Four drivers of frontline employee satisfaction and business results: United States spotlight

Critically, because we can classify employees into these three categories, we can examine what policies, processes, and conditions drive employee satisfaction with each of the five aspects of job rewards and opportunities. Because women are disproportionately represented in the least satisfied group,¹⁴ businesses committed to increasing gender equity in their frontline workforce should take note of the factors identified in this research.

Employee satisfaction drives business results

As frontline employees’ satisfaction with job rewards and growth opportunities rises, we see a clear uptick in work engagement,¹⁵ organizational commitment,¹⁶ and whether they would choose to work for their organization again.¹⁷ This demonstrates that investing in job rewards creates a virtuous cycle of improvement for individual employees and organizations as a whole. The pattern is striking — a 23-40% percentage point increase in engagement and commitment as satisfaction moves from least to moderate to most.

Four drivers of employee satisfaction with job rewards and growth opportunities

Our data reveal that frontline leaders can take four key actions to boost satisfaction with job rewards and growth opportunities, ultimately improving frontline employee engagement.

Driver 1: Competitive pay

When executed effectively, this strategy could deliver a 5.2x return on investment.

Key finding: Pay increases are the starting line. To truly boost satisfaction among frontline employees, meaningful and strategic raises are crucial. These raises are not only necessary for retention, engagement, and satisfaction across frontline roles, but also serve as a strategy for fostering financial stability and wellbeing.

Digging deeper: Competitive pay — including regular pay raises — is crucial for both attracting and retaining frontline talent, and it plays a significant role in ensuring employees can meet their basic financial needs.¹⁸ Despite its importance, women are often overrepresented in the groups with the lowest pay¹⁹ and the least satisfaction,²⁰ and they are less comfortable discussing wage disparities or pay raises with their managers,²¹ highlighting a critical gap that needs addressing.

The data are clear and likely unsurprising: as compensation rises so does employee satisfaction.²² In turn, this drives productivity and reduces turnover — delivering measurable financial benefits for organizations. However, not all employees experience financial growth equally. Women are underrepresented among those who received performance-based raises exceeding $1 per hour or $2,000 annually²³ — the pay strategy most likely to increase satisfaction and outperform company-wide raises in terms of impact.

The bottom line? Meaningful, strategic pay increases are essential to elevate satisfaction. These investments yield strong returns, benefiting both employees and the organization.

While everyone desires higher pay, it’s important to note that many frontline employees live paycheck to paycheck. Employees earning just enough to get by are less likely to feel economically secure or engaged at work. For hourly frontline employees, financial stability begins to improve once their pay reaches around $30 per hour.²⁴ For salaried employees, the tipping point lies around $40,000 annually.²⁵ These income thresholds mark the transition from the least satisfied group to the moderately satisfied group, but they do not represent a point of thriving.

For both hourly and salaried employees, satisfaction levels tend to plateau once these thresholds are met. Greater satisfaction — and the resulting higher engagement, commitment, and intent to stay — are tied to other key drivers outlined in this report, such as personal growth, development opportunities, and support from both teammates and managers. Organizations should view these income thresholds as a baseline, not an endpoint, ensuring that employees' financial wellbeing is paired with opportunities for advancement and a supportive work environment.

Driver 2: Job growth and development opportunities

Two in five employees at risk of turnover could be retained through this strategy.

Key finding: For companies seeking to boost retention, strategically bundling benefits is an effective approach that enhances employee satisfaction, loyalty, and overall performance.

