Effects of Need for Achievement and Feedback on Job Satisfaction
Lydia Andrejevich, Jason Urban, and Luke Wilcox
Valparaiso University
SECTIONS:
Introduction
Abstract
Is McClelland's concept of Need for Achievement (1961) useful in predicting job satisfaction? The present study attempted to determine whether two variables (need for achievement and the amount of feedback received that is pertinent to one's career goals) could effectively predict one's job satisfaction. The study also looked at any possible interaction between the two; i.e. were those people with both high goal feedback and high need for achievement more satisfied with their jobs than other people? Participants were given questionnaires that measured their need for achievement, amount of goal feedback, and job satisfaction. Only goal feedback had a significant effect; need for achievement and the interaction between the two did not.
People spend an enormous portion of their adult lives working. Jobs help to
define and give meaning to people's lives. Obviously, it is very important
for people's happiness that they are satisfied with their job or career. There
are a great many factors that affect job satisfaction, and it would be a near-impossible
task to try to measure or even identify all of them in one experiment. The
present study examines two variables that could potentially affect job satisfaction:
need for achievement and feedback relevant to one's career goals (goal feedback).
The interaction between the two factors will also be assessed.
The concept of need for achievement comes from McClelland's Need to Achieve
Theory (1961). This theory is based on the concept that many people have an
intense need to achieve and succeed. These people desire to do well and consistently
try to figure out ways to do their work better. They are more concerned about
personal achievement than rewards, and set high but achievable goals for themselves.
McClelland believed that these people are very desirable for companies, because
their drive to succeed and achieve makes them work harder and attempt to think
of better ways of accomplishing goals (The Three Basic Approaches, n.d.) The
present study sought to determine if this important workplace variable affects
or is correlated with job satisfaction.
The second major factor that was examined was goal feedback.
Participants were simply asked to rate the extent to which they were getting
the appropriate amount of feedback at their workplace to help them towards
their career goals. In a study conducted by Ivancevich and McMahon (1982),
goal setting was positively correlated with intrinsic satisfaction and feedback
was positively correlated with organizational commitment. This study involved
209 engineers who completed both the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire
(assessing job satisfaction) and a questionnaire that measured organizational
commitment. The participants were then split into 6 groups under three conditions:
goal setting or no goal setting, feedback or no feedback, and self generated
feedback or no feedback. Their scores on the questionnaires were then examined
over a period of 9 months. Although this study did not measure exactly what
the present study sought to assess, it sets a precedent for the possibility
of a relationship between goal setting, feedback, and job satisfaction. The
present study simply combined goal setting and feedback into the one variable
of goal feedback and attempted to determine its relationship to job satisfaction.
Based on Ivancevich and McMahon's findings (1982), goal feedback should influence
job satisfaction.
Finally, the present study looked at the relationship between
goal feedback and need for achievement, and how this was related to job satisfaction.
One facet of McClelland's (1961) theory was that people high in achievement-motivation
desire feedback because it helps to satisfy their need to succeed. If this
is true, then people who score high on the need for achievement assessment
should have higher job satisfaction when they receive a greater amount of
feedback. The present study looked at feedback relevant to career goals specifically,
rather than general feedback, because it seemed that this kind of feedback
is especially suited to assessing and helping people towards success and achievement-
something that people with a high need for achievement are especially concerned
about.
One important point that must be remembered when assessing a
criterion such as job satisfaction is that there could be any number of other
variables besides need for achievement and goal feedback that are influencing
the results. Job satisfaction is determined by a great many factors, and it
would be extremely difficult or impossible to control for all of the individual
differences that exist which affect job satisfaction. When examining the results
of this study, it is important to remember that individual variability in
factors such as work ethic or optimism could have acted as confounding variables
and skewed the results.
The hypothesis of the present study was threefold. First, we predicted that there would be a significant positive correlation between the amount of goal feedback that one receives and overall job satisfaction. The second prediction was that, based on the Need for Achievement Theory (McClelland, 1961), need for achievement would have a significant positive correlation with job satisfaction. Lastly, we believed that the interaction between goal feedback and need for achievement would also significantly affect job satisfaction.
Methods
Participants
There were a total of 96 participants, ranging in age from 18
to 67, with a mean of 30.25. There were 45 males and 51 females. The average
years spent at their current job was 4.5, and the mean number of hours worked
per week was 33.7. 65 of the participants were paid hourly, 24 by salary,
and 7 by some other method. Finally, participants' ethnicity consisted of
12 black, non-Hispanic; 1 Asian or Pacific Islander; 81 white, non-Hispanic
and 2 other.
