This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mason, C. M. Articles by Griffin, M. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Grouptask Satisfaction

Applying the Construct of Job Satisfaction to Groups

Queensland University of Technology, cm.mason{at}qut.edu.au

Mark A. Griffin

Queensland University of Technology

This article reviews evidence for considering job satisfaction at the group level of analysis. Group-level job satisfaction is functionally independent of individual-level job satisfaction. This construct is labeled group task satisfaction and is defined as the group’s shared attitude toward its task and the associated work environment. The authors propose that group task satisfaction develops out of within-group homogeneity in individual job satisfaction, which in turn is a product of the shared work conditions, social influence processes, attraction-selection-attrition effects, and emotional contagion effects associated with work groups. They predict that through group interaction, the within-group homogeneity in job satisfaction will come to be perceived as a characteristic of the group. Once identified as a group characteristic, group task satisfaction will be subject to processes such as polarization and prototyping, with the result that group task satisfaction should function independently of the mean level of job satisfaction within the group. The authors predict that group task satisfaction will be related to the mean level of individual job satisfaction within the group, the quality of the group’s processes, and the performance of the group, thus serving as an important indicator of team viability.

Small Group Research, Vol. 33, No. 3, 271-312 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/10496402033003001


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. M. Bartunek, Zhi Huang, and I. J. Walsh The development of a process model of collective turnover Human Relations, January 1, 2008; 61(1): 5 - 38. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. M. Mason and M. A. Griffin Group Task Satisfaction: The Group's Shared Attitude to its Task and Work Environment Group Organization Management, December 1, 2005; 30(6): 625 - 652. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. S. Spink, D. Nickel, K. Wilson, and P. Odnokon Using a Multilevel Approach to Examine the Relationship between Task Cohesion and Team Task Satisfaction in Elite Ice Hockey Players Small Group Research, October 1, 2005; 36(5): 539 - 554. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. M. Mason and M. A. Griffin Identifying Group Task Satisfaction at Work Small Group Research, August 1, 2003; 34(4): 413 - 442. [Abstract] [PDF]