Relationship of Principal Management Styles and Job Satisfaction

Halpin (1956) found out that the management style characterized as high on both task and relationship dimensions is associated with such group characteristics as harmony, intimacy and procedural clarity, and with favorable changed in group attitude. Rapport and a positive perception of the principal as a leader can improve climate and subsequently student achievement (Miller, 1969). Staff participation and leadership in decision-making is related to student achievement, cohesiveness of the schools and teacher morale (Wynne, 1980). Principals’ involvement in and concern for instruction is related with pupil social growth, morale and school climate (Young, 1980). Staff morale and school climate is closely related with effective principalship (Sapone, 1983).

Kowalski (2003), after reviewing a number of researches, reported that the effectiveness of task-oriented versus people-oriented management has not conclusively supported the superiority of either orientation. Smith and Piele (1997), based from a review of researches, reported that there are different effects of management styles in organizational context. First, a minor task that is simple and unambiguous may benefit from a directive approach while a complex work will often benefit from a more participative approach. Second, workers with little training or expertise will benefit from clear, detailed directions or emotional support while highly capable workers may resent micromanagement from above. Third, when circumstances dictate a quick decision, participation may have to be sacrificed for efficiency. Fourth, ingrained patterns of behaviors may crimp any kind of management styles. Fifth, a participative approach may soften resistance to new ideas. And sixth, events in surrounding community or the larger society may affect management style.

Bunanig (1976) in her research of management behaviors of elementary and secondary schools of CFIC school administrators revealed that principals consider themselves as consideration-oriented. Teachers had similar perceptions of the administrators and viewed them as considerate and democratic. Marra (1988) in his research of elementary principals’ leadership behaviors revealed that teacher perception of principals’ behavior was affected by how much they participated in decision making. Teachers’ job satisfaction and decision making participation correlated with principals’ leadership behavior which is also correlated with the achievement of students.

Relationship of School Climate and Job Satisfaction

The most well-known conceptualization and measurement of the social climate of the school was developed by Andrew W. Halpin and Don B. Croft (Hoy & Forsyth, 1986) in their pioneering study of elementary schools. They viewed the climate of the schools as a combination of two dimensions of social behavior: principal-teacher interactions and teacher-teacher interactions. OCDQ-RE instrument will reveal four kinds of school climate. The first is an open climate where principals have high supportiveness and low directiveness and teachers have high intimacy and high engagement. The second is engaged climate where principals have low supportiveness and high directiveness and teachers have high intimacy and high engagement. The third is disengaged climate where principals have high supportiveness and low directiveness and teachers have low intimacy and low engagement. The fourth is closed climate where principals have low supportiveness and high directiveness and teachers have low intimacy and low engagement.

There are studies of the relationship between school climate and job satisfaction. Schools with positive and cohesive climate appear to be the characteristics of high achieving schools (Wynne, 1980). Teacher morale is consistently associated with schools climate, i.e., teachers who expresses satisfaction with schools tend to perceive school climate as more positive (Kalis, 1980). If the teachers are motivated, the effect is significant in the climate of the schools (Berson, 1993).

Climate is a correlate of work, motivation and productivity (Reichers & Schneider, 1990). Different dimensions of climate are reported to directly affect motivation (Kopelman et. al., 1990). Climate seems to have a greater effect on job satisfaction than on performance (Scott et. al., 1981). Climate fosters performance and job satisfaction (Davis & Newstrom, 1985).

Smith and Piele (1997), based from a review of researches, reported that a positive school culture and climate is associated with higher student motivation and achievement, increased teacher collaboration, and improved attitudes among teachers toward their jobs.

Antiojo (2007) mentioned Pama (2001) who made a study in Ilo-ilo and Angco (1999) who made a study at Davao City that showed a strong correlation between positive school climate and job satisfaction of teachers. Antiojo’s research (2007) showed a strong positive relationship between positive school climate and job satisfaction. 

Relationship of Characteristics of Teachers with the Job Satisfaction of Teachers

Gender

Women might be expected to be more satisfied with their jobs than men because their lower expectations are consistent with the female role in the home (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998; Hopkins, 1983). Gregoria (1978) investigated the motivational-hygiene elements of satisfaction in the morale state of personnel of the Manufacturing Company in Metro Manila. She found out that the overall employees’ morale is highly positive and the age, tenure, marital status and level of employment, but not sex, of the subjects influence their morale states.

In the case of teachers, women consider teaching and having family a convenient and comfortable situation (Martires, 2009). Some studies found higher levels of job satisfaction by females (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Hodson, 1989; Kelly, 1989) but there are also investigations that found out higher job satisfaction by males (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Friessen, et. al., 1983).

Scott, Swortzel & Taylor (2005) made a study to determine what demographic factors were related to the level of job satisfaction of Extension Agents. It was found out that there is a significant relationship that existed between job satisfaction constructs and the demographic factors of gender and race.

Barrows and Wesson (2005), on their research on the job satisfaction among public and private sector professionals in Ontario, Canada, found out that female respondents are significantly less satisfied with their coworkers, operating conditions, contingent rewards, opportunities for promotion, and the training opportunities provided by their employers.

Mabutas (2000) made a study on the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance of the personnel of CIDO. He found out that the level of job satisfaction of the said personnel falls under the category of satisfactory – high level of satisfaction; age, gender, civil status, educational attainment and designation did not cause significant differences in the level of job satisfaction of the personnel; demographics did not caused any significant difference in the level of job performance of the personnel; and, there exists a very high positive correlation between job satisfaction and job performance.

