International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

2017, Vol. 7, No. 3

ISSN: 2222-6990

Impact of Supervisor Support on Job Satisfaction:

A Moderating role of Fairness Perception
Muhammad Asif Qureshi
PhD candidate, School of Business Management,
College of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia
Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

Dr. Kamal bin Ab Hamid

School of Business Management,
College of Business, Universiti Utara Malaysia

DOI: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i3/2729 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i3/2729

Abstract
Supervisor support plays a substantial role in increasing employee job satisfaction. The aims of
this conceptual paper is to provide a theoretical rationale of: a) direct impact of supervisor
support on job satisfaction; and b) the moderating role of fairness perception for the positive
relationship between supervisor support and job satisfaction. It is argued that increasing
competition in the global markets is pushing businesses to focus on ways through which they
could help build a much stronger and more competitive workforce. This, principally can be
achieved when the employees are happy and contented with their jobs. Job satisfaction has
been empirically studied as a significant predictor for various organizational outcomes such as
employee commitment, engagement, organizational citizenship behavior, information sharing,
etc.
Keywords: Job satisfaction, Supervisor Support, Fairness Perception.

Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is a concept that became popular in the 1930’s (Locke, 1976) and thousands of
studies have been conducted on this topic (Cook, Heptworth, Wall, & Warr, 1981). It is a
complex concept that is not easily defined. Hoppock (1935) introduced the concept of job
satisfaction as a set of psychological, physiological and environmental circumstances that make
a person feel satisfied with their job. Another definition states that job satisfaction is a positive
feeling about one’s job that results from an evaluation of the job’s characteristics (Robbins,
2005).

Job satisfaction has been empirically proven to be one of the most prominent features an
organization looks after in order to boost its performance, productivity and achievement of
strategic objectives. Sadly, there have been severe issues outlined pertaining to employees` job
satisfaction whereby, enterprises have been complaining for decreasing satisfaction levels. The
current paper has attempted to outline that organizations can effectively improve job
235
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

satisfaction issue through supervisor support. The paper has critically appraised literature to
outline that these factors are essential to help foster a satisfactory work environment thus,
induce job satisfaction amongst employees. Moreover, the paper has recommended fairness
perception to potentially moderate the relationship between supervisor support, job
satisfaction.

More broadly, Chen, Sparrow, and Cooper (2016) defined job satisfaction as a term expressing
one’s thinking, feeling and attitude toward work. It is influenced by the worker’s experience,
the job itself, communication from others, as well as the person’s expectation about the job.
Another definition by Spector (1997) described job satisfaction as individual feelings of people
about their jobs and other facets related to their jobs.

Job satisfaction of a person can be assessed in terms of overall satisfaction or satisfaction with
elements of the work (Gupta et al., 2014). With an overall approach, researchers discover the
general degree to which a group of workers is satisfied. They, however, cannot tell what
aspects of a job the workers like or dislike. Satisfaction by aspects can show a more
comprehensive picture of job satisfaction in comparison with the global approach. There are
many influences on job satisfaction such as pay, supervision, rewards, benefits, nature of job,
and relationships with co-workers and supervisors. A worker may be satisfied with some
aspects of his/her job while dissatisfied with other aspects (Chen, Sparrow, & Cooper, 2016)

Job satisfaction is defined as an attitude that individuals have about their work. That is the
extent to which people feel positive or negative about the intrinsic aspects and/or extrinsic job.
King and Williamson (2005) stated that job satisfaction is the difference between expectations
implied by someone who has the job of contributions do with the fact that they expect. Of
some opinion above it can be concluded that job satisfaction is a response someone on what
they expect when working with what they get after they do the job. Where it is relating to the
employment situation, cooperation between employees, benefits and factors other. If there is a
small difference between what is expected to what we get then that person will feel satisfied as
well vice versa (Millán, Hessels, Thurik, and Aguado, 2013).

