학술논문
직무만족의 측정도구에 대한 개요와 활용방안
이용수 4053
- 영문명
- Job Satisfaction Measures and Developing New Measures in Korea
- 발행기관
- 한국인사조직학회
- 저자명
- 이영면(Young-Myon Lee)
- 간행물 정보
- 『인사조직연구』인사·조직연구 제15권 제3호, 123~186쪽, 전체 64쪽
- 주제분류
- 경제경영 > 경영학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2007.09.30
10,480원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
본 논문은 그 동안 경영학, 특히 인사조직분야에서 가장 많이 활용되어 온 직무 만족에 대한 측정도구를 정려한 논문이다. 직무만족은 조직구성원의 직무에 대한 만족도를 측정하는 변수로 중요하게 안정되고 오랫동안 활용되어 왔으나 그럼에도 불구하고 아직도 국내에서 공식적으로 인정받고 활용되고 있는 측정도구는 없다고 할 수 있다.
이러한 이유로 국내에서 수행된 직무만족도에 대한 실증연구는 외국에서 개발된 측정도구를 충분한 검토 없이 활용하고 있어서 이를 바탕으로 한 실증연구결과에 대해 신뢰성과 타당성을 인정하기 어려운 상황이다. 구체적으로 우선, 외국에서 주로 영어를 바탕으로 개발된 측정도구에 대해 충분한 타당성을 검토하기 위한 번역과정을 생략함에 따라 그 결과를 인정하기 어려운 면이 있다. 또한 원래의 측정요인이나 측정문항수를 임의로 변경함에 따라 새롭게 필요한 신뢰성이나 타당성을 확인하는 작업도 생략된 연구가 많다. 마지막으로 외국의 측정도구에 대응해 국내의 조직구성원에 대한 측정도구를 개발하려는 노력도 미흡하다고 하겠다.
본 논문에서는 그 동안 외국에서 개발되어 널리 활용되어온 직무만족에 대한 측정도구를 정려하여 제시하고 측청도구의 신뢰도와 타당도를 중심으로 활용에 필요한 사전정보를 제공하였으며 이는 국내에서 측정도구를 활용하기 위한 출발점이 될 것으로 생각된다. 특히 외국 측정도구의 번역, 측정요인과 측정문항수, 그리고 국내에서 측정도구를 개발해가는 과정에서 검토해야 할 사항을 구체적으로 제시하고자 하였다.
이러한 이유로 국내에서 수행된 직무만족도에 대한 실증연구는 외국에서 개발된 측정도구를 충분한 검토 없이 활용하고 있어서 이를 바탕으로 한 실증연구결과에 대해 신뢰성과 타당성을 인정하기 어려운 상황이다. 구체적으로 우선, 외국에서 주로 영어를 바탕으로 개발된 측정도구에 대해 충분한 타당성을 검토하기 위한 번역과정을 생략함에 따라 그 결과를 인정하기 어려운 면이 있다. 또한 원래의 측정요인이나 측정문항수를 임의로 변경함에 따라 새롭게 필요한 신뢰성이나 타당성을 확인하는 작업도 생략된 연구가 많다. 마지막으로 외국의 측정도구에 대응해 국내의 조직구성원에 대한 측정도구를 개발하려는 노력도 미흡하다고 하겠다.
본 논문에서는 그 동안 외국에서 개발되어 널리 활용되어온 직무만족에 대한 측정도구를 정려하여 제시하고 측청도구의 신뢰도와 타당도를 중심으로 활용에 필요한 사전정보를 제공하였으며 이는 국내에서 측정도구를 활용하기 위한 출발점이 될 것으로 생각된다. 특히 외국 측정도구의 번역, 측정요인과 측정문항수, 그리고 국내에서 측정도구를 개발해가는 과정에서 검토해야 할 사항을 구체적으로 제시하고자 하였다.
영문 초록
Researches on job satisfaction in Korea have invariably used measures developed in Western countries, without giving serious consideration as to issues of reliability and validity of measures used in a foreign context. Such practice can lead to wrong interpretations of empirical research results on job satisfaction and its relationship with other variables.
This paper first presents the current state of research on job satisfaction measures in Korea. Out of 296 researches, 31 researches measured overall job satisfaction although many of them did not provide the sources of those measures quoted. Researches done in other countries on job satisfaction in 2003 and 2004 were also surveyed, using EbscoHost. Forty-five papers out of 257 using job satisfaction measures referred the sources and questionnaires of job satisfaction. Thirty-one papers used overall measures on job satisfaction. A recent trend in using measures for overall job satisfaction in those empirical analyses was explained and summarized.
The next step of this paper is to organize and present the commonly used job satisfaction measures. Some measures presented here in the appendix include only a couple of example questions because of copyrights. This, however, is an effort to improve the process of measuring job satisfaction by presenting well-known and frequently used measures on job satisfaction. Overall job satisfaction measures presented here include those developed by Hoppock (1935); Brayfield & Rothe (1951) [Job Satisfaction Index, JSI]; Bullock (1952); Weiss et al.(1967) [Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, MSQ]; Taylor & Bowers (1972); Hackman & Oldham (1975); Quinn & Staines (1979); Cammann et al.(1979) [Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire, MOAQ]; Vroom (1960) [Attitude towards the Job]; Warr, Cook, and Wall (1979); and Ironson et al.(1989) (Job in General, JIG).