Age

Early findings of the relationship between age and job satisfaction indicate a U-shaped or curvilinear relationship. This means that job satisfaction in younger age groups declines and improves in older employees (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998; Gruneberg, 1979). Job satisfaction typically increases with age because old workers have realistic view of work and life (Drafke, 2008; Clark, et. al., 1996). Age and work experience were found to correlate significantly with job satisfaction and those belonging to the older bracket and who have longer work experience tend to be more satisfied (Martires, 2009; Lee & Tarce, 1981). Employees begin work with unrealistic expectations about what they will get out of their jobs. They endure the first decade of work, gradually becoming more discouraged. Then, employees moderate their expectations to fit their current state of employment and begin to see their jobs more positively, resulting in higher level of job satisfaction (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998;  Organ & Hamner, 1982). Older, married and experienced workers were found to be more satisfied than were young, unmarried and less experienced workers (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998; Khalaque & Rahman, 1987).

In the field of education, younger males reported higher degrees of job satisfaction than did female academics of the same group while female academics older than 35 years old reported higher levels of job satisfaction than did their male peers (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Sloane & Ward, 2001). In their study among Turkey educators, Bilge, et. al. (2007), they got mixed results where some researchers found a significant correlation between age and job satisfaction whereas others did not.

Old teachers, due to their security, status, financial stability and competence are more stable compared to younger teachers who are concerned with their certification and salary (Sagor, 2003; Dornyei, 2001; Bairagee, 2008).

Gerdtham & Johannesson (2002) investigates the relationship between happiness and socio-economic variables of 5,000 individuals in Sweden. The results show that happiness increases with income, health and education, and decreases with unemployment, urbanization, being single and male gender. The relationship between age and happiness is U-shaped, with happiness being lowest in the age group 45 to 64 years old.

Marital Status

Civil status, educational attainment and living accommodations were found out to be string predictors of job satisfaction (Martires, 2009; Cabigao, 1980). Stressors like marital problems and child care affected female academic’s job satisfaction more so than such stressors did to their male colleagues (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Tack & Patitu, 1993). Bilge, et. al. (2007), found mixed results on the relationships of civil status and job satisfaction. One research shows married academics and those with children to have higher degrees of job satisfaction than did academics who where single as well as those who has no children, and another research reported that single academics had higher degrees of job satisfaction than did their married counterparts. Bilge, et. al. (2007) found out too that single persons have lower satisfaction regarding administrative style, opportunities for advancement and physical conditions. Peiro (2002) examined the relationships between socio-economic conditions and happiness or satisfaction on individuals in 15 countries. In agreement with other studies, age, health and marital status are strongly associated with happiness and satisfaction. In seeming contrast with other studies, unemployment does not appear to be associated with happiness although it is clearly associated with satisfaction. Income is strongly associated with satisfaction.

Herzberg et. al. (1957) identified several characteristics of satisfied and dissatisfied workers. They indicated that morale is high when people first start their jobs then decreases during the next few years and remains at a relatively low level until workers are in their late twenties or early thirties. At that age, job satisfaction levels begin to rise and continue to rise through the remainder of the workers’ careers. Some studies reviewed by Herzberg et. al. (1957) gave no simple conclusions about the differences in the area of gender, educational level, marital status, number of dependents, number of previous occupations, and ethnicity.

According to Osias (2005), the average number of dependents of parents in the Philippines is three. This means that teachers are supporting economically three persons. In spite of this reality, Barcelo (1998) found out that teachers’ adequacy and effectiveness in classroom strategies do not differ as to number of children, age, sex, civil status, educational attainment, and number of years of teaching.

Length of Service

Seniority affects job satisfaction differently for different people. Sometimes satisfaction increases as people learn to perform more proficiently. For others, satisfaction decreases due to boredom or due to the realization that their goals and careers are not advancing as they had hoped (Drafke & Kossen, 2002; Tremblay, et. al., 1995). Cano & Miller (1992) found out that the teachers’ age, years in current position, total years teaching and degree were not significantly related to overall job satisfaction. In general, both males and females were equally satisfied with their jobs. A similar study was done by Castillo et. al. (1999) and found similar findings. Their findings are contrary to the findings of Berns (1989) who found out that the age of teachers and those with master degree are more satisfied in their work and Grady (1985) who found out years of teaching is significantly related with job satisfaction.

La Madrid (1996) made a similar research on the relationship among job satisfaction, work values and job performance. She found out that the personnel were satisfied with their jobs; the variables of sex, age, civil status, educational attainment and sector were found not to be significantly related to job satisfaction, although designation and year of service were; the personnel were rated very satisfactory in their job performance; and, the correlation between job satisfaction and work values and job performance were high; between job satisfaction and job performance, moderately high.

Corpuz (1997) found out that the performance of Social Science teachers in public schools do not differ as to age, sex, civil status and number of years of teaching. In a research by Chiumento (2007) about happiness and work, she found out the following: (1) people are happiest working for smaller organizations between 20 to 100 staff; (2) happiness declines the longer people stay with an organization; (3) happiness also declines as people stay longer in the same position; (4) there is no difference in happiness among those working in public or private organizations; (5) those occupying higher positions are more happy than those who are in rank and file; (6) people who work part-time are happier than those who work full-time; (7) women feel more job satisfaction than men; and, (8) those aged 55 and above are happier than their younger age workers.

