Work motivation and Job Satisfaction between private employees and civil servants

Σταυρούλα Σαρρή και Ευστράτιος Παπάνης

1. INTRODUCTION

Human resource management is a discipline or science that focuses on all the human factors that coexist and interact in any organizational environment. These factors such as employee personality, work experience, education and many more have to be implemented and managed in a proper and careful way so that people can perform at their best potential. In highly productive and economically developed countries like U.S.A., Germany, England and other countries the application of human resource management practices has been developed more than in less developed countries like Greece. A country is like an organization or a company. The way that is governed characterizes its culture and the culture consists of elements such as values, customs, a certain type of communication between employees and employers, etc. The culture of Greece and hence, the culture of a Hellenic company promotes collectivism and the decisions are made mainly by the general manager of the company. The application of human resource management practices has just begun to exist only in few large multinational companies and people have just started to know about this science.
The aim of this paper is to investigate three different types of employees who work at three different industries and companies. These employees differ in the pay system that their company uses. The first and the second category consist of employees who work in two private companies. The first category includes employees who receive at least the basic monthly salary and the second one consists of professional men who receive a certain amount of money they produce from sales. The third category of employees consists of those who work at the public sector and receive a basic monthly payment. The investigation will mainly focus on issues of employee motivation, employee satisfaction and rewards received by each company and sector, either intrinsic or extrinsic.


2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Many studies in the past have been concerned with the notion of motivation in the workplace. Motivation is a hidden factor that, as some researches will show later on in this category, is greatly related to employee performance. For a company not only motivated individuals are needed to perform a task well but also satisfied employees to some certain extent in order to stay in that company for a certain period of time. Satisfaction also influences employee productivity and performance, and theories of satisfaction and many more will be appropriately referred below. Employee motivation and satisfaction can be related to many aspects of work but this research will try to investigate them in relation to employee intrinsic or extrinsic rewards.


2.1. Definitions
2.1.a. Motivation
“Motivation is the set of processes that moves a person toward a goal. Thus, motivated behaviours are voluntary choices controlled by the individual employee” (Allen, 1998). From a manager’s perspective, motivation is “getting the desired outcomes from employees that help them reach their goals” (Gordon, 2002, p.102). Similarly, Whetten and Cameron refer to motivation as an equation which consists of employee desire multiplied by employee commitment to the job” (2002, p.305). This definition implies that motivated employees are those who feel the desire to complete a task – successfully - and at the same time feel committed to that task up to some certain extent.
The supervisor (motivator) wants to influence the factors that motivate employees to higher levels of productivity. Factors that affect work motivation include individual differences, job characteristics, and organizational practices. Individual differences are the personal needs, values, attitudes, interests and abilities that people bring to their jobs. Job characteristics are the aspects of the position that determine its limitations and challenges. Organizational practices are the rules, human resource policies, managerial practices, and rewards systems of an organization. Supervisors must consider how these factors interact to affect employee job performance (Allen, 1998).

2.1.b. Employee Performance
Various organizational researchers have concluded that employee performance is an equation of ability multiplied by motivation; motivation can similarly be restated as an effort (Vroom, 1964; Steers, Porter and Bigley, 1996; cited in Whetten and Cameron, 2002, p.305). They declare that ability is the outcome of aptitudes multiplied by training and available resources. Aptitude refers to the native skills and abilities an employee brings to a job. These include physical and mental capabilities and personality characteristics. In summarizing the above equations, the researchers point out that an employee must desire and be committed to complete a task or a job that in relation to certain physical and mental capabilities and personality characteristics he or she must have the possibility to receive training and make use of adequate resources in order to perform well.

2.1.c. Job Satisfaction
The second component of this research is concerned with employee’s job satisfaction which is defined as “a pleasurable feeling that results from the perception that one’s job fulfils or allows for the fulfilment of one’s important job values” (Locke, 1976; cited in Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright, 2003, p.430). This definition entails three important aspects of job satisfaction which are the values, individual differences and perception. Firstly, job satisfaction is a function of values defined as what a person consciously or unconsciously desires to obtain. Secondly, due to individual differences different employees may have different views of values which they believe in as important and this is a critical issue in determining the nature and degree of their job satisfaction. One person may have pay as the highest value whereas another person may have recognition as the highest one. Third is the perception. Every person in the universe is unique and has its own perception of the world which sometimes may not accurately reflect reality. It is one’s perception of one’s present situation relative to one’s values that matters. People may see the same thing or view the same situation in a completely different way (Noe et al, 2003, p.430). Therefore, their values can be distorted or change by a given situation that reflects their satisfaction in that particular time.

2.1.d. Employee Rewards
The third and last component of this research is employee rewards. Rewards are either qualitative or quantitative elements that are offered to employees by the employer – company - after the completion of a task or a difficult assignment. Jack Zigon defines rewards as “something that increases the frequency of an employee action” (1998; cited in Ryan, p.1). Three types of rewards exist. “Rewards can be intrinsic and extrinsic, financial and non-financial, and performance-based and membership-based rewards” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1). Companies may use all of them in order to reward their employees or a proportion of them. Different companies may use different rewards to employees depending on several factors, such as the compensation plan of that company. Firstly, “intrinsic rewards” are within the control of the employee. They include feelings of personal satisfaction, a sense of achievement, status, recognition, the opportunities for advancement, responsibility and pride in the work. Intrinsic rewards are directly concerned with satisfaction gained from the job itself (Ball, 2001, p.1). They also contain “praise, feelings of accomplishment or being part of a work team, giving a challenging responsibility and opportunity for growth in stature and peer recognition” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1; Intrinsic Rewards, p.1). It has been noted that “rewards which aim to offer the opportunities for achievement, advancement and growth, and a challenging responsibility have to be timely, offered sincerely, appropriate, worthwhile and done in public” (Intrinsic Rewards, p.1).
“Extrinsic rewards are outside the control of the employee and at the disposal of others. They are obvious and can be seen” (Ball, 2001, p.1). “They consist of rewards offered mainly by management such as money or pay, promotions, pay incentives, benefits, working environment or conditions and security” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1; Extrinsic Rewards, p.1). They also include “share schemes, pension schemes, insurance and wider facilities such as crèches” (Ball, 2001, p.1). “In some developing organizations extrinsic rewards can take the form of certain recreational facilities, library services, day care and attractive stock option programs” (Whetten and Cameron, 2002, p.315).
Secondly, “financial rewards entail wages, bonuses, profit sharing, pension plans, paid leaves and purchase discounts” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1). They are similar to extrinsic rewards. Non-financial rewards are similar to intrinsic rewards and “emphasize in making life on the job more attractive. Employees vary greatly on what types they find desirable” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1).
Thirdly, “performance-based rewards are tied to specific job performance criteria of a company and consist of commissions, piecework pay plans, incentive systems, group bonuses and merit pay. Membership-based rewards are offered to all employees and include cost-of-living increases, benefits and salary increases” (Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans, p.1).
Apart from the above types of rewards, four approaches to rewards exist but one that is not applicable to Greece; skill – based pay reward (it will be mentioned appropriately later). Firstly, “cafeteria - style fringe benefits rewards allow employees to choose the benefits they want up to a certain dollar amount” (Nickels, McHugh and McHugh, 2001). They are small and sudden and can occur any time of the day or the month. They can take the form of a sudden half-day off during the working hours of a day or a sudden meeting for a drink or beer outside the company after work. This approach emphasizes in individual differences and programs can be tailored to fit individuals’ different needs and desires (Mazarakis, 2005, 2). However, administration of this approach can be complex. A sufficiently small number of employees is needed because the more employees involved the more difficult it is to operate the approach. Research supporting this approach is limited and only a few programs have been scientifically examined (Mazarakis, 2005, 2).
Banking time-off rewards is another approach which includes a day-off or a form of saving money. “It provides employees with the opportunity to save hours of work and use them for vacations or cash” (Banking Time Off, 1999). Any organization needs a valid, reliable and equitable performance appraisal program in order to implement this approach. Research supporting this perspective is extremely limited (Mazarakis, 2005, 2).
Skill-based pay reward refers to “a pay system in which pay increases are linked to the number or depth of skills an employee acquires and applies and it is a means of developing broader and deeper skills among the workforce. Such increases are in addition to general pay increases employees may receive” (Sriyan de Silva, 1998). Employees must clearly demonstrate skill before receiving pay increases. However, labour costs may increase if employees learn many skills. This approach has been supported by very limited research (Mazarakis, 2005, 2).
Finally, gainsharing is “a compensation program which rewards employees for their contribution to an improvement in company performance. It involves the employee who is allowed to address quality and productivity issues. Employees have a great deal of say in what goes on. Gainsharing is a long run based program aimed at improved productivity and profitability” (Gainsharing). It can also enhance teamwork but there is a great chance that employees may ignore other important objectives. Despite the fact that gainsharing has been supported by limited research a distinct increase in studies has been reported (Mazarakis, 2005, 2).
“Reward systems” incorporate certain motivational principles (which will be analyzed appropriately below) into formal mechanisms, such as wages, benefits, incentives and employee ownership for encouraging high performance and meeting organizational goals. They contain both compensation and non-pay components, such as promotions, flexible hours and even praise (Gordon, 2002, p.117). Reward systems have to be consistent, transparent and understood. They should be equitable and seen to be fair. Prospective employees will wish to know whether a reward system exists and to understand its characteristics. For the organization, a reward system aids recruitment and retention and ensures that employees work to a known and consistent standard. A well organized reward system can be able to reflect the nature of the post and task and recognize the skills and experience required to fulfil that particular post. It will motivate employees increasing commitment and effort, resulting in better performance (Ball, 2001, p.1). Reward systems are subject to financial possibilities of a company. They are structured under certain employment laws and imposed by a particular country. Importantly in Greece, basic salary of an employee who works either in the public sector or in a private company is standardised and the possibility for an employee to receive less money than the basic monthly wage is illegal for any company or sector.
Rewards are very important due to several reasons. Sommers states that the increasingly demanding pace of work in a greatly global, challenging and competitive environment has changed over the years and human resource management is no longer just a discipline but an actual practice (1999, p.1-2). He now believes that managers must increasingly serve as coaches to indirectly influence rather than demand desired behaviour from employees. Managers need to create work environments that are both positive and reinforcing. Demographics predict that fewer workers will be available in the post-baby boom era and that those who exist will likely have fewer skills than their predecessors. Employees of this new type have different values and expect work to be both purposeful and motivating. In tight financial times, rewards provide an effective low-cost way of encouraging higher levels of performance from employees (Nelson, 1994).

