1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

2

CHAPTER –I

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

Universities are the most important centres of research and educational

activities in every country and faculty members at universities are among most

significant characters in educational system and most principle elements of

development in every country. Also training expert human resources is achievable

through reinforcement of academic education. Therefore, we must try to identify

different motivating and stimulating factors and also variants that form these

factors and their effects and study and analyze them.

Training is a systematic process of developing employees‟ knowledge,

skills, and abilities that are essential to perform the job effectively (Davis & Van

Wert, 1998; Patrick, 2000; Swanson & Holton, 2001). Organizations recognized

the importance of training in terms of its contributions to productivity and

organizational performance (Scott & Meyer, 1991).

Faculty is an important part of cooperative research centers. However,

their decision to become involved in a center is entirely voluntary. A center‟s

success is dependent on both the recruitment and retention of top-notch faculty.

Knowing what contributes to a faculty member‟s satisfaction, commitment, and

ultimately decision to remain in the organization should be a high priority for

center management.

This research studies the Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and Organizational

Commitment among faculty members of secondary level teacher training

program in India (Mysore) and Iran (Tehran)-a comparative study.

3

One of the elements that are considered in survival of organizations by

managers or organization heads is human resource. In a general view, success in

any organization depends on efforts and Job Satisfaction of organization staff.

The 20th century has been called the century of anxiety and psychological

disorders and one of the duties of managers is considering their staff/employees'

mental health. Managers should always consider Self Esteem and Job Satisfaction

as two important elements in mental hygiene of the staff.

Self Esteem describes ones feelings regarding his or her value or it are to

consider oneself as a valuable person. This particular kind of consideration comes

from all of the thoughts, feelings, emotions and experiences throughout one's life.

On the other hand, Job Satisfaction is a concept that indicates the mental and

spiritual enjoyment that one gains from his or her job through satisfaction of

needs, interests and hopes.

The relationship between Job Satisfaction and Self Esteem and Job

Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment has been pondered for decades by

many different professionals. These groups of professionals include psychologists,

sociologists, academic professors, and people from the business community. In a

capitalistic environment, learning the relationship that exists between Job

Satisfaction and Self- Esteem is for the ultimate purpose of improving worker

productivity. However, from a human interest prospective, the importance of the

relationship is to learn whether happiness with one's job is related to one's self-

confidence.

Many researchers point out that Organizational Commitment has remained

a topic of interest ever since it was introduced in the early 1950s to the field of

organizational behaviour (Meyer & Allen, 1993).

4

Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction are widely studied

factors in management literature which are the precursors of employees‟

performance. These factors are even more important to study in academic

institutions, especially universities which are the sources of human resources and

sole responsible for educating the intellect of nations. Teacher is the central

element in educational system holding various important responsibilities. The

overall performance of universities depends upon their teachers and ultimately

their level of commitment and Job Satisfaction. Thus understanding their

behaviours and attitudes needs more attention in organizations (Tsui & Cheng,

1999).

Faculty members are the main structure of every university. Colleges and

universities need experienced teachers as one of the principles for education in

order to raise scientific level of students. Job dissatisfaction and low Self Esteem

among faculty members could threaten their physical and mental health and life

quality and could prevent achieving individual and social development.

Organizational Commitment is an important variant in understanding staff

behaviour. It influences performance of staff and improves productivity, services

and quality. Bateman and Stressed (1984) state that the reasons for studying

Organizational Commitment are related to “(a) employee behaviours and

performance effectiveness, (b) attitudinal, affective, and cognitive constructs such

as Job Satisfaction, (c) characteristics of the employee‟s job and role, such as

responsibility and (d) personal characteristics of the employee such as age, job

tenure.

Self- Esteem has long been known to play a significant role in education in

general.

5

In recent years there has been an enthusiastic rebirth of interest in the

subject of Self Esteem. Among others the research writings of (Rosenberg, 1965;

Coppersmith, 1967) have provided a deeper understanding of the dynamics of

Self- Esteem in determining behaviour. In addition, recent developments in the

areas of developmental, cognitive, experimental, social and clinical psychology

have all contributed to the Recognition of the importance of self-concept and Self-

Esteem in understanding human behaviour.

Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and Organizational Commitment of faculty

members are the most important elements in academic education. If we intend to

improve productivity and effectiveness of academic education system and

universities, we should study the influential elements on Job Satisfaction, Self

Esteem and Organizational Commitment of faculty members prior to anything

else.

1.1. Concept of Job Satisfaction

1.1.1Definition of Job Satisfaction

To begin a discussion on Job Satisfaction, one might logically begin with a

definition. Varied definitions have been given in literature for Job Satisfaction.

Nevertheless, 'there appears to be a general agreement that Job Satisfaction is an

affective (that is emotional) reaction to a job that results from the incumbent's

comparison of the actual outcomes with those that are desired (expected,

deserved, and so on). (Cranny, Smith, & Stone, 1992). Job Satisfaction is a

positive feeling an individual has towards his or her job (Daft, 2003). An

employee who is satisfied feels fulfilled doing the job. It is an inherent feeling

6

that one's talents are being fully utilized and that one's contribution is impacting

society, while at the same time, personal growth-needs are being met.

Job Satisfaction has also been defined by Mullins (2005) as being more of

an attitude, an internal state. It could, for example, be associated with a personal

feeling of achievement, either quantitative or qualitative. Mullins further stated

that concept of Job Satisfaction is regarded as complex and multifaceted.

Many researchers in the field of social sciences have attempted to define

the concept of Job Satisfaction. However, Al-Owed (2001) pointed out that there

is a diversity of interpretations of the term and that there is no universal

comprehensive definition. This fact is confirmed by the work of Palatka and

Mammon (2008) who state that there is no universal definition of the term Job

Satisfaction that can be agreed upon. Locke (1969) defined Job Satisfaction as an

emotional state related to the positive or negative appraisal of job experiences.

Vroom (1982) defined Job Satisfaction as workers‟ emotional orientation toward

their current job roles. Similarly, Schultz (1982) stated that Job Satisfaction is

essentially the psychological disposition of people toward their work. Hop pock

(1935) defined Job Satisfaction as “any combination of psychological,

physiological, and environmental circumstances that causes a person truthfully to

say, „I am satisfied with my job‟‟.

1.1.2 Importance of Job Satisfaction

Specter (1997) presented three reasons to clarify the importance of Job

Satisfaction. First, organizations can be directed by humanitarian values. Based on

these values they will attempt to treat their employees honorably and with respect.

Job Satisfaction assessment can then serve as an indicator of the extent to which

7

employees are dealt with effectively. High levels of Job Satisfaction could also be

a sign of emotional wellness or mental fitness. Second, organizations can take on

a utilitarian position in which employees‟ behavior would be expected to

influence organizational operations according to the employees‟ degree of Job

Satisfaction/dissatisfaction.

Job Satisfaction can be expressed through positive behaviors and job

dissatisfaction through negative behaviors. Third, Job Satisfaction can be an

indicator of organizational operations.

Assessment of Job Satisfaction might identify various levels of satisfaction

among organizational departments and, therefore, be helpful in pinning down

areas in need of improvement. Specter (1997) believed that each one of the

reasons is validation enough of the significance of Job Satisfaction and that the

combination of the reasons provides an understanding of the focus on Job

Satisfaction.

Specter, of course, is only one of many researchers, scholars, and writers

who addressed the importance of Job Satisfaction. His reasons appear to be

representative of many views on the importance of the concept in other major

works (i.e., Bruce & Blackburn, 1992; Cranny et al, 1992) dealing with Job

Satisfaction.

1.1.3 Theories of Job Satisfaction

There are numerous theories attempting to explain Job Satisfaction, but

three conceptual frameworks seem to be more prominent in the literature. The first

is content theory, which suggests that Job Satisfaction occurs when one‟s need for

growth and self-actualization are met by the individual‟s job. The second

8

conceptual framework is often referred to as process theory, which attempts to

explain Job Satisfaction by looking at how well the job meets one‟s expectations

and values. The third conceptual group includes situational theories, which

proposes that Job Satisfaction is a product of how well an individual‟s personal

characteristics interact or mesh with the organizational characteristics. Each of the

three theoretical frameworks has been explored and reviewed by countless

scholars and researchers, and the purpose of this chapter is not to provide an

exhaustive review of Job Satisfaction theories. Instead, a highlight of the main

theories and theorists from each framework will be offered, to provide clarity,

relevance and direction to this study of Job Satisfaction.

1.1.3.1 Content Theories

Content theory is one of the three contemporary approaches to employee

satisfaction and motivation. Content theory gives insight into the needs of people

in an organization in order to help managers to understand how employee needs

can be satisfied in the work place (Daft, 2003).Maslow‟s (1954) need hierarchy

theory and Herzberg‟s motivation hygiene theory (Herzberg, 1966) are examples

of content theories.

1.1.3.2 Process Theories

Process theories attempt to explain Job Satisfaction by looking at

expectancies and values (Gruenberg, 1979). This theory of Job Satisfaction

suggests that workers‟ select their behaviours in order to meet their needs. Within

this framework, Adams‟ (1963) and Vroom (1982) have become the most

prominent theorists. J. Stacy Adams‟ suggested that people perceive their job as a

series of inputs and outcomes. Inputs are factors such as experience, ability, and

9

effort, while outcomes include things like salary, recognition, and opportunity.

The theory is based on the premise that Job Satisfaction is a direct result of

individuals‟ perceptions of how fairly they are treated in comparison to others.

This “equity theory” proposes that people seek social equity in the rewards they

expect for performance. In other words, people feel satisfied at work when the

input or contribution to a job and the resulting outcome are commensurate to that

of their co-workers.

According to Milkovich and Newman (1990), this social equity is not

limited to others within the same workplace, and the equity comparisons often

reach into other organizations that are viewed as similar places of employment.

Vroom‟s (1964) theory of Job Satisfaction was similar in that it looked at

the interaction between personal and workplace variables; however, he also

incorporated the element of workers‟ expectations into his theory. The essence of

this theory is that if workers put forth more effort and perform better at work, then

they will be compensated accordingly. Discrepancies that occur between expected

compensation and actual outcome lead to dissatisfaction. If employees receive less

than they expect or otherwise feel as if they have been treated unfairly, then

dissatisfaction may occur. Conversely, overcompensation may also lead to

dissatisfaction and the employee may experience feelings of guilt. The

compensation does not have to be monetary, but pay is typically the most visible

and most easily modified element of outcome. Salary also has significance beyond

monetary value and the potential to acquire material items, and Gruneberg (1979)

notes that it is also an indication of personal achievement, organizational status,

and recognition.

10

Vroom‟s theory also goes one step further to incorporate an individual‟s

personal decision making within the work-place. Vroom (1982) explained that

employees would choose to do or not do job tasks based on their perceived ability

to carry out the task and earn fair compensation. To illustrate and clarify his ideas,

Vroom generated a three-variable equation for scientifically determining Job

Satisfaction. Expectancy is the first variable, and this is the individual‟s

perception of how well he or she can carry out the given task. Instrumentality is

the second variable of the equation, and this refers to the individual‟s confidence

that he or she will be compensated fairly for performing the task. Valence is the

third variable, which considers the value of the expected reward to the employee.

In Vroom‟s formula each variable is given a probability value, and when all three

factors are high, workers will be more satisfied and have more motivation. If any

of the factors are low, work performance and employee motivation will decline.