Educational Attainment

Studies found different results on the role of educational attainment to work. One study showed a weak relationship between education and motivation at work (Antwi, 2004; Bairagee, 2008) while other research disproved it (Nath, 2002; Bairagee, 2008). Scott et. al. (2005) in their review of related literature discovered the following: (1) Regarding age, intrinsic job satisfaction was higher for those in the age groups of 23-33 and 46-50; (2) Regarding years of teaching, some found significant relationships while others no significant relationships; (3) Regarding education, some discovered a relationship between educational level and job satisfaction while others found no such relationship; (4) Regarding marital status, the reviewed literature found out that married workers are more satisfied with their jobs than those who were single; (5) Regarding gender, the literature is divergent where some studies indicate that females have higher levels of job satisfaction, while others indicate that males do.

It was found out that a teacher’s satisfaction with her work depends on his/her competence which relates also the educational attainment of teachers (Johnson et. al., 2005). The research by the Colorado Pay Equity Commission (2007) mentioned educational attainment, along with work and occupational differences, previous work experience, and negotiation practices, as strategies to close the pay gap among those with higher and lower pays.

Monthly Salary

Martires (2009) quoted Alano’s research (1991) where it revealed that most employees work because of three major reasons: (1) for service to others; (2) challenging work environment; and, (3) salary and benefits that come with the work. Dajoc (1991) also found out that workers expressed that absence of good pay would be good reason to change jobs. Padua (1991) found out that money motivate secondary school educators in both public and private institutions perceived to be a means to survive and to be a source of authority. Setiawan (1975) found out that the most important job morale factor was salary.

In the context of teachers, it was found out that there is a significant relationship between academic job satisfaction and wages (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Heller, et. al., 1993). Drafke and Kossen (2002) identified money as a motivator because of five reasons: money is a traditional and societal expectation as a reward for those who work; it is tangible and a solid reward perceptible to all; it is objective, knowable and easily measurable; it is symbolic of success and achievement; and, it is better compared to subjective rewards.

Easterlin (2006) found out that in the United States happiness rises slightly, on average, from ages 18 to midlife, and declines slowly thereafter. The slight rise of happiness through midlife is due chiefly to growing satisfaction with one’s family life and work, which together more than offset decreasing satisfaction with health. His research is consistent with a “bottom up” model in which happiness is the net outcome of both objective and subjective factors in various life domains that include financial situation, family life, health and work.

Garcia (1982) found out that majority of the teachers in the Division of Cebu City are emotionally stable and their common problems are low salary, lack of school leadership, and financial difficulties.

Job Status

There is a significant relationship between academic job satisfaction and permanence of employment (Bilge, et. al., 2007; Bertz & Judge, 1994). Blue collar “blues” have been referred to the feelings of laborers (manufacturing and construction workers) about the absence of opportunity to progress to desired higher level jobs that would provide them with opportunities for creativity, responsibility, control and other characteristics related to job satisfaction (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998; Sheppard & Herrick, 1972). Bilge, et. al. (2007) noted that for white collar workers, intrinsic factors are more important but for blue-collar workers, extrinsic factors are more important. They also noted that for scientists, success is the most motivating factor but for engineers, low pay and organizational policies are highly important affecting job satisfaction (Hampton, 1972).

Akpa (2006) discovered that job or employment status has a positive effect on the workers of Northern Luzon Adventist College. Maslow identified safety needs is one of the motivating factors that give a feeling of security, stability and protection from physical and economic harm and against deprivation in the future (Champoux, 2000; Nickels et. al., 1996).

Job Satisfaction of Teachers

In reviewing the literature on job satisfaction, there are numerous studies in the United States that addressed job satisfaction of students, teachers, staff and principals serving in the education context (Berwick, 1992; Santos & Eddy, 1992; Singh & Green, 1995; Leckie & Brett, 1997; Brewer & Clippard, 2002; Ernst, 1998; Robertson & Bean, 1998).

Definition of Job Satisfaction

Hoppock (1935) defined job satisfaction as any combination of psychological, physiological and environmental circumstances that causes a person truthfully to say, ‘I am satisfied with my job. Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as an emotional reaction that results from the perception that one’s job fulfills or allows the fulfillment of one’s important job values, providing and to the degree that those values are congruent with one’s needs. Hackman & Oldham (1980) looks at job satisfaction as a result of some aspects of job characteristics which includes skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy in doing the task, and feedback of supervisors on the task done. These aspects or characteristics of the job result in four kinds of satisfaction: (1) internal work motivation (the work itself is rewarding and satisfying); (2) growth satisfaction (experience of personal learning and growth at work); (3) general satisfaction (the worker decide not to quit the job and feels satisfied); and, (4) work effectiveness (satisfaction on the quantity and quality of goods and services produced).

Job satisfaction has been a historical by-product of the Human Relations Movement which studied the behavior of people in groups, particularly the workplace groups. It originated in the 1920’s Hawthorne studies which examined the effects of social relations, motivation and employee satisfaction on factory productivity. This movement has the following principles: social aspects take precedence over functional organizational structures; communication is two-way; and, good leadership is needed to communicate goals and to ensure effective decision making (Davis, 1972; Schermerhon et. al., 1985; Greenberg, 1994; Greenberg & Baron, 1995; Hanson, 1996; Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998).

