European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies
Volume 7, Issue 4, 2022 · ISSN 2411-958X (Print) · ISSN 2411-4138 (Online)
Job Satisfaction of Social Service Workers in Penitentiary Institutions in Albania
“Alexander Moisiu” University, Durrës, Albania
enidak@hotmail.it
Submitted: 2022-08-28 · Accepted: 2022-11-28 · Published: 2022-12-28
DOI: 10.26417/ejms.v1i1.p88-94
Abstract
This study analyzes job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania. The overall job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania is associated with 12 variables. These variables are the most important among all the 24 variables that taken in consideration in this study. If these factors are considered carefully, then there will be a positive overall satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions. This study gives a message to the employers of Penitentiary Institutions that if they want to improve job satisfaction of Social Service Workers then they have to consider the above 12 variables: recognition for good work, adequate remuneration for work, feel proud of job, satisfaction from non-financial rewards, motivated to work, job is meaningful, available opportunities for promotion, exchange of ideas between superior and subordinate, job evaluated reward, relationship –colleagues, training program regularly and satisfied with available opportunities. This study covers a wide range of independent variables that significantly influences job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions; however, referring to the limited number of data, this study fails to bring a complete and exhaustive evaluation picture on job satisfaction of social workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania.
Keywords: Job satisfaction, social service workers, penitentiary institution
Introduction
Job satisfaction has been defined as an emotional reaction to the work situation (Ilham, 2009, Locke, 1969, 1976). Perhaps the best-known definition of job satisfaction is Locke’s contention that ‘‘job satisfaction is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from an appraisal of one’s job or job experiences’’ (Locke, 1976). Rahma, M.M et al. (2012) underline that “The degree of satisfaction is determined by the ratio outcomes against the desire of employees from their respective jobs. By law of nature as we have more, we want more, hence the level of satisfaction remain less. Job satisfaction is dynamic, as it can go as quickly as it comes. It is positive emotional state that occurs when a person’s job seems to fulfill important values, provided these values are compatible with one’s needs”
The penitentiary Institutions in Albania are considered by social service employees as a good opportunity to exercise their profession and as a job that is in line with their expectations (Kume, E. 2013). Given the target groups (prisoners) to whom this service is offered, it is naturally that “…social service workers must often deal with intense emotional issues and are frequently confronted with disturbing situations (Bernal, J.G., et al. 2005, Zaimi, et al. 2013).
The purpose of this study is the evaluation the job satisfaction level and identification of factors (variables) important for social service employee`s job satisfaction in order to plan and carry out the necessary intervention in order to increase the effectiveness of this service in penitentiary Institutions in Albania.
The objectives of the study are: (i) to identify the most important factors of job satisfaction, (ii).to identify the level of satisfaction of social service specialist in penitentiary Institutions and (iii) to evaluate the correlation between job satisfaction and factors of job satisfaction
Methodology
Sample Design
The targets of this study are 36 social service specialists who work in 23 penitentiary institutions. A structured questionnaire was developed using job satisfaction forces to which the respondents was asked to react using a seven step Bi-polar scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7).
At the end of the questions, a final question was added: “overall I am satisfied about my job”. This question was intended to measure the respondent’s reaction to the job satisfaction in a scale. Bipolar scale has been selected because of its widespread appropriateness of measuring attitude (Rahma, M.M et al. 2012)
The demographic compositions of the respondents are shown in Figure no.1
| Figure no.1 Demographic characteristics of respondents | |
Methods
SPSS 17.0 and Excel have been used to process and analyze the data. Dependent and independent variables are analyzed by using correlation and linear regression. Different statistical tools like ANOVA, T-test have been used to assess and interpret data. ANOVA has been used to analyze the relationship of job satisfaction factors with overall satisfaction of employees. T-tests have been performed to test the statistical significance of the parameters at 5% level of significance.
