crucial for this research considering the enormous size of the research population. The population for this study is involved of specialists who serve in ‘x organization’ government body located in Oman, Muscat. The population is difficult to determine, but an estimate is about 400. Conducting research with the entire population would have required long time and resources. Therefore, only Civil servants at the (GDPS) were chosen and researcher excluded the staff of the department of Department of Library Affairs since the scope of the study covering the Muscat area and this Department is out of city Muscat. Besides, excluded those who had served for less than three months, were selected.

Figure 1.The organizational structure of the GDPS

Resource: Diwan Decision (56/2010)*

*Due to the Ministry of security, some division has not shown.

4.1 Sample and Sampling method

The total population of this investigation is not distinguished to the researcher and attempting to find out the same is not pragmatic. Hence, giving each specialist an equal chance to engage in the research is not possible. It is acknowledged that carefully managed nonprobability sampling frequently appears to provide acceptable outcomes (Naoum, 2012, p.44.). Thus, the method of non-probability sampling is suitable for this research. According to the records (DRC, 2015) there are 115 specialists with various educational backgrounds and levels of experience, who are eligible to participate in the study. In addition, it is useful since the researcher currently works at the head office of the (X Organization). However, taking into consideration of all the sampling techniques, a 100% convenience sampling was employed to choose both the Directorate and the location to get participants for the research from GDPS. Hence, this study has at its center the purpose of doing an in-depth and qualitative insight in nature into specialist’s ‘Job satisfaction’ issues. The survey of the relevant literature placed that civil servant’s ‘Job satisfaction’ is a field of increasing interest in the wider public service leaders (Al Awaisi, 2012), and so the consequences of this study will be of interest to those engaging with job-related matters.

Research instrument:

Research tools are important in delivering the analyzed data for any research (Spector, 1997). In general, numerous tools have been placed in the study ranging from a single part to multiple numbers of elements of measures (Al-Rubaish et al., 2011). However, the ‘questionnaire’ can be deemed as the most widespread research tool (Qasim et al., 2012). Therefore, the reason for adopting this data collection as the primary research technique is questionnaire formation from the employees. The instrument was used by the researcher to gather information from the employees by interacting them personally due to the leave of September for higher studies. It helps the researcher to maintain the sample size accordingly.   

5.2 Questionnaire Design

Questionnaires are the most popular tools utilized by researchers to gather data. Questionnaires can be employed to obtain a rich of data and information from study participants, they can be inexpensive for the researcher to manage, and it is relatively easy to compare and analyze the responses to questionnaires (Mertens, 2010). The questionnaire had demographic data added to, and combined with some questions that reflect the hygiene and motivator factors. A certified translator in Muscat translated the questionnaire into the Arabic language and each translated question was written under each English question for all the questionnaire items to increase the accuracy of the questions and to make sure that all employees understood the questions.

The first section of the survey was consisted of five issues that gathered demographic data about the respondents: gender, age, marital status, education, occupation, and experience. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of 33 items covering the following factors due to (Herzberg theory: motivator factors; recognition; work itself, growth and achievement. In other hand for hygiene factors: organization policy, relationship with the peer, relation with supervisor, salary, works security) and the ‘Job satisfaction’. The answers to each of the questions were measured on the five- point Likert-type scale.  The questionnaire represented an extract and adapted version of a research instrument originally developed by Smerek and Peterson (2007).

The Smerek and Peterson (2007) survey was employed in this research because it is based on Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory. The main concept of this theory is the distinction between two groups of factors called motivation (or intrinsic factors) and hygiene (or extrinsic factors). In line with this framework, the researcher designed a questionnaire base on was used to measure GDPS’S employee ‘Job satisfaction’ based on Smerek and Peterson (2007) survey with considering some questions that not practicable with the context of the ‘X’ organization. Table 4.2 below shows the distribution of the questionnaire items as they correlate to Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory.

Table 4.2 Distributions of the Questions in Relation to Herzberg’s Motivation and Hygiene Theory:

Questionnaire subscales	Number of Items	Question Numbers
Hygiene
Recognition	3	1,2,3
Work itself	3	4,5,6
Growth	3	9,10,11
Opportunities for advancement	2	7,8
Achievement	3	12,13,14
Total	14
Motivators
Salary	3	21,22,23
Relationship with peers	3	24,25,26
Relationship with supervisor	3	18,19,20
Organization policy	3	15,16,17
Working condition	2	30,31
Working security	3	27,28,29
Total	17
‘Job satisfaction’	32,33                                  2
Total items	33

 

5.3 Pilot test of the questionnaire:

According to Burns and Grove (2009), some of the reasons for doing a pilot test include the following:

To determine whether the proposed study is feasible

To identify potential problems with the research design

To examine the validity and reliability of the data collection and research instruments

To give the researcher more experience with the research method and subject

To determine the justified sample

The purpose of piloting was to examine the instrument for timing, clarity, and accuracy. The questionnaire was translated into the Arabic language, and the Arabic questions were written under the English questions for all survey items to increase clarity and to make sure that all participants understood the survey easily. Five specialists of X organization were asked about the degree of simplicity of the questions, expected duration and understandability of the selected questionnaires. The responses of those specialists were not involved in the research sample. The results of this pilot test revealed that it got about 10–20 minutes to answer the questionnaire, and there was no struggle in reading the questions. The respondents admitted that the Arabic translations explained the questions being examined. Therefore, the content of the survey was not altered, just was changed by the extension of the Arabic translation of each item.

