INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 144
www.rsisinternational.org
Workplace Facilities, Organizational Differences, and Strategic
Approaches to Enhancing Job Satisfaction: A Study of Public and Private
Organizations in Bangalore City
Mohan H C
1
; Dr. Shruti Mathur
2
1
Research Scholar, Dept. of Management, Shyam University, Dausa, Rajasthan.
2
Research Supervisor, Dept. of Management, Shyam University, Dausa, Rajasthan.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.15020000013
Received: 14 February 2026; Accepted: 22 February 2026; Published: 03 March 2026
ABSTRACT
This study looked at how Bangalore City's public and private businesses' workplace facilities affected workers'
job satisfaction. Finding out how satisfied employees were with their workplace amenities, identifying any
disparities among industries, and devising solutions were the objectives.
150 employees—75 from the public sector and 75 from the private sector were asked to complete a standardized
questionnaire on a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics, independent samples T-test and reliability
evaluations using SPSS were all used in the analysis. The findings indicated that public sector employees evaluated
workplace facilities considerably more favorably than their private sector counterparts, suggesting superior
infrastructure and organizational support within the public sector. However, overall job satisfaction did not differ
significantly across the two sectors, indicating that elements outside workplace amenities, such as career
advancement and organizational culture, also significantly influence satisfaction. These results show that private
companies need to improve their physical and technological resources, whereas public companies should focus on
ways to help employees career advancement and thrive. The study offers valuable insights for human resource
managers and policymakers to improve employee happiness and organizational efficacy.
Keywords: Job satisfaction, Workplace facilities, Public sector, Private sector, Organizational differences,
Bangalore City, Employee satisfaction.
INTRODUCTION
Job satisfaction has been acknowledged as a fundamental notion in organizational behavior and human resource
management for an extended period. It shows how happy employees are with their jobs and the environment at
work, which affects their motivation, commitment, performance, and plans to leave. One of the most important
factors that affects job satisfaction is the workplace facilities, which include things like infrastructure, tools and
technology, ergonomics, and amenities. These things have a big impact on how employees feel about their work
environment. Facilities that are well-designed and supportive not only make people feel safe and comfortable,
but they also boost productivity and the general health of employees.
The examination of workplace amenities is particularly pertinent in Bangalore City, which functions as a central
point for both governmental and commercial companies. Public organizations are usually thought to have more
stable institutions, greater infrastructure, and more uniform facilities. Private organizations, on the other hand,
are recognized for their competitive atmosphere and limited resources. These disparities between sectors mean
that we need to look at how facilities affect employee happiness in each type of firm. The study aims to determine
if disparities in workplace amenities between public and private enterprises result in significant discrepancies in
overall job satisfaction.
Research shows that the environment at work have a big impact on how happy and productive employees are
Well-kept and comfortable facilities help lower stress, keep people safe and healthy, and get them more involved.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 145
www.rsisinternational.org
On the other hand, poor amenities can cause unhappiness, absenteeism, and worse performance. Nonetheless,
whereas numerous research have investigated the influence of compensation, advancement, or leadership styles
on job satisfaction, a limited number have concentrated exclusively on workplace amenities as a driver,
particularly within the Indian organizational setting. This gap justifies the current investigation.
Objectives of the Study
1. To determine the level of job satisfaction based on workplace facilities.
2. To examine whether there are differences in job satisfaction between the organizations considered for the
study.
3. To suggest appropriate strategies (if any) to improve job satisfaction among employees.
Hypotheses of the Study
H₀₁ (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant difference in employee satisfaction based on workplace facilities
between public and private organizations.
