The impact of Job Satisfaction to Job Performance of the Banking Sector (Private) employees on its organizational Performance

Table of Contents

1. Literature Review on the Impact of job Satisfaction of Banking Employees on Job Performance 3

1.1. Importance of Job Satisfaction in the Banking Sector 3

1.2. Importance of Job Performance in the Banking Sector 4

1.3. Job Satisfaction of Banking Employees 6

1.4. Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Job Performance 8

1.5. Correlation Studies on the Relationship between job Satisfaction and Job Performance 11

1.5.1. Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction 12

1.5.2. Job Satisfaction and Job Performance 13

1.5.3. Emotional Intelligence and Job Performance 13

2. Measuring Job Satisfaction 15

2.1. Sample 15

2.2. Research Design 15

2.3. Data Collection 16

2.3.1. Primary Data Collection 16

2.3.2. Secondary Data Collection 18

2.3.3. Emotional Intelligence 18

2.3.4. Job Satisfaction 19

2.3.5. Job Performance 19

2.4. Data Analysis 19

2.5. Implications of the Study 19

2.6. Limitations of the Study 20

References 21

Table of Figures

Figure 1 – Christen, Iyer and Soberman Model of Job Satisfaction 9

Figure 2 – Locke and Latham Model of Job Satisfaction 10

Figure 3 – Relationship between Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction and Job Performance 14

Literature Review on the Impact of job Satisfaction of Banking Employees on Job Performance

Importance of Job Satisfaction in the Banking Sector

The banking sector is one of the primary sectors in any nation that enables the enhancement of the economy (Praveena 2015). Banking sector in Sri Lanka is a highly lucrative sector in the country. There are two types of banks in the country, namely Privately owned Commercial Banks and Public Commercial Banks. Private Banks consist of all the banks that are operated and managed by private boards of directors and investors, while public commercial banks include the banks that operate to serve the requirements of customers under the direct guidance of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. Whilst there are many privately owned commercial banks in the country there are only two public commercial banks that are in operation in the country.

A few decades ago, banks were considered inefficient organizations as the systems were mostly manual which consumed a lot time. However with the advancements in technology, consumers in Sri Lanka are now able to perform banking activities without even visiting the bank and depositing and withdrawing of cash can be done through machines at any time of the day. Nevertheless, the operations of the bank in its front and back end are perceived to be tiresome and never ending. The success of the banks depends on how well the customers are managed through effective customer service and customized financial solutions. Creation of sustainable competitive advantage through an organization’s employees is considered to be the best strategy as one of the most significant strategic resources in any organization is the human resource (Praveena 2015).

The services offered by the banking sector ranges from accepting monetary savings, providing credit facilities through loans and credit cards, issuance of treasury bills and bonds as a mode of investment, representation of customers in the event of international transactions and many tailor made services for individuals and business owners. Thus, the employees of the banks are expected to serve for customers who might simply be an executive of a company, a farmer who requires micro financing facilities, a businessman who requires financial support for his business, an entire business conglomerate that requires an investment for a new building or a new business venture, or a person who requires a vehicle imported from Japan through a Letter of Credit. The demands the banking employees need to meet are thus varied, complex and often challenging.

The managers of the banking sector thus needs to be competent in ensuring that their subordinates are highly satisfied in what they do as satisfied employees are a key element in determining the success of the banking sector in any part of the world (Awan & Asghar 2014). Leaders who are possess emotional intelligence competencies are likely to achieve success in the workplace that leaders who are otherwise (Goleman 1998: San & O’Higgins 2012). Leaders’ non-cognitive skill of emotional intelligence is instrumental in enhancing and improving work-related behavior and thereby employee job performance which would ultimately lead to organizational success (Derman 1999: Groves, McEnrue, & Shen, 2008). However, understanding that emotional intelligence directly impact employee performance and employee productivity, provides organizations with the valuable input of identifying the right skills and competencies that are required by its managers and subordinates (Carmeli, 2003: Johnson & Julie, 1999: Mina & Melika, 2011).

As such many literature have been written on the relationship between the job satisfaction and job performance of banking employees. Wright (2009) state that employees who are considered to have higher levels of job satisfaction, psychological well-being are expected to be efficient and effective performers in the respective field of work and are likely to leave their employment. Awan and Asghar (2014) state that only satisfied employees would be loyal to the bank they work and bring in high valued deposits and well-reputed customers and this may not be the same with dissatisfied employees.