5.4 Validity and reliability of the instruments:

Validity and reliability are essential in data collection research tools (Bryman, 2008; Johnson & Christensen, 2008). Validity is an inherent measure to assess the quality of study (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2010). According to Cone and Foster (2003, p.156), validity is ‘the extent to which scores on a measure relate to scores on other measures’. Polit and Beck (2004 p. 714) claim that content validity is ‘the degree to which the items in an instrument adequately represent the universe of content for the concept being measured’. Reliability is also a crucial criterion to evaluate the quality of research (Cohen et al., 2010). Due to Creswell (2002 p.180), reliability intends that ‘individual scores from a tool should be nearly the same or stable on repeated administrations of the instrument, they should be free from sources of measurement error, and they should be consistent’.

Validity of the questionnaire:

So to assure the content validity of the survey and to recognize the level of ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS, the questionnaire’s validity was examined for the current research through a pilot study, which described above.

Internal Validity:

The internal validity of the research is low as with most field research.  The response of the respondents is likely to be impacted upon by numerous factors, as cited by John, William, and Whitmore (2008).  Some of the factors that have been identified to cause an impact on the internal validity of a study includes the following:

First, reactivity effects or the Hawthorne effects that are a kind of reactivity where the subjects being studied modifying their behavior because they are being studied.  This may have an impact on the internal validity where they respond, not because of the procedures of the study but merely as an independent response or reaction to being studied.  For instance, in the Hawthorne study, the researchers found though they had created different environments for the employees, the workers’ productivity just kept increasing.  They made a conclusion that the workers were merely responding, not because of the experimental conditions that had been created but because of their awareness of being studied (Meeusen et al., 2010).

Another notable threat to internal validity is selection bias.  Since participation in the study by respondents is voluntary, selection bias is likely to affect the internal validity.  Wood and Haber (2009) noted that in most studies in which target respondents decide themselves whether they wish to participate or not face the impact of selection bias.  In this threat, any change or alterations made in the measurement of variables or changes in the techniques of observation may justify changes in the measurement that is ultimately obtained.  A high-quality way of dealing with this threat is to ensure consistency of the instruments used and techniques applied in the study.

Another threat that may cause a considerable impact on the internal validity of this research study is a hypothesis guessing threat.  This threat is exhibited where the respondents base their reply and behavior. The basis of what they perceive from the study by responding to a reaction to the study rather the than just response to the survey questionnaire and has been explained by Sapsford (2007).  The researcher will minimize the impact of this threat by clarifying to the respondents the concepts of the study before the actual study commences.  This threat to internal validity is more often experienced where such event happens between the pre-test and post-test (Davis, 2007).

Nevertheless, the threats mentioned above will likely be minimized through proper proportional stratified random sampling coupled with careful and systematic consideration.  Moreover, plausible considerations will be put instead to ensure elimination of alternative causes of particular responses (Babbie, 2005).

External Validity

The external validity relates to the extent to which the results of the study can be generalized to particular populations. External validity also relates to the extent to which the results of the study could be generalized to particular populations.  This is a serious threat to external validity since the results of the study may not hold across all groups despite the use of true random sampling.  The salient threats to the external validity of the study are related to the extent of generalization that can be drawn from the study.  Historic behavior of the data, interaction, selection and treatment of data and structure of the settings have become the biggest threats of external validity of the survey.  

The biggest limitation is the trend in quantitative research, is to look for bigger patterns in small structure.  The generalization issue is one that would need to be correctly contested and addressed.  The possible problems here may well be as follows:

Social change is the aim of the research; the very essence of the research is thus subjective; predicting behavior is always going to be tricky.

The research approach is not very flexible.

Hence, to reduce the impacts of the threats to external validity, the researcher has identified the target population.  Further, the questionnaires are set in survey format so that concise answers can be achieved from the survey. It will help to conclude the research in a quantifiable manner.

Reliability of the questionnaire:

Cronbach’s alpha was practiced to measure the reliability of the questionnaire. Commonly, a reliability rate (alpha) of at minimum .70 is deemed reliable (Nunnally 1978). So according to the results from this study showed .90 and so it is considered strong. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha value for motivating factors was 0.94 and for hygiene factors, it was 0.86. The higher value of the alpha states the higher consistency among the items of the factors. It also proved the reliability of the gathered information. However, the high ‘alpha value’ makes a doubt on the similarity among the items of the factors of ‘Job satisfaction’. Therefore, the items were scrutinized thoroughly to reduce the redundant data. Table below shows the reliability statistics for the total study, as well as the motivation and hygiene factors.

Reliability Statistics (Cronbach’s alpha)
Factor	α	Number of items
Motivator	.94	16
Hygiene	.86	17
Total	.90	33

The Data Collection Procedure:

For the questionnaire, a letter of invitation, (Appendix C), will be attached and sent to participants to clarify what the research study is about and give the approximate span of the investigation. The researcher is working for the ‘X’ organization in the area of studies for the top administration, the permission to access the Directorate and contact participants not necessary for this study. However, the letter will also be an opportunity to explain the purpose of the study, assuring the respondents of confidentiality, and emphasize to them that participation is optional.

The duration of five working days is anticipated from the time the survey is distributed, to the date of the collection by the researcher.  The estimated completion time for the survey form is between 10 to 20 minutes.

One hundred fifteen set of questionnaires were distributed. The researcher got only 65 set filled by the respondents of GDPS unit’s specialists with a response rate of 56.5%. The data were collected through the distribution of questionnaires focusing on Directorate as mentioned earlier of Muscat Region. The questionnaires were distributed to General office, specialized office, and administrative department.

