Measuring job satisfaction in surveys: Spain

Comparative analytical report

Questionnaire

Editorial disclaimer
This report has not been subjected to the standard Foundation editorial procedures

This Spanish national report is part of a comparative overview (EF/06/55/EN) of how job
satisfaction is measured in national working conditions surveys based on 16 national
contributions for the European Working Conditions Observatory (EWCO).

Aim and structure of the comparative analytical report

questionnaire
The main objective of this comparative analytical report is to assess if and how the job
satisfaction issue is dealt in the national surveys and to bring forward some data and trends on job
satisfaction. This comparative analytical report shall reveal how national surveys produce data on
job satisfaction, focusing on the methodologies used and shall present available data on job
satisfaction.
Thus, the questionnaire is divided into three main sections. The first section is mainly focused on
the national surveys dealing with job satisfaction (priority given to the national working
conditions surveys) and the methodological frame used. In this section, the national
correspondents are basically asked to identify which surveys deal with job satisfaction, what
questions are made, how questions are made and what definitions are used in those questions.
The second section is addressed to gather available data on general job satisfaction and job
satisfaction broken down by some of its determinants. Whenever it is possible, trends should be
identified.
Finally, the last section is focused on the analytical aspects of job satisfaction. In this section,
national correspondents are asked to identify correlations between job satisfaction and other
variables related to organisational practices that may be present in national surveys data reports
and to identify interesting pieces of conceptual or meta analysis of job satisfaction.

1/13
Section 1: Survey sources and questions
Question 1 – Is job satisfaction an issue addressed in your national working conditions
surveys? Do other national surveys include any questions on job satisfaction?
The issue of job satisfaction is treated in the two main existing Spanish national surveys of
working conditions, basically, the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ (Encuesta de
calidad de vida en el trabajo) and the ‘National Survey on Working Conditions’ (Encuesta
Nacional de Condiciones de Trabajo).
The ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ already started in 1999 and is carried out on an
annual basis by the Spanish Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (latest data available for year
2004). The main goal of this survey is to examine the quality of life of the Spanish workforce,
which includes a number of questions dealing with the job satisfaction issue. This survey pursues
three different objectives:
• To obtain information about the workplace context as well as the workers’ perceptions of it, in
order to assess life quality in the workplace, and thus workers’ job satisfaction
• To gather information on the labour situation (promotions, work organisation, etc) of workers.
• Finally, to collect socio-economic data of workers in order to relate results to their Job
situation.
Meanwhile, further details of the survey methodology can be summarised as next:
• Geographical coverage Î All Spanish territory except Ceuta and Melilla (Spanish
autonomous cities in Northern Africa)
• Surveyed population Î Working people aged over 16 years old, living in family households.
• SampleÎ 6,020 surveyed people.
• Characteristics of data classification Î Occupation (Occupation National Classification),
economic activity (NACE classification) and other variables (sex, age, level of studies, size
of enterprise and size or living municipality)
• Data collection methodologyÎ Interviews are carried out face-to-face at households of
selected workers.
• Publication periodicityÎ Annual.

Meanwhile, the ‘National Survey on Working Conditions ’is carried out by the Spanish National
Institute of Safety and Hygiene in the Workplace (Instituto Nacional de Seguridad e Higiene en el
Trabajo INSHT), which is a subsidiary body of the Spanish Ministry of Labour and Social
Affairs. This survey has been conducted in five occasions, in years 1987, 1993, 1997, 1999 and
2002 (the last one). The main goal of the study is to provide an overview of health and safety
conditions in Spanish workplaces, which may affect overall job satisfaction.
Further details of the survey methodology can be summarised as next:
• Geographical coverage: All Spanish territory except Ceuta and Melilla (Spanish autonomous
cities in Northern Africa)
• Surveyed population: Businesses with more than one employee and across all activity sectors
(except agriculture and mining)
• Sample: 9,290 interviews were carried out: 4,054 with managers and 5,236 with workers
2/13
• Data collection methodology: There are two questionnaires: a ‘company’ one, to be completed
by someone from management, and a ‘worker’ one, to be completed by employees.
• Characteristics of data classification: Economic activity (NACE classification),
• Publication periodicity: every 3-4 years.
Finally, it is worth stressing that the ‘National Survey on Working Conditions’ focuses on the
reasons for dissatisfaction in the workplace rather than reasons for satisfaction as the ‘Survey on
quality of life in the workplace’ does.