1.1.3.3 Situational Theories

The situational occurrences theory of Job Satisfaction was proposed by

Quarstein, McAfee, and Glassman (1992). The two main components of the

theory are situational characteristics and situational occurrences. Examples of

situational characteristics are pay, promotional opportunities, working conditions,

company policies, and supervision. Individuals tend to evaluate situational

characteristics before they accept a job. Situational occurrences tend to be

evaluated after accepting a job. Situational occurrences can be positive or

negative. Positive occurrences include, for example, giving employees some time

off because of exceptional work or placing a microwave in the work place.

Negative occurrences include, for example, confusing email messages, rude

11

remarks from co-workers, and copiers which seem to break down a great deal.

Quartstein et al. (1992) hypothesized that overall Job Satisfaction is a function of

a combination of situational characteristics and situational occurrences. The

findings of their study supported the hypothesis. According to the researchers, a

combination of situational characteristics and situational occurrences can be a

stronger predictor of overall Job Satisfaction than each factor by itself.

1.1.4 Dimensions of Job Satisfaction

The idea of a Job Satisfaction is very complicated (Mccormick & Ilgen,

1985). Locke (1976, cited in Sempane et al., 2002) presented a summary of job

dimensions that have been established to contribute significantly to employees'

Job Satisfaction. The particular dimensions represent characteristics associated

with Job Satisfaction. The dimensions are worked itself, pay, promotions,

recognition, working conditions, benefits, supervision and co-workers. This is

postulated to influence employees‟ opinion of “how interesting the work is, how

routine, how well they are doing, and, in general, how much they enjoy doing it”

(McCormick & Ilgen, 1985, p. 309).

1.1.4.1 The Work Itself

The nature of the work performed by employees has a significant impact

on their level of Job Satisfaction (Landy, 1989; Larwood, 1984; Luthans, 1992;

Moorhead & Griffen, 1992). According to Luthans (1992), employees derive

satisfaction from work that is interesting and challenging, and a job that provides

them with status.

Landy (1989) advocates that work that is personally interesting to

employees is likely to contribute to Job Satisfaction. Similarly, research suggests

12

that task variety may facilitate Job Satisfaction (Eby et al., 1999). This is based on

the view that skill variety has strong effects on Job Satisfaction, implying that the

greater the variety of skills that employees are able to utilize in their jobs, the

higher their level of satisfaction (Ting, 1997).

Sharma and Bhaskar (1991) postulate that the single most important

influence on a person‟s Job Satisfaction experience comes from the nature of the

work assigned to him/her by the organization. They purport that if the job entails

adequate variety, challenge, discretion and scope for using one‟s own abilities and

skills, the employee doing the job is likely to experience Job Satisfaction.

Khaleque and Choudhary (1984) found in their study of Indian managers, that the

nature of work was the most important factor in determining Job Satisfaction for

top managers, and job security as the most important factor in Job Satisfaction for

managers at the bottom.

Similarly, Liden, Wayne and Sparrowe‟s (2000) research involving 337

employees and their supervisors found that desirable job characteristics increased

work satisfaction.

Culpin and Wright (2002) found in their study of Job Satisfaction amongst

expatriate women managers, that they enjoyed the expansion of their job

responsibilities. These women‟s Job Satisfaction increased as they saw the

significant impact of their job on their employees.

1.1.4.2 PAY

Pay refers to the amount of financial compensation that an individual

receives as well as the extent to which such compensation is perceived to be

equitable. Remuneration and earnings are a cognitively complex and

13

multidimensional factor in Job Satisfaction. According to Luthans (1998), salaries

not only assist people to attain their basic needs, but are also instrumental in

satisfying the higher level needs of people.

Lambert, Hogan, Barton and Lubbock (2001) found financial rewards to

have a significant impact on Job Satisfaction. Such findings are largely consistent

with the idea that most employees are socialized in a society where money,

benefits, and security are generally sought after and are often used to gauge the

importance or the worth of a person. Thus, the greater the financial reward, the

less worry employees have concerning their financial state, thereby enhancing

their impression of their self-worth to the organisation.

Groot and Maassen van den Brink (1999; 2000) provide contradictory

evidence for the relationship between pay and Job Satisfaction. In their earlier

research they did not find evidence for a relationship between compensation and

Job Satisfaction, however, their subsequent research revealed the opposite.

However, Hamermesh (2001) found that changes in compensation (increases or

decreases) have concomitant impact on Job Satisfaction levels of employees.

Several other authors maintain that the key in linking pay to satisfaction is

not the absolute amount that is paid, but rather, the perception of fairness

(Aamodt, 1999; Landy, 1989; Robbins, 1998). According to Robbins et al. (2003),

employees seek pay systems that are perceived as just, unambiguous, and in line

with their expectations. When pay is perceived as equitable, is commensurate with

job demands, individual skill level, and community pay standards, satisfaction is

likely to be the result.

14

1.1.4.3 Supervision

Research indicates that the quality of the supervisor-subordinate

relationship will have a significant, positive influence on the employee‟s overall

level of Job Satisfaction (Aamodt, 1999; Kinicki & Vecchio, 1994; Luthans, 1992;

Moorhead & Griffen, 1992; Robbins, 1998).

Research appears to be equivocal since most research indicates that

individuals are likely to have high levels of Job Satisfaction if supervisors provide

them with support and co-operation in completing their tasks (Ting, 1997).

Similar results were reported by Billingsley and Cross (1992) as well as Cramer

(1993). These researchers generally hold that dissatisfaction with management

supervision is a significant predictor of job dissatisfaction. The above findings are

corroborated by Staudt‟s (1997) research based on social workers in whom it was

found that respondents, who reported satisfaction with supervision, were also

more likely to be satisfied with their jobs in general.

Morris (2004) postulates that teacher Job Satisfaction is affected by the

work environment and strong principal leadership. Conversely, lack of

participation in decision making is advocated to be the greatest sources of teacher

dissatisfaction (Holdaway, 1978).

Abbey and Esposito (1985) report that teachers who perceive greater social

support from their principal‟s report less stress than those who do not receive any

social support. Setting up shared decision-making processes in schools, such as

governance councils, allows teachers to participate in school processes rather than

feel subordinate to their principals and coerced into participating in school and

teacher responsibilities (Nagel & Brown, 2003).

15

1.1.4.4 Promotion

An employee‟s opportunities for promotion are also likely to exert an

influence on Job Satisfaction (Landy, 1989; Larwood, 1984; Moorhead & Griffen,

1992; Vecchio, 1988). Robbins (1998) maintains that promotions provide

opportunities for personal growth, increased responsibility, and increased social

status (Robbins, 1998).

Nonetheless, opportunities for promotion appear to have a significant

positive correlation with Job Satisfaction (Tolbert & Moen, 1998). In a study by

Jayaratne and Chess (1984 cited in Staudt, 1997) the opportunity for promotion

was found to be the best and only common predictor of Job Satisfaction in child

welfare, community mental health, and family services agencies.

Luthans (1992) further maintains that promotions may take a variety of

different forms and are generally accompanied by different rewards. Promotional

opportunities therefore have differential effects on Job Satisfaction, and it is

essential that this be taken into account in cases where promotion policies are

designed to enhance employee satisfaction.

1.1.4.5 Work Group

There is empirical evidence that co-worker relations are an antecedent of

Job Satisfaction (Morrison, 2004). Research (Mowday & Sutton, 1993) suggests

that Job Satisfaction is related to employees‟ opportunities for interaction with

others on the job. An individual‟s level of Job Satisfaction might be a function of

personal characteristics and the characteristics of the group to which he or she

belongs. The social context of work is also likely to have a significant impact on a

worker‟s attitude and behavior (Marks, 1994). Relationships with both co-workers

16

and supervisors are important. Some studies have shown that the better the

relationship, the greater the level of Job Satisfaction (Wharton & Baron, 1991).

According to Hodson (1997), such social relations constitute an important

part of the “social climate” within the workplace and provide a setting within

which employees can experience meaning and identity. Luthans (1998) postulates

that work groups characterized by co-operation and understanding amongst their

members tend to influence the level of Job Satisfaction or dissatisfaction. When

cohesion is evident within a work group it usually leads to effectiveness within a

group and the job becoming more enjoyable. However, if the opposite situation

exists and colleagues are difficult to work with, this may have a negative impact

on Job Satisfaction.

Hillebrand (1989) found that the greatest need of educators centered on

interpersonal needs. He maintains that healthy relationships with colleagues and

school principals increase educational concerns and goal attainment. These

findings strengthen the argument that organizations should engage in the

integration of employees so as to create group cohesion among employees and

departments within the organization (Lambert et al., 2001).

1.1.4.6 Working Conditions

Working conditions is another factor that has a moderate impact on the

employee‟s Job Satisfaction (Luthans, 1992; Moorhead & Griffen, 1992).

According to Luthans (1998), if people work in a clean, friendly environment they

will find it easier to come to work. If the opposite should happen, they will find it

difficult to accomplish tasks.

17

Vorster (1992) maintains that working conditions are only likely to have a

significant impact on Job Satisfaction when, for example, the working conditions

are either extremely good or extremely poor. Moreover, employee complaints

regarding working conditions are frequently related to manifestations of

underlying problems (Luthans, 1992).

Teacher‟s workload, changes in the education system and a lack of

discipline amongst some of the learners may be some of the reasons why teachers

want to exit the profession. The working environment of teachers also determines

the attitude and behavior of teachers towards their work (Bishay, 1996).

Bishay (1996) indicates that research has shown that improvement in

teacher motivation has a positive effect on both teachers and learners. Moreover,

within the teaching profession, for example, there are different working conditions

based on the past allocation of resources to schools. In disadvantaged schools

working conditions are often not conducive to teaching and learning (Ngidi &

Sibaya, 2002; Steyn & van Wyk, 1999).

1.1.5 Job Satisfaction and Emotional Factors

The mental health of a teacher relates to Job Satisfaction. Both positive

and negative factors cause various degrees of satisfaction. Positive factors are

enthusiasm and a high level of energy when teaching in the classroom. Negative

factors are stress, burnout, and anxiety (Terry, 1997). Negative factors hinder the

performance of a teacher and reduce satisfaction.

Anxiety, stress, and burnout can affect a teacher‟s ability to create an

environment conducive to learning. Burnout most often occurs for those teachers

who are very dedicated and committed to their careers. They tend to work long,

18

intense hours to achieve their goals (Farber, 1991). For teachers to remain

enthusiastic year after year, the principal must implement strategies that will

enhance the mental health of the teaching staff (Eberhard et al., 2000;

Terry,1997).Terry (1997) included five suggestions for principals to use with

teachers. They are positive feedback, high standards, opportunities for

professional growth, support systems, and increased parental and community

involvement. Coates and Thoresen (1976) indicated the mental health of a teacher

might be more important than a teacher‟s knowledge of the subject matter and

methods of teaching.

Anxiety is a concern with beginning teachers and can result in a negative

effect on thousands of students across the country (Coates & Thoresen, 1976).

New teachers have very high expectations and burnout results when reality is not

constant with those expectations (Terry, 1997). Teacher burnout is a cause of

attrition and must be dealt with to lengthen the time that teachers remain in the

profession (Berry, 1995; Dworkin, 1985).

1.1.6 Personal Determinants of Job Satisfaction

Studies investigating Job Satisfaction indicate that personal determinants

such as race, gender, educational level, tenure, age and marital status impact on

Job Satisfaction.

1.1.6.1 Race

Research evidence with regard to the relationship between race and Job

Satisfaction have yielded inconsistent results (Friday, Moss & Friday, 2004).

19

A survey conducted by Henault (2004) investigating Job Satisfaction

amongst American healthcare executives revealed that minorities continued to lag

behind their White counterparts.

