German Job Satisfaction

Abstract

The German Job Satisfaction scale, known originally as the Arbeitsbeschreibungsbogen (ABB), is a comprehensive psychological instrument designed to measure an individual’s affective and evaluative attitude towards their work situation. The scale is composed of 79 items distributed across seven distinct subscales: colleagues, supervisor, activity/task content, working conditions, organization and management, professional development, and pay. Reliability analysis demonstrates high internal consistency and split-half coefficients for the subscales, ranging from 0.81 to 0.91. Extensive validation studies have provided evidence for both the construct and criterion validity of the instrument, establishing the ABB as an objective and reliable tool for assessing multidimensional job satisfaction in German-speaking populations.

Keywords

Job satisfaction, working conditions, affective attitude, occupational psychology, organizational psychology, work environment, scale validity, scale reliability

Authors

O. Neuberger, M. Allerbeck

Purpose

The primary purpose of the German Job Satisfaction scale (ABB) is the differentiated and quantitative measurement of an individual’s evaluation of key aspects within their work environment. It aims to operationalize job satisfaction as a cognitive-evaluative attitude resulting from specific experiences in the workplace, which, in turn, influence future behavioral tendencies such as approach or avoidance.

The instrument was developed to provide researchers and practitioners with a robust tool capable of capturing not only overall satisfaction but also satisfaction levels across seven critical sub-domains of work life. This granular approach allows for the identification of specific organizational or situational factors contributing positively or negatively to an employee’s overall work experience.

Construct

The German Job Satisfaction scale conceptualizes job satisfaction (Arbeitszufriedenheit) as a cognitive-evaluative attitude towards the work situation. According to Neuberger and Allerbeck (1978), individuals evaluate specific work experiences along a “good-bad” dimension, and these evaluations subsequently impact their future interpretative, approach, and avoidance behaviors related to work.

The scale measures this construct through seven distinct dimensions, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the work environment: satisfaction with colleagues, supervisor, activity/task, working conditions, organization/management, development opportunities, and pay. While most items capture perceptions of the work situation, some items (particularly those related to pay and the Kunin faces) capture direct affective evaluations of these aspects. Factor analysis supports the existence of a single General Factor of Job Satisfaction, which justifies summing the subscale scores to obtain a comprehensive satisfaction index, alongside the differentiated subscale scores.

Validity

The validity of the German Job Satisfaction scale is supported by extensive criterion-related and construct validation studies documented by the authors. Specifically, Neuberger and Allerbeck (1978) cite numerous studies demonstrating the scale’s effectiveness as an objective, reliable, and valid instrument for capturing satisfaction across major aspects of the work situation.

Validation efforts included examining the relationship between job satisfaction scores and several external criteria. These criteria included objective work situation characteristics (measured using the Position Analysis Questionnaire, PAQ), personality traits (measured using the Freiburger Persönlichkeitsinventar, FPI), absenteeism (Fehlzeiten), and leadership behavior (measured via the Fragebogen zur Vorgesetzten-Verhaltens-Beschreibung, FVVB). Furthermore, construct validity was supported through correlations with other established German job satisfaction questionnaires, such as the Skala zur Messung von Arbeitszufriedenheit and the Brüggemann-Arbeitszufriedenheits-Kurzfragebogen. However, a multiple regression analysis predicting “General Job Satisfaction” (measured by the Kunin faces item) from the seven subscales accounted for less than half of the criterion variance (R² = 39.7%), suggesting the seven detailed subscales capture aspects distinct from the single global satisfaction measure.

Reliability

The reliability of the seven subscales of the German Job Satisfaction instrument is consistently high, based on internal consistency and split-half methods applied to the original Neuberger sample. The reliability estimates for the seven subscales (My colleagues, My supervisor, My activity, My working conditions, Organization and performance, My development, My pay) range from 0.81 to 0.91.

Specific reliability coefficients reported for the Neuberger sample include:

Furthermore, multiple replication studies reporting retest reliability coefficients indicate that job satisfaction, as measured by the ABB, is a relatively stable construct over time. Conversely, the importance ratings collected at the end of the instrument, intended for calculating personal weighting of factors, demonstrated unsatisfactory reliability coefficients in studies by Lesch (1976) and Hoffmann (1977). This instability was attributed by the authors to factors such as test fatigue, computational complexity, global item wording, or genuine volatility in importance weighting.

Factor Analysis

Initial item construction involved gathering 500 items from German and American literature, which were subsequently reduced to a 79-item revised form based on item and factor analyses performed on six subsamples (N = 695). Items retained had difficulties below 0.85, discrimination indices (Trennschärfen) above 0.50, and factor loadings greater than 0.50 on their respective primary factors.

Dimensionality analysis using a large sample (N = 4057) showed mixed results depending on the criterion applied. According to the Kaiser criterion (eigenvalues > 1), only the “Development” and “Pay” scales were consistently unidimensional, while the “Working Conditions” scale was multidimensional. However, applying the scree plot criterion (Eigenwertverlauf), all seven scales were considered unidimensional due to the pronounced drop-off between the first and second eigenvalues. The strength of the first factor across all scales suggests that the items predominantly capture affective valences. The moderate average intercorrelation of the seven ABB scales (mean correlation of 0.35, as shown in the original data) supports treating the individual scales as relatively autonomous measures. A factor analysis including all seven scales extracted a General Factor of Job Satisfaction, justifying the summation of scale scores to complement the differentiated assessment.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire (Psychometric Scale)

Format: 79 items divided into seven subscales. Most items use a four-point Likert-type scale (1 = “ja” / yes, 4 = “nein” / no). The final item of each subscale uses a 7-point Kunin faces scale (1 = lowest satisfaction, 7 = highest satisfaction) without verbal anchors, intended to capture global satisfaction for that dimension.