Importance of Job Performance in the Banking Sector

Lopes and Kachalia (2016) state in their study carried out on private and public banks that technological advancements have revolutionized the operations carried out in the banking sector and that competition among banks are now globalized due to the open economies of the world. The study show that there is a significant relationship between the human aspects such as age of the employee, gender, education level and interpersonal relationships and employee stress levels which also determines the efficiency towards the job roles.

Dasl and Srivastav (2015), state in their study that managers of banks are responsible of improving the condition of work environments as these aspects directly affect the psychological well-being of the employees. Nevertheless, the stress levels of bank employees are relatively high compared to employees of other sectors and if necessary actions are taken to reduce these stress levels, employee performance can be increased significantly.

On the very basic level, Jex (2002) defines job performance as the collection of all the performance of employees while at work. However this definition can be very vague as the behaviours of employees may not necessarily relate to a specific job task and job performance relates to how well an individual does his/her part in an organization full of tasks and responsibilities. Although definitions of job performance can range from being a general definition to being qualitative or even quantitative, Milkovich et al (1991), define job performance as the complex series of interrelating variables affecting the aspects of the job, employee and the organizational environment. The approaches of job performance have been on the function of outcomes, function of behavior and function of personal traits Milkovich et al (1991). However, the majority of literature has been focusing on defining job performance based on the function of outcomes and behavior as these approaches are easier and more unbiased to express than to observe personal traits (Hersen 2004).

Borman and Motowidlo (1993) separated performance into two types namely, task and contextual performance.

  • Task performance was defined as the effectiveness with which employees contributed to the organizational vision.
  • Contextual performance was described as performance that is not formally required to carry out the assigned tasks but is helpful to shape the organizational culture.

Contextual performance was further broken down into two sub-sets such as interpersonal facilitation and job dedication. Interpersonal facilitation referred to an employee being considerate and cooperative with others while job dedication referred to the aspects of self-discipline and self-motivation that is required for an employee to work hard and take initiative when required (Van Scotter & Motowidlo, 1996). Contextual performance

Elements such as organizational behavior (Bateman and Organ, 1983; Smith et al., 1983), and extra-role performance (Van Dyne et al., 1995), contribute significantly to organizational effectiveness.

The effectiveness of organizational aspects such as productivity, quality and customer service are determined by the performance of employees and employees will perform up to the expected standards only if they are motivated (Raunok & Parvin 2011). Thus a motivated group of employees is a key element to an organization to drive towards profitability and high performance (Carlsen 2003). The managements of organizations need to understand the reasons behind motivation of employees. It is often a difficult task to motivate employees as employees react differently to different situations. Thus the managers should ensure that their leadership styles influence employees to willfully contribute towards higher levels of productivity. Motivating employees is thus directing employees towards achieving organizational goals (Darmon 1974). A motivated team of employees is likely to enhance greater understanding, commitment and acceptance of different organizational situations (Denton 1991).

Job Satisfaction of Banking Employees

Job Satisfaction as defined by Hoppock (1935) is created through a combination of physiological, psychological and environmental situations that enable an individual state that he/she is genuinely satisfied with his/her job. As per this definition, although there can be many external factors that determine an employee’s job satisfaction, there can be many internal factors that influence an employee’s job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction is one factor as per these motivation theories that motivate employees in their job roles and job satisfaction of employees is closely related to an individual’s behavior (Davis et. al 1985).

Job satisfaction the personal sense of achievement of an employee on the success of the job. It is thought to be directly linked to productivity and to personal well-being. Job satisfaction implies the enthusiasm an employee has towards his/her work and job satisfaction would ideally be the key element that determines recognition, remuneration, promotion and achievement of other organizational goals that leads to self-fulfillment (Kaliski 2007).

Job satisfaction can be reflected as one of the foremost influences of efficiency and effectiveness of employees (Aziri 2011). While positive environments create favourable attitudes, negative environments create unfavourable attitudes, and unfavourable attitudes indicate job dissatisfaction (Armstrong 2006).

