Chapter 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
4.5 Research Summary
H1a: Perceived fairness treatment does not affect job satisfaction.
Furthermore, the figure below shows the relationship between all variables which have figured out of this research.
Figure 4.2: Regression analysis results POS
.723
Turnover Intention Organizational
Reputation
Job Satisfaction
.767
-.183
-.394
Perceived organizational reward and job condition
Perceived fairness treatment
-.412
.261
Chapter 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions
As presented in Chapter I, the purpose of this study was to pursuit four research questions: (1) How does POS affect job satisfaction? (2) How does job satisfaction affect turnover intention? (3) What is the relationship between POS, job satisfaction and turnover intention? (4) How does organizational reputation influent job satisfaction and turnover intention process? which identified by four specific objectives: (1) Exploring the role of perceived organizational support to job satisfaction (2) Examining the impact of job satisfaction on turnover intention (3) Figuring out how perceived organizational support affects turnover intention through employee job satisfaction. (4) Figuring out the moderate effect of organization reputation on job satisfaction and turnover intention process that base on the case of Formosa Ha Tinh Steel – a very famous and long established Taiwanese company with a “bad reputation” in recently at Vietnam. This study was developed 4 hypotheses which tested by using a sample of 271 employees have been working at this company and the results gave empirical pieces of evidence to support all hypotheses.
5.1.1 POS and Job Satisfaction
The first finding is POS positively effect to employee job satisfaction. Aligning with studies conducted by Eisenberger et al., (1997, 2001) this research found out an important role of perceived organizational support from organizational human practices to enhance job satisfaction. Furthermore, organizational reward and working condition support show strong evidence to predict how much job satisfaction employees have whereas perceived fairness treatment does not have an affect directly toward job satisfaction which also was found by Thomas (2012). Because of perceived fairness treatment is concern of the ways used to
determine the distribution of resources among employees while the second factor - perceived organizational reward and job condition relating to pay, benefits, and rewards (Greenberg, 2011), hence the reasons to explain this finding is Vietnamese employees satisfaction are not much bothered about the procedural aspects – how fairness the distribution of resources does but their job satisfaction much more affected by the amount of pay or recognition, reward, promotion…that they receive from their company.
5.1.2 Turnover intention
Starting from the enormous brain-drain problem at Vietnam recently, the main aim of this study to enhance theoretical understanding of turnover intention and the result achieve this goal in several ways.
Firstly, hypotheses H2, H3 explain how perceived organizational support and job satisfaction influence intention to quit a job through social exchange theory. In detail, these findings are the low level of job satisfaction is associated with high level of intention to quit.
In other word reasons make the employee quit the job have direct expressions of job dissatisfaction that also was proven in many previous types of research (Maertz & Campion, 2004; Greenberg, 2011). Moreover, the caring, respect, recognize connoted by POS can fulfill employees socio-emotional need, amplify employee’s belief that organization approval and rewards their efforts and performances, then can lead to positive outcomes to both the employee (job satisfaction) and the organization (turnover intention) which explains the reason why job satisfaction fully mediation the relationship between perceived organizational reward and job condition support toward turnover intention, although other hand fairness treatment perceived is not a satisfied but in reality its absence can cause dissatisfaction and strong directly affect to turnover intention too.
Secondly, social identity theory was applied to elucidate how employees think outsiders see them that can lead to decrease satisfaction, self-esteem, embarrassment if their company
has a “bad reputation” then potentially triggering the decision to leave this company – hypothesis H4. That finding emphasized the importance of building a good organizational image brand because it not only affects the external customer but also affects the inside customers – employees who are the most important predictor of organizational success in the era of fierce competition.
5.2 Practical contributions
This research has some implications for managers in organizations.
First, because job satisfaction holds a major role of employee turnover intention, the higher satisfaction employee has, the less likely they are to leave the organization. Hence, managers need to focus on factors that strongly effectively enhance job satisfaction, let the employee more embedded into their jobs then remain with the organization. These factors are human practical actions inside the organization such as develop an effective and unique organizational reward system, provide more opportunities for employee advancement and development, create attractive promotion policies, give employee more chances for growth through an amount of training courses, sharing knowledge and experience programs.