Digging deeper: Achieving economic stability for employees requires more than just competitive wages — they also need opportunities to advance, learn new skills, be challenged at work, and receive meaningful growth and development experiences. Our data show that satisfaction levels are associated with differing levels of access to these opportunities²⁷ — suggesting those who are more satisfied report greater access to opportunities. Employees are 42x as likely to be in the most satisfied category relative to the least satisfied group when they have frequent access to development opportunities²⁸ like learning new skills, participating in job shadowing or mentorship programs, and expanding their role.²⁹

By every measure, there is a significant gap in access to growth opportunities by level of satisfaction, including:

• Promotion opportunities.³⁰
• Skill-building assignments.³¹
• Job-shadowing.³²
• Mentorship programs.³³
• Training for higher-paying jobs.³⁴
• Educational resources.³⁵
• Opportunities to move from part-time to full-time.³⁶

Critically, these opportunity gaps are also shaped by gender disparities. Women employees are less likely than men to receive career-building support from their managers — only 22% of women say their manager has identified a mentor for them, compared to 30% of men.³⁷ This pattern extends across other areas, with women reporting lower access to promotions,³⁸ skill-building assignments,³⁹ job-shadowing,⁴⁰ training for higher-paying jobs,⁴¹ mentorship programs⁴² educational resources,⁴³ and pathways to full-time roles.⁴⁴ Addressing these inequities is essential to ensuring all employees — regardless of gender — have equitable opportunities to grow and thrive in the workplace.

Driver 3: Clear, fair, and individual-centered promotion processes

This strategy has the potential to amplify employee satisfaction six times over.

Key finding: Organizations that provide clear guidance on what drives promotions — including the necessary skills, timing, and training — and partner with employees to prepare them for advancement can have a profound impact on their satisfaction, loyalty, and trajectory. However, 50% of employees cite unclear promotion processes as a major concern.⁴⁵

Digging deeper: Frontline employees don't just want access to development opportunities — they also need transparent, fair,⁴⁶ and individualized promotion pathways.⁴⁷ When these are in place, they play a crucial role in increasing satisfaction with job rewards and growth opportunities. Our data highlight a noticeable gap: employees who are more satisfied report having clear, consistent, and personalized promotion processes, reinforcing the link between perceived opportunity and satisfaction.

The data reinforce the critical need for both transparency and personalization in promotion systems. Without a clear, fair, and individualized approach to promotions, organizations risk disengagement and dissatisfaction, especially among frontline employees, who often face unique barriers in career advancement.

Driver 4: Supportive manager relationships

Managers who support employee development can quadruple employee satisfaction.

Key finding: Managers serve as the primary link between employees and the broader organization. When they are perceived as fair, supportive of job growth, and understanding of employees' competing life and work responsibilities, they can effectively reduce disengagement and significantly increase satisfaction.

Digging deeper: For frontline employees, managerial support is often a critical, yet underappreciated, factor. Managers who ensure fair access to opportunities,⁴⁸ invest in their team's growth,⁴⁹ and offer flexibility⁵⁰ to help balance job demands with personal responsibilities⁵¹ create substantial benefits. However, only 29% of women frontline employees report that their manager has discussed specific actions they can take to advance in their career, compared to 40% of men.⁵² Our data show that the most satisfied employees are around 11x as likely to perceive fairness in the allocation of resources and opportunities,⁵³ and 41x as likely to feel supported in their development compared to those who are less satisfied.⁵⁴ Additionally, access to flexible work arrangements plays a significant role — employees who are the most satisfied report a more than 50 percentage-point increase in their ability to balance job demands with their personal and life responsibilities. The employees who are most satisfied also report substantially greater access — a 36 percentage-point increase — to flexible working policies.⁵⁵

These forms of managerial support are especially critical in addressing the persistent barriers that hinder employee growth and wellbeing. By actively promoting career advancement and enabling work-life balance, managers do more than improve daily job experiences; they play an essential role in enhancing overall job satisfaction and long-term employee engagement.

Take action

The four key drivers identified above consist of 21 distinct actions, policies, or practices. Through analysis, we determined which of these actions have the greatest influence on employee engagement, retention, and satisfaction,⁵⁶ ultimately yielding the most significant outcomes and strongest return on investment for organizations.

Below are the top five strategies with the most considerable impact:

Methodology

Recruitment and sample

Participants were full-time frontline employees (entry-level, first-level manager, or supervisors) recruited through a panel service company. After obtaining informed consent, participants completed a 20-minute online survey.

