Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation: Perspectives from a Nation-Wide Study in Public Higher Education Institutions in Portugal

Machado-Taylor, Maria de Lourdes; Soares, Virgílio Meira; Brites, Rui; Ferreira, J. Brites; Farhangmehr, Minoo; Gouveia, Odília; Peterson, Marvin

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45844-1_5

Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor^6,7,
Virgílio Meira Soares⁸,
Rui Brites^9,10,
J. Brites Ferreira^11,12,
Minoo Farhangmehr¹³,
Odília Gouveia^11,14 &
…
Marvin Peterson¹⁵

Part of the book series: The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective ((CHAC,volume 18))

530 Accesses
5 Citations

Abstract

The centrality of the faculty role makes it a primary sculptor of higher education institutions (HEIs). The performance of academic staff such as teachers and researchers has an impact on student learning and implications for the quality HEIs and therefore their contribution to society. Thus the academic staff can, with appropriate support, build a national and international reputation for themselves and for the institution in the professional areas, in research and in publishing.

The Portuguese higher education system has been faced with major reforms over the last years, which include the implementation of the Bologna Process, the approval of a new legal regime for the HEIs and the approval of new statutes relating to the academic career in the public HEIs.

Job satisfaction and motivation are viewed as a predictor of positive attitudes at work, productivity, and, consequently, good results for the institutions. The purpose of this chapter is to present and analyse the findings of a nationwide study on satisfaction and motivation of academics in Portuguese public higher education institutions. The data are extensively analysed and findings are presented here, along with the implications they offer to Portuguese public HEIs.

Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF

Why has there been a decrease in the job satisfaction of faculty at Spanish universities?

Article 01 December 2015

The factors associated with teachers’ job satisfaction and their impacts on students’ achievement: a review (2010–2021)

Article Open access 24 April 2023

Job satisfaction, academic motivation, and organizational citizenship behavior among lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-national comparative study in Japan and Malaysia

Article 23 March 2022

Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

1 Introduction

The work of academics is influenced by global trends such as accountability, massification, deteriorating financial support, scientific progress and managerial controls (Altbach and Chait 2001; Galaz-Pontes et al. 2007; Henkel 2010). Authors such as Kogan and Teichler (2007, p. 9) stressed “[…] the academic profession has come under enormous pressure potentially endangering the survival of the core identity of academics and universities… Increased expectations and work roles from society and notably the perception of knowledge as the most vital resource of contemporary societies have both expanded the role of the academy and challenged the coherence and viability of the traditional academic role”. Changes in the academic career are emphasized by Henkel (2007, p. 201) “Most academics now work in a multi-functional organizations, in which the definitions of work and responsibilities have expanded and become more varied, for them and for others, and organizational principles have been incorporated.” Also Gappa (2010, p. 209) argues “The effects of changes in faculty work, appointments, and demographics in their colleges and universities are being felt by faculty members, who are experiencing declining autonomy in their work, escalating workloads, an increasingly diverse student body, and, for some, a change in the nature of the academic community.” Many authors will describe other trends including for instance

“[…] as a threat to academic autonomy as one of the central tenets of university life” (Brennan 2007, p. 20);
“Traditions of academic freedom, professional autonomy, and allegiance to disciplinary fields continue to characterize what means to work in higher education. An extensive literature points to the survival of these values as being critical to the future of academic work” (Gordon and Whitchurch 2010, p. XVII);
“Academic faculty find themselves working with and to a broader range of stakeholders and in more national and international sites than before […]” (Marginson 2009, p. 105);
“[…] on-going evolution of the academic profession: the transformation of academic activities” (Musselin 2007, p. 185);
“[…] increasing influence of institutional leaders (be they ‘academic’ or not) in decision-making processes that affect the individual careers of faculty members” (Musselin 2010, p. 125);
“democratization of knowledge in “knowledge societies”” (Henkel 2007, p. 191);
“[…] the authority of academic knowledge is no longer taken for granted” (Henkel 2010, p. 11);
“From the standpoint of the Academic Estate, the significance of new specialized and technical functions on the margins of academia is central. It engages the crucial issue of how boundaries of Academia may be defined in the future.” (Neave 2009, p. 12);
“But the majority of academics believe that higher education these days is being exposed to excessive instrumentalist pressures.” (Teichler 2009, p. 65).

Hence, we assisted to the rapid change of the academic workplace and the necessity to manage the tensions within the academic profession. On this note, Altbach (2003) argued that with the era of mass higher education the conditions of academic work have deteriorated everywhere. Moreover Kogan and Teichler (2007, p. 11) argue “One view would see a victory of managerial values over professional ones with academics losing control over both the overall goals of their work practices and their technical tasks”.

Thus, HEIs have to manage their resources and human resources in particular in order to be proactively positioned to seize opportunities and confront threats in an increasingly competitive environment. Therefore more and more importance is placed on the satisfaction of the constituent groups of HEIs, namely the academic staff, among others (Machado et al. 2011).

The importance of work for us and for our satisfaction is evident. “Work plays a prominent role in our lives. It occupies more time than any other single activity and it provides the economic basis for our lifestyle. Therefore, job satisfaction is a key research area for numerous specialists and is a heavily researched area in the recent years” (Santhapparaj and Alam 2005, p. 72).

According to Silva (1998), being in the market today is being in a permanent evaluation of competitive ability. It becomes clear in this context the importance of the human factor and its “involvement” in the objectives of the organization.

The centrality of the faculty role makes it a primary sculptor of the institutional culture. The performance of academic staff as teachers and researchers determines much of the quality of the student satisfaction and its impact on student learning and thus the contribution of the HEIs to society (Ambrose et al. 2005; Capelleras 2005; Gappa et al. 2007; Hagedorn 2000; Höhle and Teichler 2011). Therefore the contribution of academic staff within an HEI has implications for the quality of the institution (Altbach 2003; Enders 1999; Teichler 2009). However, HEIs are extremely complex social organizations. One must examine a multitude of factors and their numerous interactions even to approach an understanding of its functions. HEIs are now in a time of globalization, traversed by profound contradictions, uncertainties and doubts. Those concerns are due not only to a lack of resources or quality of resources, but also are conceptual in nature and concern with the extension and amendment of the HEI mission with reflections on the academia (Burbules and Torres 2004; Morgado and Ferreira 2006), with consequences also for the job of professors (Hargreaves 1998, 2003; Tardif and Lassardi 2008).

Serious research reveals that the concept of job satisfaction is a complex collection of variables that interact in a myriad of ways. Furthermore, the precise arrangement of these factors differs across segments of the job market. There are intrinsic variables related to personal growth and development, and extrinsic factors associated with security in the work environment. There are global trends that impact professors and universities – notably accountability, massification, managerial controls, and deteriorating financial support (Addio et al. 2007; Hagedorn 2000; Stevens 2005). There is also ample and somewhat obvious evidence that job satisfaction relates to employee motivation. Job satisfaction is important in revitalizing staff motivation and in keeping their enthusiasm alive. Well motivated academic staff can, with appropriate support, build a national and international reputation for themselves and the institution (Capelleras 2005) in the professional areas, in research and in publishing. Such a profile may have an impact on the quality of HEI. In this context, institutions and their leaders who understand the intricate tapestry of organizational culture have an opportunity to tap the multiple resources at their disposal and thus manage job satisfaction and employee motivation more effectively (Machado et al. 2011).

Over the recent years, there have been many changes in Portuguese higher education. These include, among others: the implementation of the Bologna Process, which was given particular visibility; the approval of a new legal regime for the HEIs, which paved the way for the existence of the foundational regime and the approval of new statutes relating to the academic career in the public HEIs. Thus, the changes affect and will continue to affect academic careers (Machado-Taylor et al. 2010).

One important point to note about previous studies of satisfaction is reported by Changing Academic Profession (CAP) project. According to this study, Portugal is among the countries with lower levels of overall satisfaction. For instance, only South Africa showed a lower level of overall satisfaction among academics (International Database of the CAP Project (Dias et al. 2013). Also, the EUROAC survey reports that Portuguese junior academics are among the less satisfied (Höhle and Teichler 2011).

This chapter will provide a diverse range of information on multiple dimensions of the faculty job satisfaction in public Portuguese higher education institutions. The findings of a nationwide study on satisfaction and motivation are extensively analyzed.

2 The Academic Career in Portugal: Issues and Challenges

In this section we present and analyse the structure of the academic career in Portugal. We start by describing the evolution of the career since 1970, highlighting the changes that took place with the stabilisation of the democratic life after the revolutionary period and other changes that occurred as an adaptation to the recent evolution in European Higher Education including the application of the Bologna Process in Portugal.

First we briefly describe the evolution of the organisation of the Portuguese Higher Education (HE) system since 1970 until 2012. In particular we underline the reforms experienced in 1973, the introduction of the Polytechnic subsystem in the late 70s, the expansion of the HE system, including a brief analysis of the emergence of the private sector.

In the second section the evolution of the academic career is presented and a detailed description of the present legislation regulating is also included.

2.1 Evolution and Organization of the Portuguese Higher Education

The higher education system in Portugal is a binary system, including universities and polytechnics, initially planned in the early’1970s. It was mainly from the second half of the 1970 that the growth and the dissemination of higher education started, after the democratic revolution in 1974. Until the early 1970s the Portuguese HE system was an elite system, it was attended by a small number of members of society, mostly from upper classes. There was a situation of great inequality based on the socio-economic origin (Cabrito 2006). Thus, the HE system was not a democratic one and this fact was the consequence of the very political system itself. After 1974, as a consequence of the democratization of the country the social demand for HE increased very much (Cabrito 2006).

Since then, many changes in higher education took place, namely: the implementation of the binary system; the distribution of higher education institutions (HEI) across the country; the approval of the statutes of the university academic career, in 1979, and of polytechnic academic career, in 1981; the approval of the Education System Act in 1986 (Law 46/86 of October 14); the approval of the laws of autonomy of the universities and polytechnics (Law n° 108/88 of September 24 and Law n° 54/90 of September 5, respectively); the emergence of the private sector in the 80s; and the massification of higher education. More recently, in the last decade, there were also other major changes in higher education. Among them it should be noted the amendment of the Education System Act, by the Law n° 49/2005, of August 30, in order to implement the Bologna Process, which was also followed by other important changes, including the approval of a new legal regime of the HEI (Law n° 62/2007 of September 10), the approval of the legal assessment of higher education (Law 38/2007) and the approval of amendments to the statutes of the academic careers in higher education in 2009 (Decree-Law n° 205/2009 and Decree-Law n° 207/2009, amended, respectively, by the Law n° 8/2010 and Law n° 7/2010, both of May 13).

Until the early’1970s, higher education was an elitist system, enrolling only a small number of students. There were only four universities, one in Coimbra, and one in Porto and two in Lisbon. In the early’1970s, there were important changes in the educational system, particularly in higher education. In 1971 the Catholic University was established. In 1973, a legal framework was approved (Law n° 5/73, of July 25), defining the basis of the educational reform. According to this law, higher education was provided by Universities, Polytechnics, Higher Normal Schools and other similar establishments (Base XIII, n°. 3). In the same year, by the Decree-Law n° 402/73 of August 11, the network of higher education was approved, creating new Universities, Polytechnics and Higher Normal Schools.

The aim was to modernize, expand and diversify the higher education, “so as to reach a rate of 9 % for the age group 18–24 years” (target set out in the preamble of the Decree-Law n° 402/73). As stated by Amaral et al. (2006, p. 41), the question was the necessity of “bringing the country closer to European standards, coupled with the influence of international organizations like the OECD, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, which led that the government policies reflect an increasing number of ‘functionalization’ of education in general and in particular, higher education in relation to aspects of the country economic development”. The plan was ambitious, compared to what previously had been the policy of higher education. The implementation of this plan was interrupted with the establishment of democracy in 1974 and the days of the revolution that followed, and that changed the political agenda, including higher education (Magalhães and Santiago 2012).

In the late’1970s, the agenda of higher education was the subject of particular attention, in particular in what regards the diversification and the creation of polytechnic institutions. In 1977 the “short-term higher education” was introduced (Decree-Law n° 427-B/77), and was formally replaced by “polytechnic higher education”, in 1979 (Decree-Law n° 513-T/79). The professional scope of polytechnic education was emphasized against the “more conceptual and theoretical characteristics” of university education. The Word Bank played an important role in the development of polytechnic subsystem, being responsible for several projects carried out until the integration in EU.

In the early’1980s, there were public higher education institutions in all districts. At the end of the 1970s, the Law on Private and Cooperative Higher Education was approved (Law 271/79), although its implementation has occurred, particularly in the second half of the 1980s and 1990s (Teixeira 2012). In 1986, the year Portugal joined the EEC, the Education Act (Law 46/86 of October 14) was approved, consolidating the binary system. According to this law, universities could confer all degrees (“bacharel”, “licenciado”, mestre e “doutor”^{Footnote 1}), while polytechnics could confer only a bachelor’s degree. This situation changed in 1997 (first amendment of Education Act – Law n° 115/97, of September 19) and from this date, polytechnics grant also the degree of “licenciado”. In 2005, the Education Act was amended in order to implementing the Bologna Process (Law 49/2005, of August 30). The law maintained the binary system. The number of higher education degrees was changed from four (“bacharel”, “licenciado”, “mestre” e “doutor”) to three (“licenciado”, “mestre” e “doutor”). Actually, universities grant all degrees while polytechnics grant the degrees of bachelor and master. The amendment of 2005 was followed by other changes, including the adoption of a new legal regime of the HEI (Law n°. No. 62/2007 of September 10) and the approval of legislation regulating accreditation and evaluation of higher education institutions and study programmes (Law n° 38/2007 of August 16).

