This chapter includes the discussions as represented in the descriptive analysis, regression analysis and the structural equation model. The results reflected and answered the questions of the study that perceived managerial trust has a positive significant effect on employees’ job involvement, organization affective commitment and job satisfaction, and will be discussed at length.
Research Review
In Chapter I the introduction section of this study, trust was described by Tzafrir and Dolon (2004) as “A willingness to increase one’s resource investment in another party, based on positive expectation, resulting from past positive mutual interactions.” The importance of trust in the organization was presented particularly managerial trust in employees. Managers according to Whitener et al. (1998) should be the initiators of trust.
This study is significant because few studies have actually focused on managerial trust in subordinates (Hassan & Ahmed, 2011; Leonard 2008; Tzafrir 2005). This study aimed to make a contribution in establishing that managerial trust has a positive and significant relationship with job involvement, organization affective commitment, and job satisfaction.
Data was collected from the financial sector in St. Lucia then analysed, and the findings were presented in Chapter IV. This section discusses the results and its implications.
64
Discussions for Descriptive Statistics
Managerial Trust
In the descriptive statistics for managerial trust in subordinates, we noticed that participants generally agree that their immediate managers trust them. Since the responses for reliability items were mostly agree it can be implied that in the financial sector, employees generally perceived that their managers saw them as reliable in that their managers believe they will keep the promises that they make, or that their managers believe that they will take actions consistent with their words. Also it may also mean that employees perceive that their managers trust them to share the values of the organization, and to be concerned about the wellbeing of both employers and other organization at large.
On a whole, responses to trust items ranged from somewhat neutral to agree which suggest that in the financial sector employees generally perceived that their managers trust them to be in harmony, be reliable and to show concern. In the descriptive statistics for managerial trust items, it was interesting to note that though employees perceived that their managers trust them, they were mostly neutral in responding that there is warmth in the relationship between themselves and managers “X1: There is a lot of warmth in the relationship between my manager and I.” (M = 3.34). They were also mostly neutral in responding to item X10: If I make a mistake my manager is willing to forgive and forget (M = 3.39). This could imply that there is some level of power distance in the financial sector in that employees and managers are not close enough to maintain a warm relationship with their managers. This could also imply that managers and employees do not necessarily mingle socially with each other as this is one way of building a warm relationship. Remaining mostly neutral on item X10 could imply that if employees make a mistake on the job that it is not directly communicated to the managers hence employees may not know if their managers would forgive them if a mistake is made, or feedback is not immediately given instead feedback may be communicated at appraisals which may be held annually.
65
Job Involvement
According to the definition of job involvement provided by Lawler and Hall (1970) who describes the concept as the degree to which one a identifies his entire work situation to be important and a dominant part of his identity; then it must be noted based on the descriptive statistics for the construct that the employees in the financial sector did not generally agree to be highly involved in their jobs. For example item Y2: The most important thing that happens to me involves my work (M = 2.83). This means that responses ranged from fairly disagreeing or responding neutral to the item. Based on responses for all four items measuring job involvement it can be implied that there does not exist a high level of job involvement among the employees.
This is not surprising since majority of the respondents are very young between the ages of 21-25 (33%). Majority of the respondents are bank tellers (28%) and majority has an associate degree (51%). Also the second highest respondents simply have a high school diploma accounting for 34% of the respondents. The reason for the low agreement on job involvement items could be in part to the relatively young sample that are high school leavers or completed their associate degree and have not fully decided on their career path. It should be noted however that though employees were reluctant to agree that their work is the most important part of their lives, they fairly agreed that they are very much involved personally with their work (Y4 with mean 3.62).
One also should regard the culture in which the sample was drawn as it could share some light on information collected. Some cultures may not place too much significance on work as others would, hence the job would not be regarded as the most important part of their lives. With regards to item Y2 another reason for respondents fairly disagreeing to this item could be because people maybe dissatisfied with aspects of their jobs which would lead them to disagreeing to the item.
66
Affective Orgnanizational Commitment
For the most part, employees agree that they are willing to put a great deal in helping their organization succeed (Y5 with mean 4.20). Willingness to help the organization succeed appears to be the most agreed upon item in the entire instrument. Based on the responses provided by employees it can be implied that though they have the willingness to help their organizations succeed, they were not exactly disposed to going above and beyond themselves to accomplish that. For example Y6: I would accept almost any type of job assignment to keep working for this company (M = 3.18). This indicates that responses were mostly neutral.