2.2. Motivation
2.2.a. A Simple Model of Motivation
The purpose of behavior is to satisfy needs. A need is anything that is required, desired, or useful. A want is a conscious recognition of a need. A need arises when there is a difference in self-concept (the way I see myself) and perception (the way I see the world around me). The presence of an active need is expressed as an inner state of tension from which the individual seeks relief (Allen, 1998).

2.2.b. Theories of Motivation
Motivation theories are based on two primary approaches which are the content theories and process theories of motivation. On the one hand, the content approach of motivation “focuses on factors within the person that energize, direct, sustain and stop behaviour. These factors can only be inferred” (Mazarakis, 2005). “Content theories focus on the needs that motivate people and assume that individuals are motivated by the desire to fulfil inner needs.” (Allen, 1998). “Managers need to be aware of differences in needs, desires and goals because each individual is unique in many ways” (Mazarakis, 2005, 1). The founders of this approach are: Abraham Maslow, Clayton Alderfer, Frederick Herzberg and David McClelland.

2.2.c. Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Maslow, 1954) Maslow proposed that individuals have five specific needs that are based on a hierarchy and must be satisfied. The most basic need is hierarchically first and the most sophisticated need is last. A person does not satisfy all needs simultaneously but in a continuum. A person begins to satisfy the first need, food. When this need has been satisfied the individual is able to move to the next need. Maslow stated that “a satisfied need is no longer a motivator. The most powerful employee need is the one that has not been satisfied” (Allen, 1998). The most basic need and the first in the hierarchy is the physiological need. It includes food, water, shelter and sexual life. “An organization helps to satisfy employees' physiological needs by a paycheck” (Allen, 1998).
The second need is safety and security. “It describes employees’ desires for security and stability, and desires to feel safe from harm. A company helps to satisfy this need by the provision of benefits” (Allen, 1998). “Some companies may provide extensive safety programs to employees to protect them from hazardous materials” (Gordon, 2002, p.104). In addition, “employees can satisfy their needs by living in a safe area, receiving medical insurance and getting financial reserves” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). A real life example is the application of no-smoking areas in public and private organizations. Once the need for food and safety has been satisfied the next need is activated. This need is belongingness and love or social need. “In general, individuals need to be in contact with other people. They have the need for friendship, to belong to a group, and give or receive love” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). Companies can satisfy employees’ need by organizing regular social activities, such as sports leagues, teams, parties and celebrations. “The supervisor can help fulfil social needs by showing direct care and concern for employees” (Allen, 1998). Once the employee feels the sense of belonging, then the need for esteem arises. “Esteem need refers to a person’s concern for mastery, competence and status” (Gordon, 2002, p.104). “Esteem needs may be classified as internal or external. Internal esteem needs are those related to self-esteem such as self respect and achievement. External esteem needs are those such as social status and recognition. Some esteem needs are self-respect, achievement, attention, recognition and reputation” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). Managers can help employees satisfy their need for esteem by providing them with a job title, a luxury car, a large office and other rewards related to their success. “Maslow later refined his model to include a level between esteem needs and self-actualization: the need for knowledge and aesthetics” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). The last need in the hierarchy is self-actualization. “It reflects an employee’s desire to grow and develop to his or her fullest potential” (Gordon, 2002, p.104). “This need is never fully satisfied. As one grows psychologically there are always new opportunities to continue to grow” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). Individuals who have the need for self-actualization desire autonomy, responsibility and challenge in their work. In addition, “they need truth, justice, wisdom and meaning. Self-actualized persons have frequent occurrences of peak experiences, which are energized moments of profound happiness and harmony. According to Maslow, only a small percentage of the population reaches the level of self-actualization” (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005). While Maslow developed a well comprehensive model of motivation, “he does not address the issue of individual differences. He assumes that all people are motivated by the same needs any time. His theory has received limited research support” and his contradictors focus on the order of needs that Maslow has proposed (Mazarakis, 2005, 3). For instance, some cultures place social needs before any others. Maslow's hierarchy also has difficulty in explaining cases such as the "starving artist" in which a person neglects physical needs in pursuit of aesthetic needs or spiritual needs. Finally, there is little evidence to suggest that people are motivated to satisfy exclusively one need at a time, except in situations where needs conflict (Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory, 2005).
2.2.d. ERG Theory (Alderfer, 1970) Clayton Alderfer based his theory on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and his model of motivation provides a more simple explanation of satisfying human needs. Alderfer renamed the needs of Maslow and summarised them into three, instead of five. These are existence, relatedness and growth and are explained by the ERG letters of his theory (ERG Theory, 2005). The need for existence is equal to both physiological and safety needs. The need for relatedness includes social needs (belongingness and love) and external esteem needs. The need for growth entails both internal esteem needs and self-actualization. This theory is hierarchical - existence needs have priority over relatedness needs, which have priority over growth. It allows for different levels of needs to be pursued simultaneously. “It recognizes that the order of importance of the three needs may vary for each individual. Managers must recognize that an employee has multiple needs to satisfy at the same time. Focusing exclusively on one need at a time will not effectively motivate individuals” (ERG Theory – Clayton P. Alderfer, 2005). In addition, the ERG theory acknowledges that if a higher level need remains unfulfilled, the person may regress to lower level needs that appear easier to satisfy. This is known as the “frustration-regression principle that impacts workplace motivation. For instance, if growth opportunities are not provided to employees, they may regress to relatedness needs, and socialize more with co-workers” (ERG Theory – Clayton P. Alderfer, 2005). Thus, while the ERG theory presents a model of progressive needs, the hierarchical aspect is not rigid. This flexibility accounts for a wider range of observed behaviors. It can explain the "starving artist" who may place growth needs above existence ones, that could not be explained by the Maslow’s theory (ERG Theory, 2005). However, “not enough research supports Alderfer’s theory which is limited also in the issue of whether individuals have only three basic needs (Mazarakis, 2005, 3).
2.2.e. Two Factor Hygiene and Motivation Theory (Herzberg, 1959)
This theory focuses on two dimensions of motivation: the hygiene theory and motivation. “The hygiene theory includes the job environment which consists of the following hygiene factors: the company, its policies and its administration, the kind of supervision people receive from the work, working conditions, interpersonal relations, salary, status and security” (Frederick Herzberg - Two Factor Hygiene and Motivation Theory, 2005). “Though the absence of hygiene factors can create job dissatisfaction, their presence does not motivate individuals or create satisfaction” (Gawel). The second part of Herzbergs' motivation theory involves what people actually do on the job. He determined that the motivators were elements that enriched a person's job. He found five factors in particular that were strong determinants of job satisfaction (motivators): achievement, recognition, interest, responsibility, and advancement - growth. These motivators (satisfiers) were associated with long-term positive effects in job performance while the hygiene factors (dissatisfiers) consistently produced only short-term changes in job attitudes and performance (Gawel). In summarizing the above, satisfiers describe a person's relationship with what she or he does. Dissatisfiers, on the other hand, have to do with a person's relationship to the context or environment in which she or he performs the job.
One of the limitations of this theory is that “it was developed years ago and has not been updated to reflect changes in job security and pay needs” (Mazarakis, 2005, 3). A more recent study on teachers revealed that the two factor theory did not include them. Research by Tutor (1986) with Tennessee Career Ladder Program – TCLD - found that thirty - thousand participants were as influenced by motivation factors as by hygiene factors, contrary to Herzberg's position that hygiene factors do not motivate (cited in Gawel). The study showed that teachers ranked salary as the most important factor in their decision to participate in the TCLD study, whereas Herzberg proposed that achievement is the most important motivating factor. Furthermore, this theory is limited because it assumes that every worker is similar in preferences and needs. It does not address the issue of individual differences.

