1. Introduction

In Mexico, organizations present a diversity in their classification, according to ^{Munch and García (2017)} , three major groups can be distinguished: a) by their sector (industrial, extractive, manufacturing, commercial, wholesale, retail, commission and service) , b) by its origin of capital (public and private) and c) according to the magnitude (large, medium and small); This work concentrates within the third group where Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are located, which, according to Rebollo (2013), define them as an establishment in which a person or a very small number of individuals produce a good or provide a service.

Organizations face diverse problems in individual and organizational performance, caused in some cases by internal problems of individuals such as job dissatisfaction, which inhibits the development of creative and innovative work. This is why job satisfaction is a concept studied mainly by three scientific disciplines: psychology, human resource management and recently economics. Psychology has tried to explain the different levels of satisfaction among workers who perform the same job based on studies of perception of what employees think of their work. As for the administration of human resources and psychology, they have also studied the possible causes that affect job satisfaction, such as; the physical and / or material conditions, administrative policies, the relationship with the authority, the labor or remunerative benefits, personal development, the performance of tasks and social relations and, from an economic perspective, the study of performance and effectiveness at the personal or organizational level.

According to ^{Cequea and Nuñez (2011)} , when speaking of productive organizations, it is important to address the issue of human resources, to understand the participation of people within companies and, to recognize that the factors that affect productivity are mainly motivation, work environment and job satisfaction, among others.

^{Sánchez-Sellero, Sánchez-Sellero, Cruz-González, and Sánchez-Sellero (2018)} , mention that satisfaction arises from comparing the real work and the expectations that the worker generates in advance, which arouses a state of dissatisfaction for those who believe that he is at a disadvantage with respect to his colleagues, in the same way if he considers that the previous job offered him better conditions. Therefore, it turns out that the greater job satisfaction, the greater the commitment of the worker in the performance of their tasks.

^{Salessi and Omar (2016)} report that conceptually, job satisfaction has fluctuated between an affective and a cognitive perspective, where in the first job satisfaction is assumed as positive feelings experienced by the worker when performing their tasks and, from the second, as an objective evaluation of their working conditions.

^{Robbins and Judge (2017)} reiterate, from the affective orientation at the individual level towards work roles, that satisfaction is not only the product of an event or the combination of human phenomena but the way in which the human reacts. That is, it is a construct that is made up of several specific factors of work, individual characteristics and group relationships outside of work. Hence, the different definitions indicate that there is no unanimity on their definition or a single explanatory model.

Regarding the influence of the individual characteristics of workers on their levels of job satisfaction, it has been analyzed in the literature, where differential and controversial relationships have been observed regarding gender, marital status, work seniority and age. Regarding age, the findings reported by ^{Ng and Feldman (2010)} conclude that there are statistically significant positive relationships between worker’s age and attitude. Which has been corroborated by other authors (^{Hildebrandt and Eom, 2011}; ^{Plascencia, Pozos, Preciado, and Vázquez, 2016}; ^{Palomino, Matzumura, Gutiérrez, and Zamudio, 2016})

Other authors have highlighted the importance of studying various attributive variables in workers that act as determinants and mediators of job satisfaction; among these they refer the antiquity (^{Plascencia et al., 2016}; ^{López, Chávez, Peña, and Guevara, 2018}; ^{Omar, 2011}; ^{García-Pozo, Moro-Tejedor, and Medina-Torres, 2010}; ^{Chiang and Ojeda, 2013}), gender (^{Krapp, Oliveira, Vaz de Campos, Both, and Folle, 2019}; ^{Plascencia et al., 2016}), type of contract (^{Campos, Rodríguez, and Jiménez, 2016}), time spent at work (^{López, Madrigal, and Pagés, 2014}), educational level (^{Sánchez-Sellero et al., 2018}), job position (^{Rojas et al., 2017}) and marital status (^{Calvo-Salguero, Carrasco-González, and Salinas-Martínez, 2010}).

On the other hand, the evaluation of job satisfaction according to ^{Carrero (2011)}, allows us to identify those factors that have positively or negatively influenced the achievement of job goals and thereby determine the actions that permanently guarantee compliance. In this regard, the literature mentions various related variables such as economic perception (^{Escobedo, Hernández, and Rico, 2016}), employment benefits (^{Mendoza and Martha, 2019}), recognition (^{Erazo, Álvarez and Serna, 2018}), the relationship with colleagues (^{Linarez, Maldonado, and Gutiérrez, 2018}), the supervision of the boss (^{Benedito, Bonavia, and Llinares, 2008}), working conditions (^{Molina, Avalos, Valderrama, and Uribe, 2009}) and freedom of action (^{Robbins and Judge, 2017}), among others.