Job Satisfaction Theories

According to Scitovsky (1992), modern economics and psychology originated with the rationalist philosophers of the 18^th century and especially through Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) (Russel, 1945). At first, the psychologists chose “instinct” as a starting point for studying motivation, but later replaced it with the concept of the “drive” based on biological disturbances (hunger, thirst, pain, sex, etc.). But since biological “drives” cannot explain all human behaviors, “learned drives” were added to the biological disturbances. But even these biological or learned drives cannot explain all behavior that a more general framework of motivation is needed (Franken, 2007).

Maslow’ Hierarchy of Needs. Abraham H. Maslow, founder of humanistic psychology, used “human needs” as the starting point for studying motivation (http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Abraham_Maslow). Maslow’s theory assumes that individual’s need affect behavior in accordance with two basic principles. The first is the deficit principle where people act to satisfy deprived needs where satisfaction deficit exists. The second is the progression principle where needs exist in a strictly ordered hierarchy of potency. A need at any one level only becomes activated once the next lower-level has been satisfied (Schermerhonn, 1985). These needs, from lower to higher, are physiological needs, safety needs, needs of love, affection and belonging, need for self-esteem, and needs for self-actualization.

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. In 1959, Frederick Herzberg distilled Maslow’s motivation theory in the context of work. Herzberg proposed the Motivation-Hygiene Theory, also known as the Two-Factor theory of job satisfaction. According to his theory, people are influenced by two factors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Herzberg): hygiene factors and motivator factors.

Hygiene factors are seen as producing short-term changes in job attitudes and had no effect on employee motivation. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory is seen to be one of the most influential models for explaining the psychology of human motivation at work (Schermerhonn, 1985). Hygiene factors in the job are related to the context, circumstances and conditions surrounding the job (Gomez-Mejia, 2002). Hygiene factors or job comfort factors are extrinsic in nature (Chandan, 2001; Massie, 1979). According to Herzberg, hygiene factors are not motivators, but dissatisfiers. When inadequately met, insufficient or absent, they dissatisfy employees or lead to job dissatisfaction or discomfort; but will not motivate or contribute to job satisfaction if they are adequately met or present (Nelson & Quick, 2005; Nickels, et. al., 1996). These factors do not produce growth (Chandan, 2001). Their presence does not ensure high level job satisfaction and motivation to work but simply prevents dissatisfaction and maintains the status quo or neutral state (Akpa, 2006). These factors can not stimulate psychological growth or human development (Nelson & Quick, 2005). Hygiene factors or job comfort involves the environmental circumstances of the job (Bilge, et. al., 2007). Greenberg & Baron (1995) looks at the hygiene factors as the organizational determinants of job satisfaction. They include pay, supervision, nature and level of work, working conditions, relationships. Hygiene factors are necessary at work or else they will serve as a significant distraction to employees (Newstrom & Davis, 1997). They should not be lacking, underprovided or ignored in the workplace (Griffin, 1990) for they are at least a minimum degree provided and enforced by the law of the land. In the context of the poor countries like the Philippines where employment is scarce or limited, so many organizations still provided lower provisions for the hygiene or comfort of employees. Andres (1992) noted that most of the strikes and production slowdown of factory workers in the Philippines are due to poor working conditions, inequitable or low salary, lack of benefits and poor supervision. Even the Bible gave instructions to employers for the benefits of the workers. The qualities of good employers emphasized are prompt payment of wages (Deuteronomy 24:15, James 5:4), consideration for workers (Job 31:13-14), refraining from threats (Ephesians 6:9), and just dealings and payment of proper salary rates (Colossians 4:1, Malachi 3:5, Luke 3:14).

            Motivation factors are directly related to both the content of the job or associated with the work itself and what the employee actually does on the job. They are intrinsic in nature and employees find to be intrinsically rewarding (Akpa, 2006). Motivation factors at work cause job satisfaction and motivate employees to perform better or put forth superior effort (Herzberg, 1973). The absence of these factors from a work situation will not lead to dissatisfaction; it only makes them feel neutral toward their job and demotivated to perform better well (Champoux, 2000; Chandan, 2001; Nelson & Quick, 2005). Motivators encourage an employee to strive to do his best in his job, challenge people to grow, contribute to the work environment, and invest himself in the organization (Nelson & Quick, 2005). Herzberg used the term “motivators” because they have a positive effect on job satisfaction, often resulting to an increase output (Hersey & Blanchard, 1988). These factors which include achievement, recognition for achievement, work itself, responsibility, advancement and possibility for growth provide opportunities for personal or inner satisfaction (Cornelius, 1999) and are a source of personal growth (Attwood, 1987). The Bible gave instructions some attitudes that Christian should have at work. Some of the virtues required of workers are honesty (Leviticus 19:35-36, Deuteronomy 25:15, Nehemiah 5:12), respect for authority (1 Timothy 6:1) and hard work (Genesis 3:19, Proverbs 14:23, Ecclesiastes 9:10, Ephesians 4:28). Herzberg looks at motivating factors as connected with the essence of the job which increases performance in the job. These motivational factors are associated with the employee’s need for personal growth. These motivating factors include the job itself, success, recognition and appreciation at the job, taking responsibility, and possibilities for advancement (Bilge, et al., 2007).

