____________________________Sections / Links______
_______________________________________________
Literature Review
Journalism job satisfaction studies have been conducted for more than 45 years. A migration of newspaper journalists to other careers prompted Samuelson (1962) to assist in the development of a measuring instrument to examine 13 attitudinal areas of satisfaction. The study involved 223 journalism graduates who had worked at a newspaper between 1950 and 1961. Of the 223 respondents, 72 had changed careers. Samuelson reported that journalists at larger newspapers (50,000 circulation or more) were less satisfied than those at smaller newspapers; salary did not influence level of satisfaction; those with at least four years experience were more satisfied in their personal duties; and older journalists (35 and older) with two or more dependents saw more future in the job.
Samuelson (1962) also reported that the journalists who left the profession said there was not much future in it as a career; poor leadership in editorial roles; and low pay. Samuelson said that the turnover of editorial staff was between 10 and 20 percent each year. He wrote: “Because finding adequate replacements for the departed staffers has become more difficult, newspapers are paying attention to the turnover of editorial workers.”
Johnstone, Slawski and Bowman (1971) conducted their seminal study involving more than 1,300 journalists. Johnstone et al. compared two groups (under 40; 40 and older) and examined satisfaction in terms of professional standards, editorial constraints, concrete rewards, such as salary, gender, and education. The study demonstrated that journalistic standards are correlated to satisfaction; older journalists are more accepting of editorial constraints such as deadlines, editing and story selection; low salaries cause dissatisfaction among younger journalists; and women are more satisfied in their work than men. Johnstone et al. concluded that between 20 and 25 percent of young journalists question their professional commitment. They wrote: “Moreover, dissatisfaction within this group does not seem to stem from economic opportunities, but job dissatisfaction for many young newsmen has to do more with professional considerations – discrepancies between journalistic ideals and day-to-day practices” (p. 154).
Overall, of the 1,300-plus journalists in the study, Johnstone et al. reported that in five years, 82.8 percent expected to be working in news media. Also, 48.8 percent said they were “very satisfied” in their jobs and 38.6 percent said they were “fairly (moderately) satisfied.”
For nearly three decades, building upon the work of Johnstone, et al. (1971), Weaver and Wilhoit have examined job satisfaction among journalists, beginning with their 1982-83 study involving 1,001 newsroom workers. In the decade since the Johnstone et al. (1971) study, job satisfaction among journalists dropped substantially with 40 percent saying they were “very satisfied” with their jobs. For young journalists (40 and under) in the Weaver and Wilhoit (1986) study, a major prediction of satisfaction was their perception of how well their news organization was informing the public.
Weaver and Wilhoit’s findings diverted from Johnstone et al.’s in one primary area – salary. Income for young journalists was no longer a predictor of satisfaction. As for older journalists, salary was still a predictor of satisfaction, but the relationship was not as strong as earlier studies. Other predictors of the satisfaction in the Weaver and Wilhoit (1986) study were frequent communication with supervisors and the esteem of the organization. Weaver and Wilhoit wrote: “Professionalism factors on the job – such as the importance of autonomy and the estimate of how well the employing organization is doing in informing the public – appear to have become stronger predictors of work satisfaction” (p. 101).
In terms of leaving the field, there was little overall change between the Johnstone et al. study and Weaver and Wilhoit’s. In the 1982-83 study, 82.6 percent said they expected to be working in the news media in five years. Overall, journalists who had intentions of leaving said salary and benefits were the primary reasons.
By 1992, Weaver and Wilhoit (1996) discovered a major shift in journalists and job satisfaction. They reported that 27.3 percent of journalists said they were “very satisfied” with their work. In two decades since the Johnstone et al. (1971) study, satisfaction had declined more than 47 percent. Meanwhile, 50 percent said they were “fairly satisfied,” which was up from the Johnstone et al. study where 39 percent responded “fairly satisfied.”
