Timely fulfillment of fundamental as well as secondary motives is important for us to be able to continue working at optimum levels of performance. There are remote chances that a worker who is dissatisfied with his employer, the working conditions, compensation package, behavior of colleagues and overall harmony at the organization would strive hard to contribute to the organization’s knowledge database and for the achievement of its goals and objectives. Conversely, a worker who believes that the pay he receives is equitable, has a more positive opinion about the working environment, conditions and fairness of treatment at work would be more inclined to contribute effectively to his role and participate towards organization’s objectives. Because of this relationship between job satisfaction and performance, jobs with highest satisfaction should never be ignored and be considered as an essential element of achieving high performance at workplace.

The controversy relating to the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance has been there for quite many years. Although a majority of people believe that a positive correlation exists between the two, some have suggested that the relationship is not so strong and may be ignored. The quantum of studies in favor of the positive relation between job satisfaction and job performance still remains very large compared to those against or partially against it. One thing we know for sure is that in order to perform well an individual needs to be mentally and physically fit. His well-being and soundness is a major contributor to productivity and effectiveness at work. It has been suggested by many authors that job satisfaction is a major player for an employee in terms of maintaining proper level of health and well being. Job satisfaction is also said to have an effect on the employee absenteeism, turnover rate, employee-employer relations, organizational harmony which eventually affects productivity and efficiency in the feedback system (Judge, et al., 2005)

Besides the aforementioned system of feedback, the idea of job satisfaction affecting the performance of employee is supported by Victor Vroom’s work, who was one of the first and major contributors to the study of organizational behavior, based on the notion that performance would be driven as a natural product of providing job satisfaction to the employees (Vroom, 1964). Many other early theorists also based their argument on a somewhat similar notion stating that a satisfied worked will work harder. This idea has been held for as early as 1960s. May authors have presented their research and studies based on the inter-relationship between the two variables and how a firm can use its resources to motivate talented individuals and encourage them to perform better. Although the link between job satisfaction and job performance cannot be studies in isolation, it certainly exists at all levels in the organization (Judge, et al., 2005).

In addition to the direct relationship between job satisfaction and performance, some authors have tried to establish the reverse relation as well stating that the steps that an employer takes to encourage job performance can also create job satisfaction in the employee, so the work conditions should be set by the employee as such that will not only induce an employee to perform better and in a more efficient way, but also contribute to the job satisfaction (Porter & Lawler, 1974). For example, the use of ergonomics which intends to maximize productivity by arranging the workplace and equipment, while at the same time reducing the worker fatigue and discomfort caused by unhealthy working environment and lack of proper equipment. Three major things were identified by Cummings in 1970 trying to understand the potential relationship between job satisfaction and job performance:

• Job satisfaction results in job performance
• Job performance results in satisfaction
• Rewards cause both satisfaction and performance (Bako, 2008)

These points have been accepted and supported by many other authors as well. Therefore, the idea that the “level of job satisfaction is not important; the only thing that matters is job performance.” is totally wrong, as it is impossible to achieve one without the other. Both variables are interdependent on above as job satisfaction would create willingness among the employee to work harder and more efficiently to achieve his individual objectives, which if achieved would again create a sense of accomplishment and success among the employee leading back to job satisfaction. The employer may also cause job satisfaction by introducing extrinsic factors such as high pay and compensation packages, fringe benefits to motivate the employee, pleasant work environment, opportunities for good interpersonal relations, importance to informal groups, flexible work approaches, responsibility and authority etc (Bako, 2008). All these factors would lead to job satisfaction by creating a positive image of employer and job in the mind of employee. It may however be argued that employer needs to do more than just adjust the working conditions and environment to fit the employee needs.

            It may therefore be said that job satisfaction is but one of the many contributing factors that lead to efficient and effective job performance. For example, after providing pleasant work environment, an employer may need to create high performance work groups, provide them tough deadlines, challenging tasks and performance-related benefit schemes to encourage them to work at their best. This approach will eventually result in better job performance. Conversely if the employer fails to provide adequate opportunities, pay and pleasant conditions and constantly demands an employee to work harder and perform better, he would eventually start feeling abused and fulminated. This will result in increased absenteeism and employee turnover as supported by the theories of organizational behavior and job satisfaction (MBAOfficial.com, 2010).

Moreover, a large volume of research in organizational psychology realizes the role of job satisfaction in creating and managing effective work relationships. An employee’s willingness to perform effectively is in fact dependent on his motivation level. Motivation and job performance are two different things; the latter however results in the former. Therefore, it should also be recognized that the force of motivation in an employee is in fact dependent on the employee’s individualistic goals, targets and what he/she wants to achieve and his/her own set of motives relating to that job (Christen, et al., 2005). Considering these factors, it should be the responsibility of the organization to manage their motives and provide them adequate satisfaction to drive high performance. Conversely, if an organization goes onto the belief that employee’s satisfaction is not necessary and employee can be forced and coerced to performance harder and better, it would create job stress among the employee. The consequences of prolonged job stress can be as serious as heart and stomach diseases, trauma, ulcers, arthritis, dermatitis, back pain and muscle aches. A dissatisfied worker will become economically and socially worsen off and eventually develop job stress. Finally an employee considers himself trapped in a job and takes all possible measures to avoid work and find a new satisfying job (Bako, 2008).

Besides being a means to increase productivity and job performance, job satisfaction can also contribute in minimizing losses and on-the-job accidents. For example, an employee who is dissatisfied with his job would be more prone to commit an error or engage in an accident, because dissatisfaction doesn’t allow an employee to concentrate on the task at hand and diverts his attention elsewhere resulting in costly losses and accidents. On the other hand, highly satisfied workers would try to discover new and easy ways of doing tasks and avoiding accidents by all means possible. Satisfaction increased the concentration level and leads to productivity and efficiency in working (MBAOfficial.com, 2010).

To conclude the essay, we may say that job satisfaction results from an individual’s perception about his job the job environment, colleagues and the employer. A higher level of satisfaction directly results in highly favorable and harmonious organizational climate which in turn enables the management to attract and retain highly competent and high performance workforce.  Although other extrinsic factors such as good pay, interpersonal interactions, growth, opportunity, responsibility and authority can be used to create positive image, satisfaction and motivation among the employee, the need to set the work methodology and relations should also be realized and given equal importance by the organization. A satisfied worker is an asset for an organization, whereas a dissatisfied worker would eventually leave an organization causing numerous other costs. So it is always a better decision to invest in the employee’s satisfaction and motivation today then pay the much higher cost later. To continue to manage employees believing that job satisfaction is not important and job performance is everything is living and managing in ignorance.

References

Bako, A. A., 2008. The Positive and Negative Effects of Job Satisfaction on. Australian Journal of Commerce Study, pp. 45-48.

Christen, M., Iyer, G. & Soberman, D., 2005. Job Satisfaction, Job Performance and Effort: A Re-Examination. Insead.

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E. & Putton, G. K., 2005. Job Satisfaction – Job Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), pp. 376-407.

MBAOfficial.com, 2010. What are benefits of Job Satisfaction?. [Online] Available at: http://www.mbaofficial.com/mba-courses/human-resource-management/what-are-benefits-of-job-satisfaction/
[Accessed 10 January 2015].

Porter, L. & Lawler, E., 1974. The effect of Performance on Job Satisfaction. In Pushpakumari Paper.

Vroom, V., 1964. Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.