H₁₁ (Alternative Hypothesis): There is a significant difference in employee satisfaction based on workplace
facilities between public and private organizations.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Kebede et al. (2025) examined job satisfaction among midwives in Southwest Ethiopia, focusing on a previously
underexplored aspect of healthcare workforce studies in the region. The study employed an institution-based
cross-sectional design, gathering data via questionnaires that were analysed using bivariate and multivariate
logistic regression. The results showed that less than half (46.28) of the midwives were satisfied with their job, a
figure that is very low in comparison with the rest of the world. Other factors that influenced job satisfaction
included individual performance, availability of other career possibilities and teamwork. Specifically, the better
midwives were, the more likely they said that they were happy with their jobs (AOR = 5.64). Other job options
and working as a team, on the other hand, were associated with diminished levels of satisfaction. The findings
identified the immediate need to enhance teamwork, increase performance incentives, and improve the
organisational conditions in state healthcare facilities by the healthcare executives and policymakers. The
research contribution to the literature was the identification of the particular challenges facing midwives in
Ethiopia and the specific policy recommendations that could address these issues and improve the satisfaction of
healthcare workers.
Morales-Huamán et al. (2023) performed a bibliometric review of papers examining the relationship between
organisational culture and teamwork. 836 records were searched and filtered based on the PRISMA 2020
guidelines using the databases such as Scopus and Web of Science. Keywords densities and theme clusters were
then mapped with the use of VOSviewer software. The outcome showed a considerable rise of interest in the
aspects of organisational culture and teamwork which peaked in 2019. It was revealed that culture and teamwork
were closely correlated with such things as knowledge management, patient safety culture, interdisciplinary
collaboration, knowledge exchange, and innovation. One of the keywords that reoccurred in most of the clusters
was communication, which is why it is important in the study of organisational culture. The authors argue that
the future studies should focus on such themes as leadership, the safety climate, and team information exchange.
This paper focuses on the shifting nature of culture and collaboration in improving organisational performance
in the government and the business world.
Mustika et al. (2025) studied how the organisational climate, job satisfaction, and work stress of instructors at a
private Islamic school in Indonesia affected each other. The study utilised a quantitative research design
methodology, polling all 50 teachers at the institution using a saturated sampling technique. The study utilised
regression and Pearson correlation analyses in SPSS 26, revealing strong negative connections between
organisational climate and work stress, as well as between job satisfaction and work stress. The findings imply
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 146
www.rsisinternational.org
that an improved organisational climate and elevated job satisfaction directly mitigate teacher stress. The research
underscores the necessity of improving organisational climate quality—via supportive leadership, participatory
decision-making, and transparent policies—alongside increasing teachers’ job satisfaction to mitigate burnout
and foster well-being. The study is useful because it shows how environment and satisfaction may be both
working conditions and ways to defend against stress at work.
Vergara et al. (2025) detailed analysis that plots the reciprocal correlation between work satisfaction and
organisational atmosphere. They present 78 academic sources that were published over the last five years (2015-
2024) to demonstrate how globalisation and digital development transformed the requirements of contemporary
companies. Their results emphasize the fact that employee satisfaction is directly positively correlated with a
favorable climate (characterized by open communication, empathetic managers, continual training, and a flexible
organizational culture). Consequently, satisfied workers are more productive, dedicated to the organization and
tend to remain in it. The assessment also highlights current issues like resistance to change, lack of proper
leadership strategies and poor communication channels that may reduce satisfaction and competitiveness..
Consequently, the research identifies talent management and atmosphere enhancement as strategic imperatives
for maintaining organisational success.
In a more focused empirical context, Wandra (2025) examines the mediation function of job satisfaction in
connecting psychological well-being and organisational climate to employee performance in educational
institutions. Despite the negligible direct impacts of psychological well-being and climate on performance, both
factors exerted a substantial beneficial impact on work satisfaction, which subsequently served as a significant
predictor of employee outcomes. This conclusion indicates that climate measures alone may not result in
immediate enhancements in performance unless they lead to increased employee satisfaction. The study presents
a significant significance for educational managers: Improving well-being and climate elements might indirectly
boost organisational performance by way of employee job satisfaction.