It should be noted that, for the study of job satisfaction, Herzberg proposed that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two different and separate phenomena, so they should not be measured as a continuous spectrum, but as different constructs. That is why; the possible causes that promote satisfied or dissatisfied employees have not been studied, since Herzberg’s classic proposal of more than six decades ago, where he established two explanatory factors of job satisfaction: the hygienic ones, whose nonexistence causes dissatisfaction such as wages, environmental conditions and status, and those of growth, whose existence generates satisfaction and dissatisfaction at levels lower than expected, such as the performance, nature of the task and recognition (^{Bòria-Revertera, Crespi-Vallbonaa, and Mascarilla-Mirób, 2012}).

In the case of the relationship of the workers with the organization, the concept of organizational satisfaction is addressed, since the importance of the nature of the work context is usually distinguished. According to ^{Laguador, De Castro, and Portugal (2014)} , organizational satisfaction describes the performance of any administration in managing its businesses through the observation and perspective of employees about how satisfied they are with the way in which the Management takes care of human resources.

On the other hand, the study of employability in the labor market seems to be a mitigating factor of the effect of the employment contract on job satisfaction, where; ^{Santos, Guillén, and Montalbán (2012)} found that workers who perceive high employability in the labor market have higher job satisfaction. However, even when there is high employability in the labor market, they found differences in the level of satisfaction between the type of hiring and type of organizations; where workers with fixed-term contracts in permanent organizations and with temporary work agencies show a very similar level of satisfaction. But for workers with temporary contracts with temporary agencies, there is no verified increase in their level of job satisfaction.

^{Ollarves (2006)} in a study carried out with university professors who exercise management functions, whose purpose was to establish if there was an association between the cultural typology of the organization according to the theory of Roger Harrison and the motivating properties of the post of Hackman and Oldham. The results obtained demonstrate that teachers have a medium motivation profile, in which the factors of task identity and variety stand out as motivating components for their work performance, which allows them to use their individual talents and obtain visible results. Likewise, in relation to the organizational culture of the institution and the motivating properties of the job, it was found to be significant according to Harrison’s typology.

In other words, they are inclined in the first order to a power-oriented ideology and secondly to a person-oriented culture. Based on these findings, the author concludes that the sample studied is likely to have a decisive influence on the decision-making process and to exercise absolute control over subordinate personnel according to the organizational structure, reducing opportunities for the achievement of personal growth of their subordinates and individual development for organizational goals.

Likewise, ^{Karin Andreassi, Lawter, Brockerhoff, and Rutigliano (2014)} in their study identified significant differences in the labor and cultural situation between different countries, highlighting the important impact that the particular environment of each society has on the job satisfaction of employees, suggesting the importance of studies of satisfaction and the factors associated with it in various cultural settings.

Based on the background described, the need for organizations of any sector and size to identify those organizational, personal or contextual aspects that may weaken overall job satisfaction of workers is recognized, since it is in them that this research is carried out. Likewise, the different findings indicate that there is no single explanatory model or unanimity on the definition of job satisfaction and that this is a construct that is made up of several specific factors of work, individual characteristics and group relationships outside of work and that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two distinct and separate phenomena so they should not be measured as a continuous spectrum, but as different constructs according to the Herzberg model. For this reason, it is important to carry out studies related to organizational satisfaction that allow an adequate administration of human resources.

The purpose of this research is to propose an explanatory model of organizational satisfaction, by validating a measuring instrument and characterizing job satisfaction in a sample of SMEs workers.

2. Method

The present study is non-experimental in cross-section, with the aim of building an explanatory model of satisfaction with the organization based on the variables of job satisfaction proposed by ^{Cayama and Pazmiño (1998)} . Likewise, construct validation of the job satisfaction scale is assumed as a specific objective.

3. Results

By submitting the data to the Rasch analysis from the graduated response model, the difficulty parameters were obtained for the polytomous reagents that assess the degree of satisfaction in relation to each aspect of the organization.

As general data, the analysis yielded a standard deviation of .34 in the measure of affinity of the reagents and a separation index of 8.22, suggesting a pertinent distribution and quantity of the subjects; as well as an overall reliability of .99 within the analysis.

Table 1 shows the measurement statistics, model fit, biserial point correlation and the discrimination index for each item; highlighting that the reagents P4SLDPR, P3SLSg, P19SLSp, P22SLRPM, P2SLRPM, P17SLCTAL and P8SLDPR did not have an adequate discrimination index. Likewise, it is highlighted that said items had considerably low biserial point correlations and in some cases negative, suggesting that the items do not obey the scale dimension; finally, the P4SLDPR and P3SLSg reagents also did not have relevant statisticians in the internal and external adjustment to the model.