Only after democratization in 1974, a significant expansion of higher education was initiated. In 1978 the total number of students enrolled in higher education was 81,582 (77,501 in the public sector and 4081 in the private sector). In the following years this number has been increasing, reaching in 1990 the total number of 157,869 (119,733 in the public sector and 38,136 in the private sector). At this time, higher education was already present in many cities and counties, although some of HEI have small size. In the following years, this number has continued to grow and in 2003 it reached 400,831. However this growth was different by subsystem and type of education.

In the private sector, the number of students reached the highest number in 1997, reaching 121,399 (96,163 in the universities and 25,236 in the polytechnics). Since then it has been declining, reaching 78,699 in 2012 (55,147 in the universities and 23,552 in the polytechnics). Private universities reached the maximum number of students in 1997. Since then it has been continuously decreasing. The private polytechnic subsystem reached the highest number in 2003 and since then it has also been decreasing.

In the public sector, the trend has been different. The number of students reached the highest number in 2012, total of 311,574 (197,912 in the universities and 113,662 in the polytechnics). The public university subsector has always grown, except for the period 2004 to 2009. The public polytechnic subsector reached the highest number in 2011.

From 1997 to 2012 the private sector has lost 42,700 students, mostly in the university subsector. In the same period, the public sector has grown 98,848 (50,563 in universities and 48, 285 in the polytechnics) (Table 5.1).

Table 5.1 Students enrolled in higher education: total and by sub-system and type of education

Full size table

The establishment of the binary system in the late 70s and its development in the following decades, aimed at the existence of two sub-systems with different goals and philosophies. The main idea was to expand higher education in the country and regional development, locating the polytechnics and their schools especially in cities where there were no universities. Its education programmes would be of short duration or up to 3 years of an applied nature and would be designed to meet the needs of work in the regions where they were deployed. There had been planned research activities for the polytechnic system. The research activities were taking place in universities and it was also these institutions that formed the faculty of polytechnics. In this sense, it can be said that the training of teachers of polytechnics was dependent on the universities. This situation has been changing and went to a growing rapprochement between the two subsystems, namely in terms of research. In fact, there are today research units in polytechnics.

The current system of higher education includes: 14 public universities, the Catholic University and a non-integrated public University Institute (institutions awarding university degrees, but not having the necessary conditions to be universities), all represented in the Portuguese Rectors’ Conference (CRUP); 15 public polytechnics, represented in the Council of Portuguese Polytechnics (CCISP), and five schools not integrated in polytechnics (polytechnic institutions awarding degrees, but not having the necessary conditions to be polytechnics); and six public schools of higher education, depending on both the Ministry of Science and Education and other Ministry (Military Schools and Police Academy). Higher education includes also 99 private institutions, including 39 university institutions (universities and non-integrated institutes or schools) and 60 polytechnic institutions (polytechnics institutes and non-integrated polytechnics schools) (http://www.dges.mctes.pt/DGES/pt/Estudantes/Rede/Ensino+Superior/).

2.2 The Academic Career

The higher education system in Portugal, being a binary system, is characterised by the existence of different academic careers. The legal framework of academic careers is quite different in public and private institutions. The government defines the size of the teaching staff and creates the rules for career advancement within public institutions. The academics of public institutions are civil servants, as opposed to those that work in private institutions (Meira Soares 2001, 2003; Meira Soares and Trindade 2004).

The main regulatory frameworks of academic careers date back to 1970 (Decree-Law n° 132/70, March 30), 1979/80 (Decree-Law n° 448/79, November 13, and Law 19/80, July 16) and 1981 (Decree-Law n° 185/81, July 1). Recently, in 2009, the statutes of academic careers were subject to changes, after they have been in force for three decades. In the following pages, we cover the main changes in the academic career from the’1970s to the present day.

2.2.1 Shaping the Academic Career in the Early 1970

Until 1970, matters relating to university academic career appeared associated or integrated in the Statute of University Education. In 1970, the academic career was treated in a specific regulation (Decree-Law 132/70, dated March 30). There was not binary system of higher education in Portugal. According to this normative the academic career focused on two major areas, teaching and research, although they also set out some administrative functions. In the introduction of this normative some issues were reported regarding higher education, namely the difficulties of recruiting qualified academics to cope with the increase of school population, salary and career conditions offered. Furthermore, the need to create conditions for achieving the doctoral degree was also raised, because the system was facing a lack of professors and unattractive conditions for the academic career.

The university career was divided into two phases: “the first one, especially devoted to the preparation for teaching and learning methods of research and the second one devoted to the full exercise and training of researchers.” The first phase included the assistants and the second one the professors. Thus, the academic career was structured into two main groups: professors (full professor, extraordinary professor and auxiliary professor) and teaching assistants (readers, assistants, junior assistants and monitors). It was the structure shaping the academic career over four decades, until the changes introduced in 2009.

In the normative, more emphasis was given to teaching and research and after to the administrative tasks. Referring to this period, Caraça et al. (1996) say that the dominant model of the university up to 1970s gave priority to education and that only in the 80’s emphasis to the research university was given, a trend reinforced in the following decades with the development of postgraduate programmes and the evolution of the university towards a greater openness to the outside society and the productive system.

2.2.2 The Diversification of Academic Careers in Higher Education

The expansion and diversification of higher education was the subject of particular attention from the late 70s and was followed by the approval of the university academic career legislation in 1979 (Decree-Law n° 448/79 and Law 19/80) and the polytechnic academic career legislation in 1981 (Decree-Law n° 185/81). Analysing this legislation we are faced with two different realities.

In the case of university, the structure of academic career designed in 1970 continued. The introductory of the new legislation was focused on a diverse set of issues, namely: a lack of qualified academic staff, the need to “make the career more attractive and dignified”; the need to provide means for assistants to obtain the doctoral degree; improving the quality of universities for international competition; the creation of conditions for graduates professionals to “neutralise or mitigate the effects of centrifugal […] requests from the private sector and even the public sector”; the idea that the university is not a “simple factory graduate” but “a comprehensive institution, dedicated to undergraduate and graduate teaching, to fundamental and applied research and to providing highly specialised services of undeniable social interest”; the full realization of the academics and of the universities, the creation of conditions to decrease bureaucracy and more autonomy; a more professional career with more employment stability.

In the case of polytechnic the main aim was to approve the creation of a new career, for the recently created subsystem (Decree-Law no. 185/81). In that sense, the creation of a new academic career was considered fundamental to the development of polytechnic education. On the introductory part of the decree-law, it was reported that this career was in line with “the teaching of higher level, targeted to the technicality and specificity of the various professional activities, claimed by modern societies”. It was the desired connection between polytechnics, professional activities and regional development, which was emphasised in legal texts regarding polytechnics, namely the Decree-Law n° 427-B/77, the Decree-Law n° 513-T and Decree-Law n° 513-L1/79.

There were two different agendas for academic careers. In the case of the university the academic career was faced with the need for universities to modernise and respond to new demands and challenges, coming from both inside and outside the country, including increasing massification, which would deeply influence the end of the century and the beginning of the next. In the case of polytechnics, the purpose was to diversify higher education, developing a different subsystem and disseminating it over the country and, at the same time, creating a different academic career. This diversity of careers continued until the recent changes in 2009.

The university career (Decree-Law n° 448/79) had the following sequence: Assistente Estagiário (junior assistant), Assistente (assistant), Professor Auxiliar(auxiliary professor), Professor Associado(associated professor) and Professor Catedrático(full professor). Access to the lower rankinvolved the undergraduate degree, starting in the position of Assistente Estagiário, which remained for 2 years. After this period, the person was promoted to Assistente, which involved the acquisition of the master’s degree. His/her career continued as Assistente for 6 years, during which he/she should acquire a doctoral degree to be promoted to the next category: Professor Auxiliar. This new situation did not guarantee, by itself, a permanent academic career. Indeed, after 5 years of service in this category, an applicant had to submit a very detailed “curriculum vitae” to the Scientific Council of the Institution, which, upon evaluation of academic performance, decided in favour (or not) of changing a temporary contract to final contract. Access to the next category, Professor Associado, required submission to a public competition, and implied a minimum period of service in the category of Professor Auxiliar, the condition for permanent appointment in this category not being required. In practice, access to a permanent appointment in the university academic career meant 13 years of service. Access to the rank of Professor Catedrático, the highest cumulative depended on three conditions: to be Professor Associado, the title of Agregado (may be compared with German notion of Habilitation) and submit to a public competition.

A career in polytechnic (Decree-Law no. 185/81, 1 July) included fewer categories: − Assistente (1st and 2nd triennium), Professor Adjunto and Professor Coordenador. Access to the rank of Assistente required a suitable higher education qualification (bachelor’s or graduate). To progress to the next category, Professor Adjunto, it was necessary to obtain the master degree and to be a candidate in a public competition. Access to this category did not imply, by itself, a permanent appointment. This occurred only after a period of provisional appointment of 3 years, after which the candidate had to submit a detailed report to the Scientific Council and only with the approval of this body the appointment became final. Access to this category could also be done through public examination in the case of candidates without a master’s degree. In practice, access to a permanent appointment in the polytechnic academic career meant 9 years of service. To access to the next category, Professor Coordenador, the Professores Adjuntosshould be candidates in a public competition.

2.2.3 The Academic Career in the 2000s

The legislation concerning academic careers in public institutions of higher education has remained unchanged, or nearly so, over the last three decade, despite repairs and criticism over the years (Meira Soares and Trindade 2004). Changes arrived in 2009 by the approval of amendments to the statutes of academic careers in higher education, both public universities and polytechnics (Decree-Law n° 205/2009, n° 206/2009 and n° 207/2009, amended by the Law n° 7/2010 and n° 8/2010), after the amendment of Education Act in 2005 (Law 49/2005), in order to implement the Bologna Process. These changes in the statutes in 2009, occur in a national context characterised by a binary system already implemented and disseminated throughout the country and after other major changes for Portuguese higher education were approved, including the adoption of the new legal regime of the HEI governing regulations (Law 62/2007) and of the new HEI’s evaluation system (Law 38/2007).

In 2009, a new legal framework changed the academic careers regulations. Under this new regulations, the academic careers in public HEI’s were changed, although the main structures remain very similar. According to the new legal framework, academics of university and polytechnic public institutions continue to have different careers. Nevertheless, with the recent changes, there has been an approximation between the two sectors. Unlike what was published in 1979 and 1981, the preambles of the statutes in 2009 are very similar, sharing largely the same text, a sign that the issues of higher education are now largely common to both subsystems. The difference between them does not appear as 30 years before. Confining ourselves to the question of academic careers, the preambles of the diplomas focus largely on a common agenda. They are focused on issues such as: the modernization and strengthening of the vital contribution of higher education for the development of the country; the new challenges that higher education is called to respond to today; changes in the legal framework of employment of academics; changes in the careers of both subsystems, namely in the rules of the access to the academic career and of the public competitions to fill vacant positions; autonomy of HEI to produce regulations regarding the management, recruitment and assessment of performance of academic staff. The jury judging the filling a post through a public competition (always international for the filling of university positions) must have a composition with a majority of external members. With these new legislations in-breeding becomes more difficult, internationalisation is favoured and mobility is encouraged.

As noted above, the academic careers remained unchanged over the past three decades. Amendments in 2009 refer mainly to the career structure, the access and mobility, the recruitment and the academic work. In The following table (Table 5.2) shows the professional categories of both subsystems, before and after the amendments made in 2009, with reference to legislation on the public sector.

Table 5.2 Basic categories of academic staff in public institutions

Full size table

In university career, a doctoral degree was required to access to the categories of professor. In the case of polytechnic education, the degree required for access to the categories of professor was a master’s degree, but you could access these categories, without a master’s degree, through the provision of public exams. With the changes of 2009, the degree required to access the categories of professors in both subsystems, is the doctoral degree. However, in the case of polytechnic education the title of specialist was also created, and can be obtained through public examination in which it is necessary to prove “the quality and the particular importance of the professional curriculum in a particular area for the performing functions of the polytechnic teachers” (Decree-Law n° 206/2009). Moreover, these experts, provided they meet certain requirements, may also apply to “professor coordenador”, but not to the Professor Coordenador Principal. Access to this category, created in 2009, implies that in addition to other conditions candidates must be holders of the Agregado. The other categories provided for in previous legislation, no longer exist or remain in a transitory existence, according to new legislation. In addition, there remains the possibility of hiring teachers in HEIs situation of guests.

2.2.4 Academics’ Functions

The approval of the statutes of the academic careers of 2009 brought closer the two careers also in respect to general functions of academics. One remaining difference between the two careers is the weekly teaching load, which is higher in polytechnics (9–12 h) than in universities (6–9 h). With regard to functions, in general, for academic staff in both subsystems in public higher education, they show small differences (Table 5.3). The main differences appeared in the regulations adopted by each HEI concerning the provision of teaching since this matter became the responsibility of each HEI.

