See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317935898

Gender Inequality, Job Satisfaction and Job Motivation: Evidence

from Indian Female Employees

Article · June 2017

DOI: 10.1177/0258042X17718742

CITATIONS READS
3 918

2 authors:

Nazia Zabin Memon Lalatendu Kesari Jena

Sambalpur University Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar (XIMB)
7 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    85 PUBLICATIONS   119 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Workplace Spirituality and Human Resource Effectiveness View project

Purpose and Passion View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lalatendu Kesari Jena on 27 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Article

Gender Inequality, Job Satisfaction Management and Labour Studies

42(3) 1–22
and Job Motivation: Evidence © 2017 XLRI Jamshedpur, School of
Business Management
from Indian Female Employees & Human Resources
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0258042X17718742
http://mls.sagepub.com

Nazia Zabin Memon1

Lalatendu Kesari Jena2

Abstract
Gender inequality (GI) at the workplace and the ensuing opportunity loss of economy has long been
studied, and results were established in different context. Several empirical research confirmed the
impact of non-fulfilment of job characteristics and employee expectations on job satisfaction and moti-
vation levels. However, its debilitating effect on the job satisfaction and job motivation levels of the
female employees have not seen any empirical conclusion. The primary purpose of the study is to
explore the relationship between workplace gender equality, job satisfaction and job motivation of
female employees in Indian context. The study was conducted during mid of 2016 on female employees
identified through convenience sampling and are employed in Indian organizations (N = 356). The sub-
scales were tested for psychometric properties and model fit followed by structural equation modelling
(SEM) to test the hypotheses. The results confirmed a significant relationship between workplace GI
inflicted on the women employees and their reduced satisfaction and motivational levels. The research
finding aims at identifying various human resource practices adopted by organizations worldwide to
reduce GI and empowers its female employees which are discussed in managerial implications.

Keywords
Gender inequality, job satisfaction, job motivation, human resource practice, female employees, SEM

Introduction
The importance of gender equality in all spheres, especially in economic participation, has long been an
area of considerable research but it has witnessed limited action during implementation. India, the
biggest economy of the Indian subcontinent, has a skewed gender ratio in economic participation as per
the Global Gender Gap (GGG) Report 2016 by World Economic Forum. A cursory glance at the GDP of

1
Doctoral Scholar, Department of Business Administration, Sambalpur University, Jyoti Vihar, India.
2
Doctoral Scholar, Department of Humanities and Social Science, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, West Bengal, India.

Corresponding author:
Nazia Zabin Memon, Doctoral Scholar, Department of Business Administration, Sambalpur University, Jyoti Vihar, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
2 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

various developing nations included in the report showed a positive correlation between the per capita
GDP and the female-male ratio in economic participation (f-m ratio). India has a per capita GDP of
US$5,730 with an f-m ratio of 0.41, far behind other developing nations like Brazil with US$14,455 and
0.64 and Indonesia with US$10,385 and 0.598 as the per capita GDP and f-m ratio, respectively. These
statistics indicate that higher participation of women has pushed the countries’ economies to greater
heights.
Taking these statistics into serious considerations, India needs economic participation from its women
who comprise 48.5 per cent of its population (Census India, 2011). The work environment should lower
entry barriers, especially for women re-entering workforce post-maternity breaks. A study conducted by
England, Bearak, Budig and Hodges (2016) on a panel data of American women ranging from 1979 to
2010 concluded a ‘motherhood penalty’ of as high as 10 per cent reduction in remuneration for women
re-entering workforce post-motherhood. Along with increased participation of women in the workforce,
an equally important aspect will be to boost the efficiency and productivity of these women. This can be
made possible only by providing a conducive work environment with special attention to the markers of
job satisfaction and job motivation (Okpara, 2006).
In the post-industrialization era, employees have begun to be esteemed as the human capital providing
a competitive advantage to the organization (Gardner, 2005) and have contributed considerably in
escalating the organizational performance (Hitt, Bierman, Shimizu & Kochhar, 2001). Thus, the human
capital losses (voluntary turnover) are a hefty price for organizational performance (Shaw, Park & Kim,
2013) and an ultimate dent to the talent pool. Since the effectiveness of an organization depends on its
approach towards its employees (Moynihan & Pandey, 2007), it has become imperative for the organizations
to identify factors that provoke the voluntary turnover. Results from earlier studies demonstrate a robust
and consistent association between retention of employees and higher levels of job satisfaction and
motivation. Rust, Stewart, Miller and Pielack (1996) in their study identified a key result linking intent
to stay with their job satisfaction levels. This result was reiterated by Rahman, Naqvi and Ramay (2008)
who replicated earlier research work in Pakistani context.
The intent to quit and voluntary turnover is comparitively higher in women (Becker-Blease, Kaen,
Etebari & Baumann, 2010; Blau and Kahn, 1981) but female voluntary turnover and its antecedents have
attracted little attention from the scholarly community. Lee (2012), in his study, deduced the catalyzing
role played by lower motivation levels in attrition of female employees and that of lowered job satisfaction
levels in future quits. Lower job satisfaction levels have been researched as a determining variable
in ‘intent-to-quit’ by many researchers (Griffeth, Hom & Gaertner, 2000). These results make job
satisfaction and job motivation of employees crucial to address since they affect the organization’s
performance (Roos & Eeden, 2008).
Till date, not many, detailed and empirical, studies have been performed to investigate the impact of
workplace gender inequality (GI) in India on the job satisfaction and job motivation levels of the Indian
female employees. While some research has been carried out on the constructs of female job satisfaction
and motivations but no study has captured the relation among the three constructs, namely, GI, job
satisfaction and job motivation, in entirety in Indian context. This article highlights the various aspects
of workplace GI and the importance of discouraging at the different levels of organizations.
GI leads to a deep-seated and everlasting impact on the perceptions of female employees deteriorating
their psychological capital (Pradhan, Jena & Bhattacharya, 2016), which is an indispensable requirement
for organizational success. The aim of this study is to analyze the relationship between GI and job
satisfaction, and job motivation. Human resource management practice plays a crucial role in nurturing
the talent of its employees and cultivating them into human capital (Delery & Shaw, 2001). This article
Memon and Jena 3

also tries to analyze the effectiveness of the various human resource practices implemented by global
MNCs in India to foster gender equality and increase the participation of women in the workforce. The
results would pave the way for HR professionals to devise better strategies for improving job satisfaction
and motivation of female employees in the workforce.
The overall structure of the study takes the form of six chapters. The first part of the article introduces
the topic and the primary objectives. The second part—literature review—highlights the key theoretical
concepts as well as contextualizes the research by citing seminal works on the three constructs. The third
part elaborates the methodology employed for this study including data analyses and results of hypotheses
testing. The next two parts—discussions and managerial implications—discuss the significant findings
of this study and recommend the practices for human resource department to improve job satisfaction
and motivation of female employees. The final section—conclusion—summarizes the principal results
of the article and scope for future research.