Studies indicating the relationship between race and Job Satisfaction

within the South African context are however, limited. An investigation by

Erasmus (1998) from the Unisa Business Leadership School, found a difference in

Job Satisfaction between White and African females within a human resources

profession. The researcher reports that White females were found to be more

satisfied than their African female colleagues. The research highlighted factors

such as pay and benefits causing dissatisfaction amongst African females.

Findings of another study conducted in 2000 among readers of the apartment

section of the South African Business Times, revealed that African respondents

are more likely to feel less secure in their positions than their White counterparts.

Reasons cited for their feeling of lack of job security were as a result of

restructuring, affirmative action or shrinking of industry sectors (Robbins et al.,

2003).

1.1.6.2 Gender

Several studies conducted with regard to the relationship between gender

and Job Satisfaction has yielded contradictory results (Chiu, 1998).

Tang and Talpade (1999) maintain that there is a significant difference

between males and females in terms of job dimensions impacting on Job

Satisfaction. Their study found that men tend to have higher satisfaction with

remuneration in relation to females, while females tended to have higher

satisfaction with co-workers than males.

20

Findings of a survey looking at issues affecting women in the South

African workforce indicated similar findings with regard to females. The majority

of respondents revealed that they were satisfied with their jobs. The factors that

contributed the most to their Job Satisfaction were the company of co-workers, the

opportunity to learn new things and factors inherent in the job itself (Robbins et

al., 2003).

Oshagbemi (2000) however, failed to find that gender affects Job

Satisfaction. Similarly, Donohue and Heywood (2004) could not prove gender

satisfaction differences in a study conducted amongst young American and British

employees.

Contrary to the above, Robbins et al. (2003) argues that no evidence exists

suggesting that gender impacts on an employee‟s Job Satisfaction. The authors are

of the opinion that gender differences can have an effect on the relationship

between job dimensions and Job Satisfaction, but that it does not have a direct

impact on Job Satisfaction.

1.1.6.3 Educational Level

Studies conducted on the relationship between the level of education and

Job Satisfaction showed no consistent pattern (Kh Metle, 2003).

An investigation by Crossman and Abou-Zaki (2003) in the Lebanese

banking sector found that no statistically significant relationship existed between

Job Satisfaction and education although the relationship was not significant; their

research found that a relationship between Job Satisfaction and education existed.

In this regard respondents in possession of a school certificate reported the lowest

level of overall Job Satisfaction, while employees with a college certificate

21

reported the highest level of overall Job Satisfaction. The researchers highlighted

possible factors such as a lack of skills and less favorable treatment by

management as contributing to lower satisfaction levels among staff in possession

of a school certificate.

Kh Metle (2003) suggests that Job Satisfaction decreases in relation to an

increase in the level of education as the expectations of employees are often not

met by employers. To concur with this finding, results obtained from a study

conducted by Johnson and Johnson (2000) whereby 288 employees in the

American postal services were surveyed, found perceived over-qualification to

have a negative relationship with the dimensions of Job Satisfaction.

1.1.6.4 Tenure

Tenure refers to the length of time for which the individual has worked for

the organization (Lim et al., 1998). Research (Jinnett & Alexander, 1999; Staw,

1995; Vecchio, 1988) indicates that employees with longer tenure have a greater

propensity to be satisfied with their jobs than employees with shorter tenure.

Moreover, a study by Chambers (1999) established that employees with

longer tenure were more satisfied with their work itself as well as their level of

pay. From this it might be concluded that satisfaction increases with time and that

those benefits that increase in time, such as security and experience, are likely to

have an important influence on employee satisfaction.

On the other hand, Lambert et al. (2001) argue that an inverse relationship

exists between tenure and Job Satisfaction. The reason the literature is both

inconsistent and inconclusive in this regard may be because the relationship

between these variables depends on the specific organization and how tenure is

22

viewed. In some organizations, senior employees are highly respected, while high

tenure is viewed as a liability in other organizations (Lambert et al., 2001).

1.1.6.5 Age

Mixed evidence exists regarding the relationship between age and Job

Satisfaction (Robbins et al., 2003).

According to Greenberg and Baron (1995), older employees are generally

happier with their jobs than younger employees, while people who are more

experienced in their jobs are more highly satisfied than those who are less

experienced. This view is supported by Drafke and Kossen (2002). The

researchers state that Job Satisfaction typically increases with age as older

workers have more work experience and generally have a more realistic view of

work and life in comparison to their younger counterparts. They are of the opinion

that younger workers have less experience to draw on and have an idealistic view

of what work should be like.

Research conducted by Okpara (2004) amongst managers within an IT

environment found a significant relationship between Job Satisfaction and age.

Robbins et al. (2003) report that although most studies indicate a positive

relationship between age and Job Satisfaction, other studies reflect a decrease in

satisfaction as employees move towards middle age, at least up to the age of 60.

Satisfaction increases again from around 40 and on. The authors refer to this

phenomenon as the-shaped relationship. Mottaz (1987) in Oshagbemi (2003) cited

several reasons for the variance in Job Satisfaction between older and younger

workers. Mottaz‟s view is that younger workers are generally more dissatisfied

than older employees because they demand more than their jobs can provide. The

23

author postulates that older workers possess more seniority and work experience

enabling them to move easily into more rewarding and satisfying jobs. Older

workers place less emphasis on autonomy or promotion, thus they demand less

from their jobs, making them more satisfied than their younger counterparts.

Workers tend to adjust to work values and the work environment the longer they

are employed, adding to greater Job Satisfaction.

1.1.6.6 Marital Status

Research on the effect of marital status on Job Satisfaction has yielded

inconclusive results (Robbins et al., 2003).

The results of a study conducted by Kuo and Chen (2004) investigating the

level of Job Satisfaction amongst IT personnel working in Taiwan, found marital

status to be highly related to general, intrinsic and overall satisfaction. They

reported that the results of the study indicated that married employees experienced

higher levels of Job Satisfaction in comparison to that of single employees.

Research conducted by Cimete, Gencalp and Keskin (2003) which involved 501

nurses employed at two university hospitals in Istanbul, established that the Job

Satisfaction mean score of divorcees and widows was higher than that of single

and married groups. The difference between the mean scores was significant.

Research conducted by Jamal and Baba (1992) also found a significant

relationship between Job Satisfaction and marital status.

1.1.7 The Consequences of Job Satisfaction

Numerous authors have highlighted that Job Satisfaction impacts on

employee productivity, turnover, absenteeism, physical and psychological health

(Johns, 1996; Luthans, 1989).

24

1.1.7.1 Productivity

Research findings indicate that the relationship between satisfaction and

productivity is positive, but very low and inconsistent (Johns, 1996).

According to Luthans (1989), although a relationship between Job

Satisfaction and productivity exists, the relationship between these variables is not

strong. The author maintains that the most satisfied employee will not necessarily

be the most productive employee.

At an individual level the evidence is often inconsistent in terms of the

relationship between satisfaction and productivity, but at an organizational level a

strong relationship exists between satisfaction and productivity (Robbins et al.,

2003).

1.1.7.2 Physical and Psychological Health

Spector (1997) states that individuals who dislike their jobs could

experience negative health effects that are either psychological or physical. On the

other hand, Luthans (2002) mentions that employees with high levels of Job

Satisfaction tend to experience better mental and physical health.

1.1.7.3 Turnover

A number of studies strongly support the view that turnover is inversely

related to Job Satisfaction (Griffon, Hand, Meglino & Mobley (1979) and Price

(1977) cited in Robbins et al., 2003).

According to French (2003), a high employee turnover rate is often

prevalent in an environment where employees are highly dissatisfied. Greenberg

and Baron (1995) contend that employees lacking Job Satisfaction often tend to

withdraw from situations and environments as a means of dealing with their

25

dissatisfaction. A major form of employee withdrawal is voluntary turnover. By

not reporting for duty, or by resigning to seek new job prospects, individuals

might be expressing their dissatisfaction with their jobs or attempting to escape

from the unpleasant aspects they may be experiencing. Phillips, Stone and Phillips

(2001) concur that employee turnover is the most critical withdrawal variable.

A study conducted by Steel and Ovalle (1984) established a moderately

strong relationship between Job Satisfaction and turnover, indicating that less

satisfied workers are more likely to quit their jobs. According to Lee and Mowday

(1987) cited in Luthans (1989), a moderate relationship exists between satisfaction

and turnover.The researchers posit that high Job Satisfaction will not necessarily

contribute to a low turnover rate, but will inadvertently assist in maintaining a low

turnover rate.

1.1.7.4 Absenteeism

Research indicates that Job Satisfaction levels are related to absenteeism

(Hellriegel, Slocum & Woodman, 1989).Nel et al. (2004, p. 548) maintain that

“absenteeism is regarded as withdrawal behavior when it is used as a way to

escape an undesirable working environment.”

According to Luthans (1989), various studies conducted on the

relationship between satisfaction and absenteeism indicates an inverse relationship

between the two variables. Thus, when satisfaction is high, absenteeism tends to

be low. The converse indicates that when satisfaction is low, absenteeism tends to

be high. Contrary to this, the findings of a study undertaken by Johns (1996)

found the association between Job Satisfaction and absenteeism to be moderate.

26

Robbins (1993) supports the view of a moderate relationship existing

between satisfaction and absenteeism. According to Robbins et al. (2003), the

moderate relationship between these variables could be attributed to factors such

as liberal sick leave, whereby employees are encouraged to take time off. The

afore-mentioned could ultimately reduce the correlation coefficient between

satisfaction and absenteeism.

1.2 Concept of Self Esteem

1.2.1 Definitions and Descriptions of Self Esteem

In the field of psychology, a positive attitude toward the self has been

accepted historically as a marker of healthy psychological functioning (Neff,

2003). In recent years, however, there have been criticisms of the most popularly

known self-evaluative view: Self Esteem.

One of the earlier and more prominent examinations of Self- Esteem is that

of William James. Several aspects of James‟ view of Self- Esteem are pertinent.

First; James (1999) described Self Esteem in terms of a ratio. The numerator of

the ratio entails our actualities, or our accomplishments and successes, while the

denominator is comprised of our supposed potentialities, pretensions, or

aspirations for success. For James, high Self- Esteem occurs when an individual‟s

perceived successes outweigh their pretensions, while low Self- Esteem comes

about when an individual‟s pretensions exceed their successes. It‟s important to

note however, that according to James, an individual‟s pretensions are only

significant to their Self- Esteem in areas deemed important by the individual. In

other words, Self- Esteem is positively impacted only by success in a domain of

importance and negatively impacted only if success is not achieved in an area of

27

importance. Conversely, if an individual fails to achieve success in a domain for

which he or she does not care or believe that success is important, Self- Esteem

will not be diminished (Harter, 1999). With this, it was James‟ (1999) contention

that Self- Esteem can be increased in one of two ways: either by increasing one‟s

successes or decreasing the degree to which one attributes importance to various

domains (i.e., lowering pretensions). “To give up pretensions is as blessed a relief

as to get them gratified” (James, 1950, p. 311).

According to Dr.Nathaniel Branden (2007), Self- Esteem has been defined

in various manners without much agreement. He contends that, “Self- Esteem has

two essential components: (a) Self-efficacy: Confidence in the ability to cope with

life‟s challenges. Self-Efficacy leads to a sense of control over one‟s life. (b) Self-

Respect: Experience oneself as deserving of happiness, achievement and love”.

He states that Self Esteem, along with other factors, is a necessary condition for

well-being. He contends that parents with strong Self- Esteem most often pass it

on to their children.

Rosenberg (1979) stated, “Self- Esteem signifies a positive or negative

orientation toward an object”. A reference to high Self Esteem, for example,

denotes self-worth or self-respect for oneself; low Self Esteem, on the other hand,

specifies a lack of self-respect, and feeling unworthy or inadequate (Rosenberg,

1979).

