Listen to this article:
Abstract: Employee retention is a key concern for organizations seeking to maintain talented workforces. Past research has consistently demonstrated a strong relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover intention. However, questions remain regarding which specific factors influence satisfaction levels and how organizations can maximize this relationship to boost retention outcomes. This research brief explores the extensive foundation documenting the satisfaction-intention link and investigates satisfaction determinants with the strongest empirical backing, such as pay, leadership support, and work content. Potential moderators like employee characteristics and situational contexts are also examined. Practical strategies for addressing core satisfiers supported by real-world examples from different industries are then proposed. The brief concludes satisfaction has endured as a robust retention predictor and offers evidence-based methods for organizations seeking to strategically enhance job experiences and curb unwanted turnover through targeted satisfaction initiatives.
As human resource professionals and organizational leaders, one of our key responsibilities is retaining talented employees and reducing unwanted turnover within our teams and workforces. We know intuitively that satisfied employees are less likely to seek new opportunities elsewhere. But what exactly drives employee satisfaction, and how strong is the link between satisfaction and intention to stay or leave an organization?
In this brief, we will explore the established research foundation on job satisfaction and its relationship to turnover intention. I will then reflect on the practical implications of this research through the lens of my own experience consulting with and studying organizations across industries. By better comprehending the factors influencing satisfaction and intention to remain, we can develop people practices with retention top of mind.
Defining the Concepts
Before diving into the research, it is important we define the fundamental terms and concepts. Job satisfaction refers to "the pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job as achieving or facilitating one's job values" (Locke, 1976, p. 1304). Put simply, it is the degree of positive feeling employees have about their role and work environment. Turnover intention, meanwhile, describes "an employee's estimated probability that they are permanently leaving the organization at some point in the near future" (Tett & Meyer, 1993, p. 262). It indicates the likelihood an individual will actively seek alternative employment options rather than remaining with their current employer. While actual voluntary turnover ultimately involves a choice to resign, intention is a strong predictor, making it valuable to study.
The Research Foundation
A wealth of academic research since the 1970s has established a clear and consistent inverse relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention. Meta-analyses synthesizing hundreds of individual studies consistently report a moderate to strong negative correlation between the two variables across cultures, industries and occupations (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Griffeth et al., 2000; Hom et al., 2017; Tett & Meyer, 1993). In other words, higher levels of satisfaction are linked to lower probabilities employees will contemplate leaving their roles. The strength of this association has remained stable over time despite changes to workplaces and economies.
The Impact of Specific Satisfiers
Going beyond the aggregate relationship, researchers have also explored which facets of satisfaction are most predictive of retention. Commonly examined dimensions include:
Pay satisfaction - A consistent strong predictor, with higher compensation tied to lower intention to quit (Brown & Peterson, 1993; Shaw et al., 1998).
Benefits satisfaction - A moderate association, though benefits appear less pivotal than pay (Gupta & Jenkins, 1980; Mobley, 1982).
Supervisor satisfaction - One of the most influential facets, with supportive leadership linked to retention (Brown & Peterson, 1993; Griffeth et al., 2000).
Coworker satisfaction - Having positive relationships with peers also exhibits an inverse correlation with intention to leave (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Tett & Meyer, 1993).
Nature of work satisfaction - Finding meaning and stimulating tasks decreases probability of turnover (Brown & Peterson, 1993; Shaw et al., 1998).
While other variables exist, these five facets in particular demonstrate robust research backing their impact on employee retention through satisfaction.
Moderating Influences
A complication is some attributes can moderate or alter the satisfaction-intention relationship. For example, the strength of the association tends to be weaker for:
Younger, less tenure employees who may be more open to new roles (Griffeth et al., 2000; Mobley et al., 1979).
Those with higher education levels and more job alternatives due to greater mobility (Mobley et al., 1979; Tett & Meyer, 1993).
However, certain contextual factors have been shown to enhance the predictive power of satisfaction. Specifically:
Organizational commitment, or identification and loyalty to the firm (Mobley et al., 1979).
