AN INVESTIGATION OF FACTORS AFFECTING JOB SATISFACTION AND
CAREER MOTIVATION OF ON-AIR RADIO PERSONALITIES
A Paper Presented to
Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication
Media Management and Economics Division
by
Kathleen A. Fox
B.A., Aquinas College, 1992
M.A. , Indiana State University, 1994
Ph.D. Student, Ohio University
Investigation of Job Satisfaction
Kathleen A. Fox
Ohio University
Abstract
This study uses Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, Vroom's Expectancy Theory
and London's Theory of Career Motivation to analyze employee
motivation.
Radio personalities within the state of Indiana were mailed
questionnaires
and interviewed by phone to respond to questions regarding
satisfaction and
dissatisfaction within their jobs. The study found support for Vroom's
Expectancy Theory and partial support for Herzberg's Two-Factor
Theory.
However, the study's findings did not replicate the London based study
of
Noe, Noe, and Bachhuber concerning career motivation.
Investigation of Job Satisfaction
Review of Literature
The on-air radio personality, whose voice wakes people in the morning,
provides information about dangerous weather and accompanies people to
the
beach, has touched American society since the early twentieth century.
The
first licensed radio station, KDKA, Pittsburgh, operated by Dr. Frank
Conrad, began a flurry of interest in the radio industry (Sterling &
Kittross, 1990). From that tentative beginning, the radio industry has
remained far from static. Changes in personnel and technology created
an
even more complex business than originally thought.
This study is an investigation of the factors affecting job satisfaction
and career motivation of on-air radio personalities. The research for
this
study of motivation draws upon Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, Vroom's
Expectancy Theory and London's Career Motivation for its theoretical
underpinning. The purpose of this study is to assist station Program
Directors in understanding and managing the motivational factors revealed
by their subordinates.
The importance of worker motivation should not be underestimated in the
radio industry. Personnel serve an important function in maintaining
profitability at radio stations. A radio station is a business that
creates revenue through selling advertisements. While the on-air radio
personalities usually do not sell the advertisements, their job is
directly
related to this business function. For example, radio personalities often
perform the voice work for the advertisement. Indirectly, yet equally
important, a station's image is also shaped by the (on and off-air)
behavior of on-air personalities. The radio personality's behavior may be
influenced by the amount of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction he/she
may
feel. Craig and Hindmarsh (1984) feel there is a serious need for
emphasis
on motivation within the broadcast industry.
Attend any meeting and you will hear still the "rah-rah" kind of motivation
for sales people and on-air staff. It's this "let's sell one for the
Gipper" attitude that needs to be changed. Industry after
industry is
concerned about worker motivation. Business schools after
business school
spend considerable time discussing the need to examine causes of
better
work performance. The broadcast industry has to begin examining
its
conception of management and worker motivation from a more critical
viewpoint (p. 21-22).
Unfortunately, the few broadcast management textbooks that appear on the
market report little on how to motivate radio personnel. The
textbooks
provide explanations of the popular motivation theories but provide
little
specific application to broadcast employees (Willis & Willis, 1993;
Sherman, 1987; Pringle, Starr, & McCavitt 1995; Lavine & Wackman, 1988).
More specifically, the books neglect to discuss how motivation
theories
pertain to managing radio or television personalities.
For purpose within this study, work motivation is the sum of the
energizing forces, both internal and external, that account, at least in
part, for certain productive behavior in a person's job (Hitt,
Middlemist,
& Mathis, 1989). It is acknowledged by researchers from many fields
that
motivation is a changing process that needs consistent attention. As
society changes, people's drives and motivations within their personal
and
work lives change. Also, what motivates one person may not motivate
another. Therefore, this study focuses on the energizing forces that
drive
individual workers instead of generalizing one worker's needs and wants as
every workers' needs and wants.
There are many theories of human motivation, and more specifically,
organizational employee motivation. The strongest worker motivation
theories are McGregor's Theory X and Y, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs,
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and Vroom's Expectancy Theory (Terpstra,
1979;
Pardee, 1990; Craig & Hindmarsh, 1984). This study focuses on Herzberg's
Two-Factor Theory, Vroom's Expectancy Theory and London's Career
Motivation
Theory in belief they will provide insight into the radio personality's
work attitudes.