Literature Review

Gender Inequality and Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction (hereafter JS) is one of the most widely and frequently studied construct in both the
research and theories of organizational behaviour (Rainey, 2009) owing of its established relation with
job performance (Miller et al., 2001; Moynihan & Pandey, 2007). The most cited as well as the earliest
definition of JS by Locke (1976), in his book The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction, defines it as
‘[...] a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience’.
Another dimension, given by Ellickson and Logsdon (2002), defines JS as the likability aspect of the job.
The traditional models of JS have described it as a phenomenon of positive feeling and an adequate
orientation towards the work (Shields & Price, 2002). However, contemporary researchers have added a
newer perspective. They conclude that JS is not a one-dimensional phenomenon; rather the ambit of JS
also covers other dimensions like the expectation which an employee holds from the entire gamut of
workplace attributes (Togia, Koustelios & Tsigilis, 2004). Career progression, training and development
opportunities, recognition and rewards, etc. are a few expectations of employees.
JS has been extensively studied in varied contexts, but investigation on female employees has always
been a dimly lit alley. A step towards filling this void was initiated by Vlosky and Aguilar (2009). In their
enlightening work, they concluded about similar antecedents of JS for both male and female employees.
This confirmed the absence of any gender differential in triggers of JS clearly indicating that female
employees were satisfied to the same extent as male counterparts by the fulfilment of similar antecedents.
Both seek the achievement of the same antecedents of JS.
Eminent researchers have uncovered the antecedents of JS (Parnes et al., 1970; Quinn, Staines &
McCullough, 1974). Researchers have found out organization’s characteristics, like leadership style and
organizational policies, to be the dependent variables of JS. JS is also determined by various job
characteristics like recognition and rewards (Bodur, 2002; Gupta & Sharma, 2009; Steijn, 2002); job
complexity (Lee & Wilkins, 2011); relationship with co-workers (Gordon, Osgood & Phillips, 2010);
participative management (Jun, Cai & Shin, 2006; Willems, Janvier & Henderickx, 2004); opportunities
of training and development (Kim, 2002); performance management (Lin & Shen, 2007); and ease with
supervisor (Kim, 2002).
Porter and Steers (1973) have described satisfaction as a response to one’s expectation from job
characteristics like pay, quality of work, authority, responsibility, status and the likes which were
4 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

confirmed by Tziner and Vardi (1984) and Cranny, Smith and Stone (1992). Crosby (1982) in his
pioneering work on female employees’ satisfaction explained the non-fulfilment of expectations as a
cause for their lower JS levels. Female employees expect equality from all the facets and attributes of
their workplace as observed by Hodson (1989) and that when male counterparts are found to achieve all
the markers of JS, female employees develop a lower JS level.
In the mid-nineteenth century, women workers had a flat rate of work participation, and their jobs
concentrated in particular low-paying jobs requiring mostly women staff (Oppenheimer, 1970). Because
of the initial handicap of inferior educational opportunities and professional scope, female employees
drew comparisons with female co-workers and seldom with male counterparts (Mill, 1867, p. 236;
Phelps Brown, 1979, p. 134). With organizations supporting gender diversification in the workplace and
reducing gender segregation, the iron barriers rusted allowing more women into the workforce. With
higher qualifications, stellar work experiences and the newly gained armour of competence allowed
Indian females to have expectations on par with the male employees. But the prevalent ‘formal dis-
crimination’ (Brief & Barsky, 2000) caused disappointments by non-fulfilment of organizational and job
characteristics leading to burnout, stress (Channar, Abbassi and Ujan, 2011) and voluntary turnover
(Miner-Rubino & Cortina, 2006). Formal discrimination or gender discrimination against the female
employee, although was condemned in board daylight by the legal system and the organizations, its
existence was and is undeniable (Brief & Barsky, 2000; Deitch et al., 2003; Dipboye & Halverson,
2004). The presence of GI is becoming difficult to eradicate GI due to its diffused boundaries, subtleties
and challenging demarcation making it a persistent existence (Dipboye & Halverson, 2004).
The most evident disparity between male and female employees has been the presence of gender
wage gap which affects the fairness and equity perception of female employees (Card, Mas, Moretti &
Saez, 2012). This existence of wage disparity is found across many countries (Stedham et. al., 2002).
A study was conducted by Soumya and Panchanathan (2011) on the antecedents of women JS and the
pay and promotion aspect of job characteristic was found to be the most impacting factor deciding the JS
of female employees. Equal pay between men and women equated their status in the organization confer-
ring them a source of empowerment. Apart from equal pay, organizational aspect, which included an
emotional attachment and feeling of pride, acts as the second most important determiner of female
employee JS.
A survey conducted by Fairygodboss (2015), an online community created by women to share experi-
ences, in 2016 has revealed the significant impact of gender discrimination on JS. Women who felt they
were treated at par with male counterpart had higher JS rating. The disadvantage of gender borne by
female employees renders them with lower pay and inferior status in the organization which not only
impacts their JS (Hicks-Clarke & Iles, 2000) and their overall performance (Cohen-Charash & Spector,
2001). This, in turn, degrades the standing of women in the society (Goldenhar, Swanson, Hurrell, Ruder
& Deddens, 1998).
Eagly and Carli (2007), in their research work, observed that women at organizations get fewer
opportunities of work as compared to men since supervisors prefer male employees over female coun-
terparts for complex and challenging projects (Glick et. al., 2000; King et al., 2012). These lost opportu-
nities reduce responsibility and accountability of female employees who are the steps for climbing the
organizational ladder (DePater, Van Vianen & Bechtoldt, 2010). Male employees, on the other hand, are
given ability defining roles (Maume, 1999) giving them quicker climb in the organizational pyramid
(Blau & DeVaro, 2007). Indian women face one of largest pay gap of 30 per cent as per the Global Wage
Report 2016–17 released by the International Labour Organization (ILO). Women employees have kept
away from leadership roles thus having a cascading effect with reduced number of women in an organi-
zation (Ostroff et al., 2012). There have been studies identifying the antecedents of JS female employees
Memon and Jena 5

and separate studies concluding the existence of GI in these defined job characteristics. We are investi-
gating the presence of any relationship between the two phenomena. The first hypothesis is framed as,

H1: GI at workplace impacts the JS levels of female employees.