Procedure and analysis

• Participants were asked about their experiences in their workplace. Specifically, we asked questions about positive job conditions and opportunities for job improvement that they may (or may not) have experienced, as well as about a range of company practices that impact employees’ financial situations.
• Participants were also asked demographic questions such as their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and caregiving status. Participants were also asked questions about their financial situation, like how much money they earn, the amount of any recent raises or promotions, and their ability to make ends meet.
• We employed several statistical analyses to investigate the impact of fair pay, comprehensive benefits, skill development, and clear advancement opportunities on frontline employee satisfaction, engagement, commitment and intent to leave. We conducted exploratory factor analysis, a two-step cluster analysis, ordinal regression, linear regression, and relative importance analysis.
• All analyses were performed in IBM SPSS version 25 except for relative importance analysis, which was performed using Python version 3 in JupyterLab. All results presented in this report were significant at p < .01 unless otherwise noted.

Demographics

Note that participants could skip demographic questions, so totals may not equal 100% or total sample size.

Satisfaction profiles by rank, gender, and industry

About the authors

Ellie Smith, PhD

Ellie Smith, PhD, is a developmental cognitive neuroscientist and thought leader specializing in the science of behavior change, translating data into powerful tools for impact at both individual and systemic levels. As an EMEA-based Research Director at Catalyst, she brings a global lens to her work, applying expertise in diversity, equity, and inclusion, research methods, and advanced statistics to explore how cultural and organizational contexts shape workplace experiences in the rapidly evolving world of work.

Tara Van Bommel, PhD

Tara Van Bommel, PhD, is a social psychologist with expertise in stereotyping and prejudice, nonconscious bias, and intergroup relations. At Catalyst, Tara leads the Research team and brings her background in advanced statistics to develop solutions that create meaningful systemic change in the workplace and more positive workplace experiences for women across intersections of identity.

How to cite: Smith, E. & Van Bommel, T. (2025). Four drivers of frontline employee satisfaction and business results: United States spotlight. Catalyst.