Statistical parameters like mean, standard deviations will be estimated. In order to evaluate and estimate the significance level among dependent and independent variables, the variables are further analyzed with the help of regression model. Overall job satisfaction is the dependent variable and adequate remuneration for work, job is meaningful, salary increases on performance, satisfaction from non-financial rewards, job evaluated reward, available opportunities for promotion, satisfied with available opportunities, feel proud of job, training program regularly, use skill, experience and qualification, top management support, satisfied environment, recognition for good work, motivated to work, flexibility working hours, like job, job meaningful, relationship-colleagues, collective work, team work, colleagues help, supervisors care, trust between superior and subordinates and exchange of ideas between superior and subordinates are independent variables
The regression model is as follows:
OJS = α+ β1X1+ β2X2+ β3X3+ β4X4+ β5X5+ β6X6+ β7X7+ β8X8+ β9X9+ β10X10+ β11X11+ β12X12+ β13X13+β14X14+ β15X15+ β16X16+ β17X17+ β18X18+ β19X19+ β20X20+ β21X21+ β22X22+ β23X23+ β24X24+Ɛt
Where:
OJS-Overall Job Satisfaction
X1- Adequate remuneration for work X2- Job is meaningful
X3- Salary increases on performance
X4- Satisfaction from non-financial rewards X5 - Job evaluated reward
X6- Available opportunities for promotion X7- Satisfied with available opportunities X8- Feel proud of job
X9- Training program regularly
X10- Use skill, experience and qualification X11- Top management support
X12- Satisfied environment
X13- Recognition for good work
X14- Motivated to work
X15- Flexibility working hours X16- Like job
X17- Job meaningful
X18- Relationship –colleagues X19- Collective work
X20- Team work
X21- Colleagues help X22- Supervisors care
X23- Trust between superior and subordinates
X24- Exchange of ideas between superior and subordinates
Ɛt - Error Term
and α is a constant and β1, β2, β3, β4, β5, β6, β7, β8, β9, β10, β11, β12, β13, β14, β15, β16, β17, β18, β19, β20, β21, β22, β23, β24 are coefficients to estimate.
Results and Discussion
The mean value and standard deviation of variables are showed in Table no.1. The mean value of all factors, except Flexibility working hours, Team work and Colleagues help, is more than 5.0 which is between the neutral and agree in the scale showing the average employees perception about job satisfaction.
Table no. 1 Descriptive Statistics
| Variable | Main | Standard deviation | Variable | Main | Standard deviation |
| Adequate remuneration for work | 5.06 | 0.721 | Recognition for good work | 5.06 | 0.634 |
| Job is meaningful | 6.13 | 0.824 | Motivated to work | 5.32 | 0.891 |
| Salary increases on performance | 5.02 | 0.703 | Flexibility working hours | 4.61 | 0.637 |
| Satisfaction from non-financial rewards | 6.09 | 0.986 | Like job | 5.36 | 0.843 |
| Job evaluated reward | 5.72 | 0.712 | Job meaningful | 5.82 | 0.784 |
| Available opportunities for promotion | 5.42 | 0.783 | Relationship –colleagues | 5.21 | 0.782 |
| Satisfied with available opportunities | 5.31 | 0.923 | Collective work | 5.03 | 0.789 |
| Feel proud of job | 6.04 | 1.003 | Team work | 4.81 | 0.853 |
| Training program regularly | 5.21 | 0.754 | Colleagues help | 4.16 | 0.609 |
| Use skill, experience and qualification | 6.02 | 0.762 | Supervisors care | 5.10 | 0.712 |
| Top management support | 5.21 | 0.759 | Trust between superior and subordinates | 5.03 | 0.735 |
| Satisfied environment | 5.03 | 0.692 | Exchange of ideas between superior and subordinate | 5.13 | 0.789 |
| Overall Job Satisfaction | 5.23 | 0.897 |
From Table no.2, it is seen that there is a significant correlation between dependent variable and independent variables. At 5% level of significance the correlation is 88.2%. Here, adjusted R square is 0.722 which tells us about 72.2% variation of dependent variable is explained by independent variables included in regression model.