Data Analysis tools

The main approach to achieving research objectives of this report was the quantitative research method where research questionnaires have been used as a data-gathering tool. The sample population is the specialists of selected units at GDPS, who are randomly selected from their directorate in Muscat Region. Thus, the researcher has used SPSS 22.0 version & MS Excel for making graphs, charts of data, Cronbach’s Alpha for the reliability of questionnaires, applying Regression i.e. Linear Model. The research data obtained was assembled on Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and was applied to examine the relationship between the independent variables and dependent variables. Descriptive statistics was applied to examine the demographical data collected, and it comprises the frequency, mean, percentage distribution and standard deviation.

The inferential statistics employed Hierarchical multiple regression, Pearson product moment correlation coefficient, examination of variance (ANOVA), and T-tests. This statistics helps the researcher to acquire from the organized data by examining the correlation between two variables, variances in variables among different groups (Sekaran 2000). The variable demographic differences were considered by utilizing independent samples t-tests and analyzes of variance (ANOVA). Independent samples t-tests were meant to compare the mean amounts of two separate groups, so the test was done to examine differences in gender and marital status. Since age and years of service included more than two groups, ANOVAs were utilized.

Correlation analysis is utilized to depict the quality and heading of the straight relationship between dependent as well as independent variables. There are various diverse facts accessible from SPSS, contingent upon the level of estimation and the way of the information. In this study, two sorts of the association will be figured – the linear measurement and partial regression. Regression model shape can be assessed using R-squared values.  This analysis assists in understanding the strength of the predictor variables otherwise named as independent variables over the dependent factor. This testing is widely used for predicting or forecasting the effects of a factor and the variable. The sample is the representative of the population; error predicted in the random variable is assumed as zero conditional over the explanatory variable. The independent variables are supposed to be linear independent. The variance and covariance matrix errors are assumed to be diagonal and also every non-zero element is the variance of zero error.

3.7 Ethical Consideration

Ethics is fundamental in this research to uphold integrity and validity of the findings. Various steps were taken in this research conduct to ensure the ethical standards. The first ethical consideration was the use of an ethics form and the collection the approval before commencing the research. The approval shows the acknowledgement of standard ethical conduct during the research. The ethics form stated the possible ethical challenges and some ways in which the research can impact the participants. Completing the form explained how the challenges will be managed to achieve standardized research conduct.

Third party access to the data was eliminated as the storage and archiving was done in a highly secured location. The content of the research was stored in a computer system that is password protected. The identity of the participants was concealed to avoid any traceability or influence that will shape the findings. This was further reflected in the communication with participants as they were conducted over channels that protect the anonymity of participants.

This was important to achieve the integrity of this research and ensure that opinions are valid. The collected data was used for the purpose of this research alone without allowing any sort of access or influence from another party. The findings were put in electronic format and the hard copies safely kept to avoid compromise.

Achieving research validity is focused ensuring that the results of research reflect the actual reality. Achieving validity was initiated from the secondary research where theoretical discussion focused on the aims and objectives of the research. The secondary research provided variables that are core to the primary findings and the reality in the subject area. The questions and response options in the questionnaire were based on findings from previous researchers. The adopted method is another means for which research validity was achieved. Bias was eliminated by allowing participants to fill the questionnaire by themselves without any pressure. The participants were allowed to complete the survey without any sort of suggestion in the desired direction of the findings.

The conduct of the research was done in a manner in which subsequent research under the same circumstance will retrieve the same result. This was done by conducting secondary research using recent researches and materials to measure the accurate state of knowledge in the research area. The validity of the research influence the reliability as the accuracy of the findings ensures that subsequent research can be confident of the research finding quality.

Summary

The chapter has explained the method of different research can be employed in this study. It has also justified the method will be employed in this chapter. The research methodology of the study has explained the details method to be employed in this research. Further, it has explained the ethical considerations of the research.

Chapter Four: Results And Data Analysis

The statistical analyses of the research were split into two primary processes. Descriptive and inferential statistical studies were carried. The descriptive statistics included measures of frequency, mean, and standard deviation for each item of the questionnaire and the overall satisfaction scores of the topics. The inferential statistical involved the analysis of variance and t-tests were used to distinguish variations in ‘Job satisfaction’, motivation, and hygiene factors among responders. Multiple linear regression analysis and correlation test were also employed to recognize the highest predictor variables that influence responders level of ‘Job satisfaction’ at GDPS.

Descriptive Statistics

This section shows the demographic and individual characteristics of the GDPS specialists engaging in the research and gives the response to the first five items on the question’s demographic part. Table 5.1 shows that 33 percent of the employees were female, and 67% percent were male. 45% of the staffs were less 30 to 40 years of age, 30 percent were 18–29 years and 25 per cent were above 40 years. More than half (66 percent) of the employee were married, 34% percent were single. Besides, more than half of responses (58 percent) of the GDPS had an undergraduate certificate, and 18 percent of them held a postgraduate as the same percentage with secondary education and below with same each diploma and Ph.D. alike three percentages. It can be incidental that most of the employees participated in the analysis were found to be highly educated. Forty five percent of the sample informed that they had less than 10 years of experience in civil servant; 32 percent had between 11 to 20 years of experience; and only 13 percent of the participants showed that they had more than 20 years of experience. (See table 5.1).

Gender wise satisfaction of the employees has scored a good mean for both the male and female employees. The deviation for the female is lower than the male one. The combined deviation of the job satisfaction is 1.13. The age wise result shows that overall mean is 3.13 with a deviation of 1.13. The majority sample consists of young generation. Therefore, it can be seen that sample of the employees are formed with the three different aged people whereas the middle-aged people are minimum in that sample. The ‘Job satisfaction’ among the young-aged people is higher than other aged employees. The marital status of the employees’ shows that majority of the employees are married while it has low deviation in terms of satisfaction in job. The score of ‘job satisfaction’ is higher for the low educated people. The highest degree holders have the least satisfaction of their job.     

