Proceeding of the 2
nd
International Conference on Arts, Social Science & Technology
Penang, Malaysia, 3
rd
-5
th
March 2012
Paper No: 12032
12032-1
JOB SATISFACTION: THE COMPARISON BETWEEN
SCHOOL-LEAVERS AND COLLEGE GRADUATES
Wirawani Kamarulzaman¹ and Mohamad Sahari Nordin²
¹Faculty of Creative Industries, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR), Malaysia
wira[email protected]du.my
²Institute of Education, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM)
msahari@iiu.edu.my
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to address the gaps in the literature and compare the job satisfaction
between school leavers and college graduates. Specifically, the proposed study sought to expand the existing,
yet limited research exploring job satisfaction between school-leavers and college graduates. In this study, the
comparison includes these factors: the job itself (work conditions, employment benefits, job challenge, job
security, and educational benefit), pay, opportunities for promotion, supervisor, and coworkers (Wei &
Kopischke, 2001). This study used MSQ as a data gathering tool. The questionnaires were administered to 89
male respondents, 55 are school-leavers and 34 are graduates, and 121 female respondents, 60 are school-
leavers and 61 are graduates. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was employed as a tool to conduct
independent t-test, and descriptive statistical analysis. The results showed insignificant differences of job
satisfaction between the variables. Several recommendations for future studies were also listed
.
Keywords: college graduates, employment, job satisfaction, school-leavers
1. INTRODUCTION
It is clear that education has an important effect on job performance. It is not clear,
however, whether higher education would lead to job satisfaction. According to Wise (1975),
there is a difference in job performance between persons with different level of education.
He further mentioned that having a higher education level would be an advantage in terms of
intelligence, supervisory ability, initiative, self-assurance, and perceived occupational level.
Another finding suggested that graduates who believed to have higher cognitive abilities than
school-leavers, tend to perform better since they have the ability to learn faster on the factual
information and concepts relevant to the tasks (Miller & Rosse, 1984) and that they have
more organizational citizenship behaviour than school-leavers (Beatty, 1998).
Ritter and Anker (2002) postulate that highly educated workers are more likely to
report high job satisfaction level. However, Mora, Aracil and Vila (2007) on the other hand
found that the courses taken by the graduates in the college must match with the current job
in order for them to be satisfied in their jobs, since the academic background would be the
important prediction of organizational citizenship behaviour and organizational-specific
success (Beatty, 1998).
Along with this, job satisfaction for the graduates is also linked with the knowledge
and skills acquired during the study and the match between educational level and job level
(Mora, Aracil & Vila 2007; Battu, Belfield, & Sloane, 1999; Verhaest & Omey, 2006).
Likewise, Bowden and Marton (1999) found that job satisfaction is essential to college
12032-2
graduates. They believe that when it comes to searching for jobs, college graduates are not
motivated for money but rather they prefer jobs which will give them access to senior people
in companies, and they favour large companies over small organizations
Studies done by Winefield, Tiggemann and Goldney (1988) suggest that school-
leavers feel satisfied in their employment resulting in improved psychological well-being.
Nonetheless, they also found that recent school-leavers who cannot find job were far less well
psychologically than their employed counterparts, and minority of unemployed school-
leavers may be preferable to work, plus they would ideally like to stay in the current
organization for senior positions (Callear, 1992). However, Griin, Hauser, and Rhein (2010)
found that school-leavers who are taking up a new job out of employment are, on average,
more satisfied with life than those remaining unemployed.
Goodwin and O’Connor (2003) also believe that those young people who were living
school then might also gradually realize that education and qualifications are far more
important for better living than they ever expected when they were at school. Although the
certainty of bringing home the wages, many of these school-leavers expressed a perceptible
sense of regret at leaving school. The idea of leaving school and entering labour market was
due to the need to be at freedom but this had seemed to be forsaken by them. They were
reported, even during their first year of work, to already have the nostalgic feeling about the
shorter school days, the school holidays and the breaks, and realizing the betterment of
staying on at school in order to obtain as many qualifications as possible
This is supported by the findings of Callear (1992) which states that the school-
leavers in her study also believed that education is relevant in preparing for adult working
life. In her study, she investigated the attitudes to education among school-leavers and found
that it was positive. The majority of them were found to consider they had learned useful
things during school years. The majority disagree that school had done little to prepare them
for work and they felt that school had prepared them well particularly for the transition
between school and work. There was a fairly balanced opinion that their school had
concentrated too much on getting people through examinations at the expense of other
curriculum areas. In addition, Callear (1992) also uncovers that the school-leavers held
positive views about their current job and hoped to be working in the same company in
another five-year time, often to seek for a more senior position
Job satisfaction has been studied extensively. The question such as “Are you satisfied
with your job or is it a question that you would not want to be asked?” may be asked to know
the answer. Job satisfaction is typically defined as positive or negative attitudes held by
individuals toward their job (Greenberg & Baron, 2008), and the feelings a person has about
his or her job (Balzer, Kihm, Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, & Parra, 1997). It is also
related to an emotional state reflecting an affective response to the job situation. It measures
by internal construct, such as commitment, loyalty, and intention, as well as with observable
construct, such as turnover, absence, tardiness, and voice, that the current job satisfaction
may influence future performance (Ross, 1991).