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory
According to Herzberg(1966), work-related variables contributing to job
satisfaction are separate from factors contributing to job
dissatisfaction.
The factors that compose job satisfaction, often called satisfiers,
motivators or intrinsic factors, are achievement, recognition, work
itself,
responsibility and advancement. These are the components believed to
motivate employees within the work place. When satisfiers are absent,
motivation is prevented. When satisfiers are present, they lead to
satisfaction and motivation when the hygienes are also present (Hitt,
Middlemist & Mathis, 1989).
Herzberg (1966) found that the major work dissatisfiers, often called
external or hygiene factors, are company policy and administration,
supervision, salary, interpersonal relations and working conditions.
Dissatisfiers or hygienes do not motivate employees, but when absent,
increase dissatisfaction with the job. When hygienes are present, they
prevent dissatisfaction with the job (Hitt, Middlemist & Mathis, 1989).
Satisfiers often produce long-term changes in job attitudes, while
dissatisfiers produce short-term changes in job attitudes (Herzberg, 1966).
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Herzberg's work showed that the opposite
of job satisfaction is no satisfaction rather than dissatisfaction; the
opposite of job dissatisfaction is no job dissatisfaction, not
satisfaction
with one's job (Hill, 1986-1987). In short, satisfaction and
dissatisfaction may be considered two different elements in the
motivation
mix rather than two ends of a single continuum.
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, also called the Motivation-Hygiene Theory,
was empirically tested using accountants and engineers as subjects
(Herzberg, 1966). From the results of Herzberg's extensive studies, the
theory has been generalized to other employee groups. Herzberg (1987)
performed twelve investigations of the theory on the following groups:
lower level supervisors, professional women, agricultural
administrators,
men about to retire from management positions, hospital maintenance
personnel, manufacturing supervisors, nurses, food handlers, military
officers, engineers, scientists, housekeepers, teachers, technicians,
female assemblers, accountants, Finish foremen and Hungarian engineers.
Some previous research has provided support for Herzberg's Two-Factor
Theory. Hill (1986- 1987) tested college faculty by gathering
information
from over one thousand full-time faculty at colleges and universities.
Hill determined that Herzberg's theory is applicable to institutions of
higher learning.
Maidini (1991) tested the Two-Factor Theory and found support for half of
the theory. He tested the theory on public and private sections of
personnel management using a questionnaire based on the theory. The study
concluded that motivators are factors of satisfaction but hygiene
factors
also were causes of satisfaction. Therefore, some of Maidini's
results
contradicted the predictions of Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene Theory.
While there has been much support for Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, there
also has been some criticism. The critics (Hill, 1986-1987; Notz,
1975;
Terpstra, 1979; Szura & Vermillion, 1975) say efforts to validate the
theory have inconsistent results, therefore raising questions about the
adequacy of the theory to predict motivational factors. However,
different
jobs attract different personnel, and people who may respond differently
to motivators. Consequently, studies performed on different
professions
will yield different results. Herzberg's Theory may be applicable to
some
professions and not others. This study will seek to discover whether
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory can be used to predict motivational factors
of
radio personalities.
Vroom's Expectancy Theory
Another major theory of human behavior is Vroom's expectancy Theory.
Vroom's (1970) Expectancy Theory has three beliefs: people will perform
their jobs if they believe they have the ability to do the job; people
will
perform their jobs if they believe they will be rewarded for their effort
(expectancy); and people will perform their jobs only if they will
receive
the rewards they desire (valence). Vroom's theory is a mathematical
equation expressed as Motivation = Valence X Expectancy (Craig & Hindmars
h, 1984).
According to Vroom (1970), there are four classes of variables that decide
the attitude of a person toward his/her role in an organization and the
probability that he/she will leave it. The first class of variables
is
that outcomes such as pay, status, acceptance and influence attained by
a
person performing his/her organizational role affect a person's
attitude.
Second, the strength of the person's desire or avoidance for these
outcomes
decides a person's attitude. Third, the outcomes believed by a person to
be equitable to others influences the person's attitude (i.e. equal
pay for
equal work). Last, the extent these perceived outcomes meet the person's
expectations decides a person's attitude.