2.2.f. Needs Theory (McClelland, 1961)
McClelland’s theory assumes that individuals have three innate needs: the need for achievement, the need for power and the need for affiliation. “The need for achievement is the drive to accomplish challenging goals, setting new records, successful completion of difficult tasks, and doing something not done before.” (Sinclair, 2004 and Swenson, 2000). High need achievers prefer a job in which success depends on effort and ability, and tasks that enable them to exercise their skills. They want frequent and specific feedback about performance so they can enjoy the experience of making progress toward objectives. People scoring high at need for achievement are often found in jobs such as sales representative, real estate agent, producer of entertainment events, and owner-manager of small business. If achievement is dominant, the manager may try to achieve objectives alone rather than through team development (Swenson, 2000).
The need for power is “the desire to control others and to influence others’ behaviour according to one’s wishes” (Sinclair, 2004). It includes “the feelings of defeating an opponent or competitor, winning and argument, or attaining a position of greater authority. Persons with high need for power are highly assertive and self confident” (Swenson, 2000).
The need for affiliation is “the desire for close relationships with others” (Sinclair, 2004). Affiliated individuals want to establish or restore close and friendly relationships, join groups, participate in pleasant social activities, and enjoy shared activities with family or friends. This need reflects behaviors toward others that are cooperative, supportive, and friendly and which value belonging and conformity to the group. They obtain great satisfaction from being liked and accepted by others, and prefer to work with others who prefer group harmony and cohesion (Swenson, 2000).
McClelland developed the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) with which he examined the needs of the individuals. Through a series of pictures provided to participants they were asked to describe what they see and this reflected their need. This tool may not be accurate in a sense that interpreting the TAT test is difficult and can lead to a subjective conclusion. The participant’s description of a picture may be reflected by the current psychological state which may influence his or her need at that particular time.
Furthermore, the other approach of motivation is process approach which “describes, explains and analyses how behaviour is energized, directed, sustained and stopped” (Mazarakis, 2005, 1). It emphasizes “in how and why people choose certain behaviours in order to meet their personal goals. Process theories focus on external influences or behaviours that people choose to meet their needs. External influences are often readily accessible to supervisors” (Allen, 1998). “Managers need to understand the process of motivation and how individuals make choices based on preferences, rewards and accomplishments” (Mazarakis, 2005, 1). The founders of this approach are: Victor Vroom, Burrhus Frederic Skinner, John Stacey Adams and Edwin Locke.

2.2.g. Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964)
“Vroom's theory” is based on the belief that employee effort will lead to performance and performance will lead to rewards. Rewards may be either positive or negative. The more positive the reward the more likely the employee will be highly motivated. On the other hand, the more negative the reward the less likely the employee will be motivated (Vroom, 1964; cited in Lindner, 1998). This theory argues that motivation is based on how a person feels about effort, performance and outcomes. He developed an equation to explain motivation using three factors: expectancy, instrumentality and valence. The motivation - equation was the result of expectancy multiplied by instrumentality multiplied by valence. Expectancy is the probability that effort will be followed by personal accomplishment. Instrumentality is the probability that performance will lead to outcomes. Valence is the value of an individual of an outcome. Vroom states that a manager can use this equation to predict whether a particular reward will motivate an individual. While the basis of Vroom’s expectancy theory is very good, the equation seems a little awkward today (Young, 2000). “Although the motivation – equation may oversimplify the motivational process, the limitations of this theory include the interpretation and operationalization of the key constructs” (Van Eerde and Thiery, 1996; Klein, 1991; all cited in Gordon, 2002, p.114).

2.2.h. Reinforcement Theory (Skinner, 1953)
The reinforcement theory proposes that human behaviour is governed by external events or influences that are referred as stimuli. It is based on the assumption that some behaviours can lead to either positive or negative consequences for the person who produces the behaviour. When a stimulus results in any change in behaviour is defined as response (Sociological Theory – Reinforcement Theory: Theory, 2005). “The reinforcement theory includes a step-by-step process which can be referred as the When – Do – Get process. People can learn several things through this process: When in some situation - Do some behaviour - Get some consequences (Reinforcement Theory, 1996). There are three fundamental principles of this theory that describe the logical outcomes which occur after consequences. Firstly, consequences that provide rewards increase a behaviour. The presentation of a stimulus following a response increases the likelihood of the response to occur in the future - positive reinforcement. The withdrawal of a stimulus following a response increases the likelihood of the response to occur in the future - negative reinforcement. Secondly, consequences that provide punishments decrease a behaviour. The presentation of a stimulus following a response decreases the likelihood of the response to occur in the future - positive punishment. The withdrawal of a stimulus following a response decreases the likelihood of the response to occur in the future - negative punishment. Thirdly, consequences that provide neither rewards nor punishments extinguish or ignore a behaviour (Reinforcement Theory, 1996; Theory, 2005).
Although this theory attempted to explain how certain behaviours can motivate people it fails to take into account that people may behave in ways that are not primarily based on particular external influences. It is limited in that external stimuli produce a behaviour whereas in particular, a behaviour may be the product of creative or imaginative thought. It does not consider other factors that may motivate individuals (Sociological Theory – Reinforcement Theory: Theory, 2005).

2.2.i. Equity Theory (Adams, 1965)
This theory is based on the belief that employee performance may be greatly influenced by others’ performance. People seek to know what they put into their job and what they get out of it. Adams called these inputs and outputs. Inputs include effort, loyalty, hard work, commitment, skill, ability, adaptability, flexibility, tolerance, determination, heart and soul, enthusiasm and personal sacrifice Outputs are typically all financial rewards: pay, salary, benefits, bonus, recognition, reputation, praise, interest, responsibility, travel, training, development, sense of achievement and advancement, and promotion. People need to feel that there is a fair balance between inputs and outputs (Chapman, 2005). Adams argues that a major input into job performance and satisfaction is the degree of equity (or inequity) that people perceive in their work situation. On the one hand, inequity can occur when an employee perceives that his or her own outputs to inputs compared with a co-worker’s outputs to inputs are unequal. If this is the case, then the individual will strive to restore equity that is considered as employee motivation. The greater the perceived inequity the more motivated an employee becomes (Sherman, 2002). On the other hand, if an employee feels that his or her inputs are fairly and adequately rewarded by his or her outputs then he or she is motivated to continue inputting at the same level. But if he or she feels that his or her inputs out-weigh the outputs then he or she may become de-motivated (less motivated) in relation to his or her job and employer (Chapman, 2005).
This theory is limited in explaining how motivation can occur in the workplace. It focuses only on the importance of inputs and outputs that a person produces at work. It does not include other factors that may motivate individuals to perform a task well. Additionally, “it does not address the role of individual differences in employees’ motivation and performance” (Eysenck, 2004).


2.2.k. Goal-Setting Theory (Locke, 1968)
Locke’s theory assumes that in order to perform well and be motivated an employee must consider the importance of goals. Eysenck declared that “the harder the goal the greater the level of performance” (2004). People perform better when they try to reach goals that are difficult - challenging and even impossible - and specific - clear - than when they try for any other type of goal. Goals must be attainable so that people can be strongly committed to them and receive feedback showing their progress in relation to the goals. People are most likely to set high goals and be committed to them when they have high self-efficacy. Goals regulate action directly by affecting what people pay attention to, how hard they work, and how long they work. Goals affect action indirectly by motivating people to discover and utilize task strategies which will facilitate goal achievement. Incentives must not discourage risk-taking, such as trying for nearly impossible goals (Shalley and Locke, 1996).
Locke’s theory explains individual differences in motivation and performance as highly motivated workers use higher goals and greater work commitment. However, “his theory works better in the laboratory than in work organizations and it ignores the processes between goal setting and attainment. Goal setting does not improve performance if people are not confident in the task” (Eysenck, 2004).