Table. No. 2 Model Summary
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .8823a | .779 | .722 | 0.394 |
| a. Predictors: (Constant), adequate remuneration for work, job is meaningful, salary increases on performance, satisfaction from non-financial rewards, job evaluated reward, available opportunities for promotion, satisfied with available opportunities, feel proud of job, training program regularly, use skill, experience and qualification, top management support, satisfied environment, recognition for good work, motivated to work, flexibility working hours, like job, job meaningful, relationship-colleagues, collective work, team work, colleagues help, supervisors care, trust between superior and subordinates, exchange of ideas between superior and subordinates | ||||
Table no. 3, shows that the regression equation is explaining a statistically significant portion of the variability in the dependent variable from variability in the independent variables. Therefore we can conclude that it accurately explains that the overall job satisfaction of the social service specialists who work in penitentiary institutions depends on the factors that have entered in the model.
a
Table no.3. ANOVA
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 342.86 | 24 | 54.14 | 15.60 | b .00 |
| Residual | 107.52 | 11 | 3.47 | |||
| Total | 450.38 | 35 | ||||
| a. Dependent Variable: Overall Job Satisfaction | ||||||
Table no.4 shows the coefficients between dependent and independent variables. According to significant values of the coefficients for adequate remuneration for work, job is meaningful, salary increases on performance, satisfaction from non- financial rewards, satisfaction from non-financial rewards, job evaluated reward, available opportunities for promotion, training program regularly, recognition for good work, motivated to work, flexibility working hours, job meaningful are statistically significant (p<0.00) and satisfied with available opportunities, feel proud of job, relationship–colleagues are statistically significant (p<0.05). The coefficients for other independent variables are not statistically significant which implies that these factors have some impact on overall job satisfaction but these are not considerable.
Referring to the values of standardized coefficients that correspond to the variables that have statistical significant effect on dependent variable, overall job satisfaction, in Table no 5, are chronologically ranked the variables that should be taken in consideration by the decision making body in drafting policies that want to increase job satisfaction level for social service specialist in penitentiary Institutions.
a
Table no. 4 Coefficients
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
| β | Std. Error | β | ||||
| 1 | Constant | 2.346 | 0.561 | 2.32 | 0.75 | |
| Adequate remuneration for work | 0.468 | 0.231 | 0.387 | 3.76 | 0.00 | |
| Job is meaningful | 0.521 | 0.268 | 0.294 | 3.98 | 0.00 | |
| Salary increases on performance | 0.219 | 0.318 | 0.128 | 3.07 | 0.00 | |
| Satisfaction from non-financial rewards | 0.326 | 0.056 | 0.307 | 4.02 | 0.00 | |
| Job evaluated reward | 0.189 | 0.082 | 0.256 | 4.12 | 0.00 | |
| Available opportunities for promotion | 0.321 | 0.125 | 0.287 | 3.08 | 0.00 | |
| Satisfied with available opportunities | 0.156 | 0.025 | 0.203 | 2.75 | 0.05 | |
| Feel proud of job | 0.507 | 0.089 | 0.321 | 2.98 | 0.05 | |
| Training program regularly | 0.329 | 0.120 | 0.237 | 3.67 | 0.00 | |
| Use skill, experience and qualification | -0.221 | 0.107 | -0.241 | -1.11 | 0.62 | |
| Top management support | 0.142 | 0.112 | 0.067 | 1.67 | 0.09 | |
| Satisfied environment | 0.068 | 0.321 | 0.088 | 1.06 | 0.62 | |
| Recognition for good work | 0.367 | 0.054 | 0.406 | 3.69 | 0.00 | |
| Motivated to work | 0.293 | 0.217 | 0.302 | 3.05 | 0.00 | |
| Flexibility working hours | -0.324 | 0.142 | -0.289 | -3.12 | 0.00 | |
| Like job | 0.387 | 0.121 | 0.098 | -1.68 | 0.10 | |
| Job meaningful | 0.309 | 0.120 | 0.152 | 3.17 | 0.00 | |
| Relationship –colleagues | 0.341 | 0.122 | 0.241 | 2.06 | 0.05 | |
| Collective work | -0.027 | 0.203 | -0.067 | -1.04 | 0.62 | |