Similar to Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, Vroom's Expectancy Theory has
been criticized. Some researchers argue that there is a difficulty in
testing expectancy theory because it is difficult to reduce employee
attitudes to numbers(Butler & Womer, 1985; Craig & Hindmarsh, 1984). This
study will employ open-ended interview questions to avert this
difficulty.
London's Career Motivation
One aspect of work motivation is an employee's desire to further his/her
career goals. While some of an employee's motivation contributes to
the
general good of an organization, career motivation gives the employee
incentive to further his/her own life (Noe, Noe & Bachhuber, 1990)
Career
motivation consists of three individual characteristics: career
identity,
career insight and career resilience (London, 1983; London & Mone,
1987).
Career identity describes the centrality of a career to an individual's
personal identity. In service jobs, career identity describes the
extent
to which people define themselves through their work (London, 1983;
London
& Mone, 1987). For example, on-air radio personalities may consider
themselves artistic performers. A great deal of radio personalities'
work--radio announcing-- may be considered a natural expression of who
they
think they are.
Career insight is the extent to which people have realistic career
expectations, knowledge of their abilities and specific career goals
(London, 1983; London and Mone, 1987). For example, some radio
personalities may realistically feel they have the talent to work in a
large market while others may unrealistically believe their skills,
although no better than mediocre, will lead them to a job in New York.
Career resilience describes the ability of a person to maintain a career
through adapting to changing circumstances within the work environment
(London, 1983; London and Mone 1987). For example, a radio station may
be
bought by a different corporation and change formats. Resilience
describes
the on-air personality's ability to accept and adopt this change.
Noe, Noe and Bachhuber (1990) based a study upon London's concepts of
career identity, career insight and career resilience. The study was
performed through distributing a questionnaire asking attitudes about
career identity, career resilience and career insight, to 400 employees
working in health care, financial services and computer-related
industries.
The study discovered that individuals with high work role salience are
more likely to engage in career exploration. In other words, those
employees with distinctive jobs in society (i.e.. radio personalities) will
explore more within their careers. Also, work role salience and job
characteristics have the strongest relationship with career motivation.
Since radio personalities perform distinctive jobs within society,
Noe, Noe
and Bachhuber's study may have strong implications for their careers.
Career identity, career insight and career resilience provide theoretical
insight that Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and Vroom's Expectancy
Theory do
not. These three concepts provide an understanding of the journey
throughout a career while Herzberg and Vroom's Theories look at specific
facets of a particular work environment. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory
presents the components within an organization that drive a person to
perform a particular job. Vroom's Expectancy Theory narrows employee
motivation by examining the human desires that lead to specific tasks in
the work place. Noe, Noe and Bachhuber's study focuses on a person's
choices and desires throughout the course of a career while moving from
job
to job.
On-air radio personalities often travel from job to job to further their
careers. Moving from one station or market to another is often
considered
"moving up in the business." An analysis needs to be executed to
determine
what motivates on-air radio personalities throughout their careers in
order to understand the motivating factors within a particular job.
Perhaps, employees behave in a particular way within their jobs simply to
move toward their career goals.
Research Questions
This study's research questions are guided by Herzberg's Two-Factor
Theory, Vroom's Expectancy Theory and London's concepts of career insight,
career identity and career resilience. The following research
questions
lead this study of employee motivation.
RQ1: What factors internal to the organization serve as motivators for
air personalities at a radio station?
RQ2: What factors external to the organization serve as motivators for
air personalities at a radio station?
RQ3: What factors internal to the organization serve as dissatisfiers for
air personalities at a radio station?
RQ4: What factors external to the organization serve as dissatisfiers for
air personalities at a radio station?
RQ5: What outcomes do radio personalities desire in order to perform their
job?
RQ6: What abilities do radio personalities feel will lead them to
desired outcomes?
RQ7: To what extent do radio personalities have career identity?
RQ8: To what extent do radio personalities have career insight?
RQ9: To what extent do radio personalities have career resilience?