Endnotes

1. Catalyst Labor Economist review of Bureau of Labor Statistics 2023 & 2024 data collected and analyzed in June 2024.
2. Catalyst Labor Economist review of Bureau of Labor Statistics 2023 & 2024 data collected and analyzed in June 2024; Joubert, E. (2023, March 8). Equalizing the frontline: Why women matter. Quinyx.
3. Kallin, L. (2024, February 6). How not to overlook women in frontline roles, and help them thrive. LSE Business Review.
4. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to skill-building assignments and the gender of frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 29.47, p < .001, where women (59%) reported less frequent access than men (39%). Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (3.3) and men (-3.5) differed significantly from what was expected. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to skill-building assignments and the gender of frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 29.05, p < .001, where women reported less frequent access than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001, but did not differ between men (p = .49) or women (p = 1.0) vs another gender.
5. Satisfaction was measured on a 1 to 5 scale (1 being very dissatisfied and 5 being very satisfied) across five categories: base pay, pay increases advancement opportunities, benefits, and development opportunities. Satisfaction across all five scales were averaged for the aggregate “satisfaction” score. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their base pay. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (8, n = 4,011) = 104.87, p < .001, where of those who indicated they were dissatisfied, 66% of women sat in the dissatisfied profile, versus 31% of men and 2% of another gender. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their base pay. The analysis revealed a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 48.63, p <.001, where women reported lower dissatisfaction than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their company’s approach to pay increases. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (8, n = 4,011) = 112.28, p <.001, where of those who indicated they were dissatisfied, 61% of women sat in the dissatisfied profile, versus 37% of men and 1.5% of another gender. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their company’s approach to pay increases. The analysis revealed a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 56.14, p <.001, where women reported lower dissatisfaction than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the benefits their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (8, n = 4,011) = 87.90, p <.001, where of those who indicated they were dissatisfied, 63% of women sat in the dissatisfied profile, versus 35% of men and 2% of another gender. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the benefits their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 43.30, p <.001, where women reported lower dissatisfaction than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the professional development their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (8, n = 4,011) = 55.38, p <.001, where of those who indicated they were dissatisfied, 60% of women sat in the dissatisfied profile, versus 38% of men and 2% of another gender. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the professional development their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 26.22, p <.001, where women reported lower dissatisfaction than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the opportunities for advancement their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (8, n = 4,011) = 79.85, p <.001, where of those who indicated they were dissatisfied, 61% of women sat in the dissatisfied profile, versus 38% of men and 2% of another gender. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with the opportunities for advancement their company provides. The analysis revealed a significant association, F (2, 4,008) = 35.28, p <.001, where women reported lower dissatisfaction than men. Post-hoc Bonferroni testing highlighted this difference was significant to p < .001.
6. Bankert, L., Dhar, J., Wasserteil, S., Verghese, M., Roehri, C., Di Prizio, C., & Negreros, A. (2024, April 10). Supporting frontline workers is boon to bottom line. Boston Consulting Group.
7. State of the frontline workforce 2024. (2024). Quinyx.
8. Where respondents were asked their hourly wage, and responses were dichotomized into “below $20” and “above $20.” 52% of frontline employees reported earning below $20 per hour and 48% reported earning $20 per hour or above.
9. US national living wage calculated using the MIT Living Wage calculator in April 2025. The living wage for two working adults with two children were averaged across all states. Average = $28.19 with a range between $22.43 and $37.71.
10. Out of approximately 63.9 million frontline employees, 55% have considered leaving their jobs. 55% of approximately 63.9 million = 35.15 million. Approximate turnover cost per frontline employee = $52,000. As such, 35.15 million x $52,000 = 1.83 trillion dollars, as an estimate of the at-risk cost to organizations that do not ensure sufficient wages, benefits, and advancement and growth opportunities.
11. We surveyed 4,017 frontline employees and managers in the United States in a range of industries including retail (n = 1,144, 29%), wholesale (n = 144, 4%), hospitality (n = 696, 17%), manufacturing (n = 602, 15%), construction (n = 561, 14%), finance and insurance (n = 415, 10%), mining, quarrying, oil and gas extraction (n = 30, 1%), utilities (n = 61, 2%), and transportation and warehousing (n = 364, 9%). Our sample was majority cisgender women (51%, n = 2,042), with just less than half men (47%, n = 1,903), with some representation of other genders (<2%, n = 66). Around half of the respondents were White (55%, n = 2,203) and our sample included representation from other racial and ethnic identities as well: Asian (3%, n = 130), Black (22%, n = 889), Indigenous (1%, n = 47), Latine (7%, n = 275), MENA (0.3%, n = 11), and multiracial employees; 11%, n = 423). Most respondents identified as heterosexual/straight (85%, n = 3,394), and our sample represented other sexual identities as well (e.g., asexual, bisexual, gay, lesbian, pansexual, or queer employees; 15%, n = 580). The average participant age was 40 years old, and ages ranged from 18 to 75. Almost half of the respondents were Millennials (46%, n = 1,827), 19% were Gen Z (n = 780), around a quarter were Gen X (26%, n = 1,036), and the rest were Baby Boomers (9%, n = 374). Roughly a third of the respondents were in non-managerial roles with no supervisory responsibilities (37%, n = 1,473), a quarter were in non-managerial roles with supervisory responsibilities (25%, n = 1,009), and over a third were in first line or frontline managerial roles (38%, n = 1,535). Note that participants could skip demographic questions, so totals may not equal 100% or total sample size.