Spector’s Nine-Facet Theory of Job Satisfaction. Paul E. Spector (1985) developed the Nine-Facet theory of job satisfaction specifically for human service, public and nonprofit organizations. Locke (1976) discovered a total of 3,350 articles written about job satisfaction in 1972 and it went up to 4,793 in 1985 (Spector, 1985). During that time, the focus of job satisfaction are factories and business organizations, and little amount of research had been written with human services. The instruments commonly used are the Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire designed for business organizations (Spector, 1985). Spector (1985) designed the Job Satisfaction Survey instrument to fill-up the gap for investigating job satisfaction of those in the human services. Spector (1985) looks at job satisfaction as a cluster of evaluative feelings about the job that includes (1) pay, (2) fringe benefits, (3) supervision, (4) co-workers, (5) communication, 6) work conditions, (7) nature of work itself, (8) contingent rewards, and (9) opportunity for promotion. The first six facets deal with Herzberg’s hygiene factors, while the last three facets deal with Herzberg’s motivation factors.

Factors of Job Satisfaction

            Paul E. Spector (1997) provided nine facets or factors of job satisfaction. These nine factors are pay, benefits, contingent rewards, opportunity for promotion, communication, co-workers, operating conditions, supervision, and the work itself.

1.      Pay. Research has found that satisfaction is enhanced by the use of pay systems believed to be fair (Miceli & Lane, 1991; Berkowitz et. al., 1987). Morice & Murray (2003) found out three things researches on job satisfaction and pay. First, although most teachers are attracted to the profession by the intrinsic satisfaction of working with students, research has found that teachers cite low pay as one of the major reasons for leaving (quoted Goodlad, 1984; Harris and Associates, 1995). Second, though teachers derived satisfaction from seeing students learn more, but they also valued salary (quoted from Heneman, 1998). Third, though pay did not have an appreciable effect on the way teachers work, monetary incentives do affect recruitment, retention and attendance (quoted from Jacobson, 1995).

2.      Fringe Benefits. Avila (1989) identified the job satisfaction factors of agricultural extension workers out of the extension work in Catanduanes. She found out that the degree of satisfaction of the workers was affected by their personal and occupational characteristics except fringe benefits; responsibility, nature of work and total life space were the highest ranking satisfaction factors of the extension workers; majority like and were satisfied with their present job; and, the workers’ suggestions were centered on salary, promotion, advancement, scholarship, personnel development and fringe benefits among others. On the other hand, Arbolares (1999) studied the perception of teachers on factors relevant to their job satisfaction; to find out if there is a significant statistical correlation between teachers’ rating on job satisfaction factors (working conditions, teachers’ welfare, supervision of instruction, administrator-teacher relationship, teacher-teacher relationship, teacher-pupil relationship, teacher-parent/community relationship) and their ratings on teaching efficiency as given by the school administrators. She found out that there was a moderate correlation between the teachers’ perception on job satisfaction and their teaching efficiency. Her study concluded that the level of job satisfaction as perceived by teachers is not as high as expected and their feeling of satisfaction was affected by their dissatisfaction on teachers’ welfare.

3.      Supervision. This refers to the perceived quality of supervision. Studies have determined that satisfaction tends to be higher when people believe their supervisors are competent, have their best interest in mind, and treat them with dignity and respect and when they have opportunities to communicate with their supervisors (Tempre, et al., 1985; Callan, 1993). Included in the style of supervision is the decentralization of power a certain degree is given to teachers to make decisions for their own work (Locke & Schweiger, 1979).

4.      Co-workers. Barth (2006) concluded that relationship has a greater influence on the character and quality of the school and on student accomplishments than anything else describing four options for relationships: parallel play or “living is separate caves”, adversarial, congenial, and collegial. The indicators of collegial relationship include talking about teaching experiences, sharing craft knowledge, observing one another while teaching, and rooting for another’s success. In the study of Calera (2000) among public elementary school teachers, two of the most satisfying in their work are students and coworkers relationship. She found out the following as contributing to the job satisfaction of teachers: administration, curriculum, job tasks, coworkers, communication, school building, supplies and maintenance. She also found the following to be cause of stress among teachers: student-related issues, social factors, public pressure, professional image, and lack of administrators’ recognition and role in government.

5.      Communication. A study on teacher attitude indicates the importance of communication skill which encompasses the teacher characteristics (http://www.valdosta.peachnetEdu-whuitt/pay702/teacher/char.Htm, 2001). David (2001) defined communication as the process of transferring or transmitting views and information to and fro. It refers to the openness in the communication system which provides the avenue to teachers and administrators for brainstorming and feed-backing.

6.      Work Conditions. Handley (2002) looks at the small teacher-student ratio as beneficial and satisfying to the teacher sue to the ease of establishing successful classroom community, more time for individual students, fewer discipline problems, personalized assessment, more opportunities to maximize best teaching practices. According to Sundstrom (1986) job satisfaction is positively related to pleasant working conditions. Jacuis (1989) found out that workers gain personal satisfaction when working conditions are worthwhile and safe.

7.      Work Itself. Eisner (2006) mentioned six things that provide deep satisfaction among teachers about the work of teaching: (1) great ideas; (2) remembered forever by students; (3) very personal performance at work; (4) artistry; (5) sharing what you really feel; and, (6) making a difference to the life of others. Provenzo (2002) showed that what attracted teachers from 1964 to 1984 to teaching is consistently their awareness that they served and facilitated the learning of a student or group of students. Teachers entered their profession with an interest to meet specific needs of the students (Pryor & Pryor, 2005). Akpa (2006) conducted a research on the motivation of the workers of Northern Luzon Adventist College, Philippines. She found out that the top five motivation factors of NLAC workers are competence or knowing the job, importance of the task, work enjoyment, having enough freedom, responsibility, and authority to do the job. The rule given to work is that the level of work and social stimulation referring to jobs where the level of variety is not so low as to be boring and not so high as to be overwhelming and over challenging (Greenberg, 1995; Curry, et. al., 1986). Dajoc (1997) conducted a research in six commercial banks in Metro Manila to find out what motivates their employees. The findings include sense of self-fulfillment, growth opportunities and recognition. Limbong (2000) conducted a research on job satisfaction among the employees of Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies, Philippines. The findings reveal that the top five factors that motivate them are (1) importance of task, (2) work environment, (3) competence, (4) having enough freedom, and (5) originality.