Methodology
Subjects
Subjects were on-air radio personalities within the state of Indiana. Two
methods were utilized for this study and each consisted of a different
sample. One sample, receiving the questionnaire, consisted of all
two-hundred thirty-eight-radio stations within the state of Indiana.
Bacon's Radio/TV Directory (1992) was used to obtain addresses of all
Indiana radio stations. The program director at each radio station was
asked to distribute the questionnaire to a morning or daytime air
personality. Half the sample was morning air personalities and half was d
aytime personalities. Morning and daytime air shifts were thought to
provide an accurate representation of the variety of full-time radio
personalities. Part-time employees were not considered in the study
because they may have a different set of motivators than full-time radio
personalities. Seventy-two radio personalities completed the
questionnaire
creating a thirty percent response rate for the mail questionnaire.
Fifty-three percent of the respondents were morning radio personalities
and
forty-seven percent were daytime personalities.
An interview format usually uses a much smaller sample than a
questionnaire. Therefore, the interview sample consisted of
twenty-five
percent of the sample used for the questionnaire. A stratified sample
was
used for the phone interviews. The phone interview's sample was based
upon
the size of the radio station as measured by transmitter power. A
breakdown of radio station transmitter wattage was used to determine a
station's reach and size. A random sampling within each station wattage
category was used to determine the actual stations phoned. While not
the
only measurement of a station's size, wattage is a commonly used
measurement and a reasonable measurement for use within the study.
Each radio station phoned was asked to participate in the study by having
a morning or afternoon radio personality complete a phone interview at a
later time. If a radio personality was unable or unwilling to
participate
in the study after three contact attempts then he/she was discarded
from
the sample. Forty of the fifty-nine subjects completed the interview
creating a sixty-eight percent response rate.
Method
Two methods were used to gather data from radio talent: questionnaire and
phone interviews. Using both research methods allowed the researcher to
gain all the advantages of using each individual method.
The questionnaire (Appendix), derived from London's Theory, was obtained
from Noe, Noe and Bachhuber's (1990) study of career motivation that
includes career identity, career insight and career resilience. The mail
questionnaire was used to acquire answers to research questions seven
through nine. The questionnaire used a five-point likert response scale
from 1 = "to a very small extent" and 5 = "to a very large extent."
This
study retests the questionnaire developed for Noe, Noe and Bachhuber's
research of career motivation in the medical and computer industries.
The questionnaire also included one open-ended question that partially
replicated Herzberg's study. Similar to Herzberg's study, the
respondents
were asked to briefly describe the incident/event in which they felt
the
greatest satisfaction at their job. Not only was this question used
in the
mail questionnaire but was asked during each phone interview. This
question added career information the scales did not measure.
The phone interview questions were created to find answers for research
questions one through six. The interview questions investigated
elements
of Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and Vroom's Expectancy Theory. The
phone
interview questions were open-ended and the researcher was allowed to
probe
for further information when needed. An interview protocol provided
structure to guide the interviews yet allowed the researcher freedom to
clarify and elaborate.
The first step of the interview process was the mailing of letters to
program directors within the sample. The letter asked for the station's
cooperation with the study and offered the results of the study upon
request. Accompanying this letter was a second letter from a well-known
member of the Indiana Broadcasters Association that stressed the
importance
of the study. An appointment was then arranged to interview the station's
morning or mid-day radio personality.
Data Analysis
Indiana State University's Computer Center computated the statistical
information obtained from the questionnaire. The center provided the
mean
and standard deviation for each question and a factor analysis of all
items
within the questionnaire.
The phone interview responses were coded through a thematization process.
Groupings of similar responses were determined through an extensive
analysis of interview responses. Interview responses were grouped and
quantified whenever possible.
Results
This study tested three theoretical perspectives through using radio
personalities as subjects. The findings of this study are grouped into
two
sections. First, the phone interview questions (Appendix) tested
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and Vroom's Expectancy Theory. Second, the
questionnaire tested Noe, Noe and Bachhuber's study of career
motivation.
