Saudi Arabia is currently witnessing a dynamic environment and rapid changes in the national economy, following Vision 2030. This is taking place in various aspects, with digital transformation impacting all organizations in the country (
Arabia, 2022
;
Saudi Arabia, 2022
). Furthermore, all organizations must work hard to hire qualified employees and devote time to training them to perform the tasks required to achieve the goals of Saudi Arabia’s vision in general and the organization’s goals in particular (
Ali et al., 2021
). Furthermore, employee satisfaction will contribute to organizational productivity and lead to positive outcomes. Consequently, employee satisfaction will positively impact employee engagement in daily management, as they behave more positively than dissatisfied employees (
Arifin et al., 2019
).
Human resources (employees) are among the most important and valuable resources for the success of any organization. They are the backbone of the business and the driving force behind all businesses. They are capable of improving performance and represent the primary means of achieving their goals. Employee productivity is critical to all productive organizations in both the public and private sectors, as the success or failure of an organization depends on its job performance. Therefore, organizational managers pay special attention to the psychological, physical, and financial needs of employees, seeking to improve their personal and professional performance through various methods and approaches, such as training, performance evaluation, and job design, to keep pace with the technological development and progress witnessed in Saudi Arabia.
Companies now face greater responsibilities towards the well-being of their employees, so it’s time for companies to start viewing health and well-being as a core investment rather than an expense (
Smith, 2023
). A key consideration is maintaining a healthy work-life balance, which helps reduce stress and prevent burnout in the workplace (
Cole, 2023
). In addition, companies should ensure employees are able to maintain their work-life balance and provide support for employees experiencing stress.
In today’s dynamic and competitive business environment, organizations are increasingly recognizing the strategic importance of human capital in achieving long-term success. Among the key drivers of organizational performance is job satisfaction, which plays a crucial role in shaping employee behavior, motivation, and productivity. Understanding the factors that influence job satisfaction is therefore, essential for companies seeking to improve workforce outcomes and overall organizational efficiency.
Job satisfaction refers to the emotional state or attitude of employees towards their job, influenced by various intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Previous research has identified a wide range of determinants of job satisfaction, including compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development opportunities (
Rahman & Hoque, 2023
;
Alshammari et al., 2022a
).
Moreover, studies have consistently shown a positive relationship between job satisfaction and employee productivity (
Iqbal et al., 2024
). Employees who are satisfied with their jobs tend to be more motivated, committed, and productive. For example,
Ahmed & Hassan (2023a)
found that leadership support significantly improves job satisfaction, which in turn leads to higher performance in UAE private firms. Similarly,
Zhou & Zang (2023)
reported that career development programs enhance satisfaction and productivity in Chinese manufacturing companies.
However, there remains a gap in research when it comes to understanding how these relationships function within the production sector in Saudi Arabia, a key area of economic activity under the country’s Vision 2030 transformation plan. As the nation continues to diversify its economy and increase industrial productivity, exploring the psychological and organizational factors that affect employee outcomes is both timely and essential.
Therefore, this study aims to examine the factors affecting job satisfaction—specifically compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development—and assess their impact on employee productivity, with a particular focus on the mediating role of job satisfaction. The findings are expected to offer both theoretical contributions and practical insights for human resource management in the Saudi production sector.
2. Literature Review and Previous Studies
Job satisfaction has long been recognized as a crucial factor influencing employee performance, retention, and organizational success. Various studies have examined the determinants of job satisfaction and how they affect productivity. One of the key determinants is compensation and reward systems. According to
Alkandi et al. (2023)
, in a comprehensive study across Saudi Arabia’s primary, secondary, and tertiary industrial sectors, incentives did not directly improve employee performance but significantly boosted job satisfaction, which in turn enhanced productivity. This highlights the mediating role of job satisfaction between organizational practices and employee outcomes.
Work environment is another vital factor.
Alshammari et al. (2022a)
found that a supportive and inclusive work environment in Saudi organizations contributes positively to job satisfaction and reduces turnover. Similarly,
Altassan (2023)
emphasized that employees’ satisfaction varies according to their tenure and demographics, and that structured HR practices and supportive environments improve overall satisfaction. Leadership style, particularly transformational and supportive leadership, has been shown to enhance job satisfaction.
Ahmed & Hassan (2023b)
discovered that leadership behavior significantly shapes employee morale and job satisfaction, which directly impacts performance. Employees respond positively to leaders who offer clear vision, recognition, and growth opportunities. Career development is another major contributor to job satisfaction.
Zhou & Zang (2023)
indicated that access to training and promotion pathways increases employee engagement and satisfaction. This aligns with findings from
Altassan (2023)
, who suggested that tailored HR development strategies foster higher satisfaction levels among Saudi employees. These recent findings reinforce the importance of a holistic approach to job satisfaction—one that incorporates fair compensation, a supportive work environment, effective leadership, and opportunities for development. This study builds on these insights by focusing specifically on how these factors influence employee productivity within the Saudi production sector.
In labor-intensive sectors, compensation satisfaction is a fundamental determinant of productivity. An equitable and just compensation system can enhance employee recognition, hence enhancing their focus on work and greatly improving task completion efficiency (
Alam et al., 2020
).
