Factors Influencing the Job Satisfaction:

A Study in Technical Institutions in Chhattisgarh

ABSTRACT
Globalisation has created a cutthroat competition among the major players. Organisations are indulged in tempting the customers. They are offering tremendous benefit schemes in order to win a considerable level of customer satisfaction. But this customer satisfaction cannot be compromised with the employee satisfaction as the employees play the key role and without whose effort the organisation cannot develop and survive in the market. A study has been conducted on the teachers of technical institutions to evaluate the factors which influence the job satisfaction. The paper attempts at finding out the relationship among the various factors as well as significant differences among them. Key Words: Turnover, Retention, Job Satisfaction, Performance, Work Environment, Career Development, Salary and Benefit.

1 2

Sr. Lecturer, Shri Shankaracharya College of Engg & Tech, Bhilai <saketjeswani@[Link]> Associate Professor, Shri Shankaracharya College of Engg & Tech, Bhilai <sumitadave@[Link]> 3 Reader, Shri Shankaracharya College of Engg & Tech, Bhilai, <saket07@[Link]>

Introduction: Every employee has a willingness to climb the corporate ladder as fast as he can. To prevent employees from job-hopping, companies should provide vistas for personal and professional growth. If people can accomplish their growth objectives with one employer over a long period of time, they will usually continue in the same place. Employees will definitely seek greener pastures if they perceive the environment is restrictive. A companys ability to retain the kind of workers it wants and needs has a direct impact on its profitability and effectiveness. The corporate mantra for employee retention is to have a satisfied employee in every aspect. To have satisfied and effective employees, it is important to seek and understand the needs of the corporate vision, as well as the needs of the employees, and to align them to create an environment that is synergistic and heading in the right direction. The employees attitude of job satisfaction is clearly one of the most researched concepts in the business literature. Hundreds, if not thousands, of studies have examined the various dimensions of the job satisfaction and the relationships between job satisfaction and a vast array of other variables. The amount of energy spent studying job satisfaction is implicitly based upon the idea that satisfied employees, at all organizational levels, are important contributors to an organization's effectiveness and ultimately to its long-term success. Employers should understand the need to keep employees from leaving and going to work for other companies. This is because of the great costs associated with hiring and

retraining new employees. The best way to retain employees is by providing them with job satisfaction and opportunities for advancement in their careers. This empirical research work aims at identifying the various parameters of job satisfaction directly affecting the teachers of technical institutes of Chhattisgarh. It will be helpful in studying and understanding the reasons, the extent and the consequences of satisfaction level. It also helps in designing suggestive strategies for the organizations in the face of the emerging competition with a view to increase the employee retention and minimizing turnover of teachers. The paper highlights the various concepts essential to develop the job satisfaction retention model. The paper is divided in five parts. In the first part, an overview of research on teacher satisfaction is provided and the need for empirical studies is highlighted. The second part of the paper considers the conceptual background of the employees retention and job satisfaction. In the third part, the research methodology is described. In the fourth part, the findings and suggested strategies to maximize job satisfaction is discussed; in the fifth and concluding part, attention is drawn to the consequences of the present analysis for future research.

Literature Review
Employees that are satisfied and happy with their jobs are more dedicated to doing a good job and taking care of customers that sustain the operation (Hammer 2000). Job

satisfaction is something that working people seek and a key element of employees retention. So there is a definite need to analyze the elements of employees retention through job satisfaction. Job satisfaction plays a key role in the turnover process (Bluedorn 1982). Accordingly, job satisfaction is a central element in virtually all turnover models and the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover has been the focus of extensive research efforts (Cotton and Tuttle 1986). Turnover and Retention Imagine a world where firms rigorously compete to employ the best workforce but where these skilled employees place extortionate demands on their employers. In this world, knowledge of a firm and its practices is an invaluable asset that firms will strive dearly to contain within the organization. With this in mind, the question of retaining this knowledge embodied by key contributors in organizations, namely knowledge workers, is imperative for their survival and profitability (Wallin Christian, Stipic Ivan, 2007). Retention of excellent employees is one of the most important challenges confronting organizations today. Attracting, hiring, and retaining high-caliber employees in today's labor market challenges organizations to manage talent at all levels. If organizations want to manage talent and minimize turnover, they have to identify and understand the factors which are responsible for employee turnover as shown in fig.1.

