The contents of chapter one include the background of the study, problem statement, purpose of the research, research questions, significance of the study, and delimitations and limitations of the study follow suit. The first chapter concludes with several key terms and definitions.
Background of the Study
The service industry is categorized under the tertiary sector and includes various job descriptions. Whether services range from retail sales, financial services, or education, these industries provide products or assistance to customers. Customer service is the act in which service industries conduct a series of activities that are intended to enhance a customer’s level of satisfaction (Turban et al., 2002). The basic concept of the service sector requires that a service provider supplies services according to the needs and requests of customers, because the service provider cannot function without customers.
The tertiary sector involves a further discrimination of for-profit, nonprofit, and public sectors. The for-profit sector includes corporations and businesses that operate for the purpose of gaining profit from services. On the other hand, the nonprofit sector provides services not for profit, that neither for-profit nor public sector provides for the public’s benefit (Lee, 2014). As for the public sector, this division offers services yielded by the government.
Transaction services are for the most part executed through an exchange of face-to-face interactions. Yet, due to the acceleration of technological development, there has been less need of manpower for organizations to operate. Services that benefit from face-to-face interaction with customers are also reducing the number of individuals needed for employment. Fortunately, the need for human capital within organizations still exists.
Nevertheless, along with the continuance of human interaction within organizations, issues in
the workplace continue; not just those related to customer-employee relations, but also among employees themselves, for example, job satisfaction.
The success and survival of companies or organizations is often heavily contingent upon the performance of its employees (Wiley, 1997). Nevertheless, to maintain high levels of performance, organizations must understand what motivates employees. Similarly, the relationship between job satisfaction and performance is of great importance. Siding with the concept that job satisfaction causes job performance (Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001), organizations should strive to keep employees satisfied in order to obtain optimal performance levels. On the other hand those that believe job performance causes job satisfaction should also understand what motivates employees to increase performance, and in turn, job satisfaction.
A study conducted by Frey, Bayón, and Totzek (2013) revealed employee satisfaction to be positively affected by positive client feedback. Some studies showed that positive performance feedback increases intrinsic motivation and in reverse performance criticism diminishes it (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Grandey and Diamond (2010) stated that customer feedback heightens motivation. More specifically, Harackiewicz (1979) hypothesized that free from reward effects, positive performance feedback has the potential to enhance intrinsic motivation. Herzberg’s motivational theory claims that showing signs of appreciation (positive feedback) for an individual’s work and performance acts as a motivator to stimulate job satisfaction (Frey et al., 2013). In addition, researchers hypothesized that customers are active participants in service interactions (Ma & Qu, 2011). Therefore, to suggest customers’
actions and reactions, such as feedback, may impact employees’ actions and reactions is not altogether preposterous.
Statement of the Problem
There is a continuing problem of employees’ job satisfaction – an issue that is of importance to all organizations with human resources. However, there are various
components that factor into employee job satisfaction. Therefore, it is unrealistic to generalize or generate standard measures defining precisely what level criteria define job satisfaction across all industries. Nevertheless, it is crucial for researchers to continue to pursue the solution to this issue. Oftentimes the approach to job satisfaction issues is narrowed down by limiting scopes of studies to contextual domains (Cleveland & Yeh, 2015).
Dating back to the 1930s, job satisfaction assessment used tactics such as employee anonymous surveys and has since continued in practice (Latham & Budworth, 2007).
Nevertheless, the solution to job satisfaction remains unsolved and has driven researchers to battle this problem from multiple perspectives (e.g. Babin & Boles, 1996; Frey et al., 2013;
Griffin, Patterson, & West, 2001; Locke, & Latham, 1990; Parvin & Kabir, 2011). This issue has lead much research dedicating resources to understanding the phenomenon of job satisfaction. Many studies (e.g. Brown & Lam, 2008; Evanschitzky, Groening, Mittal, &
Wunderlich, 2011; Grandey, Goldberg, & Pugh, 2011) have also examined how customer satisfaction is affected by employee satisfaction (Frey et al., 2013). Furthermore, a similar amount of studies have examined the relationship between and effects of motivation and job satisfaction (e.g. Locke & Latham, 1990; Parvin and Kabir, 2011; Tietjen & Myers, 1998).
Moreover, recent research has begun investigating the reverse effect of how customer satisfaction affects employee job satisfaction (e.g. Frey et al., 2013). Yet studies incorporating constructs linking employees’ job satisfaction to relationships with customers, supervisors and work motivation in unison are limited, though some theories demonstrate support for linkages among these relationships (e.g. Locke, 1976).
