Job satisfaction among academic employees in private and public sector universities at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: A comparative analysis

Abstract Job satisfaction plays a significant role in the success of higher educational institutions. It boosts the skills and abilities of academic employees. However, there are few studies on academic employees’ job satisfaction in higher education institutions in developing countries, including Ethiopia. Previous studies also did not examine and discuss comparing job satisfaction among academic employees between private and public sector universities in Ethiopia in general and Addis Ababa in particular. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the job satisfaction of academic employees between private and public sector universities in Addis Ababa. A quantitative research approach with a descriptive survey research design was used. Full-time academic employees were the study population.The study used a self-administered structured questionnaire to collect data from 319 respondents selected by a proportional stratified random sampling method in private and public universities. The data were analyzed by mean, one sample t-test, and independent samples t-test at p < 0.05. The findings of this study indicated that academic employees in higher education institutions in Addis Ababa were dissatisfied with their jobs, except for the work itself. Concerning the employment sector, this study also showed that academic employees were satisfied with pay and supervision in private universities. Academic employees in public universities, however, were satisfied with job security. Based on the findings, this study recommended further research relevant to the issue under investigation to provide directions for policy amendment and implications for practice.


PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
Job satisfaction is an important condition in higher education institutions for academic employee motivation, retention, and institutional performance. However, academic employee job satisfaction is critical in higher education institutions in emerging nations like Ethiopia. Past studies were also not well documented regarding the comparison of job satisfaction among academic employees between private and public universities in Ethiopia in general and Addis Ababa in particular. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the job satisfaction of academic employees between private and public sector universities in Addis Ababa. A quantitative research approach with a descriptive survey research design was used. The study involved 319 academic employees in both private and public universities. The findings of this study reported that academic employees of higher education institutions were dissatisfied with their jobs, except for the work itself. Concerning the employment sector, this study revealed that academic employees at private universities were satisfied with their pay and supervision. In contrast, academic employees were satisfied with their job security at public universities. Based on the findings, this study recommended additional research relevant to the issue under consideration to provide policy recommendations and implications for practice.
used. Full-time academic employees were the study population.The study used a self-administered structured questionnaire to collect data from 319 respondents selected by a proportional stratified random sampling method in private and public universities. The data were analyzed by mean, one sample t-test, and independent samples t-test at p < 0.05. The findings of this study indicated that academic employees in higher education institutions in Addis Ababa were dissatisfied with their jobs, except for the work itself. Concerning the employment sector, this study also showed that academic employees were satisfied with pay and supervision in private universities. Academic employees in public universities, however, were satisfied with job security. Based on the findings, this study recommended further research relevant to the issue under investigation to provide directions for policy amendment and implications for practice.
It is difficult to define job satisfaction using only one definition (Filiz, 2014). Different scholars look at job satisfaction from different perspectives. Thus, job satisfaction is a complex and multi-faceted concept (Al Farsi et al., 2017;Aziri, 2011;Bakotic & Babic, 2013;Demirel, 2014;Volkwein & Parmley, 2000;Vuong & Duong, 2013). George and Jones (2012) defined job satisfaction as "the collection of feelings and beliefs people have about their current jobs." Another understanding of job satisfaction is a combination of employees' positive and negative feelings about their jobs (Aziri, 2011). According to Locke cited in Khalid et al. (2012), the most commonly accepted definition of job satisfaction is "a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job." Job satisfaction is attributed to various intrinsic and extrinsic factors that enhance the motivation of employees (Smerek & Peterson, 2007). It can range from extreme dissatisfaction to extreme satisfaction (Aziri, 2011;Eleswed & Mohammed, 2013). Better levels of job satisfaction tend to lead to an organization's ability to enhance efficiency, productivity, and employee relations; reduce turnover intentions and burnout; and lower absenteeism (Budría & Baleix, 2020;Khan et al., 2014;Mgaiwa, 2021;Nandan & Krishna, 2013;Rahman, 2020). Job satisfaction is generally related to life satisfaction and can directly impact an individual's social, physical, and mental health (Filiz, 2014).
Higher education institutions in the private and public sectors are considered the highest sources of knowledge and skills (Khalid et al., 2012). They are role models for innovation and change (Sakiru et al., 2017). They also promote equality and social justice (Daniel et al., 2017). Additionally, through their key functions of teaching and learning, research, and consultancy, higher education institutions play a critical role in any country's socioeconomic development (Ngatuni & Matoka, 2020). Academic employees significantly contribute to achieving higher education institutional objectives (De Lourdes Machado et al., 2011) and the performance of higher education institutions (Agmasu, 2020;Khalid et al., 2012;Saraih et al., 2017). Hence, academic employees are the most important asset for higher education institutions (Dachew et al., 2016;De Lourdes Machado et al., 2011;De Lourdes Machado-Taylor et al., 2016;Dias et al., 2013;Qazi & Jeet, 2017;Saraih et al., 2017;Shah, 2018).