Gender Inequality and Job Motivation

Job motivation (hereafter JM), apart from JS, is an important phenomenon in the business worldwide.
Owing to its substantial contribution in organizational success and an essential attribute of human capi-
tal, fluctuating JM levels of employees tops the list of the managerial problem faced by contemporary
organizations (Watson, 1994, p. 4). Westwood (1992, p. 288), in his book Organizational Behavior:
South-east Asian Perspectives, defined motivation as ‘an internal state […] giving rise to desire or pres-
sure to act’. JM and satisfaction are bordering concepts, but there lies a fine line difference between the
two. JS, on the other hand, is defined as ‘the extent to which people are satisfied with their work’ (Warr,
2002, p. 1).
A motivated employee is an asset to the organization because of her elevated levels of commitment
(Meyer, Becker & Vandenberghe, 2004). An employee in her aroused state of motivation brings more
profit (Origo & Pagani, 2008) and effectiveness (Manzoor, 2012) to the organization and further
decreases the employee turnover (Clark, 1997). Many researchers have worked in the area of JM of
employees and concluded a direct relationship between higher levels of JM and improved organizational
performance (Grant, 2008; Halbesleben & Bowler, 2007). JM is achieved when its antecedents are ful-
filled but it is often observed that female employees do not get an equal set of job characteristic as well
as organizational features at par with male employees further leading to diminished JM levels. These
lower motivational levels of female employees make them a mediocre source of human capital having
impoverished productivity and efficiency which is susceptible to layoffs. Various models confirm the
crucial role of JM in the high attrition of female employees (Lee, 2012).
With a moderating role played by JM in increasing organization’s overall benefits, it is the onus of
managers to keep the employees in a healthy state of motivation (Oosthuizen, 2001). The management
should create a conducive environment where the female employees can develop their potential to contrib-
ute to organizational performance as well as fulfil one’s intrinsic motivators. Non-fulfilment of the require-
ments above leads to frustration and stress and ultimately lower levels of JS (Islam, Zaki & Ismail, 2008).
For sustaining the high levels of motivation, the first step involves identifying the antecedents of JM.
Herzberg’s (1966) two-factor theory of motivation details about the intrinsic and extrinsic factors of
motivation. An employee needs to satiate herself through the fulfilment of extrinsic motivators of liking
one’s work and incidences related to it. An employee seeks autonomy in the execution of work, recogni-
tion of work, career growth opportunities, accountability and meaningfulness of work. Intrinsic motiva-
tors of an employee are pay and rewards, company and HR policies like flexible work hours and work
from home, fringe benefits like insurance and med claims, working condition assuring the safety of
individuals, status in the organization, interpersonal relation with co-workers and superiors and job secu-
rity. However, female employees are kept bereft of opportunities to fulfil their intrinsic and extrinsic
motivators owing to existent GI. A recent study by Danish and Usman (2010) also resonates the impact
of promotional opportunities, work complexity, job description, recognition, relationship with co-
workers, compensation, security, supervision and growth to be positively and significantly correlated
with JS of employees. If the antecedents of JM are not satiated, demotivated employees tend to have a
comparatively easier chance to quit.
6 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Female employees at organizations are evaluated to have lesser promotion potential (Roth, Purvis &
Bobko, 2012) despite having similar qualifications (Lazear & Rosen, 1990). Individual studies confirm
the discriminatory nature of HR practitioners in dispensing higher remuneration to male employees
instead of equally performing female employees (Lips, 2003). A large number of employed females have
confessed being harassed at the hands of supervisors (Croker & Kalemba, 1999; McDonald et al., 2009)
thus jeopardizing their security at the organization. By existing theories and literature review, GI is
perceived to impact JM of Indian female employees.

H2: GI significantly impacts JM levels of female employees.

Methodology

Procedures and Sample

The respondents of the study were Indian female employees from different sectors, namely manufactur-
ing, banking, IT, BPO and hospitality. Qualitative methods offer an effective way of understanding the
latent variable of the study thus contributing to choose the most relevant scale to measure the identified
constructs/model. The first leg of the research comprised of semi-structured interviews with female
employees to understand the various facets of discrimination as well as predictors of motivation and
satisfaction at their workplaces. Female employees across all management levels were considered in the
study to get a comprehensive view of the quality of their work life. Before undertaking the investigation,
confidentiality was assured and participants received an explanation of the research work. This helped to
ease their fears and made them come out of their closets.
Convenient sampling and snowballing methods were adopted as sample collection method. First,
questionnaires were emailed to working female acquaintances and they were requested to pass the ques-
tionnaire to female employees at their departments. Second, questionnaires were distributed to few
female employees personally, and some female employees were mailed printed questionnaires and were
asked to circulate as well. Out of the 500 questionnaires distributed, 364 were received of which eight
were less than 80 per cent complete thus they were rejected. The response rate was a decent 72.8 per cent.
The cohort comprised of 356 female employees and the descriptive statistics are in Table 1.

Table 1. Demographic Characteristic of Sample

Years of Experience Less than five years—26.9 Maternity break(s) Yes—47%

5–15 years—52.6 No—53%
15 years or more—20.5
Managerial level Senior—9.2% Sector Manufacturing—21.6%
Middle—47.5% Banking—21.1%
Junior—43.3% IT/BPO—53.2%
Others—4.1%
Marital status Married—52.6%
Unmarried—47.3%
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Memon and Jena 7

Measures
For testing the hypotheses of the study, data were collected using a well-structured questionnaire com-
prising of the GI scale, JS scale and motivation at work scale (MAWS). The first section of the question-
naire sourced the biographic details of the respondents using a nominal scale and the second section
measured the three constructs of the study employing the five-point Likert rating scale ranging from
strongly disagree (1) through disagree (2), may be, (3) agree to strongly agree (5).

Gender Inequality (GI) Scale

A 20-item scale used in this study was developed and validated on Memon and Satpathy’s (2016) work
of identifying factors contributing to GI at the workplace. The GI scale comprised of five subscales cov-
ering the various dimensions of GI at the workplace. The organizational biases dimension composed of
five items which captured inequalities relating to HR practices (sample item: Equal opportunity for qual-
ity work), the three-item organizational support subscale captured the organization’s willingness to help
its female employees (sample item: Location flexibility), the five-item parity in treatment dimension
grasped the extent of equality ingrained in organization’s work culture (sample item: Equal sharing of
responsibilities), the three-item policies of organization (regarding maternity and harassment) subscale
measured the pro-female culture of the (sample item: Equal sharing of responsibilities), the four-item
employee motivation subscale measured organization’s efforts to keep its female workforce motivated
(sample item: Empowered female employees).