8.      Contingent rewards. Provenzo (2002) discovered also the three most important rewards for a teacher are as follows: opportunity to study, plan, master classroom management, reach and associate with students and colleagues (73%); salary and respect and the position of influence (11.6%); and, economic security, time, freedom from competition (11.6%). Santiago (198) research on the teacher-stayers and leavers in Metro Manila and found out that non-monetary considerations were found to be the source of satisfaction of public elementary school teachers such as achievement, responsibility, interpersonal relations and supervision. Teachers stayed in teaching because of the increased skills in the profession and adjustment through the years of teaching. Shiming Tan (2000) made a study on job satisfaction of the local government employees of Baguio City. She found out that the said government employees have high level of satisfaction. They project the highest satisfaction in the area of intrinsic satisfaction including the items of ability utilization, achievement, activity, authority, creativity, independence, moral values, responsibility, security, social service, social status and variety. Their level of job satisfaction is not affected by gender, age, civil status, educational qualification, years of working experience, office where working, ethnic group and religious affiliation. Further, the subjects demonstrate a high level of job performance including both sub-scales of duties and responsibilities and behavioral dimensions. Comparatively, they manifest better performance in the area of courtesy, human relations, punctuality and attendance, and initiative in the area of quantity, quality and time. There are moderately high levels of correlation between work values and job satisfaction, and between work values and job performance. There is a high level of correlation between job satisfaction and job performance.

9.      Opportunity for promotion. Gurney (2007) made a survey examining the work setting in terms of social support, job stress, promotion opportunities, professional values, disposition, direct patient care, job hazards, pay and fairness of pay and benefits. She found out that certain personal characteristics were associated with satisfaction such as race (non-Hispanic blacks were less satisfied) and overall physical health (those who described themselves as poor in health). Although pay did not influence work satisfaction but the fairness of pay did. Other organizational factors seen that can enhance work satisfaction are paid time off, supervisory support, work group cohesion, reduction in the interference of work with family, autonomy, variety, and promotion opportunity. Baldwin (1982) noted some work motivation in the Asian context: (1) compensation policy (an important motivator because actual wages paid simply satisfy a need); (2) security of stability (due to unemployment and underemployment issues in Asia); (3) Affiliation need or the desire to belong to a group is high; and, (4) Career advancement or promotion is very much acceptable to Asians.

Measurement of Job Satisfaction

The researcher used the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS; Spector, 1971) in this paper. Job Satisfaction Survey is chosen because it yields not only an overall measure of job satisfaction, but measures the nine factors of job satisfaction mentioned above. Additionally, Job Satisfaction Survey is freely available for use for academic studies and the author has published norms to allow comparisons between the sample group and the general population.

Management Styles of School Leaders

School Management

In the school setting, Kowalski (2003) decry the different definitions and treatment given to the terms “leadership” and “management” (Yukl, 1989; Shields & Newton, 1994). One consequence is that many educators look at management as negative and leadership as positive. This is not necessary since both leadership and management has its own positive functions. In the context of schools, Dunklee (2000) used the word “administration” to join the concepts of “management” and “leadership”. Leadership focuses on determining organizational objectives and strategies, building consensus for meeting those objectives, and influencing others to work toward the objectives. Management is a process of developing tactical plans to implement strategies and control resources in an effort to achieve organizational objectives. Administration encompasses both management and leadership (Kowalski & Reitzug, 1993). Kowalski (2003) believes that in school administration, both management and leadership are integrated in the contemporary practice of school administration.

It was during the first two decades of the twentieth century that pressure was placed on school officials to adopt management practices done in business and industries. Schools began to use management principles and practices in 1905 and became prominent in the 1930’s (Callahan, 1962; Murphy & Hallinger, 1987; Glass et. al., 2000; Kowalski, 1995). Management is conceived of as the coordination of human, material, technological and financial resources needed for the organization to reach its goals (Hess & Sociliano, 1996). Management is a process of obtaining, deploying and utilizing a variety of essential resources in support of an organization’s objectives (Bittel & Newstrom, 1990; Dressler, 2001).

Management Works of School Principals

            The National Association of Secondary School Principals (NSSSP) conceptualized the management works of principals into three skills with twelve sub-categories. The first is the administrative skill which includes problem analysis, judgment, organizational ability, and decisiveness. The second category of principals’ skill is interpersonal which include leadership, sensitivity, oral communication, and written communication. The third category of principals’ skill is intrapersonal which include stress tolerance, range of interest, personal motivation, and educational values.  

Hughes & Ubben (1984) identified five areas in which the principal must function effectively: school-community relations; staff personnel development; pupil personnel development; educational program development; and, business and building development (Hersey, n.d.).

Kimborough & Burkett (1990) listed the major duties of principals as being responsible for all activities within the school, administering its operation, formulating the teaching program based on the prescribed curriculum, maintaining good public relations with the community, utilizing resources to enrich the learning program, assisting in the preparation of budget, keeping records of collection and expenditure, explaining to teachers the board policies, maintaining an up-to-date policy manual, and assisting in the evaluation and recommendation of personnel in the school. Principals also supervise instructions, oversee the health and safety of students, implement a code of discipline and behavior within the school, and perform such other duties which may be assigned by the superintendent pursuant to the written policies of the board of education.