In the previous studies (Johnstone et al., 1971; Weaver and Wilhoit, 1986), 61 percent of people said “helping people” was “very important” in terms of job satisfaction. By 1992, “editorial policy” had moved to the top of the list with 69 percent. Weaver and Wilhoit attributed the shift to more stringent news policies on journalists’ autonomy. While autonomy and impacting the community still rated high among satisfied journalists, management policies, low salaries and inadequate advancement opportunities created dissatisfaction. Weaver and Wilhoit (1996) said diminished autonomy cannot be attributed to corporate ownership or lack of resources but to “internal, organizational factors” (p. 118). They also said salaries were not a factor in the attitudinal shift. However, they wrote:
Journalists in 1992 appeared to want to lead normal lives. They were less willing to suffer the dislocation and unpredictable schedules that were accepted by an earlier generation, especially in a competitive environment in which newsrooms were expected to do much more with fewer resources, and where there was little hope of professional advancement in an era of stalled growth (p. 118-119).
The number of journalists with intentions to leave the industry within five years also increased to 21 percent overall – double the 1982-83 study (Weaver and Wilhoit, 1996).
The 2002 Weaver, Beam, Brownlee, Voakes and Wilhoit (2007) study showed an increase in job satisfaction. Of the 1,149 journalists, 33.3 percent said they were “very satisfied” with their work and more than 50 percent said they were “fairly satisfied.” For the 445 daily newspaper journalists in the study, 82.7 percent were either very or fairly satisfied. Once again, autonomy to select story assignments and choose what to emphasize in those stories was closely associated with job satisfaction. Also, journalists who said their news organization was doing an “outstanding” or “very good” job of informing the public demonstrated high levels of satisfaction.
Another shift in the 2002 study was the intentions of journalists to leave the news media within five years. Weaver et al. (2007) reported that 17.2 percent expressed intentions to leave, which was down about 20 percent from the 1992 study. Reasons for leaving included pay, job security, stress and burnout, and an unfavorable work environment, such as deadlines and hours. Weaver et al. (2007) wrote:
Despite the fact that job satisfaction rose over all, women journalists rated their level of satisfaction below that of men, and the youngest journalists – those under 25 – tended to be considerably more pleased with their jobs than journalists in the next age group, the 25-34-year-old. Given the close connection between job satisfaction and intent to leave the profession, media managers should be concerned about these gaps (p. 124).
The work of Weaver, Wilhoit and their fellow authors has been the benchmark of job satisfaction research among journalists for the past 25 years. They based job satisfaction upon a single survey question: “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your present job – would you say very satisfied, fairly satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied” (Weaver, et al., 2007, p. 264; Weaver and Wilhoit, 1996, pg. 257; Weaver and Wilhoit, 1986, p. 175).
In implementing a portion of the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire developed by Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins and Klesh (1983), this study will examine journalists’ perceptions of job satisfaction from a broader foundation established by Weaver and Wilhoit. Cammann et al. developed the instrument to measure six models designed to provide information concerning the perceptions of individuals in an organization. The models include general attitudes (including the subcategory job satisfaction); job facets; task, job, and role characteristics; work group functioning; supervision; and pay.
Cammann et al. (1983) said the MOAQ was created to measure individual attitudes in an organization as part of a larger organizational analysis. The information gathered at the individual level allows for a complete assessment of an organization to assist in a thorough analysis.
Building upon the theoretical framework established by Hackman and Oldham (1976), Cammann et al. (1983) developed the MOAQ during a four-year period in which they tested the models based upon more than 400 respondents in at least three different organizations. Overall Job Satisfaction was established “to provide an indication of the organization members’ overall affective responses to their jobs” (p. 80). It is a three-question set to be answered on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). The questions include: “All in all, I am satisfied with my job;” “In general, I don’t like my job” (reverse coding); and “In general, I like working here” (p. 84). Cammann et al. report an internal consistency reliability at .77.
Harrison (1994) writes that the MOAQ is “the most useful and comprehensive standardized instrument” in measuring individual performance and quality of work life issues (p. 71). The MOAQ has been utilized to assess job satisfaction in a multitude of studies, including the examination of white-collar employees, including editors (Chen and Spector, 1992), state government employees (Carlson and Kacmar, 2000), state civil service employees from a university (Liu, Spector and Jex, 2005), non-faculty university employees (Jex and Gudanowski, 1992), traffic enforcement agents (Baruch-Feldman and Schwartz, 2002), and newspaper sports editors (Reinardy, 2007).
Along with the MOAQ to measure job satisfaction, diagnostic tools regarding perceived organizational support, role overload, job demands, work-family conflict and social support will also be implemented.