Question 2 – The questions regarding job satisfaction in national surveys are single-item
questions? Or multi-facet questions? Are there ‘indirect’ job satisfaction questions in the
survey, e.g. scale questions of the type ‘Your job gives you the feeling of work well done’?
The characterisation of existing questions on job satisfaction in Spanish working conditions
national surveys requires a clear distinction between the two existing main surveys.
Thus, and as far as the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ is concerned, this survey
distinguishes different types of questions:
1. To begin with, a direct question on the general level of satisfaction with the job:
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-10) your degree of overall satisfaction
relative to your current job (Question 70)?
2. Next, a question asking about the reasons for the general level of satisfaction previously
stated. This question is different depending on the stated level of satisfaction:
● If you answered 8,9,10 in question 70, please give three reasons (open answer) (Question
71A).
● If you answered 5,6,7 in question 70, please give three reasons (open answer) (Question
71B).
● If you answered 1,2,3,4 in question 1, please give three reasons (open answer) (Question
71C).
3. Other direct questions which ask explicitly about the level of satisfaction on different job-
related issues (i.e. salary, work organisation, labour contract, physical environment, safety
and hygiene conditions, etc). Direct questions are single-item-formulated:
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-5) your degree of satisfaction relative to
the work organisation within your company (Question 77)?
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-5) your degree of satisfaction relative to
your labour contract (Question 92)?
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-5) your degree of satisfaction relative to
the physical environment in your workplace (Question 116)?
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-5) your degree of satisfaction relative to
safety and hygiene conditions in your work place (Question 117)?
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1-5) your degree of satisfaction relative to
your salary (Question 127)?

3/13
4. Finally, an indirect question which asks workers about their degree of agreement on different
job-related facts that have a relationship with the ‘job satisfaction’ issue. This question is
multi-facet-formulated:
● Could you, please, mark on the following scale (1=totally agree – 5=totally disagree) your
degree of agreement relative to the following issues (Question 78)?
1. I have got an attractive and interesting job.
2. I can work with independence and put my ideas into practice
3. I can help people in my job.
4. I have got a useful job to society.
5. I have got a stable job.
6. Physical environment in my workplace is nice/comfortable.
7. I do always take part in the decisions to allocate tasks in my job.
As it can be seen, the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ uses two main scales for
measuring job satisfaction:
• A scale of 1-10 when asking about the general level of satisfaction (in Question 70), in which
different degrees of satisfaction are:
● Very satisfied (8,9,10)
● Satisfied (5,6,7)
● Little satisfied (1,2,3,4)
● Don’t know/No Answer, DK/NA (not to be mentioned)(99)
• A scale of 1-5, in which different degrees of satisfaction/agreement are:
● Very satisfied (1)
● Satisfied (2)
● Neither satisfied nor unsatisfied (3)
● Unsatisfied (4)
● Very unsatisfied (5)
● Don’t know/No Answer, DK/NA (not to be mentioned)(8)
As far as the evolution in questions used in the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’, it is
worth stressing that all the questions remain the same since the very first survey. Therefore, no
questions have been added, changed or removed.

Referring now on the ‘National Survey on Working Conditions’, there is not any specific
question asking about job satisfaction. However, it is possible to identify just only one question
that somehow addresses this issue, more specifically ‘dissatisfaction in the workplace’. This
question, which can be found in the questionnaire to be answered by employees, has got a multi-
facet structure, where data distribution is based on a scale of 1-5. Specifically, the question is
formulated as next:
• Could you, please, mark on the scale (1=not at all – 5=very much) how much bother to you
the following issues (Question 92)?
4/13
 1. Insufficient job autonomy.
2. Work rhythm imposition.
3. Superiors’ control on you.
4. Working time
5. Monotony
6. Difficulties to inter-personal communication.
7. Physical effort in your job.
8. Body posture in your job.
9. Illumination in your workplace.
10. Noise in your workplace.
11. Temperature and humidity in your workplace.
12. Toxic agents you are exposed to.
13. Likelihood of labour accident.
14. Job insecurity.

Section 2: Survey data and trends

Question 4 – Provide data, including trends if possible, on general job satisfaction.
This section analyses the most relevant data on job satisfaction in the Spanish ‘Survey on quality
of life in the workplace’, as this survey is the only one that provides specific and direct
information on the issue. The provided results refer to the latest available year (i.e. 2004). Main
results can be summarised next:
• In percentage terms, almost 90% of Spanish workers state that they are satisfied or very
satisfied with their jobs (51% are very satisfied), whereas only 9.5% report that they are not
satisfied with their job (see Table 1).

