An Empirical Study on the Impact of Hygiene and Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction of Bank Executives in Western Province, Sri Lanka

An Empirical Study on the Impact of Hygiene and Motivation Factors on Job Satisfaction of Bank Executives in Western Province, Sri Lanka Dissanayake D. R. Department of Human Resource Management University of Kelaniya Kelaniya Sri Lanka ranjanied@gmail.com Wickremasinghe M.T.P. Union Bank of Colombo PLC Gampaha Branch thanuraa@yahoo.com Abstract In the organizational sciences, job satisfaction occupies a central role in many theories and models of individual attitudes and behaviors. The problem of job dissatisfaction exists across various spheres of industries around the world although numerous theories have been established and empirical studies conducted to address the problem. Hence, more researches and empirical studies pertaining to the concept of job satisfaction are essential in order to enhance the boundaries of existing knowledge. Although theories of job satisfaction have been extensively studied, researchers are yet to agree on the major predictors of Herzberg s two factor theory of job satisfaction, Hygiene factors and Motivation factors. Further, it seems very rare to find a good empirical study with respect to job satisfaction of bankers in Sri Lankan context. This is the research gap that will be addressed in this empirical study. This study aims at finding out the impact of Hygiene and Motivation Factors on job satisfaction of bank executives (junior and middle level) of Commercial banks in Western Province, Sri Lanka. To investigate this, a quantitative empirical study was conducted using a self-designed questionnaire on the selected convenient sample (n = 200). Then reliability (Cronbach s Alpha) of the questionnaire was determined and the questionnaire was found to be reliable. Descriptive and inferential statistics were calculated. The findings indicated that 85% of the variance in job satisfaction is significantly explained by hygiene and motivation factors. Further, the study reveals that except for salary, benefits, working condition, relationship with peers and growth, other hygiene and motivation factors are not significant

predictors of the job satisfaction. But, if individually taken, all the hygiene and motivation factors are significantly correlate with job satisfaction. It is, therefore, recommended that the banks should focus on hygiene and motivation factors very seriously when crafting and executing new strategies. This will ensure that the banks remain sustainable and continue to make a positive contribution to Sri Lankan economy. Key Words: Hygiene factors, Job satisfaction, Motivation factors 1. Introduction Work is central to most people s lives. Hence, the investigation of various aspects of one s job is very important. No research pertaining to work can be complete without considering the well being at work. Job attitudes play a vital role in assessing the well being at work. One of the most extensively researched job attitudes in the industrial and organizational psychology literature is Job Satisfaction (Highhouse & Becker, 1993). The number of articles and books investigating this concept has increased from over 3000 in 1976 (Locke, 1976), to over 5000 in 1992 (Harwood & Rice, 1992) and over 10000 in 2002 (Maher, 2002). In addition, in the organizational sciences, job satisfaction occupies a central role in many theories and models of individual attitudes and behaviors. Why does the concept of job satisfaction occupy a central role in industrial and organizational literature? Because the problem of job dissatisfaction exists across various spheres of industries around the world although numerous theories have been established and empirical studies conducted to address the problem. Job satisfaction had been a researchable concept in the past. It continues to be a researchable concept in the future as well with the ever changing social, economic, technological facets of the world and the emergence of new industries. Hence, more researches and empirical studies pertaining to the concept of job satisfaction are essential in order to enhance the boundaries of existing knowledge. Although theories of job satisfaction have been extensively studied, researchers are yet to agree on the major predictors of Herzberg s two factor theory of job satisfaction, Hygiene factors and Motivation factors. Further, it seems very rare to find a good empirical study with respect to job satisfaction of bankers in Sri Lankan context. This is the research gap that will be addressed in this empirical study. 1.1. Problem Statement There has been a rapid expansion in government as well as private commercial banks in Sri Lanka during the last decade. The growth of private commercial banks has added a new