The phone interview responses proved insightful in analyzing the
motivational factors of radio personalities. Research Question one asked
what factors internal to the organization serve as motivators for
radio
personalities. During the interviews respondents answered that they
felt
successful in their careers because of the work itself. The aspects
of the
job enjoyed the most were creativity, promotional activities, meeting
listeners and having a variety of job duties. Three personalities
responded creativity, three responded promotional activities, four
responded meeting listeners, and three personalities responded that job
variety was the aspect of the job enjoyed the most.
The radio personalities felt positively about the recognition from
co-workers and program directors and feedback from co-workers was highly
regarded. Thirty-five percent of the respondents wanted more job
responsibility than they were given, fifteen percent wanted less, and fifty
percent were content with the amount of job responsibility. Twenty-three
percent of the respondents sought advancement through station
ownership,
thirty-five percent sought management positions, fifteen percent
wanted
positions outside radio, and twenty-seven percent had other responses.
Research question two asked what factors external to organization served
as motivators for the radio personality. Forty-percent of the
respondents
replied that they had never received a tangible award for their job.
Sixty
percent had received awards such as trade magazine awards, community
service awards and thank you cards. Feedback from listeners was a common
source of recognition recognized by the respondents. Talking with
listeners was a frequently mentioned enjoyable aspect of the work itself.
Fifty percent of the respondents felt their employment pursuits could
be
achieved at their present station. The remaining fifty percent felt
they
needed to leave the organization to achieve their career goals. This
percentage implies that half the radio personalities felt they could not
be
fully motivated or satisfied within their current organization.
Research question three asked which factors internal to the organization
served as dissatisfiers for air personalities. Respondents felt the
most
discouraging aspects of their jobs were working for a large
corporation and
communication breakdowns with management.
In relation to their supervisors, radio personalities reported little
dissatisfaction. Ninety-five percent of the radio personalities had
daily
contact with their supervisor while five percent had monthly or
biweekly
contact. Eighty-one percent of the respondents received oral feedback
and
nineteen percent received both oral and written feedback from their
supervisors. Eighty-three percent of the respondents felt the amount and
type of feedback was appropriate, eight percent wanted more contact,
eight
percent wanted better quality feedback and three percent wanted less
contact with their supervisors.
Fifty-five percent of the radio personalities felt they were adequately
compensated for their work while forty-five percent felt they were
inadequately compensated. However, many who felt adequately compensated
noted that they were inadequately compensated for the amount of work
they
do but felt adequately compensated in comparison with others in the
field,
or within the same market.
Eighty-seven percent of the radio personalities responded that job
security was important to them. Eighty-five percent stated they had job
security, but only thirteen percent had a contract with their station.
The
radio personalities felt they had security because of their talent,
longevity of employment, market size or verbal assurance from management.
Research question four asked which factors external to the organization
served as dissatisfiers to the radio personalities. Air
personalities
responded that the major factors of dissatisfaction external to the
organization were job instability, limited job openings and the fact that
success in the business is "all in who you know." Three respondents
named
job instability, three mentioned limited job openings and three
personalities mentioned "all in who you know" as dissatisfiers.
Research question five examined which outcomes radio personalities desire
in order to perform their job. The interviews discovered that
recognition
and a specific market size were desired by radio personalities.
Forty-two
percent of air personalities mentioned a desire for recognition and
thirty-two percent had a desire to move to a specific market size. Radio
personalities spoke of desires to produce quality work and to have
that
work recognized by supervisors and peers as distinctive. There was no
one
market size desired by all radio personalities but specific market
sizes
were often mentioned as desirable outcomes by individual radio
personalities. According to Vroom, a person is motivated in future
performance if these desired outcomes are achieved.
Research question six asked what abilities radio personalities feel will
lead them to their desired job outcomes. Five radio personalities
mentioned confidence and seven mentioned creative freedom as the abilities
needed to further their talents. The radio personalities felt
confidence
and creativity are furthered through working every day at doing the
best
possible job. Fifty-six percent of the respondents felt their talent
fell
above the demands of their position and no one felt their talent fell
below
the demands of the position. This percentage supports Vroom's Expectancy
Theory that states that a person must first believe he/she has the
ability
to do a job, more effort will lead to higher performance and this
effort
will lead him/her to desired outcomes.