2.2.l. Theory X and Theory Y (McGregor, 1960)
McGregor’s theory distinguishes two types of employees that each is referred as Theory X and Theory Y. The essence of Theory X is that people don't normally want to work (Markwell and Madhavan). “Workers are only motivated by one thing: money. They are selfish and hate work. They need to be closely controlled and directed” (Woollard, 2003). Thus, this type of employee approach promotes an authoritarian style of management. McGregor felt that such managerial views led to behaviours and organisational systems which relied on rewards, promises, incentives, close supervision, rules and regulations, even threats and sanctions all designed to control workers (Douglas McGregor - Theory X and Y). The contrasting view of this approach is the Theory Y that describes employees as naturally motivated to work productively (Markwell and Madhavan). “Workers are motivated by many different factors apart from money. They enjoy their work. They will happily take on responsibility and make decisions for their work” (Woollard, 2003). From a manager’s perspective, Theory Y employees are committed to their company’s objectives and their commitment is the function of intrinsic rewards associated with their achievement, not just extrinsic rewards (Douglas McGregor - Theory X and Y). This theory tends to use a more participative style of management.
This approach is limited in that employees are individuals and every person is unique, and what he or she brings to the job is the outcome of many variables, such as ability, perception, effort, etc. McGregor’s theory may be applicable only to some proportion of employees. Other types of employees existing in the workplace may have a combination of the characteristics described in the Theories X and Y. McGregor failed to consider this possibility. A recent theory of employee motivation provides a more accurate description of employees’ needs and motivation.

2.2.m. Theory Z (William Ouchi, 1981)
Ouchi formed his theory from the combination of American and Japanese management practices. He points out that people are innately self motivated not only to do their work but also to be loyal towards the company, and want to make the company succeed. Theory Z employees include the following characteristics: long-term employment, collective decision making, individual responsibility, slow evaluation and promotion, and moderately specialized career paths. (Theory Z - Ouchi, 2005). It assumes that workers desire to build cooperative and intimate working relationships with those that they work for and with, as well as the people that work for them. In addition, such employees have a high need to be supported by the company and value highly a working environment in which family, cultures and traditions, and social institutions are regarded as equally important as the work itself. This type of workers have a very well developed sense of order, discipline, moral obligation to work hard, and a sense of cohesion with their fellow workers. They can be trusted to do their jobs to their best potential, so long as management can be trusted to support them and look out for their well being (Massie and Douglas, 1992; cited in Lycos, 2005).

2.2.n. Model of Organizational Behaviour (Argyris, 1960)
Argyris believed that the properties of the organizational environment and their influences on the characteristics of people are responsible for the behaviour and reaction of employees. In his theory, Argyris included that self-esteem, self-acceptance and psychological success are some of the central factors for the mental health of the members of a bureaucratic organization (1960; 1964; 1972; cited in Weinert, 1986, p.25). He developed a Model of Organizational Behaviour in order to interpret, predict and explain behaviour of individuals in relation to any type of social organization. There is an intrinsic conflict between the requirement of organizations and the psychological needs and expectations of their employees. The organization does not permit its employees to define their own goals nor to exercise control over their own work. This discouragement of self-expression causes employee disturbance, frustration and short time perspectives. The degree of frustration and conflict tends to increase as the degree of individual maturity increases. Employees working under these conditions create informal activities which increase with increasing degree of social maturity. Therefore, defensive reactions are stronger when employees are more mature. These defensive reactions involve; leaving the work situation (absenteeism and turnover), climbing the organizational ladder, becoming apathetic, disinterested and not involved in the organization and its formal goals, formalizing or joining informal groups in the form of trade unions, and unemphasizing the importance of self-growth and creativity and emphasizing the importance of money and other material rewards (Weinert, 1986, p.26).
However, some criticisms have been pointed out over the years regarding Argyris’ theory. Firstly, Argyris failed to take into account the issue of individual employee differences. He also supported that the only way that employees gain need gratification and life satisfaction is through job. These two criticisms intimate that every individual employee is similar to another (Lichtman and Hunt, 1971; Sayles and Strauss, 1966; Strauss, 1970; 1974; cited in Weinert, 1986, p.26). In addition, there is insufficient evidence for the generality and universal applicability of his theory. In a few organizations with a small number of employees his findings were only partially successful (Argyris, 1959a; 1959b; cited in Weinert, 1986, p.27).


2.2.o. Motivation Calculus Theory (Charles Handy, 1976, 1991)
Handy’s theory of motivation is an extension of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. Handy involved the needs, results and effectiveness as the major parts of his theory. He considered needs as the Maslow’s factors, personality characteristics, current work environment, outside pressures and influences. In explaining the results, Handy stated that “we must be able to measure the effect of what our additional efforts, resulting from motivation, will produce” (Chapman, 2001). Effectiveness is the decision upon whether the results employees have achieved meet the needs that they feel (Chapman, 2001). If the results of employees’ efforts meet their initial needs the results are effective in a sense that employees feel motivated.

2.2.p. Elton Mayo (1945)
Elton Mayo was involved in Hawthorne Studies and he worked in areas of motivation and commitment and worker – management relations. He highlighted the importance of communication between management and workers. He embraced the notion that work satisfaction lay in recognition, security, and sense of belonging, rather than monetary rewards. Communication between managers and workers was the key - because of the problems caused when they didn't communicate well. They were on different tracks. Workers had the 'logic of sentiment' while managers were motivated by the 'logic of cost and efficiency'. Conflict was bound to arise in such circumstances. Mayo raised the awareness of individual's reactions and need for managers to show respect towards their staff and workers (Clark, 2005).

2.2.q. Job Characteristics Model (JCM, Hackman and Oldham, 1976)
Hackman and Oldham have focused on the issues of job itself to present another way of motivating employees. The JCM explains how perceived characteristics of jobs are related to outcomes that are important to individual workers and to their employers. Desired outcomes in the JCM include high levels of internal motivation, quality performance and job satisfaction, and low absenteeism and turnover (Panzano and Seffrin, 2002). The job characteristics include skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and job feedback. Skill variety is the range of personal competencies required to perform the job. Task identity refers to the degree to which the entire job is done by a single person. Task significance entails the extent to which the job has an impact on the lives of other persons within or outside the organization. Autonomy is the extent to which one has freedom, discretion, and independence in scheduling one's work and determining how to perform the job. Job feedback involves the extent to which the worker gets information about the quality of his/her performance from the job itself, from co-workers, from customers, etc (Panzano and Seffrin, 2002). It has been pointed out that these five work characteristics are determinants of three critical psychological states. Skill variety, task identity and task significance contribute to experienced meaningfulness. Autonomy contributes to experienced responsibility and feedback to knowledge of results (Jelstad, p.2-3). Remarkably, this model assumes that autonomy and feedback are more important than the other job characteristics.


2.2.r. Motivation Management Theory (Ritchie and Martin, 1999)
Ritchie and Martin put forward some interesting insights in the motivation of employees. They provide some useful models and tools based on a long-term multi-country study of 1600 employees. They identified twelve factors as key drivers that motivate people to act. These factors are money and tangible rewards, good working conditions, structure and rules, social contact, long-term relationships, recognition, achievement, power, variety, creativity, autonomy and interest (First; Young, 2000). Each person possesses different combinations and levels of these factors. Certain factors however show up more often than others do. These include achievement, recognition and interest. Money was ranked ninth in the original study (Young, 2000). There was no apparent combination of factors that seemed to dominate (First). Ritchie and Martin claimed that each of the twelve drivers is independent of the other. Their theory would be classified as a content theory, which suggests that motivation results from the individual’s attempts to satisfy its needs.

2.2.s. A recent study of motivation (Lindner, 1998)
A study conducted by Lindner (1998) aimed to investigate the most important factors in motivating employees currently working in three different centers. The researcher surveyed twenty-five participants who were asked to rank the importance of ten factors that motivated them in doing their work. Results revealed that the ranked order of motivating factors was (a) interesting work, (b) good wages, (c) full appreciation of work done, (d) job security, (e) good working conditions, (f) promotions and growth in the organization, (g) feeling of being in on things, (h) personal loyalty to employees, (i) tactful discipline, and (j) sympathetic help with personal problems. Apparently, the most motivating factors of this survey are similar to those that Ritchie and Martin proposed; i.e. interest and recognition. On the contrary, this study does not support the Job Characteristics Model which claimed that autonomy and feedback are the most important motivating factors. However, the sample size of the study is so extremely small that is almost impossible to apply the findings to the general population.

2.2.t. Integrative Model of Motivation Enhancement (Whetten and Cameron, 2002)
This model proposes that the most contemporary way to motivate employees is by putting several elements together that are relevant to and important for employees’ work output. Whetten and Cameron clarify that skilled managers incorporate all components of this model into their motivational efforts rather than concentrating only on a specific subset. There are no shortcuts to effective management. All elements of the motivation process must be included in a total, integrated program for improving performance and satisfaction (2002, p.328). The model consists of employee effort, goals and expectations, ability, reinforcement, equity, salience – personal needs and timeliness. Effort means that employees desire to work and are committed to their job. Goals must be accepted and understood, challenging, specific and when a task has been accomplished employees must receive feedback regarding their performance. Ability is referred as a native skill of an employee who must receive training to do a task and make use of certain appropriate resources that aid its performance. The combination of goals and ability determines the extent to which effort is successfully transformed into performance.
Once the employee performs well, the manager must reinforce its output by providing either discipline or rewards. Firstly, a manager provides discipline by responding negatively to an employee’s behaviour with the intention of discouraging future occurrences of that behaviour. Secondly, rewarding employee’s behaviour implies linking desired behaviours with employee - valued outcomes. Good performance leads to extrinsic and intrinsic outcomes (rewards). Furthermore, equity takes place meaning that employees must feel that the rewards offered are appropriate to their expectations and in comparison to the rewards received by other “similar” co-workers. Salience is the subjective value that employees attach to incentives for performance. Rewards with little personal value have low motivational potential. The combination of salience with the timeliness and accuracy of feedback determines the overall motivational potential of rewards. Based on their perceptions of outcomes, workers will experience varying degrees of satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Satisfaction will increase employee motivation whereas dissatisfaction will result in decreased effort and performance, and if uncorrected, it may result in absenteeism and turnover (p. 328-330).

