SELF-AWARENESS, SELF-REGULATION AND SELF-EFFICACY AS CORRELATES OF JOB SATISFACTION AMONG ANGLICAN CLERGY OF BAYELSA AND DELTA STATES

SELF-AWARENESS, SELF-REGULATION AND SELF-EFFICACY AS CORRELATES OF JOB SATISFACTION AMONG ANGLICAN CLERGY OF BAYELSA AND DELTA STATES

SELF-AWARENESS, SELF-REGULATION AND SELF-EFFICACY AS CORRELATES OF JOB SATISFACTION AMONG ANGLICAN CLERGY OF BAYELSA AND DELTA STATES

 

AGAMUGORO, Peters Akpevweoghene

Phone Number: 08035342032

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

&

 

IZUCHI, Mary-Rose Ph.D

Phone Number: 08038975105

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

 

Department of Educational Psychology, Guidance and Counselling

University of Port Harcourt

 

Abstract

This study investigated the relationship among self-awareness, self-regulation, self-efficacy and job satisfaction among clergymen with attention on Anglican Clergies in Old Warri Diocese. The study adopted a correlational survey design. The study covered the five dioceses that were created from the old Warri diocese. Three research questions and three corresponding hypotheses respectively were raised and formulated to guide the study. The entire study population of 528 was used. The research instrument that was used in this study is a four-point Likert type scale questionnaire titled “Emotional Intelligence, Self-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction of Clergy Scale” (ESJSCS). Cronbach Alpha statistic was used to estimate the reliability of the instrument and the following reliability coefficients (r) of 0.772 for self-awareness, 0.756 for self-regulation, 0.801 for self-efficacy and 0.911 for clergy job satisfaction were obtained. Regression statistic was used to analyse data to answer the research questions and test the hypotheses at 0.05 alpha level of significance. From the data analyzed, it was found that self-awareness, self-regulation and self-efficacy are significantly related to job satisfaction of clergymen.  Based on these findings the following recommendations were made: Clergies should be trained on the knowledge of self-awareness and self-regulation. Self-efficacy has the highest contributing effect to job satisfaction, as such clergies should be assisted to boost their self-efficacy at all times; and the church should create a counselling unit and a professional counsellor be engaged to assist the clergy.

 

Keywords: Clergymen, Job Satisfaction, Self-Awareness, Self-Regulation, Self-Efficacy

 

Introduction

Job satisfaction is not achieved before one starts a job or at the end of the execution of a task.  Satisfaction is a construct that cannot be seen but can be observed from the behaviour of the individual. In other words, satisfaction is a state of emotion that can be inferred from the behaviour of the individual. Satisfaction is applied to every area of human existence, including, family, marital, job, friendship, religion, relationships, and so on. No single area is exempted.  However, this study is limited to job satisfaction of clergymen. However, this study investigated the relationship between self-awareness, self-regulation, self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen.

Job satisfaction is necessary for job performance. Hulin and Judge (2003), noted that “job satisfaction includes multi-dimensional psychological responses to an individual's job, and that these personal responses have cognitive (evaluative), affective (or emotional), and behavioural components”.  Cognitive job satisfaction is an objective and logical evaluation of various facets of a job. Cognitive job satisfaction does not assess the degree of pleasure or happiness that arises from specific job facets, but gauges the extent to which those job facets are judged by the job holder to be satisfactory in comparison with objectives they themselves set or with other jobs (Moorman, 1993). Affective job satisfaction is a subjective construct representing an emotional feeling individuals have about their jobs (Spector, 1997). This implies that affective job satisfaction reflects the degree of pleasure or happiness the job induces in general. While cognitive job satisfaction might help to bring about affective job satisfaction, the two constructs are distinct, not necessarily directly related, and have different antecedents and consequences. The behavioural component may be less informative regarding job satisfaction compared to affective and cognitive components. This is because one’s attitude may not always be consistent with behaviour (Jex & Britt, 2014).