Most of facet-only job satisfaction measures are not presented here due to the limitation on space. Those measures are the next research topic for the author. Discussions on reliability and validity for each measure are collected from books and papers and presented. Some are provided by the measure developers and some by users. All of the measures presented here have shown at least the acceptable level of reliability and validity. This explains why these measures have been used for decades. However, a caution is called for when these measures are going to be used in Korean context.
Although strictly facet-only job satisfaction measures had to be omitted here, facet-based overall job satisfaction measures are presented. These measures are composed of several different facets to measure the overall job satisfaction. Five facet-specific overall job satisfaction measures are presented and compared with each other. They include measures developed by Weiss et al.(1967) [Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, MSQ); Smith, Kendall, & Hulin (1969) [Job Description Index, IDI]; Hackman & Oldham (1975) [Job Diagnostic Survey, IDS]; Spector (1985) [Job Satisfaction Survey, JSS]; Smith (1976) [Index of Organizational Reactions, lOR] and the Index for Organizational Health and Personnel Management (IOHPM). Comparing facet-based measures of the kind I present with facet-only measures would be good research topic, since the researches using facet-based measures are increasingly in demand.
We may use existing measures in research in the Korean context. We may, however, try developing new measures on our own. When existing measures are used, the translation should be done accurately and rigorously, while issues such as reliability and validity of original measures need to be given sufficient consideration. Copyright is also an important matter to be considered. In developing new measures on our own, surveys and survey processes should be devised in such a way that respondents can feel
This paper first presents the current state of research on job satisfaction measures in Korea. Out of 296 researches, 31 researches measured overall job satisfaction although many of them did not provide the sources of those measures quoted. Researches done in other countries on job satisfaction in 2003 and 2004 were also surveyed, using EbscoHost. Forty-five papers out of 257 using job satisfaction measures referred the sources and questionnaires of job satisfaction. Thirty-one papers used overall measures on job satisfaction. A recent trend in using measures for overall job satisfaction in those empirical analyses was explained and summarized.
The next step of this paper is to organize and present the commonly used job satisfaction measures. Some measures presented here in the appendix include only a couple of example questions because of copyrights. This, however, is an effort to improve the process of measuring job satisfaction by presenting well-known and frequently used measures on job satisfaction. Overall job satisfaction measures presented here include those developed by Hoppock (1935); Brayfield & Rothe (1951) [Job Satisfaction Index, JSI]; Bullock (1952); Weiss et al.(1967) [Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, MSQ]; Taylor & Bowers (1972); Hackman & Oldham (1975); Quinn & Staines (1979); Cammann et al.(1979) [Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire, MOAQ]; Vroom (1960) [Attitude towards the Job]; Warr, Cook, and Wall (1979); and Ironson et al.(1989) (Job in General, JIG).
Most of facet-only job satisfaction measures are not presented here due to the limitation on space. Those measures are the next research topic for the author. Discussions on reliability and validity for each measure are collected from books and papers and presented. Some are provided by the measure developers and some by users. All of the measures presented here have shown at least the acceptable level of reliability and validity. This explains why these measures have been used for decades. However, a caution is called for when these measures are going to be used in Korean context.
Although strictly facet-only job satisfaction measures had to be omitted here, facet-based overall job satisfaction measures are presented. These measures are composed of several different facets to measure the overall job satisfaction. Five facet-specific overall job satisfaction measures are presented and compared with each other. They include measures developed by Weiss et al.(1967) [Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, MSQ); Smith, Kendall, & Hulin (1969) [Job Description Index, IDI]; Hackman & Oldham (1975) [Job Diagnostic Survey, IDS]; Spector (1985) [Job Satisfaction Survey, JSS]; Smith (1976) [Index of Organizational Reactions, lOR] and the Index for Organizational Health and Personnel Management (IOHPM). Comparing facet-based measures of the kind I present with facet-only measures would be good research topic, since the researches using facet-based measures are increasingly in demand.
We may use existing measures in research in the Korean context. We may, however, try developing new measures on our own. When existing measures are used, the translation should be done accurately and rigorously, while issues such as reliability and validity of original measures need to be given sufficient consideration. Copyright is also an important matter to be considered. In developing new measures on our own, surveys and survey processes should be devised in such a way that respondents can feel
목차
〈초록〉
Ⅰ. 직무만족에 대한 측정도구의 활용 현황
Ⅱ. 전반적 직무만족의 측정도구
Ⅲ. 요인종합 전반적 직무만족 측정도구
Ⅳ. 직무만족 측정도구의 활용방안
참고문헌
〈부록〉
ABSTRACT
Ⅰ. 직무만족에 대한 측정도구의 활용 현황
Ⅱ. 전반적 직무만족의 측정도구
Ⅲ. 요인종합 전반적 직무만족 측정도구
Ⅳ. 직무만족 측정도구의 활용방안
참고문헌
〈부록〉
ABSTRACT
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
관련논문
경제경영 > 경영학분야 BEST
더보기경제경영 > 경영학분야 NEW
- The Determinants of Entrepreneurial Inentions in Local Brand Fashion: A Perspective from Vietnamese Youth.
- Activation Plan of the Post-Construction Sales through a Perception Survey of Seoul Citizens and Experts
- The Effect of Consumption Value of Alternative Protein Products on Self-Efficacy and Purchase Intention
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!