In the discussion of job performance and job satisfaction, employee attitude and behavior cannot be overlooked. Secord and Backman (1969) define attitudes as certain irregularities of and individual’s feelings, though process and tendencies inclined towards a certain aspect in his/her environment. As such attitudes are formed due to an emotional component, cognitive component and a behavioural component. However, out of these three components, attitudes only refer to the emotional and cognitive component whilst the outcome of such attitude is the behavioural component (Arnold et al. 1998). Job satisfaction is related how an employee’s expectations of work are corresponded with his/her actual outcomes and since job satisfaction is only an employee’s attitude towards his/her job, the components of behavior and attitude developed by Arnold et al. (1998) directly apply to the aspect of job satisfaction. Thus, job satisfaction can be viewed as a collection of the same three components, affective, cognitive and behavioural (Jex 2002).

Hackman and Oldham (1976), state that factors of the job such as Skill variety, Task identity, Task significance, Autonomy and Feedback can determine the level of satisfaction of employees and if any of these factors pose a negative impact on the employee’s behaviour, it can cause job dissatisfaction. Employees assess these factors using their cognitive skills and the outcome will determine the level of satisfaction at their workplace (Jex 2002).

Pennings (1986) state that job satisfaction can be measured based on the social information that is gathered on an employee’s past behavior and the perceptions of others on his/her performance level. This theory however shifts the concept of job satisfaction from the light of individual characteristics and rational decisions to the consequences of past behavior and influences of the contexts. Further to this, Salanchik and Pferrer (1978) also argue that job satisfaction is determined by how others assess the context of the workplace and this is the approach of ‘social information processing’.

Jex (2002) however state that job satisfaction is solely based on the individual characteristics and these characteristics may be formed through past experiences or genetic features or a combination of both.

In conclusion of the above three approaches it can be viewed that job satisfaction is an outcome of;

  • The features of a job
  • The view of another on the job
  • The employee’s sole personality

There are many factors that affect motivation as recognized by Abraham Maslow (1954) on his Hierarchy of Needs, Elton Mayo (1927) on his Hawthorn studies, Clayton Alderfer (1972), ERG model, Frederick Herzberg (1950) on his motivation hygiene theory and similar motivation theories. Job satisfaction however, is a complex feeling of an individual and cannot be gauged the same with many. Although satisfaction is directly related to motivation, satisfaction is not the same as motivation because satisfaction is more inclined to be an attitude of a person and could be associated with the feeling of achievement in either a quantitative or qualitative measure (Mullins, 2005).

Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Job Performance

Job satisfaction is a very important element in the banking sector as dissatisfied banking employees would create high turnover, absenteeism, lack of loyalty and any errors. These factors would directly affect the image of the bank and errors on customer’s financial details and transactions may even lead to the Central Bank of Sri Lanka ordering closure of the bank leading to customers shifting to competitor banks. Spector (1997) developed three features an organization can adapt to counter the negative elements of job dissatisfaction.

  • Guided by human values

An organization should be employee-oriented and guided by human values so that all employees are treated equally with respect. In such organizations employee satisfaction may be the foundation for employee effectiveness.

  • Employee behavior will determine the performance of the organization.

Job satisfaction will result in positive behavior and positive behavior would contribute to higher levels of job performance.

  • Job satisfaction acts as an indicator of organizational activities.

Job satisfaction can be used as an effective measurement to gauge the level of performance in each division of the organization and any division that underperforms can be given more attention if the performance is directly due to job dissatisfaction.

The following model developed by Christen, Iyer and Soberman (2006) provide the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance and job related factors such as role perceptions and firm performance.

Figure 1 – Christen, Iyer and Soberman Model of Job Satisfaction

Source: Christen et al. (2006)

In this model, the aspects, Job factors and Problems with Role perceptions are independent factors that directly affects job performance and job satisfaction. Job factors include motivating factors such as remuneration, job security, level of safety in the job environment, non-financial incentives, and other similar motivating factors that fulfill the different levels of human needs. Problems with role perceptions include elements such as the level of perceived career progression, the extension to which the employee is given authority and empowerment, the level of trust the employee’s superior has over him/her and the opportunities given to the employee to grow individually and intellectually. This model is quite contrary to the above features developed by Spector (1997) as the model states that job satisfaction is the result of positive job performance and job satisfaction is created when the problems with role perceptions is minimized. According to this model the essential and non-essential rewards are not directly related with job satisfaction, because employees think that their pay is well-deserved by them.