Job Motivation Scale

The MAWS developed by Gagne et al. (2010) was used for capturing employee motivation. It consists
of four subscales consisting of three items each. The subscales covered four dimensions, namely intrin-
sic, identified, introjected and extrinsic: Scale 1–3 measured intrinsic dimension (sample item: Because
I enjoy this work very much), scale 4–6 measured identified dimension (sample item: Because this job
fulfils my career plans), scale 7–9 measured introjected dimension (sample item: Because my reputation
depends on it) and scale 10–12 measured extrinsic dimension (sample item: I do this job for the pay-
check).

Job Satisfaction
The 39-items Lomond and Spector (2000) scale was adopted in the study to measure JS. Comprising of
nine subscales, pay captures the satisfaction of female employees regarding pay and pay rises (sample
item—I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do), the second dimension measures the satis-
faction of female employee with promotion opportunities (sample item: Those who do well on the job
stand a fair chance of being promoted), the dimension supervision captures the satisfaction of female
employees with their supervisors. Similarly, fringe benefits dimension captures satisfaction with fringe
benefits (sample item: The benefit package we have is equitable), whereas contingent rewards depict the
satisfaction with rewards (sample item—I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated), the dimension
co-workers explains the satisfaction with peers (sample item—I find I have to work harder because of
8 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

the incompetence of people I work with), nature of work dimension measures the satisfaction with the
work done (sample item—I sometimes feel my job is meaningless) and the last dimension communica-
tion captures the satisfaction of employees with the ease of communication (sample item—Work assign-
ments are not fully explained).
Data collected from different sources were collated and converted into respective subscale composite
scores to be further used for statistical analysis. Various statistical tools were applied for preparatory
scrutiny of data like descriptive statistics, reliability tests and correlation analysis. The identified
hypotheses and the conceptual model were tested using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and SEM.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modelling

A CFA model is a tool to assess the psychometric appropriateness of data and to measure the validity of
construct-item relations. Also known as a measurement model, it measures the goodness of fit of each
latent construct thus fulfilling the preliminary specifics of SEM (Byrne, 2013). It simultaneously answers
the issue of uni-dimensionality emphasized upon by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). An assessment of the
goodness of fit is done based upon the following parameters. The values are CMIN/df ≤ 3 (Wheaten
et al., 1977), GFI ≥ 0.90 (Bentler & Bonnet, 1980), CFI ≥ 0.95 (Hu & Bentler, 1999), RMSEA ≤ 0.05
(Browne & Cudek, 1993).
SEM is a tool to assess multiple dependent and independent variables simultaneously along with
latent (immeasurable) variables. SEM helps to validate relationships between variables thus facilitating
in theory testing and ultimately model development (Savalei & Bentler, 2010).

CFA for Gender Inequality

The measurement scale of perception of GI was entered into a CFA analysis process resulting in an
acceptable model fit. The model fit indices are in Table 2. The measurement model displaying absolute
goodness of fit is displayed in Figure 1. This was succeeded by inspection of the significance of stand-
ardized regression weights of all items which were found to be associated with the variable perception
of GI (Table 3).

CFA for Job Satisfaction

The measurement scale of JS was entered into a CFA analysis not resulting in an acceptable model fit.
This was followed by model modification resulting into deletion of two variables, FB 2 (The benefits we
receive are as good as most other organizations offer) and Comm 4 (Work assignments are not fully
explained), due to factor loading lower than 0.5 (Hair et al., 1998). Model fit was achieved on the

Table 2. Goodness of Fit Results for PGI

Items Reason for

Model |2 |2/df p GFI CFI TLI RMSEA Deleted Deletion
CFA1 223.11 1.39 0.01 0.94 0.98 0.98 0.03 – –
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Memon and Jena 9

Figure 1. Final Standardized CFA for Five Factors PGI with 20 Items
Source: Authors’ own findings.

deletion of two variables. The goodness of fit measures are in Table 4. The measurement model display-
ing absolute goodness of fit is displayed in Figure 2. This was assisted by inspection of the significance
of standardized regression weights of all items which were found to be associated with the variable
perception of JS in Table 5.

CFA for Job Motivation

The measurement scale of JM was entered into a CFA analysis process resulting in an acceptable model
fit. The model fit indices are in Table 6. The measurement model displaying absolute goodness of fit is
10 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Table 3. Standardized Regression Weight Factor Loading for GI

Item Direction Variable B S.E. C.R.

OB5 OB 0.769* *
OB4 OB 0.722 0.065 15.047
OB3 OB 0.787 0.063 15.383
OB2 OB 0.887 0.063 17.512
OB1 OB 0.683 0.06 13.06
PT5 PT 0.506* *
PT4 PT 0.712 0.179 8.526
PT3 PT 0.69 0.172 8.401
PT2 PT 0.732 0.168 8.631
PT1 PT 0.712 0.171 8.526
EM4 EM 0.866* *
EM3 EM 0.886 0.047 22.679
EM2 EM 0.906 0.043 23.596
EM1 EM 0.845 0.053 20.815
OS3 OS 0.847* *
OS2 OS 0.945 0.05 22.244
OS1 OS 0.817 0.051 18.899
PO3 PO 0.867* *
PO2 PO 0.845 0.054 18.561
PO1 PO 0.799 0.054 17.392
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Notes: **Level of significance at p < 0.001.
**The blank cells exist because the regression weights were fixed to 1.0.

Table 4. Goodness of Fit Results for JS

Items Reason for

Model |2 |2/df p GFI CFI TLI RMSEA Deleted Deletion
CFA1 1,012.59 1.81 0.01 0.86 0.92 0.91 0.04 Comm 2 Low FL
CFA2 816.06 1.46 0.01 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.03 FB 2 Low FL
Source: Authors’ own findings.

displayed in Figure 3. This was assisted by inspection of the significance of standardized regression
weights of all items which were found to be associated with the variable perception of JM in Table 7.

Reliability and Factor Correlation

Once the measurement models were considered to be well fitted, a reliability test was essential to con-
firm the statistical reliability of all three scales and which was found to be above the accepted threshold
of 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978). The average factor loadings were found to be above 0.7, hence proving the
convergent validity (Chin, 1998). Table 8 shows the summary statistics for the reliability test.
Though JS and motivation are overlapping concepts, these two are treated as two distinct constructs
in the study. To support the conceptual framework of the study, the two constructs were tested for
Memon and Jena 11

Figure 2. Final Standardized CFA for Nine Factor Job Satisfaction with 34 Items
Source: Authors’ own findings.
12 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Table 5. Standardized Regression Weight Factor Loading for JS

Item Direction Variable Estimate S.E.