The research of Davis (1986) found out that principals are focused on curriculum planning, implementing and evaluating. NASP (1979) found out that principals spent much of their time in school management, with personnel, students’ activities, student behavior, program development, works at the district office, community relations and planning in a consecutive order.

Prior to 1850, many of the duties of principals are of a clerical nature (Blumberg & Greenfield, 1980). A sampling of the duties shows that: 58.8 % concerned records and reports, 23.4% related to matters of school organization, 11.8% focused on building and equipment, and 5.9% concerned discipline and care of pupils. By the year 1900, the principal became the manager of the school and his/her office serves the following functions: a communications center, a clearing house, a counselling center, a research division, a repository of school records, a planning center, a resource center, and a coordinating center (Blumberg & Greenfield, 1980).

Management Styles

Management styles have been associated and treated as synonymous with leadership styles or administrative styles, in the context of school management (Kowalski, 2003). Styles refer more directly to individual behavior, action disposition, or set of patterns of behaviors, displayed by an administrator (Immegart, 1988). Styles describe the way an administrator handles work responsibilities such as human relations, supervision and sharing power (Bassett, 1970).

The three most talked about management styles are democratic, autocratic and laissez faire. A democratic manager delegates authority to his/her staff, giving them responsibility to complete the task given to them. Staff will complete the tasks using their own work methods. However, the task must be completed on time. Employees are involved in decision making giving them a sense of belonging and motivating individuals. In contrast to democratic style, an autocratic manager dictates orders to their staff and makes decisions without any consultation. The laissez faire manager sets the tasks and gives staff complete freedom to complete the task as they see fit. There is minimal involvement from the manager. The manager however does not sit idle and watch them work! He or she is there to coach or answer questions, supply information if required (http://www.learnmanagement2.com/leadership%20styles.htm).

According to Cherry (2010), these three management styles was formulated by Kurt Lewin in 1939. Authoritarian, also known as autocratic leaders, provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group. Lewin’s study found that participative style, also known as democratic leaders, is generally the most effective leadership style for they offer guidance to group members, and participate in the group and allow input from other group members. Delegative style, also known as laissez faire leaders, were the least productive of all three groups for they offer little or no guidance to group members and leave decision-making up to group members (http://psychology.abut.com.od/leadership/ a/leadstyles.htm).

These management styles – autocratic democratic and laissez faire, will be used as descriptions of the management styles of principals among elementary Christian schools in Cavite which will be correlated with job satisfaction of teachers.

Organizational Climate

1. Definition of Organizational Climate

Hoy and Forsyth (1986) defined organizational climate as a broad concept that refers to the teachers’ perceptions of the school’s work environment or an internal quality or set of internal characteristics experienced by its members that distinguishes one school from another and that influences the behavior of its members. The concept of climate is important in the analyses and practice of school supervision because it has a major impact on the behavior of both teachers and principals (Hoy and Forsyth, 1986). Denison (1996) explains that the attention was first focused on climate as a topic of study in 1996. Organizational climate is a psychological construct that is shared by members of organizations (Glick, 1985). Ekvail (1983) defined it as an attribute of the organization composed of behaviors, attitudes and feelings which are characteristic of the organization. Iqbal (2009) defined organizational climate as perceptions of organizational features like decision-making, leadership and norms about work. Smith and Piele (1997) look at climate as people’s shared perceptions of the organization or work unit.

Hence, the focus is on impressions, feelings and perceptions held by members of the organization. These perceptions are aroused by the organizational structure and social interactions among those who work on the organization. The present study is delimited to using primarily the perceptions of teachers about the principal attitudes to teachers and the teacher-teacher relationships.

2. Concepts and Instruments to Measure Organizational Climate

The wide variation in the conceptualization and definition of climate is reflected in the instruments used to measure the construct. Explicitly and implicitly, each climate’s instrument claims to embody the nature of the climate of the organization to which it is applied. There are four basic conceptual frameworks used to understand and measure organizational climate: open and closed climates, healthy and unhealthy climates, humanistic to custodial climates, exploitative and participative climates.

The most well-known conceptualization and measurement of the social climate of a school was developed by Andrew W. Halpin and Don B. Croft (Hoy & Forsyth, 1986). Halpin & Croft (1962) viewed the climate of the school as a combination of two dimensions of social behavior: principal-teacher interactions and teacher-teacher interactions. The leadership of the principal, the nature of the teacher group and their mutual interactions became the major components for identifying the social climate of schools.

The principal leadership behavior is categorized as supportive, directive and restrictive. Supportive behavior is reflected by genuine concern for teachers. Directive behavior is starkly task-oriented with little consideration for the personal needs of teachers. Restrictive behavior provides impediments for teachers to work. The nature of the teacher group is categorized as collegial, intimate and disengaged. Collegial behavior refers to supportive professional relationship among teachers. Intimate behavior refers to close personal relationship among teachers not only in but outside of the school. Disengaged behavior pertains to a general sense of alienation and separation among teachers in the school (Bandura, 1997; Hoy & Miskel, 2001; Hoy & Sabo, 1998; Hoy et. al., 1991).