Locke and Latham (1990) developed a somewhat different model to indicate the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. The model identifies that well-established organizational objectives and high expectation on employee efficiency are the foundation for achievement and success in performance at the assigned tasks. Thereby when success is created through high efficiency, it creates a factor that gives rise to job satisfaction. When high job performance is rewarded with financial and non-financial rewards it creates job satisfaction. Job satisfaction in turn creates commitment of employees to work towards organizational objectives with high efficiency which will finally lead to job performance. This is thus a cycle and other elements such as mediating mechanisms, rewards, moderating factors play a vital role in assisting the cycle continue smoothly and the absence of any element would cause a disrupt in the entire cycle.

Figure 2 – Locke and Latham Model of Job Satisfaction

Source: Locke and Latham (1990)

In the lines of the different approaches described under job satisfaction and job performance, from and employee’s point of view, job performance is fundamentally the result of a collection of employee behaviours and various tasks undertaken on a daily basis by an employee contribute towards job performance (Cardy 2004). Campbell (1993) developed an influential model that contains eight measurements to evaluate job performance.

  1. Behaviour in relation with the job task
  2. General work behavior that does not directly relate to work tasks
  3. Communication proficiency in terms of written and oral form
  4. Level of commitment to the primary work tasks
  5. Maintenance of personal discipline
  6. Facilitation of environment for team performance
  7. Leadership style
  8. Management and Administration style

Researchers have critically assessed the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance at various organizational settings. Cummings (1970) developed three elements that determine this relationship.

  • Satisfaction leads to performance
  • Performance leads to satisfaction
  • Rewards lead to both satisfaction and performance

Mirvis and Lawler (1977), in their study proved that satisfied bank employees who work as tellers had less shortages when balancing cash and were less likely to leave their jobs. Kornhanuser and Sharp (1976) conducted over studies to ascertain the relationship between satisfaction and performance. The results showed a positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. Katzell, Barret and Porker (1952) argued that job satisfaction did not always lead to improved production. Smith and Cranny (1968) stated that job satisfaction also had a relationship with employee performance, commitment, intention and effort. Porter and Lawler (1969) state that employee satisfaction that leads to job performance and this leads to higher expectations of rewards. Carrol et al (1964) state that job satisfaction and job performance is a relationship where one factor affects the other. David and William (1970) argue that the reward system established influences both job satisfaction and job performance.

Correlation Studies on the Relationship between job Satisfaction and Job Performance

In the statistical procedure of studies conducted by Brayfield and Crockett (1955), the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance did not show any significant connection. However, from their 9th study in this regard, the average correlation between the two elements was 0.15 which indicated that job satisfaction was highly impacting on the level of job performance (Judge et al. 2001). Cacioppo and Petty (1984), developed a meta-analysis that indicated the correlation between the two elements as 0.31 which concluded that the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance is highly significant and this had been consistent in the studies that followed afterwards (Judge et al 2001). Iaffaldano and Muchinsky’s (1985) meta-analysis conducted for 217 correlations from 74 studies indicated a correlation between job satisfaction and job performance where satisfaction from pay was accounted for only 0.6 whilst, the overall job satisfaction was accounted for 0.29 and the correlation between job satisfaction and job performance accounted for 0.17 average from all the 217 correlations taken into consideration (Judge et al 2001). Iaffaldano and Muchinsky’s (1985) study although has flaws has the most persuasive study on modern researchers to consider the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance.

According to the above literature that discusses on job satisfaction and job performance, there are seven models that directly discusses the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance (Judge et al. 2001). The most relevant models are as below:

Secord and Backman (1969), model that states that attitudes predict behavior and it is perhaps the most popular theory on to represent this relationship although on the contrary, many studies that were conducted on attitudes and behavior were not conclusive (Judge et al 2001).

Christen, Iyer and Soberman (2006) model, claims that performance is the basis for rewards and in turn the rewards act as a factor to create job satisfaction. Similar to this, Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory model yielded better results than the previous, but the findings were not yet conclusive (Judge et. al 2001).

According to the literature and research presented by Praveena (2015), Emotional intelligence has a direct impact on job performance (Stein et al., 2009: Carmeli, 2003: Dries & Pepermans, 2007) and emotional intelligence has a direct and significant effect on job satisfaction (Jordan & Troth, 2011; San and O’Higgins, 2012: Carmeli, 2003). Thus, job satisfaction has a direct and favourable impact on job performance (Fisher 2003: Luthans 1995)

1.5.1. Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction

Emotional Intelligence refers to one’s ability to monitor his own and others’ emotions and discriminate or use the information he gathers to guide his own thinking and behavior. It can further be used to recognize one’s own feelings and those of others so that one can motivate himself and manage the emotions in different situations and relationships (Salovey and Mayer 1989: Goleman 1998). Job satisfaction refers to the series of positive emotions one associates with his/her job (Spector 1997: Robbins & Judge, 2009).