| Team work | -0.257 | 0.065 | -0.185 | -1.07 | 0.62 | |
| Colleagues help | 0.067 | 0.103 | 0.024 | 2.19 | 0.05 | |
| Supervisors care | -0.127 | 0.111 | -0.204 | -1.87 | 0.09 | |
| Trust between superior and subordinates | -0.129 | 0.183 | -0.183 | -1.90 | 0.08 | |
| Exchange of ideas between superior and subordinate | 0.357 | 0.098 | 0.276 | 3.15 | 0.00 | |
| a. Dependent Variable: Overall Job Satisfaction | ||||||
Table no. 5. Rank order of variables
| Variables | Value | Rank order on the basis of significance |
| Recognition for good work | 0.406 | 1 |
| Adequate remuneration for work | 0.387 | 2 |
| Feel proud of job | 0.321 | 3 |
| Satisfaction from non-financial rewards | 0.307 | 4 |
| Motivated to work | 0.302 | 5 |
| Job is meaningful | 0.294 | 6 |
| Available opportunities for promotion | 0.287 | 7 |
| Exchange of ideas between superior and subordinate | 0.276 | 8 |
| Job evaluated reward | 0.256 | 9 |
| Relationship –colleagues | 0.241 | 10 |
| Training program regularly | 0.237 | 11 |
| Satisfied with available opportunities | 0.203 | 12 |
Conclusions
This study analyzes job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania.
The overall job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania is associated with 12 variables. These variables are the most important among all the 24 variables that taken in consideration in this study. If these factors are considered carefully, then there will be a positive overall satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions. This study gives a message to the employers of Penitentiary Institutions that if they want to improve job satisfaction of Social Service Workers then they have to consider the above 12 variables: recognition for good work, adequate remuneration for work, feel proud of job, satisfaction from non-financial rewards, motivated to work, job is meaningful, available opportunities for promotion, exchange of ideas between superior and subordinate, job evaluated reward, relationship –colleagues, training program regularly and satisfied with available opportunities
This study covers a wide range of independent variables that significantly influences job satisfaction of Social Service Workers of Penitentiary Institutions; however, referring to the limited number of data, this study fails to bring a complete and exhaustive evaluation picture on job satisfaction of social workers of Penitentiary Institutions in Albania.
Leterature
Bernal, J.G., Castel A.G., Navarro, M.M., and Torres P.R., (2005), “Job satisfaction: empirical evidence of gender differences”, Women in Management Review, vol. 20, No. 4.
Ilham Dahir Sheikh Mohamoud (2009). The role of work motivation on employee performance. Master’s thesis. Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah.
Kume, E. 2013 “Punonjesi social ne sistemin e drejtesise dhe arsimin parauniversitar. Master` thesis. University of Tirana, Albania
Lise M. Saari, Timothy A. Judge (2004) Human Resource Management, Vol. 43, No. 4, Pp. 395–407
Locke, E.A., (1969), “What is job satisfaction”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 4, Iss. 4, pp. 309- 336.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Lund, D.B. (2003), “Organizational culture and job satisfaction”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 18, No 3, pp. 219-236.
Remus Ilies, Timothy A. Judge (2004) An experience-sampling measure of job satisfaction and its relationships with affectivity, mood at work, job beliefs, and general job satisfaction. European Journal Of Work And Organizational Psychology, 13 (3), 367–389
Rahman, M.M. Das Gupta, A., Moudud-Ul-Huq, S. (2012) Job Satisfaction of Female Employees in Financial Institutions of Bangladesh: A Study on Selected Private Commercial Banks in Chittagong. Global Journal of Management and Business Research. Volume 12 Issue 14 Version 1.0
Zaim, H., Zaim, S. 2013 Measuring employee satisfaction in small and medium sized enterprises. First International Conference on Management and Economics, “epoka” University, Tirana, Albania
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Mentisia under the CC BY 4.0 license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).