2.3. Satisfaction with Performance
Two major issues regarding employees are satisfaction and performance. Whetten and Cameron (2002) emphasized in the combination of the two elements and produced a relationship between them to describe managers’ behaviour accordingly. The table below shows that relationship.
Table 1 Relationship between Satisfaction and Performance
Emphasis on Performance


High
Low Low High
Indulging Integrating
Ignoring Imposing

Emphasis on

Satisfaction

Source: Whetten, D. and Cameron, K. (2002). Developing Management Skills.
(7th Edition), p. 328

Managers who emphasize more on employees’ satisfaction than on their performance behave in an indulging way. When employees seem to perform well but they are not satisfied, managers impose on them certain tasks that employees must do. In the long run, this type of behaviour can produce negative effects including decrease in productivity through increased absenteeism and turnover (Whetten and Cameron, 2002, p.309). In the case when employees neither perform well nor are satisfied, managers ignore their own responsibilities which often reflect a lack of management. If this continues to occur it may lead to the failure of the work unit. Finally, employees who perform well and are satisfied with their work managers emphasize satisfaction and performance equally. Managers should keep up the same strategy in the future for the best of both organizational and employee levels. As Whetten and Cameron point out, “the best managers have productive people who are also satisfied with their work environment” (Kotter, 1996; 2002, p.309).



2.3.a. Empirical research on corporate culture and job satisfaction (Papanis and Rontos, 2003)
The research aimed to study the prevailing type of Greek corporate culture, job satisfaction among Greek employees, the relationship between culture and work motivation as well as the interaction between job satisfaction and gender, age, occupational sector and work position. The study consisted of three phases. In the first phase, researchers included two hundreds and three ventures in the study to measure the type of the dominant corporate culture among cultures characterized by support, innovation, goals, and rules. The ventures were located in Attica and periphery of the North Aegean of Greece. In the second phase, job satisfaction was tested in six hundreds and forty – eight employees in relation to gender and occupational sector, public and / or private. In the third phase, interactions between job satisfaction and type of corporate culture were studied in connection with employees’ work position in the company. The sample size in this phase was one – hundred ventures (Papanis and Rontos, 2003, p.60-61). .
The results of the study demonstrated that employees were mostly satisfied by innovative cultures (71,1% of respondents) and less satisfied by cultures characterized by goals (60, 5%). This is a conflicting finding though since the largest proportion of ventures (79,6%) appeared in large ventures with ruling cultures (p. 68). Furthermore, the results showed that only fifty – four percent of the respondents were satisfied with their work. Gender differences also confirmed the finding that female employees (57%) were more satisfied by their work than male employees (53%) although none statistically significant difference appeared (p. 68-69). Both men and women were more satisfied by the private sector than the public sector. This can be explained by the fact that work in private ventures is more challenging than in public organizations and it avoids routine (p. 69). In the same manner, the results of the study showed a negative relationship between job satisfaction and age. Meaning, that as age increases so job satisfaction decreases. This probably may happen due to fatigue, routine and / or family responsibilities (p. 71). In addition, employees holding superior job positions felt the highest level of job satisfaction (70%). A similar level (69,9%) exhibited by employees who worked in small ventures (Papanis and Rontos, 2003, p. 72-73).

2.4. Job Satisfaction and Organizational Justice
Organizational justice plays an important role in employees’ perceptions about work. Organizational justice “refers to people's perceptions of the fairness of treatment received from organizations and operates as a basic requirement for the effective functioning of organizations” (Greenberg, 1990a; cited in Lee, 2000, p. 3). It is an expansion of Adams’ equity theory which proposed that employee motivation is activated when employees compare and seek balance between their own inputs to outputs, and other co-workers’ inputs to outputs. Most recent studies have been concerned primarily with two types of organizational justice; distributive and procedural justice. Distributive justice “seeks to explain how individuals react to the amount and form of compensation they receive from the organizations” (Tremblay, Sire and Balkin, 1998, p. 1). In other words, “it is the perceived fairness of the outcomes that an employee receives” (Folger and Cropanzano, 1998; cited in Lee, 2000, p. 15). Procedural justice, on the other hand, is the perceived fairness of the policies and procedures administered to make decisions (Greenberg, 1990a, p. 402; cited in Lee, 2000, p. 15). “It examines the reactions of individuals to the procedures used to determine compensation. Distributive justice focuses on “ends” while procedural justice focuses on “means" (Sweeney & McFarlin, 1993; cited in Tremblay et al, 1998, p. 1).
Interestingly, several studies have found a link between distributive and / or procedural justice and job satisfaction. Lee (2000) conducted an empirical study of organizational justice among two hundreds and fifty employees who worked in the lodging industry. Results demonstrated that positive distributive and procedural justice had a positive direct influence on job satisfaction (p. 106 - 108). Similarly, Leung, Smith, Wang and Sun (1996) found out that both distributive and procedural justice were predictors of job satisfaction among employees who worked in joint ventures in China (cited in Pillai, Scandura and Williams, 1999, p. 766).
However, it has been generally indicated that procedural justice is strongly related to organizational level outcomes such as commitment while distributive justice is more strongly related to individual level outcomes such as job satisfaction (Greenberg, 1995; cited in Pillai, Scandura and Williams, 1999, p. 766). Evidence from research proves and supports that statement. Tremblay, Sire and Balkin (1998) aimed to provide a complementary approach to organizational justice in the domain of compensation. Their study included a sample of six hundred employees who worked in three different Canadian organizations. According to the findings, employees distinguished clearly between pay satisfaction and benefit satisfaction. Specifically, distributive justice perceptions were better predictors of pay satisfaction than procedural justice perceptions. Reversely, procedural justice perceptions were better predictors of employee benefit satisfaction than distributive justice perceptions. It is remarkable to note that, as the results showed, distributive justice perceptions with regard to pay played a more important role in job satisfaction and satisfaction with the organization than procedural justice (p. 10).
Furthermore, Cohen – Charash and Spector (2001) studied the correlates of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice through one hundred and ninety studies samples including sixty – four thousands and seven hundreds fifty – seven employees. Job performance and counterproductive work behaviors were mainly related to procedural justice, whereas organizational citizenship behavior was similarly predicted by distributive and procedural justice. Most satisfaction measures were similarly related to all justice types. Although organizational commitment and trust were mainly related to procedural justice, they were also substantially related to the other types of justice (p. 278).
In addition, Scandura (1997) investigated the role of organizational justice in relation to mentoring theory in order to develop a new fairness “frame”. His study involved one hundred and ninety – seven managers working at Australian organizations. The findings demonstrated that for those who were mentored, career development, psycho-social and role modelling functions of mentoring were significantly and positively related to both procedural and distributive justice. The protégés perceived more procedural justice than non-proteges. Mentoring functions made unique contributions to explained variance in protégé career expectations, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, after controlling for organizational justice variables (p. 58).


2.5. Conclusion
The issue of work motivation and satisfaction has been developed many years ago, with the starting researcher Elton Mayo in 1945. However, the founder of motivation theory was Abraham Maslow who provided an adequate scientific approach almost ten years later after Mayo. His theory was regarded as a foundation for many later researchers. Some of them added further elements into their theory and some others criticised the work of Maslow. It is a fact that as years proceed so people change, customs and habits change and so work issues and conditions do. Each theory mentioned above, presented the issue of work motivation and employee satisfaction from different perspective which reflected the needs of the era that was developed. Today, Maslow’s theory seems little awkward and restrictive in a sense that people have additional stimuli and inner states that contribute to their source of motivation. The integrative model of motivation enhancement (2002), is the most contemporary and realistic approach to motivation because it entails many different aspects of job and employee into one system that describes and explains better than any other approach the process of employee motivation. Although the theories stated in the previous lines offered a further understanding into work motivation, a certain issue of it was missing. That is, the effects of unemployment in job satisfaction. Under periods of high levels of unemployment, people are forced to follow a specific job type or sector in order to survive. This means that their work might not be desirable enough to offer their abilities, skills and/or education. As a result, unemployment might promote job dissatisfaction. Currently, the unemployment rate especially in Greece is so high that many people probably face this situation and feel dissatisfied from their work.

