Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

Abstract

The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) is a widely utilized psychometric instrument designed to measure employee job satisfaction. The original “long form” of the MSQ comprises 100 items distributed across 20 distinct subscales, assessing aspects such as ability utilization, achievement, advancement, compensation, co-workers, and working conditions (Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967). A highly common variant is the 20-item “short form,” which provides a measure of overall job satisfaction. This short form is further divisible into two primary dimensions: a 12-item subscale dedicated to intrinsic satisfaction (e.g., sense of accomplishment and use of abilities) and an 8-item subscale focused on extrinsic satisfaction (e.g., pay, supervision, and advancement opportunities). The MSQ has demonstrated cross-cultural applicability through translations into languages including French and Hebrew.

Keywords

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, MSQ, job satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, vocational rehabilitation, psychometrics, organizational psychology, work adjustment, employee attitudes.

Authors

David Weiss, René Dawis, George England, Lloyd Lofquist

Purpose

The primary purpose of the MSQ is to provide a detailed and quantifiable assessment of an individual’s satisfaction with various facets of their job and work environment. Developed within the framework of the Theory of Work Adjustment, the instrument aims to capture the degree to which an employee’s needs are met by the work setting. This information is crucial for research in areas such as vocational counseling, organizational development, personnel selection, and understanding turnover intention.

The scale serves not only to determine a general level of satisfaction but also to pinpoint specific sources of contentment or discontent across the 20 detailed dimensions in the long form. By differentiating between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, the short form allows researchers and practitioners to understand whether satisfaction stems from the nature of the work itself or from the surrounding contextual factors.

Construct

The MSQ measures the psychological construct of Job Satisfaction, defined as an affective response to one’s job environment. It operationalizes this construct through two higher-order factors:

• Intrinsic Satisfaction: This subscale captures satisfaction derived from internal rewards inherent to the work itself, such as the opportunity to utilize one’s abilities, creativity, independence, sense of responsibility, and feelings of accomplishment. This dimension reflects the fulfillment of self-actualization needs.

• Extrinsic Satisfaction: This subscale captures satisfaction derived from external, tangible rewards and the work context, including pay, working conditions, company policies, technical and human relations supervision, and chances for advancement. This dimension relates to hygiene factors and environmental support.

The comprehensive nature of the MSQ allows for a nuanced assessment, recognizing that job satisfaction is a multi-dimensional construct influenced by both internal psychological experiences and external organizational variables.

Validity

Numerous studies support the validity of the MSQ as a measure of job satisfaction, particularly demonstrating strong nomological network validity. Overall job satisfaction, as measured by the MSQ, consistently showed expected correlations with various organizational outcomes and psychological constructs.

• Criterion-Related Validity: Overall job satisfaction was found to correlate negatively with detrimental workplace factors such as role conflict and role ambiguity, as well as behavioral intentions like propensity to leave (Klenke-Hamel & Mathieu, 1990; Smith & Brannick, 1990) and intention to quit (Sagie, 1998, using the Hebrew version). Conversely, satisfaction correlated positively with life satisfaction, non-work satisfaction, job involvement, and performance expectancy (Hart, 1999; Smith & Brannick, 1990).

• Construct Validity (Discriminant Validity): Confirmatory analysis has established that job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job involvement are empirically distinct psychological constructs (Mathieu & Farr, 1991). Additionally, job satisfaction was found to be independent of occupational commitment (Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1992), confirming that the MSQ measures a unique facet of work attitude.

• Predictive Validity: Longitudinal analysis demonstrated that both job satisfaction and non-work satisfaction serve as reliable predictors of overall life satisfaction (Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1992).

Reliability

The MSQ exhibits high levels of internal consistency across its various forms and subscales, confirming its reliability for research and applied settings.

• Internal Consistency (Short Form): The 20-item short form of the MSQ consistently demonstrated robust internal reliability, with Coefficient alpha values typically ranging from .85 to .91 across multiple studies (Hart, 1999; Huber et al., 1992; Wong et al., 1998). The intrinsic satisfaction subscale showed alpha values ranging from .82 to .86, while the extrinsic satisfaction subscale demonstrated values ranging from .70 to .82 (Breeden, 1993; Davy et al., 1997; Wong et al., 1998). The reliability of translated versions is also supported, with the Hebrew-language version reporting acceptable Coefficient alpha values (Sagie, 1998).

• Test-Retest Reliability: The stability of the overall job satisfaction score, measured using the 20-item MSQ, was assessed through test-retest reliability across three time periods, yielding a correlation of r = .58 (Wong et al., 1998).

Factor Analysis

While the theoretical basis of the MSQ supports a distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic factors, empirical factor analysis has yielded varied results regarding the optimal dimensional structure, often related to the version used and the population studied.