Figure 1 According to Mythili Kolluru, the new market orientation of the employee is no longer in a work for lifetime mindset. This is the pull factor. Though a survey shows that the employees give their vote to stability. The main reason for turnover is the lack of interest, frustration at work, lack of communication. The push factor is the actual culprit in employee turnover. The employee must have satisfaction of work for e.g. lack of proper delegation, miscommunications about nature of work leads to monotony. Often there is a mismatch between the work & the employee. This further escalates the tension. Often there are problems between the employee & the employer and therefore bad leadership leads to bad management. At other times there are internal problems between employees. This results because there is no proper coordination between various departments. The lack of bonding in the organization fosters a sense of resentment, which slowly poisons the minds of the employee. Abbasi and Hollman (2000) sought to determine the impact of employee turnover on organizations and found that excessive employee turnover often engenders far-reaching

consequences and, at the extreme, may jeopardize efforts to attain organizational objectives. Frank and Taylor (2003) argue that there is no issue of greater importance than employee retention and is a growing concern for many employers. To understand what encourages retention of employees, it is relevant to understand the commitment and the satisfaction factors, since satisfaction is a central field of managing human resource (Lindmark & nnevik, 2006). Job Satisfaction The best way to retain employees is by providing them with job satisfaction and opportunities for advancement in their career (Dyne Van Linn, Pierce L. Jon, 2004). Employees that are satisfied and happy with their jobs are more dedicated to doing a good job and taking care of customers that sustain the operation (Hammer 2000). Job satisfaction is something that working people seek which is a key element of employee retention. Studies show that employees who are satisfied with their jobs are more productive, creative and be more likely to be retained by the company (Eskildsen & Dahlgaard 2000). Research has shown that there may be many environmental features that can be created and maintained to give employees job satisfaction. So there is a definite need to analyze the elements of employee retention through job satisfaction. Organizations need to concentrate more towards the factors that make an employee more satisfied which will eventually affect the employees turnover.

Job satisfaction has been defined as the "positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences" [Locke 1976]. Therefore, job satisfaction emphasized the specific task environment where an employee performs his or her duties [Mowday, Porter and Steers 1982]. Employees attitudes, including satisfaction, are developed through interaction with other workers within the context of the work environment [Salanick and Pfeffer 1978]. The context of the work environment is multidimensional with the major parameters like job/task characteristics, organization characteristics, and worker characteristics [Rousseau 1978]. The interaction of these parameters collectively results in an environment unique to a particular organization and set of employees. Job satisfaction is not a univariate concept and has been conceptualized in many ways. Job satisfaction has been operationalized as satisfaction with various facets of the job, but the number of facets has ranged from five [Hackman and Oldham 1980] to thirteen [Rice, McFarlin and Bennett 1989]. Job satisfaction has also been conceptualized more generally as total satisfaction measured by either a few general questions [Hackman and Oldham 1980] or by a linear aggregation of individual facets [Levin and Stokes 1989]. Another popular conceptualization, and the one used in this study, is the intrinsic-extrinsic distinction [Weiss, Dawis, England and Lofquist 1967]. Intrinsic satisfaction is derived from actually performing the work and experiencing feelings of accomplishment, self-actualization, and identity with the task. Extrinsic satisfaction

is derived from the rewards bestowed upon an individual by peers, superiors, or the organization and can take the form of recognition, compensation, advancement, and so forth. Recent studies carried out in a number of countries have drawn attention to the degree of job satisfaction among teachers and have shown that teachers work intensification (Hargreaves, 1994) mirrors societal trends toward overwork (Naylor, 2001). Imposed and centralized system accountability, lack of professional autonomy, relentlessly imposed changes, constant media criticism, reduced resources, and moderate pay, relates to low employees satisfaction (Dinham and Scott, 1998b, 2000a; Scott et al., 2001; van den Berg, 2002; Vandenberghe and Huberman, 1999). The effects of these trends include declining job satisfaction, reduced ability to meet students needs, significant incidences of psychological disorders leading to increased absenteeism, and high levels of claims for stress-related disability (Farber, 1991; Troman and Woods, 2000), dissatisfaction appears to be a main factor in teachers leaving the profession in many countries (Huberman, 1993; Woods et al., 1997). Thus, research into teacher satisfaction is becoming more and more important because not only a growing number of teachers leave the profession but also that dissatisfaction is associated with decreased productivity (TshannenMoran et al., 1998). In terms of definitions, there is no generally agreed upon definition of teacher job satisfaction or of what constitutes teacher satisfaction although there might be some international trends such as, the notion that teachers are most satisfied by matters intrinsic to