Especially for those employees who have had long working years at the company, they seem to be more sensitive and demanding in terms of perceived support requirements. Hence, making the procedures to distribute outcomes to employees and let them perceived a fairness treatment between others can strongly help them be more embedded with their current job.
In addition, these factors to reduce turnover intention are not only come from inside organizational practices but also include the external influences. Managers should have awareness about the role of organization reputation in their successful strategy to maintain talent pool and competitive advantages, letting their employees proud of being a part of the company and totally embed themselves with their job by building up a “healthy organization”
which organizational healthy perception from both customer and employee side view.
5.3 Limitations
As any empirical research does, this study also has some limitations. Firstly, because only a single organization was involved in this research, the findings would be limited to the current sample rather than generalized. Another limitation can come from using the self-completed questionnaire which may raise some dishonest problem because of social desirability affection to respondent during the answering time.
5.4 Recommendations for further research
Future researchers can develop from this research framework and limitation in some ways. First, exploring additional and detail factors of POS, human resource practices from an organization in order to have a better understanding about job satisfaction and turnover intention. Second, further research should have a broader sample size, include the different sample from many areas to get a bigger view in turnover intention topic. Lastly, the approach from external factor – organizational reputation effect to turnover intention process still newly and lack of research in Vietnamese context hence further research can exercise more in this area.
REFERENCES
Allen, D.G., Shore, L.M. & Griffeth, R.W. (2003). The Role of Perceived Organizational Support and Supportive Human Resource Practices in the Turnover Process. Journal of Management, 29(1), 99-118.
Amstrong, M. (2006). A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 10th edition.
Kogan Page Publishing, London, 264.
Andrey, P. (October 2016). Vietnamese steelmakers use risky strategy - Vietnam in Focus, Mental Expert.
Anphabe (2016). 1 within 10 employees want to quit a job. Anphabe Survey.
Ashforth, B. E. & Meal, F.(1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A.(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Berens, G. & van Riel, C. (2004). Corporate associations in the academic literature: three main streams of thought in the reputation measurement literature. Corporate Reputation Review, 7( 2), 161-178.
Biswas, S., & Bhatnagar, J. (2013). Mediator analysis of employee engagement: Role of perceived organizational support, P-O Fit, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction. Research, 38(1), 27- 40.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Brown, A., Duncan, A., Harris, N., & Kelly, S. (2003). Strategic talent retention. Strategic HR Review, 2(4), 22-27.
Byrne, Z.S., & Hochwarter, W.A. (2008). Perceived organizational support and performance relationships across levels of organizational cynicism. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 23(1), 54-72.
Cable, D. & Turnban, D. B.(2003). The value of organizational reputation in the recruitment context: a brand equity perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 2244-2266.
Carmeli, A. (2004). The link between organizational elements perceived external prestige and performance. Corporate Reputation Review, 6, 314–331.
Dowling, G.R. (1986). Managing your corporate images. Industrial Marketing Management 15, 109-115
Eisenberger, R., & Stinglhamber, F. 2011. Perceived organizational support: Fostering enthusiastic and productive employees. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P.D.and Rhoades, L. (2001).
Reciprocation of perceived support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42-51.
Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812–820.
Firth, L., Mellor, D. J., Moore, K.A. & Loquet, C. (2003). How can managers reduce employee intention to quit? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(2), 170-187.
Fombrun, C.J., & Rindova, V. (1998). Reputation management in global 1000 firms; a benchmarking study. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(3), 205-214.
Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A., & Sever, J.M (2000). The reputation quotient: a multi-stakeholder measure of corporate reputation. The Journal of Brand Management, 7(4), 241-255
Freeman, R.B., Joseph R. B. & Douglas L. K. (2010), Shared Capitalism at Work Employee Ownership, Profit and Gainsharing and Broad-based stock option. National bureau of economic research.