2.6. Experimental Hypotheses

 H1: Job satisfaction will be statistically significant between public and private sector.
 H2: Job satisfaction will be statistically significant between men and women.
 H3: Work motivation will be statistically significant between public and private sector.
 H4: Work motivation will be statistically significant between men and women.















3. METHODS
3.1.Design
The design of this study is repeated measures and involves two Independent Variables (I.V.s): 1) Gender entails three levels, males, females and unknown. 2) Type of job sector consists of two levels, private and public. Two Dependent Variables (D.V.) will be measured in this study, work motivation and job satisfaction which will be collected from participants’ scores.

3.2. Participants
The participants in this study consisted of thirty employed individuals in either private or public sector, 11 males, 15 females and 4 unknown ones. Sixteen participants currently work at a public organization located in a suburb of Athens (Greece) and fourteen employees work at two different private companies. Seven participants were basic salary employees working at a Pharmaceutical Company located in the area of Athens and seven participants were professional men who work at a Real Estate Agency located also in the area of Athens who received in average a percentage of money produced from sales (refer to Tables 1 – 4 below).


Table 1




Figure 1




Table 2


Participants’ ages ranked from 26 years old to 51 years old with a mean of 25 years and four months.

Table 3


Table 4


3.3. Materials / Apparatus
The materials used for this study consisted of two questionnaires. One involved employee work satisfaction which was an original photocopy from Papanis’ and Rontos’ work (2003) and the second questionnaire aimed to measure employee motivation. The first questionnaire consisted of fifty questions which required participants to answer in a scale ranged from 1 to 6, with 1 representing “totally disagree” and 6 “totally agree”. The questionnaire involved twenty-one negative questions that tested participants’ reactions to those questions. If they answered “Disagree” the opposite meaning was true, that is “Agree”.
The second questionnaire is comprised of eight different questions. The first question entails fifteen motivating factors that participants should answer in a range from very important, equal to 1, and not important, equal to 5. The second question involves five subsets that participants were asked to answer in a range from 1 to 3, equal to “Very”, “Little” and “None”. The third question consisted of nine subsets. The fourth question included seven subsets from which the sixth one provided the possibility to participants to clarify their answer. Question 5 involved the amount of money they receive in a ranked order. Question 6 required them to answer by “Yes” or “No”. The seventh question is double. The first part consists of a statement that requires participants to answer in a range from 1 to 5, equal to “Totally Agree” and “Totally Disagree”. The second part was an open question that enabled them to explain their answer. The last question was also an open one that participants should state and explain their answer clearly (refer to Appendix 1). .

3.4. Procedure
Both questionnaires were completed at the same time. Due to time restrictions, all participants completed the questionnaires during their working hours. They were informed about the anonymity of information provided and the confidentiality of personal information prior to the completion of the questionnaires. However, they were given plenty of time to complete the questionnaires. Once, they finished the questionnaires were collected in order to be analysed appropriately.




4. RESULTS
In order to analyze the findings of the study, an extended statistical analysis will be used including each question separately. From the collection of data it was found that nominal data required the use of a two Non-Parametric tests, Chi-Square. The tests will be presented below to show differences between the job sectors. Table 5 will present the relationship between type of sector and employee satisfaction among several questions included in the questionnaire. The results are significant when p is less than 0,005 of significance level.

Question Significance Level
I overcome problems quickly that are presented to my work 0,001
My colleagues’ negative comments do not influence my performance 0,010
I believe I have reached successfully my professional goals 0,003
I am claiming in my work 0,001
I don’t feel confident about my work 0,000
Cooperation with my supervisors is effective 0,000
My work offers career opportunities 0,025
I often prove my skills and abilities through demanding tasks 0,001
I feel dissatisfied from training provided by my company 0,001
I would like to receive more training 0,004
My work creates pleasant feelings 0,048
My company is interested in insurance issues 0,025
Some times I find it difficult to understand supervisor’s demands 0,004
My work is monotonous 0,000
My company’s communicative policy is satisfying 0,010
Schedule is so pressing that creates stress 0,027
Transition to work influences my mood 0,000
I am satisfied with the quality and quantity of my work 0,000
I often take on additional tasks voluntarily 0,020
Bureaucratic climate stops initiative 0,000
Financing of important sections delays work 0,003
My work is the work of my dreams 0,016
I know and take part to company's future plans 0,001
I rarely make inexcusable absences 0,004
I try to facilitate my colleagues when they need help 0,001
I have self control under stressful situations 0,006
Conflicts at work delay company's development 0,002
Table 5: Type of company and job satisfaction

Regarding the private sector, the working environment seems that influences employees’ performance, especially colleagues’ behaviour. Private sector provides career opportunities and adequate training programs that aid employees work more productively and feel more confident about their performance. In addition, working at a private company creates pleasant feelings to employees whereas at a public organization work is characterised by routine, work is monotonous and bureaucratic procedures prevent employees from taking initiatives.

Table 6 will present the differences between private and public sector, and work motivation. Each question will be analysed and presented separately.
Question Significance Level
I deem most important in my work feedback 0,034
I deem most important in my work team work 0,001
I deem most important in my work recognition of work 0,000
I deem most important in my work significance of work 0,011
I deem most important in my work variety of work 0,000
I deem most important in my work continuous training 0,000
I deem most important in my work money 0,001
I deem most important in my work opportunities for initiative 0,013
I deem most important in my work freedom in work 0,034
I deem most important in my work friendship with colleagues 0,013
I deem most important participation to work for improvement or change 0,027
I deem most important in my work respect from others or relationship with supervisors 0,000
Table 6: Type of company and work motivation
Certain job characteristics motivate employees more than others. The above table describes those factors in detail. From those characteristics listed, the most important found to be recognition, variety, training, respect, money and team work.

Table 7 will present significant differences in gender and job satisfaction
Question Significance Level
I overcome problems quickly that are presented to my work 0,001
My colleagues’ negative comments do not influence my performance 0,010
I believe I have reached successfully my professional goals 0,003
I am claiming in my work 0,001
I don’t feel confident about my work 0,000
Cooperation with supervisors is effective 0,000
My work offers career opportunities 0,025
I prove my skills through demanding tasks 0,001
I am dissatisfied from training offered by company 0,001
I get paid less than my colleagues 0,048
I would like to receive more training 0,004
My work creates pleasant feelings 0,048
My company is interested in insurance issues 0,025
Some times I find it difficult to understand supervisors' demands 0,004
My work is monotonous 0,000
Company's communicative policy is satisfying 0,010
Schedule is so pressing that creates stress 0,027
Transition to work influences my mood 0,000
I am satisfied with quality and quantity of my work 0,000
I often take on additional tasks voluntarily 0,020
Bureaucratic climate stops initiative 0,000
Financing of important sections delays work 0,003
My work is the work of my dreams 0,016
I know and take part to company's future plans 0,001
I rarely make inexcusable absences 0,004
I often try to facilitate my colleagues when they need help 0,001
I have self control under stressful situations 0,006
Conflicts at work delay company's development 0,002
Table 7: Gender and Job satisfaction

Job characteristics differ greatly between men and women. It seems that work creates unpleasant feelings to women who seem to be more prone to stress under work pressure than men.

Table 8 will show significant differences between gender and work motivation.
Question Significance Level
I deem most important in my work feedback 0,034
I deem most important in my work team work 0,001
I deem most important in my work recognition of work 0,000
I deem most important in my work significance of work 0,011
I deem most important in my work variety of work 0,000
I deem most important in my work continuous training 0,000
I deem most important in my work money 0,001
I deem most important in my work opportunities for initiative 0,013
I deem most important in my work freedom in work 0,034
I deem most important in my work friendship with colleagues 0,013
I deem most important in my work participation to work for improvement or change 0,027
I deem most important in my work respect from others or relationship with supervisors 0,000
Table 8: Gender and work motivation

From the above most important motivating factors, even more important ones for men and women are team work, recognition, variety of work, training, money and respect from superiors.