Table 5.1
Demographic and Personal Characteristics of the Study Group (N=67)

Characteristics	N	Percentage
Gender:	Male Female	45 22	67% 33%
Age	18 to 29 30 to 40 Above 40	20 30 17	30% 45% 25%
Marital status:	Single Married	23 44	34% 66%
Educational Level:	Secondary education and below Diploma Undergraduate Postgraduate Ph.D.	12 2 39 12 2	18% 3% 58% 18% 3%
Experiences:	Less than 10 years 10 to 20 years Above 20 years	30 28 9	45% 42% 13%

Responses to the Factors Reflecting Hygiene and Motivation

Table 5.4 provides a summary of the descriptive statistics for motivation factors, including advancement, the work itself, growth, recognition and personal achievement. It was determined that the overall mean satisfaction score for the motivation factors be M=3.1, SD=1.1; with the highest mean and SD scores reported for growth (M=3.1, SD=1.1); and the lowest score was for advancement (M=2.0, SD=0.73). From the table, we can see that the motivation factors of the employees in government job in X organization have the highest affinity towards personal growth as well as the achievement from the job. The variable ‘work itself’ has scored moderately well in this case. It means the employees can be satisfied due to complete their job on their own. It is an external factor in this theory to influence the ‘job satisfaction’ of the employees. The award and recognition of the work done in the organization for the especially skilled people has moderately well. However, the volatility in ‘work itself’ is higher than the ‘recognition’ variable. It provides the truth on the sentiment of the employees that states majority of people like to be recognized by others during a job rather the self-satisfaction is enough. The scope in the job sector also motivates the people highly as it can be seen from statistics. However, it can be said that employees are more concerned of growth and achievement rather promotion and scope from the job. The satisfaction level of the employees for the recognition for their performance has scored lower than the achievement as the later has empirical evidence over the former. Due to failing to prove the appearance of the recognition through empirical evidence to the employees, it is lesser popular among them. Further, it might be said being internal factors for motivation, employees favor the empirical evidences and recognizable proof of development in satisfying themselves. The factors of hygiene are also derived in this process. The relationship with the supervisor has the least impact on the employees as the mean has scored minimum in this regard. Working condition in the companies has scored the highest. Therefore, it can be said that employees can be dissatisfied due to bad working condition more than other issues. The job security holds an important position in this matter for the employees. The high mean value of security of the job is welcome by the employees whereas policy of the organization is also a factor for them. Transparent policies are the factors to make the employees satisfied at work place (Schroder, 2008). Salary holds a good position in the sentiment of the employees. However, it is not the most important matter for dissatisfaction of the employees in government sector. Relationship with the peers companies is essential in this regard, as the employees think it as a positive move from the company.

Statistics
	Jsatisfaction	recognition	workitself	opp.Adv	Growth	achievement	organizpoly	Rsupervisor	salary	Rpeers	Wsecurity	Wcondition
N	Valid	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Missing	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Mean	3.1343	2.9353	3.0597	2.0348	3.0746	3.0746	3.0597	2.8756	3.0697	3.1294	3.0896	3.2090
Std. Deviation	1.13679	.72064	1.09932	.72968	1.15881	1.10983	1.06193	.72436	1.06606	1.08705	1.06771	1.03773
Variance	1.292	.519	1.209	.532	1.343	1.232	1.128	.525	1.136	1.182	1.140	1.077
Minimum	1.00	1.67	1.00	.67	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.33	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
Maximum	5.00	4.33	5.00	3.33	5.00	5.00	5.00	4.33	5.00	5.00	5.00	5.00

Statistics

Statistically, gender in the sample has mean of 1.33 with a deviation of .473. The distribution of gender is positively skewed with a negative Kurtosis. Age is distributed with a positive skewness and negative kurtosis. The deviation of age is .747 with a variance of .559. Marital status of the sample is negatively skewed as well as having negative kurtosis.

 

Relation with the individual factors of motivation and hygiene with job satisfaction

The table shows that job satisfactions has the correlation with recognition and ‘work itself’ by -1.34 and -.55 respectively. The rest of the three motivational factors are also negatively correlated with job satisfaction. It can be seen that among the hygiene factors, organizational policy is positively correlated – .16 value. However, the rest of the factors such as relationship with supervisor, salary, relationship with peers, work security and working conditions – all are negatively correlated.