By carrying out an analysis of the content of the indicated items, it was possible to see that the nature of the items was due to negative characteristics of the work, considering items that seek to measure dissatisfaction and not job satisfaction.

Due to the aforementioned, these items were separated to resume the analysis with the items corresponding to the satisfaction dimension. Table 2 shows the statistics of the scale with only the items of satisfaction, observing pertinent values in the adjustment of items, as well as adequate values in the biserial point correlation of all the reagents; however, it is possible to notice that the reagents P15SLDPR and P20SLCF did not show ideal levels of discrimination capacity, so they are discarded from the scale.

From the content analysis, it was possible to corroborate that seven items were due to statements associated with dissatisfaction with the job, seven items were associated with characteristics of satisfaction with the organization in which they work, four items reported satisfaction with salary compensation and six items were associated with satisfaction with immediate job supervision. To confirm this categorization, the aforementioned groupings were submitted to confirmatory factor analysis via structural equations, in order to generate measurement models that confirm the indicated variables.

Figure 1 shows the measurement models for the variables of job dissatisfaction and organizational satisfaction. In both models, pertinent adjustment criteria were observed with a CFI greater than .9, an RMSEA less than .1, and an SRMR less than. 05; likewise each construct included seven reagents.

Figure 1 Models for measuring the variables of job dissatisfaction and organizational satisfaction 

For the variables of salary satisfaction and satisfaction with supervision, it was observed that both models also met the adjustment criteria of CFI, RMSEA and SRMR; where the structure of salary satisfaction is confirmed from four items and satisfaction by supervision with six items (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Models of measurement of the variables of Salary Satisfaction and Satisfaction by Supervision 

Once the structure of the constructs of job dissatisfaction, organizational satisfaction, salary satisfaction and satisfaction with supervision was corroborated; an explanatory model of satisfaction with the organization was built. For this model, the variables of job dissatisfaction, salary satisfaction and satisfaction with supervision were used as predictors of organizational satisfaction (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Integral model of satisfaction with the organization 

For the model, suitable adjustment criteria were observed for the CFI and the RMSEA, and the SRMR had a value close to .05. It was also observed that the variable that explained organizational satisfaction the most was satisfaction with supervision (β = .84), as well as considerable predictive capacity on the part of salary satisfaction (β = .75) and a lower coefficient for job dissatisfaction with negative polarity (β = -. 26).

Identified the variables and in order to know the type of distribution of the same, they were subjected to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in which dissatisfaction obtained a significance of 002, for salary satisfaction .000, satisfaction for supervision. 000 and .000 in satisfaction with the organization; Due to the above, it is assumed that none of the variables has a normal distribution in the analyzed sample.

Subsequently, descriptive statistics of mean and standard deviation were obtained for the attributes of sex, type of contract, type of position, working hours, length of service in the company, educational level, marital status, number of children and age group; in relation to the variables of dissatisfaction and salary satisfaction (Table 3) and satisfaction with supervision and satisfaction with the organization (Table 4).

In the same way, the differences between each category were compared with the corresponding hypothesis tests. Regarding dissatisfaction, it was identified that only the type of position showed significant differences, with the operative ones reporting the highest dissatisfaction. Likewise, marital status showed significant differences, with singles reporting being more dissatisfied with their working conditions (Table 3).

Regarding satisfaction with supervision, there are significant differences by educational level, where workers with a medium level showed to be more satisfied; This satisfaction was significantly different among the workers by the number of children, being those workers without children who showed feeling more satisfied with their supervisors (Table 4).

For satisfaction with the organization, significant differences were found by the type of contract, where workers with permanent contracts reported greater satisfaction with the organization, and it was also observed that the type of position also influenced the level of satisfaction with the organization, being the operative the one that reports greater satisfaction (Table 4).

4. Conclusions

Based on the findings, it was possible to check the validity and reliability of the scale proposed by ^{Cayama and Pazmiño (1998)} under a new structural approach to organizational satisfaction. This is due to the limitations of the type of sample used, as well as the difference cultural of the same in relation to the Peruvian and Chilean population where it has been used previously.

With the Rasch analysis, it was possible to observe that the reagents belonging to dissatisfaction showed extremely low biserial point correlation values ​​and unsuitable productivity criteria for each item; for the analysis, this suggests that these items do not belong to the satisfaction dimension, the aforementioned coincides with the proposal of Herzberg (^{Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman, 1959}), who proposes that dissatisfaction obeys psychological processes other than satisfaction, for what should be worked independently.