The last three research questions sought to test Noe, Noe, and Bachhuber's
study of career motivation. Each table reports the questions, mean and
standard deviations to assist in the interpretation of the
questionnaire
results.
Research question seven asked to what extent radio personalities have
career identity. Questions 5, 10, 15, 22, and 24 of the questionnaire
focused on career identity (see table one).
Table One. The Mean and Standard Deviations of Career Identity.
QUESTION
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
Q5. To what extent do you stay abreast of developments in your line of
work?
4.127
.985
Q10 To what extent have you kept current on company affairs?
3.915
1.038
Q15 To what extent have you taken courses toward a job-related degree?
2.958
1.686
Q22 To what extent do you spend your free time on activities that will help
your job?
3.414
1.070
Q24 To what extent have you joined professional organizations related to
your career goal?
2.157
1.223
The results of the questionnaire portrayed no particular pattern of career
identity. The extent that radio personalities kept current on company
affairs (question 10) and spent free time on activities that will help
their job (question 22) had the majority of responses falling from a
moderate to a large extent. The extent that radio personalities stayed
abreast of developments in their line of work (question 5) had the
majority
of responses falling in the categories large and very large extent.
The responses concerning the extent that radio personalities had taken
courses toward a job related degree (question 15) were mainly at either
end
of the likert scale. The extent that radio personalities had joined
professional organizations related to
their career goal (question 24) was primarily from a very small moderate
extent. These two question, having a large number of responses
falling
within a very small extent, may show radio personalities preferring to
work
on furthering their career on their own rather than through a formal
organization (i.e.. university, professional organization).
Research question eight asked to what extent radio personalities have
career insight. Questions 2, 4, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17, and 19 represented
the
factor of career insight (see table two).
Table Two. The Mean and Standard Deviations of Career Insight.
QUESTION
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
Q2 To what extent have you asked your boss to discuss your specific skill
strengths and weaknesses?
2.958
1.303
Q4 To what extent have you taken the initiative to discuss your career
goals with your boss?
3.169
1.530
Q7 To what extent have you sought job assignments that will help you obtain
your career goal?
4.042
1.101
Q9 To what extent have you changed or revised your career goals based on
new information you have received regarding yourself or your
situation?
3.606
1.236
Q12 To what extent do you ask co-workers you respect for feedback on your
3.535
1.157
Q14 To what extent do you feel you are aware of your skill strengths and
weaknesses?
4.296
.782
Q17 To what extent do you have a specific plan for achieving your career
goal?
3.300
1.278
Q19 To what extent do you have a specific career goal?
3.957
1.148
The distribution of responses showed that radio personalities
predominantly had career insight from a moderate to a large extent.
However, the responses to questions 2, 4, and 12 fell proportionately among
all possible responses. These questions asked to what extent he/she has:
asked the boss to discuss specific skill strengths and weakness (question
2), taken the initiative to discuss career goals with the boss
(question
4), and asked co-workers for feedback on his/her performance (question
12).
Research question nine asked to what extent radio personalities have
career resilience. Questions 1, 3, 8, 11, 13, 16, 18, 20, 21, 23, 25,
and
26 of the questionnaire tested this
factor (table three).
Table 3. The Mean and Standard Deviations of Career Resilience.
QUESTION
MEAN
STANDARD DEVIATION
Q1 To what extent have you evaluated your job performance against personal
standards rather than comparing it with what others do?
4.028
.894
Q3 To what extent have you outlined ways of accomplishing jobs without
waiting for your boss?
4.056
.939
Q8 To what extent do you help co-workers with projects?
4.197
.821
Q11 To what extent do you look for opportunities to interact with
influential people in your organization?
3.676
1.106
Q13 To what extent have you made suggestions to others even though they may
disagree?
3.761
1.259
Q16 To what extent have you accepted a job assignment for which you have
little or no expertise?
2.886
1.303
Q18 To what extent have you designed better ways of doing your work?
4.214
.815
Q20 To what extent do you set difficult but not impossible work goals?
3.657
.946
Q21 To what extent do you take the time to do the best possible job on a
task?
4.343
.679
Q23 To what extent do you reward yourself when you complete a project?