Job Satisfaction refers to the collection of positive feelings and affective responses associated with the job (Spector, 1997; Robbins & Coulter, 2002; Robbins & Judge, 2009).

The aspect of Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction can be justified based on the following hypothesis.

H1 – Higher the level of Emotional Intelligence, higher the level of Job Satisfaction

1.5.2. Job Satisfaction and Job Performance

Job satisfaction is perhaps one of the most prominent variables in the literature written on organizational behavior and management (Pfeffer 1994: Fisher 2003). Contemporary organizations in the banking sector use job satisfaction as a factor that controls the retention of employees within the organizations (Robbins and Judge 2009). Luthans (1995) argue that that there is a significant negative relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism. Further job satisfaction has been proved to have a positive relationship with job performance (Fisher 2003). Research proves that satisfied employees effectively perform their tasks with more performance and productivity (Fisher 2003).

H2: Higher the level of Job Satisfaction, higher the level of Job Performance of bank employees

1.5.3. Emotional Intelligence and Job Performance

Dries and Pepermans (2007), developed a study to reveal that emotional intelligence creates smart managers and employees. The samples selected for this study proved that elements that are directly related to emotional intelligence such as independence, assertiveness, optimism and social responsibility created managers with high performance. Based on this justification, the following hypothesis can be created.

H3: Higher the level of Emotional Intelligence, higher the level of Job Performance of bank employees

According to the above hypothesis that is derived, the following model was developed.

Figure 3 – Relationship between Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction and Job Performance

Source: Praveena (2015)

The aspect of emotional intelligence is used as a mediator between job satisfaction and job performance in this scenario. Studies show that the relationship between these three aspects have positive and significant effect on each other (San and O’Higgins, 2012).

Measuring Job Satisfaction


The sample that can be gathered to analyse the research problem defined in this report can include respondents from private banks in Sri Lanka. The group can include a total number of about two hundred and fifty respondents, about 10 from each private bank in Sri Lanka. The respondents can be chosen to have managers and executives from the banks so that the attitudes and emotional intelligence of each level can be measured accordingly.

The respondents will need to indicate the length of period in their respective banks as well in order to arrive at more reliable information. Majority of the respondents about 60% can indicate over 10 years while 20% of the respondents can indicate a service period of 6-10 years and 19% of the respondents can indicate a tenure between 2 to 5 years. The banks selected for this purpose too would need to imply it had had existed in the market for a long period and thus the organizations would have enough experience in dealing with a variety of human resources over time.

Research Design

There are two methods for the collection of data for any research study. The first one is the qualitative approach which helps the researcher identify the root cause of a problem by answering the questions of why, what, how. The answers sought in a qualitative study may be different from one respondent to another. Qualitative research collects information that is not in numerical form through methods such as unstructured interviews, open-ended questionnaires and observations. Hence qualitative data analysis provides descriptive data that can be used for individual level studies that find out in-depth of what people feel or think. Analysis of qualitative data is often challenging and complex because the responses of different individuals may be different and will need to be categorized into broad themes. Expert knowledge is required to interpret the information gathered through this type of research.

On the contrary, a quantitative approach, would help the researcher identify the correlation of job satisfaction and job description as the collection of data would rely on numerical information that will then be analysed using a range of analytical methods. This type of data can be analysed using graphical representation and tables of data. Experiments are usually carried out through quantitative data as they are concerned with measuring aspects. Surveys and questionnaires can take the form of quantitative data collection. For instance a rating scale or closed questions can categorize the numerical data to either yes or no. However, experimental methods limit the researcher with the possible ways the participants can react to and share their personal experiences which will give space to more assumptions rather than actual findings.

Quantitative data collection can be done through surveys with close-ended questionnaires that will be analysed to arrive at the correlation of the two aspects. This study is a research that can be conducted through a descriptive survey study. According to Kothari (2011) states that descriptive survey studies undertaken provides general characteristics of the population and provides insights on characteristics of the variables of interests in a given situation. The method takes and in-depth approach rather than a breadth.