Low unemployment rates limiting outside options (Griffeth et al., 2000).
High costs to leaving, such as specializing skills (Mobley et al., 1979).
Overall, while moderators do exist, robust research confirms job satisfaction remains a considerable retention driver across diverse samples.
Practical Implications for Organizations
As a management consultant and researcher, much of my work involves advising leaders on retention strategies grounded in academic evidence. Several practical takeaways emerge from the satisfaction-intention relationship:
Focus on core satisfiers. As the research identified, pay, benefits, leadership support, coworker dynamics and meaningful work are core drivers of employee fulfillment. Benchmarks, surveys and analytics can pinpoint areas requiring attention.
Compensation matters greatly. While salary alone does not satisfy, pay should remain market competitive. Equity ensures fairness and motivation. Benefits offer flexibility employees value.
Prioritize supportive management. Supervisor training develops coaching skills. Recognition programs boost well-being. Leadership also models collaboration setting the coworker tone.
Shape work content and challenges. Job crafting allows customizing roles to interests. Projects provide learning and stimulation. Flexible scheduling fosters work-life fit.
Build loyalty through culture. Mission and values foster pride. Growth opportunities provide fulfillment long-term. Loyalty stems from mutual commitment to employees' success.
I have seen these tactics successfully implemented across industries. For example, a healthcare system enhanced supervisor support through manager mentoring and appreciated more equitable on-call compensation to bolster clinical staff retention. An urban school district crafted teacher leadership roles within schools alongside small class sizes to retain talent amid high demand for educators.
In each case, addressing modifiable satisfiers through a collaborative process rooted in needs assessments paid dividends in higher satisfaction scores and lower quit rates over time. Organizations ignoring the strong evidence base risk facing higher preventable turnover costs and talent losses. By strategically focusing on multidimensional satisfiers via data-driven methodology, any workplace can gain an edge on retention.
Conclusion
After over forty years of consistent research, job satisfaction stands as one of the most robust predictors of employee intention to remain with or voluntarily exit an organization. While individual circumstances exist, establishing satisfaction through competitive compensation, supportive supervision, positive coworker dynamics, meaningful work and flexible benefits represents a tested recipe for retaining top talent. Large scale meta-analyses and longitudinal studies confirm the stability of this relationship over time, cultures and industries.
As human resources and business leaders, we have a duty to apply evidence-based strategies cultivated from academic fundamentals to develop engaged, loyal workforces. By surveilling satisfaction levels, pinpointing improvement areas and crafting positive work experiences, any organization can measurably boost retention outcomes crucial for long term success. Continuing to investigate moderators and emerging satisfiers as work evolves will ensure our retention methodologies stay on the cutting edge. With data and collaboration, job satisfaction provides a straightforward pathway for impacting one of the most pivotal people metrics - turnover intention.
References
Brown, S. P., & Peterson, R. A. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: Meta-analysis and assessment of causal effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379303000106
Cotton, J. L., & Tuttle, J. M. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review with implications for research. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4282625
Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26(3), 463–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600305
Gupta, N., & Jenkins, G. D. (1980). The structure of withdrawal: Relationships among frustration, attitudes, intentions, and behavior in A model of the withdrawal process. Academy of Management Proceedings, 106–110. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.1980.4975938
Hom, P. W., Mitchell, T. R., Lee, T. W., & Griffith, R. W. (2017). Reviewing employee turnover: Focusing on proximal withdrawal states and an expanded criterion. Psychological Bulletin, 143(8), 831–858. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000090
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Rand McNally.
Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. Addison-Wesley.
Mobley, W. H., Horner, S. O., & Hollingsworth, A. T. (1978). An evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 408–414. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.4.408
Shaw, J. D., Gupta, N., & Delery, J. E. (2005). Alternative conceptualizations of the relationship between voluntary turnover and organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 50–68. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.15993158
Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: Path analyses based on meta‐analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), 259-293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb00874.x
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Understanding the Impact: Exploring the Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention. Human Capital Leadership Review, 14(1). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.14.1.6