Table 5.3 Academics’ functions

Full size table

The changes in 2009, increases the quantity and diversity of tasks required to academics, and can be systematised into five groups of activities: (a) Research and development (scientific research, cultural creation, technological and experimental development); (b) Teaching (teaching service, monitoring and mentoring of students); (c) Participation in activities related to the scientific and technological dissemination and economic and social value of knowledge; (d) Participation in the management of institutions; (e) Participation in other duties assigned by the competent bodies, in the institution.

The first two groups are activities with a tradition in the academy. The following two formulations did not appear so explicitly in the previous statutes. The final group adds new responsibilities, whose definition is at the discretion of each HEI. From the classic teaching and research, the function and tasks of academics are moving to “other activities”, which also means some ambiguity. Only the regulations of the HEI, in particular regarding with the provision service and performance evaluation, are likely to clarify the meaning of “other activities”

2.3 Coping with the Changes

In a few decades, Portugal changed from a system of higher education of elites to a system of mass higher education, showing signs of stabilization in the last decade. With the expansion of higher education, there was also an increase in the number of academics, rising from 2726 in 1971 to 9097 in 1981, an increase that occurred mainly in the public sector. In the following decades, from 1981 to 1991 and from 1991 to 2001, growth continued to be very high. Since 2001 we are seeing some stabilization (Table 5.4).

Table 5.4 Teaching staff in higher education: total, by sub-system and by type of education

Full size table

In the 2000s, there was an improvement in the academic qualifications. The number of PhDs increased from 9465 in 2001 to 16,771 in 2010 and the total number of non-PhD decrease in the same period from 26,275 to 21,393 (GPEARI/MCTES). Another fact to be noted is the increasing feminisation in higher education. In the period from 2001 to 2010, the number of female teachers increased from 14,571 to 16,650. In the same period, there was a decline in male teachers, whose numbers rose from 21,169 in 2001 to 20,459 in 2009. The percentage of female teachers is higher in the polytechnic than in university education. In 2010, the percentage was 43.7 % in polytechnics and 40.2 % in universities. Throughout the first decade of this century there was certain stability in the number of academics. But in terms of age, there is some aging. Indeed, from 2001 to 2010, the number of teachers in the age-groups <30 years and 30–39 years decreased and the number of teachers in all other groups increased.

2.4 Challenges

There are various challenges academics and HEIs are currently facing, namely: the evaluation and accreditation, the developments of the Bologna process and the implementation of the European Area of Higher Education, the future development and reorganization of higher education network and its relation with the decreasing number of students and the economic anxieties.

Issues of evaluation and accreditation in higher education are some of the main concerns of both politicians and academics. One of the recent changes was the adoption of a new system of evaluation and accreditation of HEI (Law n° 38/2007, August 16), which led to the creation of A3ES.^{Footnote 2} The accreditation and evaluation of programmes of study, now under A3ES, is taking its first steps. The creation of programmes is now dependent on prior accreditation by A3ES. In addition, programmes are subject to periodic review, consisting of a set of guidelines that HEI’s should take into account when implementing their programmes and self-assessment processes.

Study programmes are evaluated every 5 years and the process is based on a self-assessment (where students’ opinions are included), followed by an external evaluation carried out by academic peers (domestic, external and foreign experts). In the previous evaluation system, there was not a link between direct and immediate results of evaluations and recognition of study programmes or other any consequences.^{Footnote 3} Actually, the process of accreditation has immediate consequences, namely non-accreditation. The implementation of the process of evaluation and accreditation is one of the main challenges that HEI and academics are faced with. Not accredited study programmes no longer work, which has consequences for the HEI. At the same time, this process also has an impact on academic work and may lead to termination of employment contracts of academics. These policies have important effects on the working conditions of academic staff and are related with quality assurance of HEI.

Another important challenge for higher education institutions and academics is the creation of the European Higher Education Area, created by the Bologna Declaration. The amendment to the Education Act in 2005 (Act 45/2005), has provided the implementation of the Bologna Process in Portugal. However, it has been a process that has not always received the consensus of the academic community. Actually, the system of degrees and diplomas in HE is organised according to the Bologna Process. However, in certain cases, the previous degree programmes have been replaced by new ones, merging undergraduate and master’s degree (integrated masters), as is the case in various engineering, pharmacy, medicine. Identical procedures were not adopted in all areas of education and training. The introduction of the ECTS credit system happened but it needs yet some developments, particularly in terms of curriculum and teaching methods. On the other hand the concept of learning outcomes is not yet well known by the academics. It is also not clear to many students, academics and institutions that the acceptance of the principles of Bologna force them to change their attitudes regarding teaching and learning. It is difficult to predict the effect of these developments in the academic career. We believe that these changes are being reflected in the academic work. However, it is still early to say whether these effects are positive or negative for the academic career. The decrease in the number of training hours also resulted in a decrease in the number of teachers and in budget of HEIs.

As was already mentioned, in a few decades, Portugal passed from a higher education system of elites to a system of mass higher education. In the last decade, it is showing signs of stabilization and even some decrease in the number of students, which has led to increased competition between HEIs in attracting students. In this sense, the reorganization of the HE network is unavoidable. This reorganization may be the result of different options, including administrative (governmental) intervention, negotiation processes between institutions, market logics and so on.

HEI’s have been confronted with the decreasing number of students each year, a decrease that is not evenly distributed among different scientific disciplines. As a result, in some areas, there will be excess of teachers while in other areas, there may be a need to increase their number, although not many. As mentioned above, the number of teachers in the first decade of the 2000s showed signs of some stability. Simultaneously, there has been an increase in the level of their qualifications, given the high number who acquired a PhD degree. This is beneficial to the quality of human resources and also has the effect of increasing competition among academics seeking a job or a position in an academic career. Moreover, as noted above, during the first decade 2000s there has been some aging on the academic staff. Furthermore, the laws of work and social security have also been altered, so that reforms are of lower value and occur later than previously. This also makes it more difficult the rejuvenation on the academic staff. Moreover, labour laws making employments more precarious and dismissal easier.

All these “ingredients” associated with budget constraints increase pressure on public institutions. The autonomy of institutions is greatly reduced. It is still unclear how they will deal with these situations and what will be the effect in academic career. Some people argue, rightly, that there are study programmes in the country offered by institutions geographically very close to each other, making cooperation between them desirable in order to reduce costs. This argument is correct, and solutions can be implemented in this direction. However, the implementation of those solutions may be insufficient, given the fact that teachers are already in institutions and the savings will not be felt in the short or medium term, except in what concerns administrative costs. Moreover, HE is still distant from goals of 2020.

The problems of the private institutions are not minor. It is a fact that they invested mainly in study programmes that are less expensive, such as law, management, information technology, teacher training and alike. Some of these programmes are still the most preferred by the candidates to HE. The demographic recession is, however, bringing problems. Moreover, the taxes in private education are much higher than those of public institutions. Therefore, it is expected that financial problems will profoundly affect these institutions. Probably the merging processes will continue and some institutions will have to close, bringing additional problems to the academic community of these institutions. As a result unemployment among academics is indeed a threat the country faces, both at the university and at the polytechnic subsystems.

These data, as well as those mentioned above, show that there are many factors that influence the work of academics. Moreover, they also show that these factors are not unrelated to the times of change, uncertainty and instability on academic work.

3 Models for Examination of Academic Job Satisfaction

3.1 Some Models of Faculty Satisfaction

The literature on job satisfaction of academics is limited. However, authors such as Santhapparaj and Alam (2005, p. 72) stressed that “Work plays a prominent role in our lives. It occupies more time than any other single activity and it provides the economic basis for our lifestyle. Therefore, job satisfaction is a key research area for numerous specialists and is a heavily researched area in the recent years”. In fact, the “concept of job satisfaction is an important one for study because every individual has a variety of needs and values and much of a person’s activity in a workplace is directed towards the acquisition of means and ways to fulfil these needs and values” (Egbule 2003, p. 158). In this context, Gappa et al. (2007, cited in Gappa 2010) argued that faculty members value equity, collegial relationships (with colleagues and administrators), security in employment, professional development, autonomy, access to the resources they need to do good work, support from department chairs and institutional administrators and recognition for their work. These are factors that, according to these authors, lead to high levels of satisfaction.

Job satisfaction is multi-dimensional, with both intrinsic and extrinsic qualities. The former include ability, achievement, advancement, compensation, co-workers, creativity, independence, moral values, social service, social status and working conditions. The latter involves authority, policies and practices, recognition, responsibility, security and variety (Weiss et al. 1967).

For instance, Herzberg et al. (1959) distinguish Motivators or Intrinsic Factors – Achievement, Recognition, The work itself, Responsibility, Advancement, Growth; and Hygiene Factors or Extrinsic Factors – Company Policy, Supervision, Relationship with Boss, Work Conditions, Salary, Relationship with Peers. According to Herzberg et al. (1959) intrinsic factors relate to job satisfaction when present but not to dissatisfaction when absent. The extrinsic factors are associated with job dissatisfaction when absent, but not with satisfaction when present. Motivating job characteristics are associated with job satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and work effectiveness (Winter and Sarros 2002).

Nyquist et al. (2000), presenting their model for faculty job satisfaction, suggested that organizational factors, job-related factors and personal factors affect self-knowledge, social knowledge and satisfaction. Organizational factors are available resources, collegial relations among colleagues, perceived opportunity for promotion and advancement, adequacy of mentoring, decision-making abilities and commitment to the organization. Job-related factors integrate autonomy and academic freedom, clear and consistent job duties, job security, stimulation from work, workload, income, resources available and work-related time pressures. Personal factors include -perceptions of role conflict and interference of work responsibilities with home. The model shows that institutional context and individual characteristics influence faculty satisfaction (please see Fig. 5.1).

An adaptation of Hagedorn (2000) illustrates another model. L. Hagedorn (2000) wrote about faculty job satisfaction using the “Conceptual Framework of Faculty Job Satisfaction”, being her mission to sort and categorize the factors that contribute to job satisfaction. This model hypothesizes two types of constructs that interact and affect job satisfaction. These constructs are triggers and mediators. A trigger is a significant life event that may be either related or unrelated to the job. A mediator is a variable or situation that influences or moderates the relationships between other variables or situations producing an interaction effect. The mediators represent situations, developments and extenuating circumstances that provide the context in which job satisfaction must be considered. The conceptual model presented by L. Hagedorn (2000) is composed by six triggers and three types of mediators, forming a framework in which faculty job satisfaction may be scrutinized (please see Table 5.5).

Table 5.5 Conceptual model 2 of academic staff job satisfaction

Full size table

To measure the job satisfaction of university teachers, Oshagbemi (1997) used a questionnaire comprising eight basic job elements. The job elements were listed in Fig. 5.2. Respondents were asked to indicate the level of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with which they derived from each of the aspects considered.

Verhaegen (2005) analysed the recruitment and retention of academic talent, as the most important factors for the success and competitiveness of a business school. With respect to faculty, the most important factors from both recruitment and a retention perspective were academic freedom, research time, geographic location of the school and opportunities for professional development. The important factors for faculty were institutional factors, specifically reputation of the school, innovativeness and progressiveness of the school and international orientation. In the case of deans, the most important factors for recruitment of faculty were reputation of the school in the academic community, innovativeness and progressiveness of the school, stimulating peer community and research time. For retention, the most important factors were academic freedom, recognition of research achievements and career opportunities (please see Table 5.6).

Table 5.6 Categories and factors used in the Verhaegen’s survey

Full size table

According to Verhaegen (2005, p. 815), the results of academic job satisfaction “[…] could not only help the school in identifying its main bottlenecks in the recruitment and retention of academic talent, but it can also help the school to assess its competitive position and identify its unique selling points and help to design an effective profiling strategy”.

Another conceptual model is that of Houston et al. (2006) (please see Fig. 5.3). The figure shows a clear relationship between some dimensions of academic staff job and their job satisfaction.

3.2 Suggested Model for Faculty Satisfaction

In our study, the research team proposed a conceptual model derived from some of the best known models in the literature, such as those described above. Figure 5.4 shows the model, in which it was hypothesized that some dimensions – teaching climate, management, colleagues, non-academic staff, physical work environment, conditions of employment, personal and professional development, institutions’ culture and values, institutions’ prestige and research climate – have an impact on academic staff satisfaction. Moreover, the conceptual model shows the relationship between satisfaction and motivation. This relationship was demonstrated by several authors. The literature also shows that job satisfaction is closely connected to employees’ motivation. Herzberg et al. (1959) have already stressed the need to strengthen motivators in order to engender career satisfaction. In like manner, Dinham and Scott (1998, p. 362–363) stated that “Satisfaction and motivation are […] inextricably linked through the influence each has on the other.” Higher levels of motivation have been considered as a positive outcome of job satisfaction (Sledge et al. 2008).

4 Methodological Approach

A nation-wide study emerges in the context of the Project PTDC/ESC/67784/2006 – An Examination of Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation in Portuguese Higher Education, financed by the Foundation for Science and Technology.

In this chapter, we present results derived from quantitative data gathered through an on-line survey (please see Appendix 2). Before the application of the survey, the research team applied three Focus Groups to ascertain the factors of satisfaction/dissatisfaction and motivation/amotivation^{Footnote 4} of academic staff. The information collected was used in the construction of the questionnaire. Thus, the survey gives rise to the literature review for this theme and from the preoccupations expressed by faculty members/participants in the Focus Groups. The on-line survey was accessible to all faculty members, including all sub-groups (professor, researcher, part-time, full-time, etc.) for all institutional types of Portuguese HEIs public-private, university-polytechnic, etc.). Here we will only present results about academics in public higher education institutions.