Data Collection

Any data that is collected through first hand responses from the sample that is under interest is referred to as Primary data collection. Secondary data too can be collected for this research through findings and information that is already published for other research studies that may always not be published to find the same correlation and hence the validity of the data is highly questionable.

Job satisfaction is the independent variable here and based on the level of satisfaction gained in this aspect, the researcher can determine the level of job performance that can arise further. Usually job satisfaction can be measured using a questionnaire and the most effective type of questionnaire would be the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire and Job Description Index.

Primary Data Collection

The Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire takes a simple format where the respondents respond to the questions by writing the on the paper provided and this can be given to either a group or on individual basis. There is a short form and a long form for the questionnaire and outlines 20 work features with five levels of satisfactions. The time given for such questionnaire is about 15-20 minutes. The levels of satisfaction range as below in the 1977 Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

  • Strongly dissatisfied,
  • Dissatisfied,
  • Nor satisfied nor dissatisfied
  • Satisfied and
  • Strongly satisfied.

The following aspects related to the job are asked in the Minnesota 1977 Satisfaction Questionnaire.

  • Achievement
  • Activity
  • Advancement
  • Authority
  • Company Policies
  • Compensation
  • Co-workers
  • Creativity
  • Independence
  • Moral Values
  • Recognition
  • Responsibility
  • Security
  • Social Service
  • Social Status
  • Supervision-Human Relations
  • Supervision-Technical
  • Variety
  • Working Conditions

Further to the questionnaire, a Job Description Index can also be used to measure the satisfaction level of the job. It measures the strengths and weaknesses of each given factor and provide the areas that needs improvement. The questionnaire can be adjusted according to the information the researcher is looking for in terms of work and satisfaction and the format that was developed measures the following five aspects from over 70 potential job descriptions.

  • The nature of work,
  • Compensation and benefits,
  • Attitudes toward supervisors,
  • Relations with co-workers and
  • Opportunities for promotion.

The evaluation of each of the five factors can be carried out through

  • 1 – meaning the description is relevant
  • 2 – meaning the description is not relevant and
  • 3 – meaning the employee does not have an opinion.

In the study conducted by Praveena (2015), on the relationship between emotional intelligence, job satisfaction and job performance the hypothesis H1, H2 and H3, can be carried out using a self-administered questionnaire with a Likert scale of seven points in which 1 indicated strongly agree and 7 indicated strongly disagree, and the respondents can be asked to provide their agreement or disagreement.

Secondary Data Collection

Secondary data can be collected through various journals that have been published on the like by local and international researchers. Further to this Central Bank reports can be used to analyse the nature of the private banks in Sri Lanka and the work related features such as the period of service of employees in a bank. Further to this the financial and non-financial rewards provided by each bank can also be gathered through the annual reports of each bank.

Emotional Intelligence

The study can adapt the self-report of Emotional Intelligence of Schute et al. (1998) that includes 33 Likert-type scales to measure the Emotional Intelligence traits of employees.

Job Satisfaction

In order to measure this aspect, the 6 items developed by Tsui, Egan, and O’Reilly (1992) can be used. This is however a qualitative data collection method because instead of questions, the questionnaire uses statements with an intention of getting responses from employees on each question.

Job Performance

This aspect can be measure using the 4 items of measurements developed by Perarce & Porter (1986).

Data Analysis

Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 20.0 and SmartPLS version 2.0 (Ringle, et al. 2005) can be used to analyse the data collected from the above sources. Correlation of job satisfaction and job performance can be measured by arriving at the mean and its respective standard deviation using the 20.0 version of SPSS software. The data that is analyzed using Smart-PLS version 2.0 software can be tested for the reliability of the data. In addition to this, the internal consistency reliability can also be measured. According to Hair et al. (2011), the item reliability and the internal consistency reliability needs to have an acceptable threshold value of 0.70.

The coefficient of correlation can be applied to identify the impact of job satisfaction on job performance. The independent variable here would be job satisfaction, whilst the independent variable would be the level of job performance. This statistical technique in comparison would show that satisfaction could be determined by the other factors such as rewards and employee empowerment that is discussed in the theories discussed above. The average level of satisfaction that is needed to determine the job performance can be found out by the summation of the total scores arrived at. The hypothesis can be tested using path coefficients that indicates the advantages of the cause-effect relationships between emotional intelligence, job performance and job satisfaction. The bootstrapping procedure can be used to assess the significant of the path coefficient values.