Job Satisfaction
Based on the descriptive statistics, the responses for the six items ranged from fairly disagree to fairly agree. The mean scores for item Y11 (M = 2.64) I am satisfied with my rate of pay and Y12 (M = 2.76 ) I am satisfied with my chances of getting a promoted are the lowest whereby employees tend to fairly disagree or remain neutral. It should be noted that this two items focused on extrinsic elements of the job and is not directly meshed with the job itself.
Again most of the respondents have been employed with the organization between 0-4 years which suggest that some of them may have entry levels positions, for example the descriptive statistics revealed that 28% of the respondents are bank tellers. It may therefore be reasonable to suggest that there is low satisfaction with rate of pay and chances of promotion.
Positive and Negative Affect
For positive affect most respondents answered neutral for Y15: Inspired. This could imply that the job does not necessarily inspire them, or it is possible that the true meaning of the word was not understood. Respondents mostly agreed to items Y16: Alert and Y19 determined both with a high mean score of (3.94). The balance of the items ranged between neutral and
67
fairly agree. Based on the descriptive statistics of positive affect it shows that respondent were not very keen to respond directly with agree or disagree.
For negative affect most of the respondents disagree with items and this could be because most people are not willing to admit to having negative feelings.
Discussions Multiple Regression Analysis
This study used two types of multiple regression analysis to evaluation the relationships between the independent variable managerial trust and its effect on job attitudes. First a standard multiple regression was used to assess the relationship between managerial trust and job involvement. Second a hierarchical regression was used to measure the relationship managerial trust dependent variables organization affective commitment and job satisfaction controlling for the effects of positive affect and tenure.
As mentioned in the introduction in chapter I, majority of studies focused on employees trust in their leaders rather than on managerial trust in their subordinates therefore this research adds to our understanding of the importance of trust in the organization. This study investigated managerial trust in subordinates based on the perception of the employees. The study found that managerial trust in employees has a significant effect on employees’ job involvement, affective organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. These results are consistent with prior research for example Lester and Brown (2003) states that when people perceive that their managers think them worthy of trust, this would positively affect them. If employee believes that their employers trust them then they will reciprocate by performing citizenship behaviours. Nyhan and Marlowe (1997) posit that trust is indeed connected with attitudinal attributes of employees’ jobs within the organization. Hassan and Ahmed (2011) also states that trusting relationships in work groups can bring about positive outcomes; job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work engagement. Furthermore, recalling the theories mentioned in the introductory chapter; we mentioned social exchange theory where “One individual voluntarily provides a benefit to
68
another, invoking an obligation of the other party to reciprocate by providing some benefit in return.” (Whitener et al., 2008 p.515). In this case if managers can demonstrate their trust towards their employees by allowing them to self-manage, provide more variety in their jobs, be willing to listen to suggestions that employees make, employees may feel some sort of obligation to reciprocate by demonstrating positive attitudes towards work. Further discussions are given for the main research hypothesis 3 to 5 corresponding to the three main research purposes.
Discussion Hypothesis 3 (H3)
As have been established from the regression analysis hypothesis 3 (H3) “There is a significant relationship between managerial trust in subordinates and its effect on their job involvement” was supported. However it must be noted that out of the three sub independent variables used in the analysis only “concern” and “harmony” had a significant relationship with job involvement. Concern is described in this research as one party’s belief that another party will not take undue advantage of them (McGregor, 1967; Bromiley & Cummings, 1993 as cited in Mishra, 1996). The beta coefficient associated with “Concern” (0.307) in managerial trust is positive, indicating a positive relationship between the variables which means that when concern in managerial trust increases job involvement also increases. It can be implied then that if employees perceive that their managers trust them not to take undue advantage of them this would have a positive impact on how involved they are with their jobs. In other words because there is the expectation that employees would demonstrate concern towards their employers and their organization, employees feel disposed to fulfil that expectation to show concern. Also the beta coefficient for harmony (0.309) is also positive which indicates that if employees perceive that their managers trust them to have shared values with the organization this would positively affect their job involvement.