Materials
Two questionnaires were used for this study; one measured need for achievement and goal feedback and the other measured job satisfaction. The first consisted of 14 questions that determined need for achievement and 3 questions concerning feedback. The fourteen questions that measured need for achievement were taken directly from an article in the Australian Psychologist by Ray (1979). This test was shown to have a reliability of over .70 when applied to English speakers (Ray, 1979). A copy of these 14 questions and the 3 questions that measured feedback can be found in Appendix 1. The second questionnaire was designed by Winquist (2004) to measure job satisfaction. A copy of this can be found in Appendix 2. The present study compared the results from the first questionnaire- need for achievement and feedback- with the results from this second one.
Results
The data collected from the questionnaires consisted primarily
of need for achievement, goal feedback, and job satisfaction scores. The first
hypothesis, that the amount of goal feedback would be significantly and positively
correlated with job satisfaction, was supported by the results of a univariate
analysis of variance, F (1, 92) = 10.08, p< .05. The differences in the
means for goal feedback, across two levels of need for achievement, can be
seen in Figure 1. When goal feedback was high, mean job satisfaction scores
were 4.10 and 4.47 for high and low need for achievement, respectively. When
goal feedback was low, mean scores were 3.72 and 3.55 for high and low need
for achievement. The first hypothesis was also supported by an analysis of
correlation. Significant positive correlations were found between goal feedback
and satisfaction with the work itself, r (94) =.29, p< .01; goal feedback
and satisfaction with promotional opportunities, r (93) =.23, p< .05 and
goal feedback and overall satisfaction with one's job, r (94) =.24, p<
.05.
Unlike the first hypothesis, the second and third hypotheses
were not supported by the results. The second hypothesis stated that need
for achievement would have a significant positive correlation with job satisfaction.
The only factor that was found to be significantly correlated with need for
achievement was satisfaction with promotional opportunities, r (93) =.22,
p< .05. An analysis of variance failed to support a significant relationship
between need for achievement and job satisfaction, F (1, 92) = .23, n.s. If
a relationship between the two did exist, the job satisfaction means should
have been higher when need for achievement scores were higher. As can be seen
in Figure 1, the means for high need for achievement were (tense) 4.10 and
3.72 and the means for low need for achievement were 4.47 and 3.55. No clear
relationship exists.
Similar results were found for the third hypothesis, which stated that the interaction between goal feedback and need for achievement would significantly affect job satisfaction. An analysis of variance clearly showed that the interaction did not significantly affect job satisfaction, F (1,92) = 1.71, n.s. The means for the interaction can be seen in Figure 1.
Discussion
These surveys produced some interesting results. First of all,
goal feedback was indeed significantly correlated with job satisfaction, both
overall and with the work itself. Meaning, the more feedback relevant to ones'
career goals one receives, the higher the level of job satisfaction. This
is consistent with our hypothesis that statedfeedback will have a significant
correlation with job satisfaction. Feedback toward career goals was also significantly
correlated with promotional opportunities satisfaction. This is not surprising
since feedback relevant to ones' career goals has a direct relationship with
salary and advancement.
However, need for achievement (NACH) was not significantly correlated
with feedback as we thought it would be. Overall job satisfaction was only
significantly correlated with career goal feedback and not with need for achievement.
Need for achievement did share a significant correlation with a dimension
of job satisfaction but not overall satisfaction.
Some possible changes made to this study would be to try and
find another variable that might effect job satisfaction for example, fulfillment
of biological needs such as food and rest. As McClelland stated, need for
achievement is not the only variable effecting level of job satisfaction,
if a worker is tired or hungry, they will not feel satisfied, even if they
do receive appropriate feedback or have many promotional opportunities readily
available. Would feedback, NACH or hunger have the strongest correlation with
job satisfaction? Another change would be to make the feedback questionnaire
longer and ask more questions concerning the nature of the feedback such as
it positive or negative? Which is more effective?
References
Accel-Team(2004). McClelland-Achievement Motivation. Retrieved 03/01/04 from <http://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/hrels_06_mcclelland.html>
McClelland, D.C (1961).The Achieving Society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Ray, J.J. (1979). A Quick Measure of Achievement Motivation - Validated in Australia and Reliable in Britain and South Africa (Electronic version). Australian Psychologist, 14 (3), 337-344.
CONTACT US
LINKS
Ray's Short Achievement Questionnaire
Page created by Group 1: Luke, Jason & Lydia