Self Esteem, an important component of people's lives, refers to how

individuals feel about themselves and influences how they interact with their

surroundings (Kernis, 2003). Individuals with low Self- Esteem lack self

confidence, and those with high Self- Esteem have elevated self-confidence

(Kernis, 2003).

28

Self Esteem is often divided into “global” Self- Esteem and “specific” Self

Esteem; global Self- Esteem refers to the degree to which people like themselves

as a whole, while specific Self- Esteem refers to the degree to which people like a

specific part of themselves (Sanford & Donovan, 1984). One‟s global Self-

Esteem may be a combination of several dimensions, such as(1) Concept:

dispositions, social identity elements, and physical characteristics; (2) Direction:

positive or negative attitudes or high or low Self Esteem; (3) Intensity: strength of

feelings; (4)Salience: importance or consciousness of an attitude; (5) Consistency:

contradictory self attitudes;(6) Stability: stable versus shifting self-attitudes; (7)

Clarity: unambiguous versus blurred self-attitudes; (8) Accuracy: true or false

self-attitudes; and (9) Verifiability: perceptions may be difficult to assess

(Rosenberg, 1979, p. 23). Global Self- Esteem is essentially equal to the sum of

the parts, or, forms from the specific to the whole.

1.2.2 Theories and Perspectives on Self Esteem

The term Self Esteem was first coined by American psychologist and

philosopher William James, in 1890.the term “Self Esteem” is one of the oldest

concepts in psychology. In addition, Self Esteem is the third most frequently

occurring theme in psychological literature and over 25,000 articles, in various

chapters and books refer to the topic (Rhodewalt & Tragakis, 2003).

Self Esteem has been implicated in a variety of behavioral, cognitive and

affective reactions. In addition, many psychological problems have been attributed

to an unfulfilled need for Self Esteem. Furthermore, research has shown that

peoples self perceptions of their likeability, and physical appearance strongly

predict their overall Self Esteem. Different perspectives in psychology explain

29

why this is the case. Various authors, as will be discussed have described Self

Esteem differently.

1.2.2.1 James‟ Perspective on Self Esteem

William James (1890) first referred to self-as an elementary endowment of

human nature. He regarded Self- Esteem as the ratio of pretensions to successes.

People with grandiose ambition tend to fail even when 'accumulating considerable

success. Their Self- Esteem is low because their pretensions are too lofty for them

to match. People with modest pretensions, however, need little success for their

Self- Esteem to be high. Thus, to increase Self- Esteem one must either increase

one's successes or lower one's expectations (Baldwin & Hoffmann, 2002).

1.2.2.2 Rosenberg's Perspective on Self Esteem

Rosenberg's perspective focuses on global Self- Esteem and incorporates

the sociological aspect of self-acknowledgement. Global Self- Esteem describes

an overall evaluation of one's self as a person, or how one feels about one's self in

a comprehensive sense (Rosenberg, 1965). Research indicates that children as

young as 8 years make judgments of global Self- Esteem that can be distinguished

from evaluation attached to specific characteristics of the self (Harter, 1996).

According to Rosenberg's perspective, global Self- Esteem gauges an individual's

basic attitude toward his or her own worth by allowing that individual to invoke

his or her own frame of reference. The emphasis is not on one's immediate or

momentary self-perception; rather, it stresses the more permanent, more stable

components of the self-image (Mecca, Smelser & Vasconcellos, 1989). Global

Self- Esteem aims at capturing the individual's enduring, longstanding self-

estimate.

30

Rosenberg, (1965) emphasizes an affective aspect and refers to Self-

Esteem as a positive or negative attitude toward a particular object, namely, the

self. He further acknowledges (1965, 1979) that these feelings derive from the

individual's evaluation of self in relation to criteria of excellence, derived in turn

from what is valued by society. Thus, high Self- Esteem is expected to reflect and

predict good adjustment and behaviours valued by society. In contrast, low Self-

Esteem is expected to be associated with deviant behaviour that is not valued by

society (Mecca, Smelser & Vasconcellos, 1989). Rosenberg (1965) suggests that

the motive to achieve and maintain Self- Esteem is possibly the most powerful in

the entire human repertoire. He continues to stress the earlier of the individual's

immediate social context - particularly the family in determining Self Esteem.

The emphasis is generally on the affect received from "significant others

within the individual's most immediate social context.

It is clear that Rosenberg (1979) emphasizes how social-

structural and contextual factors influence individuals' perceptions of self. This

sociological perspective seems to see the structuring of self as developing

throughout life, whereas the psychological tradition tends to see the self

becoming structured in the earlier Years Rosenberg's perspective is primarily

sociological, concentrating on the development of self- evaluative behaviour in

terms of how social milieu affects behaviour (Rosenberg, 1965, 1979). According

to Rosenberg's perspective, Self- Esteem is an overall evaluation of one's self as a

person.

31

1.2.2.3 Coppersmith‟s Perspective on Self Esteem

According to Coppersmith (1967, p.4), Self- Esteem is defined as the

evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to

himself: it expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the

extent to which the individual believes himself to be capable, significant

successful and worthy.

It is a personal judgment of worthiness that is expressed in the attitudes the

individual holds toward himself as well as a subjective experience the individual

conveys to others by verbal reports and other overt expressive behaviour. This

definition centres upon the relatively enduring estimate of global Self- Esteem

rather than upon specific and transitory changes in evaluation (Coopersmith,

1981).

There are undoubtedly momentary, situational, limited shifts in self-

evaluation, but these are not the concern of the present study. In addition, Self-

Esteem may vary across different areas of experience and according to sex, age

and other role-defining conditions. But, one's overall appraisal of one's abilities

would presumably weigh according to one's subjective importance, enabling him

to arrive at a general level of Self Esteem.

1.2.2.4 Rogers' Perspective on Self- Esteem

Rogers (1961) modified James‟ ideas, preferring a concept of self-ideal

discrepancy. He emphasized who people are (the real self), not what they can

accomplish. A congruency between real self and ideal self means self-acceptance.

Rogers (1961) argued that what is important is not one's view of one's ability but

one's view of one's ability relative to an ideal - what one would like to be.

32

1.2.2.5 Identity Theory on Self Esteem

An overall theory of Self- Esteem has been developed by bringing together

various conceptualizations of Self- Esteem in the framework of identity theory.

According to this view, proposed by Ervin & Stryker (in Cast & Burke, 2002)

Self- Esteem can be understood as a central component of basic identity

processes. From this perspective, Self- Esteem has been viewed on the

presumption of three conceptualizations. Firstly, Self- Esteem has been

investigated as an outcome (Coopersmith, 1981; Rosenberg, 1979). Secondly,

Self- Esteem has been investigated as a self-motive, noting the tendency for

people to behave in ways that maintain or increase positive evaluation of the self

(Kaplan, 1975; Tesser, 1988). Finally, Self- Esteem has been investigated as a

buffer for the self, providing protection from experiences that are harmful (Cast &

Burke, 2002).

Identity theory attempts to synthesise the above three conceptualizations

and presumes that Self- Esteem also serves as a type of defence mechanism. When

individuals are unable to verify their identities, the Self- Esteem produced by

previous successful efforts at self-verification 'buffers' or protects individuals from

the distress associated with a lack of self-verification (Burke, 1991). Thus, Self-

Esteem is analogous to a 'reservoir of energy'. Like any other resource, Self-

Esteem can be built up, but when used, it is lost. Here, the reservoir of Self-

Esteem is filled up by successful self-verification and used up when the self-

verification process is disrupted (Cast & Burke, 2002).

33

1.2.2.6 Theory of Mead on Self Esteem

James, Mead and their followers (in Bagley et al., 1979) proposed this

theory. Accordingly, the self arises from interaction with others. The individual's

notion of himself and especially his evaluation of himself is derived from his

interaction with others who evaluate him in various ways. This interactions'

inception of the self makes the self- social in origin: and the self arises in social

'interaction. According to the Meadian theory, the process, „taking the role of

others‟, describes how a person comes to have beliefs about himself (self-

concepts) which are similar to those significant others have of him (Bagley et al.,

1979). Thus, a person's -Self- Esteem is also congruent with the evaluation of

those around him.

1.2.2.7 Sociometer Theory

Sociometer theory was developed by Mark Leary (1999) and his

colleagues in order to explain the functions of Self Esteem. Self- Esteem is often

over attributed and misperceived in society as the driving force behind many

behaviours. They proposed, however, that Self- Esteem evolved to monitor one's

social acceptance and are used as a gauge for avoiding social devaluation and

rejection.

In general, people are highly motivated to protect their Self- Esteem and to

increase it through their thoughts and actions (Leary, 1999). A sociometer, as

proposed by Leary his colleagues, is a measure of how desirable one would be to

other people and this is influenced by one's Self Esteem. This measure may be

made in a variety of terms such as team member, relationship partner, employee,

and colleague or in numerous other ways.

34

Although it is often treated as a monolithic entity, self- esteem differs

across various areas of people's lives; for example, the person with low academic

achievement may possess high Self- Esteem regarding social attributes and

moderate Self- Esteem regarding his or her athletic ability. Sociometer theory

predicts that primary domains of Self- Esteem should reflect factors that

determine the degree to which people are valued by others. In support of this

notion, the content of commonly used measures of Self- Esteem and self-concept

reflect valued social attributes.

Sociometer theory is useful in explaining why people are so concerned

with Self Esteem. Self- Esteem measures the traits you have according to how

socially acceptable they are and how these qualities integrate you into society.

This measurement helps to guide people through their social interactions on a

daily basis. A more complex version of this theory is known as terror management

theory, which states that having Self- Esteem helps protect people from the fear of

death so people are constantly searching for ways to enhance their Self- Esteem in

order to avoid thoughts of dying.

Self- Esteem can be defined as how favourably someone evaluates himself

or herself (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). There have been several different

proposals as to what the true function of Self- Esteem is and it is generally

believed that people have an inherent need to feel good about themselves, which is

why Self- Esteem becomes so important. From the perspective of humanistic

psychologists (Leary, 1999; Leary, 2000) Self- Esteem is the relationship between

one's real self and one's ideal self, feeding off of favourable behaviours.

According to Leary (1999), there are two distinctions commonly made in

Self Esteem: state Self- Esteem and trait Self Esteem. State Self- Esteem refers to

35

the fluctuation in a person's feelings about themselves because of how they

perceive others is currently valuing their relationship. Self- Esteem is raised or

lowered based on positive or negative feedback. Trait Self Esteem, conversely,

refers to the sense a person has about the type of person who is generally valued

and accepted by others. This is sometimes referred to as the resting state for the

sociometer because this is how the person feels when relational information is

absent (Leary, 1999). The theory from the ethological perspective (Leary, 1999)

proposes that Self- Esteem developed as way for a person to remain dominant in

relationships since dominance has traditionally led to favourable partners and

reproduction practices. Finally, terror management theory (Leary, 1999) is one of

the more controversial in the theories of the function of Self Esteem, proposing

that Self- Esteem protects people from the fear that can arise from the prospect of

death.

Consistent with Jame's (1890) notion that Self- Esteem depends on

people's success and failures in domains that people regard as important. Self-

perceptions in a particular domain predict Self- Esteem only to the extent that

people regard the domain as important. Sociometer theory regards these

"important" domains as those on which an individual has staked his or her social

acceptance. An individual who believes her / his social acceptance is predicated

on her/his athletic ability but not on her intelligence will suffer a greater loss of

Self- Esteem following an athletic failure than an academic one. Although

sociometer theory focuses on the effects of perceived acceptance or rejection on

Self Esteem, it acknowledges that a person's current level of Self- Esteem (either

state or trait) can also moderate his or her perceptions of interpersonal feedback.

