Files
Abstract
Retention of student affairs administrators is vital for institutions to achieve positive operational and student outcomes (Conley, 2001; Davidson, 2012). Specifically, institutional efforts to retain Black student affairs professionals show a commitment to improving their experiences through increased job satisfaction and organizational commitment. However, minimal research exists that sheds light on job satisfaction and organizational commitment for Black student affairs professionals (Hirt et al., 2006; Marcus, 2000; Steele, 2018). Literature about Black student affairs professionals at HBCUs is even scarcer. Given the distinct cultural elements of both PWIs and HBCUs, little is known about whether the Black student affairs professionals at both institution types share similar attitudes and feelings toward their job and the organization.
This quantitative study sought to extend on existing literature to examine the differences in job satisfaction and organizational commitment of Black student affairs professionals at PWIs and HBCUs. Two hundred eighty-eight Black student affairs professionals at PWIs (n=218) and HBCUs (n=70) participated in the study. The survey consisted of three validated instruments that measured global job satisfaction, job facet satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The Abridged Job in General Scale (Russell et al., 2004) measured global satisfaction. The Abridged Job Descriptive Index (Stanton et al., 2001) measured satisfaction with job facets (work, pay, promotion, supervision, and coworker). The revised Three-Component Model Employee Commitment Survey (Meyer & Allen, 1993) measured three components of organizational commitment (affective, continuance, and normative). Independent t-tests were run to analyze the results.
Findings indicated no differences amongst Black student affairs professionals at PWIs as compared to those at HBCUs for the following dependent variables: global job satisfaction, work, pay, promotion, supervision, affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. However, there was a difference in the coworker job facet. Respondents at PWIs reported a higher level of satisfaction than those at HBCUs. Understanding the levels assists student affairs leaders in their retention efforts for Black student affairs professionals. Furthermore, knowing where the differences exist allows student affairs leaders to cater their retention efforts to the institutional context and adopt universal retention strategies in areas where no differences exist.
This quantitative study sought to extend on existing literature to examine the differences in job satisfaction and organizational commitment of Black student affairs professionals at PWIs and HBCUs. Two hundred eighty-eight Black student affairs professionals at PWIs (n=218) and HBCUs (n=70) participated in the study. The survey consisted of three validated instruments that measured global job satisfaction, job facet satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The Abridged Job in General Scale (Russell et al., 2004) measured global satisfaction. The Abridged Job Descriptive Index (Stanton et al., 2001) measured satisfaction with job facets (work, pay, promotion, supervision, and coworker). The revised Three-Component Model Employee Commitment Survey (Meyer & Allen, 1993) measured three components of organizational commitment (affective, continuance, and normative). Independent t-tests were run to analyze the results.
Findings indicated no differences amongst Black student affairs professionals at PWIs as compared to those at HBCUs for the following dependent variables: global job satisfaction, work, pay, promotion, supervision, affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. However, there was a difference in the coworker job facet. Respondents at PWIs reported a higher level of satisfaction than those at HBCUs. Understanding the levels assists student affairs leaders in their retention efforts for Black student affairs professionals. Furthermore, knowing where the differences exist allows student affairs leaders to cater their retention efforts to the institutional context and adopt universal retention strategies in areas where no differences exist.