Implications of the Study

The current study can be narrowed to fill the empirical gap by exploring the impact of job satisfaction of executives or tellers in the banks. The research can also be narrowed down by only selecting a few private banks in the country so that the data can be easily accessed and the time duration to carry out the entire process would be less.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations such as the unwillingness of employees to provide reliable data can minimize the accuracy of the research. The non-availability of the respondents when requires will also cause limitations to the study conducted and for this the data collection methods can be carried out via online mediums so that the respondents will not be required physically to collect the data.


  • Armstrong, M, 2006, A Handbook of Human resource Management Practice, (10th ed.), Kogan Page Publishing, London, , pp. 264
  • Arnold, J, Cooper, C L, Robertson, I T, 1998, Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behaviour in the Workplace, (3rd ed.), Pearson Education: Prentice Hall
  • Awan, A G, Asghar, A, 2014, Impact of Employee Job Satisfaction on their Performance: A case study of banking sector in muzaffargarh district, pakistan, Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.2, No.4, pp.71-94
  • Aziri, B, 2011, Job Satisfaction: A Literature Review, Management Research and Practice, South East European University, Makedonia, vol. 3 issue 4, pp: 77-86
  • Backman, C W, Secord, P F, 1968, A Social Psychological View of Education, Harcourt, Brace & World, New York, pp. 160
  • Bateman, T S, Organ, D W, 1983, Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee, “citizenship”, Academy of Management Journal, 26 (4): 587-595.
  • Borman, W C, Motowidlo, S J, 1993, Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance, In Personnel Selection in Organizations (N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman, (eds), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 71-98
  • Brayfield, A H, Crockett, W H, 1955, Employee attitudes and employee performance, Psychological Bulletin, Vol 52(5), Sep 1955, pp. 396-424
  • Cacioppo, J T, Petty, R E, 1984, The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion, in NA – Advances in Consumer Research Volume 11, pp. 673-675
  • Carmeli, A, 2003, The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior, and outcomes: An examination among senior managers, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(8), 788-813.
  • Carroll, S, Keflas, R, Watson, C, 1964, Job Satisfaction and Productivity, Irwin, Illinois.
  • Carslen, K, 2003, Sales motivation: one size does not fit all, Selling, October, pp.14–15
  • Christen, M, Iyer, G, Soberman, D, 2006, Job Satisfaction, Job Performance, and Effort: A Reexamination Using Agency Theory, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70, pp. 137-150
  • Darmon, R Y, 1974, Salesman’s response to financial incentives: an empirical study, Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (3), pp. 418 – 426
  • David, F J, William, K, 1970, Job satisfaction Commitment, Irwin, Illinois.
  • Davis, K, Nestrom, J W, 1985, Human Behavior at work: Organizational Behavior, (7th ed.), McGraw Hill, New York, pp.109
  • Denton, D K, 1961, What’s wrong with these employees?, Business Horizons, 34(5), pp. 45–49.
  • Derman, J, 1999, The relationship between the emotional intelligence of family member managers and business success in family business, Dissertation Abstracts International, 55: 2397.
  • Dries, N, Pepermans, R, 2007, Using emotional intelligence to identify high potential: Meta competency perspective, Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 28(8), pp. 749-770
  • Fisher, C, 2003, Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated? Possible sources of a commonsense theory, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(3), pp. 753-771.
  • Goleman, D, 1998, Working with Emotional Intelligence. Bantam Books, New York
  • Groves, K S, McEnrue, M P, Shen, W, 2008, Developing and measuring the emotional intelligence of leaders, Journal of Management Development, 27(2), pp. 225-250.
  • Hair, J F., Ringle, C M, Sarsted, M, 2011,. PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19(2): 139-151
  • Hersen, M, 2004, Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment: Industrial and Organizational Commitment, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New Jersey
  • Hoppock, R, 1935, Job Satisfaction, Harper and Brothers, New York, pp. 47
  • Iaffaldano, M T, Muchinsky, P M, 1985, Job Satisfaction and Job Performance. A Meta-Analysis, Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), pp. 251-273