dimension in the banking industry in the country. Licensed commercial banks play a major role in the financial market in Sri Lanka. Furthermore, after the completion of the war in North and East of the island, the demand for financial services particularly in North and East provinces has increased. The importance and the demand for the licensed commercial banks have rapidly increased recently because of that reason and due to the debacles faced by unlicensed financial institutions in the country. Hence, the public trust and confidence have increased towards the licensed commercial banks. A trend has emerged in the banking industry during the past few years that some of the executives from junior and middle levels resign from their respective posts in the local banks and embark to Gulf countries for employment. The researcher himself is able to provide evidence pertaining to same since he is employed in banking sector for seven years. Further, a pilot survey carried out by the researcher which included 35 junior and middle level bank executives shows that a significant number of bank executives express their willingness to go abroad or change their banking careers if they will get opportunities. Upon inquiry, the respondents who express willingness to either go abroad or change their banking careers said that they are not satisfied about the current job. Recruiting and retaining human talent is a key issue for Sri Lankan banks (www.fitchratings.com). Fitch observes that there is rather high staff turnover at the middle / junior level management and clerical levels within the banking system due to dissatisfaction of the job. This affects the creation of a trained pool of staff to meet current requirements and future management succession needs. Although Fitch does not consider this a critical issue at present, unless addressed appropriately, Sri Lankan banking industry will have to face a human talent shortage in the next decade or so as per Fitch. From the above observations, it is evident that there is a problem among bank executives with respect to their job satisfaction. In other words, there are evidences that quite a significant number of bank executives are not satisfied with their occupation. 1.2. Objectives of the Study The primary objective of the present research study can be furnished as follows. To find out the impact of Hygiene and Motivation Factors on job satisfaction of permanent junior and middle level executives of commercial banks in Western Province, Sri Lanka.

While achieving the primary objective, the following specific objectives (Secondary objectives) need to be achieved simultaneously. To gather information and evaluate the present level of job satisfaction among bank executives. To find out whether there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction level of the executives of Government and Private commercial banks To examine whether there exists a significant difference of job satisfaction among the bank executives working in the three districts of Western Province. To recommend ways and means to improve job satisfaction of the bank executives 2. Literature Review 2.1. Definitions of Job Satisfaction The concept of job satisfaction has been defined in many ways. Job satisfaction is a positive feeling about one s job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Job satisfaction is defined by Arnold and Feldman (1986) as the amount of overall positive affect (or feelings) that individuals have towards their jobs.locke (1976) describes job satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences. According to Robbins (1996), Job satisfaction is the difference between the amount of rewards employees receive and the amount they believe they should receive. Again Mobey and Lockey (1970) opined Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are function of the perceived relationship between what one expects and obtains from one s job and how much importance or value one attributes to it. There has been disagreements among researchers about whether Job satisfaction has multiple dimensions. Researchers like Porter (1961) defines Job satisfaction as a one-dimensional contract; that is, one is generally satisfied or dissatisfied with one s job. In contrast, Smith, Kendall and Hulin (1969) argue that Job satisfaction is multidimensional; that is one may be more or less satisfied with one s supervisor, pay or workplace etc. Spector (1997) defines job satisfaction as the extent to which employees like their job and its components. He says there are two approaches in the study of job satisfaction: the global approach and the facet approach. The global approach considers job satisfaction as a single, overall feeling towards the job, whilst the facet approach focuses on different factors of job satisfaction such as pay and the work environment. Fraser (1983) states that job satisfaction is not a unitary factor. He

says it is possible that an individual could be satisfied with one factor of the job, such as work, but be dissatisfied with another factor, like pay. According to Mitchell and Lasan, (1987), it is generally recognized in the organizational behaviour field that job satisfaction is the most important and frequently studied attitude. Luthan (1998) posited that there are three important dimensions to job satisfaction: Job satisfaction is an emotional response to a job situation. As such it cannot be seen. It can only be inferred. Job satisfaction is often determined by how well outcome meets or exceeds expectations. For instance, if organization participants feel that they are working much harder than others in the department but are receiving fewer rewards they will probably have a negative attitudes towards the work, the boss and coworkers. On the other hand, if they feel they are being treated very well and are being paid equitably, they are likely to have positive attitudes towards the job. Job satisfaction represents several related attitudes which are most important characteristics of a job about which people have effective response. These to Luthans are: the work itself, pay, promotion opportunities, supervision and coworkers. Job satisfaction is so important that its absence often leads to lethargy and reduced organizational commitment (Moser, 1997). Lack of job satisfaction is a predictor of quitting a job (Jamal, 1997). Sometimes workers may quit from public to private sector and vice versa. At other times the movement is from one profession to another. Explaining its nature some researchers (e.g. Flanegan, Johnson and Berret, 1996; Kadushin, and Kulys, 1995) tend to agree that job satisfaction is essentially controlled by factors external to the worker. From this viewpoint, satisfaction on a job might be motivated by the nature of the job, its pervasive social climate and extent to which workers needs are met, working conditions that are similar to local and international standards (Osagbemi, 2000), and extent to which they resemble work conditions of other professions in the locality. Other inclusions are the availability of power and status, pay satisfaction, promotion opportunities, and task clarity (Bolarin, 1993). Other researchers (e.g. MacDonald, 1996; O'Toole, 1980) argue in favour of the control of job satisfaction by factors intrinsic to the workers. Their arguments are based on the idea that workers deliberately decide to find satisfaction in their jobs and perceive them as worthwhile.