Cost (2001) portrays job satisfaction as a compelling introduction that representatives have
towards their work environment. Job satisfaction is characterized as a degree to which
representative likes their life history. It highlights the particular occupation environment where
a representative performs his obligations and mirrors the most substantial parts of the work.
Mowday et al. (1982) state job satisfaction is primarily an effective response of individuals
toward their workplace. Job attitude is as well set as the position of workers toward the
organization, the job, their fellow workers, and other psychological objects in the workplace
environment. A confident position toward these aspects shows attitude and vice versa, (Beer,
1964). Lu, Barriball, Zhang, and While (2012) in the field of empirical testing of job attributes
from the private and public sector managers suggest that job satisfaction is a mishmash of

236
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

psychological, physiological, environmental circumstances which realizes the soul to express

the individual to express the satisfaction with job.

Significance of Job Satisfaction

The significance of the job satisfaction relies on the tardiness, turnover over, employee
retention and absenteeism these factors related to employee job satisfaction and employee
performance (Hülsheger, et al., 2013). Hence, job satisfaction has relationship to employee
performance. Secondly, job satisfaction provides the mediator and moderator effects on the
employee’s performance increase and decrease job related tension and job (stress). Previous
literature confirms that satisfied employees more effective and efficient and committed to
perform better in the organization (Lu et al., 2012).

Better job satisfaction level additionally diminishes the truancy affinity among workers. The
impacts of fulfillment on truancy appear to be much more grounded. At the point when job
satisfaction level falls it is likely, that absenteeism is to rise. Absenteeism is another option to
turning over in conditions where one has not very many choices of a reasonable satisfaction
somewhere else (Safi, & Kolahi, 2016). Subsequently, we can accept that job satisfaction affects
absenteeism as it has on representative turnover. It has been scholastically discussed over a
period among researchers whether satisfaction prompts high performance. Writing uncovers
contentment and performance has unauthentic relation.

Supervisor Support
Supervisor support refers as the supervisors behave in helping their employees to demonstrate
the skills, knowledge, and attitudes collect from the training program (Rhoades & Eisenberger,
2002). According to Bhatti et al. (2013), supervisor plays important roles in training
effectiveness. Without getting support from the supervisor, the transfer of training process
cannot be successful. This is because the employee will tend to lost focus when they are not
monitor or supervise. It is said to be one of the most powerful tools in enhancing transfer of
training and supported by numerous studies (Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Ismail et al., 2010).

According to Putter (2013), the support can be in terms of emotional, instrumental, and at the
same time support which are provided before and after the training program. Providing
feedback also would be a form of supervisor support (van der Klink et al., 2001). This is because
feedback is relatively seen as part of supervisor support whereby the supervisor identify which
area of their employees needs to be improved, encouraging them to join the training program,
and help them to apply the learned skills upon completing their job.

Apart from that, Ismail et al., (2010) stated that supervisor is also responsible for allocating
budget for their employee’s developmental purpose. This is because, each individual has the
rights to increase their knowledge, skills, and abilities, and hence, this can only be achieved
when they undergo the training program provided by the organization.

237
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

Further, Goleman (2000) mentioned that good supervisor should be able to develop achievable
targets, spread positive attitudes thorough out the organization, as well as increase the
employees’ awareness on why the training is fundamentally important for them. Congruently,
these objectives are achievable if the supervisor gives full support to their employees. The
effectiveness of the supervisor support also depends on how the supervisor deals with the
employee are who resist participating in the training activities (Baldwin & Ford, 1988).

Besides, Baldwin and Ford (1988) identified that discussion between the supervisors with their
employees can also certainly stimulate the transfer of training. This is because; the employees
feel that they are valued in the organization. Furthermore, Yarnall (1998) refers supervisor
support as the supervisor is care and responsible for their employees’ career which they will
spend time together to discuss the matter, thus taking into account actions to be taken for the
sake of the employees’ development. As a matter of fact, the supervisor themselves must have
basic understanding of development concept before they can facilitate their employees
(Karatepe, 2013).

This is because when the supervisors have good understanding about the development
concept, it increases the employee confidence that their supervisor is qualify and can lead
them.