  • Jex, S M, 2002, Organizational Psychology: A Scientist-Practitioner Approach, John Wiley & Sons, New York
  • Johnson, P R, Julie, I, 1999, Organizational benefits of having emotionally intelligent managers and employees, Journal of Workplace Learning, 11(3), pp. 84-88
  • Jordan, P J, Troth, A C, 2011, Emotional intelligence and leader member exchange: The relationship with employee turnover intentions and job satisfaction, Leadership Organizational Development Journal 32(3), pp. 260-280.
  • Judge, T A, Thoresen, C J, Bono, J E, Patton, G K, 2001, The Job Satisfaction –Job Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 127, No. 3, pp. 376-407
  • Kaliski, B S, 2007, Encyclopedia of Business and Finance, Second edition, Thompson Gale, Detroit, p. 446
  • Katzell, A, Barret, C, Porker, 1952, Motivation and Labour Turnover, Irwin Inc. Illions.
  • Kornhanuser, F, Sharp, P, 1976, Job Satisfaction and Motivation of Employees in Industrial Sector, Journal of Social Psychology, (1983) 145, 323-342.
  • Locke, E A, Latham, G P, 1990, A theory of goal setting and task performance, Prentice Hall, p.4
  • Lopes, C, Kachalia, D, 2016, Impact of job stress on employee performance in banking sector, International Journal of Science Technology and Management, Vol.No.5,Issue No.03
  • Luthans, F, 1995, Organizational behavior, (7th ed.), McGraw-Hill
  • Milkovich, G T, Wigdor, A K, 1991, Pay for Performance: Evaluating Performance Appraisal and Merit Pay, National Academy Press, Washington
  • Mina, B, Melika, S, 2011, Effects of an emotional intelligence training program on service quality of bank branches, Managing Service Quality, 21(5), pp. 552 -567.
  • Mirvis, C, Lawer, 1977, Job Satisfaction and Job Performance in Bank Tellers, Journal of Social Psychology, (1980), 133 (4), 564-587.
  • Mullins, J L, 2005, Management and organizational behavior, Seventh Edition, Pearson Education Limited, Essex, p. 700
  • Pennings, J M, 1986, An Organizational Behavior Approach, Markus Wiener Publishing Inc., America
  • Pfeffer, J, 1994, Competitive advantage through people: Unleashing the power of the work force, Harvard Business School Press, Boston
  • Praveena, S, 2015, Emotional Intelligence on Job Performance of Bank Managers in Sri Lanka, Open University of Sri Lanka Journal, Vol. 9, pp. 41-59.
  • Raounok, N, Parvin, 2011, Fostering Employee Performance: A Literature Review, Industrial Engineering Letters, Vol 1, No.3. Available on [06 June 2017]
  • Robbins, S P, Judge, T A, 2009, Organizational Behavior, (13th ed.), Prentice-Hall Inc.
  • Robbins, S P, Judge, T A, 2009, Organizational Behavior, (13th Ed.), Prentice-Hall Inc.
  • Salancik, G R, Pfeffer, J, 1978, A Social Information Processing Approach to job Attitudes and Task Design, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 23, No. 02, pp. 224-253
  • Salovey, P, Mayer, J D, 1990, Emotional intelligence, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 185-211.
  • San, L C, O’Higgins, E R E, 2012, Enhancing employee outcomes: The interrelated influences of managers’ emotional intelligence and leadership style, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(2), pp. 149 – 174.
  • Schutte, N S, Malouff, J M, Hall, L E, Haggerty, D J, Cooper, J T, Golden, C J, Durkheim, L, 1998, Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167-177.
  • Smith, D, Cranny, F, 1968, Job Satisfaction, Effort and Commitment, Journal of Business management, 123 (3), 151-164.
  • Spector, P E, 1997, Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and consequences, Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA
  • Spector, P, 1997, Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes and Consequences, Sage Publications, London
  • Stein, S J, Jeremy, A P P, Gill Sitarenios, Y, 2009, Emotional intelligence of leaders: a profile of top executives, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(1), pp. 87-101
  • Tsui, A S, Egan, T D, O’Reilly III, C A, 1992, Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment, Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549-579.
  • Van Dyne, L, Cummings, L L, Parks, J M, 1995, Extra-rolebehaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters, Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT
  • Van Scotter, J R, Motowidlo, S J, 1996, Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5): 525-531.
  • Vroom, V H, 1964, Work and motivation, John Wiley and Sons, New York, p.99
  • Werner, J. M, 2000, Implications of OCB and contextual performance for human resource management, Human Resource Management Review, 10(1), pp. 245-261.