Demographic factors too have influenced Job satisfaction as showed in some research works. Kalleberg and Loscocco (1983) showed that in USA, older workers are more satisfied than younger workers. Rahman and Sarcar (1990) found that among professional women occupational stress was higher for unmarried ones. Most of the studies identified the relationship between job-related factors and Job satisfaction. Khaleque and Rahman (1987) conducted a study on Job satisfaction of Bangladeshi industrial workers regarding influence of some job facets including job content, coworkers, supervision, wage, promotion, work environment and communication. They concluded that job facets can be source of satisfaction as well as dissatisfaction. 2.2. Herzberg s Two Factor Theory In 1959, Hertzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman published their findings in which they concluded that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction must be separated into two different continua. This belief was a departure from the traditional approach that viewed job satisfaction and dissatisfaction as being on opposite ends of the same continuum. The findings supported their belief that job satisfaction was basically determined by one set of factors, and job dissatisfaction basically by a different set of factors. The two-factor theory is based on a study of accountants and engineers. They were asked to identify those situations that lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The results showed that job satisfaction was associated with positive intrinsic sources that related to the content of the job such as achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, and advancement which Herzberg termed motivators. On the other hand, job dissatisfaction stemmed from negative extrinsic sources relating to the context of the job such as company policy and administration, supervision, salary, recognition, and relationship with supervisor & peers which he labelled as hygiene factors On the basis of these findings, Herzberg et al., (1959) proposed that paying attention to motivator factors will increase job satisfaction, but will not affect job dissatisfaction. Alternatively, paying attention to hygiene factors will decrease job dissatisfaction but will not increase job satisfaction Some researchers have found support for the theory (i.e., Schmidt, 1976), whilst others have contradicted the theory (e.g., Brenner, Carmack & Weinstein, 1971; Hill, 1986). Critics of Herzberg s theory argue that the results he obtained are artificial and criticize his

methodology in collecting the data. It is common for people to attribute positive events to internal reasons and negative events to external forces (Vecchio, 2000). In addition, Herzberg s research was conducted among supervisors and middle management. Therefore its applicability to other areas of work or to workers of a different culture, is questionable (Fraser, 1989). However, this study has been replicated across other populations and included different occupation levels. The results of these studies still support Herzberg s theory (Herzberg, 1990). Thus, it can be concluded that Herzberg s theory is applicable to other cultures and other occupations. Despite the criticism, this theory has had a major influence on the field of management and is said to be one of the most widely known theories of motivation in managerial circles. According to Vecchio (2000) Herzberg s theory also influenced job redesign and Robbins (2001) states that the popularity of vertically expanding jobs to allow workers more responsibility can be attributed to Herzberg s research. The two-factor theory was notable for proposing that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are separate continua, and that the factors which affect job satisfaction are different to the factors which affect job dissatisfaction. Regardless of criticisms, Herzberg s theory has been widely read and its popularity is maintained over the past 30 years for measuring job satisfaction. From the literature review it was established that work-related factors such as pay, relationship with supervisor, opportunity for growth, responsibility, etc could influence job satisfaction either positively or negatively. All the work related factors were found to correlate with the Job Satisfaction theories. 2.3. Conceptual Model The model or the construct used in this empirical study is Herzberg s Two Factor Theory Figure 2.1: Conceptual Model Independent Variables Hygiene Factors Salary Fringe Benefits Working condition Company Policy Relationship with Superior Relationship with Peer Motivation Factors Possibility of Growth Achievements Recognition Work itself Responsibility Job Satisfaction (Dependent Variable)