Likewise, it was possible to interpret and corroborate four constructs, which showed to have internal consistency and pertinent adjustments in the measurement models; likewise, the proposal of an explanatory model of organizational satisfaction allows us to suggest the importance of satisfaction with the supervision or immediate boss as a predictor of the satisfaction that workers have on the organization in which they work.

The predictive role of salary satisfaction with organizational satisfaction was also observed, suggesting that the remuneration that workers receive from the company has an important influence on satisfaction with the organization.

On the other hand, job dissatisfaction as an indicator of nonconformity with working conditions had a less significant role as a predictor of organizational satisfaction, suggesting that the satisfaction that workers present with their organization is less affected by the dissatisfaction they present with their work. This finding allows us to infer that job dissatisfaction may be mostly associated with other types of factors besides those related to the organization and that the same workers do not associate these conditions as the responsibility of the company.

Regarding the attributive variables of the workers, it is highlighted that, contrary to what was reviewed in the literature, no significant differences were observed in the types of satisfaction and dissatisfaction in the workers based on age, gender and seniority. Regarding age and seniority, it is taken into account that, due to the nature of the companies, no significantly long periods were recorded, and what is mentioned in the literature cannot be recognized (^{Hildebrandt and Eom, 2011}; ^{Plascencia et al., 2016}; ^{Palomino, et al., 2016}; ^{López et al., 2018}; ^{Omar, 2011}; ^{García-Pozo et al., 2010}; ^{Chiang and Ojeda, 2013}), due to the aforementioned, the possible limitations to identify the influence of age and seniority with organizational satisfaction are highlighted. On the other hand, the absence of significant differences by gender may be due to the type of work performed, likewise, it is recognized that more specific analyzes may be necessary to characterize the type of employee and their conditions based on gender, since as mentioned in the literature, sex is expected to be an important determinant of such satisfaction (^{Krapp et al., 2019}; ^{Plascencia et al., 2016}).

On the other hand, it was observed that the type of position significantly determined job dissatisfaction, with the operative being the most dissatisfied. Likewise, satisfaction with the organization showed significant differences, with the operative workers also being the most satisfied with the organization; this suggests the existence of a complex phenomenon between the properties that a job has and the way in which workers value their working conditions under that job. This complexity is pointed out by ^{Ollarves (2006)}, who identifies that there are particular motivating properties in the workplace and that these influence the way in which workers perceive their role within an organization, in addition to identifying the significant influence of culture organizational; It is then possible to assume that the dissatisfaction presented by the operators is related to factors external or not closely associated with the organization, and that within this group of workers there is a clear distinction between the labor elements and those related to the company.

It was also found that job dissatisfaction had significant differences by marital status, with married people being the most dissatisfied, and the number of children significantly influenced the distribution of satisfaction with the supervisor, with childless workers being the most satisfied. The above coincides with ^{Calvo-Salguero et al. (2010)}, who identify that the family-work conflict has a significant impact on job satisfaction, mainly in women, which is mainly related to the fact that it is women who generally have greater family responsibilities; It is possible to affirm, then, that workers who are married and have children have conditions that can interfere with the labor dynamics, particularly with the immediate boss, and likewise, decrease in the satisfaction of the workers.

In the case of the educational level, it was identified that there are significant differences in the satisfaction with the supervisor, being the workers with a medium level the most satisfied and those with a higher level the least satisfied; Taking up again what was mentioned by ^{Sánchez-Sellero et al., (2018)} , the importance of the educational level and its equivalence with the jobs, as the authors mention, this relationship, being equivalent, can lead to greater satisfaction when understanding the worker as a well-exploited workforce, while a mismatch would have the opposite consequence.

For the job, it was observed that satisfaction with the organization varied significantly, with base workers with permanent contracts showing the greatest satisfaction; the foregoing is in line with the statements made by ^{Santos, Guillén, and Montalbán (2012)}, who demonstrate that the conditions of instability and insecurity in labor contracts have an important influence on the satisfaction that workers have, due to the uncertainty and fear that may be generated.

Finally, it is suggested to corroborate the findings presented through studies with samples of greater amplitude and better methodological rigor, since the limitation of a non-probabilistic sample is recognized for convenience, and therefore the difficulties of generalizing the results are noted. The inclusion of other factors associated with job satisfaction that allow integrating organizational satisfaction as an independent construct is also suggested. Likewise, it is urged to carry out studies that allow analyzing the differences in organizational satisfaction depending on the type of organization, characterize possible attributive profiles of the workers, as well as consider the influence of contexts parallel to the workplace in the lives of the workers.