Job Diagnostic Survey

Abstract

The Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) is a seminal psychological instrument developed by J. R. Hackman and G. R. Oldham in 1974. Its primary function is to provide comprehensive measurement of both overall and facet-specific job satisfaction. The JDS delineates overall satisfaction into three core dimensions: general satisfaction (five items), internal work motivation (six items), and growth satisfaction (four items). These dimensions are frequently combined to form a single measure of total satisfaction.

In addition to the overall measure, the JDS assesses satisfaction with specific job facets, including security, compensation, co-workers, and supervision. The scale is widely used in organizational research for the diagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign initiatives.

Keywords

Job Diagnostic Survey, JDS, job satisfaction, organizational psychology, work motivation, job design, Hackman and Oldham, organizational commitment

Authors

J. R. Hackman, G. R. Oldham

Purpose

The central purpose of the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) is to provide a standardized, quantitative measure for diagnosing the characteristics of jobs and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions such as job redesign projects. It is a foundational tool in industrial and organizational psychology for assessing how employees perceive and respond emotionally and motivationally to their specific work environment.

The instrument is designed not only to capture a holistic view of overall contentment but also to pinpoint satisfaction levels related to specific, manageable facets of the job, allowing organizations to target improvements precisely in areas like supervisory support, compensation, or job security.

Construct

The JDS is designed to measure the psychological construct of job satisfaction, which is operationalized through a combination of affective and intrinsic components. The measurement structure differentiates between overall satisfaction, which reflects a global feeling toward the job, and satisfaction with specific job aspects.

The primary dimensions contributing to overall satisfaction include:

• General Satisfaction: The employee’s broad feeling of contentment with the role.
• Internal Work Motivation: The sense of personal reward and self-esteem derived from performing the job well.
• Growth Satisfaction: The fulfillment received from opportunities for personal development, challenge, and skill expansion inherent in the work.

The secondary measures focus on extrinsic and contextual elements, covering satisfaction with job security, compensation (pay and benefits), co-workers (social environment), and the quality of supervision received.

Validity

The JDS demonstrates strong criterion validity through consistent correlations with key organizational outcomes. Overall job satisfaction, as measured by the JDS, correlates positively with vital organizational behaviors, including organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors, and interrole facilitation (the degree to which participation in one role enhances performance in another).

Conversely, overall satisfaction is often found to correlate negatively with employee tenure, a common finding in studies of long-term employment dynamics. Furthermore, structural validation studies using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), such as those conducted by Mathieu and Farr (1991), affirm the discriminant validity of the scale, demonstrating that overall job satisfaction is empirically distinct from related constructs like job involvement and organizational commitment.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the Job Diagnostic Survey subscales is typically assessed using Coefficient alpha (Cronbach’s alpha). For the composite measure encompassing general satisfaction, internal work motivation, and growth satisfaction, reported alpha coefficients show a wide but acceptable range, spanning from .55 to .92 across multiple research samples (Adkins, 1995; Rothausen et al., 1998).

Specific subscale reliability estimates highlight adequate internal consistency for the core dimensions: general satisfaction reported an alpha of .77, internal work motivation reported an alpha of .67, and growth satisfaction demonstrated a high alpha of .85 (Munz et al., 1996). For the facet satisfaction subscales, reported alphas were strong: satisfaction with supervision (.89), satisfaction with pay (.88), satisfaction with growth (.84), satisfaction with job security (.73), and satisfaction with co-workers (.63) (Mathieu, Hofmann, & Farr, 1993). A composite measure combining facet and growth satisfaction also achieved a high alpha of .91 (Duffy et al., 1998).

Factor Analysis

The factor structure of the JDS has been scrutinized through advanced statistical modeling. In the realm of construct validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) has been utilized to test the theoretical separation of the JDS constructs from other organizational measures. Mathieu and Farr (1991) confirmed that the overall job satisfaction factor was empirically distinct from measures of job involvement and organizational commitment.

This evidence supports the intended multidimensional structure of the JDS, validating the use of its separate subscales—general satisfaction, internal work motivation, and growth satisfaction—as distinct components contributing to the overall experience of work.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale; Diagnostic instrument used primarily in Industrial/Organizational Psychology.

Format: Multi-item questionnaire typically utilizing 7-point Likert-type scales, ranging from “disagree strongly” to “agree strongly” or “extremely dissatisfied” to “extremely satisfied.”

Language Available: English (Original); widely translated for international research purposes.

Population Group: Employed adults; Organizational staff across various industries and functional roles.

Age Group: Typically 18+ (Working adults).

Population Details: Designed for use in organizational settings to assess perceptions of job design and work context, applicable to both managerial and non-managerial employees.

Test Methodology: Standardized paper-and-pencil or digital administration; scoring involves calculating means or sums for the various subscales, often resulting in composite scores for overall satisfaction.