Correlations
	Jsatisfaction	recognition	workitself	opp.Adv	Growth	achievement	organizpoly	Rsupervisor	salary	Rpeers	Wsecurity	Wcondition
Jsatisfaction	Pearson Correlation	1	-.134	-.055	-.085	-.061	-.018	.016	-.056	.576**	.703**	.562**	.682**
Sig. (2-tailed)		.279	.658	.495	.622	.885	.896	.652	.000	.000	.000	.000
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
recognition	Pearson Correlation	-.134	1	.502**	.513**	.381**	.461**	.381**	.304*	-.101	-.230	-.194	-.080
Sig. (2-tailed)	.279		.000	.000	.001	.000	.001	.012	.414	.061	.116	.522
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
workitself	Pearson Correlation	-.055	.502**	1	.954**	.845**	.915**	.910**	.515**	.001	-.122	-.085	.009
Sig. (2-tailed)	.658	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.000	.995	.325	.494	.944
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
opp.Adv	Pearson Correlation	-.085	.513**	.954**	1	.869**	.914**	.871**	.534**	-.020	-.167	-.147	.010
Sig. (2-tailed)	.495	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.000	.869	.177	.236	.934
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Growth	Pearson Correlation	-.061	.381**	.845**	.869**	1	.769**	.846**	.440**	.057	-.088	-.078	.029
Sig. (2-tailed)	.622	.001	.000	.000		.000	.000	.000	.647	.479	.533	.817
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
achievement	Pearson Correlation	-.018	.461**	.915**	.914**	.769**	1	.888**	.533**	-.033	-.114	-.146	-.014
Sig. (2-tailed)	.885	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.000	.791	.358	.237	.912
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
organizpoly	Pearson Correlation	.016	.381**	.910**	.871**	.846**	.888**	1	.445**	.019	-.056	-.054	.027
Sig. (2-tailed)	.896	.001	.000	.000	.000	.000		.000	.881	.650	.666	.825
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Rsupervisor	Pearson Correlation	-.056	.304*	.515**	.534**	.440**	.533**	.445**	1	.221	.155	.028	.069
Sig. (2-tailed)	.652	.012	.000	.000	.000	.000	.000		.073	.209	.824	.581
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
salary	Pearson Correlation	.576**	-.101	.001	-.020	.057	-.033	.019	.221	1	.779**	.803**	.685**
Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.414	.995	.869	.647	.791	.881	.073		.000	.000	.000
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Rpeers	Pearson Correlation	.703**	-.230	-.122	-.167	-.088	-.114	-.056	.155	.779**	1	.776**	.708**
Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.061	.325	.177	.479	.358	.650	.209	.000		.000	.000
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Wsecurity	Pearson Correlation	.562**	-.194	-.085	-.147	-.078	-.146	-.054	.028	.803**	.776**	1	.621**
Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.116	.494	.236	.533	.237	.666	.824	.000	.000		.000
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
Wcondition	Pearson Correlation	.682**	-.080	.009	.010	.029	-.014	.027	.069	.685**	.708**	.621**	1
Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.522	.944	.934	.817	.912	.825	.581	.000	.000	.000
N	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67	67
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Table 2 Correlation Matrix of motivator-hygiene factors and Job Satisfaction

JS

RC

WI

OA

GR

AC

OP

RS

SA

RP

WS

WC

JS

RC

-.134

WI

-.055

.502**

OA

-.085

.513**

.954**

GR

-.061

.381*

.845*

.869**

AC

-.018

.461**

.915**

.914**

.769**

OP

0.16

.381**

.910**

.871**

.846**

.888**

RS

-.056

.304**

.515**

.534**

.440**

.533**

.445**

SA

.576**

-.101

.001

-.020

.057

-.033

.019

.221**

RP

.703**

-.230*

-.122

-.167

-.088

-.114

-.056

.155

.779**

WS

.562**

-.194

-.085

-.147

-.078

-.147

.054

.028

.803**

.776**

WC

.682**

-.080

.009

.010

.029

-.014

.027

.069

.685**

.708**

.621**

From the correlation matrix, we can see a significant result in this case. Except, organization policy, not any of the factors have positive relation with the ‘Job satisfaction’. It provides that satisfaction of jobs for the employees is not correlated with the factors of satisfaction of the Omani government employees. Further, we also can elaborate that the negative correlation with the hygiene factors with satisfaction are in line as they are the reason behind the dissatisfaction for the employees in the job. However, the negative correlation with the motivators show that selected factors for motivating the employees in the government firms is not enough. The Pearson correlation co-efficient are way behind the significant value of the respective motivators.     

The correlation matrix of the factors can be seen in the table. The relationship of recognition of the employees’ performance with ‘work itself’ [a self satisfactory factor] is .502 – positive and significant at 95% confidence level. The opportunity for the employees in the firm is positively correlated with the ‘work itself’ and recognition of performance of the employees at 95% confidence level. At 99% confidence level, the correlation between growth and recognition and ‘work itself’ is significant – 381 and .845 respectively. The factor shows significant correlation with opportunity for the employees at 95% confidence level. Achievement from the job in government sector is correlated positively with the other factors at 95% confidence level. However, the significant values show intimidated correlation with ‘work itself’ and opportunity for advancing in career. From the motivating factors, it can be analyzed that majority the correlation of the factors are at 95% confidence level. Thereby, it can be summarized that the measure of correlation is accurate up to 95%. The dissimilarities were seen in case of growth factor, which is significantly correlated with recognition and ‘work itself’ with 99% accuracy. According to Schroder (2008), growth is not an intrinsic factor as it has some connection with salary of the employees. Therefore, at the time of analyzing the hygiene factors, the discrepancy in relation of growth will be found clearly to nullify any judgmental decision. Achievement has shown higher correlation with work itself as well as opportunity for the employees as the former factor is an internal matter along with the opportunity. However, the factor ‘work itself’ for self satisfaction is an extrinsic factor for the employees.