2.929
1.243
Q25 To what extent do you believe other people when they tell you that you
have done a good job?
3.571
.986
Q26 To what extent do you accept compliments rather than discount them?
3.471
1.126
The frequencies showed that radio personalities largely had career
resilience from a moderate to a very large extent. However, three
questions had respondents answering anywhere between a very small extent to
a very large extent with proportionately the same percentage of responses.
These questions asked to what extent he/she has: accepted a job
assignment for which he/she has little or no expertise (question 16),
rewarded him/herself when a project is completed (question 23), and
he/she
accepts compliments rather than discount them (question 25).
Discussion
Research questions one through six provided the basis for the
phone interviews. Primarily, the interviews provided support for
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and Vroom's Expectancy Theory. The interviews
discovered that radio personalities strive for quality work, recognition,
a specific market size, and enjoyable job duties. This corresponds to
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory that states that work itself, recognition,
and
advancement are motivators within the workplace.
The discouraging factors that radio personalities felt were job
instability, limited job openings, communication breakdowns with management
and that success in the industry is "all in who you know." The response
dealing with communication breakdowns agrees with Herzberg's
Two-Factor
Theory that sees supervision as a dissatisfier in the work place.
However,
job pursuits are the focus of the remaining responses and are considered a
form of advancement and the respondents saw these factors as a dissatisfie
rs as well as satisfiers.
Radio personalities felt their talent fell equal to or above the demands
of their position, they had specific career goals and hard work,
confidence, freedom and creativity would lead them to their goals. This
corresponds with Vroom's Expectancy Theory which states that a person
must
first believe he/she has the ability to do a job, more effort will
lead to
higher performance and this effort will lead to the desired goals.
Research questions seven through nine were the basis for the
questionnaire. The questions tested the extent radio personalities
had
career resilience, career insight, and career identity. Career insight
responses produced no particular pattern for radio personalities.
Career
insight responses primarily fell from a moderate to large extent.
Radio
personalities had career resilience largely from a moderate to very
large
extent. Radio personalities as a whole appear to have career identity
and
career resilience to some extent while the attribute of career insight
is
an individual characteristic.
Some questionnaire results did not correspond with the phone interview
responses. The interview results showed that radio personalities enjoy
co-worker's feedback, and have positive, friendly relationships with
supervisors. However, the questionnaire results did not show the majority
of radio personalities taking the initiative to discuss talents and
performances with supervisors or co-workers. The radio personalities
enjoyed hearing feedback from supervisors and co-workers but would not
ask
for critical comments. The lack of communication may be due to the
fact
that rising stars are generally unwilling to share trade secrets with
competitors
Conclusion
This study used phone interviews and a mail questionnaire to investigate
which factors motivate on-air radio personalities. The subjects
consisted
of morning and afternoon radio personalities in Indiana. The two
methods
discovered elements that lead to or prevent job satisfaction.
The interviews found partial support for Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory and
full support for Vroom's Expectancy Theory. However, the
questionnaire's
results did not reject or support Noe, Noe and Bachhuber's study of
career
motivation.
Implications for Further Study
The results of this study are in no way to be considered a comprehensive
examination of work motivation. Large market radio stations need to
be
researched. Large market radio personalities' responses may alter and
enrich a study concerning motivational and career factors of radio
personalities.
The sample consisted of morning and afternoon radio personalities within
Indiana. This sample touches mainly on the small town radio station.
The
largest market within the study is Indianapolis, the thirty-seventh
market
in the country, a medium market size (Bacon's Radio/TV Directory:
1993,
1992). However, if large market radio personalities, such as New York,
Chicago and Los Angeles, were sampled they could produce different
results
than small towns. Therefore, the results do not represent all radio
personalities and should not be generalized beyond the small and medium
market radio station.
Although this study was unable to replicate the findings of career
motivation of Noe, Noe, and Bachhuber, the theoretical perspective should
not be ignored. This study of radio personalities did not replicate
their
findings; however, studies of other job classifications may support
Noe,
Noe and Bachhuber's findings.