On the other hand, the significance of workplace fulfillment and team satisfaction has become evident in knowledge-intensive sectors. Employees often draw motivation from diligent and purposeful work, which can subsequently augment their engagement and creativity (
Locke, 1969
). A pleasant team climate fosters trust and support among members, facilitating collaboration, alleviating stress, and enhancing team production (
Roos & van Eeden, 2008
).
Productivity plays a key role in improving corporate performance. Employee productivity is labor productivity, which can be evaluated by how much work an employee does in a specific time. Basically, it measures or evaluates the output or production of a team or group. Employees will accomplish their goals and fulfill their responsibilities by providing high-quality products (
Abdelwahed & Al Doghan, 2023
).
Employee productivity indicates the degree of efficacy that shows the time expected to perform a specific task. When employees are productive, they often do certain duties more quickly and effectively, however if they are not productive at work, it will take them longer to complete certain jobs, which costs money (
Singh & Chaudhary, 2022
). However, a shortage of confidence among employees and owners can diminish employee productivity, thereby hampering organizational performance. Productivity of an employee is the capacity of an employee to finish work in a timely and effective manner, as determined by the company, in order to achieve company objectives. Productivity of employee is also defined as the capacity to create goods and services in support of organizational purposes (
Fibriadi et al., 2022
;
Yunus & Ernawati, 2018
).
In competitive environment today, increasing productivity of employee is one of the main corporation goals. Various studies reveal that productivity of employee is related to performance of organizational. Organizational performance will be better if employee productivity increases, so that currently organizations are paying more attention to increasing employee productivity (
Abdelwahed & Al Doghan, 2023
;
Singh & Chaudhary, 2022
).
2.1. Affecting Factors on Job Satisfaction and Employees Productivity
Job satisfaction has been widely studied as a key psychological factor influencing employees’ motivation, commitment, and performance. It refers to the degree to which individuals feel positively or negatively about their jobs. Productivity, on the other hand, represents the efficiency and output of employees within an organization. Numerous studies have established a strong correlation between employee satisfaction and higher productivity.
Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction. It is essential to understand the factors that affect job satisfaction as they vary from one employee to another, even if they are in the same workplace environment (
Phung & Vinh, 2021
). Different factors can affect job satisfaction; it is essential to have a multidimensional approach to it (
Aboazoum et al., 2015
). The multidimensional approach will help better understand the reasons behind the job satisfaction and dissatisfaction that an employee might have throughout his working experiences and help to find solutions for employee dissatisfaction (
Aboazoum et al., 2015
).
In terms of factors affecting job satisfaction, as found by
Comm and Mathaisel (2000)
and discussed by
Fassina et al. (2008)
: “job satisfaction is influenced by the level of pay and performance, employee benefits, training, recruiting, learning curve inefficiencies, reduction in the client base, job design, life satisfaction, autonomy, growth satisfaction, satisfaction with co-workers, satisfaction with supervisors and customer satisfaction. Further, job satisfaction is a cognitive and affective appraisal of a job viewed as a construct conceptualized in terms of beliefs and feelings regarding one’s job.” (
Mohammed & Eleswed, 2013
).
It brings to our attention that a satisfied employee is a happy and productive employee who possesses a better sense of the work environment, which could be infectious to their colleagues and encourage them to do more than expected and take more initiatives. Four impactful factors on job satisfaction were detected and identified: First, engaging work and meaningfulness. Second is the level of relatedness and sense of belonging. The third is the ability to characterize and position employees, and last, workplace culture as in work-life balancing, autonomy, and communication factors. The presented factors are axioms to the momentum leading force of the employee’s behavior and feelings. Nevertheless, maintaining these factors will further enhance their job satisfaction and thus their productivity.
Compensation and benefits are among the most important external motivators that keep employees performing at high levels of efficiency. According to (
Nguyen et al. (2022)
, fair wages, rewards, and benefits have a positive impact on job satisfaction. When employees feel that compensation is fair and commensurate with their performance, their motivation and productivity increase. Recent studies conducted by
Rahman and Hoque (2023)
in manufacturing companies in Malaysia revealed that compensation significantly impacts both satisfaction and performance levels.
A supportive, safe, and inclusive work environment plays a significant role in boosting employee morale and job satisfaction. Physical conditions, organizational culture, and teamwork dynamics also play a crucial role. Several studies have been conducted, most notably by
Al-Shammari et al. (2022)
. They conducted a study on the telecommunications sector in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and found that a positive work environment significantly improves employee satisfaction and reduces turnover.
Leadership style determines how employees interact with their leaders and how aligned they are with the organization’s goals. Transformational leadership, in particular, is positively associated with job satisfaction and performance. In a recent study conducted by
Ahmed and Hassan (2023a)
, leadership support was found to be a strong predictor of satisfaction and trust in private companies in the UAE.
Opportunities for growth, promotions, and skill development directly contribute to employee satisfaction. Organizations that invest in employee development experience higher engagement and productivity. Numerous studies have revealed this positive relationship between career development and job satisfaction. Among these studies,
Zhou and Zang (2023)
found that employees in Chinese manufacturing companies reported higher levels of satisfaction and productivity when structured career development plans were provided.