The satisfaction dimensions considered were: Teaching Climate; Management of the Institution/Department/Unit; Colleagues; Non Academic Staff (administrative staff, technical and laboratory staff); Physical Work Environment; Conditions of Employment; Personnel and Professional Development; Institutions’ Culture and Values; Institutions’ Prestige; and Research Climate. Those dimensions to examine the academic staff job satisfaction were defined accordingly to the literature review. The aspects mentioned by academics during the Focus Groups were also covered by these dimensions. Therefore, each satisfaction dimension is composed of factors of satisfaction/dissatisfaction identified in the literature review and considered by the academics in the Focus Groups. The instrument was available to all Portuguese academics on the website http://questionarios.ua.pt/index.php?sid=19766&lang=pt. This address was sent to all Portuguese HEIs in year 2010 and all academics invited to participate:

In order to have a vast divulgation of the survey among the faculty members, several efforts were pursued. Therefore, all the faculty members were invited to participate in many different ways:

1.
Communiqués were sent to the Council of Rectors of Public Universities (CRUP), Council of Presidents of Public Polytechnics (CCISP) and Portuguese Association of Private Higher Education (APESP) informing them about the study and requesting their help in the dissemination of the study;
2.
A letter was sent to all Rectors and Presidents of both public and private universities as well as polytechnic institutes requesting that the link to the survey was sent to the faculty members in their institutions;
3.
Also the link to the survey was sent to the three faculty unions;
4.
All the steps above were repeated thrice in order to increase the response rate.

On average, the response time was 25 min. Because the questionnaire was long, some people gave up halfway through the fill which is often common in online surveys. In Portuguese higher education, according to the last statistics available at the time the survey was launched (2009), there were 36215 academics (PORDATA 2011; GPEARI 2011). The response rate obtained was about 12.5 % – a total of 4529 academics participated in the study, a response rate that is much higher than usual in a study of national dimension and administered online.

The results relate only to the academics that work in public higher education institutions (universities and polytechnics) and agreed to answer the online questionnaire (the total of 2544 academics). The response was free and spontaneous.

Most respondents to the survey work in public universities 54.1 %. With regard to age groups, respondents are concentrated in age groups “41–50 years” (38.2 %), “31–40 years” (28 %) and “51–60 years” (23.7 %). It should be noted that, on average, the age of respondents were 45 years with the mode range of 44 years. Considering the distribution of the respondents by gender, we can verify that 50.7 % of them are men and 49.3 % are women. There are, therefore, slightly more men than women among the respondents. Finally, with respect to the academic rank in Portuguese higher education, a higher proportion of respondents are “Juniors” (58.4 %). Only 15.5 % of the academics respondents are “Seniors”. With respect to academics by institutional type and academic rank, the sample and the population present the following configuration: (Table 5.7)

Table 5.7 Academics by institutional type and academic rank in the sample and in the population

Full size table

As noted, there are marked and statistically significant differences between the sample and the population, preventing, therefore, to generalize any conclusions.^{Footnote 5} That is, comparisons between academic ranks and institutional type, which we proceed to in this work, do not reflect more than the opinions and attitudes of academics who responded to the questionnaire.

5 Results

5.1 Satisfaction with Teaching Climate by Institutional Type

With regard to satisfaction with Teaching Climate in public polytechnic institutes and in public universities, only the indicator “training of students” records mean below the centre of the scale (5) which is interpreted, therefore, as dissatisfaction. The “degree of autonomy in teaching practice” is the indicator with which academics are more satisfied (Fig. 5.5). Research shows that autonomy and academic freedom have been particularly expensive for teachers, although some have referred to it with a sense of nostalgia (Ylikoji 2005), and others referring to the major constraints that have been felt in academic work and on professional autonomy (Barrier and Musselin 2009). Moreover, the previous preparation of students as well as the way on how it occurs in the transition from secondary education to higher education have been considered crucial to the success of students at the beginning of higher education (Brites Ferreira et al. 2011, 2012a, b; Seco et al. 2006).

5.2 Satisfaction with Management of the Institution/Department/Unit by Institutional Type

The satisfactory means with the Management of the Institution/Department/Unit is higher in public polytechnic institutes, when compared with satisfaction in public universities. In public universities, academics are dissatisfied with almost all indicators: with the ability of managers to innovate, with management’s response to faculty needs, with time that managers take to respond to these needs and to communicate with managers. The satisfaction with the managers of the department/organizational unit registers the highest values but around the centre of the scale, as shown in the following figure. With respect to this dimension and with consideration of the satisfaction levels of the academics, it seems to us that the data suggest that there is quite some way to go with regard to possible improvements in the management of the institutions, their departments and their units (Fig. 5.6).

5.3 Satisfaction with Colleagues by Institutional Type

Regarding satisfaction with Colleagues, the indicators “interaction between faculty members of different courses” and “cooperation with colleagues from different departments/units” record lower values, especially in public universities. The satisfaction with scientific quality, skills and pedagogic quality of the faculty registers the highest values, as was shown in the following figure. These results suggest that improvements are possible, particularly in terms of cooperation and interaction between academics of different departments or disciplines. Although the data may also reflect competition among academics or between areas and departments in which they are; this is related to managerial trends that have been felt in higher education (Lima 2012; Magalhães and Santiago 2012) (Fig. 5.7).

5.4 Satisfaction with Non Academic Staff (Administrative Staff, Technical and Laboratorial Staff…) by Institutional Type

The satisfaction with cooperation, with administrative staff and technical and laboratory staff registers the highest values. Academics express less satisfaction with the adequacy of the number of non academic staff to the amount of existing work. In public universities, they are dissatisfied with this aspect (mean is below the centre of the scale) (Fig. 5.8).

5.5 Satisfaction with Physical Work Environment by Institutional Type

Regarding satisfaction with Physical Work Environment, only the indicators “existence of an area to monitor the students” and “equipment available to faculty and their families” record means below the centre of the scale (5) and are interpreted, therefore, as dissatisfaction, especially in public universities. The “cleanup of the institution” and the “size of classrooms” are the indicators with which academics are more satisfied (Fig. 5.9). From these results emerges the fact that HEIs cannot dispose of support facilities, including kindergartens. Academics spend a lot of time in institutions or in classes or meetings and administrative work with obvious prejudices family (Forest 2002). Still, another reason for dissatisfaction of the academics is lack of spaces for student attendance. The authors of this book for personal knowledge supports this evidence. Many faculty share offices (sometimes there are 3, 4 or more teachers per cabinet) which naturally complicates the personalized attention to the student.

5.6 Satisfaction with Conditions of Employment by Institutional Type

Regarding satisfaction with Conditions of Employment, in public universities and public polytechnic institutes, the satisfaction mean is below the centre of the scale of the three indicators (“remuneration”, “job security” and “career opportunities”). This means that academics are dissatisfied with this dimension, and more dissatisfied in particular with career opportunities (indicator that registered the lowest mean: 3.7) (Fig. 5.10). Indeed, Portuguese academics are overall more satisfied with intrinsic aspects of job and dissatisfied with the extrinsic aspects of the job, such as the characteristics of employment considered in this study. This dissatisfaction with extrinsic aspects of the job is well documented in scientific literature (Ward and Sloane 2000).

5.7 Satisfaction with Personal and Professional Development by Institutional Type

Academics in public universities and public polytechnic institutes seem to be reasonably satisfied with the dimension “Personal and Professional Development” (means registered are close to the centre of the scale) (Fig. 5.11). These data confirm that, despite its importance, it is not always easy to reconcile the professional aspects of career development with personal life or family (Santos 2007; Brites Ferreira et al. 2011, 2012a, b).

5.8 Satisfaction with Institutions’ Culture and Values by Institutional Type

Academics are more satisfied with the academic freedom they have. Academics in public universities are dissatisfied with the ability to innovate in the institution (mean = 4.8) and with the participation of faculty in decision-making processes (mean = 4.6) (Fig. 5.12). As a result of the research, academic freedom is highly valued by academics. However, if we consider the other two indicators mentioned, we may wonder if we are not before some critical attitude towards innovation of institutions and participation of the academic staff in decision-making processes. With regard to the latter aspect, it is important to note that the legal regime of IES, approved by Law no. ° 62/2007 of 10 September, has provided conditions for the existence of more uninominal bodies, to the detriment of collegial bodies and elected bodies.

5.9 Satisfaction with Institutions’ Prestige by Institutional Type

With respect to satisfaction with Institutions’ Prestige, all indicators (“prestige of the institution”, “efforts of the institution to improve its image”, “international partners of the institution”, “national partners of the institution”) registered satisfaction means slightly above the centre of the scale, which means that academics in public higher education institutions are satisfied but not very satisfied with this dimension (Fig. 5.13).

5.10 Satisfaction with Research Climate by Institutional Type

Regarding satisfaction with Research Climate, in public universities and public polytechnic institutes, only the indicator “research outputs” records means above the centre of the scale (5) in both institutional types. This is, therefore, the indicator with which academics are more satisfied. Dissatisfaction is higher with financial resources to do research, but academic staff is also dissatisfied with logistical conditions to do research, research time, recognition by the institution of the research work and opportunities to do research (Fig. 5.14).

Research in higher education in Portugal was “marginal” before the Revolution of April 1974. The relationship between research and teaching was reinforced by law (Decree-Law 448/79) in universities. It then becomes clear that academics have assumed the three traditional missions of the university: teaching, research and services to society, together with duties in terms of institutional governance and academic management at all organizational levels. Later, a similar law was approved for the polytechnic institutes (Decree-Law 185/81) (Santiago et al. 2013). Thus, research is a relatively recent requirement in the academic career. On the other hand, we must associate the current state of economic and financial constraints that have been reflected in research funding.

5.11 Overall Satisfaction by Institutional Type

Overall Satisfaction of academics were higher with the indicators “adequacy of skills to the teaching practice” and “job”, in public universities and public polytechnic institutes. Less satisfaction (but not dissatisfaction) was expressed by academics with the “institution”. The satisfactory means are higher in public polytechnic institutes, except with respect to the indicator “opportunity to update knowledge” as shown in Fig. 5.15. The literature shows, similar to what happens in our study, positive levels of satisfaction among teachers (Oshagbemi 1999; Ward and Sloane 2000).

5.12 Overall Motivation by Institutional Type

Regarding Overall Motivation, academics are more motivated to teach and to remain as faculty members in higher education in public universities and public polytechnic institutes. They are less motivated to serve the community and to participate in the governing bodies in public universities and public polytechnic institutes. Demotivation to participate in the governing bodies was shown by academics in public universities (only this indicator records a motivation mean below the centre of the scale in public universities, interpreted as demotivation) (Fig. 5.16). These results are similar to those of several studies which indicate that the preferences of the academics are primarily for teaching activities, then to research and ultimately to management (McInnis 2000a, b; Oshagbemi 2000; Verhaegen 2005).

5.13 Satisfaction with Teaching Climate, Management, Colleagues and Work environment: A Structural Equation Model

As shown in the following figure, the indicators are well explained by their latent dimensions, all are statistically significant and the correlations between the dimensions (latent variables) are high (rs>=0,7), positive and statistically significant (Fig. 5.17). More information is provided on Appendix 1 (please see Tables 5.8, 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14, 5.15, 5.16, 5.17, 5.18, and 5.19).

Table 5.10 Satisfaction with colleagues

Full size table

5.14 Synthetic Indexes

The dimensions of satisfaction and motivation are synthetic indexes constructed using a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with a single dimension.^{Footnote 6} The factorial scores - standardized values, after unstandardized^{Footnote 7} – are the individual index scores. Based on the respective indicators, we have constructed the following dimensions of satisfaction and motivation:

Satisfaction with Teaching Climate^{Footnote 8}
Satisfaction with Management of the Institution/Department/Unit^{Footnote 9}
Satisfaction with Colleagues^{Footnote 10}
Satisfaction with Physical Work Environment^{Footnote 11}
Satisfaction with Non academic staff (administrative staff, technical and laboratorial staff…)^{Footnote 12}
Satisfaction with Conditions of Employment^{Footnote 13}
Satisfaction with Personal and Professional Development^{Footnote 14}
Satisfaction with Institutions’ Culture and Values^{Footnote 15}
Satisfaction with Institutions’ Prestige^{Footnote 16}
Overall Satisfaction^{Footnote 17}
Overall Motivation^{Footnote 18}

As can be observed, only academics in public polytechnic institutes reveal satisfaction values above the mean, in the dimensions Physical Work Environment and Management of the Institution/Department/Unit, and also Overall Motivation is above the mean (Fig. 5.18).

Regarding synthetic indexes by academic rank, there are not significant statistical differences between juniors and seniors with respect to their overall motivation and their overall satisfaction. The significant statistical differences are only between seniors and juniors with respect to their satisfaction with conditions of employment; personal and professional development, being seniors more satisfied than juniors and with respect to their satisfaction with management and colleagues, being juniors more satisfied than seniors (Fig. 5.19).

Regarding synthetic indexes by gender, there are not significant statistical differences between men and women with respect to their overall satisfaction, their satisfaction with institutions’ culture and values, conditions of employment, non academic staff and physical work environment.