Mora, Aracil and Vila (2007) suggest that job satisfaction indicates how people value
the whole package of both monetary and non-monetary returns to their jobs according to their
own personal tastes, preferences and expectations. Their finding suggests that job
satisfaction, as a personal perception, and individual expectations, physical and psychological
needs, is a relative issue closely related to comparison and expectation. Individuals compare
their own current situation with the situation of comparable people around them and draw
conclusions depending on their expectations and relative personal position, and there is a
positive relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.
Moreover, job satisfaction is conceptualized as the difference between what a worker
experiences on the job and what he or she expects to find (Lichtenstein, 1984). Job
12032-3
satisfaction is also viewed as an important output or outcome of organization and labour-
markets which are direct measures of well-being (Clark, 1998), at the same time it also plays
a dual role as both an important determinant of organizational commitment, and as an
intervening variable between structural and individual determinants and commitments
(Currivan, 1999).
Furthermore, Griin, Hauser, and Rhein (2010) compare those unemployed and
employed people, found that employed people are more satisfied with their lives than those
unemployed whether or not they are satisfied with their jobs. Job satisfaction was also found
to be in relation to the supervisor’s performance. Favara (2009) suggests that the relationship
between the supervisors and subordinates is related to job satisfaction, which is if the
supervisor or the individual demonstrates an exemplary leadership styles, it will lead to
greater level of job satisfaction and job performance.
Finally research is lacking in understanding whether education may lead to job
satisfaction. In one study, Bowden and Marton (1999) found supporting evidence that
graduates are satisfied with their jobs, and they are not motivating for money when it comes
to looking for jobs. In some studies, job satisfaction was substituted by organizational
commitment and job involvement (Lee, 1988), and dissatisfaction may lead to turnover
(Price, 1999). However, neither study compares the job satisfaction between school-leavers
and college graduates.
In exploring job satisfaction between school-leavers and college students, the
following research questions are asked:
RQ1: Are school-leavers satisfied with their jobs?
RQ2. Are college graduates satisfied with their jobs?
RQ3: Are the college graduates more satisfied with their jobs than the school-
leavers?
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study focused on employees who work in the service industry where there are no
specific assigned tasks or duties. The respondents of the study comprised of 210 employees
of Malaysian Alliance Assurance Berhad (MAA), Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB), and
Perodua Malaysia Berhad. They were 89 males; 55 school-leavers and 34 graduates, and 121
females; 60 school-leavers and 61 graduates. They were randomly selected to answer the
questionnaire to get high response rate. These companies are chosen because they are well-
established with population of at least 2000 employees of each company with different
educational background. It is believed that the turnover rate is very low.
This study used Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) as a data gathering tool.
The MSQ is offered in a long form, and a short form, which measure on a five-point Likert
scale. The format of MSQ is a paper and pencil inventory, which measures vocational needs
and social values based on job satisfaction. The MSQ is administered in a self-report style
and required participants to read at the minimum ability of a fifth grade level (Weiss, Davis,
England & Lofquist, 1967). Developed by Weiss, Davis, England and Lofquist (1967), the
MSQ is a five-dimension tool for measuring job satisfaction. The items include the job itself,
pay, promotion opportunity, supervision, and coworkers. The short form of MSQ is preferred
in view of the fact that it contained only 20 questions, which is easier to be answered by the
school-leavers, who may have some difficulties in answering the 100-questions-version long
version MSQ questionnaire. The questionnaire is translated to Bahasa Melayu for the same
reason. A cover letter explaining the study was attached to the MSQ. The following table
itemized the MSQ variables that relate to job satisfaction through the job itself, pay,
promotion opportunity, supervisor and coworkers.