Source: Herzberg s Two Factor Theory 2.4. Hypotheses In order to achieve the objectives of this research study, the following hypotheses will be tested. Hypothesis 1 There exists a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. Hypothesis 2 There exists a positive relationship between each motivation factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. Hypothesis 3 Hygiene and Motivation Factors significantly explain the variance in job satisfaction of bank executives Hypothesis 4 There exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between public and private bank executives Hypothesis 5 Job satisfaction of bank executives will vary depending on the district they are employed. 3. Research Methodology Both descriptive and inferential statistical methods are used in this empirical study in order to analyze the collected data. Descriptive statistical methods are used to summarize and describe the collected data while inferential statistical methods are employed to test the research hypotheses. 3.1. Population The population for this research study is composed with permanent junior and middle level bank executives of commercial banks situated in Western Province, Sri Lanka. 3.2. Sample and Sampling Method The total population of this research is not known to the researcher and trying to find out the same is not pragmatic. Hence, giving each bank executive an equal opportunity to participate in the research is not possible. Therefore, probability sampling is not a suitable sampling method for this research. Accordingly, a non probability sampling method has to be used in

this research. It is a recognized fact that carefully controlled non probability sampling often seems to give acceptable results. Thus the use of non probability sampling method is the appropriate sampling method for this research. Therefore, widely used convenient sampling method is applied in this research. The researcher selects 200 permanent bank executives (From junior and middle level) which includes 100 from government banks and 100 from private banks as sample size for the research 3.3. Data Both primary and secondary data are used for this investigation. 3.4. Data Collection Method The study will be based on data collected from both primary and secondary sources. The method that will be used to collect primary data is the self designed questionnaire. From this method, the researcher is able to find quantitative as well as qualitative data. The questionnaire designed by the researcher for the present empirical study consists of two sections. Section A contains the personal characteristics of the respondents such as gender, age, race, tenure, etc. The questions of Section A are included to get a general idea about the sample, which is useful in analyzing the results, concluding and giving recommendations. Accordingly, there are seven questions in the questionnaire to gather demographical data. Section B of the questionnaire consists of 32 items measured on a 5-point Likert scale, with scale responses varying between Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Of the 32 questions in Section B, there are six questions relating to job satisfaction and twenty six questions relating to hygiene and motivation factors. Further, three open ended questions are included at the end of the questionnaire to obtain the views of the respondents regarding their jobs. Two Hundred questionnaires were distributed among the bank executives and out of them one hundred and seventy seven participants submitted the filled questionnaire. The response rate for the questionnaire is 88.5%. The secondary data for the research are gathered from the sources such as research papers, journals, magazines etc. 3.5. Analytical Method The data gathered through the questionnaire method are analyzed using the following descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Mean, Variance and Standard Deviation are calculated in order to get an idea of demographical factors of the sample

Correlation Coefficient method is used to measure the strength of association between the two variables. In this case, correlation coefficient is used to find out which job satisfaction factor has more effect in employee s job satisfaction. T test is used to check whether there exists significant difference of job satisfaction between the employees of government and private banks Multiple Regression Method is employed to check whether hygiene and motivation factors will significantly explain the variance in job satisfaction ANOVA method is carried out to check whether there exists a significant difference of job satisfaction among the bank executives working in Colombo, Gampaha and Kalutara Districts. SPSS (version 15.0) computer statistical package is used to analyze the collected data. 4. Results and Discussion 4.1. Nature of the sample The sample is almost equally represented by the respondents from government banks (50.8%) and private banks (49.2%). Majority of the employees in the sample (58.8%) belongs to junior level management. Middle level management represents 41.2% of the total sample. 46.9% of the elements of the sample have served between 1 to 5 years in their respective banks. Further, 49.2% of the elements of the sample have worked more than 6 years for their employer. Thus, it is apparent that the sample under investigation consists of relatively new comers and experience personnel in the respective commercial banks. Majority of the respondents of the sample (37.3%) are from Colombo District. In addition, 33.9% and 28.8% of the respondents are from Gampaha and Kalutara Districts respectively. It is apparent that most of the respondents fall in the age category between 30 40 years (45.2%). Another 27.1% are between 40 50 age category. Hence, the sample consists of relatively middle aged employees. For this research, 71.2% of the sample are male and 28.8% are female. There is a strong possibility that female category is under represented as a result of selection bias due to the fact of using convenience sampling method in the research. It is evident that the majority of the respondents (89.8%) are married. This result is possible since the majority of the sample are middle aged individuals.