George, R. (2011). Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. 427 Gotsi, M., & Wilson, A.M. (2001). Corporate Reputation: seeking a definition. Corporate
Communications. An International Journal, 6(1), 24-30.
Gouldner, A.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
Greenberg, J. (2011) Behavior in Organization, 10th edition, 225-231
Hair, J.F.Jr., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Herzberg, F. (1987) "One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?" Harvard Business Review. 46 (1), 53–62.
Hoppock, R. (1977). Job Satisfaction. New York: Harper. (Original work published 1935) Judd, C.M. & Kenny, D.A. (1981). Process Analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment
evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5(5), 602- 619
Lacey, E.B & Hoang, T.H. (2014). A Guide to Understanding HR Trends in Vietnam, Vietnam Briefing.
Maertz, C.P. & Campion, M.A. (2004). Profiles in quitting: integrating process and content turnover theory. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 566-582.
Martins, L.L. (2005). A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science, 16 (6), 701-720.
McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, 117–127.
Meyer J. P., Allen, N. J. & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to Organizations and Occupations:
Extension and Test of a Three-component Conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89.
Mobley, W.H., Horner, S.O. & Hollingsworth, A.T. (1978). An evaluation of precursor of employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 408-414.
Nestrom, J.W. (2015). Human Behavior at work: Organizational Behavior, 14th edition.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Nguyen, Q.V. (2010). Organizational, Job and Supervisory Antecedents and Consequence of Job Embeddedness: The case of Vietnam. Doctor dissertation, Mississipi State, USA,
103
Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory 3rd edition. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Pfarrer, M.D., Pollock, T.G. & Rindova, V.P. (2010). A tale of two assets: the effects of firm reputation and celebrity on earnings surprises and investors’ reactions. Academy of Management Journal, 53 (5), 1131-1152.
Rhoades, L. & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived Organizational Support: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714
Richardson, J. & Bolesh, E. (2002). Towards the See-through Corporation. Pharmaceutical Executive, 54, 6-13
Riordan, C. M., Gatewood R.D. & Bill J.B. (1997). Corporate image: employee reactions and implications for managing corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 16, 401–412.
Ristig, K. (2009). The impact of perceived organizational support and trustworthiness on trust. Management Research News, 32(7), 659-669.
Ruge, B. (February 2011). Employee Engagement & Retention in Vietnam. American Chamber of Commerce.
Shapiro, J.A. & Conway, N. (2005). Exchange relationship: Examining psychological contracts and perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4) 774-781
Shore, L.M., & Shore, T.H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and organizational justice. Managing the social climate of the workplace, 149–164.
Shrout, P.E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies:
New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
Soumendu B. & Jyotsna B. (2013). Mediator analysis of Employee Engagement: Role of Percieved Organizational Support, P-O Fit, Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction. Vikapa. 38(1), 27-40.
Talentnet (2016). Talentnet and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey (TRS) 2016.
Tett, R. P. & Meyer, J.P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), 259-293.
Theguardian (2016). Vietnam blames toxic waste water from steel plant for mass fish deaths.
Thomas, P. & Nagalingappa, G. (2012), Consequences of Perceived Organizational Justice:
An empirical study of White-collar employees. Journal of Arts, Science & Commerce.
Tuoitrenews (2015). Taiwanese investor to add $18bn to multibillion-dollar steel project in central Vietnam.
Việt Nam News - The National English Language Daily (2013). Senior-level jobs see high turnover.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M. & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 82-111.
Appendix 1
Timeline of Formosa Ha Tinh Steel, Vietnam
Time Event
In 2008 - Formosa Ha Tinh Steel Corporation was formed by Formosa Plastics Group of Taiwan to establish a large iron and steel making plant at a deepwater port in Vietnam.