The results of a similar study could also be more precise through
separating variables such as market size, career longevity or gender. For
example, women radio personalities with families may not desire moving
to
larger markets to advance their career. A study that separates
motivational factors such as age and gender would assist in analyzing
diversity among job attitudes. Acknowledging diversity among individuals
in the industry is the first step toward understanding the
motivational
factors driving the employee.
APPENDIX
Phone Interview Questions
What tangible awards have you received for your current job? From who?
Are you successful in your career? Why?
What personal recognition have you received from others in your current
job? From who?
What aspect of your job do you enjoy the most?
On a scale from 1 to 100, how much responsibility has been given to you in
your job?
On this scale what amount of responsibility do you want at your job?
To what position do you ultimately aspire?
Can this be achieved at your present station? Market? Why or Why not?
What has encouraged or discouraged you in your quest for advancement?
Do you feel your talent has grown while working at this station? Why or
why not?
Do you feel your talent/abilities is (inadequate to, equal to, above) the
demands of your position?
What company policies or procedures have encouraged your growth?
What is the title of the position you report to?
How often do you have contact? What type of feedback do you receive:
oral, written, other?
Is this the amount and type of contact you would like with this person?
Describe in one word your relationship with your supervisor.
Do you feel adequately compensated for the work you do? Is this through
salary and/or fringe benefits?
In one word describe your relationship with your coworkers.
In what ways do your coworkers help your job?
What do you think the public's perception is of the status of your job?
Is job security important to you?
Does your job have job security? What?
Briefly describe the incident/event which you felt the greatest
satisfaction at your job.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bacon's Radio/TV Directory: 1993. (7th ed.). (1992). Chicago: Bacon's
Information Inc.
Butler, John K. & Womer, Norman Keith. (1985). Hierarchical vs. non-nested
tests for contrasting expectancy-valence models. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 20, 335-352.
Craig, J. Robert & Hindmarsh, Wayne A. (1984). Management
Theories and Broadcasting: A Handbook (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 264 624).
Herzberg, Frederick. (1966). Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World
Publishing.
Herzberg, Frederick. (1987). One more time: How do you motivate
employees? Harvard Business Review,65, 109-120.
Hill, Malcolm D. (1986-1987). A theoretical analysis of job
satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Educational Research Quarterly, 10,
36-43.
Hitt, Michael, Middlemist R. Dennis & Mathis, Robert L. (1989).
Management: Concepts and Effective Practices. St. Paul: West Publishing.
Lavine, John M. & Wackman, Daniel B. (1988). Managing Media Organizations
. New York: Longman Inc.
London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. Academy of
Management Review,8, 620-630.
London, M. & Mone, E. M. (1987). Assessing measures of work commitment.
Journal of Occupational Behavior,7, 139-145.
Maidini, Ebrahim A. (1991). Herzberg's two-factor theory of job
satisfaction among public and private sectors. Public Personnel
Management, 20, 441-448.
Pringle, Peter K., Starr, Michael F. & McCavitt, William E. (1995).
Electronic Media Management. Boston: Butterworth.
Noe, Raymond A., Noe, Ann Wiggins, & Bachhuber, Julie A. (1990). An
investigation of the correlates of career motivation. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 37, 340-356.
Notz, William W. (1975). Work motivation and the negative effects of
extrinsic rewards. American Psychologist, 10, 884-890.
Pardee, Ronald L. (1990). Motivation Theories of Maslow, Herzberg,
McGregor and McClelland. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 316
767).
Sherman, Barry L. (1987). Telecommunications Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Sterling, Christopher H. & Kittross, John M. (1990). Stay Tuned: A
Concise History of American Broadcasting. California: Wadsworth.
Szura, John Paul & Vermillion, Mary E. (1975). Effects of defensiveness
and self-actualization on a Herzberg replication. Journal of
Vocational
Behavior,7, 181-187.
Terpstra, David E. (1992) Theories of motivation-borrowing the best.
Personnel Management,24,49-51.
Vroom, Victor H., & Deci, Edward L. (eds.). (1970) Management & Motivation
. Baltimore: Penguin Books.
Willis, Jim & Willis, Diane B. (1993) New Directions in Media Management
. Mass: Allyn & Bacon.
|
