The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1 - 89

Job Satisfaction and Retention

	 The	 nature	 of	 student	 affairs	 work	 differs	 by	institutional	type	(Hirt,	2006).	This	appears	 to	be	the	case	for	entry-level	RLH	work	where	 levels	of	satisfaction	with	the	work	itself	varied	 by	the	highest	degree	awarded	by	the	employing	institution.	Ensuring	a	good	match	between	 entry-level	professionals’	understanding	of	the	 nature	 of	 their	 work	 and	 supervisor	 expectations	may	improve	employee	satisfaction	with	 the	 work	 itself.	 Graduate	 preparation	 faculty	 can	support	the	development	of	accurate	perceptions	 by	 exploring	 the	 influence	 of	 institutional	 type,	 while	 supervisors	 can	 inform	 prospective	employees	of	the	nature	of	work	at	 their	institutions.	Additionally,	supervisors	can	 engage	staff	in	conversations	about	work,	what	 it	involves,	and	its	importance	to	departmental	 and	institutional	goals	and	mission,	further	increasing	the	congruence	between	perceptions	 and	realities	of	work	and	rewards. 	 Expectancy	 theory	 implies	 that	 entry-level	 RLH	staff	members	are	not	necessarily	dissatisfied	with	remuneration	levels,	though	they	may	 become	so	when	later	they	compare	their	effort,	 outcomes,	and	rewards	to	the	remuneration	received	by	others.	Graduate	faculty	can	help	students	anticipate	salary	differences,	while	hiring	 officials	and	supervisors	can	be	forthright	about	 salary	information,	how	salaries	are	determined,	 and	the	factors	involved	in	raises. 	 Understanding	the	nature	of	the	work	that	 employees	perform,	reconceptualizing	professional	 advancement,	 expanding	 collegial	 relationships,	 and	 increasing	 transparency	 about	 remuneration	 will	 help	 workers	 align	 their	 perceptions	 of	 effort,	 outcomes,	 and	 rewards,	 thereby	increasing	entry-level	staff	job	satisfaction	and	retention	within	the	residence	life	and	 housing	profession.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This	study	was	limited	in	several	ways.	 It	is	possible	that	individuals	attracted	to	 professional	affiliation	differ	in	their	levels	 of	job	satisfaction,	potentially	affecting	 results.	Findings	from	this	study	should	be	 generalized	with	care	as	the	sample	was	not	 inclusive	of	all	entry-level	RLH	practitioners,	 the	ethnicities	of	respondents	were	 unbalanced,	and	lack	of	representation	from	 individuals	working	at	two-year	and	for-profit	 institutions	was	notable.	Finally,	the	sample	 was	relatively	small,	possibly	depressing	 results	concerning	significant	differences. 	 Future	 inquiries	 concerning	 entry-level	 RLH	 professionals’	 job	 satisfaction	 can	 take	 several	forms.	Replication	using	a	sample	from	 ACUHO-I	 membership	 is	 likely	 to	 secure	 a	 larger	 number	 of	 responses.	 In	 this	 study,	 several	 personal	 characteristics	 (e.g.,	 gender,	 age,	and	ethnicity)	were	not	factors	in	job	satisfaction.	Different	variables—such	as	current	 salary,	size	of	housing	operation,	and	number	 of	 coworkers,	 as	 utilized	 by	 Jones	 (2002)— might	 provide	 additional	 insights	 into	 differences	in	job	satisfaction	and	related	predictors.	 Finally,	 qualitative	 investigations	 will	 help	 us	 better	understand	entry-level	professionals’	experiences	relative	to	job	satisfaction.

Ensuring a good match between entry-level professionals’ understanding of the nature of their work and supervisor expectations may improve employee satisfaction with the work itself.
V o l u m e 3 8 , No. 2 • 2 0 1 2

89
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1