Table 1: Percentages of workers according to their Job Satisfaction

degrees
Sample PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
TOTAL Very Satisfied Little DK/NA
satisfied satisfied
Degree of Job 6,020 100 51.0 38.1 9.5 1.4
Satisfaction
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace, Spanish Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs, 2004

• The main reasons underlying work satisfaction are ‘enjoying the job’ (22.9%), ‘comradeship’
(12.4%), a ‘good salary’ (9.4%) and ‘suitable working time (7.8%). In contrast, ‘getting used
to the job’ (3.1%), ‘Human/working relationships’ (3.7%), and ‘Job stability’ (4.0%) appear
as the less satisfactory reasons underpinning job satisfaction (see Table 2).

5/13
 Table 2: Percentage of Occupied workers who are satisfied with their job,
according to 11 reasons.
1. Enjoying the job. 7. Autonomy in taking decisions.
2. Good salary. 8. Personal development.
3. Comradeship 9. Owned/familiar business.
4. Suitable working time. 10. Getting used to the job.
5. Job Stability. 11. Others.
6. Human/working relationships.
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Total 100 22.9 9.4 12.4 7.8 4.0 3.7 4.8 5.6 4.7 3.1 21.4
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace, Spanish Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs, 2004

• Concerning the satisfaction of workers with a number of issues (work organisation, labour
contract, workplace environment, safety and hygiene conditions, salary), the available
information shows that a vast majority of workers are ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with these
five aspects of their job. ‘Safety and hygiene conditions’ and ‘Workplace environment’ are
the issues that reveal satisfaction levels. In contrast, ‘salary’ and ‘labour contract’’ receive the
worst consideration (see Table 3)

Table 3: Percentages of occupied workers according to their degree of

satisfaction on issues directly related to job satisfaction.
Sample PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
Total Very Satisfied Neutral Unsatisf. Very DK/NA
satisfied unsatisf.
Work 6,020 100 17.8 52.8 19.2 6.1 2.2 1.8
organisation
within the
company
Labour contract 1,758 100 5.7 44.6 28.4 11.8 4.4 5.1
Workplace 6,020 100 19.8 59.2 14.8 4.3 1.0 0.9
environment in
the workplace
Safety and 6,020 100 21.8 55.1 15.9 4.0 1.7 1.4
hygiene
conditions in the
workplace
Salary 6,020 100 5.9 45.8 25.4 17.7 4.0 1.3
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace, Spanish Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs, 2004
• Considering the ‘age’ variable, the highest level of job satisfaction refers to workers aged
below 19 (54.5% very satisfied) and above 65 years old (64.8%) years old. As far as
‘occupation’ and ‘sector of employment’ are concerned, the highest levels of job satisfaction
can be observed in ‘business and public administration managers’ jobs (63.1%) and the sector
of ‘services’ (53.3%), respectively. In contrast, fishing and agriculture show the highest
percentage (16.7%) of occupied workers who are ‘little satisfied’ with their job. Finally,

6/13
regarding the variable of education, the highest levels of job satisfaction correspond to
workers with a university degree background (57.4% very satisfied), while primary studies
holders show the lowest levels (13.8% little satisfied) (see table 4).

7/13
 Table 4: Percentage of occupied workers stating their job satisfaction
degree according to different variables
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION

Sample Total Very Satisfied Little DK/NA

Satisfied satisfied
TOTAL 6,020 100 51.0 38.1 9.5 1.4

GENDER
Male 3,653 100 50.9 38.2 9.2 1.7
Female 2,367 100 51.1 37.9 10.1 1.0

AGE
16-19 years old 102 100 54.5 35.5 9.5 0.5
20-24 years old 511 100 45.4 44.4 9.3 0.9
25-29 years old 819 100 47.6 41.4 9.8 1.2
30-44 years old 2,651 100 50.6 38.1 9.9 1.5
45-54 years old 1,283 100 52.9 36.1 9.8 1.2
55-64 years old 618 100 56.4 34.0 7.1 2.5
More than 65 years old 36 100 64.8 21.4 13.8 0.0

EDUCATION DEGREE
Less than primary 185 100 43.9 40.6 13.8 1.7
Primary 965 100 47.6 39.3 11.5 1.5
Secondary 3,315 100 49.4 39.5 9.4 1.7
University degree 1,350 100 57.4 34.4 7.7 0.4
Others 53 100 44.7 37.3 12.9 5.1
NO ANSWER 153 100 59.2 29.4 10.0 1.4