12. Each of these industries have unique characteristics, and frontline employees working within them cannot be homogenized. Some frontline positions in manufacturing, for example, provide better pay, benefits, and security (depending on the sector, company size, relations with unions) than service sector jobs, which are often characterized as precarious work (a broad term used to describe working arrangements that are risky, temporary, part-time, insecure, uncertain, often provide low or unreliable wages, and typically lack benefits, rights, and other legal protections). These differences are critical in shaping the experiences of women working in each industry.
13. A two-step cluster analysis was conducted to explore patterns of frontline employee rewards among US frontline employees. The solution revealed three clusters: a “least satisfied” group (n = 1,710, 30%), a “moderately satisfied” group (n = 1,079, 41%), and a “most satisfied” group (n = 1,266, 29%).
14. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their workplace benefits. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (4, n = 4,011) = 116.39, p <.001, where 63% of women sat in the least satisfied group, versus just 35% of men and 2% of another gender.
15. Engagement was measured across three variables: including how often employees felt passionate, committed and motivated about their work, on 1-5 scale (1 being “never” and 5 being “always”). A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the relationship between the employee satisfaction clusters and work engagement. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 723.49, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (12.5), and least (-11.2) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, while the moderately satisfied group approached significance (-1.9).
16. Commitment was measured across four variables: including agreement on “this company deserves my loyalty,” whether they’d “be happy to spend the rest of their career” there, whether they would recommend the company as a good place to work,” and whether they “feel a strong sense of belonging” on 1-5 scale (1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”). A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their commitment to their organization. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 1155.47, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (18.3), moderately (-2.8), and least (-16.3) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected.
17. Whether an employee would choose to work for their organization again was measured on 1 to 5 scale (1 being not at all likely to leave and 5 being very likely). A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on whether they would choose to work for their organization again. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 104.19, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (1.4) satisfied group did not differ significantly from what was expected, but the moderately (3.5), and least (-5.9) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected.
18. US national living wage calculated using the MIT Living Wage calculator in April 2025. The living wage for 2 working adults with 2 children were averaged across all states. Average = $28.19 with a range between $22.43 and $37.71.
19. Employees were asked what the hourly wage of their primary job was (before taxes) on a sliding scale from “$0-9.99” to “$35 or higher,” and/or what their income was last year (before taxes) on a sliding scale from “under $20,000” to “over $65,000.” Lower wages are described as an hourly wage below $20 or an annual salary of below $40,000. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the wages of men and women frontline employees in the United States. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 252.07, p <.001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed that women were overrepresented in the group earning an hourly wage below $20 or an annual salary of below $40,000 (8.0) more often than men (-8.7) or employees of another gender (2.0) and differed significantly from what was expected.
20. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the satisfaction of men and women frontline employees in the United States with their workplace benefits. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (4, n = 4,011) = 116.39, p <.001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed that 63% of women sat in the least satisfied group (5.6), versus 35% of men (-5.8) and 2% of another gender (0.1), and differed significantly from what was expected.
21. Pace, L. (2022, March 8). Gender imbalance at work continues. Quinyx.
22. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on whether their hourly wage was below $20 or their annual salary was below $40,000. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 285.60, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (-8.8) and least (9.3) groups differed significantly from what was expected, while the moderately satisfied group did not significantly differ from the others (0.2).
23. Merit- or performance-based raises were asked on a sliding scale between “50 cents or less” and “between $3-4 and hour” for hourly employees and “less than $500” and “between $4,000-5,000” for salaried employees, where they were asked how much did their income increase. This was then dichotomized into above/below $1 hourly or $2,000 annually. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the experience of merit/performance-based raises larger than $1 hourly or $2,000 annually of men and women frontline employees in the United States and their satisfaction with their workplace rewards and benefits. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 414) = 15.89, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed that women were represented in the group receiving a smaller merit-performance-based raise (1.6) more often than men (-2.1) or employees of another gender (0.7), with men differing significantly from what was expected and women approaching significance.