There are significant statistical differences between men and women with respect to their overall motivation, their satisfaction with teaching climate, management, colleagues, personal and professional development, institution’s prestige (please see Fig. 5.20).

5.15 Satisfaction and Motivation

The following figure shows the relationship between the dimensions of satisfaction and academic motivation (Fig. 5.21).

The model explains that 35 % of the variation are motivated to teach, 41 % of the variation are motivated to work in the institution and 50 % of the variation are motivated to remain as a faculty member in higher education. Only the relationship between “Satisfaction with Physical Work Environment” and “Motivation to Work in the Institution” is not statistically significant.

6 Interviews

In the survey cited above, interviews were also made with policy makers, (including former ministers, former directors, former presidents and current presidents and rectors of HEI) and human resource managers of HEI. Some questions and answers were directly related to academic work and academic career. Despite the diversity of responses, there are issues that reappear throughout the interviews, particularly when they are about motivation and satisfaction of the academics.

Talking about what motivates academics, respondents refer mainly the following aspects: research, teaching, good environment, exchange with other communities, international acknowledgement and appreciation, freedom and autonomy, social position, self-motivation, working conditions, payment. On other hand, referring to what discourages academics, respondents highlight the following aspects: uncertainty, job insecurity/lack of stability, excessive administrative work, lack of real conditions for career progression, lack of time and conditions for research, poor organizational climate, increased bureaucracy, difficulties to create research teams, and lack of commitment to student success, reward, no recognition of bureaucratic work.

Regarding the existing dissatisfaction of academics, respondents report that it is due mainly to the following reasons: too much bureaucracy, contract instability, payment, difficulties in promotions/career, differential treatment, not recognizing the merits of teaching, lack of research funding, lack of resources, lack of technological resources, lack of student motivation. On other hand, in relation to the satisfaction, they report the following aspects: recognition/appreciation of the work results/merit, research, good working conditions, organizational support, stability in employment, payment, flexible timetable work, training support, career progression, freedom and autonomy, exchange and dialogue between communities, merit awards performance, student’s success and/or motivation of students.

There are several studies related to academic work and satisfaction on several professional roles that characterise the academic work (Dowd and Kaplan 2005; Hagedorn 2000; Hermanowicz 2003; McInnis 2000a, b; Rosser 2005; Ssesanga and Garrett 2005; Stevens 2005; Taylor 2008; Teichler 2012; Verhaegen 2005; Winter and Sarros 2002; Ylikoji 2005). In general, these studies indicate high levels of satisfaction with aspects intrinsic to academic work, such as the content of academic activities (with particular reference to the case of research), freedom and autonomy in planning and organizing the work itself. Dissatisfaction appears associated with material and financial conditions of work, as well as dimensions related to the work in this heightened competition among colleagues and the deterioration of relations of collegiality, lack of human and material support for performing an increasing number of administrative tasks. These studies also warn the degradation of working conditions of academics and a general increase in stress levels in the academic career. These constraints and unrealistic expectations in terms of performance of the various professional roles are aspects mentioned by a large number of academics, as relevant to the decreased quality of life at work.

The present statutes of academic career enunciate explicitly functions of teaching, research, service to the community and management. Moreover, they allow a number of other tasks that are regulated by each HEI. Thus, academics are facing changes and challenges. On the one hand, these changes and challenges refer to the complementarity between the various activities. On the other hand, the question of competition between the activities is also present. Indeed, these activities have a different value in the organization and management of academic careers. As stated by the authors such as McInnis (2000a, b); Taylor (2008) the perception of the importance of different professional roles for the promotion system shapes the everyday working practices and career planning by academics.

Given the diversity of roles currently assigned to academics and the changes that have been happening in higher education it will be natural that the academic profession in Portugal, will be faced with moments of uncertainty, insecurity and challenges.

7 Analysis

7.1 Dimensions of Job Satisfaction

Academic staff expresses more satisfaction with “Non academic staff (administrative staff, technical and laboratory staff)”, “Teaching Climate” and “Colleagues”. On the contrary, academics reveal less satisfaction or dissatisfaction with “Research Climate” and “Conditions of Employment”. These results are similar to Ssesanga and Garrett (2005) conclusions – academics were relatively satisfied with the co-worker behaviour and intrinsic factors of teaching. Also Ward and Sloane (2000) have stated similar results: academics were most satisfied with the opportunity to use their own initiative, with the relationship with their colleagues and with the actual work; they were least satisfied with promotion prospects and salary.

7.2 Indicators in Each Dimension of Job Satisfaction

Some indicators included in each dimension deserve to be highlighted. With respect to satisfaction with Teaching Climate academics are dissatisfied with the indicator “training of students”. The “degree of autonomy in teaching practice” is the indicator with which academics are more satisfied. As argued by Teichler (2010) the academic profession is a free profession and academic freedom is a value appreciated in academia.

With respect to the dimension Colleagues, the indicators “interaction between faculty members of different courses” and “cooperation with colleagues from different departments/units” record lower values, especially in public universities. Thus, it seems very important to pay more attention to these aspects especially in public universities.

Because academics express less satisfaction with the “adequacy of the number of non academic staff to the amount of existing work”, this is the indicator in the dimension Non academic staff that needs more attention by policy makers and institutional leaders. Dissatisfaction is evident with “existence of an area to monitor the students” and “equipment available to faculty and their families” in the satisfaction dimension Physical Work Environment. In public universities, academics are dissatisfied with the ability to innovate in the institution and with the participation of faculty in decision-making processes (indicators in the dimension Institutions’ Culture and Values). Therefore, as argued by Evans (1999), it is important to give professors a voice, by effective consultation and sharing of decision-making. This is a factor to improve and to work.

Academics are dissatisfied with remuneration, job security and career opportunities in the dimension Conditions of Employment and with financial resources to do research, logistical conditions to do research, research time, recognition by the institution of the research work and opportunities to do research in the dimension Research Climate. These two dimensions need very urgent attention to work, because dissatisfaction is more pronounced here.

Moreover, analysing why academics are less motivated to serve the community and to participate in the governing bodies is an important task to be undertaken, in order to work these two indicators of the dimension Motivation.

7.3 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Institutional Type

Academics seem to be more motivated and more satisfied in public polytechnic institutes, when compared with academics in public universities, but this result has to be interpreted with precaution, because the results of this study relate only to the academics who agreed to answer the online questionnaire, the sample is not representative of the population.

7.4 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Gender

In our study, we found that there were no significant statistical differences between men and women with respect to their overall satisfaction. Moreover, with respect to satisfaction with institutions’ culture and values, conditions of employment, non academic staff and physical work environment, there were no significant statistical differences between men and women. Similarly, authors such as Ward and Sloane (2000); Santhapparaj and Alam (2005) and Stevens (2005) found that women expressed similar levels of satisfaction when compared with men.

There were significant statistical differences between men and women with regard to their overall motivation, their satisfaction with teaching climate, management, colleagues, personal and professional development and institutions’ prestige. Women are more motivated than men and are more satisfied than men with institutions’ prestige, management and colleagues. Men are more satisfied than women with teaching climate and, not surprisingly, with personal and professional development. In a study by Monroe et al. (2008), this was the most intractable problem derived from the tension between career and family. It was notable that almost every woman with children lamented the difficulty in balancing the two roles.

7.5 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Academic Rank

Seniors are more satisfied than juniors (significant statistical differences) with respect to their satisfaction with conditions of employment and personal and professional development. This is not surprising, considering that seniors when compared with juniors have a stable career. Moreover, as shown by EUROAC survey, in all countries juniors are less satisfied than seniors (Höhle and Teichler 2011).

7.6 Motivation and Satisfaction

The relationship between the dimensions of satisfaction and academic motivation was statistically demonstrated in our study. Thus, this finding is similar to some other findings in other studies in the literature. Dinham and Scott (1988, p. 362–363) stated that “Satisfaction and motivation are …inextricably linked through the influence each has on the other.” Higher levels of motivation have been considered as a positive outcome of job satisfaction (Sledge et al. 2008).

8 Conclusion

The academic careers in Portugal have been heavily regulated by the government, and academics are covered by much of the general law on civil servants. For nearly 30 years, the legislation of academic careers remained almost unchanged. The changes introduced in this millennium occurred at the same time as changes in the legal status of HEI, in a context strongly influenced by changes in labour legislation.

Additionally, those changes allow each institution to regulate academic work. The implementation of the new statutes of HEIs is just in the beginning. The implementation of this process will clarify the future academic career in the next years. However, in the cases already known, it is clear the growing influence of market in the approved regulations.

After a period of strong growth in higher education, in Portugal, academics are faced today with much weaker employability opportunities than in the recent past. Moreover, there is more competition for the same positions than in the past. It is a context of uncertainty, increased competition and deterioration of working conditions threatening the future of academics in higher education. For the near future the academic career will strongly depend on the financial condition, framed in the logic of increasing performance assessment and accountability and immersed within European higher education area. Additionally, the financial sustainability of HEIs will put greater pressure on academics, towards raising research and in service delivery revenue for. Furthermore, financial constraints are having negative effect on his career, devalued during of the last years. In short, the career is subject to increasing uncertainty.

The changes observed in the statutes of the academic careers, as well as the current conditions of employment, have increased the difficulty of academic and career development, while creating conditions for greater mobility between HEIs. In the past, the transfer of a public higher education institution to a private one was not very popular in Portugal, due to the anchored ancient belief that the state provides security for life and the private sector does not. However, the current situation is different. The tenure has become more difficult and the uncertainty and job insecurity increased. Job mobility was very low in higher education but may increase in the new situation.

Academic career is today, in a time of globalization, characterised by uncertainties, not only due to lack of resources on higher education. As a matter of fact, HEI’s and academics are faced today with pressures, changes and uncertainties, due to multiple factors that are reflected in areas of academic work and in the mission of HEI (Alves and Possamai 2010; Barrier and Musselin 2009; Brites Ferreira et al. 2012; Ferreira et al. 2012; Machado et al. 2011; Burbules and Torres 2004; Forest 2002; Morgado and Ferreira 2006; Teichler 2012; Welch 2005). The reflection raised by authors such as Altbach (2000, 2003); Deem (2006) and Enders (2000) continues to be necessary. The changes in the academic profession have been accompanied by the increasing loss of socioeconomic status. Changes like these have been presented with some frequency, as efficiencies contrasting with the consciousness of impoverishment and decreasing resources. Moreover, there is a deterioration of wages and working conditions.

This chapter has considered the study on academic job satisfaction and motivation within the Portuguese academia. The academic profession is highly important in a society often characterized as a ‘knowledge society’, because it is responsible for the enhancement of systematic general knowledge (Cavalli and Teichler 2010). Job satisfaction is viewed as a predictor of positive attitudes at work, productivity, and, consequently, good results for the organization (Clark 1997). The study of job satisfaction can contribute to identifying organizational areas that deserve particular attention, as well as to understand and improve HEIs in relation to its main functions, such as teaching and researching (Fontes 2002). Job satisfaction in organizations has received growing attention because it reduces employee turnover, absenteeism and lateness (Chimanikire et al. 2007). Job satisfaction is essential for the organization as its absence will lead it toward laziness and will reduce the dedication to the organization (Moser 1997). Moreover, job satisfaction has an impact on worker health (Rego 2001; Marqueze and Moreno 2005). Thus, it’s undeniable the importance of academic staff satisfaction, in order to attain all these positive consequences for academics and for HEIs.

The findings of this chapter are similar to Ssesanga and Garrett’s (2005) that found out academics to be relatively satisfied with co-worker behaviour and intrinsic factors such as teaching and also similar to Ward and Sloane (2000) found academics were least satisfied with promotion and salary. The findings also confirm Herzberg et al.’s Two Factor Theory (1959) as the intrinsic element of the job- “Teaching climate” was associated with satisfaction and academics were less satisfied with extrinsic elements as “The Conditions of Employment” and interpersonal relationships with “Non academic staff” and “Colleagues” is not related with dissatisfaction.

Moreover, these set of results shows similar trends noticed in other studies developed in the topic, notwithstanding, the specificities of the Portuguese academics’ career and the momentum of Portuguese higher education (Bentley et al. 2013; Dias et al. 2013; Machado-Taylor et al. 2013; Teichler 2012).

Nevertheless, the impact of funding cuts, of increased accountability measures and wide-scale change in teaching processes and technologies have left the academic staff de-motivated. The faculty career in public higher education are not changing in the last years in the direction of the academics request, particularly since 2004 with the exception of 2009. The development of strategic responses on people issues must consider the huge changes and trends that are occurring. Besides, HEIs need to identify not only what motivates existing academics, but also potential academics – knowledge workers who can meet desires elsewhere (Dunkin 2005). This identification is crucial, because today the business environment is extremely competitive and, consequently, continuous improvement has become a necessity (Machado et al. 2011; Machado-Taylor et al. 2010).

To attain this improvement each HEI must work with and for their human resources. In this case, institutional leaders and policy makers must take into account the findings of this study and others in order in which they can contribute to the attraction of academic talents and to the improvement of quality of HEIs. Given the diversity of roles currently assigned to academics, the current changes in higher education and the influence of the contexts in which it falls it is natural that the academic profession will go through moments of tension, ambiguity and uncertainty, marked by some haziness as to their future, which, in itself, justifies a thorough reflection on academic work.