LABOUR STATUS
Wage-earners 4,915 100 49.7 39.3 9.7 1.3
Non Wage-earners 1,063 100 57.1 32.4 8.5 2.1
NO ANSWER 42 100 46.1 38.4 14.0 1.5

OCCUPATION
Management and Administration of Public 270 100 63.1 31.2 4.8 0.9
Companies
Scientist and Intellectuals 798 100 62.7 31.1 5.8 0.3
professionals/specialists
Supporting professionals/specialists 677 100 54.8 39.2 5.7 0.2
Office workers 336 100 48.0 39.5 11.6 0.9
Workers in security, restoration and personal 1,219 100 51.8 37.4 9.5 1.3
services, and retail sellers
Workers in agriculture and fishing. 207 100 40.1 40.8 16.7 2.4
Workers in construction, manufacture and 1,216 100 49.5 38.7 9.8 2.1
mining.
Installations and machines operators, and fitters. 432 100 42.7 43.2 12.1 2.1
Non qualified workers 781 100 42.4 42.4 13.5 1.8
Army 24 100 39.6 45.2 12.4 2.8
NO ANSWER 62 100 41.5 37.7 12.0 8.7

SECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT
Agriculture and fishing 335 100 39.0 43.3 15.9 1.8
Industry 995 100 47.0 40.0 12.1 0.9
Construction 747 100 50.6 39.5 7.6 2.2
Services 3,794 100 53.3 36.8 8.7 1.3
NO ANSWER 149 100 47.2 39.7 9.5 3.6
SIZE OF COMPANY
Less than 10 workers 2,331 100 52.8 36.1 9.5 1.7
10 to 49 workers 1,544 100 54.0 36.0 8.9 1.1
50 to 249 workers 781 100 46.1 43.0 9.9 1.1
More than 250 workers 852 100 47.8 41.6 9.9 0.7
NO ANSWER 512 100 46.4 40.3 10.9 2.5

SIZE OF MUNICIPALITY

8/13
Less than 10.000 inhabitants 1,384 100 51.7 39.8 7.7 0.8
10.001 to 50.000 inhabitants 1,581 100 49.0 37.8 11.8 1.3
50.001 to 100.000 inhabitants 561 100 48.3 39.0 9.2 3.5
100.001 to 1.000.000 inhabitants 1,850 100 54.2 35.8 8.2 1.7
More than 1.000.000 inhabitants 645 100 47.3 40.6 11.9 0.2
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace, Spanish Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs, 2004
• Finally, with respect to trends in the time period 1999-2004, the available data show that the
Spanish workers’ average level of satisfaction in the workplace in 2004 is rather high (6.79
points on a scale from 0 to 10), even though it has decreased slightly in relation to the peak of
2003 (6.84 points), which represented the highest level in the period. In contrast the lowest
level was observed in 1999 (6.59%). In general terms, satisfaction has fluctuated up and
down over the period. Finally, it is worth stressing that men’s average level of satisfaction has
been higher than women’s one throughout the five years (see table 5).

Table 5: Trends of the average level of satisfaction in the workplace, 1999–

2004 (0-10 scale)
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Average level of satisfaction at work
Total 6.59 6.77 6.79 6.69 6.84 6.79
Men 6.61 6.84 6.83 6.72 6.90 6.81
Women 6.56 6.66 6.74 6.64 6.73 6.77
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace, Spanish Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs, 2004

Section 3: Secondary analysis of survey data on job satisfaction

This last section tries to provide added information on the ‘job satisfaction’ issue. For this
purpose, this section provides the most interesting results coming from crossing exercises
between the variable ‘overall level of satisfaction’ (Q70) and three other variables related to
organisational/work practices that may contribute to job satisfaction (i.e. job autonomy, working
time and work participation) (results come from the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’).
Finally, this section presents a summary of an interesting conceptual analysis on job satisfaction
prepared by some Spanish experts in the issue.
5 – Is there any assessment of the relationship between job satisfaction and other variables
related to organisational practices/independent work-related practices in national surveys
data analysis/reports? Briefly mention the main findings on the cross-tabulation between
the following factors and job satisfaction: job autonomy, working time and WLB issues, and
worker participation/involvement.
To start with, it is worth underlining that there is no official analysis coming from the Spanish
national surveys on working conditions related to the relationship between job satisfaction and
other work-related/organisational practices (job autonomy, working time and work participation-
related variables).
However, the ‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ allows the possibility to carry out some
cross-tabulation exercises between the ‘job satisfaction’ variable (Question 70) and other work-

9/13
 related variables1. The main findings of these cross-tabulation exercises can be found next (data
referred to year 2004).