Santana and Pérez-Rico (2023) contributed to the discourse on organisational climate (OrgC), employee
happiness (EmH), and job satisfaction (EJoS) by examining faculty members in Chinese institutions throughout
the digital revolution period. The study investigated six hypotheses using SmartPLS 4.1 to look at a mediated–
moderated model. The findings indicated that organisational climate had a favourable impact on both happiness
and job satisfaction, with happiness serving as a partial mediator in the relationship between climate and
satisfaction. This means that a workplace culture that is helpful and interesting makes workers happier, which
makes them more satisfied with their jobs. It's intriguing that while ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence
(AIA) apps were employed as moderating variables, they had little impact on the relationship between job
satisfaction and happiness. In contrast to job satisfaction, which accounted for 13.3% of the variance in job
performance, the study found that organizational climate and happiness together explained 51.9% of the variance
in job satisfaction.These findings highlight the fact that the
use of AI tools can help to be more efficient and
provide support, but it does not reshape the connection between pleasure and satisfaction. Rather it is the
provision of an environment conducive to employees and the happiness of employees that remains most crucial
in maintaining satisfaction and performance in academia.
Yiming et al. (2024) carried out a comprehensive quantitative research to examine the correlation between
organisational climate (OC), psychological well-being (PW), and job satisfaction (JoS) in Chinese higher
education institutions among educators. The research adopted a cross-sectional survey research design and
collected responses of 690 individuals using WeChat based on the postpositivist concepts. To ensure that the
methods were sound, it pre-tested, validated the translations, and profiled demographics. The findings revealed
that both OC and PW had effect on job satisfaction, and is important to note that the atmosphere in the workplace
and the mental state of educators should be supportive to them. Importantly, PW was found to mediate the
relationship between OC and JoS, which indicates a role played by the mediator in terms of a conduit through
which an appropriate climate can increase pleasure. Moreover, this research also presented a new aspect that
focused on the technological influence (TI) as a moderator, which revealed its ability to increase the relationship
between OC and JoS. This implies that technology plays a facilitative role in enhancing happiness in a case where
it has been adequately incorporated into the learning institutions.The model accounted for 72.4% of the of the
variance in job satisfaction, demonstrating its robust predictive validity. The authors assert that enhancing
organisational atmosphere emphasising psychological well-being, and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 147
www.rsisinternational.org
strategically employing technological tools are essential for elevating instructor satisfaction, institutional
performance, and student outcomes.
These findings are especially useful for Chinese policymakers and higher education executives who want to create
programs that balance human elements with digital change in education.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study, “Workplace Facilities, Organizational Differences, and Strategic Approaches to Enhancing Job
Satisfaction: A Study of Public and Private Organizations in Bangalore City,” aimed to assess the correlation
between workplace facilities and job satisfaction, analyze sectoral disparities, and formulate strategies for
enhancement.
Research Design
We used a comparative cross-sectional design. Data were gathered from employees of both public and
commercial businesses to provide sector-specific comparisons.
Population and Scope
The population consisted of personnel (both managerial and non-managerial) employed in public and private
organizations in Bangalore City that had been in operation for a minimum of five years, thereby ensuring
organizational stability and pertinent exposure to workplace facilities.
Sample and Sampling Technique
A stratified random sampling method was employed, utilizing sector as the stratum.
Sample size: 150 employees
Allocation:75 public and 75 private employees
To make the sample more representative and less biased, respondents were randomly chosen from different
departments and job levels within each stratum.
Data Sources
• Primary data: collected opinions on workplace facilities (infrastructure, tools/technology, safety/ergonomics,
amenities), general job satisfaction, and ideas for how to make things better.
• Secondary data: To frame constructs and help with interpretation, we looked at relevant books, peer-reviewed
journals, organizational reports, and trustworthy web sources.
Data Sources
• Primary data: collected opinions on workplace facilities (infrastructure, tools/technology, safety/ergonomics,
amenities), general job satisfaction, and ideas for how to make things better.
• Secondary data: To frame constructs and help with interpretation, we looked at relevant books, peer-reviewed
journals, organizational reports, and trustworthy web sources.
Data Collection Procedure
Questionnaires were given out in person and through a secure internet form. Participation was voluntary,
anonymity was preserved, and responses with significant missing data were omitted prior to analysis.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 148
www.rsisinternational.org
Statistical Methods
We used SPSS to clean and analyze the data and provided a summary of demographics, workplace amenities,
and job satisfaction.