4.2. Measures of Central Tendencies and dispersion Table 4.1: Measures of Central Tendencies and dispersion Descriptive Statistics N Minimu m Maximu m Mean Std. Deviation Variance Job Satisfaction 177 1.50 4.83 3.6827.66017.436 Salary 177 1.00 4.00 3.1497.72017.519 Benefits 177 1.00 4.00 3.1808.81260.660 Working Condition 177 1.00 4.67 3.7119.84937.721 Company Policy 177 1.20 4.60 3.4689.69772.487 Relationship with Superior 177 1.00 5.00 3.7881.78083.610 Growth 177 1.00 5.00 3.4426.80834.653 Achievements 177 1.00 4.00 3.0734.55414.307 Recognition 177 1.00 4.33 3.4991.68454.469 Work Itself 177 1.50 5.00 3.5706.69849.488 Relationship with Peer 177 2.00 4.50 3.5537.66887.447 Responsibility 177 Valid N (listwise) Source: Survey Data 177 1.00 4.50 3.4492.74446.554 The measuring instrument used to calculate hygiene & motivation factors as well as the level of job satisfaction are scaled from 1 to 5. The value 3 means Neither Agree nor Disagree while value 4 means Agree. Hence, if value three (3) is obtained as any of the subsequent measurement, it means that level is neither good nor bad, or in other words it s in average level. Similarly, if a value of four (4) is obtained, it means a good level. Similarly value one (1) and five (5) mean very bad level and very good level respectively. In case of a value between three (3) and four (4) is obtained, it can be considered as fairly good level. From Table 4.1, it is evident that the mean scores for all factors are between three (3) and (4). This implies that majority of respondents have a fairly good level of satisfaction with respect to their jobs as well as hygiene & motivation factors. The minimum, maximum and standard deviation show that scores range from Not Satisfied at all to Extremely Satisfied. The variance for the variables except Fringe Benefits, Working Condition, Relationship with

superior and Possibility of Growth are not high indicating that most of the respondents are very close to the mean with respect to the rest of the variables. 4.3 Hypothesis Testing For the purpose of testing the stated research hypotheses, Pearson s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient is calculated and a multiple regression analysis, T-test and ANOVA test are performed. With the aid of these statistical techniques, conclusions are drawn with regard to the sample and decisions are made with respect to the research hypotheses. 4.3.1 Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 1 can be stated in null and alternative hypotheses as follows. Null Hypothesis: There does not exist a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. Alternative Hypothesis: There exists a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. In order to determine whether there exists significant relationships between each hygiene & motivation factors and job satisfaction, Pearson s Product Moment Correlation is computed. Job Satisfaction Salary Benefits Working Condition Company Policy Table 4.2: Correlations between hygiene factors and job satisfaction Job Satisfaction Salary Benefits Working Condition Company Policy Superior Peer Pearson Correlation 1.818(**).662(**).709(**).803(**).511(**).663(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.818(**) 1.876(**).707(**).819(**).415(**).602(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.662(**).876(**) 1.773(**).782(**).450(**).395(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.709(**).707(**).773(**) 1.839(**).680(**).521(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.803(**).819(**).782(**).839(**) 1.569(**).564(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Superior Pearson.511(**).415(**).450(**).680(**).569(**) 1.522(**)

Peer Correlation Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.663(**).602(**).395(**).521(**).564(**).522(**) 1 Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 177 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Source: Survey Data The result of Pearson s correlation coefficient is obtained for the sample and represented in table 4.2. All the hygiene factors have a statistically significant positive relationship with job satisfaction at 99% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and hypothesis 1 is substantiated. This implies that there exists a positive relationship between each hygiene factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. 4.3.2 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 2 can be stated in null and alternative hypotheses as follows. Null Hypothesis: There does not exist a positive relationship between each motivation factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. Alternative Hypothesis: There exists a positive relationship between each motivation factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. Job Satisfaction Table 4.3: Correlations between motivation factors and job satisfaction Pearson Correlation Job Satisfaction Growth Achievements Recognition Work Itself Responsibility 1.362(**).326(**).704(**).334(**).429(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 Growth Pearson Correlation.362(**) 1.219(**).802(**).620(**).806(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.003.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.326(**).219(**) 1.272(**).075.112 Sig. (2-tailed).000.003.000.324.136 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 Recognition Pearson Correlation.704(**).802(**).272(**) 1.619(**).758(**) Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.000.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 Work Itself Pearson Correlation.334(**).620(**).075.619(**) 1.627(**) Achievements Responsibility Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.324.000.000 N 177 177 177 177 177 177 Pearson Correlation.429(**).806(**).112.758(**).627(**) 1 Sig. (2-tailed).000.000.136.000.000