The hygiene factor such as organization policy of the company has positive correlation with all the motivators at 95% confidence level. Among them, the significant values are with ‘work itself’ and achievement from the job. The opportunities as well as growth factors are also strongly correlated with this hygiene factor. Therefore, it can be said that employees are concerned with the dissatisfaction level with the organization policy. The policies of the firms might vary with the internal matters, thus influencing the motivators of the employees. The factor ‘relationship wit the supervisor’ is positively correlated with the other motivators at 95% confidence level. However, it is found that none of them is having high affinity towards the motivational factors in job. The employees of the government organization are not much affected from changing in organization policy, which makes the relationship between relationships with supervisor poorly positive. It means the overall satisfaction due to bad relationship with supervisor has become a negative catalyst for the employees ‘Job satisfaction’. The salary is the factor that is correlated with satisfaction of the employees positively at 95% level of interval. The research found that salary is also influenced by the relationship with supervisor in work in the government jobs. This factor is negatively correlated with other factors such as recognition, advancement in career and growth of employment of ‘job satisfaction’. The salary is correlated merely with the ‘work itself’, achievement and organization policy if the X organization. The relationship with peers has positive correlation with satisfaction as it deduces the negative valuation for the dissatisfaction of the employees. The factor has also strong correlation with salary of the employees. Therefore, the salary of the individual employees influences the relationship between competitor companies and the X organization. Working security in the government sectors are high therefore, the measurement of the field shows that positive relationship with relationship with peers. It helps the company to reduce the attrition rate as well as increase the satisfaction of the employees in the government services. Correlation between working security with tackling the peers’ relation is possible by some days. The positive correlation shows the 95% confidence level in this case. The ‘work condition’ for the employees has correlation with the job satisfaction as well as other hygiene factors. The value for this test is .685, .708 and .62 respectively correlated with salary, relationship with peers and work security of the employees. From the hygiene factors of the government organization, it can be assumed that the factors are isolated from the changes happen for the company’s internal matter. However, the change in the factor ‘work itself’ has administered some changes of the hygiene factors as this factor is the external matter for the organization (Schroder, 2008). The correlation matrix of motivators and hygiene factors at different confidence level shows the 95% of accuracy from the gathered data. Further, it is also found that change in the motivators is not in the line with the hygiene factors. It is a good sign as the motivators are the factors for motivating the employees to gain the ‘Job satisfaction’ from the job while the hygiene factors are the reasons behind the dissatisfaction of the employees. Apart from the external motivator, ‘work itself’, all other motivational factors have followed this rule. According to Wright & Davis (2003), being an external agent of motivation in job for the employees, ‘work itself’ has administered its changes with the some hygiene factors of the company, thus, correlating with them.

Table : Descriptive Statistics
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Jsatisfaction	67	1.00	5.00	3.1343	1.13679
recognition	67	1.67	4.33	2.9353	.72064
workitself	67	1.00	5.00	3.0597	1.09932
opp.Adv	67	.67	3.33	2.0348	.72968
achievement	67	1.00	5.00	3.0746	1.10983
Growth	67	1.00	5.00	3.0746	1.15881
organizpoly	67	1.00	5.00	3.0597	1.06193
Rsupervisor	67	1.33	4.33	2.8756	.72436
salary	67	1.00	5.00	3.0697	1.06606
Rpeers	67	1.00	5.00	3.1294	1.08705
Wsecurity	67	1.00	5.00	3.0896	1.06771
Wcondition	67	1.00	5.00	3.2090	1.03773
Valid N (listwise)	67

From the prediction analysis, it can be seen that R² has the value of .621, which is less than .7. Thus, it can be said that from the survey, the contained data fails to predict the model of the ‘job satisfaction’ of the employees in X organization by 38%. The value of r square shows the prediction can be done successfully for the factors of the Herzberg model where the satisfaction and the hygiene are the main concern.

Table : Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate	Change Statistics
R Square Change	F Change	df1	df2	Sig. F Change
1	.788a	.621	.545	.76708	.621	8.177	11	55	.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), Wcondition, workitself, recognition, Rsupervisor, Wsecurity, Growth, Rpeers, salary, achievement, organizpoly, opp.Adv

From the individual coefficient of the factors of the satisfaction of the Herzberg model, it can be seen that composite constant is significant from the test. Further, it is also seen that individually no factor has any significant impact on the ‘Job satisfaction’ except relation with the peers companies. The significant value at 95% confidence level is .004 achieved from the t test while the value of the B is .541 for ‘relation with the peers’. Another factor, growth has also significant coefficient value at 95% confidence level. Despite having the significant coefficient, the value is negative in this case. It reflects that poor result for the ‘Job satisfaction’. Therefore, the test of coefficient of this factor is significant. For the factor ‘work itself’, the value of the coefficient is negative. It means the low ‘job satisfaction’ for the employees in that company. The factor ‘work itself’ is administered here as the proxy of self-sufficiency as well as showing the character of the employee as independent one who gets satisfied after perfect completion of the job. The negative coefficient of this factor states that employees in Omani company have low value of self-sufficiency. The negative coefficient of opportunity and advancement factor provides that low score in ‘Job satisfaction’ due to the presence of this factor among the employees. The employees of the company are not much interested in making progress and try the other opportunity in their career. According to Wright & Davis (2003), the government employees have the mentality to have a career of monologues as well as reject the versatile career options. Achievement is the last factors for motivators in the firm and it has scored insignificant value in coefficient B. The same for the salary of the employees is not significant. Salary works as the proxy for hygiene factors for the employees in job. It depicts that salary does not mean everything for the employees as it has insignificant coefficient. Relationship with the supervisor and working security have negative coefficient. It means employees have low ‘Job satisfaction’ due to this. The working condition has positive coefficient and significant too in this regard. Therefore, the ‘Job satisfaction’ of the employees must go high for better working condition.    