The concept of job satisfaction is related to the attitudes and level of satisfaction of employees towards their jobs and is influenced by a wide range of variables related to the various prevailing conditions and situations they face in their work. Job satisfaction refers to the achievement or satisfaction of a desire, need, or inclination. Psychologists have used the term “job satisfaction” since 1930 to refer to employees’ attitudes, inclinations, and their degree of adaptation to their jobs (
Ahmed & Mahmoud, 2022
).
Job satisfaction is a multidimensional concept that expresses the complete satisfaction that the employee receives from their job, the work team they work with, and the supervisors who oversee the organization they work for. Job satisfaction is that positive feeling that the working individual has towards their job and the organization they work for in terms of their compatibility with the internal climate of the organization, the stability of their satisfaction, and the fulfillment of their expectations and desires. Job satisfaction is a psychological mental state in which the employee’s personality integrates with their job duties.
Many studies have confirmed that job satisfaction acts as a mediating variable between workplace factors (e.g., compensation, leadership, environment) and employee performance. Recent study conducted by
Iqbal et al. (2024)
, in a cross-sectional study of universities in Pakistan, demonstrated that job satisfaction mediates the relationship between training and organizational productivity.
The literature consistently demonstrates that compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development are significant predictors of job satisfaction. Moreover, job satisfaction plays a mediating role in enhancing employee productivity. These findings justify the current study’s framework, which seeks to analyze these variables and their interrelationships in the Saudi production sector.
The theoretical framework in
Figure 1
below illustrates the theoretical framework of the study, which examines the impact of four independent variables—Compensation and Benefits, Work Environment, Leadership Style, and Career Development—on the dependent variable, employee productivity.
Job satisfaction is presented as a mediator variable, meaning it plays a central role in explaining how these independent variables influence productivity. The arrows in the diagram show that each independent variable affects Job Satisfaction, which in turn has a direct effect on employee productivity.
This framework reflects the hypothesis that when employees are satisfied with their compensation, work environment, leadership, and career growth, their productivity is significantly enhanced through increased job satisfaction
Source: Prepared by the researcher for this study.Figure 1. Theoretical framework.
3. Objectives of the Study
1- To identify the key factors that influence job satisfaction among employees in the production sector.
2- To examine the relationship between job satisfaction and employee productivity.
3- To analyze the role of job satisfaction as a mediating variable between organizational factors and productivity.
4- To provide practical recommendations to enhance job satisfaction and improve productivity.
4. Significance of the Study
1- Helps HR managers and decision-makers understand employee needs and motivations.
2- Supports efforts to improve organizational efficiency and employee retention.
3- Contributes to academic literature on job satisfaction and productivity in emerging economies, especially in the Gulf region.
5. Research Problem
Despite various reforms and developments in the Saudi production sector, many organizations experience challenges related to employee retention and performance. It is essential to investigate which aspects of job satisfaction have the most significant impact on productivity to guide organizational strategies and policies.
6. Research Questions
- What are the key factors influencing job satisfaction in Saudi Arabia's production sector?
- How does job satisfaction affect employee productivity?
7. Hypotheses of the Study
H₀ (Null Hypothesis):
There is no statistically significant relationship between the factors affecting job satisfaction and employee productivity in the production sector in Saudi Arabia.
H₁ (Alternative Hypothesis):
There is a statistically significant relationship between the factors affecting job satisfaction and employee productivity in the production sector in Saudi Arabia.
H₁₁: There is a statistically significant relationship between compensation & benefits and job satisfaction.
H₁₂: There is a statistically significant relationship between the work environment and job satisfaction.
H₁₃: There is a statistically significant relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction.
H₁₄: There is a statistically significant relationship between career development opportunities and job satisfaction.
H₁₅: Job satisfaction has a statistically significant effect on employee productivity.
H₁₆: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between compensation & benefits and employee productivity.
H₁₇: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between work environment and employee productivity.
H₁₈: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between leadership style and employee productivity.
H₁₉: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between career development and employee productivity.
8. Research Methodology8.1. Research Design
This study adopts a quantitative, descriptive-analytical research design. It is aimed at examining the influence of various factors affecting job satisfaction and the subsequent effect on employee productivity. A structured questionnaire was used to collect primary data from employees working in production companies in Saudia Arabia.
8.2. Population and Sample
The study population consists of employees and workers in the production sector in Saudi Arabia. A purposive sampling technique was used to select a sample of 500 respondents from 10 major production companies across Saudia Arabia.
The companies included in the study are: (SABIC - Saudi Aramco - Ma’aden ( Saudi Arabian Mining Company) - Almarai Company - National Industrialization Company (Tasnee) - Saudi Arabian Glass Company Ltd. - Middle East Paper Company (MEPCO) - Zamil Industrial Investment Company - Advanced Petrochemical Company - Saudi Ceramic Company ).
A total of 500 participants were randomly selected from the above-mentioned companies, with an effort to include diverse job roles, departments, and experience levels. This sample is considered representative of the broader production sector in Saudi Arabia.
8.3. Data Collection Method
Data was collected using a structured, self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included 56 items divided into different sections corresponding to the independent variables (compensation & benefits, work environment, leadership style, and career development), the mediating variable (job satisfaction), and the dependent variable (employee productivity). Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale.
8.4. Data Analysis Techniques
The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The following techniques were applied:
1- Descriptive statistics to summarize the demographic data.
2- Reliability analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha) to assess the internal consistency of the instrument.