N 177 177 177 177 177 177 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Source: Survey Data The results of Pearson s correlation coefficients is obtained for the sample and represented in table 4.3. All the motivation factors have a statistically significant positive relationship with job satisfaction at 99% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and hypothesis 2 is substantiated. This means that there exists a positive relationship between each motivation factor and job satisfaction of bank executives. 4.3.3. Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 3 can be stated in null and alternative hypotheses as follows. Null Hypothesis: Hygiene and Motivation Factors do not significantly explain the variance in job satisfaction of bank executives Alternative Hypothesis: Hygiene and Motivation Factors significantly explain the variance in job satisfaction of bank executives For the purpose of determining the extent to which the hygiene and motivation factors explain the variance in job satisfaction of bank executives, multiple regression analysis is performed. Model summary of the results of the multiple regression analysis, is presented in table 4.4. Table 4.4: Results of Multiple Regression Table 4.4a: Model Summary Std. Error Mode l R R Square Adjusted R Square of the Estimate 1.921(a).848.838.26603 a Predictors: (Constant), Peer, Achievements, Work Itself, Benefits, Superior, Growth, Responsibility, Company Policy, Working Condition, Salary, Recognition Mode l 1 Regressio n Sum of Squares Table 4.4b: ANOVA(b) Mean df Square F Sig. 65.028 11 5.912 83.533.000(a) Residual 11.677 165.071 Total 76.705 176

a Predictors: (Constant), Peer, Achievements, Work Itself, Benefits, Superior, Growth, Responsibility, Company Policy, Working Condition, Salary, Recognition b Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction Table 4.4c: Coefficients(a) Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Mode l B Std. Error Beta B Std. Error 1 (Constant).485.183 2.654.009 Salary.567.104.618 5.449.000 Benefits -.340.067 -.418-5.036.000 Working Condition.331.065.426 5.089.000 Company Policy.130.078.137 1.677.095 Superior.032.061.038.522.602 Growth -.473.064 -.579-7.332.000 Achievements.032.062.027.516.606 Recognition.198.114.205 1.729.086 Work Itself.083.044.088 1.904.059 Responsibility.106.056.120 1.879.062 Peer.244.056.247 4.347.000 a Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction Source: Survey Data Table 4.4a indicates R, R Square, Adjusted R Square and Standard error of the estimate. Further, it lists the independent variables that are entered into the regression model. R(.921) is the correlation of the independent variables with the dependent variable after all the inter correlations are taken into account. In the Model summary table, R Square (0.848) is the explained variance in job satisfaction by the independent variables. The ANOVA table shows that the F value of 83.533 is significant at 0.001 level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and hypothesis 3 is substantiated. The result indicates that 84.8% of the variance of job satisfaction of bank executives has been significantly explained by hygiene and motivation factors. The next table (Table 4.4c) titled Coefficients helps to see which among the independent variables influences most the variance of job satisfaction of bank executives. By looking at the Beta under Standardized Coefficients, it is concluded that salary, benefits, working condition, relationship with peers and growth are significant at 0.001 level of significance.