On the other hand, to get the support from the supervisor in ensuring training effectiveness is
not as simple as ABC (Burke & Saks, 2009). This is because, according to Garavan (1990), among
the reasons why sometime supervisor refused to support transfer of training are; the
employees lack of awareness regarding the importance of sending employee for training, work
overload, and they are not rewarded when they support their employees.

Thus, neglect their roles as supervisor that should support their employees in training activities.
Another concerning attributes, why sometimes the supervisor is reluctant to give support to
their employees is, most of the time they only give negative feedback to their employees rather
than positive feedback (Nijman et al., 2006). They only see the negative side of their employees
without noticing that their employees have done great job in performing the task, duties, and
responsibilities. As a result, the employees feel demotivate, stress, and have high intention to
leave the organization (Madi et al., 2011). Nonetheless, supervisor is responsible to give
support to their employees as it could eliminate these negatives behaviors from spreading
among employees throughout the organization.

Moderating Role of Fairness Perception

Fairness perceptions refer to fairness in job effort- reward (Mowday, 1991). The concept refers
that employees assess how much they efforts they are put in compared to the rewards and
benefits they receive. Job efforts involve all sorts of investments including time, energy, skills,
experience, and intelligence needed for the responsive job task accomplishment. Job rewards
on the other hand denote to outcomes a student receives from the organization including

238
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

money, esteem, position, authority, social image and other related perks (Adams, 1965).
Perceived inequity among these two aspects can therefore end up employee feeling unwilling
and dissatisfied (Janssen, 2001), and putting individual into unpleasant emotional condition.

Henceforth, a nurse judging the amount of effort he/she puts into the work against the rewards
received are justifiable then it will surely enhance their job satisfaction. Aryani (2009)
empirically investigated and found fairness perception plays a critical role in enhancing
employee behaviors and outcomes. The author found that when employees perceive that there
is a fair balance between the efforts input and rewards output, it pushes them to perform with
higher enthusiasm and generate better results. Important to note that as Janssen (2001) has
outlined that it is not possible to attain a perfect equation or match between the amount of
input (efforts) with the amount of output (rewards) but, a fair and acceptable ratio is
achievable.

Janssen (2001) investigated and outlined robust potential of fairness perception between the
different job features, characteristics upon job satisfaction. The author underlined the severe
shortage of research on fairness perception and how it could buffer the influence of different
work features. According to Aryee, Budhwar, and Chen (2002) that different perception
employee perception based components could intervene between different job characteristics
and work outcomes. This is in line with the recommendation and empirical suggestions by
Konovsky and Cropanzo (1991) who also outlines the robust intervening strength of fairness
perception on employee outcomes. Thus, based on these arguments, the paper forwards the
following propositions:
P1: Supervisor Support will be positively related with Job Satisfaction.
P2: Fairness Perception will moderate the relationship between Supervisor Support and Job
Satisfaction

Supervisor Support
Job
Satisfaction

Fairness
Perception

Figure1. Conceptual Framework

239
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

Conclusion
The current paper has attempted to outline the importance of supervisor support and the
major issues relating to this component in connection to job satisfaction. The study has
indicated towards the critical significance and importance for empirical understanding. Notably,
the paper has attempted to outline the prominence of supervisor support in relationship with
job satisfaction. In parallel, the study has pointed towards the noteworthy role fairness
perceptions could potentially play to buffer these relationships. The study has proposed to
outline that through providing responsive supervisor support job satisfaction could be
effectively enhanced. In addition, employees` perception regarding the work being just and fair;
can further energize their job satisfaction through supervisor support.

Conclusively, the paper has forwarded a notable framework, outlining the potential role of
supervisor support towards job satisfaction followed by the moderating potential to help
enhance the relationship.

