Purpose: The majority of research on higher education emphasizes students as customers and their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their programs. However, the satisfaction of teachers and their work is often overlooked. Hence, this study aims to analyze how employee dissatisfaction with different investment items helps identify improvement priorities.
Design/methodology/approach: To achieve this, the study utilized academic literature to develop a satisfaction model specifically for employees in higher education.
The text describes a model that is organized into six dimensions: organization vision, respect, result feedback and motivation, management system, pay and benefits, and work environment. A survey was conducted on 248 teachers using a questionnaire based on this model to determine their importance-satisfaction level. The importance-satisfaction model (I-S model) was subsequently employed to categorize each quality attribute within the model and identify areas for improvement.
The analysis revealed that employees in higher education prioritize high salaries and fair promotion systems. Surveys conducted on job satisfaction among college teachers in Europe and America have yielded similar findings. This study offers an employee satisfaction model for the higher education sector that takes into account not only satisfaction levels but also the relative importance of factors in determining improvement strategies.
Dubrovski (2001) states that improving customer satisfaction leads to higher profits and supports company growth. Previous studies have suggested that employees are crucial assets for a company, and satisfied customers should fulfill their needs (Nebeker et al., 2001). The satisfaction of employees has a similar influence on organizational performance as customer satisfaction does. Employees can be regarded as internal customers who meet the demands of the current work environment and collaborate with the business to accomplish its goals.
Teachers are vital employees in education organizations, and their contentment with the work environment is crucial for improving teaching and research quality. Meeting teachers’ needs is necessary to enhance the working environment and foster excellence in their research and teaching. Unfortunately, higher education often prioritizes students as “customers” and disregards the satisfaction of teachers in their professional roles.
While there have been multiple studies on employee satisfaction in various industries, the satisfaction of university teachers or academics has not received much attention (Ward and Sloane, 1998). It is important to note that employee satisfaction is equally important as customer (student) satisfaction (Oshagbemi, 1997a), which has led to research focusing on academic satisfaction in higher education quality (Comm and Mathaisel, 2003). However, compared to customer satisfaction, the literature on employee satisfaction is less extensive. Therefore, more research and surveys are needed, particularly in the higher education sector.
Questionnaires and employee interviews can be utilized for surveying employee satisfaction. However, frequently questionnaires are created with a managerial viewpoint, resulting in items that do not accurately represent the actual needs of employees (Comm and Mathaisel, 2000). Consequently, survey outcomes fail to effectively enhance levels of employee satisfaction. This study aims to assess which investment items hold the highest significance for enhancing employee satisfaction. A review of literature on employee satisfaction within higher education organizations emphasizes employees’ strong aspiration for job satisfaction (Oshagbemi, 2003).
Job satisfaction is a crucial factor in job performance, absenteeism, turnover, and psychological distress (Andrisani, 1978; Davis, 1992; Spector, 1997). If workers are dissatisfied with their jobs, they are more likely to have high rates of turnover and absenteeism. The understanding of job satisfaction has implications for performance, organizational productivity, and labor turnover (Dickter et al., 1996; Lee et al., 1999; Melamed et al., 1995; Sekoran and Jauch, 1978). Organizations should prioritize employee satisfaction as much as customer satisfaction in order to achieve optimal performance.
Lee (1988) found that job satisfaction is a strong predictor of turnover. It is also known to affect customer perceptions of service quality, as shown by Rafaeli (1989) and Schneider and Bowen (1985). Furthermore, Williams (1995) discovered that employee benefits have an impact on job satisfaction. The consequences of job dissatisfaction include training and recruitment inefficiencies, as well as a decrease in the client base, as highlighted by Brown and Mitchell (1993). On the other hand, employee satisfaction can lead to increased productivity, reduced staff turnover, and improved creativity and commitment.
According to Ulmer et al. (1999), employee satisfaction is often overlooked by businesses, despite its importance. The goals of higher education include acquiring deep knowledge, promoting academic growth, educating students, and meeting national development needs (Johnes and Taylor, 1990). Perkins (1973) suggested that university teachers have three key roles: teaching, research, and administration. As a result, the satisfaction of university teachers is linked to the functions of higher education (Employee satisfaction model 485).
TQM 18,5 486 education. Dalton and Pica (1998) discovered that the satisfaction of business undergraduates and graduates relies on the quality of faculty and instruction, as well as on the availability of business placement and services. Similarly, Oshagbemi (1997a) explored job satisfaction among university professors in the higher education sector. Hagedorn (1994) assessed the satisfaction levels of academic staff using multiple factors such as salary, perceived support from colleagues, administration satisfaction, enjoyment of student interaction, and perceived stress levels.
The purpose of employee satisfaction surveys is twofold: to assess employee satisfaction levels and identify areas for improvement based on the survey results. These surveys typically use questionnaires and analyses of employee complaints. However, analyzing complaints alone is a passive approach that does not provide a comprehensive measure of employee satisfaction. In recent years, more companies have begun to utilize questionnaire surveys as a more effective method (Yang, 2003a). Some businesses even adopt customer satisfaction survey models for their employee satisfaction surveys, as demonstrated in this study (Lam et al., 2001).
The SERVQUAL model is widely recognized as the leading service quality measurement model (Parasuraman et al., 1985, 1988, 1991). It assesses the discrepancy between customer expectations and perceptions of service quality in order to gauge perceived service quality. Comm and Mathaiael (2000) adapted SERVQUAL to develop employee satisfaction surveys, defining “employee satisfaction” as the variance between employees’ perceptions and expectations of their work. Some studies employ the SERVQUAL approach to conduct employee satisfaction surveys, wherein the importance values are substituted for the expectation values, referencing the theory formulated by McDougall and Levesque (1992).
In a recent study, the author examined customer satisfaction surveys in business and found that importance and expectation values are not equal. The author suggests that replacing expectation values with importance values is not recommended. Yang (2003b) also discovered that importance and expectation values are not the same. When studying service quality and measuring employee satisfaction in businesses, scholars commonly use SERVQUAL as an investigative tool. However, applying the SERVQUAL method to business can be challenging. Yang (2003b) pointed out that the SERVQUAL questionnaire design has various limitations.
Both customers and employees face challenges when answering the SERVQUAL questionnaire, specifically in regards to the “expectations” section. In Taiwan, businesses commonly use traditional satisfaction surveys instead. This study uses the I-S model instead of SERVQUAL to analyze employee satisfaction due to these reasons. The I-S model emphasizes that improvement plans should not only focus on low-quality attributes.
Typically, customers (employees) assess the quality of goods or services using various essential attributes or elements (Berry et al. 1990; Deming, 1986). They evaluate product or service quality by considering these attributes. Thus, businesses should take measures to enhance attributes that are important to the customer but have low satisfaction levels.