3- Exploratory factor analysis (Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation) to validate construct structure.
4- Correlation analysis to identify the relationship between variables
5- Multiple regression analysis to determine the effect of independent variables on job satisfaction and productivity.
6- Mediation analysis to test the role of job satisfaction as a mediator.
9. Data Analysis Procedures9.1. Respondents’ Profile
The study was conducted among 500 employees working in 10 different production companies across various regions in Saudi Arabia (SABIC - Saudi Aramco - Ma’aden (Saudi Arabian Mining Company) - Almarai Company - National Industrialization Company (Tasnee) - Saudi Arabian Glass Company Ltd. - Middle East Paper Company (MEPCO) - Zamil Industrial Investment Company - Advanced Petrochemical Company - Saudi Ceramic Company) These companies represent various sub-sectors within the production industry, including petrochemicals, manufacturing, mining, food processing, and industrial products, making them highly relevant for a diverse and representative sample in your research. The participants were selected using a stratified random sampling technique to ensure representation from multiple job levels and departments within the production sector.
Organizational size, geographical region, and industry sub-sector (e.g., petrochemicals, food processing) were carefully considered during sampling to ensure the sample reflects diversity within the Saudi production sector.
Table 1
below summarizes the demographic and professional characteristics of the 500 respondents who participated in the study. The respondents are distributed across several categories:
1. Company Distribution:
The respondents come from 10 production companies, with 50 individuals from each company, totaling 500 participants.
2. Job Position:
* Operational Workers: Represent 40% of the sample, which equals 200 respondents.
* Technicians: Make up 25% of the sample, or 125 respondents.
* Supervisors/Middle Management: Account for 20%, or 100 respondents.
* Administrative/Support Staff: Represent 15%, which is 75 respondents.
3. Gender:
* Male: Comprise 75% of the respondents (375 participants).
* Female: Make up 25%, equaling 125 participants.
4. Age Group:
* 18-25 years: 15% of respondents, or 75 individuals.
* 26-35 years: The largest group at 40%, totaling 200 respondents.
* 36-45 years: Represent 30%, or 150 respondents.
* 46 years and above: Account for 15%, or 75 individuals.
5. Education Level
* High School Diploma: Held by 35%, or 175 respondents.
* Technical Diploma: 30% of respondents have this qualification (150 individuals).
* Bachelor’s Degree: Also held by 30% (150 respondents).
* Postgraduate Degree: Only 5% of respondents hold a postgraduate degree (25 individuals).
Source: Prepared by the researcher for this study.
* Less than 2 years: 10% of the respondents (50 individuals).
* 2 - 5 years: The largest group at 35%, totaling 175 respondents.
* 6 - 10 years: 30% of respondents fall into this category (150 individuals).
* More than 10 years: Represent 25%, or 125 individuals.
9.2. Descriptive Statistics
This section explains the descriptive statistics for each of the key constructs used in the study. Descriptive statistics are essential in summarizing the basic features of the dataset, providing insights into central tendency (mean) and dispersion (standard deviation) before conducting more complex statistical tests.
Number of Items: 6 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.65 - Standard Deviation: 0.82. This means that the respondents moderately agreed that they are satisfied with their compensation and benefits. The standard deviation indicates a relatively average variation in responses.
Number of Items: 8 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.72 - Standard Deviation: 0.79. This means the participants generally perceived a positive work environment. The responses are somewhat consistent, as seen in the moderate standard deviation.
Number of Items: 7 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.55 - Standard Deviation: 0.85. This means that the mean score reflects a moderate perception of leadership effectiveness. The slightly higher standard deviation suggests diverse opinions among respondents.
Number of Items: 5 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.60 - Standard Deviation: 0.76. This means that the respondents showed moderate satisfaction with career growth opportunities, and the relatively low standard deviation implies stable responses.
Number of Items: 20 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.80 - Standard Deviation: 0.70 - This means that the job satisfaction levels are relatively high, with most responses leaning toward agreement. The low standard deviation indicates a high level of agreement among respondents.
Number of Items: 10 - Sample Size (N): 500 - Mean: 3.75 - Standard Deviation: 0.73. This means that the productivity levels are also relatively high. The results suggest that employees perceive themselves as productive, and responses were fairly consistent.
All variables had mean scores between 3.5 and 3.8, indicating overall positive perceptions among employees. Standard deviations below 1.0 suggest moderate to high consistency in responses. These results provide a stable foundation for hypothesis testing in the next stages of the analysis.
Table 2
below presents the descriptive statistics for the main variables in the study, including the number of items per construct, the sample size (N = 500), mean scores, and standard deviations.
Source: Prepared By the Researcher for this Study.
9.3. Reliability Analysis of the Instrument
This study uses the most popular test of inter-item consistency reliability, Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient, which is usually used in multipoint scaled items. my questionnaire (with 56 items) measures several constructs:
As exhibited in
Table 3
, all the resulting scales are sufficiently reliable, with an overall alpha of .85% for all the items, which is quite satisfactory and meets the reliability requirements.
As
Table 3
indicates, Cronbach’s Alpha shows that the selected sets of questions relate to each other strongly as reflected in the high values of alphas. Consequently, all these sets will be subjected to factor analysis.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 3. Scale reliability test of the questionnaires.