References
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2,
267-299.
Aryani, Y. A. (2009). The Effect of fairness perception of performance measurement in the
balanced scorecard environment. Victoria, Victoria University Press
Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between
organizational justice and work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267-285.
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future
research. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 63-105.
Beer, M. (1964). Organizational size and job satisfaction. Academy of Management journal,
7(1), 34-44.
Bhatti, MA., Mohamed Battour, M., Pandiyan Kaliani Sundram, V., & Aini Othman, A. (2013).
Transfer of training: does it truly happen? An examination of support, instrumentality,
retention and learner readiness on the transfer motivation and transfer of training.
European Journal of Training and Development, 37(3), 273-297.
Burke, L. A., & Saks, A. M. (2009). Accountability in training transfer: Adapting Schlenker’s
model of responsibility to a persistent but solvable problem. Human Resource
Development Review, 8(3), 382-402.
Chen, P., Sparrow, P., & Cooper, C. (2016). The relationship between person-organization fit
and job satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(5), 946-959.
Cook, J. D., Hepworth, S. J., Wall, T. D., & Warr, P. B. (1981). The experience of work: A
compendium and review of 249 measures and their use: Academic Press London.
Garavan, T. N. (1990). Promoting strategic career development activities: some Irish
experience. Industrial and Commercial Training, 22(6). 114-135.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 4-17.

240
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

Gupta, M., Kumar, V., & Singh, M. (2014). Creating satisfied employees through workplace
spirituality: A study of the private insurance sector in Punjab (India). Journal of Business
Ethics, 122(1), 79-88.
Hoppock, R. Job Satisfaction (1935), Oxford, England: Harper Job satisfaction. (1935). xxi 303
pp.
Hülsheger, U. R., Alberts, H. J., Feinholdt, A., & Lang, J. W. (2013). Benefits of mindfulness at
work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 310-316.
Ismail, A., Hasan, A. B. M., & Sulaiman, A. Z. (2010). Supervisor’s role as an antecedent of
training transfer and motivation to learn in training programs. Economica, 7(2), 18-37.
Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships
between job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of
Management journal, 44(5), 1039-1050.
Karatepe, O. M. (2013). High-performance work practices and hotel employee performance:
The mediation of work engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
32, 132-140.
King, J. E., & Williamson, I. O. (2005). Workplace religious expression, religiosity and job
satisfaction: Clarifying a relationship. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion,
2(2), 173-198.
Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a
predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,
76(5), 698-707.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Lu, H., Barriball, K. L., Zhang, X., & While, A. E. (2012). Job satisfaction among hospital nurses
revisited: a systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49(8), 1017-
1038.
Madi, M. Y. A. (2013). Communication, Job Satisfaction and Employees Turnover in
Multinational Engineering Organizations in the United Arab Emirates. The British
University in Dubai.
Millán, J. M., Hessels, J., Thurik, R., & Aguado, R. (2013). Determinants of job satisfaction: a
European comparison of self-employed and paid employees. Small Business Economics,
40(3), 651-670.
Mowday, R. T. (1991). Equity theory predictions of behavior in organizations. Motivation and
Work Behavior, 5(2), 111-131.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkage. The
psychology of commitment absenteism, and turn over_ Academic Press Inc. London.
Nijman, D.-J. J., Nijhof, W. J., Wognum, A., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2006). Exploring differential
effects of supervisor support on transfer of training. Journal of European Industrial
Training, 30(7), 529-549.
Putter, S. E. (2013). Making training stick : a close examination of how trainee readiness,
supervisor support, and practice foster transfer in a mobile technology based training

241
www.hrmars.com
 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
2017, Vol. 7, No. 3
ISSN: 2222-6990

program. PhD Dissertation. Retrieved from:

https://dspace.library.colostate.edu/bitstream/handle/10217/80969/Putter_colostate_
0053A_12035.pdf?sequence=1.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: a review of the
literature: American Psychological Association. 84(4), 698-714.
Robbins SP (2005). Essentials of Organisational Behaviour. New Jersey: Pearson
Safi, M.-H., & Kolahi, A.-A. (2016). The Relationship between Job Satisfaction with Burnout and
Conflict Management Styles in Employees. Community Health, 2(4), 266-274.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Van der Klink, J., Blonk, R., Schene, A. H., & Van Dijk, F. (2001). The benefits of interventions for
work-related stress. American journal of public health, 91(2), 270-281.
Yarnall, J. (1998). Career anchors: results of an organisational study in the UK. Career
Development International, 3(2), 56-61.

242
www.hrmars.com