12032-4
Table 1: MSQ Itemized Variables
Construct
Item
Measure
Job Itself
1
2
3
7
8
9
10
11
12
15
16
17
19
20
Being able to keep busy
The chance to work alone on the job
The chance to do different things from time to time
Being able to do things that don’t go against my
conscience
The way my job provides for steady employment
The chance to do things for other people
The chance to tell other people what to do
The chance to do something that make use of my
abilities
The way the company policies are put into practice
The freedom to use my own judgment
The chance to try my own methods of doing the job
The working conditions
The praise I get for doing a good job
The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job
Pay
13
The pay and amount of work I do
Promotion
opportunity
4
14
The chance to be ‘somebody’ in the community
The chance for advancement on this job
Supervision
5
6
The way my boss handles his/her workers
The competence of my supervisor in making
decisions
Co-worker
18
The way my co-workers get along with each other
The MSQ utilizes a five-point Likert rating: 1=Very Dissatisfied, 2=Dissatisfied,
3=Neutral, 4=Satisfied and 5=Very Satisfied. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS) was employed as a tool to conduct, Pearson correlations, and descriptive statistical
analysis which involved frequency count, and percentage distribution. The scoring method
followed the prescribed method that accompanies the MSQ format and the methodology
developed by Weiss et al (1967). Furthermore, independent t-test will be employed to
analyze the research questions
3. RESULTS
Participation in this study was completely voluntary. The researcher went to TNB,
MAA, and Perodua to distribute the questionnaires and collected them back after 2-weeks.
Although each company was given a total number of 100 Minnesota Satisfaction
Questionnaires (MSQ), but since participation was quite difficult, therefore only 210 were
returned as a total, which represents a 70% participation rate.
The samples were from all the companies added together. The male participants were
89 respondents (42.4%), whereas female respondents were 121 (57.6%). Their ages ranged
from 17 to 53 years old. The samples were from all the companies added together and they
were classified into 2 categories which are school-leavers and college graduate. The male
respondents who are school-leavers were 55 (47.8%) and 34 graduates (35.8%), whereas
female school-leavers respondents were 60 (52.2%) and 61 (64.2%) graduates. Their ages
ranged from 17 to 53 years old.
12032-5
The school-leavers who participated in this research were 115 (54.8%) and there were
95 (45.2%) college graduates. Their incomes ranged from below RM 1000 which consisted
of 11.4%, 69.5% between RM1000-RM3000, 15.7% between RM3000-RM5000, and 3.3%
above RM5000. Among 210 respondents, 120 (57.1%) participants were from administrative
positions, 81 (38.6%) were from non-administrative positions, 6 (2.9%) from customer
service and 3 (1.4%) were from the department of Information and Technology (IT), with 15
(7.2%) have been working for less than one year, 48 (22.8%) have been working between one
to three years, 49 (23.3) have been working between three to five years and 98 (46.7%) for
more than five years.
Table 2: Respondents’ Demography
Items Information N %
Gender Male 89 42.4
Female 121 57.6
Age Below 20 17 8.1
20-29 91 43.3
30-39 63 30.0
40-49 17 8.1
Above 50 1 0.5
Level of School-leavers 115 54.8
education Graduates 95 45.2
Income per Below RM1000 24 11.4
month RM1000-RM3000 146 69.5
RM3000-RM5000 33 15.7
Above RM5000 7 3.3
Types of Admin 120 57.1
job Non-admin 81 38.6
Customer Service 6 2.9
IT 3 1.4
12032-6
Since this research is to compare between school-leavers and college graduates, Table
3 simplified the respondents into the two variables categories.