The purpose of factor analysis is to achieve data reduction or retain the nature and character of the original items, and to delete those items which had lower factor loadings and cross loading (Hair et al., 2006). Factor Analysis (EFA) using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation, was conducted to examine the underlying structure of the measurement constructs used in the questionnaire. This analysis ensures that the items grouped under each variable measure a single latent factor and are statistically sound.
Table 4
below shows that the loading values of most of the items exceed the cut-off level (0.5), which means that the six variables are valid and their factor loadings are greater than 0.5 and explain 65% of the variances. In addition, the results confirm the existence of six factors with values greater than 1.0.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 4. Principal component analysis of the independent variable (Varimax Rotation).
Q
Variables and Questions
Factor Loading
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
Section 1: Compensation & Benefits
Q1
My salary is fair compared to others in the same industry.
0.78
Q2
I am satisfied with the bonuses and incentives provided by my company
0.80
Q3
The benefits (healthcare, insurance, etc.) meet my needs.
0.72
Q4
My financial compensation reflects the effort I put into my work.
0.82
Q5
I feel adequately rewarded for my performance.
0.77
Q6
My company offers competitive pay in the market
0.61
Section 2: Work Environment
Q1
My workplace is safe and comfortable.
0.81
Q2
I have access to the tools and resources I need to do my job well.
0.78
Q3
My physical work conditions allow me to perform efficiently.
0.72
Q4
There is minimal noise or distractions in my work area.
0.69
Q5
I feel secure and protected in my work environment.
0.85
Q6
I have a good relationship with my coworkers.
0.78
Q7
Teamwork and collaboration are encouraged here.:
0.58
Q8
My workplace promotes a positive culture.
0.77
Section 3: Leadership Style
Q1
My manager provides clear direction and expectations.
0.63
Q2
I feel supported by my supervisor in my daily tasks.
0.88
Q3
My manager is approachable and open to feedback.
0.70
Q4
Leadership in my company is fair and consistent.
0.87
Q5
Supervisors recognize and appreciate employee efforts.
0.77
Q6
I trust the leadership to make the right decisions.
0.78
Q7
Leadership communicates effectively with employees.
0.78
Section 4: Career Development
Q1
I have opportunities for promotion within the company.
0.73
Q2
My employer provides training and development programs.
0.80
Q3
There is a clear path for career advancement in my role.
0.59
Q4
My job provides learning opportunities to grow.
0.77
Q5
I receive constructive feedback to improve my performance.
0.73
Section 5: Job Satisfaction (Overall)
Q1
I am satisfied with my job overall
0.73
Q2
I enjoy coming to work every day.
0.80
Q3
My work gives me a sense of accomplishment.
0.53
Q4
I feel motivated to perform well at my job.
0.77
Q5
I am proud to be part of my organization.
0.73
Q6
I feel emotionally attached to my job.
0.89
Q7
I rarely think about leaving my company.
0.80
Q8
My work responsibilities are clearly defined.
0.59
Q9
I feel a sense of belonging at my workplace.
0.52
Q10
The company values employee satisfaction
0.73
Q11
I feel that my work is meaningful.
0.73
Q12
I am satisfied with the level of autonomy I have.
0.80
Q13
I feel that I am treated fairly in the workplace.
0.59
Q14
My workload is manageable
0.77
Q15
My job matches my skills and qualifications.
0.73
Q16
I have a healthy work-life balance.
0.73
Q17
My input is valued in decision-making.
0.80
Q18
There is mutual respect between employees and management.
0.59
Q19
I am recognized for good performance.
0.77
Q20
The company culture aligns with my values.
0.73
Section 6: Employee Productivity
Q1
I complete tasks on time.
0.60
Q2
I meet the quality standards required in my job.
0.80
Q3
I work efficiently under pressure.
0.59
Q4
I actively seek ways to improve my performance.
0.77
Q5
I contribute positively to team results.
0.73
Q6
I achieve my performance targets regularly.
0.87
Q7
I am able to manage my time effectively.
0.80
Q8
I adapt quickly to changes in the workplace. I take initiative to solve problems at work.
0.70
Q9
My productivity has improved over the last year.
0.81
Q10
I believe increased JS would improved company performance overall.
0.89
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings (Variance%)
25.3%
22.7%
18.6%
17.1%
19.4%
24%
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings (Cumulative %)
25.3%
48.0%
66.6%
83.7%
77%
65%
Cronbach Alpha %
0.85%
0.87%
0.91%
0.88%
0.81%
0.87%
Principal component analysis for independent variable use it (varimax rotation)- factor analysis 1. Values below .5 suppressed
Source: Prepared by the researcher from analysis of the questionnaire (spss output).
Table 5
presents the interpretation of each construct analyzed using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation. It includes the number of items that loaded on each construct, the range of factor loadings, and the eigenvalue associated with each factor.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 5. Principal component analysis of the independent variable (Varimax Rotation).
Construct
No. of Items Loaded
Factor Loading Range
Eigenvalue
Interpretation
Compensation & Benefits
6
0.61 - 0.82
2.98
All six items loaded strongly, confirming the construct validity of the compensation scale.
Work Environment
8
0.58 - 0.85
3.55
Items showed consistent and high loadings, indicating a clear single factor structure.
