Abstract:
The researcher aimed to determine the extent to which subordinates’
perceived supervisor source/s of power is or are correlated to subordinate satisfaction with supervision in the nine departments of the Court of Appeals of the Philippines. A descriptive research design, specifically, purposive sampling, was employed, and surveys became the primary tools. Every employee in each participating division was allowed to answer the questionnaire as long as he or she is not the chief supervisor of that department. A total of 107 subordinates answered the survey. Based on the findings of the study, it was concluded that the sample perceive their supervisors to be using the five main bases of power, coercive, referent, legitimate, reward, and expert, in getting the subordinates to change their behaviour or do something the supervisor wants the subordinates to do. Among the five, coercive was observed to be the least used, and expert was seen as the most exercised. The sample is found to be relatively highly satisfied with the supervision of their superiors. Finally, it was proven that there are weak negative associations between the perceived frequency of use of coercive, legitimate, and reward power sources and subordinate satisfaction with supervision, while none is observed when referent and expert power bases are employed. The researcher recommended that the use of coercive power should at least be minimized. Furthermore, conducting the research on a nongovernment organization using random sampling and citing more frameworks and instruments regarding power and satisfaction would help future studies, according to the researcher.