24. An ordinal regression analysis examined the relationship between hourly income and the likelihood that employees belong to the least, moderately, or better satisfied group in relation to their total salary compensation. The model was statistically significant (χ² (6) = 285.08, p < .001), indicating that hourly income is a significant predictor of employee satisfaction. The analysis revealed a key threshold at an hourly income of approximately $25.00-29.99. Employees earning below this level were less likely to report satisfaction above the moderately satisfied range. As income rose beyond that point, increases in income were associated with only marginal improvements. In other words, while higher pay beyond $30/hour continued to have a positive effect, the gains in satisfaction diminished, pointing to a plateau. This highlights the need for a rewards strategy that goes beyond pay alone to include benefits, career growth, and professional development.
25. An ordinal regression analysis examined the relationship between salaried income and the likelihood that employees belong to the least, moderately, or better satisfied group. The model was statistically significant (χ²(10) = 27.75 p < .01), indicating that salaried income is a meaningful predictor of employee satisfaction. The analysis revealed a key threshold at an annual salary of approximately $40,000. Employees earning below this range were less likely to report satisfaction above the moderately satisfied level. As income rose to or above this threshold, the likelihood of reporting moderate satisfaction increased. However, beyond this point, additional increases in income were associated with only minimal gains in satisfaction, suggesting a plateau effect. This reinforces the idea that while fair compensation is important, further improvements in satisfaction may depend on non-financial factors such as enhanced benefits, career growth, and professional development.
26. An estimated 30% of frontline workers — or 19.17 million employees — fall into the least satisfied group. Of these, 60% (11.5 million workers) indicate they would not work for their organization again, putting them at high risk of attrition. With an average turnover cost of $52,000 per employee (Increasing your return on talent: The moves and metrics that matter. (2024, April 15). McKinsey.), the potential financial impact of this churn could reach $600 billion. By contrast, raising wages by $5 per hour (an additional $10,000 per year per employee) for these 11.5 million at-risk workers would cost approximately $115 billion annually, across industries. However, this investment could yield substantial savings, as reducing attrition would offset these costs nearly fivefold, with every $1 spent on pay increases saving approximately $5.20 in reduced turnover costs. Even a $5 per hour raise could result in a 5x ROI, making higher wages a financially sound strategy for improving retention.
27. Access to development resources was measured across eight categories: educational resources, flexible work, job-shadowing, mentorship opportunities, part-time work moving into full-time, promotions, skill-building assignments, and training for higher paying jobs, on 1-5 scale (1 being “never” and 5 being “always”). A univariate ANOVA was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their experiences of development opportunities, F (2, 4,014) = 1463.86, p < .001). Post-hoc Bonferroni analyses revealed a significant difference between the least and most satisfied groups (p < .001), the moderately and most satisfied groups (p < .001), and the least and moderately satisfied groups (p < .001).
28. A logistic regression was conducted to examine the relationship between employee satisfaction (most satisfied vs. least satisfied) and their access to development opportunities. The model was statistically significant, χ²(1) = 1,287.82, p < .001, suggesting that the most satisfied employees were 42.2 times more likely to perceive support compared to those with low satisfaction, Exp(B) = 42.24, 95% CI [32.60, 54.72], p < .001. The model explained 57.7% of the variance in satisfaction (Nagelkerke R² = .577).
29. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to development opportunities and the level of satisfaction between frontline employee groups. Development opportunities were calculated as the combined opportunities an employee had across promotion opportunities, access to skill-building assignments, job-shadowing, mentorship programs, training for higher-paying jobs, educational resources, opportunities for part-time employees to move into full-time roles, and access to flexible work. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 1,195.60, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-16.2), moderately (1.5) and most (13.1) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected; A linear regression was conducted to assess the effects of receiving a series of professional development opportunities on the likelihood of belonging to a least satisfied, moderately satisfied, or most-satisfied frontline employee group. The model was statistically significant, F (6, 4010) = 90.84, p < .001, and explained 12% of the variance (R² = .12). Among the predictors, promotion opportunities (B = -.07, SE = .02, β = -.09, p < .001), skill-building assignments (B = -.06, SE = .02, β = -.08, p < .001), formal mentorship programs (B = -.06, SE = .01, β = -.09, p < .001), and opportunities for part-time employees to move to full-time roles (B = -.05, SE = .02, β = -.07, p = .001) were the strongest predictors. In contrast, flexible work arrangements (β = -.05, p = .01) and the availability of educational resources (β = -.06, p = .008), job shadowing (β = –.00, p = .86), and formal training relevant to higher-paying roles (β = –.02, p = .40) were not statistically significant at p ≤ .001.
30. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to promotion opportunities (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and the level of satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 888.71, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-11.6) and moderately (2.9) and most satisfied (7.3) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
31. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to skill-building assignments (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always”, and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and the level of satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 743.73, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-10.4) and moderately (1.9) and most satisfied (7.3) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
32. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to job-shadowing (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 654.67, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-12.0) and moderately (1.2) and most satisfied (9.6) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
33. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to mentorship programs (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 821.45, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-13.7) and moderately (0.9) and most satisfied (11.5) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
34. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to training for higher-paying jobs (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always”, and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 1118.25, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-15.0) and moderately (2.6) and most satisfied (10.8) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
35. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to educational resources (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 715.72, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-11.0) and moderately (1.5) and most satisfied (8.4) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
36. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to opportunities for part-time employees to move to full-time jobs (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 486.37, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the least (-7.6) and moderately (1.0) and most satisfied (5.8) groups differed significantly from what was expected.
37. Pace (2022).
38. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to promotions and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 33.51, p < .001, with a higher percentage of women (26%) than men (18%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (3.5) and men (-3.7) differed significantly from what was expected.
39. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to skill-building assignments and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 29.47, p < .001, with a higher percentage of women (26%) than men (18%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (3.3) and men (-3.5) differed significantly from what was expected.
40. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to job shadowing and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 36.70, p < .001, with a higher percentage of women (41%) than men (32%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (3.4) and men (-3.4) differed significantly from what was expected.
41. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to training for higher-paying roles and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 71.89, p < .001, with a higher percentage of  women (37%)  than men (25%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (4.9) and men (-5.0) differed significantly from what was expected.
42. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to mentorship and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 64.89, p < .001, with a higher percentage of  women (45%) than men (33%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (4.4) and men (-4.5) differed significantly from what was expected.
43. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to educational resources and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 53.29, p < .001, with a higher percentage of women (32%) than men (22%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (4.0) and men (-4.5) differed significantly from what was expected.
44. A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to pathways to full-time roles and the gender of frontline employees. The results indicated a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,011) = 37.93, p < .001, with a higher percentage of women (22.5%) than men (15%) reporting they rarely or never had access. Examination of standardized residuals revealed women (3.6) and men (-4.0) differed significantly from what was expected.
45. Where agreement with the statements: “My company provides useful information regarding how decisions are made,” “I can request clarification or additional information about how decisions are made,” and “My company has clear standards for these decisions” were aggregated and dichotomized into “company processes are unclear” (strongly disagree, disagree, and neither agree nor disagree), and “company promotion processes are clear” (agree and strongly agree); 50% of employees felt company processes were clear and 50% felt they weren’t.
46. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their experiences of clear and fair promotion processes. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 1339.14, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (19.1), moderately (-2.8), and least (-17.2) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected.
47. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their experiences of taking an individual-centered approach to promotion. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 1088.90, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (16.1) and least (-15.5) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, whilst the moderately satisfied group (-1.5) did not.
48. Where agreement to the statements: “My manager doesn’t favor one employee over another,” “My manager follows fair procedures in decision making,” and “My manager applies policies consistently to all employees” were aggregated and dichotomized into “employees believe their team members are not treated fairly when it comes to resources and opportunities” (strongly disagree, disagree, and neither agree nor disagree), and “employees believe their team members are treated fairly when it comes to resources and opportunities” (agree and strongly agree). A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their experiences of manager fairness. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 2,482) = 405.01, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (11.0) and least (-9.7) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, whilst the moderately satisfied group (0.1) did not.
49. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters on their experiences of manager support related to career growth. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 2,482) = 694.18, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (12.8) and least (-12.6) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, whilst the moderately satisfied group (1.2) did not.
50. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to flexible work and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 469.89, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (5.9) and least (-8.0) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, whilst the moderately satisfied group (1.3) did not.
51. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the impact of the employee satisfaction clusters whether their job demands allow for work-life balance. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 731.40, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (9.3) and least (-10.9) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, but the moderately (0.7) satisfied group did not.
52. Pace, L. (2022, March 8). Gender imbalance at work continues. Quinyx.
53. A logistic regression was conducted to examine the relationship between employee satisfaction (most satisfied vs. least satisfied) and their perception of fairness in the allocation of resources and opportunities. The model was statistically significant, χ² (1) = 426.25, p < .001, suggesting that the most satisfied employees were 11.4 times more likely to perceive fairness compared to those with low satisfaction, Exp(B) = 11.37, 95% CI [8.84, 14.63], p < .001. The model explained 35.1% of the variance in satisfaction (Nagelkerke R² = .351).
54. A logistic regression was conducted to examine the relationship between employee satisfaction (most satisfied vs. least satisfied) and their perception of managerial support in their development. The model was statistically significant, χ² (1) = 773.84, p > .001, suggesting that the most satisfied employees were 41.7 times more likely to perceive support compared to those with low satisfaction, Exp(B) = 41.20, 95% CI [29.50, 57.55], p < .001. The model explained 56.8% of the variance in satisfaction (Nagelkerke R² = .568).
55. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to examine the relationship between frequent access to flexible work (measured on a 1 to 5 scale with 1 being “never” and 5 being “always,” and dichotomized into “never and rarely” (1-2.99) and “sometimes, often, and very often” (3-5)) and satisfaction between frontline employee groups. The analysis revealed a significant association, χ² (2, n = 4,017) = 469.89, p < .001. Examination of standardized residuals revealed the most (5.9) and least (-8.0) satisfied groups differed significantly from what was expected, whilst the moderately satisfied group (1.3) did not.
56. A series of relative importance analyses were conducted to examine the relative importance of variables on US frontline employees’ sense of satisfaction in their base pay, benefits, professional development, advancement opportunities, and pay increases. These analyses required items on similar scales to be grouped together. The first analysis examined the items asked on an agreement scale (e.g., clear, fair, and individual-centered promotion processes, access to flexible work) where the regression model explained 62% of the variance in employee perceptions of promotion opportunities (R² = 0.62), indicating that the independent variables accounted for a substantial proportion of the variability in perceptions. The second analysis examined the items asked on an agreement scale related to supportive managerial experiences (e.g., managers were fair and consistent in their support) where the regression model explained 28% of the variance in employee perceptions of manager fairness (R² = 0.28). The third analysis examined items that asked about the frequency of experiences across various organizational factors (e.g., job growth and development opportunities), where the regression model explained 46% of the variance in employee perceptions of access to development resources (R² = 0.46). The fourth analysis examined the frequency of experience in employees across various managerial factors, where the regression model explained 45% of the variance in employee perceptions of manager support (R² = 0.45). Once normalized, the data were organized in terms of relative importance. In this analysis, we've evaluated the various actions highlighted in the report to understand their relative impact on frontline employee satisfaction. Rather than reporting every action, we've focused on those with the most significant impact, and while all actions in this report contribute, some have a bigger impact than others in driving overall employee experience. The action with the highest impact is increasing organizational transparency in decision-making, with a 14% impact, followed by training managers to follow fair procedures in decision-making (12%). Other significant actions include ensuring managers apply policies consistently (11%), providing clear and accessible promotion pathways for employees (11%), and ensuring managers do not favor one employee over another (10%). Additionally, designing processes to balance job demands and life responsibilities (9%), providing access to formal training for higher-paying roles (9%), enabling HR or talent management departments to understand employees’ individual goals and preferences (9%), ensuring managers share information about further training or educational resources (9%), and providing access to skill-building assignments outside of core responsibilities (8%) all contribute to improving employee satisfaction.
57. Brassel, S., Van Bommel, T., & Robotham, K. (2022). Three inclusive team norms that drive success. Catalyst.
58. Guggenberger Wigert, A. (2024, July 5). Trends and predictions for the global frontline workforce. Quinyx.