Relationship between job satisfaction and job autonomy-related variables

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘working at one’s own discretion’ (see table 6):
Available data suggests that the more independent the workers are to take their working
decisions, the more satisfied they are with their job. In contrast, the less independent they are, the
less satisfied they appear to be with their job.

Table 6: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘ability to work at

one’s own discretion’
Degree of agreement TOTAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
with the possibility to Very satisfied Satisfied Little DK/NA
work at one’s own satisfied
discretion
Totally agree 100 69.0 26.5 4.1 0.5
Agree 100 56.7 36.8 4.7 1.7
Neutral 100 45.8 46.1 6.3 1.7
Disagree 100 32.8 49.1 17.1 1.0
Totally disagree 100 20.2 44 35.1 0.7
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q70/Q78.b), Spanish Ministry of
Labour and Social Affairs, 2004

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘ability to choose or modify’ a number of issues, i.e.,
priority of tasks, working methodology, working rhythm and working breaks (see table 7):
Available data also show that the more ability workers have to choose or modify these aspects
(the more they are able to work at their own discretion), the more satisfied they are with their job.

Table 7: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘ability to choose

or modify’ work issues.
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
Ability to choose or
modify Very
Total Satisfied Little satisfied Doesn’t know
satisfied
100 Very able 62.0 32.0 5.3 0.6
100 Able 58.0 35.3 5.7 1.0
Priority of tasks 100 Sometimes able 51.3 40.1 6.4 2.2
100 Few times able 44.2 42.2 12.3 1.2
100 Never able 31.1 44.4 23.2 1.2
Working 100 Very able 63.9 29.9 5.6 0.5
methodology 100 Able 57.6 36.6 4.6 1.2
100 Sometimes able 51.4 40.8 6.0 1.8
100 Few times able 41.5 43.7 13.4 1.5

1
The Spanish Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs presents the information from the
‘Survey on quality of life in the workplace’ in a CD-ROM format that allows to make cross-
tabulation exercises.
10/13
 100 Never able 33.6 42.8 22.4 1.2
100 Very able 64.2 29.5 5.6 0.8
100 Able 56.6 36.8 5.4 1.1
Working rhythm 100 Sometimes able 52.9 39.8 6.0 1.5
100 Few times able 44.1 43.5 11.0 1.5
100 Never able 30.2 44.2 24.4 1.4
100 Very able 63.1 30.7 5.5 0.6
100 Able 58.1 34.9 5.4 1.6
Working breaks 100 Sometimes able 53.3 38.9 6.3 1.7
100 Few times able 47.5 42.5 9.0 1.0
100 Never able 34.6 43.6 20.3 1.4
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q79), Spanish Ministry of Labour
and Social Affairs, 2004

Relationship between job satisfaction and working time-related variables

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘need to work overtime’ (see table 8): It is observable
that the less the workers need to work over-time, the more satisfied they are with their job. In
contrast, the more they need to work overtime, the less satisfied they are.

Table 8: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘frequency on the

need to work overtime’
Frequency on the TOTAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
need to work Very satisfied Satisfied Little DK/NA
overtime satisfied
Always 100 38.6 41.7 19.2 0.5
Frequently 100 41.4 42.9 14.1 1.6
Sometimes 100 51.8 37.9 9.4 1.0
Few times 100 53.9 38.7 6.8 0.5
Never 100 49.5 39.2 9.3 1.8
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q70/Q104), Spanish Ministry of
Labour and Social Affairs, 2004

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘flexibility to arrive/leave workplace’ (see table 9): In
general terms, available data show that the more flexibility the workers have to arrive/leave their
workplace, the more satisfied they are with their job. By way of contrast, the percentage of little
satisfied workers increases the lesser their flexibility is.

Table 9: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘flexibility to

arrive/leave workplace’
Flexibility to TOTAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
arrive/leave Very satisfied Satisfied Little DK/NA
workplace satisfied
Very High 100 60.3 31.9 6.5 1.3
High 100 58.0 33.4 5.7 2.9
Medium 100 56.3 36.9 5.2 1.6
Low 100 53.0 39.1 7.1 0.9
Very low 100 45.1 40.5 13.5 0.9

11/13
 Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q70/Q112.e), Spanish Ministry of
Labour and Social Affairs, 2004

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘working in shifts’ (see table 10): Analysis suggests
that workers subject to a shift working structure appear to be slightly less satisfied with their job
in comparison to those workers not working in shifts.