- This project has created necessary transportation, economic and power infrastructures in Vietnam and will contribute to making Vung Ang, Ha Tinh economic zone become the biggest heavy industrial center in South East Asia
In 2010 - 300 hectares (33 km2) of land in Kỳ Anh District was allocated to the development Hung Nghiep Formosa Ha Tinh Steel Co by Ha Tinh Province.
- Initially, statements by the company estimated a $15 billion development cost to install 7.5 million tons pa steel capacity.
In 2012 - An increased project of $22 billion.
- Governmental incentives for the plant included: low taxation in imported capital goods, low land taxes, and the development of infrastructure supporting the project.
- Employment due to the project was expected to be 10,000 people with a second phase increasing production creating 30,000 jobs.
In late 2015 - The plant outputted the first hot rolled coil manufactured in Vietnam.
In 2016 Formosa cause the mass fish deaths in Vietnam Central
- In early April, residents along the central Vietnamese coast began noticing unprecedented numbers of dead fish.
- A large number of dead fish were found on the coast of Ha Tinh and three other provinces: Quang Binh, Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue until 18 April 2016
- From May, over 100 tons worth of dead fish had been collected - Formosa accepted responsibility for the fish deaths on June 30,
2016, after denying responsibility for months and admitted responsible for discharging toxic industrial waste illegally into the ocean through drainage pipes. And agreed to pay $500 million (11.5 trillion VND) compensation for the discharge.
Effects and Responses
- The disaster disrupted the livelihood of fishermen in four provinces in the central coast of Vietnam. On 4 May 2016, Vietnamese government had announced a ban on processing and selling seafood caught within 20 nautical miles of Central Vietnam provinces
- According to the local government of Quang Binh, the fishermen of this province had already lost $5.2 million; it affects the livelihoods of restaurant owners, makers of traditional Vietnamese fish sauce, in addition, the disaster also heavily impacted the tourism industry (as nearly 30% tourists canceled their planned tours to the affected provinces for the national holiday season starting on 30 April) …
Appendix 2 English Questionnaire
Dear Respondent,
I am the student of International Master of Business Administration at I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Currently, I am doing a research about a study on "The Relationship of Perceived Organizational Support, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention. The moderating role of Organizational Reputation. Case study of Formosa Ha Tinh Steel, Vietnam”
I would like to invite you to complete the questionnaire enclosed. And make sure your participation is voluntary. All the answers and your information in the questionnaire will be kept safely. Please notice that no any requirement about your name or other characteristics in any publications in this survey, also it is not a psychological test from your manager, so please don't worry that your answer could influence your job. The data will be used only for academic research purpose.
Every answer that you gave is invaluable assistance for this study.
If you have any further questions, concerns or interest in the result from this study, please do not hesitate to reach me by e-mail.
Thank you a lot for cooperating with my thesis.
Sincerely,
• Please read each statement carefully, check ONE of the alternatives that best describe YOUR CURRENT SITUATION.
I. Main questions
A. Listed below is a series of statements that represent possible feelings that individuals might have about the company or organization for which they work. With respect to your own feelings about the particular organization for which you are now working, please indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement:
1- Strongly Disagree
9. Formosa is willing to extend itself in order to help me perform my job
to the best of my ability
15. Formosa cares about my opinions 16. Formosa takes pride in my accomplishments at work 17. Formosa tries to make my job as interesting as possible
B. Listed below is a series of statements to evaluate how to satisfy you have for your current job. Please indicate the degree of your satisfied or dissatisfied with each statement:
1- Strongly Dissatisfied 20. How satisfied are you with your relations with your coworkers or
peers?
21. How satisfied are you with the pay you receive for your job? 22. How satisfied are you with the opportunities which exist in this
organization for advancement or promotion?
23. Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your current
job situation?
C. Please indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement:
1- Strongly Disagree
26. My company mainta ins high standards in the way it
treats people
27. I have a good feeling about the company
28. I admire and respect the company
29. I trust the company a great deal
30. In the past few months, I have seriously thought about
looking for a new job
31. Presently, I'm actively searching for other jobs. 32. I intend to leave my current workplace in the near
future.
