Skip to main content
Log in

The Moderating Effects of Organizational Publicness on Determinants of the U.S. Federal Employee’s Job Satisfaction

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study draws on the organizational publicness scholarship to propose that although both executive departments and independent agencies collectively are part of the federal bureaucracy, executive departments have higher organizational publicness that affects their organizational processes and employee’s job satisfaction. Analyses of federal employee viewpoint survey indicate that executive departments directly affect job satisfaction and moderate work unit quality, supervisor quality, and leadership quality's effect on job satisfaction. Public organizations' effects on job satisfaction are more nuanced than the existing scholarship suggests. Where constitutional norms allow, public organizations should promote the independent powers of work units' leaders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, R. (2020). Organizational Publicness and Mortality: Explaining the Dissolution of Local Authority Companies. Public Management Review, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1825780

  • Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2011). Dimensions of publicness and organizational performance: A review of the evidence. Journal of public administration research and theory, 21(suppl_3), i301–i319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhutto, N. A., & Laghari, M. K. (2012). A comparative study of organizational climate and job satisfaction in public, private and foreign banks. Asian Social Science, 8(4), 259–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Bretschneider, S. (1994). The “publicness puzzle” in organization theory: A test of alternative explanations of differences between public and private organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4(2), 197–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castro, M. L., & Martins, N. (2010). The relationship between organizational climate and employee satisfaction in a South African information and technology organization. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chileshe, N., & Haupt, T. C. (2010). The effect of age on the job satisfaction of construction workers. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology., 8(1), 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1955). Processes affecting scores on" understanding of others" and" assumed similarity.". Psychological Bulletin, 52(3), 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell, J., Ferres, N., & Travaglione, T. (2003). Engendering trust in manager-subordinate relationships. Personnel Review., 32(5), 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., & Aristigueta, M. P. (2016). Managing human behavior in public and nonprofit organizations. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giauque, D., Resenterra, F., & Siggen, M. (2014). Antecedents of job satisfaction, organizational commitment and stress in a public hospital: A PE fit perspective. Public Organization Review, 14(2), 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glińska-Neweś, A., & Wińska, J. (2013). Positive employee interpersonal relationships as a factor of company development. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2013(1), 13690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, S. M., & Naor, M. (2004). Linking publicness to operations management practices: A study of quality management practices in hospitals. Journal of Operations Management, 23(2), 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich, C. J., & Fournier, E. (2004). Dimensions of publicness and performance in substance abuse treatment organizations. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(1), 49–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, N. (2002). Public, Nonprofit, and Private Organizations: Similarities and Differences. In: Farazmand, A. (Ed.). Modern organizations: Theory and Practice (Second Edition). Greenwood Publishing Group.

  • Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Two-way interactions. Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., pp 17–44. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984522.

  • Kurland, N. B., & Egan, T. D. (1999). Public v. private perceptions of formalization, outcomes, and justice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(3), 437–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., & Batt, R. (2010). How supervisors influence performance: A multilevel study of coaching and group management in technology-mediated services. Personnel Psychology, 63(2), 265–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merritt, C. C. (2019). What makes an organization public? Managers’ perceptions in the mental health and substance abuse treatment system. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(4), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moulton, S. (2009). Putting together the publicness puzzle: A framework for realized publicness. Public Administration Review, 69(5), 889–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S., & Hammoud, M. S. (2017). Effective employee engagement in the workplace. International Journal of Applied Management and Technology, 16(1), 50–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. (2020). Determinants of the job satisfaction of public officials: Testing the mediation effect of organizational commitment. Public Organization Review, 20, 665–684.

  • Pesch, U. (2008). The publicness of public administration. Administration & Society, 40(2), 170–193.

  • Rainey, H. G., Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H. (1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36(2), 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 447–470.

  • Sageer, A., Rafat, S., & Agarwal, P. (2012). Identification of variables affecting employee satisfaction and their impact on the organization. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 5(1), 32–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifter, M. (2018). Understanding State Agency Independence. Mich. l. Rev., 117, 1537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smucker, M. K., Whisenant, W. A., & Pedersen, P. M. (2003). An investigation of job satisfaction and female sports journalists. Sex Roles, 49(7–8), 401–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starks, G. L. (2009). Minority representation in senior positions in U.S. federal agencies: A paradox of underrepresentation. Public Personnel Management, 38(1), 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel, B. S., & Warner, R. L. (1990). Job satisfaction among early labor force participants: Unexpected outcomes in public and private sector comparisons. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 10(3), 4–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stringer, L. (2006). The link between the quality of the supervisor–employee relationship and the level of the employee’s job satisfaction. Public Organization Review, 6(2), 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thant, Z. M., & Chang, Y. (2021). Determinants of public employee job satisfaction in Myanmar: Focus on Herzberg’s two factor theory. Public Organization Review, 21, 157–175.

  • Van Wart, M. (2003). Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 214–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verkuil, P. R. (1988). The purposes and limits of independent agencies. The Duke Law Journal, 257-279. Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol37/iss2/5.

Download references

Funding

There is no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

 

Job Satisfaction

 

How satisfied are you with:

1

Your involvement in decisions that affect your work?

2

The information you receive from management on what's going on in your organization?

3

The recognition you receive for doing a good job?

4

The policies and practices of your senior leaders?

5

Your opportunity to get a better job in your organization?

6

The training you receive for your present job?

7

Your job?

8

Your pay?

9

Your organization?

Work unit quality (organizational climate)

 

How well do you agree with the following statement:

1

The people I work with cooperate to get the job done

2

My work unit is able to recruit people with the right skills

3

Promotions in my work unit are based on merit

4

In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor performer who cannot or will not improve

5

In my work unit, differences in performance are recognized in a meaningful way

6

Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform their jobs

7

Employees in my work unit share job knowledge with each other

8

The skill level in my work unit has improved in the past year

Supervisor quality

 

How well do you agree with the following statement:

1

My supervisor supports my need to balance work and other life issues

2

My supervisor provides me with opportunities to demonstrate my leadership skills

3

Discussions with my supervisor about my performance are worthwhile

4

My supervisor is committed to a workforce representative of all segments of society

5

My supervisor provides me with constructive suggestions to improve my job performance

6

Supervisors in my work unit support employee development

7

My supervisor listens to what I have to say

8

My supervisor treats me with respect

9

In the last six months, my supervisor has talked with me about my performance

10

I have trust and confidence in my supervisor

Leadership quality

 

How well do you agree with the following statement:

1

In my organization, senior leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce

2

My organization's senior leaders maintain high standards of honesty and integrity

3

Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization

4

Managers review and evaluate the organization's progress toward meeting its goals and objectives

5

Managers promote communication among different work units

6

Managers support collaboration across work units to accomplish work objectives

7

How good a job do you feel is being done by the manager directly above your immediate supervisor?

8

I have a high level of respect for my organization's senior leaders

9

Senior leaders demonstrate support for Work/Life programs

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nukpezah, J.A., French, P.E., Dimitrijevska-Markoski, T. et al. The Moderating Effects of Organizational Publicness on Determinants of the U.S. Federal Employee’s Job Satisfaction. Public Organiz Rev 22, 883–901 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-021-00555-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-021-00555-z

Keywords

Navigation