Notes

1.
“Bacharel” was a degree achieved after 3 years at HEI before the changes introduced by the Bologna process; “Licenciado” is the Portuguese term for Bachelor; “Mestre” is the Portuguese term for Master; “Doutor” is the Portuguese term for PhD.
2.
Agência de Avaliação e Acreditação do Ensino Superior.
3.
They were predicted, but never applied.
4.
The concept of amotivation is used by Vallerand et al. (1992).
5.
According to Malhotra and Birks (2007), although no conclusions can be inferred for the population when working with non-probability samples, as it is the case, it is always possible to draw some conclusions about the behaviour of the population and, therefore, to assume some conclusions regarding the research questions. Please, see Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2007). Marketing research: An applied approach. 3rd Edition. Harlow, England: Prentice Hall.
6.
See Saris, W., available at http://surveymethodology.eu/conferences/warsaw-2009/sessions/106/).
7.
As suggested by Vaus, D. (2004). Analyzing social science data. London: Sage, reprinted, p. 112.
8.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,84; Explained Variance: 44,4 %
9.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,95; Explained Variance: 80,8 %
10.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,92; Explained Variance: 71,9 %
11.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,90; Explained Variance: 48,3 %
12.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,86; Explained Variance: 72,7 %
13.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,79; Explained Variance: 70,5 %
14.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,91; Explained Variance: 84,6 %
15.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,83; Explained Variance: 74,6 %
16.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,93; Explained Variance: 82,1 %
17.
Cronbach’ Alpha:0,89; Explained Variance: 68,8 %
18.
Cronbach’ Alpha: 0,83; Explained Variance: 54,8 %

References

Addio, A. C., Eriksson, T., & Frijters, P. (2007). An analysis of the determinants of job satisfaction when individuals’ baseline satisfaction levels may differ. Applied Economics, 39(1), 2413–2423.
Google Scholar
Altbach, P. (Ed.). (2000). The changing academic workplace: Comparative perspectives. Boston College: Center for International Education.
Google Scholar
Altbach, P. G., & Chait, R. (2001). Introduction. Higher Education, 41, 1–2.
Article Google Scholar
Altbach, P. (Org.) (2003). The decline of the guru: The academic profession in developing and middle-income countries. New York: Palgrave/MacMillan.
Google Scholar
Alves, M. P., & Possamai, F. (2010). Da simplicidade para a complexidade: O trabalho enredado do professor universitário. In M. P. Alves & M. A. Flores (Orgs.) (Eds.), Trabalho docente, formação e avaliação: Clarificar conceitos, fundamentar práticas (pp. 35–51). Mangualde: Edições Pedago.
Google Scholar
Amaral, A., Ferreira, J. F., Machado, M. L., & Santiago, R. (2006). Modelos de governação e gestão dos Institutos Politécnicos no contexto europeu. Castelo Branco: Politécnica – Associação dos Institutos Politécnicos do Centro.
Google Scholar
Ambrose, S., Huston, T., & Norman, M. (2005). A qualitative method for assessing faculty satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 46(7), 803–830.
Article Google Scholar
Barrier, J., & Musselin, C. (2009). The rationalization of academic work and careers: Ongoing transformations of the profession and policy challenges. In B. M. Kehm, J. Huisman, & B. Stensaker (Eds.), The European higher education area: Perspectives on a moving target (pp. 203–221). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Google Scholar
Bentley, P., Coates, H., Dobson, I., Goedegebuere, L., & Meek, L. (Eds.). (2013). Job satisfaction around the academic world (The changing academy – The changing academic profession in international comparative perspective, Vol. 7). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Brennan, J. (2007). The academic profession and increasing expectations of relevance. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 19–28). Kassel: INCHER.
Google Scholar
Brites Ferreira, J., Seco, G., Canastra, F., Dias, I. S., & Abreu, M. O. (2011). (In)sucesso académico no ensino superior: Conceitos, factores e estratégias de intervenção. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior (RIES), México, IISUE-UNAM/Universia, II(4). Available at http://ries.universia.net/index.php/ries/article/view/91
Brites Ferreira, J., Machado, M. L., & Gouveia, O. (2012). Satisfação e motivação dos docentes do ensino superior em Portugal. Revista Ibero-americana de Educação, secção ‘Estudos e Investigações’/Docência Universitária, 58/1, 1–12.
Google Scholar
Burbules, N. C., & Torres, C. A. (2004). Globalização e educação: Uma introdução. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Orgs.), Globalização e educação: Perspectivas críticas (pp. 11–26). São Paulo: Artmed Editora.
Google Scholar
Cabrito, B. (2006). Higher education in Portugal: Recent evolution, democratisation and trends. The Journal of Finance and Management in Colleges and Universities, 3, 242–268.
Google Scholar
Capelleras, J. (2005). Attitudes of academic staff towards their job and organization: An empirical assessment. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(2), 147–166.
Article Google Scholar
Caraça, J. G., Conceição, P., & Heitor, M. V. (1996). Uma perspectiva sobre a missão das universidades. Análise Social, 139, 1201–1233.
Google Scholar
Cavalli, A., & Teichler, U. (2010). The academic profession: A common core, a diversified group or an outdated idea? European Review, 18(1), S1–S5.
Article Google Scholar
Chimanikire, P., Mutandwa, E., Gadzirayi, C. T., Muzondo, N., & Mutandwa, B. (2007). Factors affecting job satisfaction among academic professionals in tertiary institutions in Zimbabwe. African Journal of Business Management, 1(6), 166–175.
Google Scholar
Clark, A. E. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour Economics, 4(4), 341–372.
Article Google Scholar
Deem, R. (2006). Conceptions of contemporary European universities: To do research or not do research? European Journal of Education, 41(2), 281–304.
Article Google Scholar
Dias, D., Machado-Taylor, M. L., Santiago, R., Carvalho, T., & Sousa, S. (2013). Portugal: Dimensions of academic job satisfaction. In P. Bentley, H. Coates, I. Dobson, L. Goedegebuere, & L. Meek (Eds.), Job satisfaction around the academic world (The changing academy – The changing academic profession in international comparative perspective, Vol. 7, pp. 187–208). Dordrecht: Springer.
Chapter Google Scholar
Dinham, S., & Scott, C. (1998). A three domain model of teacher and school executive career satisfaction. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(4), 362–378.
Article Google Scholar
Dowd, K. O., & Kaplan, D. M. (2005). The career life of academics: Boundaried or boundaryless? Human Relations, 58(6), 699–721.
Article Google Scholar
Dunkin, R. (2005). The HR challenge: Some more thoughts. Response to Keynote Address. Seminar on HR issues OECD, Paris, August 25–6.
Google Scholar
Egbule, P. E. (2003). Factors related to job satisfaction of academic staff in Nigerian universities. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 27(2), 157–166.
Article Google Scholar
Enders, J. (1999). Crisis? What crisis? The academic professions in the “knowledge” society. Higher Education, 38(1), 71–81.
Article Google Scholar
Enders, J. (2000). Academic staff in Europe: Changing employment and working conditions. In M. Tight (Ed.), Academic work and life: What it is to be an academic, and how this is changing (pp. 7–32). New York: Elsevier Science.
Chapter Google Scholar
Evans, L. (1999). Managing to motivate: A guide for school leaders. London and New York: Cassell.
Google Scholar
Ferreira, J. B., Machado-Taylor, M. L., Brites, R., & Gouveia, O. M. R. (2012a). O trabalho académico no ensino superior, em Portugal. In C. Leite & M. Zabalza (Coords.), Ensino superior: Inovação e qualidade na docência (pp. 9168–9182). Porto: Edição CIIE – Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas/Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade do Porto.
Google Scholar
Ferreira, J. B., Seco, G. Abreu, M. O., Dias, I. S., Cadima, R., & Canastra, F. (2012b). Sucesso e satisfação dos estudantes finalistas do Instituto Politécnico de Leiria. Instituto Politécnico de Leiria/Edições Afrontamento.
Google Scholar
Fontes, J. F. (2002). La satisfacción en el trabajo de académicos en una universidad publica estatal. Perfiles Educativos, 24(96), 47–72.
Google Scholar
Forest, J. (2002). I prefer to teach: An international comparison of faculty preference for teaching over research. New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Galaz-Pontes, J. F., Padilla- González, L., & Gil-Antón, M. (2007). The increasing expectation of relevance for higher education and the academic profession: Some reflections on the case of Mexico. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 57–81). Kassel: INCHER.
Google Scholar
Gappa, J. M. (2010). Rethinking faculty work and workplaces. In G. Gordon & C. Whitchurch (Eds.), Academic and professional identities in higher education: The challenges of a diversifying workforce. New York/London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education’s strategic imperative. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Google Scholar
Gordon, G., & Whitchurch, C. (Eds.). (2010). Academic and professional identities in higher education: The challenges of a diversifying workforce. New York/London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
GPEARI. (2011). Docentes do ensino superior [2001 a 2009]. Lisboa: Gabinete de Planeamento, Estratégia, Avaliação e Relações Internacionais.
Google Scholar
Hagedorn, L. S. (2000). Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. New Directions for Institutional Research, 105, XXVII(1), 5–20.
Google Scholar
Hargreaves, A. (1998). Os professores em tempos de mudança: O trabalho dos professores na idade pós-moderna. Lisboa: McGraw-Hill.
Google Scholar
Hargreaves, A. (2003). O ensino na sociedade do conhecimento: A educação na era da insegurança. Porto: Porto Editora.
Google Scholar
Henkel, M. (2007). Shifting boundaries and the academic profession. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 191–204). Kassel: INCHER.
Google Scholar
Henkel, M. (2010). Introduction: Change and continuity in academic and professional identities. In G. Gordon & C. Whitchurch (Eds.), Academic and professional identities in higher education: The challenges of a diversifying workforce (pp. 3–12). New York/London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Hermanowicz, J. C. (2003). Scientists and satisfaction. Social Studies of Science, 33(1), 45–73.
Article Google Scholar
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley.
Google Scholar
Höhle, E. A., & Teichler, U. (2011). What makes academics happy? Factors for academic job satisfaction – An international comparison. EAIR 33rd Annual Forum, Warsaw, 28–31 August.
Google Scholar
Houston, D., Meyer, L. H., & Paewai, S. (2006). Academic staff workloads and job satisfaction: Expectations and values in academe. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(1), 17–30.
Article Google Scholar
Kogan, M., & Teichler, U. (2007). Key challenges to the academic profession and its interface with management: Some introductory thoughts. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 9–18). Kassel: INCHER.
Google Scholar
Lima, L. (2012). Patterns of institutional management: Democratisation, autonomy and managerialist canon. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974–2009 (pp. 287–306). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Machado, M. L., Meira Soares, V., Brites, R., Brites Ferreira, J., Farhangmehr, M., & Gouveia, O. (2011). Uma análise da satisfação e da motivação dos docentes no ensino superior português. Revista Lusófona de Educação, 17, 167–181.
Google Scholar
Machado, M. L., Meira Soares, V., Brites Ferreira, J., Brites, R., Farhangmehr, M., & Gouveia, O. M. R. (2013). Job (in)satisfaction among academics in Portuguese higher education institutions. Journal of the European Higher Education Area, 2, 69–94.
Google Scholar
Machado-Taylor, M. L., Meira Soares, V., & Gouveia, O. (2010). The study of academic job satisfaction and motivation: An ongoing study in Portuguese higher education. Global Business & Economics Anthology, B&ESI, II(2), 242–246.
Google Scholar
Magalhães, A. M., & Santiago, R. (2012). Governance, public management and administration. In G. Neave & A. Amaral (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974–2009 (pp. 227–248). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2007). Marketing research: An applied approach (3rd ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Book Google Scholar
Marginson, S. (2009). The academic professions in the global era. In J. Enders & E. Weert (Eds.), The changing face of academic life: Analytical and comparative perspectives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Marqueze, E. C., & Moreno, C. R. (2005). Satisfação no trabalho: Uma breve revisão. Revista Brasileira de Saúde Ocupacional, 30(112), 69–79.
Article Google Scholar
McInnis, C. (2000a). Changing academic work roles: The everyday realities challenging quality in teaching. Quality in Higher Education, 6(2), 143–152.
Article Google Scholar
McInnis, C. (2000b). Towards new balance or new divides? The changing work roles of academics in Australia. In M. Tight (Ed.), Academic work and life: What it is to be an academic, and how this is changing (pp. 117–145). New York: Elsevier Science.
Chapter Google Scholar
Meira Soares, V. (2001). The academic profession in a massifying system: The Portuguese case. In J. Enders (Ed.), The academic staff in Europe: Changing contexts and conditions (pp. 233–253). Westport: Greenwood Press.
Google Scholar
Meira Soares, V. (2003). The attractiveness of the academic careers in Portugal. Matosinhos: Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies (CIPES).
Google Scholar
Meira Soares, V., & Trindade, A. R. (2004). The attractiveness of the academic career. In J. Enders & E. de Weert (Eds.), The international attractiveness of the academic workplace in Europe. Franfurt am Main: Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschft.
Google Scholar
Monroe, K., Ozyurt, S., Wrigley, T., & Alexander, A. (2008). Gender equality in academia: Bad news from the trenches, and some possible solutions. Perspectives on Politics, 6(2), 215–233.
Article Google Scholar
Morgado, J. C., & Ferreira, J. B. (2006). Globalização e autonomia: Desafios, compromissos e incongruências. In A. F. Moreira & J. A. Pacheco (Eds.), Globalização e educação (pp. 61–86). Porto: Porto Editora.
Google Scholar
Moser, K. (1997). Commitment in organizations. Psychologies, 41(4), 160–170.
Google Scholar
Musselin, C. (2007). Transformations of academic work: Facts and analysis. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 175–190). Kassel: INCHER.
Google Scholar
Musselin, C. (2010). The impact of changing recruitment practices on academic profiles. In G. Gordon & C. Whitchurch (Eds.), Academic and professional identities in higher education: The challenges of a diversifying workforce. New York/London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Neave, G. (2009). The academic estate revisited: Reflections on academia’s rapid progress from the Capitoline hill to the tarpeian rock. In J. Enders & J. Weert (Eds.), The changing face of academic life: Analytical and comparative perspectives (pp. 15–35). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chapter Google Scholar
Nyquist, J. G., Hitchcock, M. A., & Teherani, A. (2000). Faculty satisfaction in academic medicine. New Directions for Institutional Research, 27(1), 33–43.
Article Google Scholar
Oshagbemi, T. (1997). Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in higher education. Education + Training, 39(9), 354–359.
Article Google Scholar
Oshagbemi, T. (1999). Academics and their managers: A comparative study in job satisfaction. Personnel Review, 28(1/2), 108–123.
Article Google Scholar
Oshagbemi, T. (2000). How satisfied are academics with their primary tasks of teaching, research and administration and management? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 1(2), 124–136.
Article Google Scholar
PORDATA. (2011). Docentes. Lisbon: Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos. Retrieved June 2, 2011, from: http://www.pordata.pt/azap_runtime/?n=26&SubThemeId=43&Varnum=7
Rego, A. (2001). Percepções de justiça: Estudos de dimensionalização com professores do ensino superior. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 17(2), 119–131.
Google Scholar
Rosser, V. J. (2005). Measuring the change in faculty perceptions over time: An examination of their worklife and satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 46(1), 81–107.
Article Google Scholar
Santhapparaj, A. S., & Alam, S. S. (2005). Job satisfaction among academic staff in private universities in Malaysia. Journal of Social Sciences, 1(2), 72–76.
Article Google Scholar
Santiago, R., Sousa, S. B., Carvalho, T., Machado-Taylor, L., & Amado, D. (2013). Teaching and research; perspectives from Portugal. In J. Cheol Shin, U. Teichler, W. K. Cummings, & A. Arimoto (Eds.), Teaching and research in contemporary higher education: Systems, activities, nexus, and rewards (pp. 153–176). London: Springer.
Google Scholar
Santos, G. M. G. (2007). O desenvolvimento de carreira dos académicos: Uma análise centrada na relação entre o trabalho e a família. Ph.D. Thesis. Braga: Universidade do Minho.
Google Scholar
Seco, G., Pereira, I., Dias, I. S., Casimiro, M., & Custódio, S. (2006). Para uma abordagem psicológica da transição do ensino secundário para o ensino superior: pontos e alçapões. Politécnica – Associação dos Institutos Politécnicos do Centro.
Google Scholar
Silva, R. B. (1998). Para uma análise da satisfação com o trabalho. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas, 26, 149–178.
Google Scholar
Sledge, S., Miles, A., & Coppage, S. (2008). What role does culture play? A look at motivation and job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(9), 1667–1682.
Article Google Scholar
Ssesanga, K., & Garrett, R. M. (2005). Job satisfaction of University academics: Perspectives from Uganda. Higher Education, 50(1), 33–56.
Google Scholar
Stevens, P. A. (2005). The job satisfaction of English academics and their intentions to quit academe. London: National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
Google Scholar
Tardif, M., & Lassardi, C. (Orgs.) (2008). O ofício de professor: História, perspectivas e desafios internacionais. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes.
Google Scholar
Taylor, P. (2008). Being an academic today. In R. Barnett & R. Di Napoli (Eds.), Changing identities in higher education: Voicing perspectives (pp. 27–39). London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Teichler, U. (2009). Higher education and the world of work: Conceptual frameworks, comparative perspectives, empirical findings. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Google Scholar
Teichler, U. (2010). The diversifying academic profession? European Review, 18(1), S157–S179.
Article Google Scholar
Teichler, U. (2012). Teaching versus research: The vulnerable balance. Contribution to the Seminar Challenges and Options: The Academic Profession in Europe. Porto: Centro de Investigação de Políticas do Ensino Superior, 15–16 March.
Google Scholar
Teixeira, P. (2012). The changing public-private mix in higher education: Analysing Portugal’s apparent exceptionalism. In A. Amaral & G. Neave (Eds.), Higher education in Portugal 1974-2009 – A nation, a generation (pp. 307–328). Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., Senécal, C., & Vallières, E. F. (1992). The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003–1017.
Article Google Scholar
Verhaegen, P. (2005). Academic talent: Quo Vadis? Recruitment and retention of faculty in European business schools. Journal of Management Development, 24(9), 807–818.
Article Google Scholar
Ward, M. E., & Sloane, P. J. (2000). Non-pecuniary advantages versus pecuniary disadvantages: Job satisfaction among male and female academics in Scottish universities. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 47(3), 273–303.
Article Google Scholar
Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
Google Scholar
Welch, A. (Ed.). (2005). The professoriate: Profile of a profession. Dordrecht: Springer.
Google Scholar
Winter, R., & Sarros, J. (2002). The academic work environment in Australian universities: A motivating place to work. Higher Education Research & Development, 21(3), 241–258.
Article Google Scholar
Ylikoji, O.-H. (2005). Academic nostalgia: A narrative approach to academic work. Human Relation, 58, 555–576.
Article Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) and the Center for Research in Higher Education Policies (CIPES) for funding the research project “An Examination of Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation in Portuguese Higher Education”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Matosinhos, Portugal
Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor
A3ES – Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher Education, Lisbon, Portugal
Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor
ULisbon, CIPES Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Lisbon, Matosinhos, Portugal
Virgílio Meira Soares
ISEG-ULisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
Rui Brites
CIES/ISCTE-IUL University Institute of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
Rui Brites
Center for Research in Higher Education Policies (CIPES), Matosinhos, Portugal
J. Brites Ferreira & Odília Gouveia
Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal
J. Brites Ferreira
University of Minho – School of Economics and Management, Braga, Portugal
Minoo Farhangmehr
Interdisciplinary Centre for Social Sciences – University of Minho (CICS.NOVA.UMinho) and Communication and Society Research Centre (CECS) of the University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Odília Gouveia
Michigan University, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Marvin Peterson

