Equation 26 Variables

β value¹ t-value β value¹ t-value

Q2 .186 1.363 .242** 2.463

Gender Male/Female .352 1.303

Position Workers/Supervisor -.019 -.068

Age

¹ The value of the beta here is from the Unstandardized Coefficients.

In Equation 1, of the 30 independent variables inputted in the backward regression model, 11 have negative parameters of which only one has statistical significance explaining the variance of job satisfaction of coworkers. From the other 19 variables that have positive parameters, only one has statistical significance explaining the variance of job satisfaction of coworkers, too. For the dimension of the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation and the outward and compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, no question shows significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. For the dimension of the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, only Q11 has a positive parameter (.516) with the t-ratio (3.271) showing significance at the 1% level to job satisfaction of coworkers. For the type of nonprofits, gender, position, age, marital status, and tenure show no significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. As to the highest degree earned, employees with the degree of master show significance to job satisfaction of coworkers at the 10% level, with a negative parameter (-.509) and the t-ratio (-1.711). These results change from equation to equation.

In Equation 26, five variables show statistical significance to satisfaction of coworkers. Of those five variables, four have positive parameters and only one has negative parameter.

Result for Null Hypothesis 2-5:

For the dimension of the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, two questions show significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. Q2 has a positive parameter (.242) with the t-ratio (2.463) showing significance at the 5% level. It is suggested that the more employees enjoy trying to solve complex problems, the more they are satisfied with the coworkers. Q8, a reverse question, also has a positive parameter (.152) with the t-ratio (1.665) showing significance at the 10% level, which

means if there is a rise in the disagreement that I enjoy relatively simple, straightforward tasks would lead to an increase in job satisfaction of coworkers. As a result, we reject the null hypothesis 2-5 for Q2 and Q8 and accept the alternative that there is statistically significant relationship between the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of coworkers. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 3-5:

For the dimension of the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, only Q11 has a positive parameter (.492) and a t-ratio (5.595) showing significance at the 1% level. The result means that a rise in the agreement that what matters most to me is enjoying what I do would lead to a rise in job satisfaction of coworkers. Therefore, we rejected the null hypothesis 3-5 for Q11 and accept the alternative that there is statistically significant relationship between the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of coworkers. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 4-5:

For the dimension of the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, only one question show significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. Q17 has a positive parameter (.148) and t-ratio (1.774), showing significance at the 10% level. It indicates that the more employees are concerned about how other people react to their ideas, the more they are satisfied with coworkers. Therefore, we rejected the null hypothesis 4-5 for Q17 and accept the alternative that there is statistically significant relationship between the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation and job

satisfaction of coworkers. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 5-5:

For the dimension of compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, no question shows significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted that there is no significant relationship between the compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 6-5:

As to type of nonprofits, it is not statistically significant to job satisfaction of coworkers. As a result the null hypothesis 6-5 is accepted that type of nonprofits has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 7-5:

The demographic variable, gender, is not statistically significant. As a result the null hypothesis 7-5 is accepted stating that gender has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 8-5:

Employees’ position is not statistically significant. Therefore the null hypothesis 8-5 is accepted stating that position has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 9-5:

As to the age, using employees with the age of 20 to 29 years old as a reference group, it is not statistically significant. As a result the null hypothesis 9-5 is accepted stating that age has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 10-5:

For the marital status, using the married employees as a reference group, it is not statistically significant. As a result the null hypothesis 10-5 is accepted stating that marital status has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers.

Result for Null Hypothesis 11-5:

For the highest degree earned, using employees with the degree of bachelor as the reference group, employees with the degree of master is statistically significant at the 5% level with a negative parameter (-.411) and t-ratio (-2.185). As a result the null hypothesis 11-5 is rejected and we accept the alternative stating that the highest degree earned has statistical significance to job satisfaction of coworkers. The null hypothesis is accepted for employees with the degree of bachelor and under bachelor.

Result for Null Hypothesis 12-5:

For the tenure, using employees with the tenure of less than one to five years as the reference group, it is not significant. As a result, the null hypothesis 12-5 is accepted that there is no statistical difference between tenure and job satisfaction of coworkers.

Table 4.7 is Multiple Regression for independent variables as predictors for job satisfaction of nature of work. The backward elimination process is repeated 27 times, in 27 equations, until all remaining independent variables reach at least the 10% level of significance. In the table, the R² of Equation 1 is 0.976 which accounts for 97.6% of the variance of job satisfaction of nature of work while in Equation 27 the R² is 0.971 which explains for 97.1% of the variance of job satisfaction of nature of work.

