Week 6 Assignment: Job Satisfaction Vs. Organizational Commi

Week 6 Assignment Job Satisfaction Vs. Organizational Commitmentthis

Week 6 Assignment - Job Satisfaction vs. Organizational Commitment This assignment will build on the first assignment, with a deeper focus on motivation and performance management. Thinking again about your previous and current work experiences, consider what is more important to you: job satisfaction or organizational commitment. In this paper you will explain your choice, your rationale for that choice, and how it has impacted your work performance, as well as identify motivational theories and their impact on employees. Write a 2–3 page paper (excluding the title page and reference page in the count) in which you respond to the following: What is more important to you: job satisfaction or organizational commitment, and why? How has that impacted your work performance? What motivational theory is used for performance management purposes by your organization, and what is the impact on employee morale? You will need to reference at least three quality sources in your paper.

Paper For Above instruction

In the ongoing discourse of organizational behavior, understanding the relative importance of job satisfaction versus organizational commitment remains crucial for fostering effective work environments. Personally, I prioritize organizational commitment over job satisfaction due to its deeper influence on long-term engagement and contribution within an organization. This stance stems from the perspective that while job satisfaction offers immediate pleasure or happiness derived from work tasks, organizational commitment reflects a sustained emotional and psychological attachment to an organization’s goals, values, and mission. This attachment motivates employees to remain loyal and committed, even when faced with challenging circumstances, thus fostering a more resilient and dedicated workforce.

My preference for organizational commitment has significantly impacted my work performance. When I feel a strong sense of commitment, I am more likely to demonstrate perseverance, take ownership of my responsibilities, and pursue continuous improvement. This commitment drives intrinsic motivation, leading to higher productivity and quality of work. Conversely, relying solely on job satisfaction might result in momentary boosts in mood but may not sustain performance over time, particularly during periods of organizational change or adversity. Research indicates that employees with high organizational commitment are more likely to exhibit discretionary effort, which directly correlates with enhanced performance (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Therefore, my dedication to organizational goals sustains my performance beyond fleeting feelings of satisfaction.

In my current organization, the motivational theory primarily employed for performance management is the Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). This theory emphasizes the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness as intrinsic motivators that foster internal motivation and engagement. The organization encourages employees to take ownership of their tasks, participate in decision-making processes, and develop skills aligned with personal growth. Such practices cultivate a sense of internal motivation, leading to higher morale and organizational loyalty. Evidence suggests that when employees perceive their work as meaningful and aligned with their personal values, overall morale improves, and turnover declines (Gagné & Deci, 2005).

The impact on employee morale within my organization has been notably positive since adopting an approach grounded in the Self-Determination Theory. Employees report feeling more valued, empowered, and satisfied with their work environment, regardless of fluctuating job satisfaction levels at any given moment. This sustainable motivation, rooted in internal drives, contributes to lower absenteeism and higher engagement, reflecting a healthy organizational climate. It also underscores the importance of fostering intrinsic motivation as a core aspect of performance management.

Furthermore, integrating motivational theories such as Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory (Herzberg, 1959) allows organizations to differentiate between hygiene factors and motivators, enabling targeted efforts to enhance employee satisfaction and commitment. For example, improving work conditions and remuneration addresses hygiene factors, preventing dissatisfaction, while recognizing achievement and providing opportunities for growth serve as motivators that enhance commitment and performance. Applying a blend of motivational strategies ensures a balanced focus on both immediate satisfaction and long-term commitment, facilitating holistic organizational success.

In conclusion, prioritizing organizational commitment over transient job satisfaction fosters a resilient, loyal, and high-performing workforce. Motivational theories like Self-Determination Theory and Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory provide valuable frameworks for designing effective performance management practices that bolster employee morale and organizational loyalty. As organizations evolve, understanding and leveraging these motivational drivers remain critical for sustaining performance and achieving strategic objectives.

References

• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(A), 1014–1024.
• Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.
• Herzberg, F. (1959). The Motivation to Work. John Wiley & Sons.
• Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67.
• Armstrong, M. (2014). Armstrong's Handbook of Performance Management: An Evidence-Based Guide to Delivering High Performance. Kogan Page.
• Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (pp. 37–63). University of Rochester Press.
• Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.
• Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279.
• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.