From Table 4.4c, it can be seen that when the other variables are controlled, only salary, benefits, working conditions, relationship with peers and growth show significant correlation with job satisfaction. Tables 4.2 and 4.3 depict that all hygiene and motivation factors are significantly correlated with job satisfaction when those factors are considered individually. This is a contradiction. But, this could happen because in multiple regression, the variance that the first independent variable shares with the dependent variable could overlap with the variance that is shared between the second independent variable and the dependent variable. Consequently, the first independent variable is no longer uniquely predictive and thus would not show up as being significant in the multiple regression. Hence as per this research results, except for salary, benefits, working condition, relationship with peers and growth, other hygiene and motivation factors are not significant predictors of job satisfaction. 4.3.4 Hypothesis 4 Hypothesis 4 can be stated in null and alternative hypotheses as follows. Null Hypothesis: There is no significant difference in job satisfaction between government and private bank executives. Alternative Hypothesis: There exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between government and private bank executives. Job Satisfaction Table 4.5 : Results of t- Test Table 4.5a: Group Statistics Std. Error Mean Bank Category N Mean Std. Deviation Government Banks 90 3.8796.68833.07256 Private Banks 87 3.4789.56480.06055 Source: Survey data Table 4.5b: Independent Samples Test (t - test for equality of Means) t df Sig. (2 tailed) Job Satisfaction 4.226 175 0.000 Source: Survey data The t-test will indicate whether there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between the executives of government and private banks.

As per the results of the t-test, the difference in the means of 3.8796 and 3.4789 with standard deviation 0.07256 and 0. 06055 for executives of government and private banks respectively on job satisfaction is significant at 0.001 level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and hypothesis 4 is substantiated. This implies that there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between government and private bank executives. 4.3.5 Hypothesis 5 Hypothesis 5 can be stated in null and alternative hypotheses as follows. Null Hypothesis: Job satisfaction of the bank executives will not vary depending on the district they are employed. Alternative Hypothesis: Job satisfaction of the bank executives will vary depending on the district they are employed. Job Satisfaction Sum of Squares Table 4.6: Result of ANOVA Test ANOVA Mean Square F Sig. df Between Groups.975 2.488 1.120.329 Within Groups 75.730 174.435 Total 76.705 176 Source: Survey data Since there are more than two groups (Executives from three districts) and job satisfaction is measured in interval scale, ANOVA is appropriate to test hypothesis 5. The results of the ANOVA test pertaining to hypothesis 5 are shown in table 4.6. In the above case, the F value (1.120) is not significant. This implies that there is no evidence to reject the null hypothesis. Hence, hypothesis 5 is not substantiated. Therefore, there isn t enough evidence to conclude that the job satisfaction of bank executives will vary depending on the district they work. 5. Conclusions 5.1. Conclusions The main objective of this research was to find out the impact of hygiene and motivation factors on job satisfaction of bank executives in Western Province, Sri Lanka. The research

hypotheses number one and two indicate that the correlation coefficients between job satisfaction and each hygiene & motivation factor are significant at 0.01 level of significance. Furthermore, hypothesis three states that 84.8% of the variance in job satisfaction is significantly explained by hygiene and motivation factors. This implies that all other factors which may affect the job satisfaction have a less effect than that of hygiene and motivation factors. Furthermore, except for salary, benefits, working condition, relationship with peers and growth, other hygiene and motivation factors are not significant predictors of the job satisfaction. Therefore, it can be concluded that the main objective of this study has been achieved satisfactorily. Evaluating the present level of job satisfaction among bank executives is one of the secondary objectives in this empirical study. Research findings imply that the majority of the respondents have a fairly good level of satisfaction with respect to their jobs as well as hygiene & motivation factors. Hence, it is apparent that the said objective has been achieved satisfactorily. To find out whether there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction level of the executives of Government and Private commercial banks was another secondary objective of this research study. The results indicate that there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between the executives of government and private banks. Next objective was to examine whether there exists a significant difference of job satisfaction among the bank executives working in the three districts of Western Province. The results of the data analysis indicate that there does not exist a significant difference in job satisfaction among the bank executives working in Colombo, Gampaha and Kalutara Districts. By analysing the objectives and findings of the study, it is apparent that all the objectives of this research study have been achieved satisfactorily. 5.2 Recommendations Based on the findings of the empirical study, the following recommendations are made. Organization should develop good working conditions. This facilitates employees to do their work effectively. Organization should develop good relationship among employees by organizing events such as trips, family events, fun games at work, etc. through which, Job satisfaction of employees is enhanced.