Table 3: Respondents’ Demographic based on Level of Education
Items Information School-leavers Graduates
N % N %
Gender Male 55 47.8 34 35.8
Female 60 52.2 61 64.2
Age Below 20 12 10.4 0 0
20-29 56 48.7 61 64.2
30-39 36 31.3 27 28.4
40-49 10 8.7 7 7.4
50 and above 1 0.9 0 0
Income Below RM1000 17 14.8 7 7.4
per RM1000-RM3000 88 76.5 58 61.1
month RM3000-RM5000 8 7.0 25 26.3
Above RM5000 2 1.7 5 5.3
Type Admin 63 54.8 57 60.0
of job Non-admin 48 41.7 33 34.7
Customer Service 3 2.6 3 3.2
IT 1 0.9 2 2.1
Years Below 1 yr 10 8.7 5 5.3
of 1yr-3yrs 24 20.9 24 25.3
working 3yrs-5yrs 22 19.1 27 28.4
More than 5yrs 59 51.3 39 41.1
The results above shows that, in comparing the age aspect, there is no graduates
participant aged below 20 and above 50. The respondents are majority, (school-
leavers=48.7%, graduates=64.2%) from the age of 20 to 29 for both school-leavers and
college graduates. Furthermore, looking at the income aspect, the result proves that having
the income from RM1000 to RM3000 is the highest for school-leavers (76%) as well as
graduates (61.1%). The type of job of administration is also highest for both that is 54.8% of
total school-leavers and 60% for graduates. Finally, 51.3% of school-leavers have been
working for more than five years and less than 50% that is only 41.1% of graduates
participants have been working for more than five years.
3.1 School-leavers and Job Satisfaction
The 20 items of MSQ is listed to find the frequency percentage of the level of job
satisfaction of school-leavers. The scale of five-Likert points were recoded to only three-
Likert scale, where the scale of ‘very satisfied’ was recoded under ‘satisfied’ and ‘very
dissatisfied’ was recoded under ‘dissatisfied’. Table 4 demonstrates the job satisfaction level
of school-leavers. It is found that the percentages of satisfied scale are the highest followed
by neutral and dissatisfied. According to the analysis, school-leavers are most satisfied with
coworkers (77.4%), followed by being able to keep busy (72.2%) and steady employment
12032-7
(72.2%). Conversely, school-leavers are least satisfied with advancement (56.6%) followed
by boss handles workers (60.0%) and to be somebody with percentage of 60.9%. The school-
leavers are found to be the most dissatisfied with pay and job with percentage of 17.4%.
Table 4: Frequency Distribution of School-leavers’ Job Satisfaction
No Item Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied
(%) (%) (%)
1 Able to keep busy 17.4 10.4 72.2
2 Chance to work alone 11.3 14.8 73.9
3 Chance to do different 12.2 20.0 67.8
thing
4 To be somebody 17.4 21.7 60.9
5 Boss handles workers 17.4 22.6 60.0
6 Superior making 13.0 24.3 62.6
decision
7 Not against my 16.5 23.5 60.0
conscience
8 Steady employment 11.3 16.5 72.2
9 Do things for others 9.6 24.3 66.1
10 Tell others what to do 10.4 26.1 63.5
11 Use my abilities 11.3 17.4 71.3
12 Company put policies 16.5 16.5 67.0
Into practice
13 Pay and job 17.4 20.9 61.7
14 Advancement 8.7 34.8 56.5
15 Freedom to use my 7.8 27.0 65.2
judgment
16 My methods to do 10.4 28.7 60.9
my job
17 Working condition 12.2 15.7 72.2
18 Coworkers 9.6 13.0 77.4
19 Praise for doing 13.0 23.5 63.5
good job
20 Accomplishment from 13.9 19.1 67.0
the job
3.2 College Graduates and Job Satisfaction
To investigate the job satisfaction on college graduates, the scale of five-Likert points
were recoded to only three-Likert scale, where the scale of ‘very satisfied’ was recoded under
‘satisfied’ and ‘very dissatisfied’ was recoded under ‘dissatisfied’. Table 5 demonstrates the
job satisfaction level of college graduates. Table 5 illustrates the findings that suggested
college graduates are most satisfied with steady employment with percentage of 64.2%,
followed by coworkers (63.2%) and chance to work alone at the percentage of 61.1%. On the
other hand, college graduates are least satisfied with advancement (47.4%), followed by tell
others what to do (47.4%), and to be somebody (48.4%). College graduates are also found to
be the most dissatisfied with pay and job with percentage of 22.1%.