Clergy is an individual who is in vocation of priesthood of a Christian organization. Clergy refers to “formal leaders within certain a religious setting” (Gibson, 2020). “Some of the terms used for individuals as clergy are cleric, clergyman, clergywoman, clergyperson, Priest and churchman” (Pickens, 2015; Vanden Langenberg, 2016). “In Christianity, the specific names and roles of clergy vary by denomination and there is a wide range of formal and informal clergy positions, including deacons, priests, bishops, preachers, pastors, evangelists and ministers” (Pickens, 2015; Vanden Langenberg, 2016). The roles and functions of clergy vary in different religious traditions and settings, but these usually involve presiding over specific rituals and teaching their religion's doctrines and practices (Rodin, 2010).  However, “effective pastoral leadership begins with the call from God who is the head of the church” (Rodin, 2010). Rodin (2010) noted “that the call or the anointing must first come from God to a clergy, before an appointment by a human organisation”. Being a clergy is the description of the job an individual referred to as a priest does in an organisation, name and regarded as the church.

In order for us to understand clergy job satisfaction and have a working definition, there is need to understand what job satisfaction is all about. Job satisfaction is the degree of emotions (positive or negative) to which individuals feel about their jobs. It is an attitude or emotional response to one’s tasks as well as to the physical and social conditions of the workplace (Khan et al, 2010). Clergy job satisfaction is inherently an evaluation, judgments of satisfaction in the course of priesthood duties have large cognitive, affective and behavioural components. Job satisfaction for those in the Priesthood is defined as “the extent to which ministers experience positive affect in relation to ministry, marked by contentment with the perceived conduct and outcomes of one’s ministry work” (Miner et al, 2010). The ability of clergies “to understand and deal with personal emotions, relations with fellow clergies and, more fundamentally, those of their parishioners, is of paramount importance in the right development of their social roles (Meaghera, 2015).

To better understand and enhance job satisfaction of clergymen, this study investigated the relationship between self-awareness, self-regulation, self-efficacy and job satisfaction and clergymen.

Emotional self-awareness helps an individual to be aware of his/her emotions. The skill of emotional self-awareness is a real help in situations that are likely to provoke emotional outburst. Emotion awareness and regulatory processes associated with EI are expected to benefit peoples’ social relationships, hence affecting the experience of emotion and stress at work. Intra-personally, use of emotion and being aware of one’s own emotions can lead to regulating stress and negative emotion so that one can perform better at work and be satisfied (Kafetsios & Zampetakis, 2008).

Barnes (2015) conducted a qualitative research study to explore the influence of emotional intelligence on the leadership of eight high performing Title 1 secondary school principals in the state of Texas. The study concluded that there was a direct correlation between emotional intelligence and the effective leadership and job satisfaction of the principals of those schools. In addition, the study also stated that self-awareness competency of those leaders was a major factor in their ability to recognize and to acknowledge their individual strengths and weaknesses and job satisfaction. Barnes further concluded that the principals with high self-awareness competency were effective in their decision making because they were able to focus their leadership on areas of strengths. On the contrary, Chiva and Alegre (2008) found an insignificant relationship between the variables of emotional self-awareness and job satisfaction. The pastorate necessitates a high degree of emotional self-awareness in order to avoid the moral and professional traps inherent to full-time ministry (Laaser, 2003).

Emotional Self-regulation, refers to the ability to regulate distressing affects like anxiety and anger and to inhibit emotional impulsivity (Goleman, 2015). Salovey and Mayer, (as cited in Bouckenooghe et al, 2014) argued that emotion regulation is a building block of emotional intelligence. Stein and Book (2011) also categorized emotional self-control as impulse control. They define it as the ability of a leader to resist or to delay a drive or a temptation to act. According to Batool (2013), a leader with a high degree of self-regulation is flexible, personally accountable, and committed to his leadership which is an offshoot of job satisfaction.

Gignac (2010) stated that the emotional self-control/regulation of a leader is a measure of the relative frequency with which a leader can appropriately control his strong emotions in the workplace which in turn leads to satisfaction on the job. Furthermore, Gignac suggested that emotional self-control is best demonstrated when a leader is able to maintain his focus or concentration on the task, in spite of the emotional challenges that he may be encountering. In addition, an angry or exciting situation in the workplace, while a leader with a high degree of emotional self-regulation is known to be more proactive, a leader with a high degree of emotional self-control is more reactive. Afzaal and Taha (2013) also found significant positive relationship between emotional self-regulation and job satisfaction. While on the contrary, insignificant relationship between both variables was found by Chiva and Alegre (2008).

Another variable that can influence clergy satisfaction is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as the “belief that one has the capability to realize a special or particular behaviour or task” (Al-Emran, et al, 2016). According to Karademas, et al, (2007), the concept of self-efficacy suggests that the cognitive, motivational, emotional, and functional processes are controlled and managed by personal beliefs. This means that a strong self-efficacy produces well-being in many ways. Self-efficacy beliefs are significant influential factors of whether individuals will be able to expend effort on a task and continue to cope until the task is achieved.