5. DISCUSSION
The initial hypotheses of the study were supported. There was a statistically significant difference in job satisfaction and work motivation between employees who work in the private and the public sector. Similarly, significant difference was found between males and females in job satisfaction and work motivation. In particular, job satisfaction and work motivation measured by collecting employees’ scores, were analysed with respect to each question separately. Each question of the questionnaire involved a certain issue of employee work motivation and satisfaction from which the results derived.
This research included several previous studies about job satisfaction and work motivation. Similar to Job Characteristics Model (1976), it was found that a majority of employees rated as most important motivating factors the following: variety, significance of job and feedback. Significance of job is similar to task significance; term used initially by Hackman and Oldham. Employees deemed also most important job characteristics team work, money, training, recognition, opportunities for initiative, freedom in work, friendship with colleagues, respect from others and participation to work for improvement or change.
Regarding Maslow’s theory, this study supports the views of his contradictors who claimed that human needs may not be ordered in the way Maslow proposed. The need for esteem may occur while the need for security – a lower level need - may not be satisfied. Similarly, Alderfer’s approach to human needs is supported, who stated that people can have more than one need at a time and individuals may vary in need gratification.
Vroom’s approach to employee motivation, although antiquated, seems to be in effect till nowadays. As the findings indicated, most employees were dissatisfied with the amount of money they received – either private employees or civil servants – while they felt that they performed more than required. This is identical to Adams’ theory who pointed out that employees tend to compare their performance –he called that as “input” - to the rewards probably received – output. But also he defined that employees take into account their colleagues’ performance and their rewards to ascertain whether there is equality between them and the others. The greater the inequality between performance and rewards the greatest the motivation is to perform better. This was not supported though by the findings of the study, since most employees did not show to have any tension of disaffection towards or annoyance to their colleagues. In fact, relationship with colleagues was rated as one of the most important factors.
Most previous studies about job satisfaction and work motivation were not conducted with regard to gender differences except from one, which is Papanis’ and Rontos’ empirical study (2003). The major finding in the current study was relevant to stress as a result of work pressure. Women found to be more prone to stressful situations than men. In contrast to previous decades, today, women are responsible for many things in their lives. They have to be mothers, take care of their houses, spouse and work successfully. Especially in work, women have changed over the years. They no longer work for living. Instead, women try hard to succeed in their work because they need to feel able to perform the same as men, if possible. Human communication and relationship between men and women has also changed, in a sense that women no longer stay at home taking care of their family, this used to happen many years ago. Nowadays, married, divorced or single women need to succeed in their work and they do not need man as much as they needed them previously. This rhythm of life produces negative outcomes to them, such as stressful situations.
Another major finding of the study was the difference in work procedures between the private and the public sector. It was found that bureaucratic climate delayed the development of the organization – public sector. Indeed, bureaucracy of the public sector is a standard process that some times delays the accomplishment of an action or decision. Similarly, employees spend their working time in following specific orders of the bureaucracy. If bureaucracy would consisted of less processes employees would have spent their time more in other aspects of work.
As mentioned in the literature review, the most appropriate way to describe and explain employees’ satisfaction and motivation is by integrating many factors together that result in a desired outcome. Not only task characteristics, human needs, employees’ expectations, rewards, performance and feedback are enough. On the contrary, all elements of a job take part in order to satisfy and motivate employees. Research will continue to investigate these issues for the shake of human beings and employees.
This study though had certain limitations and some points need to be mentioned. One of them is the lack of participants’ response. Firstly, a certain number of participants did not answer concerning demographic characteristics. In fact, they avoided it because they probably thought that their company would be aware of their answer they gave in the questionnaire and that it would know where and why they were dissatisfied. They probably were afraid of loosing their job. Employees who work in private companies some times do not feel the freedom of speech because that’s the way is work in this sector. Secondly and consequently, a small number of employees agreed in completing the questionnaires. The number of participants among the three organizations was expected to be nearly one hundred and fifty. In fact, just thirty employees were included in overall.
The reliability of results is doubtful because employees filled in the questionnaires during their working time. This means that time pressure probably prevented them from giving right and reliable answers.
Suggestion for further research includes measure of work motivation and satisfaction in a less timely pressured working environment and procedures resulting in a larger response rate.















REFERENCES
Abraham Maslow – Hierarchy of Needs Theory. (2005). Retrieved in August 18, 2005 from the Envision Software Web site: http://www.envisionsoftware.com/Articles/Maslows_Needs_Hierarchy.html#Safety_Needs
Allen, G. (1998). Motivating. Retrieved in August 3, 2005 from the Management Modern Web site: http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/motivatg/motivate.htm
Argyris, C. (1959a). Understanding human behaviour in organizations: One viewpoint. In Haire, M. (Ed), Modern Organization Theory. New York: Wiley
Argyris, C. (1959b). The individual and organization: An empirical test. Administrative Science Quarterly, (4), p 145-167
Argyris, C. (1960). Understanding Organizational Behavior. Home-wood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.
Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the Individual and the Organization. New York: Wiley
Argyris, C. (1972). The Applicability of Organizational Sociology. England: Cambridge University Press
Ball, J. (2001). Rewards and Appraisal. p 1. Retrieved in August 3, 2005 from the Management Modern Web site: http://www.accaglobal.com/publications/studentaccountant.htm
Banking time off: A paid time-off bank allows employees more flexibility in when they take time off. (1999). Retrieved in August 6, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/19414.html
Chapman, A. (2001). Charles Handy – Motivation Calculus Theory. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/charleshandy.htm
Chapman, A. (2005). Adams’ equity theory. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/adamsequitytheory.htm
Clark, W. (2005). People Whose Ideas Influence Organizational Work. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.onepine.info/pmayo.htm
Cohen-Charash, Y. and Spector, P. (2001). The Role of Justice in Organizations:
A Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, (86), 2, p. 278–321,
De Silva, S. (1998). An Introduction to Performance and Skilled-based pay systems.
Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.io.org/public/english/dialog/actemp/papers/1998/srspaysy.htm#C10
Douglas McGregor - Theory X and Y. (n.d.). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the Business Open Learning Archive Web site: http://www.brunel.ac.uk/~bustcfj/bola/motivation/mcgregor.html
ERG Theory. (2005). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/erg/
ERG Theory – Clayton, P. Alderfer. (2005. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the Value Based Management Web site: http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_alderfer_erg_theory.html
Establishing Rewards and Pay Plans. (n.d.). p 1. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://faculty.palomar.edu/eschultze/Class_files/HRMch11.htm
Eysenck, M. (2004). Motivation and Homeostasis: Work Motivation and Performance. Ch. 3. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site:
http://www.psypress.com/pip/resources/slp/topic.asp?chapter=ch03&topic=ch03-sc-04
First, C. (n.d.). Motivation Management. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://library.osu.edu/sites/sel/arch/Book_Review.doc
Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational Justice and Human Resources
Management. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage Publications.
Frederick Herzberg - Two Factor Hygiene and Motivation Theory. (2005). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the Accel-Team Web site:
http://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_05_herzberg.html
Gainsharing. (n.d.). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.snc.edu/socsci/chair/336/gainshar.htm
Gawel, E. (n.d.). Herzberg's Theory of Motivation and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.ericdigests.org/1999-1/needs.html
Gordon, J. (2002). Organizational Behavior: A Diagnostic Approach. (7th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall. p 102, 104, 114, 117
Greenberg, J. (1990a). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16,(2), p 399-432.
Greenberg, J. (1995). The quest for justice on the job: Essays and experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Intrinsic Rewards. (n.d.). p 1. Retrieved in August 3, 2005 from the following Web site: www.maxwideman.com/issacons3/iac1369/tsld003.htm
Jelstad, B. (n.d.). Job characteristics and its outcomes: A comparative work design study of non-profit and profit organizations. p 2-3. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.asb.dk/upload/asb/conferences/nff2005/docs/papers/healthsector/pjelstad.pdf.
Klein, H. (1991). Further evidence on the relationship between goal setting and expectancy theories. Organizational Behaviour and Human decision processes. (49), p 230-257
Kotter, J. (1996). Kill complacency. Fortune, p 168-170
Lee, H. (2000). An Empirical Study of Organizational Justice as a Mediator of the Relationships among Leader-Member Exchange and Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, and Turnover Intentions in the Lodging Industry. p 3, 15, 106-108. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05012000- 14210002/unrestricted/dissertation.pdf
Laung, K., Smith, P., Wang, Z. and Sun, H. (1996). Job satisfaction in joint venture hotels in China: An organizational justice analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, (27), p 947-962
Lichtman, C.M. and Hunt, R.G. (1971). Personality and organization theory: A review of some conceptual literature. Psychological Bulletin, (76), p 271-294
Lindner, J. (1998). Understanding Employee Motivation. Journal of Extension. (36), 3. Retrieved in August 3, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/rb3.html