the role of teaching: student achievement, helping students, positive relationships with students and others, self growth and so on (Dinham and Scott, 2002; van den Berg, 2002). As Cherniss (1995, p. 166)points out: People can make their lives better or worse but what they think, how they feel and what they do are strongly shaped by the social contexts in which they live. Methodology Objectives of the Research: 1) To understand and evaluate the parameters of Job Satisfaction of employees; and 2) To formulate strategies to enhance Job Satisfaction amongst the workforce with a view to increase employee retention. Research Plan Research Design Data Collection Method Research Instrument Measurement scale Sample Plan Sampling Design Sample Size : Non probabilistic Convenience Sampling : 75 : Descriptive Research : Primary Data and Secondary : Written Questionnaire : Likerts Scale

Sample Location Sample Units

: City: Bhilai, Raipur and Rajnandgaon; State: Chhattisgarh : Teachers of 5 technical institutes of Chhattisgarh.

Job Satisfaction-Retention Model (Model of the Study): The purpose of this study is to determine the various parameters of the job that most significantly influence employees decisions to remain employed at a particular organization and possible reasons for choosing to leave. In addition, the study sought to describe the importance of retaining critical employees and developing strategies to enhance employee retention practices. The concept of minimizing turnover of the employees can be understood best in the context of the interrelationship between parameters of the job and the satisfaction level of employees on the basis of which employees decides to quit or stay in the organization. There are various job parameters, which have a direct relationship with the generation of the satisfaction level among the employees, considered in the Job Satisfaction Retention Model for the purpose to check the level of satisfaction and its probable relationship with the decision to quit or stay as shown in fig 2. As the struggle for reducing employee turnover rates is intensifying, employers are putting renewed efforts in identifying talent, which is committed and productive. Therefore, there is a demand to develop an insight on how employee retention is relevant in present business context. A model retention strategy must be devised that can be effectively used to

10

plan employee retention initiatives in the organization. Since one Strategy does not fit all in the organization, there exists a need for the employers to identify the employee needs and then devise the retention strategies.

Figure 2 According to Udai Pareek (2002), the parameters affecting job satisfaction are: 1. Salary/Benefit: Salary and benefits is the most important motivator for employees, and they wanted to be paid fairly. If individuals believe they are not compensated well, they will be unhappy to work for any one. Employees see whether the salaries and benefits offered to them are comparable to those of other organizations in that area. In addition, there must be clear policies related to salaries, raises and bonuses.

11

2. Job Task/Level of Responsibility: The second most important factor for satisfaction is the feeling that the work employees are doing is important and the tasks are meaningful. Employees will be more motivated to do their jobs well if they have ownership of their work. 3. Work Environment: The environment in which people work has a tremendous effect on their level of pride for themselves and for the work they are doing. 4. Relationships: Remember that part of the satisfaction of being employed is the social contact it brings, so allow employees a reasonable amount of time for socialization (e.g., over lunch, during breaks). This will help them to develop a sense of camaraderie and teamwork. 5. Sense of Purpose: There is an enormous need for the employees to find a sense of purpose in the things they do. Even if the task is boring, it will help a lot if the real benefit of the work is clear to them. 6. Career Developments: Reward should be linked with loyalty and performance with advancement. If there is no open position to which to promote a valuable employee, they should be given a new title that reflects the level of work the employee has achieved. When feasible, employees should be supported by allowing them to pursue further education, which will make them more valuable to practice and more fulfilled professionally. 7. Autonomy: Autonomy is the degree to which a job provides an employee with the discretion and independence to schedule their work and determine how it is to be done. Higher levels of

12

autonomy on the job have been shown to increase job satisfaction, and in some cases, motivation to perform the job. 8. Work Load: Workload represents a way of managing office-based work in terms of the available resources and structures. It therefore focuses on throughput and utilization. Data Analysis
Table 1