According to Lorente et al,  (2011), “efficacy beliefs influence the courses of action people choose to pursue, the challen­ges and goals they set for themselves and their commitment to them, how much effort they invest in given endeavours, the outco­me they expect their efforts to produce, how long they persevere when faced with obstacles, their resilience to adversity, the quality of their emotional life, how much stress and depression they experience in co­ping with taxing environmental demands, the life choices they make and their accomplishments”. “Self-efficacy shapes both the autonomy self-concept component” (Goñi et al, 2015). Researchers believe that there is a significant correlation between self-efficacy and performance. Studies have shown that “self-efficacy may act as a buffer in the presence of work stressors so that their negative impact is reduced” (Grau et al, 2000; Salanova et al, 2002). Individuals with “higher levels of self-efficacy will not perceive demands as threats, but as opportunities to overcome and develop their skills; they will strive to obtain good results, and achieve­ments will be interpreted as a result of their own effort” (Bandura, 2002).

Adeeko et al (2017), posits that self-efficacy of library personnel influences the quality of service being rendered. Stajkovic and Luthans (1998), in their study noted that, “enhanced self-efficacy predicts successful performance of tasks”. In the same vein, Baum and Locke (2004), who studied more than two hundred entrepreneurs over a period of six years, found that goals, vision and gains in self-efficacy were the explanatory factors for new ventures which were more successful and had grown over time. In her study Baysal (2010) “found that nurses with high level of self-efficacy have been more satisfied with jobs”.  In another study, Cetin (2011) showed the mediating effect of self-efficacy on the relationship between organizational citizenship and job satisfaction. Findings of the study support the notion that beliefs regarding ones capabilities influence work related attitude and motivations which then effect job performance and satisfaction. Individuals with high self-efficacy deal more effectively with difficulties and are more likely to attain valued outcomes through persistence, and thus derive intrinsic satisfaction from their jobs. It, then, follows that individuals “with higher general self-efficacy are more likely to be satisfied with their jobs” (Luthans, et al, 2006). McDonald and Siegall (1992 as cited in Ming-Cheng & Yen-Chun, 2012) acknowledged that there is significant positive correlation between self-efficacy and job satisfaction.

The clergyman’s job includes holding liturgical services, fasting and prayer meetings, daily morning and evening prayers, preparation of members in the catechism, administration of the sacraments, visitation of the sick, bereaved, troubled, prisoners, and others, ensure financial stability and growth of the church, counselling of parishioners, settling disputes, and so on.  In most cases, the clergy will be ministering to not less than 120 parishioners and in other cases might or may not have assistants curates, Catechists, Church Teaches or Agents, Lay Readers.

Experience has shown that while the clergy is exposed to all of the above stressors, he is emotionally stressed, burnout sets in, and his self-efficacy becomes worn-out. As a result of emotional stress, burnout, the clergy’s satisfaction on the job is being affected negatively. Sometimes, the clergy finds himself in a situation of quitting the priesthood, having outburst with parishioners, church workers and even family members. The clergy’s emotional intelligence is called upon to mitigate the situation. However, can we say to a large extent that Self-awareness, self-regulation and self-efficacy determine clergy’s job satisfaction among clergymen?

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between Self-awareness, self-regulation, self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen. In specific terms, the study achieved the following objectives:

1. Determined the extent self-awareness relate to job satisfaction among clergymen
2. Determined the extent self-regulation relate to job satisfaction among clergymen

3. Determined the extent self-efficacy relate to job satisfaction among clergymen

Research Questions and Hypotheses

Three research questions were posed and three corresponding hypotheses formulated to guide the study

1. To what extent does self-awareness relate to job satisfaction of clergymen?

Ho 1: There is no significant relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

2. To what extent does self-regulation relate to job satisfaction of clergymen?

Ho 2: There is no significant relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

3. To what extent does self-efficacy relate job satisfaction of clergymen?

Ho 3: There is no significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of Clergymen