Locke, A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Dissatisfaction in the Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. Dunnette, M. Chicago: Rand McNally. P 901-69
Markwell, J. and Madhavan, S. (n.d.). Using McGregor's Theory Y as a framework for improving student motivation. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://abstracts.aspb.org/pb2003/public/P25/0253.html
Massie, J. L. and Douglas, J. (1992). Managing: A Contemporary Introduction. Englewood Cliffs: Simon & Schuster Company,
Mazarakis, T. (2005). Four Reward Approaches: A summary and Comparison. Lecture Notes 1, 2, 3
Nelson. (1994). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: www.nelson-motivation.com
Nickels, W. G., McHugh, J. M. and McHugh, S. M. (2001). Glossary. Retrieved in August 3, 2005 from the Online Learning Centre Web site: http://www.mhhe.com/business/busadmin/nickels_6_ub/student/olc/glossary.mhtml
Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B, and Wright, P. (2003). Human Resource Management: Gaining a competitive advantage. New York: McGraw-Hill, p 430
Panzano, P. and Seffrin, B. (2002). Examining the value of the job characteristics model for improving the experience of work and work - related outcomes for adults with severe and persistent mental illness. Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.dssincorporated.com/Research/JobDesign/jobdesign.html
Papanis, E. and Rontos, K. (2005). Psychology – Sociology of Work and Human Resource Management: Theory and Empirical Research. Athens: Sideri, p 60-61, 68-69, 72-73
Pillai, R., Scandura, T. and Williams, E. (1999). Leadership and Organizational Justice: Similarities and Differences across Cultures. Journal of International Business Studies, (30), 4, p 763-779
Reinforcement Theory. (1996). Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/rf.htm
Ryan, S. (n.d.). Rewards and Recognition. p 1. Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/ARoset/pie/Interventions/incentives.htm
Sayles, L. and Strauss, G. (1966). Human Behavior in Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Scandura, T. (1997). Mentoring and Organizational Justice: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, (51), p 58–69
Shalley, C. and Locke, E. (1996). Setting Goals to Get Innovation. Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/201-250/article240_body.html
Sherman, R. (2002). Motivation. Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.units.muohio.edu/psybersite/workplace/motivation.shtml
Sinclair, V. (2004). Motivation: McClelland’s Needs Theory. p 9. Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.tech.purdue.edu/Ols/courses/ols252/slides/chapter5.ppt#9
Sociological Theory-Reinforcement Theory: Theory. (2005). Retrieved in June, 22, 2005 from the following Web site: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Sociological_Theory/Reinforcement_Theory
Sommers, C. (1999). Informal Ways to Reward Employees. p 1-2. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://academic.emporia.edu/smithwil/s99mg444/eja/sommers.htm
Steers, M., Porter, W. and Bigley, A. (1996). Motivation and leadership at work. New York: McGraw-Hill
Strauss, G. (1974). Workers: Attitudes and Adjustments. In Rosow, J. The worker and the job: Coping With Change. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Strauss, G. (1970). Organizational behavior and personal relations. In Strauss, G. (Ed) A Review of Industrial Relations Research. Madison, Wisc.: Industrial Relations Research Association
Sweeney, P.D., McFarlin, D.B., (1993). Workers’ Evaluation of the “Ends" and the "Means": An Examination of Four Models of Distributive and Procedural Justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, (55), p. 23-49.
Swenson, D. (2000). David McClelland's 3-Need Theory Achievement, Affiliation, Power. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://faculty.css.edu/dswenson/web/LEAD/McClelland.html
The X Y and Z of Management Theory. (2005). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the Lycos Web site: http://members.tripod.com/PeterVenn/brochure/complete/xyz.htm#massie
Theory Z – Ouchi. (2005). Theory X Theory Y (McGregor) Theory Z (Ouchi). Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the 12manage Web site: http://www.12manage.com/methods_mcgregor_theory_X_Y.html
Tremblay, M., Sire, B. and Balkin, D. (1998). The Role of Organizational
Justice in Pay and Employee Benefit Satisfaction, and Its Effects on Work Attitudes. p 1, 10
Tutor, F. D. (1986). The Relationship between Perceived Need Deficiencies and Factors Influencing Teacher Participation in the Tennessee Career Ladder. Doctoral dissertation, Memphis State University, Memphis, TN.
Van Eerde, W. and Thiery, H. (1996). Vroom’s expectancy models and work related criteria: A meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology. (81). p 585-586
Vroom, V. (1964). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14 (3), p 361-83
Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
Weinert, A. (1986). Testing Argyris’ Theory of Organizational Behavior. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies. p 25-27
Whetten, D. and Cameron, K. (2002). Developing Management Skills. (5th edition). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. p 305, 309, 315, 328-330
Woollard, M. (2003). McGregor's theory of X and Y. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://www.projectalevel.co.uk/business/mcgregor.htm
Young, B. (2000). Methods of Motivation: Yesterday and Today. Retrieved in June 16, 2005 from the following Web site: http://academic.emporia.edu/smithwil/00fallmg443/eja/young.html




APPENDIX

1. I like to take on responsibilities in my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

2. I overcome quickly the problems that are presented to my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

3. Negative comments of my colleagues don’t affect my performance


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

4. I believe I have succeeded in the most of my professional goals

Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

5. I feel my superiors do not appreciate my work

Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6


6. I am claiming in my work

Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6


7. I am not sure about my work unless someone positively comments on it

Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6



8. Competitive environment affects negatively my performance


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

9. I have high professional ambitions


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

10. My relations with colleagues are inferior to expected


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6


11. My cooperation with supervisors is constructive


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6


12. My salary responses to the work I offer


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

13. My job offers many career opportunities


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

14. My duties in my work are not clearly stated


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6




15. Many times I am assigned with tasks that enable me to prove my skills


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

16. I am not satisfied with the further training possibilities of my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

17. I am paid less than colleagues with fewer skills


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

18. My job encourages initiative and applauses new ideas


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

19. My work ensures security and permanency resulting in my better performance


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

20. Many times my work is overlayed with the duties of my colleagues resulting in confusion


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

21. I would like to be more often informed about new things in my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6



22. My work environment is pleasant


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

23. If I had the possibility I would change the strategic of the company


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

24. The company shows interest in matters of insurance of the employees


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

25. I am satisfied with the social policy of the company


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6
26. My work environment is depressing


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

27. The aims of the company are clearly stated


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

28. Many times, I don’t understand the demands of the supervisors


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6





29. The work I do is dull


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

30. The communication policy of the company is satisfying


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

31. Pressing schedules, many times, create conflicts and stress


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

32. My transportation to work, every day, crates negative mood


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

33. The company encourages team spirit and solidarity


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

34. My work offers motives for constant improvement


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

35. I work in a well organized environment that enables the positive performance


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6




36. I am satisfied with the quality and the quantity of my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

37. I often take on tasks voluntarily, even if not demanded


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

38. The work climate is so bureaucratic that blocks any initiative


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

39. The funding of important sectors delays, resulting in the slowing down of the employees work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

40. My present work is the one I dreamt of


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

41. I am informed with the aims of the company and I am part of their achievement


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

42. I rarely absent inexcusably from my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6



43. I am very well accustomed with the techniques and the demands of my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

44. I would like to have a more frequent contact with supervisors in order to have better quality I n my work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

45. I try to accommodate and support the colleagues in need


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

46. Many times I am being undermined in work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

47. I usually control my temper in stress situations


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

48. I very quick adapt with changes in work


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6

49. There are often conflicts in work that slow down the development of the company


Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6
50. I believe that my work has become an every day routine



Totally disagreeDisagree Partially Disagree Partially Agree Agree Totally Agree


1 2 3 4 5 6
Please answer the questions 1and 2 circling the right point

1) Important in my job:

1. Autonomy
2.Feedback
3.Team work
4. Recognition of work
5. Importance of work
6. Variety of work
7. Challenge
8. Continuous training
9. Money
10. Initiative opportunities
11. Freedom in my work
12. Friendship with colleagues
13. Participation in changes or improvements
14. Respect from others/ relations with supervisors
15. Promotion possibility/ possibility of advancement


2) The money I receive is enough to satisfy the following needs:
A lot A bit Not at all
1. Survival: food, water, shelter 1 2 3
2. Security: protection 1 2 3
3. Self belonging: social contact, love 1 2 3
4. Respect: ability, social status 1 2 3
5. Self realization 1 2 3
Please answer questions 3, 4, 5, and 6 by putting an “X” to the right point

3) The extra bonus I receive from my job when I reach the goal are:
1. Sales percentage bonus at the end of the month……
2. Sales percentage bonus at once……
3. A trip in/out of Athens……
4. Recognition……
5. Extra pharmaceutical insurance……
6. Extra leave……
7. Other……
Please explain………………………………………………………………………………..
8. None……
9. I don’t answer……

4) Along with my signing in/employment I immediately received:
1. Company vehicle……
2. Laptop……
3. Mobile phone with free time talking……
4. Basic salary……
5. Private insurance……
6. Other……
Please explain
1……………………………
2……………………………
3……………………………
7. I don’t know/I don’t answer……

5) My monthly wages are:
1. Under 599.99€ ……
2. From 600.00 to 1099.99€……
3. From 1100.00 to 1599.99€……
4. From1600.00 to2099.99€……
5. 2100.00€ and over……
6. I don’t answer……
6) I am satisfied with the wages I receive:
Yes No
…… ……

Please answer the following question circling the right point. Please explain your answer afterwards.

7) The followed wage policy by the company is right and equal or creates conflicts between me and my colleagues?

Totally Totally
Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree
1 2 3 3 4
Explain your answer.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8) Which is, from tour opinion, the suitable policy that the company should follow in order to raise the motives of the employees in the work area and consequently their performance?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………