In today's challenging global world, job satisfaction is not static but rather flexible, a complex phenomenon influenced by numerous variables (Nas, 2016). Therefore, higher education institutions or managements conduct regular research on academic employee job satisfaction in order to provide potential policies and strategies to the institutions' private and public sectors. The study also helps sustain the performance of organizations and retain qualified and experienced academic employees in academic institutions. In the education sector, job satisfaction can be measured by various variables. Pay, supervision, organizational policy and practices, interpersonal relations, opportunities for advancement, job security, the work itself, and working conditions are some of the specific variables that measure job satisfaction (Glick, 1992). These variables are also associated with Herzberg's two-factor theory (Smerek & Peterson, 2007).
Herzberg's two-factor theory was developed in 1959 and classified work dimensions into motivator (intrinsic) and hygiene (extrinsic) factors. Motivating (intrinsic) factors have a longer effect on increasing job satisfaction and converting dissatisfaction into satisfaction. In contrast, hygiene (extrinsic) factors can lead to satisfaction, while their absence can lead to dissatisfaction. Hence, hygiene factors are a maintenance factor, whose presence is required to prevent dissatisfaction but does not guarantee motivation (George & Jones, 2012;Smerek & Peterson, 2007).The motivators (intrinsic) factors related to the work itself and represent sources of satisfaction at work, such as promotion, recognition, work itself, and autonomy whereas the hygiene (extrinsic) factors related to the work environment as potential sources of dissatisfaction, such as company policy and administration, supervision, salary, interpersonal relations, working conditions, and job security (George & Jones, 2012;Seng & Wai, 2016;Smerek & Peterson, 2007). The significance of Herzberg's two-factor theory is to expand the understanding of the concept in any organisation and identify the levels needed to improve work life in that organisation. Hence, it has theoretical and practical implications for understanding in certain organisations.
Job satisfaction plays a significant role in the success of higher education institutions. It boosts the skills and abilities of academic staff. Motivation and satisfaction of academic employees are very important for the quality of higher education institutions (De Lourdes Machado et al., 2011). According to Ahsan et al. (2009) and Aziz et al. (2014), job satisfaction is necessary for retaining academic staff at academic institutions. Employees with higher satisfaction tend to be more loyal to their organization and, in most cases, are more productive and innovative (Mehrad, 2020;Tio, 2014). In addition, more satisfied employees are less likely to seek a new job with a new employer (Kaur, 2019). On the contrary, dissatisfied university academic employees leave their institutions, with costs associated with decreased institutional loyalty and quality of education and searching for new jobs (Pienaar & Bester, 2008;Webber & Rogers, 2018).
Job satisfaction in higher education institutions has been examined for decades (Rhodes et al., 2007). However, many studies on the job satisfaction of academic employees in higher education have been done in developed countries rather than developing countries so far (Amarasena et al., 2015;Chimanikire et al., 2007;Mgaiwa, 2021;Seyal & Afzaal, 2013;Ssesanga & Garrett, 2005;Tlaiss & Mendelson, 2014;Zembylas & Papanastasiou, 2006). In Ethiopia, few studies have been conducted on job satisfaction among academic staff in public higher educational institutions. Studies at Dire Dawa University (Dando et al., 2017), Wolaita Sodo University (Bibiso & Agarwal, 2017), Adi-Haqi Campus in Mekelle University (Hagos & Abrha, 2015), and some selected public universities (Damtae, 2019) were good examples. However, these studies were overlooked at private and other public universities. In addition, academic employee job satisfaction is undoubtedly an under-researched topic that requires further discussion and documentation in higher education institutions in the country.
Academic staff job satisfaction is important for student satisfaction, the performance of academics, and the contribution of higher education institutions (HEIs) to society (Machado-Taylor et al., 2011). In contrast, dissatisfaction appears to be a major factor in the desire to leave the job, which may lead to a turnover or continued dissatisfaction (Kiyak et al., 1997). Accordingly, Damtae (2019) did research in Ethiopia looking at "job satisfaction among academic staff" in some selected public universities. Its findings found that most academic staff members were dissatisfied with their jobs. In this case, dissatisfaction among academic employees has an immediate impact on the teaching-learning process, student achievement, and research work and, at long last, affects the quality of education and performance of the institutions. To solve this and other related problems and provide the possible strategies in the study, prioritize the job satisfaction of academic employees in academic institutions over other supportive staff.
In addition, the previous studies did not compare job satisfaction among academic employees between private and public sector universities in Ethiopia, particularly in Addis Ababa. But this study can contribute to addressing that gap. Therefore, this study aimed to compare job satisfaction among academic employees between private and public sector universities in Addis Ababa. This study would be useful to academic staff members working at private and public academic institutions in knowing their association factors for job satisfaction to enhance and maintain job satisfaction, reduce their turnover intentions, and increase the morale and effectiveness of the employees. In addition, it helps enhance and maintain the performance of higher education institutions.