Methods

This study adopted a correlational survey design to investigate the relationship between self-awareness, self-regulation and self-efficacy and clergy job satisfaction among clergymen with specific attention on Anglican Clergies of Old Warri Diocese of Bayelsa and Delta States. The population of the study involved all the Clergies in the Anglican Dioceses in the Old Warri Diocese situate in Bayelsa and Delta States.  It has five Dioceses which include Warri, Ughelli, Oleh, Western Izon and Sapele with a total of 528 clergies (Church of Nigeria, Anglican Communion, 2020). The study adopted the purposive sampling technique for the total 528 participants from the population of the study area. The instrument used in this study was a four-point Likert type scale questionnaire titled “Emotional Intelligence, Self-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction of Clergy Scale” (ESJSCS).  The instrument was adapted from various sources thus: self-awareness and self-regulation was adapted from the Emotional Intelligence Scale developed by Singh (2004). Self-awareness has 12 items; self-regulation has 19 items.  While Self-Efficacy Scale was adapted from General Self Efficacy Scale by Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995). This was modified from the original 10 items to 13 items, implying that the researcher added 3 more items to the scale. Finally, job satisfaction of clergy scale was adapted from the Satisfaction in Ministry Scale (SIMS) as developed by Barnard and Curry (2012). The instrument has 22 items which were modified to 23 items. Each sub-scale has four option responses of Strongly Agree (4 points), Agree (3 points), Disagree (2 points) and Strongly Disagree (1 point), while self-efficacy has four responses of Not True (1 point), Hardly True (2 points), Moderately True (3 points) and Exactly True (4 points). The Cronbach Alpha statistic was used to establish the reliability and reliability coefficients (r) of 0.772 for self-awareness, 0.756 for self-regulation, 0.801 for self-efficacy and 0.911 for clergy job satisfaction, were obtained. The data collected were analysed using regression statistics to answer the research questions and test hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance.

Results

The results of the data analysis were presented in the tables below. Data analysis was done in relation to the research questions and hypotheses.

Research Question 1: To what extent does self-awareness relate to job satisfaction of Clergymen?

Hypothesis One: There is no significant relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

Table 1: Regression Analysis for Self-Awareness and Job Satisfaction of Clergymen

Model Summary

Variables					R			R2		Adjusted R2			Std. Error of the Estimate
Self-Awareness   Clergy Satisfaction					.176a			.031		.029			19.53501
ANOVAa
Model			Sum of Squares				Df				Mean Square			f		Sig.
1		Regression	6444.119				1				6444.119			16.886		.000b
		Residual	200730.358				526				381.617
		Total	207174.477				527
Coefficientsa
Model				Unstandardized Coefficients					Standardized Coefficients			t			Sig.
				B		Std. Error			Beta
1	(Constant)			45.227		7.693						5.879			.000
	Self-Awareness			.769		.187			.176			4.109			.000

P<.05 Level of Significance, N=528; Dependent Variable: Clergy Satisfaction; Predictors: (Constant), Self-Awareness

From the model summary table, the following values are obtained: Pearson (r) = 0.176, R²=0.031 and Adjusted R²= 0.029. The correlation coefficient between the two variables of self-awareness and job satisfaction of Anglican Clergies is r = 0.176.  This shows that a relationship exists among the predictor variable of self-awareness and job satisfaction of clergies. While the R² explains the extent of variance of the contribution of self-awareness to job satisfaction of clergies. This means self-awareness contributes 3.1% (0.031) to job satisfaction of clergies. This implies a positive relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of Anglican Clergies.  From the regression ANOVA table is F= 16.886, beta=0.176, t=4.109 and Sig. = 0.000, at 0.05 level of significance, which shows that the relationship is significant. This implies that the hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of Clergymen, is hereby rejected.  This means that there is a positive relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

Research Question 2: To what extent does self-regulation relate to job satisfaction of Clergymen?

Hypothesis 2: There is no significant relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

Table 2: Regression Analysis for Self-Regulation and Job Satisfaction of Clergymen

Model Summary

Variables					R			R2			Adjusted R2			Std. Error of the Estimate
Self-Regulation					.325a			.106			.104			18.76807
Clergy Satisfaction
ANOVAa
Model			Sum of Squares				Df			Mean Square			f			Sig.
1		Regression	21895.957				1			21895.957			62.162			.000b
		Residual	185278.521				526			352.241
		Total	207174.477				527
Coefficientsa
Model				Unstandardized Coefficients					Standardized Coefficients			t			Sig.
				B		Std. Error			Beta
1	(Constant)			40.213		4.693						8.569			.000
	Self-Regulation			.592		.075			.325			7.884			.000

 P<.05 Level of Significance, N=528; Dependent Variable: Clergy Satisfaction; Predictors: (Constant), Self-Regulation

