The study aims to test the significance of Herzberg’s theory in the field of academics. The study also aims to measure the differences in the satisfaction levels of academicians towards their job on the basis of the location of their home town, that is, from Northeast and other parts of the country. The study is primary in nature and data have been collected with the help of a self-developed questionnaire. The sample units consisted of 478 academicians estimating around 30 per cent of the total academicians working in the central universities of Northeast India. Researchers have used multiple regression analysis, step-wise regression analysis and t-test in the study. It was found from the study that Herzberg’s two-factor theory can be successfully applied to the academics’ job satisfaction. Both the motivation and hygiene factors have been found to be positively and significantly related to job satisfaction. It has been found from the study that there is a significant difference in the satisfaction level of academicians towards the motivation and hygiene factors of job satisfaction due to the difference in their home town. Academicians whose home town is in the Northeast are found to be highly satisfied towards the motivation and hygiene factors than the academicians whose home town is in other parts of the country.
BalaR. (2016). Higher education in north eastern states of India. Elk Asia Pacific Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 197–218.
2.
BellasM. L., & ToutkoushianR. K. (1999). Faculty time allocations and research productivity: Gender, race and family effects. The Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 367–390.
3.
BhattacharjeeA., & SinghM. (2016). An analysis of the correlates of job satisfaction predictors of Central University Academics in North-East India. Anvesha—The Journal of Management, 9(4), 21–30.
4.
BlackburnR. T., & LawrenceJ. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
5.
BoyerE. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
6.
BrymanA., & CramerD. (1990). Quantitative data analysis for social scientists. London, UK: Routledge.
7.
BrymanA., & CramerD. (2001). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 10 for Windows. London, UK: Routledge.
8.
CherabinM., PraveenaK. B., Mohammad AzimiH., QadimiA., & Shahani ShalmaniR. (2012). Self-esteem, job satisfaction and organizational commitment of faculty members of secondary level teacher training programme in Mysore (India). Life Science Journal, 9(4), 204–214.
9.
FairweatherJ. S. (1993). The nature of trade-offs. Change, 25(4), 44–49.
10.
FairweatherJ. S. (2002). The mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 26–48.
11.
FairweatherJ. S. (2005). Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(4), 401–422.
12.
FairweatherJ. S., & BeachA. L. (2002). Variations in faculty work at research universities: Implications for state and institutional policy. The Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 97–115.
13.
FayM. P., & ProschanM. A. (2010). Wilcoxon Mann Whitney or T-Test on assumptions for hypothesis tests and multiple interpretations of decision rules. Statistics Surveys, 4, 1–39.
14.
FoxD. (1983). Personal theories of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 8(2), 151–163.
15.
GappaJ. M., AustinA. E., & TriceA. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education’s strategic imperative. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
16.
GelmanA., & HillJ. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel hierarchical models (pp. 45–46). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
GeorgeD., & MalleryP. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
18.
HagedornL. S. (2000). Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. In HagedornL. S. (Ed.), New directions for institutional research (pp. 5–20). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
HattieJ., & MarshH. W. (1996). The association between research and teaching: A meta analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542.
20.
HerzbergF., MausnerB., & SnydermanB. B. (1993). The motivation to work. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
21.
HoustonD., MeyerL. H., & PaewaiS. (2006). Academic staff workloads and job satisfaction: Expectations and values in academe. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(1), 17–30.
22.
JacobsJ. A., & WinslowS. E. (2004). Overworked faculty: Job stresses and family demands. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 596(1), 104–129.
23.
KhalidS., & IrshadM. Z. (2010). Job satisfaction among bank employees in Punjab, Pakistan: A comparative study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 17(4), 570–577.
24.
KlineP. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
25.
LeveneH. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In OlkinI.HotellingH. (Eds.), Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hoteling (pp. 278–292). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
26.
MehboobF., SarwarM. A., & BhuttoN. A. (2012). Factors affecting job satisfaction among faculty member. Asian Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 1(12), 1–9.
27.
MehradA. (2015). Role of demographic factors on academic staff job satisfaction in Malaysian Universities. International Journal of Information Research and Review, 2(10), 1259–1262.
28.
MooreD. S., & McCabeG. P. (2003). Introduction to the practice of statistics (p. 764). New York, NY: W H Freeman & Co.
29.
NagarK. (2012). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction among teachers during times of burnout. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 37(2), 1–8.
30.
PorterS. R., & UmbachP. D. (2001). Analyzing faculty workload data using multi level modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 171–196.
31.
ReynaldoJ., & SantosA. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal of Extension, 37(2), 1–4.
32.
SaundersM., LewisP., & ThornhillA. (2000). Research methods for business studies (2nd ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.
33.
SchusterJ. H., & FinkelsteinM. J. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of academic work and careers. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.
34.
SharmaH. N. (2004). Geographic perspectives on literacy and educational levels in North-East India. In MukerjiA. B. (Ed.), Cultural geography, forms and process (pp. 374–375). New Delhi: Concept Publishing University.
35.
SinghM., & BhattacharjeeA. (2016). Facilities availability and its effect on job satisfaction among central university academics of North East India. Amity Management Review, 5(1), 47–56.
36.
SirohiA., & SrivastavP. (2013). Correlation of satisfaction, commitment & performance on faculty staff’s performance at private institutions in Uttar Pradesh (India). International Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 2(8), 42–48.
37.
ZarJ. H. (1984). Statistical Analysis (2nd Ed.). Prentice Hall.