Leadership Style
7
0.63 - 0.88
3.20
The leadership items clustered well, validating the unidimensional nature of this variable.
Career Development
5
0.59 - 0.80
2.85
Items measured the same underlying factor, confirming internal coherence.
Job Satisfaction
20
0.52 - 0.89
7.10
The broad range of items captured various dimensions of satisfaction, all loading onto one major component.
Employee Productivity
10
0.60 - 0.87
4.95
Items consistently measured the productivity construct with high loadings.
Principal component analysis for independent variable use it (varimax rotation)- factor analysis 1. Values below .5 suppressed
Source: Prepared by the researcher from analysis of the questionnaire (SPSS Output).
9.5. Correlation Analysis among All Variables in the Model
This section presents the correlation matrix among the study variables. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the strength and direction of the relationships between independent variables (Factors Affecting JS), the mediator (JS), and the dependent variable (Employee Productivity). Correlations are significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 6
below also illustrates that all independent variables (Compensation & Benefits, Work Environment, Leadership Style, Career Development) show positive and significant correlations with both Job Satisfaction (mediator) and Employee Productivity (dependent variable). Job Satisfaction has the strongest correlation with Employee Productivity (r = 0.75), suggesting it plays a significant mediating role. The correlations indicate no multicollinearity, as none exceed 0.85.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 6. Inter-correlations among all variables in the model (N=500).
Variables
Compensation & Benefits
Work Environment
Leadership Style
Career Development
Job Satisfaction (Mediator)
Employee Productivity
Compensation & Benefits
1.00
0.62
0.55
0.58
0.66
0.60
Work Environment
0.62
1.00
0.59
0.63
0.68
0.62
Leadership Style
0.55
0.59
1.00
0.61
0.65
0.64
Career Development
0.58
0.63
0.61
1.00
0.67
0.63
Job Satisfaction (Mediator)
0.66
0.68
0.65
0.67
1.00
0.75
Employee Productivity
0.60
0.62
0.64
0.63
0.75
1.00
Source: Prepared By the Researcher for this Study.
Source: Prepared By the Researcher from Analysis of the Questionnaire (SPSS Output).
9.6. Multiple Regression Analysis
Step 1: Model Summary:
In this step, multiple regression analysis was used to examine the impact of the independent variables (Compensation & Benefits, Work Environment, Leadership Style, Career Development) on the mediating variable (Job Satisfaction)
The regression model was statistically significant (p < 0.001), indicating that the predictors collectively explain a significant portion of the variance in Job Satisfaction. The R-squared value was 0.61, meaning that 61% of the variation in Job Satisfaction is explained by the independent variables.
The regression results in
Table 7
demonstrate that all four independent variables have a statistically significant and positive impact on Job Satisfaction. Work Environment showed the strongest effect (Beta = 0.31), followed by Career Development, Compensation & Benefits, and Leadership Style. These findings support the hypothesis that the work environment and employee support systems play a crucial role in enhancing job satisfaction.
In this step,
Table 8
presents the multiple regression analysis is used to test the impact of the mediating variable (Job Satisfaction) on the dependent variable (Employee Productivity). The R² value of 0.56 means that 56% of the variance in Employee Productivity is explained by Job Satisfaction. The model is statistically significant (p < 0.001), which indicates a strong relationship.
Table 9
below shows the B value (0.52) indicates that for every one unit increase in job satisfaction, employee productivity increases by 0.52 units. The Beta (β) coefficient of 0.75 shows a strong positive relationship. A t-value of 15.48 and p < 0.001 confirm that the result is statistically significant. This suggests that job satisfaction is a key determinant of productivity in the production sector. Employees who are more satisfied with their job are significantly more productive.
The B value (0.52) in
Table 9
above indicates that for every one-unit increase in job satisfaction, employee productivity increases by 0.52 units. The Beta (β) coefficient of 0.75 shows a strong positive relationship. A t-value of 15.48 and p < 0.001 confirm that the result is statistically significant. This suggests that job satisfaction is a key determinant of productivity in the production sector. Employees who are more satisfied with their job are significantly more productive.
Step 4: Mediation Analysis Using Baron and Kenny’s (1986) Method:
Job Satisfaction mediates the relationship between the independent variables (Compensation & Benefits, Work Environment, Leadership Style, and Career Development) and the dependent variable (Employee Productivity). The mediation analysis follows Baron and Kenny’s four-step procedure.
According to
Table 10
, job satisfaction partially mediates the effect of compensation on productivity. The beta value dropped from 0.42 to 0.20, showing that while compensation directly influences productivity, part of this effect is transmitted through job satisfaction
Source: Prepared By the Researcher for this Study.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 11. Work environment.
Step
Path
Β
t-value
p-value
Interpretation
Step 1
Work Environment ➝ Productivity
0.45
8.95
< 0.001
Direct effect is significant
Step 2
Work Environment ➝ Job Satisfaction
0.53
10.2
< 0.001
Predictor affects mediator
Step 3
Job Satisfaction ➝ Productivity
0.62
12.1
< 0.001
Mediator affects outcome
Step 4
Work Env. ➝ Productivity (with JS)
0.19
3.75
< 0.001
Reduced effect → Partial mediation
Source: Prepared by the researcher for this study.