X1 15

Sampling Distribution Plan 5 Institutes of Chhattisgarh X2 X3 X4 X5 15 15 15 15

Total 75

Table 2

Standard Measurement Scale Overall Job Satisfaction of the Institute 0 to 480 481 to 960 961 to 1440 Interpretation Very Dissatisfied Reasonably Satisfied Very Satisfied

Overall Individual Parameter Satisfaction 0 to 60 61 to 120 121 to 180

Table 3 Y1 X1 X2 X3 X4 85 81 101 108 Y2 126 139 137 152 Y3 106 105 125 127 Y4 134 147 149 172

Consolidated Data Y5 129 138 157 153 Y6 94 131 129 133 Y7 106 108 96 98 Y8 114 107 97 129
Overall Job Satisfaction of the Institute

Mean 111.75 119.50 123.88 134.00 102.63

SD 16.19 21.19 22.22 22.85 18.38

894 956 991 1072 821

X5 75 111 102 133 115 82 88 115 Mean 90.00 133.00 113.00 147.00 138.40 113.80 99.20 112.40 SD 12.46 13.75 10.71 14.10 15.46 21.44 7.22 10.50

13

Figure 3 Table 4 Y1 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 1 0.813498 0.982917 0.850544 0.902337 0.699303 -0.00445 0.200302 Y2 1 0.755881 0.909557 0.874615 0.926984 0.434865 0.211881 Correlation among Parameters Y3 Y4 Y5

Y6

Y7

Y8

1 0.819486 1 0.910322 0.781675 1 0.698181 0.802448 0.896736 1 -0.12923 0.06285 0.210636 0.389001 0.090669 0.441774 -0.14513 -0.10891

1 -0.096

Analysis of Variance (1) Single Factor (For testing the equality of Parameters) H0: H1: The difference among the parameters is not significant (Yi=Yj) The difference among the parameters is significant (Yi Yj)

Table 5 Source of Variation Between Groups Within Groups Total SS 897.54 4251.2 5148.74 df 7 592 599

ANOVA MS 128.22 7.181081 F 17.85525 P-value 1.44E-21 F crit 2.025032

Conclusion: H0 is rejected, Hence Yi Yj

14

Analysis of Variance (2) Two Factor without Replication (For testing the equality of Institutions/ Parameters) H0: H2: The difference among institutions and/ or parameters is not significant (X i=Xj) and/ or (Yi=Yj) The difference among institutions and/ or parameters is significant (X iXj) and/ or (YiYj)

Table 6 Source of Variation Rows Columns Error Total SS 4540.85 13463.1 3055.15 21059.1 df 4 7 28 39

ANOVA MS 1923.3 109.113 F 17.6268 P-value 2.7E-05 1E-08 F crit 2.71408 2.35926 1135.21 10.4041

Conclusion: H0 is rejected for institutions, Hence XiXj as well as for parameters Yi Yj

Table 7 Overall Individual Parameter Satisfaction X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Satisfaction Analysis: Parameter Wise Very Dissatisfied Reasonably Satisfied Y1,Y3, Y6, Y7, Y8 Y1, Y3, Y7,Y8 Y1, Y7, Y8 Y1, Y7 Y1, Y2, Y3, Y5, Y6,Y7, Y8 X1 , X2 ,X5 Very Satisfied Y2,Y4, Y5 Y2, Y4, Y5, Y6 Y2, Y3,Y4, Y5, Y6 Y2, Y3, Y4, Y5, Y6, Y8 Y4 X3 ,X4

Satisfaction Analysis: Institute Wise Overall Teachers Job Satisfaction of the Institute -

Conclusion The study reveals that Y1, Y2, Y3, Y4 and Y5 are strongly and Y6 is partially correlated while Y7 and Y8 are weakly correlated [Refer Table 2]. That is to say, Salary/Benefit, Job Task/Level of Responsibility, Work Environment, Relationships and Sense of Purpose are the