From the model summary table, the following values are obtained: Pearson (r)= 0.325, R²=0.106 and Adjusted R²= 0.104. The correlation coefficient between the two variables of self-regulation and job satisfaction of Anglican Clergies is r = 0.325.  This shows that a relationship exists among the predictor variable of self-regulation and job satisfaction of clergies. In addition, the R² explains the extent of variance of the contribution of self-regulation to job satisfaction of clergies. This means self-regulation contributes 10.6% (0.106) to job satisfaction of clergies. This implies a positive relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of Anglican Clergies.  From the regression ANOVA table is F= 62.162, beta=0.325, t= 7.884 and Sig. = 0.000, at 0.05 level of significance, which shows that the relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction is significant. This implies that the hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of Clergymen, is hereby rejected.  This means that there is a significant positive relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of Clergymen.

Research Question 3: To what extent does self-efficacy relate job satisfaction of clergymen?

Hypothesis 3: There is no significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of Clergymen

Table 3: Regression Analysis for Self-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction of Clergymen

Model Summary

Variables					r			R2		Adjusted R2			Std. Error of the Estimate
Self-Efficacy					.540a			.291		.290			16.70527
Clergy Satisfaction
ANOVAa
Model			Sum of Squares				Df			Mean Square		f			Sig.
1		Regression	60385.806				1			60385.806		216.385			.000b
		Residual	146788.671				526			279.066
		Total	207174.477				527
Coefficientsa
Model				Unstandardized Coefficients					Standardized Coefficients		t			Sig.
				B		Std. Error			Beta
1	(Constant)			35.811		2.870					12.479			.000
	Self-Efficacy			1.026		.070			.540		14.710			.000

P<.05 Level of Significance, N=528; Dependent Variable: Clergy Satisfaction; Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy

From the model summary table, the following values are obtained: Pearson (r)= 0.540, R²=0.291 and Adjusted R²= 0.290. The correlation coefficient between the two variables of Self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen is r = 0.540.  This shows that a relationship exists among the predictor variable of self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergies. In addition, the R² explains the extent of variance of the contribution of self-efficacy to job satisfaction of clergies. This means self-efficacy contributes 29.1% (0.291) to job satisfaction of clergiesFrom the regression ANOVA table is F= 216.385, beta=0.540, t=14.710 and Sig. = 0.000, at 0.05 level of significance, which shows that the relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction is significant. This implies that the hypothesis which states that there is no significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen, is hereby rejected.  This means that there is a significant positive relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen.

Discussion

From the analysis of data from research question one and hypothesis one, it was found that there is a significant positive relationship between self-awareness and job satisfaction of clergymen. This implies that being aware of oneself is vital to one’s satisfaction in his/her job. The reason for this finding is the fact that when an individual is aware of himself in terms of strength and weakness, it helps him/her to take appropriate decisions and actions in relation to the environment. The above finding supports the studies of Çekmecelioğlu, et al, (2012), Pourkiani, et al, (2016), Onomuodeke, et al, (2017) and Kim and Wee, (2020) who all found that self-awareness has a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction among different individuals in different areas of profession or career.

Analysis of data for research question two and hypothesis two revealed that there is significant positive relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of clergymen. This means self-regulation has direct impact on ensuring job satisfaction among clergies in the Anglican Communion. Which implies that possessing mastery of self-regulation can help the clergy in reacting to issues at the church and family level that will in turn influence his job satisfaction positively. The reason for this finding is the fact that self-regulation saves one from unnecessary inconveniences and gives a reputation of being self-discipline. This finding is in support of the findings from the studies of Shukla, et al, (2016), Pourkiani, et al, (2016), Onomuodeke, et al, (2017) and Kim and Wee (2020) who also found a positive significant relationship between self-regulation and job satisfaction of different professionals in other areas of profession different from the Priesthood. This means that individuals with high emotional intelligence are able to achieve high job satisfaction because they are competent to manage and regulate their emotions.  However, this finding is at variance with the findings of Hamidi and Amiri, (2013), who found no significant correlation between self-regulation and job satisfaction.