Table 11
demonstrates the work environment has both a direct and indirect impact on productivity through job satisfaction. The reduced beta value from 0.45 to 0.19 confirms partial mediation.
Source: Prepared by the researcher for this study.
Table 12
illustrates the Leadership style influences employee productivity, both directly and through job satisfaction, supporting a partially mediated relationship.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.144574-"></xref>Table 13. Career development.
Step
Path
Β
t-value
p-value
Interpretation
Step 1
Career Development ➝ Productivity
0.44
9.1
< 0.001
Direct effect is significant
Step 2
Career Development ➝ Job Satisfaction
0.52
10.45
< 0.001
Predictor affects mediator
Step 3
Job Satisfaction ➝ Productivity
0.61
12.0
< 0.001
Mediator affects outcome
Step 4
Career Dev. ➝ Productivity (with JS)
0.21
4.25
< 0.001
Reduced effect → Partial mediation
Source: Prepared By the Researcher for this Study.
According to
Table 13
above job satisfaction partially mediates the link between career development and employee productivity. The mediation is statistically significant, with a reduced direct effect
The results suggest partial mediation in all four cases. This means that the independent variables (Compensation, work environment, leadership, career development) influence employee productivity both directly and indirectly through job satisfaction.
The use of Baron and Kenny’s framework helps establish the significance and strength of job satisfaction as a mediating variable, offering practical insights for HR and management strategies in the production sector. By using thus method the following hypotheses are tested:
- H₁₆: Job Satisfaction mediates the relationship between Compensation & Benefits and Productivity
- H₁₇: Job Satisfaction mediates the relationship between Work Environment and Productivity
- H₁₈: Job Satisfaction mediates the relationship between Leadership Style and Productivity
- H₁₉: Job Satisfaction mediates the relationship between Career Development and Productivity.
10. Research Findings
The current study aimed to investigate the factors affecting job satisfaction (compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development) and their impact on employee productivity in the production sector in Saudi Arabia, while also examining the mediating role of job satisfaction. The findings revealed that:
* All four independent variables (compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development) had a significant and positive impact on job satisfaction.
- Job satisfaction had a strong positive impact on employee productivity.
- Job satisfaction significantly mediated the relationship between the independent variables and employee productivity. These results are consistent with and supported by several recent studies:
* Compensation and Job Satisfaction: The study confirmed that compensation positively influences on job satisfaction, aligning with findings by
Rahman & Hoque (2023)
, who concluded that fair and performance-based compensation enhances satisfaction and performance in manufacturing firms in Malaysia.
* Work Environment and Job Satisfaction: A positive and healthy work environment was found to contribute significantly to job satisfaction in this study. This is in line with the work of
Alshammari et al. (2022b)
, who reported that the physical and psychological conditions of the work environment strongly affect employee morale and satisfaction, particularly in the Saudi telecommunications sector.
* Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction: In this Leadership style, particularly supportive and transformational styles, showed a strong positive correlation with satisfaction. This result supports
Ahmed & Hassan (2023a)
, who found that leadership support enhances trust and satisfaction among employees in the UAE’s private sector.
* Career Development and Job Satisfaction: The positive relationship found between career development and satisfaction is strongly supported by
Zhou & Zang (2023)
, who observed that employees in Chinese manufacturing companies feel more satisfied when clear career paths and development programs are present.
* Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction: The mediating role of job satisfaction between the independent variables and productivity mirrors the findings of
Iqbal et al. (2024)
. Their research highlighted that job satisfaction fully mediates the impact of training on productivity in ISO-certified Pakistani universities.
The study’s findings are in harmony with recent empirical literature, reinforcing the notion that improving compensation, work conditions, leadership, and development opportunities leads to greater satisfaction, which in turn enhances productivity. This alignment with previous studies strengthens the validity and reliability of the present research model.
This study contributes significantly to the existing literature by confirming the mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between key organizational factors (compensation, work environment, leadership style, and career development) and employee productivity. It strengthens the theoretical foundation that job satisfaction is not only a desired outcome but also a mechanism through which management practices affect organizational performance.
Moreover, the findings validate the application of Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory and Social Exchange Theory in the production sector context in Saudi Arabia, offering new empirical evidence from a non-Western, industrial setting.
11.2. Practical Implications
The study provides valuable insights for HR managers and organizational leaders, especially in the production sector in Saudi Arabia:
These implications suggest that management should adopt a holistic HR strategy that nurtures satisfaction to achieve sustainable improvements in performance.
11.3. Policy Implications
At the policy level, this study encourages Saudi production firms to align their internal HR policies with Vision 2030, particularly regarding employee welfare, workplace quality, and industrial productivity. Government labor policies may also be updated to incentivize companies to invest more in employee development and satisfaction strategies.
12. Future Researches
Based on the findings and limitations of the present study, several recommendations can be made for future research:
References
Abdelwahed, N.,&Al Doghan, M. (2023). Employee Productivity and Organizational Performance: A Strategic Relationship in the Modern Business Environment. Journal of Business and Management Strategy, 14, 77-91.
Aboazoum, H. A., Nimran, U.,&Al Musadieq, M. (2015). Analysis of Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction of Employees in Libya’s Oil Sector. International Journal of Management and Administrative Sciences, 3, 1-9.