Authors

Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Virgílio Meira Soares
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Rui Brites
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
J. Brites Ferreira
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Minoo Farhangmehr
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Odília Gouveia
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Marvin Peterson
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Matosinhos, Portugal
Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor
ULisbon, CIPES Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies, Lisbon, Matosinhos, Portugal
Virgílio Meira Soares
International Centre for Higher Education Research (INCHER-Kassel), University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
Ulrich Teichler

Appendices

1.1 Appendix 1

Table 5.8 Satisfaction with teaching climate

Full size table

Table 5.9 Satisfaction with management of the institution/department/unit

Full size table

Table 5.11 Satisfaction with non academic staff (administrative staff. technical and laboratorial staff…)

Full size table

Table 5.12 Satisfaction with physical work environment

Full size table

Table 5.13 Satisfaction with conditions of employment

Full size table

Table 5.14 Satisfaction with personal and professional development

Full size table

Table 5.15 Satisfaction with institutions’ culture and values

Full size table

Table 5.16 Satisfaction with institutions’ prestige

Full size table

Table 5.17 Satisfaction with research climate

Full size table

Table 5.18 Overall Satisfaction

Full size table

Table 5.19 Overall motivation

Full size table

1.2 Appendix 2

Survey on Faculty Job Satisfaction in Higher Education – CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies

This survey was designed to collect information on your satisfaction and motivation as a faculty member. Your personal identity is not known to participate in it. This questionnaire is applied under the Project PTDC/ESC/67784/2006 – An Examination of Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation in Portuguese Higher Education (ESMAESP), funded by the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT). If you work in more than one higher education institution, please answer reporting your major contract.

1.2.1 A Note on Privacy

This survey is anonymous. The record kept of your survey responses does not contain any identifying information about you, unless a specific question in the survey has asked for this. If you answered a survey that used an identifying token to allow you access, you can be assured that the identifying token is not kept with the answers. It is managed in a separate database and will only be updated to indicate if you completed or not this survey. It is not possible to relate the tokens of identification with the answers to this survey.

1.3 I. Satisfaction Dimensions

1.

What is your degree of satisfaction with the following aspects of your job as a faculty member?

1.1. Teaching climate	Strongly dissatisfied										Strongly satisfied
1.1. Teaching climate	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
With the distribution of teaching service for teachers of your department/organizational unit
With the recognition from your peers
With teaching facilities (e.g. classrooms, laboratories, etc.)
With the behaviour of your students in class time
With training of students
With the results of your work as a faculty member
With your degree of autonomy in your teaching practice
With class sizes
With the organization of schedules

1.2. Management of the Institution/Department/Unit	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.2. Management of the Institution/Department/Unit	0	10
With those in top management positions in your institution
With those in top management positions in your department/organizational unit
With communication with managers
With the management's response to faculty needs
With the ability of those in positions of management to innovate
With the time that those in management positions take to respond to the needs of faculty

1.3. Colleagues	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.3. Colleagues	0	10
With the skills of faculty of your department/organizational unit
With the scientific quality of the faculty of your department/organizational unit in comparison with faculty of other similar institutions
With the pedagogic quality of the faculty of your department/organizational unit in comparison with faculty of other similar institutions
With the interaction between faculty members of different courses
With the cooperation with colleagues from different departments/units
With the openness to change shown by faculty of your department/organizational unit

1.4. Non academic staff (administrative staff, technical and laboratorial staff…)	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied	Not applicable
	0	10	11
With the cooperation of administrative staff in your institution
With the cooperation of technical-lab staff in your institution
With the performance of non academic staff in your institution
With the adequacy of the number of non academic staff to the amount of existing work

1.5. Physical work environment	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied	Not applicable
1.5. Physical work environment	0	10	11
With the quality of the office
With the adequacy of laboratory equipment to your needs
With the adequacy of computer facilities to your needs
With the adequacy of reviews and books in your institution to carry out your work
With food service (restaurant/bar/canteen)
With the cleanup of the institution
With the equipment available to faculty and their families (eg, gym, nursery, living spaces…)
With the existence of an area to monitor the students (eg, ask questions)
With the fact that you have to share the office
With the existence of space/s to hold meetings
With the size of classrooms
With the availability of parking for faculty

1.6. Conditions of employment	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.6. Conditions of employment	0	10
With your remuneration
With the career opportunities
With job security

1.7. Personnel and professional development	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.7. Personnel and professional development	0	10
With the conditions you have to balance work and family life
With the conditions you have for your personnel development
With the conditions you have for your professional development

1.8. Institutions’ culture and values	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.8. Institutions’ culture and values	0	10
With the academic freedom you have
With the participation of faculty of your institution in decision-making processes
With the ability to innovate in your institution

1.9. Institutions’ prestige	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.9. Institutions’ prestige	0	10
With the prestige of your institution
With the international partners of your institution
With the national partners of your institution
With the efforts of your institution to improve its image

1.10. Research climate
(ANSWER ONLY IF YOU DO RESEARCH)	Strongly dissatisfied	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Strongly satisfied
(ANSWER ONLY IF YOU DO RESEARCH)	0										10
With the time you have to do research
With the recognition by the institution of your research work
With the financial resources to do research
With the logistical conditions to do research
With your research outputs
With the degree of internationalization of your research work
With the opportunities you have to do research
With your number of publications/presentations

1.11. General satisfaction	Strongly dissatisfied	Strongly satisfied
1.11. General satisfaction	0	10
With your job
With your institution
With the opportunity you have to update knowledge
With the adequacy of your skills to your teaching practice
With the social prestige of your job

All things considered , how do you rate your overall satisfaction:

	Strongly dissatisfied	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Strongly satisfied
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
With your teaching activity
With the research you do

2.
Would you advise other people to work in your current and primary institution?
Yes
O
No
O
I don’t know
O

3.

In your opinion, how important is each of these aspects for students’ academic success?

	Not important at all	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Very important	I have no opinion
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Your knowledge as a faculty member
Your skills as a faculty member
Your motivation as a faculty member
Your satisfaction as a faculty member

4.

Given the mission and objectives of your institution, what is the importance you give to each of the following aspects?