• An independent samples t-test contrasted public and private scores on workplace facilities and job satisfaction,
testing H₀₁/H₁₁.
Levene's test checked to see if the variances were the same; if they weren't, Welch's adjustment was used.
Ethical Considerations
We got informed consent, and we kept the information private and safe. The data were only utilized for
schoolwork DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Table 1. Demographic Profile of Respondents (N = 150)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 149
www.rsisinternational.org
Figure 1: Respondents Profile
Table 1 shows how the 150 people who answered the survey were spread out by age, gender, and other factors.
There were more men than women in the sample, with 58.7% being men and 41.3% being women. The age
breakdown shows that the biggest group was people between the ages of 30 and 40 (42.0%), followed by people
under the age of 30 (29.3%).
In terms of education, 44.7% were undergraduates, 40.0% were postgraduates, and 15.3% were professionals.
This shows that the workforce was well-trained.
The split between the public (50.0%) and private (50.0%) sectors was even. 39.3% of the people in the sample
had less than 5 years of work experience 37.3% had 5–10 years, and 23.3% had more than 10 years. This shows
that the sample includes both new and experienced professionals.
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics (1–5 Likert)
Dimension
Mean
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Infrastructure
3.72
0.66
1.00
Tools & Technology
3.58
0.74
1.00
Safety & Ergonomics
3.64
0.71
1.00
Amenities & Support Services
3.55
0.76
1.00
Workplace Facilities (Composite)
3.62
0.62
1.00
Overall Job Satisfaction
3.66
0.68
1.00
Composite = average of the four facilities sub-dimensions.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 150
www.rsisinternational.org
Figure 2:
Table 2 shows the descriptive data for workplace facilities and job satisfaction in general. Infrastructure had the
highest mean (3.72) of all the dimensions, which means that people were generally happy with the physical
resources and workspace layouts.
After that came safety and ergonomics (3.64), tools and technology (3.58), and amenities and support services
(3.55). The overall satisfaction level for working facilities was moderate to high, with a composite mean of
The average score for total job satisfaction was 3.66, which means that most employees were fairly happy with
their positions.
However, there is still room for improvement in some areas, such as amenities and technology.
Table 3. Group Statistics by Sector
Table 3 shows how satisfied public and private sector workers are with their jobs and the facilities at their
workplaces. Public sector workers said that their workplaces had better amenities (3.74) than private sector
workers (3.50), which means that people thought that public organizations had superior facilities.
Public employees also had a somewhat better mean job satisfaction score (3.70) than private sector employees
(3.62).
Even while the differences aren't big, they do show that the resources and conditions at work may have a bigger
effect on employee happiness in public companies.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 151
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 4: Independent Samples t-Test — Workplace Facilities (Public vs. Private)
Table 4 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for workplace facilities. The Levene's test for equality
of variances (F = 2.41, p = 0.122) showed that the assumption of equal variances was correct. The t-test findings
showed a big difference between public and private enterprises (t = 2.46, df = 148, p = 0.015). This suggests that
workers in public organizations gave their workplaces much higher scores than those in private businesses. The
mean difference of 0.24 shows that differences in facilities between sectors are important and statistically
significant.
Table 5 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for how happy public and private
Table 5 shows the results of the independent samples t-test for how happy public and private sector workers are
with their jobs. Levene's test (F = 0.18, p = 0.674) confirmed the hypothesis of variance homogeneity. The t-test
result (t = 0.73, df = 148, p = 0.467) indicated no significant difference in overall job satisfaction between the
two groups. There was just a 0.08 difference in the mean, which is not a statistically significant difference. This
reveals that the overall level of job satisfaction was nearly the same in both public and private companies, even
though the amenities at work were different.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 152
www.rsisinternational.org
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE
The research on workplace amenities, organizational variances, and methods to improve worker happiness in
both public and private sectors of Bangalore City yielded significant insights into sectoral parallels and disparities.