Research approach and design
The quantitative research approach with a descriptive survey research design was employed in this study. The data obtained through this research approach is considered more quantifiable and suitable for generalization to a large population (Choy, 2014). Again, numerical data obtained through this research approach allows for comparisons between organizations or groups and for determining the extent of agreement or disagreement among respondents in a short period (Yauch & Steudel, 2003). Thus, this research approach with research design is more appropriate for this study.

Sample size and sampling
The study population is found in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Full-time academic employees are the study population at both private and public sector universities in Addis Ababa. There are eight universities in the city. Four universities are private, and the remaining four are public. Two universities from each sector were selected by simple random sampling using the lottery method. Pseudonyms or unique identification were used to maintain anonymity for the study universities. The population comprised 645, 476, 149, and 304 academics from A, B, C, and D universities, respectively. The former two were public universities, whereas the latter two were private universities. Thus, the total size of the population studied is 1574. The required sample size for this research was calculated using a simpler formula of Yamane, quoted in Fikire (2021), at a 95% confidence level and a 5% margin of error.
The formula is the following: n N 1þNðeÞ 2 Where: n = signifies the sample size N= signifies the population under study e = signifies the margin error.
From the above formula, the sample size for this study was: n ¼ Therefore, the required sample size of this study is 319 academic employees.
In this study, the sample respondants were selected from private and public universities using a proportional stratified random sampling method. According to this method, the sample size was proportionally allocated to each academic institution. See details in Table 1.

Instruments
This study assessed pay, supervision, promotion, interpersonal relations, the work itself, job security, and organisational policies and practises to determine overall job satisfaction. The questionnaire was adapted from the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) (Spector, 1985) and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) (Weiss et al., 1967). However, a few words were modified and reconstructed to be appropriate for the local context of the study. The form of JSS and MSQ measures satisfaction with several different aspects of the work environment in both the private and public sectors. The questionnaire was closed-ended (structured) and used for the data collection on the job satisfaction of academic employees from Ethiopian private and public sector universities in Addis Ababa. Responses were ranged by 5-point Likert Scaling from 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree (SA) as used by Damtae (2019) and Hameed et al. (2018). The questionnaire was first piloted with 60 respondents to check the reliability of the questionnaire in a new context. Cronbach alpha for total job satisfaction was 0.93, satisfaction with supervision (0.90), organizational policy and practices (0.84), pay (0.93), interpersonal relations (0.91), promotion (0.92), job security (0.90), work itself (0.92). This was an acceptable range for conducting the study and collecting data from academic employees at higher education institutions. This is because prior studies showed that the measures whose Cronbach's Alpha exceeds 0.70 are considered reliable (Spector, 1985;Tnay et al., 2013).
The face and content validity of the questionnaires were checked and clarified by two experts in public administration and one expert in education psychology at Andhra University and Debre Berhan University, respectively. These experts have many years of teaching experience at the university level. Experts provided constructive comments. Some unnecessary questions were omitted. Some of the questions and instructions were also rewritten clearly. Insight of the feedback, the questionnaire was finalized.