36

In the fact that people with high trait Self- Esteem tend to believe that others are

more accepting of them than people with low Self Esteem.

Development of Trait Self Esteem: According to some theories

(Baumeister et al., 1993) low self- esteem is somewhat of a paradox; if people

have a strong motive to maintain high Self Esteem, why do certain people have

low Self Esteem? Has the Self- Esteem system of low-Self Esteem people

malfunctioned? According to Leary and Baumeister (2000), answer is "no", and.

in fact, it may be functioning quite well. People do not have a motive to maintain

high Self- Esteem per se. but rather a system for monitoring and responding to

threats to relational evaluation. For such a system to function properly, it must

alert the individual to possible relational devaluation. Presumably, then people

with relatively low Self- Esteem are those who have had more than their share of

cues indicating disinterest, rejection, or ostracism from parents, teachers, peers,

coaches, or whomever, when people experience relational devaluation, including

explicit rejection, repeatedly over time, they are likely to develop relatively low

trait Self Esteem. As Shaver & Hazan, (1987) noted "Low Self- Esteem is a

natural component of a negative model of self based an actual attachment- related

experiences", (P. 116).

Several studies have documented an inverse relationship between trait

Self- Esteem and negative reactions to failure and unfavourable evaluations

(Jones, 1973; Rosenberg, 1965). People with higher trait Self- Esteem appear less

bothered by negative evaluation than people with low trait Self Esteem.

Furthermore, people who have recently suffered a loss in Self- Esteem appear

particularly motivated to attain others' approval and to avoid disapproved, and

people who are low in trait Self- Esteem score higher in need for approval and

37

fear of negative evaluation than those who are high in self- esteem (Leary

&Kowalski, 1993; Schneider, 1969).

Sociometer theory provides a straightforward interpretation of these

patterns. People who do not feel adequately valued and accepted will experience

low Self- Esteem because of the action of the sociometer. At the same time, they

will become acutely attuned to the degree to which they are being accepted or

rejected and. thus, will be quite aware that events in their social environment

affect their Self Esteem. Self - Esteem is affected not only by people's judgments

of their objective characteristics but by how they compare themselves to others.

Self- Esteem improves if we compare ourselves to those with less desirable

characteristics than ourselves (Schultz & Decker, 1989).

Sociometer theory provides a plausible framework for explaining and

integrating an erect deal of the Self- Esteem literature, notably, it provides a viable

account for why human beings appear to ha\e a pervasive need for Self- Esteem

and explains why low Self- Esteem is associated with many problems in living. If

the sociometer theory of Self- Esteem is even partially accurate researchers should

augment their study of Self- Esteem with increased attention to the psychological

systems by which people monitor and control and quality of their relationship with

other people. Psychologists have long recognized that people appear to need Self-

Esteem and possess a potent desire to be accepted and induced by others. Yet they

may have underestimated the powerful link between these two pervasive

psychological facts.

38

1.2.3 Teacher Self Esteem

College effectiveness is largely determined by the teachers in a particular

college. Even in this era of technological progress, computers, televisions and

videos have not replaced the teacher.

Teachers who have a high level of Self- Esteem manifest themselves in the

classroom as confident, relaxed and have a respectful attitude towards students.

Teachers who have a high level of Self- Esteem are more likely to be flexible and

exploratory in their approach to teaching.

Research has shown that teachers' own self concept has an influence on

their own and others behavior, including that of their pupils. A teacher's level of

Self- Esteem will influence his/her style of teaching and ability to develop good

pupil-teacher relationships. Teachers' levels of Self- Esteem will also have an

influence on their perception and expectations of themselves as teachers and of

their pupils as learners (Burns, 1984).

The teacher is in a powerful position to be able to "influence a student's

Self- Esteem not only through the use of systematic activities but also through the

establishment of particular caring relationships with students and there is clear

evidence that relationships between teacher and students can be either conducive

to the enhancement of Self- Estee mor conducive towards reducing Self Esteem"

(Lawrence, 1988). This influence is powerful and occurs whether or not the

teacher in the class is aware of it or not. Teachers who are more aware of the

hidden curriculum in the classroom and its impact on Self- Estee mare better

equipped to enhance the students‟ Self- Esteem than those who are unaware or

who ignore such dynamics. It appears, therefore, that teachers' attitudes towards

39

themselves are powerful determinants of whether Self- Esteem will be enhanced

or not.

Attitudes, motives and perceptions influence the way teachers act and are

transmitted to pupils through actions, thereby influencing their attitudinal

development. Messages are transmitted to pupils by verbal and non-verbal means.

Often the real meanings of verbal messages do not really lie in the verbal content

of the message. The real message may be in the tone, inflection, facial expression

or demeanor of the speaker and the nonverbal, visual or auditory cues that deliver

the message.

Teachers with healthy levels of Self Esteem, who are confident and

relaxed about their role as teachers, communicate positive messages both verbally

and non-verbally to their students. Such verbal and non-verbal cues include tone

of voice, body posture, body orientation, speed of speech, pauses in speech,

gestures and facial expressions, the manner in which they walk around the

classroom, and the way in which teachers scan the classroom.

Teacher interactions with pupils may be encouraging, praising, valuing or

alternatively they may be cajoling, blaming, punishing and generally anxiety

producing. It is generally believed that there is a positive and a negative way of

saying the same thing and it has been shown that whichever is used has either a

constructive or a detrimental effect on a pupil's Self Esteem.

Why Self- Esteem of a teacher is impartment can be summarized in the following

points:

-Teachers have a very momentous, enduring impact on all of their students.

This impact involves reinforcing Self- Esteem in the classroom that is associated

with increased motivation and learning. Thus it involves not only the teaching of

40

particular academic skills, but as importantly, the fostering of student Self

Esteem.

- Teachers may not require additional time to use of strategies to foster Self-

Esteem that can go hand-in-glove with teaching academic skills, and from

teachers. If anything that focus on Self- Esteem can create a more exciting,

satisfying teaching learning environment.

- Self- Esteem strategies, also, do not require any additional funds, financial

assistance or a budget by the teachers, but rather the sensitivity, respect, and

caring of teachers.

-Self Esteem strategies adopted by teachers involve helping students feel they

belong and are welcome in the school setting, providing them with

responsibilities through which they perceive themselves as contributing and

making a difference, offering them chance to make choices and decisions and

solve problems, and communicating encouragement and positive feedback.

While these kinds of positive interventions are important for all students, they

are particularly relevant for students who find learning problematic.

- Many of the teachers can help children with learning difficulties. Unfortunately,

even today, continue to hear accusations about children with learning difficulties

that they are lazy and unmotivated or that they should pay closer attention so that

they wouldn't have to ask so many questions. Teachers must constantly

communicate to students that mistakes are part of the learning process and that

no student should ever feel embarrassed to ask questions if they do not

understand something (Mustaq et al., 2010).

41

1.2.4 Measurement of Self Esteem

The majority of Self- Esteem research is conducted with the use of surveys

and questionnaires (Guindon, 2002). Because there is no widely accepted

conceptualization and definition of Self Esteem (Leary, 2006), there are a

multitude of Self- Esteem measures, based on a range of definitions, which vary in

their level of adequacy (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003). In general, Self- Esteem

scales ask people to rate themselves in terms of their perceived worthiness (e.g.,

“Are you a worthwhile individual?”), likeability among other individuals (e.g.,

“Do people like you?”), and competencies in different areas (“Are you good at

school or work?”; Baumeister et al.,2003). As with any self-report measure, there

are a number of limitations, such as the semantic understanding, questioning

format, social desirability, and self-presentation (Schwarz, 1999). Unfortunately,

there is no objective criterion to compare self-reported Self- Esteem because by

definition, Self- Esteem is how a person thinks about and evaluates the self

(Baumeister et al., 2003).

Mruk (2006) has identified a number of criteria that can help ensure the

“right things” are being measured when assessing Self- Esteem with the use of

self-reports. These include ensuring that the instrument actually assesses what it

claims to, as well as clarifying that the definition the Self- Esteem rating scale is

based on is in fact what is intended to be measured (e.g., it measures global Self-

Esteem based on competence and worthiness rather than domain specific

competencies). Further (Mruk,2006) suggests making sure that the instrument

meets adequate normative characteristics (i.e., random selection, stratified subject

pool, adequate sample size), and is a valid measure (i.e., based on criterion

42

validity, content validity, and construct validity; Wells & Marwel, 1976).Finally,

one should be cautious of “ceiling effects” (Wells & Marwell) as well as self

presentational tendencies (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003) when interpreting Self-

Esteem measure, as individuals may have the inclination to rate themselves in an

overly positive light or in a socially desirable manner.

Other ways to measure Self- Esteem include introspection, case studies,

and interviews. There is a history of using introspection as a way to measure Self-

Esteem (e.g., Epstein, 1979), dating back to James (1890/1983). Introspection is a

method in which an individual examines one‟s own experience by describing it

from one‟s perspective (Mruk, 2006). Today, however, this method is rarely used

in research due to its subjectivity (Mruk, 2006). Because of a lack in

standardization, case studies may not be useful for research purposes (Mruk,

2006) but they may be useful in clinical or applied settings (Branden, 1969).

Interviews may be more reliable, especially if the interview questions are

structured and the responses are recorded and transcribed, reducing some of the

subjectivity (Mruk, 2006). The major limitations of using interviews include the

relatively small sample sizes and the, considerable amount of time and resources

necessary to conduct interviews (Mruk, 2006).

1.2.5 Self Esteem and Age

1.2.5.1 Childhood

Researchers have studied Self- Esteem in children as young as 6 years of

age. Most of these studies have focused on domain specific self-evaluations (e.g.,

self-perceived math ability) rather than abstract beliefs about global self-worth. In

general, young children rate themselves well above the scale midpoint and

43

substantially higher than they rate other children, suggesting that their views of

themselves are positively inflated. However, as children move through elementary

school, their self-evaluations tend to decline (Eccles, Wigfield, Harold, &

Blumenfeld, 1993; Ruble, Boggiano, Feldman, & Loebl, 1980; Stipek & Tannatt,

1984). The few studies that have assessed global Self- Esteem in this age group

also point to decreases over the course of childhood (Marsh, 1989; Marsh, Barnes,

Cairns, & Tidman, 1984; Trowbridge, 1972).

1.2.5.2 Adolescence

Most research on Self Esteem development has focused on the transition

from childhood to adolescence (Demo, 1992). Several studies have found declines

in Self- Esteem during this transition (Engel, 1959; Piers & Harris, 1964;

Simmons, Rosenberg, & Rosenberg, 1973). Although this decline is frequently

cited in summaries of the research literature (Harter, 1993, 1998), a few studies

have failed to replicate this finding (Hirsch & Rapkin, 1987; Nottelmann, 1987).

Research on Self- Esteem development following the adolescent transition

provides an even more confusing picture. Some studies report a rise in Self-

Esteem during adolescence (Marsh, 1989; Prawat, Jones, & Hampton, 1979;

Roeser & Eccles, 1998) others report no change (Chubb et al., 1997) and still

others report declines (Zimmerman et al., 1997). Some of these inconsistencies

may be due to gender differences that are believed to emerge at this age,

specifically the tendency for boys to have higher Self- Esteem than girls (Kling,

Hyde, Showers, & Buswell, 1999; Major, Barr, Zubek, & Babey, 1999).