Table : Coefficientsa
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.	95.0% Confidence Interval for B
B	Std. Error	Beta	Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	(Constant)	.824	.625		1.318	.193	-.428	2.076
recognition	.047	.160	.030	.297	.767	-.273	.368
workitself	-.125	.359	-.121	-.349	.729	-.844	.594
opp.Adv	-.072	.568	-.046	-.127	.899	-1.211	1.066
Growth	-.128	.194	-.130	-.658	.513	-.518	.262
achievement	.307	.263	.300	1.166	.249	-.221	.835
organizpoly	.137	.264	.128	.518	.607	-.393	.667
Rsupervisor	-.399	.175	-.254	-2.284	.026	-.750	-.049
salary	.075	.182	.070	.410	.684	-.290	.439
Rpeers	.541	.180	.517	3.009	.004	.180	.901
Wsecurity	-.072	.175	-.068	-.411	.683	-.423	.279
Wcondition	.368	.143	.336	2.572	.013	.081	.656
a. Dependent Variable: Jsatisfaction

Results for independent sample test

The significant value of gender on independent test is more than .05. Therefore, it can be said that variances of the sample are equal as the significant value of the two is same almost. Therefore, no practical difference is present between the means of the two. For age wise, the different value was 0.024 which is lower than 0.05. Therefore, the different means are present. Analyzing the situation with marital status, it can be said that the two-tailed difference between significant values are not present. Therefore, statistically there is no difference between the mean numbers of married and not married. The difference between means of significant values in case of educational level is .06, greater than .05. Therefore, different mean difference has happened by chance rather by manipulation. The difference for experience of the employees in this sample is .01 which is lower than .05. Thus, it concludes that mean difference has significant changes in its characteristics. It states that experience state can bring more employees to be satisfied rather the inexperienced employees.

Table :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
Gender	Equal variances assumed	.048	.831	-.109	11	.915	-.024	.218	-.504	.456
Equal variances not assumed			-.108	10.378	.916	-.024	.220	-.511	.463
Age	Equal variances assumed	2.556	.138	1.691	11	.119	.619	.366	-.187	1.425
Equal variances not assumed			1.625	7.912	.143	.619	.381	-.261	1.499
Marital status	Equal variances assumed	.399	.540	-.325	11	.751	-.095	.293	-.740	.549
Equal variances not assumed			-.326	10.806	.751	-.095	.292	-.739	.549
Educational level	Equal variances assumed	.133	.723	.499	11	.628	.310	.621	-1.057	1.676
Equal variances not assumed			.507	10.980	.622	.310	.610	-1.033	1.652
Years of experience in your job	Equal variances assumed	1.032	.332	3.029	11	.011	.976	.322	.267	1.685
Equal variances not assumed			3.154	9.916	.010	.976	.310	.286	1.667

The test of ANOVA

The test of ANOVA considers the ‘Job satisfaction’ and the factors of biodata of the employees. Therefore, the sum between the square of the group can establish a 2.17 with a insignificant changes in F test. Therefore, gender wise the variance analysis has covered between groups and within groups with the significant change in F test. It depicts that only satisfied employees have no difference between genders of the employees while analyzing the data within groups.

The sample of the employees in this case, the employees of the government organization has significant mean differences within the groups. The sum of the squares for this case is 36.86, which depicts that 36.86% of the value of age can contained the ‘Job satisfaction’ among the employees. However, the test passed between the groups initially but the sample was not enough to make any decision.

The marital status of the employees is not significant between the group and within the groups. Therefore, ‘Job satisfaction’ of an employee is independent of marital status of the employee while the sum of the square of the means of the groups of married employees is so poor to reveal 25% of the contained information.

The educational level and experiences of the employees have significant role in ‘Job satisfaction’. Bother of them have significant mean squares are more than significant values of the respective variables. The educational level can state the 105% of reasons behind ‘Job satisfaction’ of an employee.

Job Satisfaction And Bio Data

Table :ANOVA
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Gender	Between Groups	2.208	8	.276	1.273	.275
Within Groups	12.568	58	.217
Total	14.776	66
Age	Between Groups	6.156	8	.770	1.453	.194
Within Groups	30.710	58	.529
Total	36.866	66
Marital status	Between Groups	.618	8	.077	.309	.960
Within Groups	14.487	58	.250
Total	15.104	66
Educational level	Between Groups	7.466	8	.933	.887	.533
Within Groups	61.042	58	1.052
Total	68.507	66
Years of experience in your job	Between Groups	5.977	8	.747	1.639	.134
Within Groups	26.441	58	.456
Total	32.418	66

Chapter 5

Conclusion

From the above chapter, we can make some important conclusion regarding the ‘Job satisfaction’. The employees of the government organization have some different metrics for being satisfied with their jobs. According to Herzberg theory of satisfaction, the motivators and hygiene are the main factors for measuring the ‘Job satisfaction’ (Wright & Davis, 2003). In this context, the survey was conducted to find out the reasons behind the satisfaction in government jobs. The employees of the government company [X organization] have many reasons for being satisfied for their jobs. The key challenge in this context is the privatization of the industry in Oman. The private industry pays better and flexibility of work is much high. The government sector is facing challenge in Oman to compete with the private sector to make the employees satisfied. The ‘Job satisfaction’ is an important matter for the employees to get the best from them. There are two metrics for assessing the same – motivators and hygiene. Motivators provide the employees satisfaction in their job while the hygiene factors dissatisfy the employees from their job. The jobs for the specialists in GDPS are associated with special criteria as well as jobs. In the following section, the truth about the hypotheses will be revealed.

Hypotheses 1  

H₁: There exists a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: ‘Job satisfaction’ and factors of hygiene has no positive relationship.

The hypotheses 1 has tested negative. Thus, the null hypotheses is positive here. The hygiene factors of the employees have negative relation with the ‘Job satisfaction’ of the employees.

Hypothesis 2

H₁: There exists a positive relationship between each motivation factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: There exists no positive relationship between each motivation factor and ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

In this case, null hypotheses tests positive due to negative correlation between the ‘Job satisfaction’ and motivators.