Pay4 Pay 0.516**
Pay3 Pay 0.65 0.10
Pay2 Pay 0.90 0.16
Pay1 Pay 0.90 0.17
Prom4 Prom 0.481**
Prom3 Prom 0.78 0.21
Prom2 Prom 0.80 0.24
Prom1 Prom 0.74 0.22
Super4 Super 0.949**
Super3 Super 0.94 0.03
Super2 Super –0.85 0.03
Super1 Super –0.62 0.02
FB4 FB 0.615**
FB3 FB 0.87 0.11
FB1 FB 0.84 0.11
CR4 CR 0.669**
CR3 CR –0.68 0.11
CR2 CR 0.65 0.10
CR1 CR 0.52 0.10
OC4 OC –0.474**
OC3 OC –0.67 0.23
OC2 OC –0.79 0.26
OC1 OC –0.60 0.20
CoW4 CoW 0.76**
CoW3 CoW 0.90 0.06
CoW2 CoW 0.85 0.06
CoW1 CoW 0.85 0.06
NW4 NW 0.73**
NW3 NW 0.77 0.08
NW2 NW 0.78 0.08
NW1 NW 0.76 0.09
Comm3 Comm 0.54 0.12
Comm2 Comm 0.79 0.10
Comm1 Comm 0.76 0.12
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Notes: **Level of significance at p < 0.001
The blank cells exist because the regression weights were fixed to 1.0.

Table 6. Goodness of Fit Results for JM

Items Reason for

Model |2 |2/df p GFI CFI TLI RMSEA Deleted Deletion
CFA 1 57.48 1.19 0.01 0.97 0.94 0.99 0.02 – –
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Memon and Jena 13

Figure 3. Final Standardized CFA for Four Factors Job Motivation with12 Items
Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 7. Standardized Regression Weight Factor Loading for JS

Item Direction Variable Estimate S.E. C.R.

Intrin3 Intrinsic 0.596**
Intrin2 Intrinsic 0.795 0.135 9.644
Intrin1 Intrinsic 0.79 0.131 9.662
Ident3 Indentified 0.791**
Ident2 Indentified 0.75 0.073 13.142
Ident1 Indentified 0.817 0.079 13.543
Intro3 Introjected 0.833**
Intro2 Introjected 0.727 0.063 12.895
Intro1 Introjected 0.789 0.07 13.427
Extrin3 Extrinsic 0.841**
Extrin2 Extrinsic 0.813 0.074 15.806
Extrin1 Extrinsic 0.805 0.06 15.711
Source: Authors’ own findings.
Notes: **Level of significance at p < 0.00.
The blank cells exist because the regression weights were fixed to 1.0.
14 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Table 8. Reliability and Convergent Validity

Variables No. of Originally Items No. of Items Retained Item Loading Cronbach’s a
Gender inequality 20 20 0.68–0.94 0.78
Job satisfaction 36 34 0.52–0.95 0.81
Job motivation 12 12 0.60–0.84 0.85
Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 9. Factor Correlation Showing Degree of Inter-relationship between Constructs

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3
Gender inequality 2.34 0.63 1
Job motivation 2.83 0.72 0.61 1
Job satisfaction 2.25 0.51 0.56 0.47 1
Source: Authors’ own findings.

non-relatedness. The average variance extracted was more than the correlation square proving discrimi-
nant validity hence non-relatedness between JS and JM. Correlation between the three variables resulted
are present in Table 9.

Evaluation of the Conceptual Model

The two hypotheses were tested to examine the effect of perception of GI on JS and JM. It was proved
that perception of GI of female employees has a significant impact on their JS and JM levels. The
hypotheses were supported and the final model achieved decent goodness of fit. (χ2/df = 1.355, GFI =
0.814, CFA= 0.937, RMSEA= 0.032). The hypotheses testing the effect of GI on JS and JM were run on
AMOS (Figure 4) and results are in Table 10.

Discussion
The nucleus of the article is presented in the conceptual framework in Figure 1 which depicts the rela-
tionship between GI and JS as well as GI and JM. A correlation analysis showed close linkages among
the three concepts indicating a potential impact of GI on the two dependent variables, JS and JM. A path
analysis supported both the hypotheses. The first result of the study concluded a definitive impact of GI
on the JS levels of female employees. These results of the survey from Indian perspective converge with
the findings of Channar, Abbassi and Ujan (2011) who conducted their study on the public and private
sectors of Pakistan. However, the results of this study also suggest that JS and JM are dependent on job
characteristics and its non-fulfilment cause deterioration in JS (Miner-Rubino & Cortina, 2006) as well
as JM (Islam, Zaki & Ismail, 2008) levels.
Female employees anticipate equity in treatment by the organization (Kannan, 2005) and non-
fulfilment of this expectation of equal treatment in workplace further impacts their behaviour (Adams,
1965). Prevalence of a discrepancy between male and female, in selection (Moss-Racusin et al., 2012),
remuneration (Card, Cardoso & Kline, 2015; Nakata & Takehiro, 2002), promotion (Roth et al., 2012),
Memon and Jena 15

Figure 4. Final Model Showing Impact of Gender Inequality on Job Satisfaction and Job Motivation
Source: Authors’ own findings.

Table 10. The Effect of Perception of Gender Inequality on Job Satisfaction and Job Motivation

Hypothesized Paths Direction b estimates Decision

H1: JS PGI + 0.43 Supported
H2: JM PGI + 0.51 Supported
Source: Authors’ own findings.
16 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

leadership opportunities (Ostroff et al., 2012), performance appraisal (Thomas-hunt & Philips, 2004)
and career opportunity (Okpara, 2006), detrimentally affect the JS and JM levels. The absence of fulfill-
ment of this expectation of equality from job characteristics diminishes JS and JM (Brief & Barsky,
2000; Miner-Rubino & Cortina, 2006). The difference between the levels of perceived expectation of
equality and achieved experiences of formal workplace discrimination detrimentally affects the JS levels
of female employees.
The research findings of this article highlight about the bilateral damage GI incurs on the female
employees as well as on the organization. The first infliction is the stunted career growth of the female
employees as they get caught in the milieu of sticky floors or glass ceiling (Kee, 2006; Xiu & Gunderson,
2014) which has a debilitating effect on their JS and motivation levels. Second, their impaired contribu-
tion in productivity as a consequence of GI decelerates the organizational performance.