Reliability as a sub-independent variable of managerial trust did not have a significant relationship with job involvement. This is surprising since reliability has to do with consistency
69
and dependability yet the results show that the variable does not have a significant effect on how involved one is with work. This means that even though employees perceive that managers trust them to be reliable it does not affect their attitude toward their job. This is important because reliability is often used by researchers as one dimension of trust (please see chapter 2’s table on dimensions of trust).
Discussions Hypothesis 4 (H4)
Based on the regression findings for hypothesis 4 (H4): There is a positive relationship between perceived managerial trust in subordinates and organizational affective commitment.
The beta coefficient associated with sub-independent variable “harmony” (0.351) in managerial trust is positive, indicating a positive relationship between the variables which means that when harmony in managerial trust increases organizational affective commitment also increases. This research used tenure as control variable for affective organizational commitment (AOC) since it might have an effect on employees’ AOC outside of trust. The results of the hierarchical regression revealed that H1: There is a significant relationship between tenure and affective organizational commitment was supported. However, when the sub-independent variables were added to the model “tenure” ceased to be an important factor in predicting organizational affective commitment. This indicates that managerial trust in subordinates has a stronger relationship on affective organizational commitment than tenure in this research. Apart from harmony, other sub-independent variables reliability and concern did not significantly affect the variable.
It is important at this time to recall the definition used for “harmony” as stated in the introductory chapter. The concept is described as “A combination of feelings, interests, opinions, purpose, and values, inside the employment relationship system creates harmony.” (Tzafrir &
Dolan, 2004 p.118). This meaning implies that there are shared values or goals within the relationship if harmony exists. According to the same authors, if there is harmony inside the
70
employment relationship then there will be an intense increase in risk taking. This means that managers are more likely to allow employees to take their own initiative or listen to and act on positive suggestions that employees make. Also harmony in the employment relationship could reduce on monitoring since managers use this as form of reducing risks. If employees perceive there to be harmony between them and their managers, and that their managers trust them to share the goals and values of the organization then this would encourage an increased emotional attachment to the organization. Taking this into consideration then one can better understand the positive relationship that exists between the sub-independent variable harmony and affective commitment. Affective Organizational commitment also refers to identification with ones’
organization. Other sub-independent variables reliability and concern had no significant relationship with affective organizational commitment.
Discussions Hypothesis 5 (H5)
Hypothesis 5: Managerial trust in subordinates has a significant and positive relationship with their job satisfaction when controlling positive affect was supported. This also is consistent with previous research which looked at trust and its effect on job satisfaction. For example Paliszkiewicz (2011) mentioned that interpersonal trust is considered an important factor in fuelling employees’ job satisfaction and commitment. Lester and Brown (2003) states that when an employee perceives that their manager trust him/her it would positively affect their job satisfaction. Also in using the variables negative and positive affect to control for effect of managerial trust, we found that positive affect had a significant effect on job satisfaction.
With the inclusion of the independent variables managerial trust, positive affect became less significant but still remained significant. In fact although the power of predicting job satisfaction increased by 8.8% with the inclusion of managerial trust into the model; positive affect still had a more significant effect on job satisfaction than did trust. This reveals the importance of personality in how satisfied or dissatisfied one is with his or her job. Again several
71
researches done on the subject agree that indeed personality does affect job satisfaction. For example Kafetsios and Zampetakes (2008) in measuring the effect of emotional intelligence on job satisfaction, used positive and negative affect as mediating variables. They also acknowledged that positive and negative affect explained a significant part of job satisfaction variance. In this research only positive affect had a significant effect on job satisfaction. It is unclear why this is so since it was expected that negative affect would have had a significant but inverse effect on job satisfaction since it is known to have a positive effect on job dissatisfaction (Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2005).
Harmony was the only sub independent variable which had a significant effect on job satisfaction. Hence if values and goals of individuals are aligned with that of the organization this will in turn create job satisfaction. Wagner and Hollenbeck (2005) reports that job satisfaction consist of three important components namely: Values, importance of values, and perception. When the values of employees are aligned with that of the manager and organization, and if importance is placed on these values then this would affect satisfaction. Also based on the components of job satisfaction provided by the authors, the perception of the values would also affect job satisfaction. If employees perceive that employers trust them to demonstrate harmony then this will in turn have a positive effect on their job satisfaction.
72
73