The results showed that workers in public organizations gave the workplace facilities much higher ratings than
workers in private businesses. This shows that the public sector is mostly stable, has good infrastructure, and has
good support from its organizations.
However, as regards general job satisfaction, the two sectors did not make a huge difference. This indicates that
although the facilities varied, there must have been other factors such as the work culture, management patterns,
and career development opportunities that could have rendered both of the types of organizations equally
rewarding. The findings indicate that although workplace improvement can be used to enhance satisfaction it is
not the only factor to consider. In the case of individual businesses, better infrastructure, ergonomics, and
conditions might increase the morale of the employees and assist in retaining them. In the case of public
organizations, the maintenance of the same standards of facilities with the addition of the means of professional
growth and advancement of employees, could make them even happier.
The study will be expanded in terms of its scope in the future when organizations of more than one city are
represented in the sample. This will enable making of comparisons among areas. Longitudinal research would
also be useful to track changes in employee happiness as workplace changes and enhancements in technology
take place. Besides, qualitative approaches such as interviews and focus group discussions could bring out deeper
information about employee experiences. It would be better to include other factors such as as leadership style,
work-life balance, training opportunities to have a more comprehensive understanding of determinants of
satisfaction. Through analysis of these areas, future studies can contribute to the development of industry-specific
policies and company activities that will generate sustainable job satisfaction and workforce retention over the
long term.
REFERENCES
1. Adamopoulos, I. P., & Syrou, N. F. (2022). Associations and correlations of job stress, job satisfaction
and burn out in public health sector. European Journal of Environment and Public Health, 6(2), em0113.
2. Adams, J. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.
3. Adinew, Y. (2024). A comparative study on motivational strategies, organizational culture, and climate in
public and private institutions. Current Psychology, 43(13), 11470-11492.
4. Agrizat, A., & Megdadi, Y. (2025). The Relationship Effect of Organizational Climate In between
Strategic leadership and Organizational Innovation at Private Hospitals in Amman. International Review
of Management and Marketing, 15(3), 38.
5. Ahmad, M. K., Abdulhamid, A. B., Wahab, S. A., & Nazir, M. U. (2022). Impact of the project manager's
transformational leadership, influenced by mediation of self-leadership and moderation of empowerment,
on project success. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 15(5), 842-864.
6. Al-Mahruqi, H. N., Bouazza, A., & Al-Suqri, M. N. (2020). Readiness of public and private sector
organizations for knowledge management: A literature review. Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 10(2),
5-19.
7. Ayati, S., Sitaniapessy, A., & Widokarti, J. R. (2025). The Influence of Organizational Climate, Situational
Leadership Style, and Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance at the East Kalimantan Regional Police
Medical and Health Unit (Biddokes). Paradoks: Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi, 8(2), 697-707.
8. Babatunde, O. B., Okonji, C. T., Olanihun, Z. S., & Daniel, H. A. (2025). Public-Private Partnerships in
Advancing AI-Based Logistics. NIU Journal of Humanities, 10(2), 87-100.
9. Bannikova, K., & Mykhaylyova, K. (2024). Organisational culture as a tool for shaping human capital in
times of uncertainty. Organisational culture: theory for practical applications: monograph. Kharkiv: PUA
Publishing, 1, 172.
10. Benchis, M. P., Shahzad, K., & Dan, S. (2025). Comparative analysis of blockchain adoption in the public
and private sectors. A technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework approach. Journal of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 153
www.rsisinternational.org
Innovation & Knowledge, 10(4), 100746.
11. Besley, T., & Ghatak, M. (2001). Government versus private ownership of public goods. The Quarterly
journal of economics, 116(4), 1343-1372.
12. Blum, M. L and Naylor, J.C. (1968), Industrial psychology: Its theoretical and social foundations. New
York: Harper and Row, pp-8-12
13. Boukamcha, F. (2023). A comparative study of organizational commitment process in the private and
public sectors. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 31(5), 1987-2013.
14. Bowditch, J. L., Buono, A. F., & Stewart, M. M. (2008). A primer on organizational behavior. (7th ed).
Hoboken, N. J.: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
15. Boyne, G. A. (2002). Public and private management: what’s the difference?. Journal of management
studies, 39(1), 97-122.