Analysis of data for research question three and hypothesis three revealed that there is significant positive relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of clergymen. This means self-efficacy has direct impact on ensuring job satisfaction among clergies. Which implies that possessing self-efficacy can help the clergy in handling even the most difficult tasks in the church, society and family which will in turn impact on his job satisfaction. The reason for this finding is the fact that self-efficacy is one of the bases for motivation, welfare and personal achievements in all areas of life. Self-efficacy influences the courses of action people choose to pursue, the challen­ges and goals they set for themselves and their commitment to them, how much effort they invest in given endeavours, the outco­me they expect their efforts to produce, how long they persevere when faced with obstacles, their resilience to adversity, the quality of their emotional life, how much stress and depression they experience in co­ping with taxing environmental demands, the life choices they make and their accomplishments. This finding is in support of the findings from the studies of Caprara, et al (2006), Mustafa and Oya (2012), Saremi and Rezeghi (2015), and Adeeko, et al, (2017), who found a positive significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of different professionals in other areas of profession different from the Priesthood. This means that individuals with high efficacy are able to achieve high job satisfaction because they are competent in achieving results even in the most difficult times. 

 

Conclusion

Job satisfaction is a major variable that can encourage the clergy to be committed and dedicated to duty, in addition to productivity. Job satisfaction being a cognitive appraisal of phases of the job to show contentment is related to self-awareness, self-regulation and self-efficacy of the individual. In a nutshell, from the findings made, clergies do not have much knowledge on self-awareness compared to the others. However, clergies will have to be trained on emotional intelligence and self-efficacy.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are hereby made:

1. Clergies should be trained on the knowledge of self-awareness and self-regulation
2. From the study, self-efficacy has the highest contributing effect to job satisfaction, as such clergies should be helped to boost their self-efficacy at all times
3. The church should create a counselling unit and a professional counsellor be engaged to help the clergymen with professional counselling services

 

 

 

References

Adeeko, K., Aboyade, W.A. & Oyewole, G.O. (2017). Job satisfaction and self-efficacy as determinants of job performance of library personnel in selected university libraries in South West Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 1557. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1557

Afzaal, H.S. & Taha, A. (2013). An investigation of relationship among emotional intelligence, organizational commitment and job satisfaction: evidence from academics in Brunei Darussalam. International Business Research, 6(3), 217-228.

Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating Attitudes towards the Use of Mobile Learning in Higher Education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 93-102.

Bandura, A. (2002). Guide for construction of self-efficacy scales. Division of Educational Studies. Emory University.

Barnes, C. A. (2015). The influence of emotional intelligence on the leadership of effective principals in high performing title I secondary schools (Order No. 3721231). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1727140476). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1727140476?accountid=165104

Batool, B. F. (2013). Emotional intelligence and effective leadership. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 4(3), 84-94.

Baysal, E., (2010). The relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction in Nurses: Field study in a University Hospital. Unpublished Master's thesis, Istanbul University.

Baum J.R., & Locke E.A. (2004). The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(4), 587-598.

Bouckenooghe, D., Raja, U., & Abbas, M. (2014). How does self-regulation of emotions impact employee work engagement: The mediating role of social resources. Journal of Management & Organization, 20 (04), 508 - 525

Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473–490

Çekmecelioğlu, H.G., Günsel, A., & Ulutaş, T. (2012). Effects of emotional intelligence on job satisfaction: An empirical study on call center employees. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences 58; 363 – 369

Cetin, F. (2011). The effects of the organizational psychological capital on the attitudes of commitment and satisfaction: A public sample in Turkey. European Journal of Social Sciences, 21(3), 373-380

Chiva, R., & Alegre, J. (2008). Emotional intelligence and job satisfaction: Role of organizational capability. Personnel Review, 37(6), 680–701.

Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) (2020). Church year Calendar 2020. CSS Bookshop

Gibson, P. (ed) (2020).  Anglican ordination rites. Groove Books Limited.

Gignac, G. E. (2010). Genos emotional intelligence inventory: Technical manual (2nd ed.). NSW

Goleman, D. (2015). What makes a leader? In HBR’s 10 must reads on emotional intelligence. Harvard Business Review Press.

Goñi, E., Esnaola-Echaniz, I., Rodríguez-Fernández, A., & Camino, I. (2015). Personal self-concept and satisfaction with life in adolescence, youth and adulthood. Psicothema, 27, 52-58.

Grau, R., Salanova, M., & Peiró, J. M. (2000). Efectos moduladores de la au­toeficacia en el estrés laboral [The mod­ulator effect of self-efficacy in work-related stress]. Apuntes de Psicología, 18, 57-75.