Keywords

Hackman and Oldham, job characteristics model, organizational psychology, internal motivation, growth satisfaction, facet satisfaction, reliability, validity, organizational citizenship behaviors

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A

Correspondence Address: Originally Yale University, Department of Administrative Sciences, New Haven, CT (1974).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1974 (Initial Technical Report publication).

Permissions: The original instrument was published as Technical Report No. 4 by Yale University. Researchers seeking current usage rights should consult with the authors’ affiliated institutions or recognized psychological testing distributors.

Fee: Fees vary depending on the licensing body and whether the user is affiliated with an academic or commercial institution.

Reference’s

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1974). The Job Diagnostic Survey: An instrument for the diagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects (Tech. Rep. No. 4). New Haven, CT: Yale University, Department of Administrative Sciences. Prepared in connection with research sponsored by the Office of Naval Research (Contract No. N00014-67A-0097-0026, NR170-744) and the U.S. Department of Labor (Manpower Administration, Grant No. 21-09-74-14).

Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Shaw, J. D. (1998). [Cited in description and reliability section].

Mathieu, J. E., & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further analysis of the discriminant validity of organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 125-135.

Mathieu, J. E., Hofmann, D. A., & Farr, J. L. (1993). [Cited in reliability section].

Munz, D. C., Huelsman, T. J., Konold, T. R., & McKinney, M. C. (1996). [Cited in reliability section].

Thompson, J. A., & Werner, J. M. (1997). [Cited in validity section].

Items of the Job Diagnostic Survey

General satisfaction instructions and items:

Each of the statements below is something that a person might say about his or her job. You are to indicate your own personal feelings about your job by marking how much you agree with each of the statements. How much do you agree with the statement?

(1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = disagree slightly, 4 = neutral,

5 = agree slightly, 6 = agree, 7 = agree strongly)

1. Generally speaking, I am very satisfied with this job
2. I am generally satisfied with the kind of work I do in this job
3. I frequently think of quitting this job (R)

Now please think of the other people in your organization who hold the same job you do.If no one has exactly the same job as you, think of the job which is most similar to yours. Please think about how accurately each of the state­ ments describes the feelings of those people about the job. It is quite all right if your answers here are different from when you described your own reac­ tions to the job. Often different people feel quite differently about the same job. How much do you agree with the statement?

(1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = disagree slightly, 4 = neutral,

5 = agree slightly, 6 = agree, 7 = agree strongly)

4. Most people on this job are very satisfied with the job
5. People on this job often think of quitting (R)

Internal work motivation items:

Now please indicate how you personally feel about your job. Each of the statements below is something that a person might say about his or her job. You are to indicate your own personal feelings about your job by marking how much you agree with each of the statements. How much do you agree with the statement?

(1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = disagree slightly, 4 = neutral,

5 = agree slightly, 6 = agree, 7 = agree strongly)

1. My opinion of myself goes up when I do this job well
2. I feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when I do this job well
3. I feel bad and unhappy when I discover that I have performed poorly on this job
4. My own feelings generally are not affected much one way or the other by how well I do on this job (R)

Now please think of the other people in your organization who hold the same job you do.If no one has exactly the same job as you, think of the job which is most similar to yours. Please think about how accurately each of the state­ ments describes the feelings of those people about the job. It is quite all right if your answers here are different from when you described your own reac­ tions to the job. Often different people feel quite differently about the same job. How much do you agree with the statement?

(1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = disagree slightly, 4 = neutral,

5 = agree slightly, 6 = agree, 7 = agree strongly)

5. Most people on this job feel a great sense of personal satisfaction when they do the job well
6. Most people on this job feel bad or unhappy when they find that they have performed the work poorly

Growth satisfaction items:

Now please indicate how satisfied you are with each aspect of your job listed below. How satisfied are you with this aspect of your job?

(1 = extremely dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = slightly dissatisfied,

4 = neutral, 5 = slightly satisfied, 6 = satisfied, 7 = extremely satisfied)

1. The amount of personal growth and development I get in doing my job
2. The feeling of worthwhile accomplishment I get from doing my job
3. The amount of independent thought and action I can exercise in my job
4. The amount of challenge in my job

Facet satisfaction items:

Now please indicate how satisfied you are with each aspect of your job listed below. How satisfied are you with this aspect of your job?

(1 = extremely dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = slightly dissatisfied,

4 = neutral, 5 = slightly satisfied, 6 = satisfied, 7 = extremely satisfied)

Satisfaction with security:

1. The amount of job security I have
2. How secure things look for me in the future in this organization

Satisfaction with compensation (pay):

1. The amount of pay and fringe benefits I receive
2. The degree to which I am fairly paid for what I contribute to this organization

“Social” satisfaction:

1. The people I talk to and work with on my job
2. The chance to get to know other people while on the job
3. The chance to help other people while at work

“Supervisory” satisfaction:

1. The degree of respect and fair treatment I receive from my boss
2. The amount of support and guidance I receive from my supervisor
3. The overall quality of the supervision I receive in my work