15

parameters that are strongly correlated whereas Career Developments is partially correlated to these parameters. On the other hand, Autonomy and Work Load are weakly correlated to these factors as well as to each other. There is a significant difference among the parameters for the teachers of all the institutions as a whole [Refer Table 3]. Hence every parameter has to be considered separately while making strategies to extend an adequate job satisfaction. For example, respondents are very satisfied as far as relationship (Mean 147) with the surrounding people is concerned [Refer Table 1]. Similarly, salary benefit has got the least mean value (Mean 90) out of the eight parameters that means employees are marginally satisfied with this parameter. If it is considered institute wise, there is a difference of opinion among the institutes for different parameters [Refer Table 4]. The teachers of the institute X4 are very satisfied (Mean 134) although salary/benefit and autonomy are the only parameters to work on which teachers are reasonably satisfied whereas those of the institute X5 are reasonably satisfied (Mean 102.63) in all the parameters except relationships [Refer Table 1 & 5]. The institutes, who have to focus more on the overall teachers job satisfaction are X1, X2 and X5 and the institutes who have to focus less is X3 and X4. Therefore, it is suggested that the parameters for the different institutes should be considered differently on the basis of both the priority and extent while making strategies for better job satisfaction among the teachers. Suggestions to Improve Job Satisfaction It is generally believed that high levels of employee satisfaction translate into increased employee commitment, productivity and retention for organizations. However, if employees

16

are dissatisfied with their jobs, trouble lies ahead. Low job satisfaction is associated with higher levels of absenteeism, decreased productivity and increased turnover. Depending on the underlying result of the study, there may be several ways to increase job satisfaction. 1. Salary/Benefit: Routinely monitor internal pay equity among staff members and recommend adjustments when needed. Reward for performance not for seniority. Establish an incentive-based compensation plan where at least some portion of earnings is determined by successful completion of objectives in order to encourage achievement. Benefits play an important role in employee satisfaction and retention like, vacation, paid holidays, insurance, retirement and educational reimbursement. 2. Job Task/Level of Responsibility: Emphasize on the understanding regarding the contributions to the result in positive outcomes and employees should feel how those tasks are essential to the overall processes that make the practice succeed. Certain tasks that are truly unnecessary should be eliminated or streamlined, resulting in greater efficiency and satisfaction. This requires giving employees enough freedom and power to carry out their tasks so that they feel they "own" the result. As individuals mature in their jobs, provide opportunities for added responsibility. Employee should not simply be overloaded with more work. Instead, they should find it more challenging and meaningful giving the employee greater freedom and authority.

17

3. Work Environment: Encourage cooperation through teamwork. Create trust by practicing open communication. Build a flexible work environment that welcomes new ideas and risk taking. Do everything you can to keep your equipment and facilities up to date. Even a nice chair can make a world of difference to an individual's psyche. Also, if possible, avoid overcrowding and allow each employee his or her own personal space, whether it be a desk, a locker, or even just a drawer. 4. Relationships: Employee Relationship Management must be adopted in each institute. It will help employees to maintain harmonious relationships with all the people concerned and helps in maintaining discipline, peace, timely task completion, which leads to higher job satisfaction and retention. 5. Sense of Purpose: Providing a meaningful purpose is a powerful job satisfaction and retention tool, one that can transform an individual to reach new heights of accomplishment. 6. Career Developments: Routinely discuss career plans with each staff member then provide development opportunities based on their skills, interests and goals. Work with each employee to help them identify reasonable and reachable performance objectives. Involve those who implement decisions into the decision-making process. Offering professional development opportunities is another tactic for retaining quality employees. Attending professional workshops, seminars and continuing education classes puts employees in charge of their own careers, helps keep them motivated and provides a support system for their skills and talents.

18

7. Autonomy: The level of employee autonomy can be governed by a most important force i.e. top management support. Moreover employees need to know when and how tasks need to be performed; they cannot work to their full potential when they are being overly micromanaged. This type of management creates an atmosphere of distrust, becoming less effective; as a result, creativity and motivation are soon snuffed out. Giving employees autonomy and trust, with accountability, is far more effective, and allows them to improve in efficiency, quality of work as well as enjoy a real sense of personal accomplishment on-the-job. 8. Work Load: Adopt workload-management techniques like outsourcing to minimise workload, taking someone on board, upsizing and downsizing. Employee retention is viewed as a process or function of the human resources department. Somehow there is an expectation that the recruiting staff should not only identify and hire employees, but that they should also ensure their retention through some sort of strategy or program. The reality is that employee retention is everyone's responsibility. Limitations Five institutions have been considered to be the representatives of all the technical institutions in chhattisgarh which may be very less. More over the mental status of the respondents have not been considered that might affect the study.