Data analysis
In this study, the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 25.0 was utilized to analyze the quantitative data. Data was entered, coded, and edited. Different statistical techniques were used to analyze the collected data. The mean, standard deviation, and one-sample t-test were used to assess job satisfaction among academic employees. Moreover, an independent samples t-test was used to see the relative difference between private and public university academics.

Ethical consideration
Research ethics is one of the prerequisites for researchers involving human participants in any research approaches used to conduct a study. This study took great care to follow the ethical obligations required in social science endeavors. A written permission letter for data collection was

Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents
The socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented with numbers and percentages. Of the 319 full-time academic employees involved in the study, 227 (

The extent of job satisfaction among academic employees
This study assessed the extent of job satisfaction of academic employees. The level of job satisfaction among academic employee responses can be determined using the best criteria. Then, afterward, the observed mean would be presented. Thus, this study determined the level of job satisfaction as used by Drukpa (2010) as cited in Kefyalew et al. (2020). They clearly stated the criteria and interpretation of the rating scale, and it showed that 1.00-1.80 = very dissatisfied; 1.81-2.60 = dissatisfied; 2.61-3.40 = neutral; 3.41-4.20 = satisfied and 4.21-5.00 = very satisfied.
The expected mean of their study was 3.41. Therefore, this study used this expected mean.
In this study, if the observed mean score of the respondents' level of job satisfaction is significantly less than the expected mean or value (3.41), then academic employees of private and public universities were dissatisfied. While if the observed mean score of the respondents' level of job satisfaction is equal to or significantly greater than the expected mean or value (3.41), then these employees were satisfied. Table 2, the mean score of academic employees' response to satisfaction with work itself (3.569) was significantly greater than the expected mean value (3.41) at (t = 2.298, df = 318, p < 0.05). Hence, it was concluded that university academics were satisfied with the work itself in academic institutions. Other studies, consistent with the present study, showed that academics were the most satisfied with the work itself (Baş & Ardıç, 2002;Lane et al., 2010;Schulze, 2006;Smerek & Peterson, 2007;Togia et al., 2004). Herzberg's two-factor theory asserted that work itself was an intrinsic or motivating factor that promoted job satisfaction, but the theory was inconclusive in an academic institution (Smerek & Peterson, 2007). It also reached a similar conclusion in this study.