12032-8
Table 5: Frequency Distribution of College Graduates’ Job Satisfaction
No Item Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied
(%) (%) (%)
1 Able to keep busy 15.8 23.2 61.1
2 Chance to work alone 8.4 30.5 61.1
3 Chance to do different 6.3 41.1 52.6
thing
4 To be somebody 13.7 37.9 48.4
5 Boss handles workers 18.9 29.5 51.6
6 Superior making 6.3 40.0 53.7
decision
7 Not against my 10.5 35.8 53.7
conscience
8 Steady employment 4.2 31.6 64.2
9 Do things for others 10.5 34.7 54.7
10 Tell others what to do 10.5 42.1 47.4
11 Use my abilities 12.6 28.4 58.9
12 Company put policies 16.8 33.7 49.5
Into practice
13 Pay and job 22.1 27.4 50.5
14 Advancement 12.6 40.0 47.4
15 Freedom to use my 13.7 36.8 49.5
judgment
16 My methods to do 15.8 31.6 52.6
my job
17 Working condition 13.7 27.4 58.9
18 Coworkers 7.4 29.5 63.2
19 Praise for doing 17.9 31.6 50.5
good job
20 Accomplishment from 18.9 29.5 51.6
the job
3.3 Comparison Between School-leavers and College Graduates in Job Satisfaction
RQ3 hypothesized that college graduates are more satisfied in their job compared to
school-leavers, which is found to be not true. Independent t-test was administered to answer
the RQ3. Table 6 below shows the 20 items of MSQ classified into 5 items, work, pay,
promote, supervisor, and coworker. When the means are compared, the school-leavers’ mean
scores were higher than the mean scores of college graduates suggesting that the school-
leavers were more satisfied with their jobs than the college graduates.
However, Table 6 also shows that, for work, t =1.685, p=.093, pay, t=1.424, p=.156,
promote t = 1.357, p=.176, superior t = .928, p=354, and coworker t = 1.609, p=.109 which
indicate p>0.05, all are statistically insignificant suggesting that there was no statistical
significant difference between the school-leavers and the college graduates.
12032-9
Table 6: Level of Education and Job Satisfaction
Job Satisfaction N Mean SD t Sig
Work School-leavers 115 52.32 10.354 1.685 .093
Graduates 95 49.94 10.254
Pay School-leavers 115 3.56 1.141 1.424 .0156
Graduates 95 3.34 1.116
Promote School-leavers 115 7.17 1.803 1.357 .176
Graduates 95 6.85 1.711
Supervisor School-leavers 115 7.29 1.923 .928 .354
Graduates 95 7.04 1.903
Coworkers School-leavers 115 4.00 1.051 1.609 .109
Graduates 95 3.78 .995
4. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Although there were not much differences in terms of demographic background, it
was expected that female respondents will be in higher number (57.6%) compared to male
respondents, higher rate of respondents between the age of 20-29 years old (43.3%), higher
rate of respondents of school-leavers (54.8%), and admin workers (57.1%) to be the
respondents since these group of people are believed to be in higher number in many work
sectors and approachable compared to others.
In answering the research questions, the result of RQ1 verifies that school-leavers
were satisfied with their jobs. The percentages of satisfied measures of MSQ was higher than
the dissatisfied measures with all score above 50% indicating that school-leavers were
satisfied with their current jobs. This finding corresponds with the study done by Griin,
Hauser, and Rhein (2010) who found that school-leavers who are taking up a new job out of
employment are, on average, more satisfied with life than those remaining in unemployment.
Moreover, Furnham (1985) suggested that school-leavers develop aspirations about the types
of jobs that they would like which can and do affect their job satisfaction and adjustment.
The findings also suggested that school-leavers were most satisfied with their coworkers and
most dissatisfied with their pay and jobs.
The finding showed that college graduates were satisfied with their job as well as the
answer for RQ2 by looking at the frequency distribution of percentages of satisfied measures
which were higher than dissatisfied measures. This is in agreement with Wise (1975) who
suggested that education is the key to better employment and better job performance. He also
found that different quality of same levels of education, and different levels of education
would lead to different job performance, which he specified as salary and grade levels. He
further mentioned that being in higher education level would advantage in intelligence,
supervisory ability, initiative, self-assurance, and perceived occupational level. Likewise,
Bowden and Marton (1999) found that job satisfaction is essential to college graduates. They
believed that, college graduates are not motivated for money but rather they prefer jobs which
will give them access to the senior people in the companies. They also added that the college
graduates favoured large companies over small organizations when it comes to searching for
12032-10
a job. College graduates are also found to be most satisfied with steady employment, and
most dissatisfied with their pay and job.
The result of independent t-test for RQ3 showed that levels of education have no
significant relationship with job satisfaction. This is incongruent with a study by Ritter, &
Anker (2002) which postulate that highly educated workers are more likely to report high job
satisfaction level. Moreover, Mora, Aracil, and Vila (2007) found that graduates’ satisfaction
was related to some education-related variables such as fringe benefits; the working
conditions; consumption benefits.