I. Respondent’s information questions 1. Gender:
1. Male 2. Female
2. Age: ______________
3. Status
1. Single 2. Married
4. How many children do you have? ________________
5. Education
1. Under Bachelor 2. Bachelor degree
3. Master degree or higher 4. Other
6. How long have you been worked at your company? ______year _______month Thanks for your cooperation!
Appendix 3
Vietnamese Questionnaire BẢNG KHẢO SÁT
Xin chào bạn, tôi là sinh viên theo học thạc sỹ ngành Quản Trị Kinh Doanh Quốc Tế trường đại học I-Shou Cao Hùng (Đài Loan).
Hiện tôi đang thực hiện một đề tài luận văn tốt nghiệp nhằm tìm hiểu:
“Mối liên hệ giữa sự cảm nhận được hỗ trợ từ tổ chức, sự hài lòng trong công việc đến dự định thôi việc và sự ảnh hưởng từ yếu tố Danh tiếng doanh nghiệp của nhân viên công ty TNHH Gang Thép Hưng Nghiệp Formosa Hà Tĩnh, Việt Nam”
Bảng khảo sát này rất cần đến sự giúp đỡ của bạn, rất mong bạn có thể dành ít thời gian để hoàn thành những câu hỏi bên dưới. Đây chỉ là một nghiên cứu mang tính học thuật nên xin hãy an tâm về tính bảo mật của những thông tin bạn cung cấp. Tôi đảm bảo sẽ giữ bí mật và tiêu hủy bảng khảo sát sau khi hoàn thành đề tài.
Nếu có bất kỳ thắc mắc nào , xin vui lòng liên hệ với tôi theo số (886) 905 611 732 hoặc tại email: vivan.hoangle@gmail.com.
Trân trọng!
Giáo viên hướng dẫn Tiến sĩ Yu-Chen Lan, Tiến sĩ Wan-Ching Chang
Sinh viên: Hoàng Lê Tuyết Vân
Thạc sỹ Khoa Quản Trị Kinh Doanh Quốc Tế Đại học I-Shou , Cao Hùng, Đài Loan
Phần I：Sự hỗ trợ từ tổ chức
16. Công ty tự hào về thành tựu của tôi tại nơi làm việc.
26. Công ty của tôi duy trì các tiêu chuẩn cao trong cách đối xử với mọi
người.
27. T ô i có c ả m xú c t ố t v ề c ô ng ty c ủ a mì n h . 28. T ô i n g ư ỡ ng mộ v à t ôn t r ọ ng công ty mì n h.
29. T ô i ti n t ư ởn g c ông ty c ủ a mì nh r ấ t n hi ề u 30. T r ong v ài t h án g qu a , tô i đ ã ngh i ê m tú c ng hĩ v ề v i ệc tì m
k i ế m mộ t cô ng vi ệ c mớ i .
31. H i ệ n t ạ i, t ôi đ a ng t í ch c ự c t ì m ki ế m mộ t vi ệ c l à m k h á c. 32. T ô i có ý đ ịn h r ờ i kh ỏ i n ơ i l à m vi ệ c củ a tô i tr on g t ư ơn g l ai
g ầ n .
Phần IV: Thông Tin Cơ Bản
Mời bạn điền X vào lựa chọn của mình hoặc điền vào chỗ trống.
1. Giới tính： (1) Nam (2) Nữ 2. Độ tuổi ：_______
3. Trình độ học vấn：(1)<=Cao đẳng (2) Đại học (3) Thạc sĩ (và cao hơn)
(4) Khác_______（Mời điền vào）
4. Tình trạng hôn nhân：(1) Chưa kết hôn (2) Đã kết hôn
5. Nếu đã kết hôn hiện tại bạn có bao nhiêu người con? (Trường hợp chưa có và chưa kết hôn vui lòng trả lời 0) _______（Mời điền vào）
6. Tính đến nay bạn làm việc ở công ty này được bao lâu? _______năm_______tháng