Hamidi, F., & Amiri, M. (2013). Predicting the job Satisfaction of Teachers Based on Their Emotional Intelligence and Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Psychology, 7 (2), 73-95

Hulin, C. L., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Job attitudes. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ligen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology. Wiley and Sons.

Jex, S.M. & Britt, T.W. (2014). Organizational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Kafetsios, K., & Zampetakis, L., A. (2008). Emotional intelligence and job satisfaction: Testing the mediatory role of positive and negative affect at work. Personality and Individual Differences, 44 (3); 712-722.

Karademas, E.C., Kafetsios, K. & Sideridis, G.D. (2007). Dispositional optimism, generalized self-efficacy and information processing of threat and well-being related stimuli. Stress & Health, 23, 285-294.

Khan, A. S., Khan, S., Nawaz, A., & Qureshi, Q. A. (2010). Theories of job-satisfaction:  global applications and limitations. Gomal University Journal of Research, 26 (2); 45-62.

Kim, S. & Wee, K. (2020). Effect of Self-Awareness and Self-Management on Organizational Atmosphere, Job Satisfaction as Leadership Coaching Roles.Journal of System and Management Sciences, 10 (1), 51-61 

Laaser, M. R. (2003). Pastors and sexual addiction. Sexual Addiction &Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment and Prevention, 10(2-3), 139-149.

Lorente, L., Salanova, M., & Martínez, I.  (2011). Developing a job-related self-efficacy scale among construction workers.  Revista Interamericana de Psicología Ocupacional, 30 (2), 149-160

Luthans, F., Zhu, W., & Avolio, B.J. (2006). The impact of efficacy on work attitudes across cultures.  Journal of World Business, 41, 121-132

Meaghera, B. R. (2015). The effects of interpersonal differences within religious communities: A group actor-partner interdependence model of U.S. congregations. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 25, 74-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2013.864531

Miner, M.H., Dowson, M., & Sterland, S. (2010). Ministry orientation and ministry outcomes: Evaluation of a new multidimensional model of clergy burnout and job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 167-188. doi:10.1348/096317909X414214

Ming-Cheng, L. & Yen-Chun, C. (2012). Self-Efficacy, Effort, Job Performance, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intention: The Effect of Personal Characteristics on Organization Performance. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 3, (4): 387-391

Moorman, R. H. (1993). The influence of cognitive and affective based job satisfaction measures on the relationship between satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviour. Human Relations6; 759–776. doi:10.1177/001872679304600604

Mustafa, Y. & Oya, E. (2012). Relationships between self-efficacy and work engagement and the effects on job satisfaction: A survey on certified public accountants.  Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences 58, 370 – 378

Onomuodeke, M. A., Akpotabore, U., Nwaukwu, C. & Magnus-Arewa, E. A. (2017). Components of emotional intelligence and job satisfaction among secondary school teachers in Ughelli-North Local Government Area of Delta State. British Journal of Education, 5 (7), 83-93

Pickens, S. W. (2015). The skill demands of pastoral leadership in today's environment (Order No. 3704249). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1690277451). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1690277451?accountid=165104

Pourkiani, M., Seyedi, S. M. & Sarasia, H. S. (2016). The effect of self-awareness and self-regulation on organizational commitment employees of Islamic Azad University of Mashhad with mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences,8 (2S), 1886-1899

Rodin, R. S. (2010). The steward leader: Transforming people, organizations and communities. InterVarsity Press.

Salanova, M., Peiró, J. M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2002). Self-efficacy Specificity and Burnout among Information Techno­logy Workers: An extension of the Job Demands-Control Model. European Journal on Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 1-25.

Saremi, H. & Rezeghi, A.A. (2015). A study on the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and organizational commitment with job satisfaction in office employees in Esfarayen City, Iran. International Journal of Life Sciences 9 (6); 15 – 23

Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON

Shukla, S., Adhikari, B. & Ray, M. (2016). Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction: An Empirical Investigation. Amity Global HRM Review, 54-61

Spector, P.E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and consequences. SAGE.

Stajkovic, A.D. & Luthans, F. (1998). Going beyond traditional motivational behavioural approaches. Organisational Dynamics, 26, (4), 62 -72

Stein, S. J. & Book, H. E. (2011). The EQ edge: Emotional intelligence and your success. Jossey-Bass.

VandenLangenberg, T. J. (2016). Revitalizing Wesley united Methodist church by reclaiming a biblical understanding of the role of pastor (Order No. 10100504). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1783997981?accountid=165104

• Prev
• Next