On the other hand, Winefield, Tiggemann and Goldney (1988) who suggested that
school-leavers feel satisfied in their employment which in turn, resulted in improved
psychological well-being, seemed to be in concurrence with the finding. These researchers
also found that recent school-leavers who could not find jobs were far less well
psychologically than their employed counterparts, and the minority of unemployed people
preferred to work. Therefore, this may conclude that school-leavers are more satisfied with
their jobs because they do not have many expectations from the job and they would feel that
they are satisfied as long as they are being employed.
The unexpected results, however, is believed by the researcher that the independency
between level of education and job satisfaction is overlapping with the study by Boucher and
Maslach (2009) which suggested that the members of Asian cultures are less likely to be
engaged in behaviour that makes them appear distinctive. It is crucial however, to emphasize
that the researcher has not yet come across any research done on comparing the job
satisfaction between school-leavers and college graduates in Malaysia. Therefore it is
somehow difficult to compare findings. In addition, the researcher believed that the
unexpected findings can be compared to the study by Farag and Allen (2007) which they
found that Asians have less expectation on their jobs. The Asians were also found to be less
successful in realizing these expectations at work which leads to insignificant difference
between school-leavers and college graduates. Since these school-leavers and college
graduates are working mostly in local environment, they are unable to compare their
expectations with other people from other cultures.
In addition, job satisfaction between school-leavers and college graduates was found
to be insignificantly different at p>0.05. This finding is in agreement with many job
satisfaction measures in the literature, as Bhosale (2004) listed down nine criteria in which
she believed that followed by job satisfactions, which are growth aspect, money talks,
responsibility and accountability, job security, recognition, enjoyment, people to work with,
working hours and conditions, and perks. Another study by Carlson (2009) states that job
satisfaction is outwardly affected by employees’ work environment, position within the
organization, status, and interactions with coworkers, supervisors, leaders, or others within
the organization as well as outside individuals such as customers and vendors.
Furthermore a study by Van de Velde, Feij, and Taris (1995) suggest that age plays a
role in one’s job satisfaction as they expanded that when young adults grow older they
become more satisfied with life and value intrinsic instead of extrinsic factors for life,
because people prefer an environment which fulfill their needs and wishes, and thus they will
have better satisfaction in their jobs. Claes and van de Ven (2008) however found that older
workers are more satisfied with their jobs when they perceived low insecurity and both young
and old workers are more satisfied if they have high skill discretion and high organizational
fairness.
As a result of the reviews of these literatures, it is found that education itself is not the
major determinant of job satisfaction since there are a variety of other factors which could
lead to job satisfaction.
12032-11
5 LIMITATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Some limitations are found throughout the study and recommendations for future
researches are as follows to better outcomes.
Firstly, the few numbers of respondents is believed to be the major issue of the
unexpected and insignificant result of job satisfaction between school-leavers and college
graduates. Therefore it is suggested that for future researches, more respondents to be
obtained in order to gain better results.
Secondly, the diversity of the selection of the companies may also be another reason.
It is known that MAA is an insurance company, TNB is responsible for the electricity supply
in Malaysia and Perodua is a vehicle company, which are not in the same industry, so in
future researches, the selection of the companies should be less varied.
Thirdly, it is clear that the respondents were from various positions, such as
administrative, non admin, customer service, and IT. The same work background of
respondents, such as only from Human Resource department, or all the respondents from IT
department should be obtained in order to increase the reliability of the job satisfaction.
Fourthly, the respondents were not equally distributed especially for the male and
female respondents. Better control of the selection of equally distributed respondents is
encouraged.
Finally, the causal effect of each satisfaction measurement should be studied in depth
with more literature reviews so that future research will have more evidences on the
outcomes. The adding of the literature reviews would make a better understanding of the
results.
12032-12
REFERENCES
Balzer, W.K., Kihm, J.A., Smith, P.C., Irwin, J.L., Bachiochi, P.D., Robie, C., Sinar, E.F., &
Parra, L.F (1997). Users’ manual for the job descriptive index (JDI; 1997 Revision) and the
job in general (JIG) scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University
Battu, H., Belfield, C.R., & Sloane, P.J. (1999). Overeducation among graduates: a cohort
view. Education Economic, Vol. 7(1), 21-38. Retrieved October 28 2010, from ProQuest
Educational Journals database.