Hypothesis 3

H₁: Hygiene and Motivation Factors significantly explain the variance in ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: Hygiene and Motivation Factors does not explain the variance in ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS.

Hypotheses tests positive as significant behavior from the coefficients of the factors of hygiene and motivators.

Hypothesis 4

H₁: ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS will diversify depending on the education and career experience details of specialists at GDPS.

H₀: ‘Job satisfaction’ of specialists at GDPS will not diversify depending on the education and career experience details of specialists at GDPS.

Independent sample test has shown that ‘Job satisfaction’ varies due to education level and the experience of the employees. Thus, the hypotheses tests positive.

Linking to objectives

To find out the ‘Job satisfaction’ and Motivational level of GDPS’s employee regarding Hygiene and Motivator factors of Herzberg’s two-factor theory

‘Job satisfaction’ can be drawn using the Herzberg’s two factor theory. The two factor theory has explained about the means of satisfaction and the dissatisfaction of the employees of GDPS’s. The key challenge is of diversified work experience as well as high package from the private sector to the government employees. It is universal truth that government jobs have more security as well as low pressure due to stipulated working activities. Therefore, it has become a tradition of Omani people to get a government job in their country. However, rapid privatization has shown that employees are getting high package that is a means of satisfaction. The employees in the government sectors are having trouble due to low motivation as the public sector has the culmination of work towards social considerations. Herzberg’s two-factor theory can evaluate the motivational level of the employees in government sector as there is little scope for the employees to grow their career. Further, it is also observed that achievements from this type of jobs are the least, as they cannot be recognized individually. The growth in government sector is always very monotonous due to their policy of standard increment and promotion in a long interval. The employees become satisfied due to the presence of motivators in their job. The basis of job satisfaction is the presence of positive motivators in job for the employees. Regarding the government jobs, the presence of work security and policy of the organization are the only motivators for the employees. Therefore, Herzberg’s two-factor theory can explain the ‘Job satisfaction’ of the employees of GDPS’s as well as motivation level too.

To investigate the effect of the fulfillment of Hygiene and Motivator factors on the motivation of employees.

The effect of hygiene and motivating factors on the employees can be explained using the Herzberg’s two-factor theory. The objective is normally the solution to the job satisfaction of the employees. Therefore, the factors of motivation are depended on the hygiene and motivators in job. Hygiene factors are the reasons behind the dissatisfaction of the employees about their job. The factors such as organization policy, relationship with supervisor, salary, relationship with peers company, work security and working condition in office are the factors to reduce the motivation of the employees in their job. Further, it can be said deteriorating of the hygiene factors might reduce the motivation of the employees to work appropriately. Increases of the hygiene factors are also reduce the satisfaction regarding the jobs. However, the motivators are the means of increasing of the motivation of the employees in their job. The change in the factors of motivators might increase the motivation of the employees. The hygiene factors might reduce the motivational factors as well as job satisfaction of the employees while motivators act as the positive catalyst for motivation of the employees in their job. Not many employees can have the job satisfaction due to absence of motivators in job. However, the change in the hygiene factors might change the satisfaction level of the employees but not the motivation in their activities. It is the satisfaction of the job that makes the differentiation between the motivational level of the employees. Further, it can be found that the factors of motivators can motivate the employees easily due to its outcomes are the means of encouraging the employees.

Chapter 6

Recommendations

From the project on the job satisfaction of the government employees in Omani context, the recommendations can be made towards the employees and the authority. From the above-mentioned conclusion, it is found that the employees in the government sectors need the motivation to work. Further, the hygiene factors of the jobs are also a constraint in making the employees satisfied. It is recommended to the authority of the Oman to change the organization policy of stipulated scope of work. Further, salary as well as the working condition of the employees is necessary to be changed to reduce the hygiene factors in this case. Working condition of an office improves the motivational level of the employees in their job. The competitive salary and performance-based salary might improve the situation too. It encourages employees to perform well and furnish the job carefully. The change in relationship with the peers company is a factor too, which must be improved for making the employees competitive. It is recommended too conduct quality circle in the departments for improving the relationships with the supervisors.

The motivators are the factors to improve the satisfaction level of the employees in positive way. Therefore, it is recommended to employ some different policies for recognizing the good works for the employees. The awards and special appraisal might improve the level of the motivation of the employees as it encourages them to work better. It is the normal human psychology to get the recognition for their activities. They feel good for being recognized for their activities. Therefore, government organization must change their policies to recognize the best employees and implement some awards and special promotion for special performance from the employees. It will also help to improve the rigid promotion policy of the government companies. The employees, especially the young employees to utilize their working energy towards the jobs. It might enhance the service quality of the government towards society as well as improve the disaster situation. Due to change in policy of promotion might bring the flexibility towards the activities of the employees. The employees might initiate to reduce the challenges and obstacles in their activities from their own. The change in growth of the career may provide the employees motivation in their job. Therefore, government companies must reduce the rigid policy of the growth in career that might enhance the job satisfaction as well as might extract the best from the employees. The flexibility in work hours as well as the growth encourage the employees of young generation to give their hundred percent in their activities. In addition to this, it is also recommended that achievement hold a good position in job satisfaction for the employees. The satisfied employees bring more production with quality and innovation in jobs. Therefore, government organization must follow the rules and break the rules for the exceptional cases for better performing employees. These will be encouraging the best brains to work in the government sector as well.

References

Hans, A., Asra Mubeen, D., & Al Ghabshi, A. (2015). A Study on Locus of Control and Job Satisfaction in Semi-Government Organizations in Sultanate of Oman. The SIJ Transactions On Industrial, Financial & Business Management, 1(2), 93-100.