16. Buenger, V., Daft, R. L., Conlon, E. J., & Austin, J. (1996). Competing values in organizations: Contextual
influences and structural consequences. Organization Science, 7(5), 557-576.
17. Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). Mechanistic and organic systems of management. The management of
innovation, 21, 96-125.
18. Canbolat, Y. (2025). Organizational structure, instructional quality, and student achievement: The case of
19. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snydermann B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley
20. Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction.
21. Hoque, K. E., Wang, X., Qi, Y., & Norzan, N. (2023). The factors associated with teachers’ job satisfaction
and their impacts on students’ achievement: a review (2010–2021). Humanities and Social Sciences
Communications, 10(1), 1-7.’
22. Hortaçsu, A., Natan, O. R., Parsley, H., Schwieg, T., & Williams, K. R. (2024). Organizational structure
and pricing: Evidence from a large us airline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 139(2), 1149-1199.
23. Huang, T., & Wu, Y. (2025). A Bibliometric Analysis of Nurses’ Job Satisfaction From 2004 to
2023. Journal of Nursing Management, 2025(1), 4285361.
24. Hudays, A., Gary, F., Voss, J. G., Arishi, A., Alfar, Z. A., Algodimi, A. M., & Fitzpatrick, J. J. (2024,
October). Factors influencing job satisfaction among mental health nurses: a systematic review.
In Healthcare (Vol. 12, No. 20, p. 2040). MDPI.
25. Imaniyati, N., Ratnasari, C. D., & Adman, A. (2025). Enhancing job satisfaction through human resource
information systems and communication: A commitment-based approach to achieve Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) in education-oriented organizations. ASEAN Journal of Educational
Research and Technology, 4(2), 237-254.
26. Indrayani, I., Nurhatisyah, N., Damsar, D., & Wibisono, C. (2024). How does millennial employee job
satisfaction affect performance?. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 14(1), 22-40.
27. Irefin, M. P., &Bwala, D. (2012). Organizational theories and analysis: A feminist perspective.
International Journal of Advancements in Research and Technology, 1(1), 71-97
28. Islam, T., Khatoon, A., Cheema, A. U., & Ashraf, Y. (2024). How does ethical leadership enhance
employee work engagement? The roles of trust in leader and harmonious work passion. Kybernetes, 53(6),
2090-2106.
29. Jacobsen, D. I. (2021). Motivational differences? Comparing private, public and hybrid
organizations. Public Organization Review, 21(3), 561-575.
30. Jain, M., & Dhir, S. (2022). Antecedents of organization ambidexterity: A comparative study of public
and private sector organizations. Technology in society, 70, 102046.’
31. Jana, B., Rautaray, B., Swain, D. K., & Swain, C. (2025). Research Trends on Motivation and Job
Satisfaction: A Scientometric Analysis. F1000Research, 14, 703.
32. Jerrim, J. (2025). The link between school leadership, staff job satisfaction and retention. Longitudinal
evidence from England. British Educational Research Journal.
33. Jogi, S., Vashisth, K. K., Srivastava, S., Alturas, B., & Kumar, D. (2025). Job satisfaction and turnover
intention: A comprehensive review of the shared determinants. Human Systems Management, 44(3), 379-
395.
34. Johnson, D. S. (2020). Public versus private employees: A perspective on the characteristics and
implications. FIIB Business Review, 9(1), 9-14.
35. Joseph, J., & Sengul, M. (2025). Organization design: Current insights and future research
directions. Journal of Management, 51(1), 249-308.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026
Page 154
www.rsisinternational.org
36. erformance: The Mediation Effect of Transformational Leadership in a Time-lagged Study. International
Journal of Organizational Leadership, 14(2).
37. Malarvizhi, S. J. R., & Vijayarani, S. (2025). IT employee perceptions: life satisfaction achieved through
job satisfaction and influencing factors. International Journal of Management and Enterprise
Development, 24(2), 177-200.
38. Maslow A (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50: 370-396.