44

1.2.5.3 Adulthood

Compared with the adolescent literature, there are few studies of Self-

Esteem development during adulthood. Generally, these studies show small,

gradual increases in global Self- Esteem (Gove et al., 1989; Jaquish & Ripple,

1981; Lall, Jain, & Johnson, 1996). However, these studies typically examined

age differences across very large intervals of time (e.g., comparing Self- Esteem

levels in samples of young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults) and thus

provide only a very rough map of the shifts in Self- Esteem that might occur over

each decade of adulthood.

1.2.5.4 Old Age

Only a handful of studies have examined age differences in global Self-

Esteem in old age. Jaquish and Ripple (1981) found that adults report somewhat

lower Self- Esteem in late adulthood (age61–81 years) than in middle adulthood

(age 40–60 years). Tiggemann and Lynch (2001) found that women age 70–85

years had slightly lower Self- Esteem than women in their 60s. Ranzijn et al.

(1998) found that those age 85–103 years had lower Self- Esteem than those in

their 70s. Consistent with these three studies, Ward (1977) found a weak negative

correlation (r __14) between age and Self- Esteem in a sample of individuals‟ age

60–92 years. In contrast, Gove et al. (1989) found the highest levels of Self-

Esteem in the oldest cohort (age 75 years and older). Moreover, several studies

have failed to find significant age differences, including Trimakas and Nicolay‟s

(1974) study of individuals age 66–88 years, Erdwins et al. (1981) study of four

cohorts ranging in age from 18 to 75 years, and Ryff‟s (1989) study comparing

middle-aged adults (mean age _ 50 years) and older adults (mean age _ 75 years).

Reflecting the lack of consistency in previous findings, researchers reviewing the

45

literature on Self- Esteem and aging have failed to reach consensus on whether

Self- Esteem increases, decreases, or remains stable in old age (Bengtson, Reedy,

& Gordon, 1985; Brandtstaedter & Greve, 1994; Demo, 1992).

1.2.6 The Development of Self Esteem

The development of Self- Esteem is highly dependent on the social factors

that one experiences throughout his/her lifetime (Rosenberg, 1965). Social factors

are with us from birth and determine opinions, attitudes, and beliefs about one‟s

self. These social factors are important because they help to determine an

individual‟s values, which are the building blocks of one‟s Self Esteem. They may

begin with the economic status given at birth to the norms that surround the family

structure including authority in the family, child-rearing practices, and family

traditions. Social group norms must also be considered to be highly influential

upon one‟s Self- Esteem as the interactions with others have a strong bearing on

self-evaluation. Consider the social factors of honor, achievement,

competitiveness and reputation at school, in the home, in sports activities, and in

business. The standards of excellence are set for each social factor depending

upon the social norm within its particular society. Self-evaluation is referenced by

specific criteria, which are derived from those standards of excellence that have

been based on historical conditions of each society and characteristics of the social

group (Rosenberg, 1965).

Military skill and valor, for example, were important criteria for self-

evaluation during the times of medieval Europe. But today, entrepreneurship,

leadership and being on the leading edge of innovation are the skills that are more

applauded. All groups in society have their own individual standards of

46

excellence. It is within the frameworks of these standards that people conduct

their own self-evaluations that either enhance and build their Self- Estee mor

degrade and lower it (Rosenberg, 1965).

1.3 Concept of Organizational Commitment

1.3.1 Commitment and Organizational Commitment

Several different definitions of commitment exist in the literature.

Buchanan‟s (1974) definition is typical: “Commitment is viewed as a partisan,

affective attachment to the goals and values of an organization, to one‟s role in

relation to goals and values, and to the organization for its own sake, apart from

its purely instrumental worth” (p. 533). In the definition of Wiener (1982)

commitment is conceptualized as a normative motivational process clearly

distinctive from instrumental approaches to the explanation of work behavior.

Tsui, Egan, and O‟Reilly (1992) defined it as an employees‟ psychological and

behavioral attachment to a social group .According to Mottaz (1988),

Organizational Commitment is an effective response resulting from an evaluation

of the work conditions which attach the individual to his or her organization.

Researchers have suggested that commitment is a process of identification

with the goals of an organization‟s multiple constituencies. In this approach

employees can be differentially committed to top management, occupations,

supervisors, co-workers, and unions (Becker, Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert, 1996;

Reichers, 1985).

Reyes (2001) has defined commitment as “a partisan, affective attachment

to the goals and values of an organisation, to one‟s role in relation to goals and

47

values of an organisation, to one‟s roles in relation to goals and values and to the

organisation for its own sake, apart from its purely instrumental worth.

Organizational Commitment in the organizations has been extensively

researched. It was defined as the strength of involvement one has with the

organization (Hall & Schneider, 1972; Mowday et al., 1979). Definitions had

three main aspects; (a) a belief in and acceptance of organizational goals and

values, (b) a willingness to exert effort towards organizational goal

accomplishment, (c) a strong desire to maintain organizational membership

(Mowday et al., 1979; Morrow, 1983). It was also accepted that commitment is a

process of identification with the goals of an organization‟s multiple

constituencies. These constituencies may include top management, customers,

unions, and\or the public at large (Reichers, 1985).

Organizational Commitment is an attitude that influences employee

behavior beneficial to the organization (Riketta, 2002). The study of commitment

to the organization is important because Organizational Commitment can

influence employees‟ creativity, innovativeness, adaptation, and reduces

withdrawal behaviors such as lateness and turnover (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990;

Clugston, 2000; Riketta, 2002). Given that Organizational Commitment harnesses

employees‟ desires, needs, and obligations and thus helps channel their efforts

toward the achievement of the organization‟s objectives, a better understanding of

the factors that can help organizations to increase their workers levels of

commitment is critical.

According to the researchers, positive consequences of Organizational

Commitment is a long list that includes higher rate of attendance, reduced

burnout, employee retention, improved job performance, work quantity, work

48

quality, limited tardiness, low labor turnover and personal sacrifice on behalf of

the organization.(Tan & Akhtar, 1998; Somers & Birnbaum, 2000). The evidence

on the prediction of these numerous antecedents was tested in different settings.

But tests in wide spread organizations are scarce.

Meyer and Allen (1990, 1996) indicate that Organizational Commitment

is a psychological link between the employee and his/her organization that makes

it less likely for the employee to voluntarily leave the organization.

In recent years, work organizations have been confronted with an

increasingly competitive global business climate. This forces organizations to

develop policies to enhance workplace commitment on the one hand, and leads

managers to develop their skills on effective conflict management on the other.

1.3.2 Components of Organizational Commitment

It has been over 20 years, since Allen and Meyer (1990) proposed a three-

component model of Organizational Commitment (henceforth called „TCM‟);

based on the idea that Organizational Commitment comes in three distinct forms:

affective attachment to the organization, perceived costs of leaving it, and a felt

obligation to stay. These three forms, labeled affective, continuance, and

normative commitment respectively, are referred to as “components” of

Organizational Commitment.

1.3.2.1 Affective Commitment

The most prevalent approach to Organizational Commitment in the

literature is one in which commitment is considered an affective or emotional

attachment to the organization such that the strongly committed individual

identifies with, is involved, and enjoys membership in the organization (Allen &

49

Meyer, 1990). Employees who have high levels of organizational identification

have enhanced feelings of belongingness to their organization and are more

psychologically attached to it (Lee et.al. , 2007). Thus, employees with strong

affective commitment remain with the organization because they want to do so

(Allen and Meyer 1996). Affective commitment tend to correlate more strongly

with any given outcome variable including the focal behavior (Meyer &

Herscovitch, 2001). Organizational-based psychological ownership is concerned

with individual members‟ feeling of possession and psychological connection to

an organization as a whole including organizational culture and climate, attitudes

of senior management, corporate goals and vision, reputation of the organization,

and corporate policies and procedures (Mayhew et.al., 2007). Therefore,

developing affective commitment should focus on the work experiences and job

characteristics such as autonomy, task significance, task identity, skill variety,

supervisory feedback and organizational dependability, all of which have been

identified as significant antecedents of affective commitment (Jaros, 1997).

1.3.2.2 Normative Commitment

A less common but equally viable approach has been to view commitment

as a belief about one‟s responsibility to the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990).

Normative commitment reflects a perceived obligation to remain in the

organization (Meyer et al., 2002). It refers to commitment based on a sense of

obligation to the organization and employees with strong normative commitment

remain because they feel they ought to do so (Allen & Meyer, 1996). Weiner

(1982) suggested that normative commitment develops as a function of

socialization experiences, such as societal or familial experience. Employees can

50

develop a sense of obligation to their organization for reasons other than

socialization, including the receipt of benefits that invoke a need for reciprocity

(Meyer et.al., 2002). Exchange theory is relevant to this attitudinal approach to

commitment in that it is reasoned that employees offer commitment in return for

the receipt (or anticipated receipt) of rewards from the organization (Oliver,

1990). Thus, normative commitment is conceptualized to reflect one specific type

of attachment related emotion (Jaros, 1997). Employees with a high level of

normative commitment believe that they have the duty and responsibility to

continue working for their current employer (Aube, 2007). Although affective and

normative commitment shows similar patterns of correlations with antecedent,

correlate and consequence variables, the magnitude of the correlations is often

quite different (Meyer et.al., 2002).

1.3.2.3 Continuance Commitment

Continuance commitment refers to commitment based on the employee‟s

recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organization and they remain

because they have to do so (Allen & Meyer, 1996). It is proposes that the

continuance component of Organizational Commitment will also develop on the

basis of two factors; the magnitude and/or number of investment (or side-bets)

individuals make and perceived lack of alternative (Allen & Meyer, 1990).

According to Becker (1960), people committed to the organization due to three

reason; (1) the generalized culture expectation where people feel that a man ought

not to change his job too often and that one who does is erratic and untrustworthy;

(2) impersonal bureaucratic arrangement where a man who wishes to leave his

current job may find that, because of the rules governing the firm‟s pension fund,

51

he is unable to leave without losing a considerable sum of money he has in that

fund; (3) individual adjustment to social positions where a person may so alter his

patterns of activity in the process of conforming to the requirement for one social

positions that he unfits himself for other positions he might have access.

Employee would be more attached to their organization if they cannot obtain the

same benefits in another firm (Lee et al., 2007). It is generally agreed that

continuance commitment develops when a person makes investments, or side-bet,

that would be lost if he or she were to discontinue the activity (Meyer &

Herscovitch, 2001; Meyer &Allen, 1991).

1.3.3 Theoretical Approaches to Organizational Commitment

Organizational Commitment has been studied from different perspectives

by various researchers. Some studies have used the social exchange theory to

explain Organizational Commitment while others have used the attitudinal or

behavioral approach. Some researchers, however, have claimed that

Organizational Commitment cannot be studied without considering its

multidimensional nature (Reichers, 1985).

These different approaches to the study of Organizational Commitment are

discussed below.

1.3.3.1 Social Exchange Theory

The exchange perspective views the employment relationship as consisting

of social or economic exchanges (Aryee, Budhwar &Chen, 2002; Cropanzano,

Rupp & Bryne, 2003). Economic exchange relationships involve the exchange of

economic benefits in return for employees‟ effort and are often dependent on

formal contracts which are legally enforceable. On the other hand, social

52

exchanges are „voluntary actions‟ which may be initiated by an organization‟s

treatment of its employees, with the expectation that the employees will be

obligated to reciprocate the good deeds of the organization (Blau, 1964; Aryee et

al., 2002; Gould-Williams & Davies, 2005).