Managerial Implications
The finding of this study has significant managerial implications for human resource development and
top management of the organization. The study was undertaken to identify and prove the effect of GI at
the workplace on JS and JM. These findings have further established implicit relations between the
gender discriminating practices exhibited by the organizations in India and employee productivity,
voluntary turnover and organizational performance.
The research finding infers about the implication of GI on the levels of satisfaction and motivation of
the female employees. The female employees on receiving an unequal treatment from the organization
develop a built of frustration and stress which in turn dampens their work dispositions. This reduces their
levels of satisfaction and motivation and eventually cast a shadow on their marginal productivity making
them sources of inferior human capital. The study also identifies the role of the fulfilment of expectation
of female employees in maintaining them as rich sources human capital organization. The female
employees, if given a gender-neutral approach by the organization would feel valued, empowered and
unambiguous about their existence and career at the organization making them sources of psychological
capital to the organization.
The perils of lower JS and JM of the female employees are not limited to the individual but have an
impending effect on organizational performance. The findings of the study emphasize about the practices
of GI as the cause of the lower levels of JS and JM. Here, the organization could play an instrumental
role in uprooting the causes of GI of female employees by incorporating gender-sensitized HR practices
across the board.
Indian organizations need to be forthcoming towards the idea of restructuring existing practices and
incorporating newer ones to enhance the satisfaction and motivation levels of its female workforce. Few
suggested measures are as follows:

1) Women leadership—There should be more female leaders in the organization acting as a role
model to the society as well as a mentor to the female employees. Accenture—the leading IT
company—has floated a mentorship programme where female employees are paired with
Accenture mentors to incorporate in them leadership capabilities and a streak to lead.
2) Internal practices—Organizations should mould their internal practices making it transparent
and proactive, encouraging the development of its female employees. Tata & Sons launched their
flagship programme TataLead (Bhattacharya, 2016) and adopted groundbreaking measures. It
increased and extended the maternity benefits and made re-entry of women after maternity breaks
Memon and Jena 17

easier by the initiatives. Taking cues from the changing industry requirements, Intel rolled out a
programme, ‘Home to Office’, to help women resume their work post maternity or relocation
(Dasgupta & Khosala, 2016). Accenture has floated a training and development programme for
its female employees providing them virtual along with in-person training to make them effective
managers and help escalate their career graphs. Delloit has come up with a project named Delloit
Women’s Initiative to retain and develop its female workforce (Churchman & Thompson, 2008).
3) External communication—Organizations are publically communicating about their intentions of
gender diversity and equality to support the cause. The Indian IT giant—WIPRO—has come up
with a campaign titled Women of Wipro (WOW) (Cherian, 2012). It aims at kindling the flame
of passion within the female employee. This programme aims organization-wide mass
sensitization to foster the career growth of male and female employees alike. Price Waterhouse
Cooper, launched its bias awareness campaign to understand the occurrences of gender bias and
finding out the needed measures. Organizations are also conducting stay interviews to foster
increased self-worth and hinder improved JS levels of female employees. Mass sensitization of
the organization, top management and male employees, towards GI and its allied effects, would
help to get collaborative effort from all quarters to reduce the perils of GI.

Improved status of women in organizations by weeding out gender inequalities would improve the worth
of female employees as the psychological capital of the organizations. This improved status would
upgrade the social standing of women in the society as well as spread a wave of optimism causing an
influx of more women in organizations and workforce participation.

Conclusion and Scope for Future Research

There is a plethora of literature, research and reports proclaiming the importance of female employees in
the workforce and their contribution to the global economy. The present study was however designed to
determine the effect of gender discriminating practices on female employees’ JS and motivation levels.
The proposed framework and the empirical findings set out to objectively examine and measure the
relationships between GI, JS and JM. This investigation shows that if female employees feel discrimi-
nated at organizations owing to their gender, their JS and JM are significantly lowered. This decreased
level of JMs and satisfaction further lowers their marginal productivity ultimately leading to overall loss
of organizational output.
However, this study was limited in several ways. First, the study used convenience sampling restrict-
ing the generalizability of results. Respondents were selected on the grounds of accessibility. Few of the
interviewees were further asked to snowball the questionnaire which would mean they would circulate
it to people in their department or hierarchy thus narrowing the representation. Second, the respondents
of the study majorly comprised of female employees belonging to managerial level, which reduces its
generalizability (applicability) to administrative and clerical female employees. The third limitation was
the hesitation expressed by HR department heads in expressing about practices of GI leading to dissatis-
faction among its female employees. The concept of workplace GI was stigmatized and unspoken of;
hence the organizational perspective could not be captured. The moderating roles of societal culture,
leadership style and region were not taken into consideration, and this should be taken up by future
researchers. Owing to these limitations, duplication of the study for cross-validation is recommended.
Future studies should include a more representative sample with the inclusion of policy makers and HR
manager’s opinions.
18 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Although, employee motivation and satisfaction have been studied and various indicators have been
explored, but research rigour is still deficient in the area of female JS and motivation. There has been a
slow improvement of the sociological and economic condition of female employees and their participation
in the workforce. This improved status has enhanced their JS JM levels as a corollary to those described
above. But dissatisfaction and lower motivation of female employees owing to gender discrimination
still exist because the reasons are rooted within the organizations. There have been many researchers
working in the realm of workplace GI and this research as well contributes to this concerted effort by
providing scope for future research.

References
Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 267–299.
Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-
step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
Becker-Blease, J.R., Kaen, F.R., Etebari, A., & Baumann, H. (2010). Employees, firm size and profitability in US
manufacturing industries. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 7(2), 7–23.
Bentler, P.M., & Bonnet, D.C. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.
Bhattacharya, S. (2016). New benchmark: Tata Sons rolling out woman-centric policies including paid maternity leave
of seven months. Retrieved on 12 July 2016, from http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52084422.
cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
Blau, F.D., & DeVaro, J. (2007). New evidence on gender differences in promotion rates: An empirical analysis of
a sample of new hires. Industrial Relations, 46(3), 511–550.
Blau, F.D., & Kahn, L.M. (1981). Race and sex differences in quits by young workers. Industrial Labor Relation
Review, 34(4), 563–577.
Bodur, S. (2002). Job satisfaction of health care staff employed at health centres in Turkey. Occupational Medicine,
52(6), 353–355.
Brief, A.P., & Barsky, A. (2000). Establishing a climate for diversity: The inhibition of prejudiced reactions in the
workplace. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 19, 91–129.
Browne, M.W. & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen and J.S. Long (Eds),
Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Byrne, B.M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming.
New York: Routledge.
Card, D., Cardoso, A.R., & Kline, P. (2015). Bargaining, sorting, and the gender wage gap: Quantifying the impact
of firms on the relative pay of women. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(2), 633–686.
Card, D., Mas, A., Moretti, E., & Saez, E. (2012). Inequality at work: The effect of peer salaries on job satisfaction.
The American Economic Review, 102(6), 2981–3003.
Census India (2011). Manual for sex ratio. New Delhi: Registrar General of India. Retrieved from http://censusindia.
gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/fsex.aspx
Fairygodboss (2015). Female satisfaction: How to get it. Retrieved on 5 September 2016, from https://fairygodboss.
com/research/female-job-satisfaction
Channar, Z.A., Abbassi, Z., & Ujan, I.A. (2011). Gender discrimination in workforce and its impact on the employees.
Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 5(1), 177–191.
Cherian, R.S. (2012). Wipro’s women focused initiatives. Retrieved on 3 September 2016, from http://www.iusstf.
org/cms/newsimages/file/women-in-science/Wipro.pdf
Chin, W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), vii–xvi.
Churchman, S., & Thompson, C. (2008). Delivering gender diversity: Beyond the business case. Strategic HR
Review, 7(5), 17–22.
Clark, A.E. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics, 4(4),
341–372.
Memon and Jena 19

Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P.E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278–321.
Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C., & Stone, E.F. (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects
their performance. New York: Lexington Books.
Crocker, D., & Kalembra, V. (1999). The incidence and impact of women’s experiences of sexual harassment in
Canadian workplaces. The Canadian Review of Sociology, 36(4), 541.
Crosby, F.J. (1982). Relative deprivation and working women. New York: Oxford University Press.
Danish, R.Q., & Usman, A. (2010). Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and motivation: An empiri-
cal study from Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(2), 159.
Dasgupta, B., & Khosla, V. (2016). Companies like Dell, Accenture and Intel introduce initiatives for women in
tech  roles.  Retrieved  on 24 August 2016, from  http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52247295.cms?
utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
DePater, I.E., Van Vianen, A.E., & Bechtoldt, M.N. (2010). Gender differences in job challenge: A matter of task
allocation. Gender, Work & Organization, 17(4), 433–453.
Deitch, E.A., Barsky, A., Butz, R.M., Chan, S., Brief, A.P., & Bradley, J.C. (2003). Subtle yet significant: The
existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56(11), 1299–1324.
Delery, J.E., & Shaw, J.D. (2001). The strategic management of people in work organizations: Review, synthesis,
and extension. In G.R. Ferris (Ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol 20.
(pp. 165–197). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
Dipboye, R.L., & Halverson, S.K. (2004). Subtle (and not so subtle) discrimination in organizations. In R.W. Griffin
& A.M. O’Leary-Kelly (Eds), The dark side of organizational behavior (pp. 131–158). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Eagly, A.H., & Carli, L.L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School Publishing.
Ellickson, M.C., & Logsdon, K. (2002). Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal government employees.
Public Personnel Management, 31(3), 343–358.
England, P., Bearak, J., Budig, M.J., & Hodges, M.J. (2016). Do highly paid, highly skilled women experience the
largest motherhood penalty? American Sociological Review, 81(6), 1161–1189.
Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M.H., Aubé, C., Morin, E., & Malorni, A. (2010). The motivation at work scale:
Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(4), 628–646.
Gardner, T.M. (2005). Human resource alliances as a means of improving the recruiting, management, and retention
of employees. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(6), 1057–1074.
Glick, P., Fiske, S.T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J.L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., & Annetje, B. (2000). Beyond prejudice as
simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
79(5), 763–775.
Goldenhar, L.M., Swanson, N.G., Hurrell, J.J., Jr, Ruder, A., & Deddens, J. (1998). Stressors and adverse outcomes
for female construction workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3(1), 19.
Gordon, V., Osgood, J.L., & Phillips, J. (2010). Municipal clerks: Examining a model of job satisfaction. Public
Personnel Management, 39(4), 327–352.
Grant, A.M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence,
performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48.
Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee
turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management,
26(3), 463–488.
Gupta, M., & Sharma, P. (2009). Job satisfaction level among employees: A case study of Jammu region, J&K. IUP
Journal of Management Research, 8(5), 17.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). New York:
Prentice Hall International.
Halbesleben, J.R., & Bowler, W.M. (2007). Emotional exhaustion and job performance: The mediating role of
motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 93.
20 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, New York: The Word Publishing Company.
Hicks-Clarke, D., & Iles, P. (2000). Climate for diversity and its effects on career and organizational attitudes and
perceptions. Personnel Review, 29(3), 324–345.
Hitt, M.A., Bierman, L., Shimizu, K., & Kochhar, R. (2001). Direct and moderating effects of human capital on
strategy and performance in professional service firms: A resource-based perspective. Academy of Management
Journal, 44(1), 13–28.
Hodson, R. (1989). Gender differences in job satisfaction. The Sociological Quarterly, 30(3), 385–399.
Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional
criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Islam, R., Zaki Hj., & Ismail, A. (2008). Employee motivation: A Malaysian perspective. International Journal of
Commerce and Management, 18(4), 344–362.
Jun, M., Cai, S., & Shin, H. (2006). TQM practice in maquiladora: Antecedents of employee satisfaction and loyalty.
Journal of Operations Management, 24(6), 791–812.
Kannan, R. (2005). Theories of motivation—J Stacey Adams—equity theory on job motivation. Retrieved on
27 September 2016, from www.geocities.com/kstability/learning/management/equity.htm
Kee, H.J. (2006). Glass ceiling or sticky floor? Exploring the Australian gender pay gap. Economic Record, 82(259),
408–427.
Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for management leadership. Public
Administration Review, 62(2), 231–241.
King, E.B., Botsford, W., Hebl, M.R., Kazama, S., Dawson, J.F., & Perkins, A. (2012). Benevolent sexism at work
gender differences in the distribution of challenging developmental experiences. Journal of Management, 38(6),
1835–1866.
Lazear, E.P., & Rosen, S. (1990). Male-female wage differentials in job ladders. Journal of Labor Economics, 1(2),
106–123.
Lee, T.H. (2012). Gender differences in voluntary turnover: Still a paradox? International Business Research, 5(10),
19.
Lee, Y.J., & Wilkins, V.M. (2011). More similarities or more differences? Comparing public and nonprofit managers’
job motivations. Public Administration Review, 71(1), 45–56.
Lin, G., & Shen, Q. (2007). Measuring the performance of value management studies in construction: Critical
review. Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE, 23(1), 2–9.
Lips, H.M. (2003). The gender pay gap: Concrete indicator of women’s progress toward equality. Analyses of Social
Issues and Public Policy, 3(1), 87–109.
Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. Handbook of industrial and organizational psycho-
logy (1st ed.). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Lomond, D., & Spector, P.E. (2000). Taking stock of the job satisfaction survey: Its validity and reliability on a
difference time and place. Proceedings of ASAC-IFSM Conference Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Manzoor, Q.A. (2012). Impact of employees motivation on organizational effectiveness. Business Management and
Strategy, 3(1), 1.
Maume, D.J. (1999). Glass ceilings and glass escalators occupational segregation and race and sex differences in
managerial promotions. Work and Occupations, 26(4), 483–509.
McDonald, S., Lin, N., & Ao, D. (2009). Networks of opportunity: Gender, race, and job leads. Social Problems,
56(3), 385–402.
Memon, N., & Satpathy, B. (2016). Gender inclusion at work place: An empirical study in selected organizations of
western Odisha. International Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2(1), 126–132.
Meyer, J.P., Becker, T.E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis
and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 991.
Mill, J.S. (1867). Principles of political economy. London: Routledge and Sons.
Miller, N.G., Erickson, A., & Yust, B.L. (2001). Sense of place in the workplace: The relationship between personal
objects and job satisfaction and motivation. Journal of Interior Design, 27(1), 35–44.
Memon and Jena 21