As indicated in
In this study, however, respondents' level of job satisfaction with facets of job satisfaction revealed that the mean scores of academic staff's responses to the satisfaction of pay (2.639), supervision behavior/supervisor (2.963), organizational policy and practices (2.798), interpersonal relations (3.227), job security (2.927) and promotion (3.119) were significantly lower than the expected mean value (3.41) at the respective t value and degree of freedom (where p < 0.05 in all cases). In addition, the mean score of overall job satisfaction among academic staff responses (3.035) was significantly lower than the expected mean (3.41) at (t =-9.049, df = 318, p < 0.05). Thus, the conclusion of this study indicated that academic employees were dissatisfied with their jobs at higher education institutions. This implies that academic employees in public and private sector universities were dissatisfied with the aforementioned facets of job satisfaction. The Herzberg two-factor theory is also associated with the current study. However, it was not inclusive in its implementation. Similarly, previous studies in some selected Ethiopian public universities (Damtae, 2019), the National University of Lesotho (Moloantoa & Dorasamy, 2017), Zimbabwean higher education institutions (Chimanikire et al., 2007), and two Ugandan universities (Ssesanga & Garrett, 2005) reported job dissatisfaction among academic employees.
Comparative data on the job satisfaction of academic employees between public and private sector universities are provided in Table 3. The table shows the mean scores of the academic employees, showing the ratings on the different aspects of their jobs and a significance test of the differences between the mean scores of the two sectors.
From Table 3, the mean scores of pay for private university academics (2.861) were higher than the corresponding mean scores of other public university academics (2.549). The independent samples t-test also revealed a significant mean difference between private and public university academics in relation to pay (t = 2.312, df = 317, p < 0.05). This shows that academic employees in private universities were relatively more satisfied with their pay than academic employees in public universities. Other studies in Nigeria (Fapohunda, 2012) and Punjab in Pakistan (Khalid et al., 2012) supported the present study.
Concerning job security, the mean score for academic employees in public universities was 3.087, whereas the mean score for academic employees in private universities was 2.533. The independent samples t-test also revealed a significant mean difference between private and public university academics concerning job security (t = −3.894, df = 317, p < 0.05). This implies that academic employees in public universities feel greater satisfaction from "job security" compared with their private university counterparts. This finding was in line with other earlier studies done in medical and dental colleges in Pakistan (Ali et al., 2021), Afghan universities (Safi, 2019), Nigerian universities (Fapohunda, 2012), and universities in Punjab, Pakistan (Khalid et al., 2012), which indicated that academic employees working in public universities were more satisfied with job security compared to academic employees working in private universities. However, an earlier study explicitly elaborated on the causes of employees' dissatisfaction with job security in the private sector. It is highly stated that, because of uncertain and frequently changing personal policies as well as the applicable ones in this sector, for instance, the private higher education sector is a good example, as per the previous study report (Baş & Ardıç, 2002). Regarding supervision, significant statistical differences exist between public and private university academics in their level of satisfaction with this aspect of their job. The mean score of supervision for private universities was 3.277, whereas for public universities, it was 2.836. In addition, the independent samples t-test revealed a significant mean difference between private and public sector universities concerning supervision (t = 2.829, df = 317, p < 0.05). From this result, it is possible to conclude that academic employees working in private universities have shown a higher level of job satisfaction with supervision than those working in public universities. This finding seems consistent with earlier studies in Nigeria (Fapohunda, 2012), and Pakistan (Khalid et al., 2012), which found that faculty members in private universities have higher satisfaction with their supervision than academic employees in public universities. Other scholars pointed out the reason why the public sector, especially academic staff in higher education with supervision, was dissatisfied. They strongly stated that academic staff in public universities might see their managers as ignorant because of heavy paperwork and procedural responsibilities resulting from the bureaucratic structure (Baş & Ardıç, 2002;Khalid et al., 2012).
The one conclusion from Table 3, therefore, is that, in general, overall job satisfaction was not significantly different between private and public university academics in Addis Ababa. It is consistent with the previous study. In line with this, Aziz et al. (2014) reported that there was no significant difference in overall job satisfaction among academic employees between private and public universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. On the contrary, overall job satisfaction of academic employees differed significantly between private and public universities, with academic employees in public universities being more satisfied than those in private universities in the Valley Region of Kenya (Kiplangat & Kiptiony, 2017), Bangladesh (Nimalathasan, 2010), and KPK Province in Pakistan (Noor et al., 2015). Again, Ali et al. (2021) found that faculty members who are working in the public sector show a higher level of satisfaction than those in the private sector in medical and dental colleges in Pakistan.
However, studies conducted by De Lourdes Machado-Taylor et al. (2016) and De Lourdes Machado et al. (2011) reported that academic employees are more satisfied with overall job satisfaction in private higher education institutions than those who work in public higher education institutions in Portugal. This implies that most academic staff in public higher education institutions were dissatisfied and unmotivated by their job compared to those academic staff working in private higher education institutions. Chughtai (2003) and Ghafoor (2012) also found that academic employees in the private sector were more satisfied with overall job satisfaction than academic employees in the public sector.

Conclusion and recommendation
The findings of this study indicated that academic employees in higher education institutions in Addis Ababa were dissatisfied with their jobs, except for the work itself. Concerning the employment sector, this study showed that academic employees were satisfied with pay and supervision in private universities. However, academic employees in public universities were satisfied with job security. Interpersonal relations, promotion, organizational policy and practices, work itself, and overall job satisfaction were insignificant variables at p < 0.05. The Herzberg two-factor theory was also associated with the current study. However, it was not inclusive in its implementation. This shows that unless the private and public sector universities give special attention to the satisfaction issue of their academic employees, the quality and performance of the education sector and the willingness of experienced and competent academic staff members to stay in their working institutions will be in question. Based on the findings, this study recommended further research relevant to the issue under study to provide directions for policy amendment and implications for practice.