From the perspective of the employee-employer relationship, social

exchange theory suggests that employees respond to perceived favorable working

conditions by behaving in ways that benefit the organization and/or other

employees. Equally, employees retaliate against dissatisfying conditions by

engaging in negative work attitudes, such as absenteeism, lateness, tardiness or

preparing to quit the organization (Haar, 2006; Crede et al., 2007). It is therefore,

expected that employees who perceive their working conditions to be negative and

distressing, would reciprocate with negative work attitudes such job

dissatisfaction, low morale and reduced Organizational Commitment, while those

who perceive the workplace conditions as positive and challenging would

reciprocate with positive work attitudes, such as high commitment, Job

Satisfaction and low turnover (Cropanzano et al., 2003; Crede et al., 2007).

Another perspective of the social exchange theory is the norm of

reciprocity which is based on two assumptions: “(a) people should help those who

have helped them, and (b) people should not injure those who have helped them”

(Gouldner, 1960, p. 171) Therefore, employees who perceive that the organization

values and treats them fairly, will feel obligated to “pay back” or reciprocate these

good deeds with positive work attitudes and behaviors (Aryee et al., 2002; Gould-

Williams & Davies, 2005; Parzefall, 2008). Studies have suggested that the norm

of reciprocity is taught as a moral obligation and then internalized by both parties

(i.e. employees and employers) in an exchange relationship such that whoever

53

receives a benefit feels obligated to repay it (Gouldner, 1960; Liden, Wayne,

Kraimer & Sparrowe, 2003; Parzefall, 2008). This suggests that employees, who

perform enriched jobs devoid of stress, receive attractive pay, job security and fair

treatment from the organization, are bound to express their gratitude for the

support received by increasing their commitment to their organization.

In summary, therefore, the exchange theory posits that commitment

develops as a result of an employee's satisfaction with the rewards and

inducements the organization offers, rewards that must be sacrificed if the

employee leaves the organization.

1.3.3.2 Attitudinal Commitment

This approach perceives commitment as an individual‟s psychological

attachment to the organization. Consistent with the unitary values and philosophy

of human resource management, attitudinal commitment posits that employees‟

values and goals are congruent with those of the organization (Mowday et al.,

1982; Armstrong, 2003). This approach, now commonly referred to as affective

commitment, has dominated most of Organizational Commitment research for

more than three decades (Kanter, 1968; Buchanan, 1974; Porter et al., 1974;

Mowday et al., 1982). Brown (1996, p.231) refers to it as a “set of strong, positive

attitudes towards the organization manifested by dedication to goals and shared

sense of values” while Porter et al. (1974, p.604) defines it as:

… The relative strength of an individual‟s identification with and involvement in a

particular organization. Such commitment can generally be characterized by at

least three factors: (a) a strong belief in, and acceptance of the organization‟s

54

goals and values; (b) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the

organization; (c) a definite desire to maintain organizational membership.

Meyer and Allen (1991, p.67) defined it as an employee‟s emotional

attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization. These

definitions view Organizational Commitment as involving some form of

psychological bond between the employees and the organization. The resulting

outcomes are increased work performance, reduced absenteeism and reduced

turnover (Scholl, 1981). Attitudinal commitment was measured using the

Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) designed by Porter et al.

(1974).

The exchange theory has also been used to explain attitudinal

commitment. According to the exchange perspective, employees exchange their

identification, loyalty and attachment to the organization in return for incentives

from the organization (Angle & Perry, 1981; Steers, 1977). This implies that an

individual‟s decision to become and remain a member of an organization is

determined by their perception of the fairness of the balance of organizational

inducements and employee contribution. This approach therefore assumes that the

employee develops attitudinal commitment when they perceive that their

expectations are being met by the organization.

According to this approach, an employee willingly maintains membership

purely for the sake of the organization without asking for anything in return.

Wiener (1982, p.421) states that employees exhibit this positive behavior because

“they believe it is the „right‟ and moral thing to do”. These feelings of obligation

to remain with an organization result primarily from the internalization of

normative pressures exerted on an individual prior to entry into an organization

55

(familial or cultural socialization) or following entry into the organization

(organization socialization) and not through rewards or inducements (Wiener,

1982; Meyer & Allen, 1997; Chen & Francesco,2003). Feelings of indebtedness

may also arise from an organization‟s providing certain benefits such as tuition

reimbursement or training. This feeling of obligation may continue until the

employee feels that he or she has “paid back” the debt (Meyer & Allen, 1991;

Scholl, 1981; Chen & Francesco, 2003).

Wiener‟s proposal which stresses identification and loyalty to the

organization, has added a new dimension to the understanding of attitudinal

commitment. Whereas in affective/attitudinal commitment an individual is

attached to the organization‟s goals and values, normative commitment arises

from the congruency of the individual‟s and the organization‟s goals and values,

which aim to make the individual to be obligated to the organization (Suliman &

Iles, 2000). Wiener (1982) further states that commitment increases when the

internalized beliefs of an employee are consistent with the organization‟s

missions, goals, policies and style of operation. Studies that have used Meyer and

Allen‟s (1991) affective and normative commitment scales have revealed that the

two approaches have an inherent psychological overlap and that it may not be

possible to feel a strong obligation to an organization without also developing

positive emotional feelings for it (Allen & Meyer, 1996; Meyer, Stanley,

Herscovitch &Topolnysky, 2002; Jaros, 2007).

1.3.3.3 The Behavioral Approach

The behavioral approach views commitment as being purely instrumental

and not psychological (Becker, 1960; Stevens et al., 1978). The assumption of this

56

approach is that employees retain their membership with an organization because

the perceived cost of doing otherwise is likely to be high.

This approach developed from Howard Becker‟s studies in 1960 which

described commitment as a disposition to engage in “consistent line of activity”

(namely maintaining membership in the organization) resulting from the

accumulation of „side bets‟ which would be lost if the activity was discontinued

(Becker, 1960, p. 33). Kanter (1968, p. 504) referred to it as “profit associated

with continued participation and „cost‟ associated with leaving” the organization.

In this regard, commitment arises from the accumulation of some investments or

side-bets tying the individual to a specific organization, which would otherwise be

lost if the activity or membership to the organization were discontinued.

According to this approach, individuals may be unwilling to quit their

organizations lest they be perceived as “job hoppers” (Reichers, 1985). Employees

therefore make side bets by staking their reputation for stability on the decision to

remain in the organization. Organizations have also been found to make side bets

for employees using practices that lock them into continued membership in the

organization through rapid promotion, non-investment pension plans,

organization-specific training among others. However, Meyer, Paunonen,

Gellatly, Goffin and Jackson (1989) caution that such tactics by the organization

may not instill in employees the desire to contribute to organizational

effectiveness. Instead, some employees may find that they have little desire to

remain with the organization but cannot afford to do otherwise. Such employees

may be motivated to do little more than perform at the minimum level required to

maintain the job they have become dependent on. Organizations should therefore

foster affective commitment in their employees rather than continuance

57

commitment since employees who value their association with the organization

will not only remain in the organization but work towards its success.

The attitudinal, normative and behavioral approaches to commitment

represent what is now referred to as affective, normative and continuance

commitment in the contemporary commitment literature.

1.3.3.4 Multi-Dimensional Aapproach

Interest in the study of the multidimensionality of Organizational

Commitment has been as a result of two factors. Firstly, previous studies on

Organizational Commitment have been criticized for failing to investigate

commitment as a construct that is distinct from other psychological concepts

(O‟Reilly & Chatman, 1986). This is despite studies showing that one‟s

commitment to an organization can result from value congruence, financial

investments, effective reward and control systems or a simple lack of

opportunities (Becker, 1960; Wiener, 1982).

Secondly, although attitudinal or behavioral approaches explained

different concepts of commitment (i.e. psychological attachment, loyalty and costs

attached to leaving the organization), Mowday et al. (1982) found that the two

approaches were not mutually exclusive but interrelated. According to Mowday

and colleagues, there is an ongoing cyclical relationship between these two types

of commitment whereby high levels of attitudinal commitment leads to

committing behaviors which in turn reinforce commitment attitudes. Similarly,

Coopey and Hartley (1991) suggest that the two approaches could be integrated

into a single approach which recognizes that commitment can develop either

through affect or through behavior and that each may reinforce the other.

58

The first study that explored the multidimensionality of Organizational

Commitment were carried out by Meyer and Allen (1984) who adopted Becker‟s

(1960) side bet theory by introducing the concept of continuance commitment

alongside the concept of affective commitment. Reichers (1985) in a review of 32

commitment studies did not find a consistent definition of commitment. However,

from these studies, Reichers (1985, p.468) classified commitment into three

categories:

A) Side-bets which suggest that Organizational Commitment is a function of the

rewards and costs associated with organizational membership. These typically

increase as tenure in the organization increases.

B) Attributions whereby commitment is a binding of the individual to behavioral

acts that results when individuals attribute an attitude of commitment to

themselves after engaging in behaviors that are volitional, explicit and irrevocable.

C) Individual/organizational goal congruence where commitment occurs when

individuals identify with and extend effort towards organizational goals and

values.

In addition, Reichers found that organizations comprised various

“coalitions and constituencies” (such as top management, work groups, co-

workers, supervisors, customers/clients) each with its own goals and values that

may or may not be compatible with the goals of the organization. As a result,

Organizational Commitment can best be understood as a collection of multiple

commitments to the goal orientations of multiple work groups that constitute the

organization. Reicher's review provided guidelines for the future direction on the

study of multidimensionality of Organizational Commitment by categorizing

commitment into three dimensions.

59

O'Reilly and Chatman (1986) who adapted Kelman's (1958) work on

attitude and behavioral change, argued that although commitment reflected the

psychological bond that ties the employee to the organization, this bond can take

three distinct forms, namely, compliance, identification and internalization.

According to O‟Reilly and Chatman (p.493), compliance occurs simply to gain

specific rewards and not because of shared beliefs; internalization occurs when the

values of the individual and the organization are the same; and identification

arises from being part of a group, respecting its values and accomplishments

without the individual adopting them as his or her own. The study found that

identification and internalization were negatively related to turnover intentions,

while compliance was positively related to employee turnover. Following up on

Meyer and Allen‟s (1984) study, McGee and Ford (1987) found that continuance

commitment was bi-dimensional consisting of „high personal sacrifice‟ and „low

perceived alternatives‟.

The current development in multidimensional commitment is credited to

studies carried out by Allen and Meyer (1990). From a review of several

Organizational Commitment studies, they concluded that it consisted of three

general themes namely; affective attachment to the organization; perceived costs

associated with leaving the organization; and obligation to remain with the

organization. These themes became known as affective, continuance and

normative commitment respectively. According to Allen and Meyer (1990, p. 4),

“the „net sum‟ of a person's commitment to the organization … reflects each of

these separable psychological states” since an employee can experience each of

these psychological states with varying degrees, for instance, a strong need and

obligation to remain in the organization but no desire to do so.

60

1.3.4 The Antecedents of Organizational Commitment

A number of personal determinants have been associated with

Organizational Commitment.

There have been a number of studies that have investigated the personal

correlates of organisational commitment. Characteristics such as age, tenure,

educational level, job level and gender have been found to influence

organisational commitment.

1.3.4.1 Organisational Commitment and Age

As employees age their level of commitment towards their employing

organisations increases. Researchers (Meyer & Allen, 1997; Cramer, 1993;

Loscocco, 1990; Luthans, 1992; Sekaran, 2000) support the findings that the

relationship between organisational commitment and age is significant.

Some theorists postulate that, as individual‟s age, alternative employment

opportunities become limited, thereby making their current jobs more attractive

(Kacmar et al., 1999; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Other proponents hypothesise that

older individuals may be more committed to their organisations because they have

a stronger investment and a greater history with the organisation than do younger

employees (Harrison & Hubbard, 1998; Kacmar & Brymer, 1999).