Miner-Rubino, K., & Cortina, L.M. (2006). Observed incivility toward women at work: The role of organizational
justice. Paper presented at the APA/NIOSH Work, Stress and Health Conference, Miami, FL.
Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle
gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479.
Moynihan, D.P., & Pandey, S.K. (2007). The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation. Public
Administration Review, 67(1), 40–53.
Nakata, Y.F., & Takehiro, R. (2002). Employment and wages of female Japanese workers: Past, present, and future.
Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 41(4), 521–547.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Okpara, John O. (2006). Gender and the relationship between perceived fairness in pay, promotion, and job
satisfaction in a sub-Saharan African economy. Women in Management Review, 21(3), 224–240.
Oosthuizen, T.F.J. (2001). Motivation influencing worker performance in a technical division of Telkom SA. Acta
Commercii, 1(1), 19–30.
Oppenheimer, V.K. (1970). The female labor force in the United States: Demographic and economic factors
governing its growth and changing composition (No. 5). IICA.
Origo, F., & Pagani, L. (2008). Workplace flexibility and job satisfaction: Some evidence from Europe.
International Journal of Manpower, 29(6), 539–566.
Ostroff C., Kinicki A.J., & Muhammad R.S. (2012). Organizational culture and climate, Handbook of Psychology,
Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.
Parnes, H.S., Shea, J.R., Spitz, R.S., & Zeller, F.A. (1970). Dual Careers (Vol. 1). Manpower Research Monograph
(21). Wasihngton, DC: Government Printing Office.
Phelps Brown, H. (1979). The inequality of pay. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and
absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80(2), 45–56.
Pradhan, R.K., Jena, L.K., & Bhattacharya, P. (2016). Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship
behavior: Moderating role of emotional intelligence. Cogent Business & Management, 3(1), 1194174.
Quinn, R.P., Staines, G.L., & McCullough, M.R. (1974). Job satisfaction: Is there a trend? (No. 30). US Dept. of
Labor, Manpower Administration; for sale by the Supt. of Docs., US Govt. Print. Off.
Rahman, A., Naqvi, S.M.M.R., & Ramay, M.I. (2008). Measuring turnover intention: A study of IT professionals in
Pakistan. International Review of Business Research Papers, 4(3), 45–55.
Rainey, H.G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Roos, W., & Van Eeden, R. (2008). The relationship between employee motivation, job satisfaction and corporate
culture. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(1), 54–63.
Roth P.L., Purvis, K.L., & Bobko, P. (2012). A meta-analysis of gender group differences for measures of job
performance in field studies. Journal of Management, 38(2), 719–739. 
Rust, R.T., Stewart, G.L., Miller, H., & Pielack, D. (1996). The satisfaction and retention of frontline employees:
A customer satisfaction measurement approach. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 7(5),
62–80.
Savalei, V., & Bentler, P.M. (2010). Structural equation modeling. Corsini encyclopedia of psychology (1–3).
Shaw, J.D., Park, T.Y., & Kim, E. (2013). A resource-based perspective on human capital losses, HRM investments,
and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 34(5), 572–589.
Shields, M.A., & Price, S.W. (2002). Racial harassment, job satisfaction and intentions to quit: Evidence from the
British nursing profession. Economica, 69(274), 295–326.
Sowmya, K.R., & Panchanatham, N. (2011). Factors influencing job satisfaction of banking sector employees in
Chennai, India. Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 3(5), 76–79.
Stedham, Y., Yamamura, J.H., Taylor, D., & Nelson, M. (2002). Organizational factors and dimensions of satisfaction:
A comparative study of accountants in Australia and the US. Australian Accounting Review, 12(28), 32–40.
Steijn, B. (2002). HRM and job satisfaction in the Dutch public sector. Proceedings of EGPA-Conference in
Potsdam, Study Group on Public Personnel Policies (pp. 4–7), Rotterdam.
 22 Management and Labour Studies 42(3)

Thomas-Hunt, M.C., & Phillips, K.W. (2004). When what you know is not enough: Expertise and gender dynamics
in task groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(30), 1585–1598.
Togia, A., Koustelios, A., & Tsigilis, N. (2004). Job satisfaction among Greek academic librarians. Library &
Information Science Research, 26(3), 373–383.
Tziner, A.E., & Vardi, Y. (1984). Work satisfaction and absenteeism among social workers: The role of altruistic
values. Work and Occupations, 11(4), 461–470.
Vlosky, R.P., & Aguilar, F.X. (2009). A model of employee satisfaction: Gender differences in cooperative extension.
Journal of Extension, 47(2), 1–15.
Warr, P. (2002). Psychology at work. Harmondsworth, London: Penguin.
Watson, T. (1994). Linking employee motivation and satisfaction to the bottom line. CMA Magazine, 68(3), 4.
Westwood, R. (1992). Organizational Behaviour: South East Asian Perspective. Hong Kong: Longman.
Willems, I., Janvier, R., & Henderickx, E. (2004). The unique nature of psychological contracts in the public sector:
An exploration. EGPA Annual Conference, Ljubljana (Slovenia).
Xiu, L., & Gunderson, M. (2014). Glass ceiling or sticky floor? Quantile regression decomposition of the gender pay
gap in China. International Journal of Manpower, 35(3), 306–326.

View publication stats