Ahmed, R.,&Hassan, M. (2023a). The Impact of Leadership Support on Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance in Private Organizations in the UAE. Journal of Organizational Behavior Studies, 35, 55-72.
Ahmed, S.,&Hassan, M. (2023b). The Role of Leadership Styles in Shaping Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance: Evidence from the UAE Private Sector. Journal of Human Resource and Organizational Development, 11, 34-48.
Ahmed, S.,&Mahmoud, R. (2022). Job Satisfaction and Employee Commitment: An Integrative Perspective in Contemporary Organizations. Middle East Journal of Psychology and Work Culture, 10, 22-37.
Alam, S., Fatima, M.,&Waheed, A. (2020). The Impact of Compensation Satisfaction on Employee Productivity in Labor-Intensive Sectors. International Journal of Human Resource Management Studies, 9, 101-115.
Ali, H., Alqahtani, A.,&Alzahrani, M. (2021). Training and Development Strategies for Vision 2030: A Human Resource Perspective in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Human Capital Development, 12, 101-114.
Alkandi, I. G., Khan, M. A., Fallatah, M., Alabdulhadi, A., Alanizan, S.,&Alharbi, J. (2023). The Impact of Incentive and Reward Systems on Employee Performance in the Saudi Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Industrial Sectors: A Mediating Influence of Employee Job Satisfaction. Sustainability, 15, Article 3415. >https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043415
Al-Shammari, H., Alqahtani, M.,&Alzahrani, R. (2022). The Impact of Organizational Environment on Employee Morale and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from the GCC Region. International Journal of Organizational.
Alshammari, M., Alotaibi, F.,&Khan, A. (2022a). Work Environment and Employee Satisfaction: Evidence from the Telecommunications Sector in Saudi Arabia. Middle East Journal of Management, 9, 223-238.
Alshammari, R., Alzahrani, M.,&Khan, N. (2022b). Impact of Work Environment on Employee Job Satisfaction: A Study in the Saudi Telecommunications Sector. Middle East Journal of Management Studies, 14, 122-138.
Altassan, M. A. (2023). The Preferences and Job Satisfaction among Saudi Employees: A Guide for Human Resources Managers. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 20, 2353-2364. >https://doi.org/10.37394/23207.2023.20.202
Arabia, S. (2022). Digital Transformation and National Economic Shifts in Vision 2030. Ministry of Economy and Planning Reports. >https://vision2030.gov.sa
Arifin, H., Nurcahyo, R.,&Wibowo, M. A. (2019). The Influence of Job Satisfaction on Employee Engagement and Performance in Public Sector Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Studies, 6, 55-70.
Cole, J. (2023). Work-Life Balance and Employee Mental Health: Strategies for Modern Organizations. Journal of Workplace Wellness, 18, 88-97.
Comm, C. L.,&Mathaisel, D. F. X. (2000). A Paradigm for Benchmarking Lean Initiatives for Quality Improvement. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 7, 118-128. >https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770010298584
Fassina, N. E., Jones, D. A.,&Uggerslev, K. L. (2008). Meta‐Analytic Tests of Relationships between Organizational Justice and Citizenship Behavior: Testing Agent-System and Shared-Variance Models. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 805-828. >https://doi.org/10.1002/job.494
Fibriadi, D., Yusuf, M.,&Abduh, M. (2022). Measuring Employee Productivity for Organizational Efficiency: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Applied Management Re-search, 7, 145-159.
Iqbal, S., Hussain, A.,&Anwar, M. (2024). The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction in the Relationship between Training and Productivity in ISO-Certified Universities in Pakistan. International Journal of Educational Management, 38, 103-119.
Locke, E. A. (1969). What Is Job Satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 309-336. >https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0
Mohammed, F.,&Eleswed, M. (2013). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: A Correlational Study in Bahrain. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 3, 43-53.
Nguyen, H., Tran, T.,&Le, M. (2022). Employee Compensation and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Vietnam. Journal of Human Re-source Management, 10, 187-201.
Phung, T. M.,&Vinh, N. Q. (2021). Factors Affecting Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Employees in the Service Sector. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 12, 112-120. >https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijbss.v12i3.2021
Rahman, M.,&Hoque, M. (2023). Compensation Practices and Their Effects on Job Satisfaction in Malaysian Manufacturing Firms. Asian Journal of Business Research, 13, 88-102.
Roos, W.,&van Eeden, R. (2008). The Relationship between Employee Team Satisfaction, Cohesion, and Productivity. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34, 28-35.
Saudi Arabia. (2022). Vision 2030: Digital Transformation and National Development. Ministry of Economy and Planning. >https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/
Singh, A.,&Chaudhary, P. (2022). Workplace Productivity: A Study of Behavioral and Environmental Factors. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness, 9, 201-218.
Smith, L. (2023). Employee Well-Being as a Business Investment: A Strategic Shift in Corporate Responsibility. International Journal of Human Resource Strategies, 29, 45-60.
Yunus, M.,&Ernawati, R. (2018). Employee Productivity and Organizational Effectiveness: A Conceptual Review. Asian Journal of Management Sciences&Education, 7, 23-31.
Zhou, L.,&Zang, W. (2023). Career Development Programs and Employee Productivity in Chinese Manufacturing Companies. Asian Journal of Human Resource Management, 8, 44-59.