19

References 1. Abbasi, S., & Hollman, K. (2000), Turnover: The Real Bottom-line, Public Personnel Management, 29(3), 333-342. 2. Bluedorn, A. C. (1982), A unified model of turnover from organizations, Human Relations, 35 (2): 135-153. 3. Cherniss, C. (1995), Beyond Burnout: Helping Teachers, Nurses, Therapists and Lawyers Recover from Stress and Disillusionment, Routledge, New York. 4. Cotton L. John and Tuttle M. Jeffrey (1986). Employee Turnover: A Meta-Analysis and Review with implications for Research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. II, No.1, Pg. 55-70. 5. Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (1998b), A three domain model of teacher and school executive satisfaction, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 36, pp. 362-378. 6. Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (1999), The relationship between context, type of school and position held in school and occupational satisfaction, and mental stress, a paper presented to the Australian College of Education/Australian Council for Educational Administration, National Conference, Darwin, Australia. 7. Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (2000a), Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 38, pp. 379-396. 8. Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (2000b), Teachers work and the growing influence of societal expectations and pressures, a paper presented to the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, April.

20

9. Dinham, S. and Scott, C. (2002), The international Teacher 2000 Project: An international study of teacher and school executive satisfaction, motivation and health in Australia, England, USA, Malta and New Zealand, a paper presented to the Challenging Futures Conference, University of New England, Armidale, Australia. 10. Dyne Van Linn, Pierce L. Jon, (2004), Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 25, 439459. 11. Eskildsen, J.K., Dahlgaard, J.J. (2000), "Prioritising opportunities for improvement", paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Building people and organisational excellence, arhus, pp.530-7. 12. Farber, B. A. (1991), Crisis in Education: Stress and Burnout in the American Teacher, JosseyBass, San Francisco. 13. Frank D. Fredric, Taylor R. Craig (2003). Talent Management: Trends That Will Shape the Future, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 27, No.1. 14. Hammer, Ray. (2000), Winning program brings smiles to hotels employees. Houston Business Journal: 43A. 15. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 16. Huberman, M. (1993), The Lives of Teachers, Cassell, London. 17. Lindmark, Anders & nnevik, Thomas (2006). Human Resource Management Organisationens hjrta, Lund, Studentlitteratur.

21

18. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational Psychology (pp. 1297-1343). Chicago: Rand McNally. 19. Mythili Kolluru, Chillibreeze article A White Paper on Employee Retention accessed on 10/01/2009 at [Link] 20. Mobley, W. H. (1977), "Intermediate Linkages in the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Employee Turnover," Joumnal of Applied Psychology, 62, 237-240. 21. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press. 22. Naylor, C. (2001), Teacher workload and stress: An international perspective on human costs and systemic failure, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 464 028. 23. Pareek Udai (2004), Effective Organization: Beyond Management to Institution Building, Oxford University Press. 24. Pareek Udai (2002), Training Instruments in HRD & OD, TMH, New Delhi, ISBN: 0-07-0483248, ed. 2nd, pp. 257-815. 25. Scott, C. and Dinham, S. (2001), In search of the third domain: Teacher satisfaction in Malta, a paper presented to the Australian Association for Research in Education, Fremantle, Australia. 26. Scott, C., Stone, B. and Dinham, S. (2001), I love teaching but.... International patterns of discontent, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 9, No 28, retrieved on-line [Link] 27. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-253.

22

28. Troman, G. and Woods, P. (2000), Careers under stress: Teacher adaptations at a time of intensive reform, Journal of Educational Change, Vol. 1, pp. 253-275. 29. Tshannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk-Hoy, A. and Hoy, W. (1998), Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 68, pp. 202-248. 30. Van den Berg, R. (2002), Teachers meanings regarding educational practice, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 72, 577-625. 31. Vandenberghe, R. and Huberman, A. M. (1999), Understanding and Preventing Teacher Burnout, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 32. Wallin Christian & Stipic Ivan, (2007), The Subtleties of Retention: A Human Resource Management Perspective, Lund University. 33. Woods, P., Jeffrey, B., Troman, G. and Boyle, M. (1997), Restructuring Schools; Reconstructing Teachers: Responding to Change in the Primary School, Open University Press, Buckingham.

23