	Not important at all	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Very important	I have no opinion
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Your teaching activity
The research you do
The support you provide to the community
Your participation in governing bodies

1.4 II. Motivation

5.
What is your level of motivation for each of the following aspects?

	Strongly demotivated	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Strongly motivated
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
To teach
To do research
To serve the community
To participate in the governing bodies
To work in your institution
To remain as a faculty member in higher education

1.5 III. Satisfaction, Motivation and Performance

6.
What is the importance you give to each of the following aspects for faculty performance?

	Not important at all	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Very important	I have no opinion
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
The faculty motivation
The faculty satisfaction

1.6 IV. Academic Decision at Your Institution

7.
Distribute 100 points among the options available to characterize the decision-making process in your (main) institution of higher education.
- In these fields only should be introduced numbers
- The total must be 100 points

collegial: There are widespread opportunities to participate meaningfully in decision making.
formal/rational: Decision making is formally structured. Problems are analysed. Decisions are made in a logical and reasoned manner.
autonomous: Academic and professional units function with a good deal of freedom in a decentralized or loosely coordinated environment.
autocratic: Decisions are made by higher level administrators with little or no consultation with faculty or lower level academic units.
political: Different people or groups move in and out of the decision making process, wielding varying amounts of power at different times.
Remaining:
Total:

8.
What influence do you have, personally, in the formulation of key academic policies at the level of your unit?

Much influence	O
Some influence	O
Little influence	O
No influence	O

9.
What influence do you have, personally, in the formulation of key academic policies at the level of your institution?

Much influence	O
Some influence	O
Little influence	O
No influence	O

1.7 V. The New Regulation for Faculty Careers (Answer Only If You Are Professor of Public Higher Education)

10.
Do you know the new regulation for faculty careers (Decree-Law No. 205 - university higher education; Decree-Law No. 206 – polytechnic higher education; Decree-Law No 207 - polytechnic higher education, of 31, August, 2009)?
Yes
O (go to question 10.1.)
No
O (go to question 11)

10.1

What is your degree of satisfaction with the following aspects of this new regulation?

	Strongly dissatisfied	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Strongly satisfied
	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Evaluation and Performance
Hiring Process
Advancement in the Academic Career
The new regulation for faculty careers in general

10.2
In your opinion, to what extent the new regulation for faculty careers (Decrees-Law No. 205, 206 and 207 of 31, August, 2009) contributes to facilitate the mobility of faculty between higher education institutions?
Doesn’t contribute
O
Contributes little
O
Contributes
O
Contributes a lot
O
I have no opinion
O

Does the new regulation for faculty careers promote inbreeding?
Yes
O
No
O
I don’t know
O

What is your degree of satisfaction with the practice of “inbreeding”?

Strongly dissatisfied
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Strongly satisfied
0
10
Degree of satisfaction

1.8 VI. Academic/Professional Context

If you work in more than one higher education institution, please answer reporting your major contract.

1.8.1 Teaching

12.
Academic position

Full Professor	O
Associate Professor	O
Assistant Professor	O
Invited Assistant Professor	O
Invited Associate Professor	O
Invited Full Professor	O
Visiting Assistant Professor	O
Visiting Associate Professor	O
Visiting Full Professor	O
Assistant	O
Junior Assistant	O
Invited Assistant	O
Reader	O
Monitor	O
Coordinator Professor	O
Adjunct Professor	O
Professor Equiparado-Coordinator, Adjunct, Assistant	O
Other (please specify) ______________________________	O

13.
Type of contract

Indefinite contract with experimental period	O
Indefinite contract without experimental period	O
Fixed term contract	O
Administrative contract (Contrato administrativo de provimento)	O
Other (please specify)____________________________________	O

14.
Validity of your contract

Less than 1 year	O
Between 1 and 3 years	O
More than 3 years	O

15.
Are you with an exclusive regime?

Yes	O	No	O

16.
Working regime

Part-time	O
Full-time	O
Other (please specify)____________________________________	O

17.
How many hours do you usually teach per week:

At night (after 8 pm) ______
During the day ______
Saturday ______

18.
Besides the hours you teach during a week, how many hours do you work per week in average considering all aspects of education (orientation, lesson planning, assessment, monitoring of students…)? ______

19.
Is the work at night (teaching) rewarded at the primary institution where you teach?

Yes	O	No	O	I don’t know	O

20.
In which area/s do you teach?

General Programs	O
Education	O
Arts and Humanities	O
Social Sciences, Commerce and Law	O
Science, Mathematics and Computer	O
Engineering, Manufacturing Industries and Construction	O
Agriculture	O
Health and Social Protection	O
Services	O
Unspecified	O

21.
Is there correspondence between the area/s you teach and your area/s of academic education?

Yes	O	No	O

22.
Does your teaching activity cause stress to you?

Yes	O	No	O

23.
For how many years, including this year, are you teaching in higher education?

Less than 1 year	O
Please indicate the years: ______

24.
For how many years, including this year, are you teaching in your current institution ?

Less than 1 year	O
Please indicate the years: ______

25.

If you have the opportunity, will you move to another institution?

Yes	O	No	O

25.1.
If yes, why?

Select all that apply
I would like to have better working conditions (e. g. space, workload)	O
I would like to work in another geographical location	O
I would like to work in another type of institution (e.g. public, private)	O
I would like to work in another institution with better reputation	O
I would like to have research opportunities	O
I am not satisfied with my position	O
I am not satisfied with my salary	O
I am not satisfied with the quality of my students	O
Other (please specify) ______________________________________	O

1.8.2 Teaching management

26.
Are you responsible for the management of any program?
Yes
O
No
O
1. 26.1.
  If yes, what is/are the academic degree/s?
Select all that apply
Undergraduate
O
Master
O
PhD
O
Advanced Training Courses
O

1.8.3 Management

27.
What management positions have you been holding in the last five years?

Select all that apply
Coordinator/Director of Department	O
President/School Director	O
School Vice-President	O
School Vice-Director	O
Rector/President	O
Vice-Rector/Vice-President	O
Pro-Rector	O
I have not held management responsibilities	O
Other (please, specify)_________________	O

1.8.4 Research

28.
Over the last five years have you been responsible for:

any research centre?
Yes	O	No	O
any funded research project?
Yes	O	No	O
any unfunded research project?
Yes	O	No	O

29.

If you have research tasks/responsibilities, what is the main scientific area in which you do research?

Mathematics	O
Computer and information sciences	O
Physical sciences	O
Chemical sciences	O
Earth and related environmental sciences	O
Biological sciences	O
Other natural sciences	O
Civil engineering	O
Electrical engineering, electronic engineering, information engineering	O
Mechanical engineering	O
Chemical engineering	O
Materials engineering	O
Medical engineering	O
Environmental engineering	O
Environmental biotechnology	O
Industrial Biotechnology	O
Nano-technology	O
Other engineering and Technologies	O
Basic medicine	O
Clinical medicine	O
Health sciences	O
Health biotechnology	O
Other medical sciences	O
Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries	O
Animal and dairy science	O
Veterinary science	O
Agricultural biotechnology	O
Other agricultural sciences	O
Psychology	O
Economics and business	O
Educational sciences	O
Sociology	O
Law	O
Political Science	O
Social and economic geography	O
Media and communications	O
Other social sciences	O
History and archaeology	O
Languages and literature	O
Philosophy, ethics and religion	O
Art (arts, history of arts, performing arts, music)	O
Other humanities	O

29.1.
On average, how many hours do you spend per week with that research activity?______

1.8.5 All Activities in Higher Education

30.
Approximately, what percentage of time do you spend , during an academic year, in the following activities (including your national and international involvement)?

In these fields only should be introduced numbers

The total must be 100 points

Teaching activities (Including preparations, teaching, evaluation)
Academic and educational advising
Orientation of works/thesis/dissertations
Research
Committee work (national and/or international)
Administrative duties
Professional development
Consulting
Service to the academic community
Community Services
Other
Remaining:
Total:

31.
Approximately, what percentage of time would you like to spend , during an academic year, in the following activities (including your national and international involvement)?
- In these fields only should be introduced numbers
- The total must be 100 points

Teaching activities (Including preparations, teaching, evaluation)
Academic and educational advising
Orientation of works/thesis/dissertations
Research
Committee work (national and/or international)
Administrative duties
Professional development
Consulting
Service to the academic community
Community Services
Other
Remaining:
Total:

32.
Please tell us the following:

Does your professional activity has an impact on your family life?
Positive Impact (Please describe)_____________________________________________
Negative Impact (Please describe)_____________________________________________

1.9 VII. General Information

33.
Sex

Female	O
Male	O

34.
Marital status

Single	O
Married	O
Divorced	O
Widow/er	O
Separated	O
União de facto (living together for more than two years)	O

34.1.
Does your partner/husband/wife work? (If you have partner/husband/wife)
Yes
O
No
O
1. 34.2.
  Is your partner/husband/wife an academic? (If you have partner/husband/wife)
Yes
O
No
O

35.
Year of birth ________

36.
Type of institution

Public University	O
Public Polytechnic	O
Private University	O
Private Polytechnic	O

37.
In which institution do you teach? (answers in attachment)
38.
Approximately, what is your net salary per month? (The answer is optional) __________
39.
Which of the following descriptions comes closest to your feeling about the current income of people living in your house?

The current income allows you to live comfortably	O
The current income is enough to live	O
It's difficult to live with the current income	O
It is very difficult to live with the current income	O
You don’t know	O

40.

What is your degree of education?

Undergraduate	O
Master	O
PhD	O

Specify the area
Mathematics	O
Computer and information sciences	O
Physical sciences	O
Chemical sciences	O
Earth and related environmental sciences	O
Biological sciences	O
Other natural sciences	O
Civil engineering	O
Electrical engineering, electronic engineering, information engineering	O
Mechanical engineering	O
Chemical engineering	O
Materials engineering	O
Medical engineering	O
Environmental engineering	O
Environmental biotechnology	O
Industrial Biotechnology	O
Nano-technology	O
Other engineering and Technologies	O
Basic medicine	O
Clinical medicine	O
Health sciences	O
Health biotechnology	O
Other medical sciences	O
Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries	O
Animal and dairy science	O
Veterinary science	O
Agricultural biotechnology	O
Other agricultural sciences	O
Psychology	O
Economics and business	O
Educational sciences	O
Sociology	O
Law	O
Political Science	O
Social and economic geography	O
Media and communications	O
Other social sciences	O
History and archaeology	O
Languages and literature	O
Philosophy, ethics and religion	O
Art (arts, history of arts, performing arts, music)	O
Other humanities	O

Specify the year of conclusion of your highest academic degree __________

GENERAL COMMENTS

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Machado-Taylor, M.d.L. et al. (2017). Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation: Perspectives from a Nation-Wide Study in Public Higher Education Institutions in Portugal. In: Machado-Taylor, M., Soares, V., Teichler, U. (eds) Challenges and Options: The Academic Profession in Europe. The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective, vol 18. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45844-1_5

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45844-1_5
Published: 23 February 2017
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45843-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45844-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Academic Job Satisfaction and Motivation: Perspectives from a Nation-Wide Study in Public Higher Education Institutions in Portugal

Abstract

Similar content being viewed by others

Why has there been a decrease in the job satisfaction of faculty at Spanish universities?

The factors associated with teachers’ job satisfaction and their impacts on students’ achievement: a review (2010–2021)

Job satisfaction, academic motivation, and organizational citizenship behavior among lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-national comparative study in Japan and Malaysia

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 The Academic Career in Portugal: Issues and Challenges

2.1 Evolution and Organization of the Portuguese Higher Education

2.2 The Academic Career

2.2.1 Shaping the Academic Career in the Early 1970

2.2.2 The Diversification of Academic Careers in Higher Education

2.2.3 The Academic Career in the 2000s

2.2.4 Academics’ Functions

2.3 Coping with the Changes

2.4 Challenges

3 Models for Examination of Academic Job Satisfaction

3.1 Some Models of Faculty Satisfaction

3.2 Suggested Model for Faculty Satisfaction

4 Methodological Approach

5 Results

5.1 Satisfaction with Teaching Climate by Institutional Type

5.2 Satisfaction with Management of the Institution/Department/Unit by Institutional Type

5.3 Satisfaction with Colleagues by Institutional Type

5.4 Satisfaction with Non Academic Staff (Administrative Staff, Technical and Laboratorial Staff…) by Institutional Type

5.5 Satisfaction with Physical Work Environment by Institutional Type

5.6 Satisfaction with Conditions of Employment by Institutional Type

5.7 Satisfaction with Personal and Professional Development by Institutional Type

5.8 Satisfaction with Institutions’ Culture and Values by Institutional Type

5.9 Satisfaction with Institutions’ Prestige by Institutional Type

5.10 Satisfaction with Research Climate by Institutional Type

5.11 Overall Satisfaction by Institutional Type

5.12 Overall Motivation by Institutional Type

5.13 Satisfaction with Teaching Climate, Management, Colleagues and Work environment: A Structural Equation Model

5.14 Synthetic Indexes

5.15 Satisfaction and Motivation

6 Interviews

7 Analysis

7.1 Dimensions of Job Satisfaction

7.2 Indicators in Each Dimension of Job Satisfaction

7.3 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Institutional Type

7.4 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Gender

7.5 Job Satisfaction and Motivation by Academic Rank

7.6 Motivation and Satisfaction

8 Conclusion

Notes

References

Acknowledgements

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Corresponding author

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendices

1.1 Appendix 1

1.2 Appendix 2

Survey on Faculty Job Satisfaction in Higher Education – CIPES – Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies

1.2.1 A Note on Privacy

1.3 I. Satisfaction Dimensions

1.4 II. Motivation

1.5 III. Satisfaction, Motivation and Performance

1.6 IV. Academic Decision at Your Institution

1.7 V. The New Regulation for Faculty Careers (Answer Only If You Are Professor of Public Higher Education)

1.8 VI. Academic/Professional Context

1.8.1 Teaching

1.8.2 Teaching management

1.8.3 Management

1.8.4 Research

1.8.5 All Activities in Higher Education

1.9 VII. General Information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

Publish with us

Search