Organization should help the employees for their career development and growth. Open door communication policy should be followed. Salary and fringe benefits should be reviewed at regular intervals. More attention should be given to performance linked pay structure. More consideration should be given for overall development of employees welfare facilities Employee satisfaction surveys should be carried out periodically. 5.3 Further Research This study tries to identify the impact of hygiene and motivation factors on Job satisfaction of bank executives in Western Province, Sri Lanka. As it is impossible to find out a similar study in Sri Lanka neither changes nor trends could be identified with regard to the job satisfaction of bank executives. Therefore, it is recommended that this study be repeated in the future to allow for comparative analysis studies. As this investigation was limited to Western Province, it is suggested that this be replicated to other provinces in Sri Lanka as well as for the entire country. Furthermore, empirical studies can be conducted for other sectors in the financial industry enabling to make a comparative analysis among each industries. As per the results of this study, there exists a significant difference in job satisfaction between government and private bank executives. Hence, it is suggested to conduct empirical studies to find out the reasons for this disparity. References Arnold, H.J., & Feldman, D.C. (1986). Organizational Behavior. New York:McGraw-Hill. Bolarin, T.A. (1993). Late payment of teachers' salary as it affects the quality of education in Lagos state primary schools: A socio-psychological perspective. Journal of National Association of Education Teachers,11-15. Brenner, V.C., Carmack, C.W., & Weinstein, M.G. (1971). An empirical test of the motivation-hygiene theory. Journal of Accounting Research, 359-366 Flanegan, T.J., Johnson, W.W., & Berret, K. (1996). Job satisfaction among correction executives: A contemporary portrait of warders of state prisons of adults. Prison Journal, 385-397.

Fraser, T.M. (1983). Human Stress, Work and Job Satisfaction. Geneva. International Labour Office. Harwood, M.K., & Rice, R.W. (1992). An examination of the referent selection processes underlying job satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 1-39. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.B. (1959). The Motivation to Work. New York: Wiley. Herzberg, F. (1990). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?. Harvard Business Review, 49-75. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing Division. Highhouse, S., & Becker, A.S. (1993). Facet measures and global job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 117-127 Hill, M.D. (1986). A theoretical analysis of faculty job satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Educational Research Quarterly, 36-44. Jamal, M. (1997). Job stress, satisfaction and mental health: An empirical examination of self employed and non-self employed Canadians. Journal of Small Bussiness Management, 48-57. Kadushin, G., and Kullys, R. (1995). Job satisfaction among social work discharge planners. Health and Social Work, 174-186 Khaleque, A. & Rahman, M.A (1987). Perceived important of job facets and overall job satisfaction of Industrial workers. Human Relations, Vol 40. Kalleberg, A.L., & Lossocco, K.A. (1983). Aging, Values and Rewards: Explaining Age Differences in Job Satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 78-90 Locke, E.A. (1976). Nature and causes of job satisfaction. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology,1297-1350 Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Luthans, F. (1998). Organisational Behaviour. 8th edition. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. MacDonald, R. (1996). Labours of love: Voluntary working in a depressed economy. Journal of Social Policy, 19-38. Maher, E. (2002). Overcoming controllable and uncontrollable work difficulties: Change environment or self. Deakin University, Mitchell, T.R., & Lason, J.R. (1987). People in organization. 3rd edition, New York: McGraw-Hill. Mobey, & Locke, E.A. (1970). Job satisfaction and performance, A theoretical analysis. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 484 500. Moser, K. (1997). Commitment in organizations Psychologies (pp. 160-170).

Oshagbemi, T. (2000). How satisfied are academics with their primary tasks of teaching research and administration and management. International Sustainable in Higher Education,124-136. O'Toole, A. (1980). Work in an era of show economic growth. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 277-330. Porter, L.W. (1961). A study of perceived need satisfaction in bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1-10. Rahman, A., & Sarcar, N.R. (1990). Occupational Stress Marital status and job satisfaction of working women. The Dhaka University Press Robbins, S.P. (1996). Organizational Behaviour. 7th edition. London: Prentice-Hall. Robbins, S.P. (2001). Organizational Behaviour. 9th edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Robbins S.P., and Judge T.A. (2007). Organizational Behaviour. Twelfth Edition, Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi Schmidt, G.L. (1976). Job satisfaction among secondary school administrators. Educational Administration Quarterly, 68-86. Smith, P.C., Kendall, L.M., and Hulin, C.L. (1969). The Job Descriptive Index Bowling Green. OH: Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University. Spector, P.E. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Applications, Assessment, Causes and Consequences. London: Sage Publications. Vecchio, R.P. (2000). Organizational Behaviour. 4th ed. Orlondo: Harcourt..