Beatty, S.C. (1998). Academic background characteristics and prediction of job
performance. Retrieved October 29, 2010, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation (UMI No.
1392796).
Bhosale, S. (2004). Job satisfaction-assessment. Retrieved August 11, 2009.
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/6-23-2004-55791.asp.
Boucher, H.C, & Maslach, C. (2009). Culture and individuation: The role of norms and self-
construals. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(6), 677-693.
Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1999). Graduates “not afraid of hard work”. Education and
Training, 41(5), 260-265.
Callear, L. (1992). Recruitment and performance of TVEI school-leavers. Education and
Training, Vol. 32(1), 4-9.
Carlson, D.J. (2009). Self-efficacy and employee satisfaction in cross utilization teams:
Predicting organizational commitment and turnover intention of cross utilization employees.
Retrieved October 28, 2010, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation (UMI No. 3344525).
Clark, A.E. (1998). Measures of job satisfaction: What makes a good job? Evidence from
OECD countries. Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers, 34.
Claes, R., & van de Ven, B. (2008). Determinants of older and younger workers’ job
satisfaction and organizational commitment in the contrasting labour markets of Belgium and
Sweden. Ageing and Society, 28, 1093-1112.
Currivan, D.B. (1999). The causal order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in
models of employee turnover. Human Resource Management Review, 9(4), 495-524.
Farag, S., & Allen, J. (2007). Japanese and Dutch graduates’ work orientations and job
satisfaction. Competencies, Higher Education and Career in Japan and the Netherlands, 191-
210.
Favara, L.F. (2009). Examining fellowship styles and their relationship with job satisfaction
and job performance. Retrieved October 28, 2010, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation (UMI
No. 3356567).
Furnham, A. (1985). Youth employment: a review of the literature. Journal of Adolescence,
8, 109-124.
12032-13
Greenberg, J., & Baron, R.A. (2008). Behaviors in organizations (9
th
Ed.). New Jersey:
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Griin, C., Hauser, W., & Rhein, T. (2010). Is any job better than no job? Life satisfaction and
re-employment. Journal of Labor Res, 31, 285-306.
Goodwin, J., & O’Connor, H. (2003). Entering work in the 1960s: reflections and
expectations. Education and Training, 45(1), 13-21.
Lee. T.W. (1988). How job dissatisfaction leads to employee turnover. Journal of Business
and Psychology, 2(3), 263-271.
Lichtenstein, R. (1984). Measuring the job satisfaction of physicians in organized settings.
Medical Care, 22(1), 56-68.
Miller, H.E., & Rosse, J. G. (1984). Emotional reserve and adaptation to job dissatisfaction.
The Psychology of Work, 205-231.
Mora, J.G., Aracil, A.G., & Vila, L.E. (2007). Job satisfaction among young European higher
education graduates. Higher Education 53, 29-59.
Price, J.L. (1999). Introduction to the special issue on employee turnover. Human Resource
Management Review, 9(4), 387-395.
Ritter, J.A., & Anker, R., (2002). Good jobs, bad jobs: Workers’ evaluation in five countries.
International Labour Review. Vol. 141(4), 331-358. Retrieved October 28 from ProQuest
Social Science Journals database.
Ross, G., (1991). School-leavers and their perceptions of employment in the
tourism/hospitality industry. Journal of Tourism Studies, 2, 28-35.
Van de Velde, M.E.G., Feij, J.A., & Taris, T.W. (1995). Stability and change of person
characteristics among young adults: The effect of the transition from school to work. Person
Individual Different, 18(1), 89-99.
Verhaest, D., & Omey, E. (2006). The impact of over education and its measurement. Social
Indicators Research, 77, 419-448. Retrieved October 12, 2010 from Springer database.
Wei, C.M., & Kopischke A. (2001). Job search methods, job search outcomes, and job
satisfaction of college graduates: a comparison of race and sex. Journal of Employment
Counseling, 38(3), 141-149.
Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the
Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Winefield, A.H., Tiggemann, M.,& Goldney, R.D. (1988).Psychological concomitants of
satisfactory employment and unemployment in young people. Social Psychiatry and
Psychiatric Epidemiology, 23, 149-157.
12032-14
Wise, D.A. (1975). Academic achievement and job performance: earnings and promotions.
Retrieved October 23, 2009, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation (No. ED 081374).