Organizational Climate Description Questionnaire (OCDQ) created by Halpin and Croft is the instrument use to measure principal-teacher and teacher-teacher interactions. The OCDQ has been subjected to a number of criticisms during the last twenty years prior to 1986 (Hoy & Forsyth, 1986). A major revision of the instrument was completed at Rutgers University and a refined version of the instrument was developed – the OCDQ-RE for elementary schools and OCDQ-RS for secondary schools by Hoy and Tarter (1997).

OCDQ-RE has two general factors – one a measure of openness of teacher interactions and the other a measure of openness of teacher-principal relations. These two openness factors are independent which means that it is possible to have open teacher interactions and closed principal relations and vice versa. Thus, theoretically, four contracting types of school climate are possible. The first is open climate where there is cooperation and respect that exist between the teachers and between the teachers and principals. The second is engaged climate marked on one hand by principals’ ineffective attempts to control teachers and on the other hand high professional performance of teachers. The third is disengaged climate where the principals’ behavior is open, concerned and supportive but the teachers are unwilling to accept the principal and they do not respect each other or work as professionals. The fourth is a closed climate where principals stress routine trivia and unnecessary busy work and teachers respond minimally and exhibit little commitment to their work (Bandura, 1997; Hoy & Miskel, 2001; Hoy & Sabo, 1998; Hoy et. al., 1991; Hansen & Childs, 1998).

Improving the School Climate

Ngamije (2000) enumerated the following as ways to improve the school climate: increase parent and community involvement, implementation of character education, use violence-prevention or conflict-resolution curricula, peer mediation, prevention of acts of bullying, teachers and principals treat students fairly, provide a safe environment, and giving honor to most improved students.

Patterson et. al. (1986) gave the following characteristics of a healthy school culture: school site management and democratic decision making, strong leadership, staff tenure, curriculum articulation and organization, staff development, parental involvement, school-wide recognition of academic success, maximized learning time, district support, collaborative planning and collegial relationship, clear goals and high expectations commonly shared, and order and discipline.

Demo-Socio-Economic Characteristics of Teachers in the Philippines

1. Gender

 In the United States, in a research done by Southern California Consortium on Research in Education last 2002, it was found out that more than two-thirds of teachers are women in California (Southern California Consortium on Research in Education, 2002). However, in South Australia, 53% of teachers in the secondary level are males though there are more female teachers in other levels (Oswald & Johnson, 1991).

In the Philippines, female teachers overwhelmingly dominate male teachers in numbers, both in public and private schools, where female teachers are as much as 93% in Pampanga (David, 2001), 90% in Nueva Ecija (Nisperos, 2001), 84% in Zamboanga (Belino, 1991), and the whole of Department of Education signifies 80% female employees (Petrasanta, 2005). Female teachers occupied 84.9 percent of the total teaching positions, at the same time, comprised the bulk of the workforce at 45.9 percent. Public school teachers are the largest occupational group in the Philippine Civil Service comprising 30.4 percent or 449,340 of the entire government workforce (Civil Service Commission, 2004).

The female gender is also the preferred sex for foreign English as Second Language (ESL) teachers in Korea (http://korean-shool.blogspot.com2007/01/study-two-teachers-age.html). Females are favored over males, especially those that  are young and inexperienced.

2. Age

Teachers in the Philippines are predominantly in their young and middle-adulthood stage. Nisperos (2001), in his study of teachers in Nueva Ecija revealed that a big number of teachers fall in age brackets of 31-55 while Razon (1994) found out that the age of the teachers in the Division of Batangas range from 20 to 65 years old with an average of 54 years old. In Zamboanga, majority of the teachers are clustered in the 41-above age bracket (Belino, 1991). In Pampanga, teachers are on the age bracket of 35-39 and 50-54 (David, 2001). In the province of Cavite, Landicho (1997) revealed that majority of teachers are in the middle-age bracket of 30-44 years old and supported also by Medina (1999) and Balani (2000).

3. Civil Status

In the context of the Philippines, majority of the teachers are married as shown by the studies in Nueva Ecija (Frany, 1994; Nisperos, 2001), in Cavite (Feranil, 2001; Petrasanta, 2005) and in Pampanga (David, 2001).

4. Length of Service

In the context of the Philippines, majority of the teachers have been working for ten years and more (Razon, 1994; Belino, 1991; David, 2001).

5. Educational Attainment

In the Philippines, it is a law that basic educational teachers (elementary and high school) are baccalaureate degree holders and licensed by the Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC). With regards to the Filipino teachers’ educational attainment, it was found out that about 50% of them acquired masters units (David, 2001; Nisperos, 2001; Razon, 1994; Belino, 1991).

6. Monthly Salary

Last 2006, a Philippine public school teacher receives P9939 per month. However, according to National Wages and Productivity Commission (NWPC), last 2003 the average income of the family of six in the National Capital Region must be P557 daily or P16,710 per month to sustain their needs. Virola (2007) reported that the salary of teachers in the Philippines is between P9,000 to P11,000 monthly.

Private school teachers, belonging to non-agricultural sector un Cavite, are mandated to receive at least the following minimum monthly salaries: P6,600 (Bacoor and Imus); P6,204 (Carmona, Cavite City, Dasmarinas, General Trias and Rosario); P6,094 (Kawit, Silang, Tagaytay City, Tanza, Trece Martires City, and General Mariano Alvarez); P5,478 (Indang, Naic, Noveleta and Ternate); and, P5,324 (Alfonso, Amadeo, General Aguinaldo, Magallanes, Maragondon, and Mendez).