Awhile back, I discussed the job characteristics model and its origins in explaining and understanding job satisfaction (JS). JS is a very Management 1.0 idea and it was researched like crazy throughout the 20th century. Gary Hamel refers to the last 100 years of management as MGT 1.0 as opposed to MGT 2.0 which is the new management thinking required in today’s work environment. I totally dig this distinction.
But back to job satisfaction. I discovered the incredible volume of research out there on the topic while doing the lit review for my masters’ thesis which examined JS as an outcome. There are easily more than 100,000 articles on job satisfaction in the academic research.
On the surface, it seems like employees satisfied with their jobs would be a worthy goal for organizations. However, the research is mixed. Sometimes satisfied workers produce desired outcomes, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes dissatisfied workers produce desired outcomes, sometimes they don’t. Inconsistency does not a useful construct make.
For a 21st century example, check out the story of the culture at Eventbrite, the online event scheduling company. After clarifying expectations, Eventbrite now has happy and productive workers. Effectively having tough conversations and stewarding the desired change is MGT 2.0 work.
Over the years, the job satisfaction research evolved; additional and more useful distinctions regarding employee attitudes have emerged including employee commitment and one that is regularly measured and discussed – employee engagement.
Would love to hear your thoughts on job satisfaction and performance.