Commentary: Public Sector Job Satisfaction: A Conversation with Impact

• Date: 01 May 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12224
• Author: J. Scott Frampton
• Published date: 01 May 2014

Commentary

J. Scott Frampton is a retired U.S.

Marine Corps off‌i cer with 22 years of

service. Currently, he is employed by

the Federal Bureau of Investigation in

Washington, D.C., and as adjunct instructor

at Averett University. He holds a doctorate

in public policy and administration from

Walden University. The opinions expressed

in this article are the author’s alone, and not

those of the FBI.

E-mail: j.scott.frampton@gmail.com

396 Public Administration Review • May | June 2014

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 74, Iss. 3, pp. 396–397. © 2014 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12224.

J. Scott Frampton

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Averett University

Knowing personal job satisfaction is sublime.

Its complexity rests on factors such as human

emotion and mood, which seem to change

for many individuals just as the seasons of the year.

Simply stated, understanding job satisfaction is

an elusive concept. Sometimes we can sense when

someone else is experiencing job satisfaction; alas,

we have dif‌f‌i culty measuring it. Enter three talented

researchers—Vurain Tabvuma, Hong T. M. Bui, and

Fabian Homberg—who have taken bold steps in

shedding light on what continues to be a mysterious

yet monumentally important topic: public sector job

satisfaction.

Of course, there are complicated theories and modeling

techniques that attempt to measure job satisfaction,

such as value congruence modeling, theory of work

adjustment, set point theory, adaptation theory, and

work–life balance determinations that are used to

underpin job satisfaction understanding.  e conun-

drum of seizing factors that inf‌l uence job satisfaction,

and, by extension, worker productivity, remain just out

of reach for those toiling in public of‌f‌i ces and govern-

ment substructures. Yet Tabvuma, Bui, and Homberg

take a stab at uncovering what some may think is intui-

tive but is actually calculated.

 e authors make a careful assessment of potential

weaknesses concerning their research on job satisfac-

tion, namely, a survey database sourced exclusively

from the United Kingdom, self-reported responses,

selection bias, and only annualized collection meth-

ods.  e research is compelling, however, especially

in light of similar contextual factors across countries.

As such, the analysis could be applied to the United

States as well.

 e United States is currently operating with a divi-

sive government combined with intense partisanship.

In these instances, maybe it is political leaders who

inf‌l uence the elements of public sector job satisfac-

tion. Tabvuma, Bui, and Homberg apparently would

think otherwise, and even in the current U.S. political

environment, I agree. However, as mentioned in

graduate courses across the United States, the answer

truly “depends.” It is contingent on the specif‌i c voca-

tion of public service. For example, if a person’s job or

agency is highly dependent on funding that requires

partisan support (e.g., the Environmental Protection

Agency or the Department of Housing and Urban

Development), it is not unreasonable to think that an

adversarial partisan political leader’s decisions might

spoil an individual’s job satisfaction.

An interesting example of the impact that political

change has on public service job satisfaction is the U.S.

military.  e transformation of military service during

the past 12 years provides a fruitful place to look. Early

in the George W. Bush administration (2001–02), the

Department of Defense (led by Donald Rumsfeld) was

forced to seek innovative approaches to the business

of national defense. After 9/11, the political winds

shifted toward a footing of war—a war without the

typical front-end diplomacy, robust coalition support,

and clearly def‌i ned end states. Political change surely

af‌f ected job satisfaction in that circumstance; however,

it depended on specif‌i c vocations, employee purpose,

and duty of the public service.

Another example might be found in the U.S. intel-

ligence community’s recent operating environment,

termed the “post-Snowden era.” When political

powers alter the tactics, techniques, and procedures

normally used by public service employees, their job

satisfaction can be inf‌l uenced.  ink of the typical

National Security Agency employee who was one day

perceived as a national treasure and an asset, only to

be thought of as a freedom-encroaching “big brother”

enabler the next.  e impact on job satisfaction is

obvious—and that impact is inextricably connected to

the political leadership and its decisions.

Finally, the recent U.S. conservative trend toward

viewing government (and, by extension, public serv-

ice) as part of the “problem” could inf‌l uence how one

views public service. As modern conservative political

Public Sector Job Satisfaction: A Conversation with Impact