Therefore, younger employees are generally likely to be more mobile and

to have lower psychological investments in the organisation. The older employees

become, the less willing they are to sacrifice the benefits and idiosyncratic credits

that are associated with seniority in the organisation (Hellman, 1997).

61

1.3.4.2 Organisational Commitment and Tenure

Tenure or the length of service of employees contributes towards

increasing the employees‟ levels of commitment towards the organisation.

Research corroborates the view that a positive relationship exists between

organisational commitment and tenure (Larkey & Morrill; 1995; Meyer & Allen,

1997).

Research overwhelmingly indicates that tenure has a positive influence on

organisational commitment (Loscocco, 1990; Luthans, 1992; Luthans, Baack &

Taylor 1987). One possible reason for the positive relationship between tenure and

commitment may be sought in the reduction of employment opportunities and the

increase in the personal investments that the individual has in the organisation.

This is likely to lead to an increase in the individual‟s psychological attachment to

the organisation (Harrison & Hubbard, 1998; Lim et al., 1998; Luthans, 1992).

Sekaran (1992) maintains that tenure is associated with some status and prestige,

and that this induces greater commitment and loyalty to the employing

organisation.

1.3.4.3 Organisational Commitment and Level of Education

Research generally indicates an inverse relationship between

organisational commitment and an individual‟s level of education; however, the

results are not unequivocal (Luthans et al., 1987).

A number of researchers maintain that the higher an employees‟ level of

education, the lower that individual‟s level of organisational commitment

(Luthans et al., 1987; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). The negative relationship may

62

result from the fact that highly qualified employees have higher expectations that

the organisation may be unable to fulfil.

Higher levels of education are postulated to enhance the possibility that

employees can find alternative employment which may reduce their levels of

commitment.

More educated individuals may also be more committed to their

profession. As a result, it would become difficult for an organisation to compete

successfully for the psychological involvement of these employees (Mowday et

al., 1982). This is because, according Mathieu and Zajac (1990), more highly

qualified individuals have a greater number of alternative work opportunities.

However, Billingsley and Cross (1992) failed to find support for a relationship

between education and commitment.

1.3.4.4 Organisational Commitment and Gender

As is the case with education, the influence of gender on organisational

commitment remains unclear.

The general contention appears to be that women as a group tend to be

more committed to their employing organisation than are their male counterparts

(Cramer, 1993; Harrison & Hubbard, 1998; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Loscocco

(1990) found that women were more likely to report that they are proud to work

for their organisation, that their values and the company‟s values are similar, and

that they would accept almost any job offered to them in order to remain with

their current employer.

Several explanations have been offered to account for the greater

commitment of female employees. Mowday et al. (1982) maintain that women

63

generally have to overcome more barriers to attain their positions within the

organisation. They concur that the effort required to enter the organisation

translates into higher commitment of female employees. Harrison and Hubbard

(1998) similarly argue that women display greater commitment because they

encounter fewer options for employment.

Numerous researchers have, however, failed to find support for a

relationship between gender and organisational commitment (Billingsley & Cross,

1992; Ngo & Tsang, 1998; Wahn, 1998). It may, thus, be concluded that a

growing body of evidence appears to support either no gender differences in

organisational commitment or the greater commitment of women (Wahn, 1998).

1.3.5 Organizational Commitment among Teachers

Most of the research on Organizational Commitment has been done by

industrial organizational and occupational psychologists (Mueller, Wallace &

Price, 1992).Very little research on Organizational Commitment has been

conducted within educational settings. The focus of the present study is to identify

the antecedents and consequences of Organizational Commitment among

university faculty members. Fostering Organizational Commitment among the

academic staff is important because, as mentioned previously, employees that are

highly committed stay longer, perform better, miss less work, and engage in

organizational citizenship behaviors.

These findings can be generalized to the teachers as well. Teachers who

are not committed to their work place are likely to put less effort in the classroom

as compared to teachers with high levels of commitment. This would adversely

64

affect student learning and achievement in particular and standard of education in

the country in general.

Moreover, high turnover among teachers, especially when good teachers

quit, can have high costs and implications for the education system. This is

because good quality teachers take with them their research, teaching skills, and

experience. Other costs include the time involved in recruitment, selection, and

training of new faculty; advertising expenses; and increased workloads for

existing faculty. It is not necessary to be a management expert or an economist to

understand that if the education managers are spending hours of their time to

replace teachers, preventing brain drain in the first place might have saved some

of the resources.

By identifying factors that help to foster Organizational Commitment

among university academics, this study aimed to provide guidelines to education

managers to come up with policies which would enable them to attract and retain

top level faculty at their respective universities. In the Iran and India context,

fostering Organizational Commitment among teachers has become imperative for

the universities. Possession of high quality faculty, especially faculty with Ph.D.

and foreign degrees, is one of the most important factors used by the Higher

Education Commission of Iran and India to evaluate the performance and standard

of universities.

This is likely to make it harder for the universities to retain their academic

staff. Because of these changes in the Iran and India education sector, universities

will have to work hard to create an environment that would enable them to attract

new faculty and retain their best teachers. Secondly, as discussed above, teachers

who are committed to their respective institutions are more likely not only to

65

remain with the institution but are also likely to exert more effort on the behalf of

the organization and work towards its success and are therefore likely to be better

performers than uncommitted teachers. Thus fostering commitment among the

academic staff is an important and viable organizational objective.

1.3.6 Development of Organizational Commitment

Organizational Commitment as a concept began to gain increasing

prominence over the past 30 years. At the start of the 20th century, the main focus

for industrialists on the management of their employees was to maximize

productivity and profits using scientific management as advocated by Frederick

Taylor. Although Taylor‟s method resulted in increased productivity and higher

pay, the workers and the labor unions opposed the approach as it resulted in high

stress levels and job losses because employees were expected to surpass their

normal work targets (Stoner, Freeman & Gilbert, 1995).

From the early 1970s, interest in the study of Organizational Commitment

gained momentum especially in America. This was spurred by a decline in

productivity, a demoralized workforce and stiff competition that American

industries were facing from foreign investors, especially Japan (Lincoln &

Kalleberg, 1990). Interest in studies of Organizational Commitment developed

from the successful Japanese management practices whereby employee

commitment was seen to be a central driver to organizational success. Guest

(1987) attributes the popularity of Organizational Commitment to its central

position in the design of human resource management policies, whose aim is to

maximize organizational integration, employee commitment, flexibility and

quality of work.

66

1.3.7 Organizational Commitment and Intention to Leave

Organizations can achieve a competitive advantage through committed

employees. Communication plays an influential role in the degree to which an

employee is committed to organizational goals and values. Research indicates that

employees who accurately receive information from their supervisor about their

work environment, are better informed, feel an integral part of the organization,

therefore the higher their commitment to the organization (Sias, 2005).

Meyer and Allen (1991) used the terms affective, continuance and

normative commitment, which refer to an employee‟s identification with the

organization, awareness of leaving the organization would be too costly, and the

employee‟s obligation to remain with the organization. Subsequently, this

research focuses on affective and continuance commitment due to their strong

predictive strength of employee turnover.

Becker‟s (1992) „side bet‟ theory emphasizes the calculative gains such as

pension plans, monetary value, skill obtainment and status that would be lost if the

employee decided to leave the organization. According to the „side bet theory‟ an

employee commits to an organization because they perceive high costs of losing

organizational membership, including social costs such as high quality supervisor

subordinate relationships would be incurred. An employee remains with the

organization because they have to, in respect to the benefits gained,

(psychological rewards) from sustaining a good relationship with their supervisor.

A high level of trust in a subordinate supervisor relationship determines an

employee‟s positive emotional attachment to the organization. An employee who

experiences mutual trust and respect with their supervisor is affectively

67

committed, as they strongly identify with the goals of the organization and desire

to stay in the organization. High quality supervisor- subordinate relationships

function as employees going beyond their own self interests to focus on larger

mutual interests of their supervisor and organization (Sias, 2005).

The lack of communication about how a job is performed, how the job

performed is evaluated, and the employee‟s work expectations such as job

functions or duties can cause some job and organizational outcomes. The lack of

consensus an employee and supervisor may have about work expectations, due to

insufficient information can cause an employee to feel less involved, less satisfied

with their job, less committed to the organization, and eventually display a

propensity to leave the organization (Tor & Owen, 1997).

1.4 Need and Significance of the Study

The present research studies the Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and

Organizational Commitment of education college faculty members. The college

teacher is the key person and plays a pivotal role at the college level. So the

college teachers who are satisfied in their job are likely to serve more effectively

than those who are not satisfied. The level of Job Satisfaction is therefore,

criterion whether an individual is working effectively or not. The Job Satisfaction

of faculty members is the most important factor in higher education. If

effectiveness and productivity of the higher education system and academic

community are to be enhanced, than we must examine what factors influences the

Job Satisfaction of faculty members.

Studding on Self- Esteem is important because it is the way we perceive

and value as well as shapes our lives. A person who lacks confidence in itself, or

68

in their own possibilities, it may be by experience that this would have been felt or

confirmation or disconfirmation messages transmitted by people who are

important in the life of it, that encourage or denigrate.

Organizational Commitment has been studied extensively among diver‟s

professional groups. The notion that commitment is important for the realization

has remained up tapped by researchers. However only a few studies have

addressed commitment in the institutions these studies on Organizational

Commitment of educators have focused on teachers in schools and to a lesser

extent on educators in higher education of institutions.

There are many teachers, particularly in terms of higher education that has

been neglected in low Self- Esteem anchoring seriously impaired their

professional, growing and of course the students with whom they exchanged

knowledge, serving as facilitator.

Dependency and relationship to Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and

Organizational Commitment among teachers aware that the only Job Satisfaction

was effective in establishing normal behaviour, but also to improve and enhance

Organizational Commitment is also effective. On the other hand changes in

different dimensions of Organizational Commitment variables, changes in Job

Satisfaction demands. Awareness of the existence of this relationship for many

managers and supervisors is important.

Doubt that increase employee Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and

Organizational Commitment in higher quality and quantity of work and

organizational goals for the overall goals of society, has a considerable impact.

While the majority of previous Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment

studies have focused on industrial and organizational settings, and Self Esteem

69

studies on students, there is much less literature on Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem

and Organizational Commitment levels of academic faculty.

Being a comparative study between two different countries, the present

research has pinpointed important need in research on the topic in hand. In fact,

due to difficulties of data collection, as well as administration problems, not many

researchers carry out such comparative studies. Collecting data from two different

countries can open our eyes on a number of important issues, i.e., local variations

as well as universities of variables like Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and

Organizational Commitment, etc. in different geographical places.

Therefore, it was assumed that this study would be of interest to human

resource administrators, and persons who work directly with college teachers and

also results of the study would assist the faculty members in clarifying their

attitudes about their jobs.

1.5 Statement of the Problem

The present study is a survey type involving descriptive cum comparative

research on Job Satisfaction (JS), Self Esteem (SE) and Organizational

Commitment (OC) among Faculty Members of Secondary Level Teacher

Training Programme in India (Mysore) and Iran (Tehran) Thus, the study is

entitled „„Job Satisfaction, Self Esteem and Organizational Commitment

among Faculty Members of Secondary Level Teacher Training Programme

in India (Mysore) and Iran (Tehran)-A Comparative Study‟‟

70

1.6 Delimitations of the Study

The following are the delimitations of the study:

1- It is delimitated to the variable under consideration. It is cannot consider

other variables which are not mentioned.

2- The research is delimited to particular regions (Tehran city in Iran and

Mysore city in India).

3- The research is delimited to be tools under consideration.

4- The results of the research will practically affect the faculty members of

Tehran city in Iran and Mysore city in India.

5- The study is delimited to the education colleges of education only, in both

the countries, India and Iran