Table 10: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘work in shifts’

Type of workday TOTAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
structure Very satisfied Satisfied Little DK/NA
satisfied
Shifted 100 46.8 39.7 13.1 0.4
Non-shifted 100 51.7 37.8 8.9 1.6
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q70/Q100), Spanish Ministry of
Labour and Social Affairs, 2004

Relationship between job satisfaction and work participation

Relationship between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘participation in working decisions’ (see table 11):
The available data show that the more the workers participate in working decisions, the more
satisfied they are with their job.

Table 11: Cross-tabulation between ‘job satisfaction’ and ‘participation in

working decisions’
Degree of agreement TOTAL PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
with the possibility to Very satisfied Satisfied Little DK/NA
participate in working satisfied
decisions
Totally agree 100 67.1 27.0 5.5 0.6
Agree 100 56.5 37.4 5.1 1.0
Neutral 100 46.3 45.2 6.6 2.0
Disagree 100 34.3 50.7 13.5 1.5
Totally disagree 100 22.5 45.9 30.8 0.9
Source: Survey on quality of life in the workplace (Q70/Q78.g), Spanish Ministry of
Labour and Social Affairs, 2004

Question 6 – Please answer one of the following questions (6a, 6b or 6c - 500 words
maximum):
6a – Are there any examples of interesting conceptual or meta-analysis of job satisfaction
per se – interpretative approaches to job satisfaction? Please summarise the main findings.
6b – Are there any examples of interesting survey approaches to quantifying and measuring
job satisfaction – methodological aspects of capturing job satisfaction data in surveys?
Please summarise the main findings.
6c – Is there any interesting piece of analysis of job satisfaction and its correlations? Please
summarise the main research findings (preferably in relation to one of the job satisfaction
correlations identified in 5).

12/13
Introduction
The analysed paper2 focuses on the measure of satisfaction as it is usually referred to in one of the
most important components of human life: work. It addresses job satisfaction as a indicator
potentially capable to provide relevant information of another work-related issue: Job quality.
Hence, the paper aims to assess adequacy of using job satisfaction as an indicator of the quality of
work.
Two approaches were followed in order to reach this objective. First, using the International
Social Survey Program (ISSP) of 1997, authors explored whether differences between countries
in job satisfaction can be explained by job quality-related variables, such as working time, wages,
etc. Second, using the Spanish Survey on Quality of Life at Work, 2000 (ECVT) as a case of
study, authors studied whether the differences in job satisfaction within the same country are
associated with objective differences in working conditions.

Methodology
In quantitative terms, the research methodology is simple to describe: instead of relying on one
particular theory or model for defining the quality of work, authors take into consideration the
most important variables used in different models. Following this model, the variables are divided
into two groups: those indicating job quality and those that are proxies of the expectations with
respect to the job. In order to relate them to job satisfaction, authors conducted a multiple
regression model. The appropriate statistical technique for this case is multiple analysis of
variance (ANOVA), designed for working with multiple categorical independent variables and a
dependent variable. Regression was expected to explain the maximum possible variance of job
satisfaction, using as many independent variables as necessary.

Conclusions
In both the approaches of the ‘International Social Survey Program of 1997’ and the ‘Spanish
Survey on Quality of Life at Work of 2000’, authors found out an unequivocal conclusion: job
satisfaction has no apparent relevant relation to other objective indicators of job quality.
Therefore, they stated that job satisfaction is not strongly correlated with job quality.
Paradoxically, they also found a co-existence of high levels of job satisfaction and a small range
of variation between the maximum and minimum levels of job satisfaction under a context with
pronounced objective differences in quality among the jobs.
In order to explain this paradox, they provided two response mechanisms for situations of job
dissatisfaction. The first would be the process through which workers who are dissatisfied with
their job tend to quit and look for a better job. This process would end up with the finding of a
more suitable job, and thus raising the worker’s level of job satisfaction. The second response
mechanism refer to those cases in which workers do not find a more suitable job and must change
and adapt their work expectations to the type of job available, thus probably increasing their
declared level of job satisfaction. The identification of these two mechanisms constitutes the
second relevant conclusion that may explain the paradox aforementioned.
Antonio Corral, IKEI

2
Llorente, R.M.B., Macías, E.F., Job Satisfaction as an Indicator of the Quality of Work,
Departamento de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Salamanca, 2003. Available at:
http://web.usal.es/~efm/jse.pdf
13/13