Table 4.7. Multiple Regression for independent variables as predictors for job satisfaction of nature of work

Equation 1 Equation 27 Variables

β value¹ t-value β value¹ t-value Q2 .370*** 2.776 .482*** 5.321

Gender Male/Female .008 .249

Position Workers/Supervisor .052 .591

Age

¹ The value of the beta here is from the Unstandardized Coefficients.

In Equation 1, of the 30 independent variables inputted in the backward regression model, 13 have negative parameters of which no one has statistical significance explaining the variance of job satisfaction of nature of work. From the other 17 variables that have positive parameters, two have statistical significance explaining the variance of job satisfaction of nature of work. For the dimension of the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, one question shows significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. Q2 has a positive parameter (.370) and t-ratio (2.776) showing significance at the 1% level. For the dimension of the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, Q6 has a positive parameter (.208) and t-ratio (1.829) showing significance at the 10% level. For the dimension of the outward and compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, no questions show significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. The type of nonprofits, gender, position, age, marital status, the highest degree earned, and tenure show no significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. These results change from equation to equation.

In Equation 27, four variables show statistical significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. All of these four variables have positive parameters.

Result for Null Hypothesis 2-6:

For the dimension of the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, only one questions show significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. Q2 has a positive parameter (.482) and t-ratio (5.321), indicating that it is significant at the 1%

level. The result means that a rise in the agreement that I enjoy trying to solve complex problems would contribute to a rise in job satisfaction of nature of work. As a result the null hypothesis 2-6 is rejected and we accept the alternative that there is significant relationship between the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation and

job satisfaction of nature of work for Q2. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the challenge in the aspect of intrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 3-6:

For the dimension of the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation, one question shows significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. Q11 has a positive parameter (.290) and a t-ratio (3.082) showing significance at the 1% level. It implies that a rise in the agreement that what matters most to me is enjoying what I do would contribute to a rise in job satisfaction of nature of work. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis 3-6 for Q 11 and accept the alternative that there is statistically significant relationship between the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of nature of work. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the enjoyment in the aspect of intrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 4-6:

For the dimension of the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, one question shows significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. The parameter for Q17 is positive (.177), with the t-ratio (2.232), indicating that it is significance at the 5% level. It means that the more employees are concerned about how other people react to their ideas, the more they are satisfied with nature of work. Therefore we rejected the null hypothesis 4-6 for Q17 and accept the alternative that there is statistically significant relationship between the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of nature of work. The null hypothesis is accepted for the other questions belonging to the outward in the aspect of extrinsic motivation.

Result for Null Hypothesis 5-6:

For the dimension of compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation, no questions show significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. The null hypothesis is accepted that there is no statistically significant relationship between compensation in the aspect of extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 6-6:

As to type of nonprofits, it is statistically significant. The parameter is positive (.057) and the t-ratio is (2.015), showing significance at the 5% level. As a result the null hypothesis 6-6 is rejected stating that type of nonprofits has statistical significance to job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 7-6:

The demographic variable, gender, is not statistically significant. As a result the null hypothesis 7-6 is accepted stating that gender has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 8-6:

Employees’ position shows no significance, either. This suggests that he null hypothesis 8-6 is accepted stating that position has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 9-6:

As to the age, using employees with the age of 20 to 29 years old as the reference group, it is not significant. As a result, the null hypothesis 9-6 is accepted

that there is no statistical difference between age and job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 10-6:

For the marital status, using the married employees as a reference group, it shows no significance. As a result, the null hypothesis 10-6 is accepted that there is no statistical difference between marital status and job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 11-6:

For the highest degree earned, using employees with the degree of bachelor as the reference group, it is not significant. As a result the null hypothesis 11-6 is accepted stating that the highest degree earned has no statistical significance to job satisfaction of nature of work.

Result for Null Hypothesis 12-6:

For the tenure, using employees with tenure of less than one to five years as the reference group, it shows no significance to job satisfaction of nature of work. As a result, the null hypothesis 12-6 is accepted that there is no significant difference between tenure and job satisfaction of nature of work.

Table 4.8 is Multiple Regression for independent variables as predictors for job satisfaction of communication. The backward elimination process is repeated 25 times, in 25 equations, until all remaining independent variables reach at least the 10% level of significance. In the table, the R² of Equation 1 is 0.965 which accounts for 96.5% of the variance of job satisfaction of communication while in Equation 25

the R² is 0.952 which explains for 95.2% of the variance of job satisfaction of communication.

Table 4.8. Multiple Regression for independent variables as predictors for job satisfaction of communication

Equation 1 Equation 25 Variables

β value¹ t-value β value¹ t-value Q2 .341** 2.424 .273** 2.437

Gender Male/Female .027 .098

Position Workers/Supervisor -.072 -.252

Age

¹ The value of the beta here is from the Unstandardized Coefficients.