Language Available: German (Deutsch)

Population Group: Employees and workers across various industries and organizational levels.

Age Group: Adults (Employees of all ages, with sample averages around 30-40 years).

Population Details: The initial standardization sample (Neuberger sample) included 993 employees (321 women, 596 men) from a chemical plant in Southwest Germany, representing various educational backgrounds. Replication studies included over 7,000 individuals across more than 20 diverse organizations, including university staff, textile workers, insurance employees, and public administration workers, demonstrating broad applicability across occupational sectors in Germany and Austria.

Test Methodology: Respondents are instructed to provide their immediate, personal opinion regarding their current work situation without overthinking. Scoring requires reversing the polarity of 36 positively worded items before summation. Subscale total scores are calculated by summing the relevant (re-coded) items (excluding the final Kunin face item for each subscale). Scale means are derived by dividing the total score by the number of applicable ABB items in that scale. The instrument also includes supplementary measures for importance weighting using the constant sum method, and overall life and work satisfaction using Kunin faces.

Keywords

Arbeitszufriedenheit, affective attitude, organizational behavior, personnel assessment, job evaluation, psychometric measurement, occupational psychology, scale development

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not available.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not available.

Correspondence Address: No author contact addresses are currently available.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Information regarding permissions and fees is not specified in the source content. The scale was originally published in 1978.

Reference’s

Neuberger, O., & Allerbeck, M. (1978). Messung und Analyse von Arbeitszufriedenheit: Erfahrungen mit dem Arbeitsbeschreibungsbogen (ABB). Bern: Huber.

Allerbeck (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Bastine, R. (1971). Fragebogen zur Direktiven Einstellung (FDE).

Benz (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Bergermaier (1975). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Borg und Allerbeck (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Büssing (1983a). (Cited in supplementary literature).

Doubrawa (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Fahrenberg und Selg (1973). Freiburger Persönlichkeitsinventar (FPI).

Fischer und Lück (1972). Skala zur Messung von Arbeitszufriedenheit.

Fittkau-Garthe & Fittkau, (1971). Fragebogen zur Vorgesetzten-Verhaltens-Beschreibung (FVVB).

Frieling, E. (1976). Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ).

Genthe (1975). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Glück (1975). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Haas (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Hirsch (1983). (Cited in supplementary literature).

Hoffmann (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

John (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Kischkel (1979). (Cited in supplementary literature).

Klemm (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Knaus (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Kruggel (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Kupper (1978). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Lesch (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Maul (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Neuberger (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Osterkorn (1975). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Rinke (1976). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Schmidt (1975). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Spindler (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Stocker (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Tränkle (1982a). (Cited in supplementary literature).

Vogel (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Weiland (1977). (Cited in Neuberger & Allerbeck, 1978).

Items of the German Job Satisfaction

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Instruktion

Bitte nehmen Sie auf den nachfolgenden Seiten Stellung zu Ihrer gegenwärtigen Arbeit (z.B. zu Ihren Kollegen, Arbeitsbedingungen, Bezahlung usw.). Äußern Sie dabei bitte Ihre ganz persönliche Meinung. Beispiel: Jemand empfindet seine Tätigkeit als sehr eintönig, langweilig und festgefahren und sie gefällt ihm nicht besonders. Deshalb streicht er bei „gefällt mir“ “eher nein”, bei „langweilig“ “ja” und bei „festgefahren“ ebenfalls “ja” an. Es ist klar, dass es bei jeder Arbeit gute und schlechte Seiten gibt. Sie sollten so antworten, wie Sie im Großen und Ganzen darüber denken. Überlegen Sie nicht lange – die erste Reaktion ist meist die beste. Lassen Sie bitte keine Zeile aus! Sie sollten also in jeder Zeile eine der vier Möglichkeiten anstreichen!

Items

Skala 1: Meine Kollegen

Gemeint sind die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit denen Sie unmittelbar zusammenarbeiten und arbeitsbezogenen Kontakt haben (es ist uns klar, dass Sie hier nur ein Durchschnittsurteil abgeben können).

Skala 2: Mein Vorgesetzter

Gemeint ist Ihr unmittelbarer Vorgesetzter (der eine Stufe höher steht als Sie, der Ihnen Anweisungen geben und Sie kontrollieren kann).

Skala 3: Meine Tätigkeit

Gemeint ist der Inhalt Ihrer Tätigkeit, die Art Ihrer Arbeitsaufgaben.

Skala 4: Meine Arbeitsbedingungen

Gemeint sind die Bedingungen, unter denen Sie arbeiten (z.B. Hilfsmittel, Maschinen, Arbeitsraum, Umgebung, Lärm, Temperatur usw.).

Skala 5: Organisation und Leitung

Gemeint ist, wie Sie die Firma (oder das Werk, den Betrieb, die Behörde) als Ganzes sehen, wie die Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Bereichen und Abteilungen funktioniert, wie Sie Vorschriften, Planung und Information und die “oberste” Leitung beurteilen.

Skala 6: Meine Entwicklung

Gemeint ist Ihr persönliches Vorwärtskommen (Ihre bisherigen und zukünftigen Möglichkeiten zum Aufstieg, zur Weiterbildung und zur Übernahme von verantwortungsvolleren Aufgaben).

Skala 7: Meine Bezahlung

Gemeint ist die Höhe Ihrer Bezahlung, die Sie für Ihre Arbeit erhalten (einschließlich Zulagen, Zuschläge, 13. Monatsgehalt usw.)