• Two-Factor Model: Moorman (1993) conducted a factor analysis that supported the traditional theoretical framework, extracting two primary factors: one assessing satisfaction with intrinsic aspects of the job and the other assessing satisfaction with the extrinsic aspects.

• Four-Factor Models: Other analyses have suggested more nuanced factorial structures. Mathieu (1991) performed an exploratory factor analysis that resulted in four distinct factors, defined as satisfaction with working conditions (six items), leadership (two items), responsibility (six items), and extrinsic rewards (six items). Similarly, Igalens and Roussel (1999) conducted a confirmatory factor analysis on a French-language version of the MSQ. Their results indicated that a four-factor model provided the best fit for the data. These four factors were intrinsic satisfaction, extrinsic satisfaction, recognition, and authority/social utility.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale; Attitude inventory

Format: Available in a Long Form (100 items, 20 subscales) and a Short Form (20 items, 3 subscales: General, Intrinsic, Extrinsic). Responses are collected using a 5-point Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English, French, Hebrew, and numerous other translations.

Population Group: Working adults and employees across various industries and occupations.

Age Group: Adult (typically 18+).

Population Details: Originally developed within the context of vocational rehabilitation studies at the University of Minnesota, but widely applicable to general working populations.

Test Methodology: Paper-and-pencil or digital self-administration. Items require participants to indicate their level of satisfaction with specific job aspects.

Keywords

Organizational behavior, vocational psychology, intrinsic rewards, extrinsic rewards, organizational commitment, test-retest reliability, psychometric properties, job attitude, work adjustment theory, factor structure.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not specified in source content (Developed at the University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire was published in 1967. The scale is copyrighted, and permission for use must typically be obtained from the Vocational Psychology Research unit at the University of Minnesota. The provided source content notes: “Copyright © 1967. Reprinted with permission.”

The original manual, which contains detailed information and the full scale items, is:

Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist. L. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Minnesota Studies on Vocational Rehabilitation, Vol. 22). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center.

Reference’s

• Breeden, S. A. (1993). Job involvement, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8(2), 233-251.

• Davy, J., Kinicki, A., & Scheck, C. (1997). A cross-cultural analysis of the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(2), 246-258.

• Hart, P. M. (1999). Predicting employee intent to leave: The contribution of organizational structure, climate, and personal characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 567-577.

• Huber, V. L., Seybolt, J. W., & Venemon, G. M. (1992). The relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3), 253-264.

• Igalens, J., & Roussel, P. (1999). A confirmatory factor analysis of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. European Review of Applied Psychology, 49(3), 255-266.

• Klenke-Hamel, K. E., & Mathieu, J. E. (1990). The dimensions of job satisfaction and their relationship to organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 1-13.

• Mathieu, J. E. (1991). A four-factor model of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(1), 197-208.

• Mathieu, J. E., & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further evidence for the discriminant validity of organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 130-137.

• Moorman, R. H. (1993). The influence of ethical culture on the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(11), 845-857.

• Riggs, M. L., & Knight, P. A. (1994). The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance: A test of three models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 567-573.

• Roberson, L. (1990). The effect of self-efficacy and job design on job satisfaction and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(2), 187-207.

• Sagie, A. (1998). A Hebrew-language version of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71(2), 175-180.

• Scarpello, V., & Vandenberg, R. J. (1992). The relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(6), 639-650.

• Smith, C. A., & Brannick, M. T. (1990). A three-component model of organizational commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 33(3), 481-502.

• Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist. L. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Minnesota Studies on Vocational Rehabilitation, Vol. 22). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center.

• Wong, C. S., Hui, C., & Law, K. S. (1998). A longitudinal study of the effects of job satisfaction on turnover intention. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(6), 675-690.

Items of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire

Responses are obtained on a 5-point Likert-type scale where 1 = very dissatisfied with this aspect of my job, 2 = dissatisfied with this aspect of my job, 3 = can’t decide if I am satisfied or not with this aspect of my job, 4 = satisfied with this aspect of my job, and 5 = very satisfied with this aspect of my job.

Instructions and items:

On the following pages, you will find statements about your present job. Read each statement carefully; decide how satisfied you are about the aspect of your current job described by the statement. Then check the box that corresponds to your level of satisfaction with that aspect of your job.

1. The chance to work alone on the job
2. The chance to do different things from time to time
3. The chance to be “somebody” in the community
4. The way my boss handles his men
5. The competence of my supervisor in making decisions
6. Being able to do things that don’t go against my conscience
7. The way my job provides for steady employment
8. The chance to do things for other people
9. The chance to tell people what to do
10. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities
11. The way the company policies are put into practice
12. The pay and the amount of work that I do
13. The chance for advancement on this job
14. The freedom to use my own judgment
15. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job
16. The working conditions
17. The way my co-workers get along with each other
18. The praise I get for doing a good job
19. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job
20. Being able to keep busy all the time