As mentioned before, previous research has predominantly focused on internal elements of organizations environment (Parvin & Kabir, 2011), and achievement orientation (Janssen
& Van Yperen, 2004) as sources influencing job satisfaction. Fairly few studies have inquired into customer satisfaction as impacting employees’ job satisfaction, even fewer
looking at customer feedback. Perhaps altering the approach to the issue of job satisfaction through a different perspective, such as customer feedback as an independent variable and through its effect on work motivation, may add to the understanding of job satisfaction.
In addition to the aforementioned, effects of work motivation and interactions with supervisors and customers on employees’ job satisfaction are oftentimes solely researched in the context of for-profit organizations. However, these issues are also relevant to non-profit organizations (NPO) and government-run organizations, and have not been widely addressed in these circumstances (Cleveland & Yeh, 2015).
Purpose of the Study
While observing employee job satisfaction, there are many components to keep in mind.
Working environment, relationships with customers and colleagues, and motives are few examples that may influence an employees’ perception of job satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to compare among the influences of perceived customer feedback, work motivation and perceived supervisor support on employee job satisfaction. Furthermore, this study proposed not only to do a comparison among the three independent variables mentioned above, but also a comparison of employee job satisfaction among the for-profit, nonprofit, and public sector employees’ perceptions.
Research Questions
Subsequent to the previous section, the following questions were generated to explore a possible comparison among for-profit, nonprofit, and public customer service employees.
• Does perceived customer feedback or perceived supervisor support have more influence on employees’ work motivation?
• Is perceived customer feedback or perceived supervisor support more positively associated with employee job satisfaction?
• Does work motivation influence employee job satisfaction?
• Are there significant differences among for-profit, nonprofit and public sector employees’ job satisfaction when looking at perceived customer feedback, work motivation and perceived supervisor support as independent variables?
Limitations and Delimitations
While customs and cultures vary among countries, this study narrowed its scope to individuals working within the United States, more specifically, Hawaii. Within this study, delimitations comprise of the size to which this research was conducted. Limitations are obstacles encountered within the study, such as access to participants, organizational information and time constraints.
This study consists of several delimitations. Firstly, this study is delimited to Hawaii.
Additionally, this study focused on influences of supervisors and customers on employees of for-profit, nonprofit, and public sectors within the service industries.
The sample size to this study was limited to employees within for-profit, nonprofit and public sectors who interact with customers face-to-face. The study targeted perceived supervisor and employee relationships in the organizations as well as perceived customer feedback. As follows, findings through the analysis of data collected are applicable to only the perception of employees’ relationship between his or her superior, or customers as well as perceptions of their own work motivation.
Significance of the Study
According to Frey et al. (2013), previous studies have focused on the effects such as leader-member exchange on job satisfaction. Studies also often focus on directional employee-customer relationships starting from employee satisfaction affecting customer satisfaction. In comparison, few studies have looked into customer satisfaction’s effect on job satisfaction; even less on perceived customer feedback and job satisfaction.
By looking at customer satisfaction as an independent variable, the issue arises in how an employee is affected by it. Unless it is perceived, customer satisfaction will have no influence
on an employee, let alone his or her job satisfaction. This study proposed a solution of this predicament by using perceived customer feedback to convey customer satisfaction. By employees receiving acknowledgement of positive service experiences from customers, this interaction allows customers to influence employees in various aspects.
While portraying customer feedback to influence job satisfaction is somewhat unusual, this approach gave further insight to attributing factors to job satisfaction. In combination with looking at perceived customer feedback, this study also aimed to investigate work motivation, and perceived supervisor support influences on employee job satisfaction.
Definition of Terms Perceived Customer Feedback
Customer feedback adopted Frey et al.’s (2013) definition of perceived customer appreciation in a service context, by characterizing it as an employee’s belief his or her performance and/or actions as an individual are valued by a customer.
Perceived Supervisor Support
Researchers (e.g. Babin & Boles, 1996; Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002; Stinglhamber & Vandenberghe, 2003) identify perceived supervisor support as the extent to which employees perceive supervisors offer employees support, encouragement and concern. It is also described as how employees formulate broad views regarding how much a supervisor values a subordinate’s work inputs and care about his or her well-being.
Work Motivation
Locke and Latham’s (1990) definition of work motivation is the intention and desire to perform a job task well. This definition of work motivation is regardless of concrete performance outcome or output evidence while it focuses solely on the employees’
psychological motive. Work motivation in this context may also be seen as an immediate precursor to work engagement.
Employee Job Satisfaction
Employee job satisfaction outlines how content an individual is with his or her job (Parvin & Kabir, 2011). This term may be applied to specific aspects of a job or the job as a whole. For the purpose of this research, the meaning adopted was applied to overall job satisfaction.