Chapter Overview
The following chapter contains three sections. The first section includes an overview of the descriptive statistics of the research data. The researcher will relate about the Demographics attributes in this section. The second section introduces the results of the PLS findings, including the result of validity and reliability, Cronbach’s Alpha and the test of hypotheses. The group of participants was between 26-30, corresponding to a total of 48.5% of respondents. This has to be highly considerate because this the average age of the foreign workers, who are the target of this research. The next group age of 37-35 has a percentage of 27.6%, that also stands for an important part of the total of foreign workers responding to the questionnaire. Groups age over 35 and below 25 have fewer respondents, with respectively 8.6% and 15.2%. This table shows that it has been easier to collect answer from middle-age workers (around 30 years old).
Regarding to the gender of respondents, there was no significant difference, being 42.4%
female and 57.6% of male respondents.
Concerning the tenure (length a worker has been working in the same company), the largest group of participants have been working in their current company for 1-2 years, corresponding to a total of 46.7% of the total of respondents. The next most important group of respondent is the one representing workers with a tenure of 3-4 years, that corresponds to 29% of the total of respondents.
The fourth most important group is the group corresponding to 7-10 years of experience in the organization. This group stands for 5.7% only. Finally, all workers cumulating 10 years or more of tenure in their company represents a total of 9.5%. This results show that respondents with a less important tenure are also the ones responding the more to the questionnaire. This fact can be taken in account by further researcher
50 Table 4.1.
Characteristics of Sample Population Based on Demographic Variables (n = 210)
Item Frequency Percentage Equation Modeling). This statistical software allows the researcher to present the relevance and importance of the study. It is available for free for the research community and it also maintain numerous discussion forums available online to allow the knowledge exchange among his users.
The descriptive statistics helped the researcher to arrange the data clearly and easily
51
interpretable, forming the frequency distributions. Graphical displays have also been generated.
Each of these data can be summarized easily or can be examined on their interrelation.
Bootstrapping
It is a non-parametric bootstrap procedure that is generally used in order to test the significance of estimated path coefficients on PLS. Its process also creates samples with randomly drawn observations from the original set of data input by the researcher. It is also used to estimate the t-value of item loadings and path coefficients.
R Square
It is also called coefficient of determination, the percentage of the response variable variation that is explained by a linear model. The substantial value of R Square are generally over 0.67, but is considered as low below 0.19.
Path Coefficients
In PLS, path coefficients are used generally in order to assess the relationship between variable and as predictor variables. Path coefficients are a standardized version of linear regression that are used to examine the possible casual linkage between a statistical variable in a structural equation model approach. show the mean and standard deviation for each item question.
Findings: Work Satisfaction.
The table 4.2 shows that regarding Work Satisfaction, the foreign workers showed a high level of agreement on the sections of Compensation and Culture. For Compensation, the highest value being (COM1, Mean = 3.47), which stated that “In general, I understand why I get what I get s”. For Culture, the highest value being (CU1 and CU4, Mean = 3.46), which stated that “In our company, managers demonstrate common commitment to quality”, and “I feel at ease talking with
52
my coworkers”. This indicates that the majority of the respondents have a high degree of organizational culture and compensation satisfaction. The section with the lowest agreement is Perspective of Evolution, displaying the lowest value of 3.12 (PE5) which presents “In order to keep working for this organization, I am ready to accept any type of job assignment.”. This can be explained by the uncertainty foreign workers may have toward their future in an environment they are not completely familiar with. We can analyze this in a positive way as respondents display a global homogeneous and positive approach of their satisfaction, demonstrating a low level of disappointment.
Table 4.2.
Work Satisfaction; Likert Scales, Mean, and Standard Deviation (SD); (n= 210)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
COM1 In general, I understand why I get what I get 3.47 0.65
COM2 The right people get rewarded around here 3.41 0.70
COM3 I know what I must do to earn higher compensation 3.45 0.74
COM4 The compensation system is fair 3.33 0.60
COM5 The range of high-to-low compensation is right 3.31 0.68 CU1 In our company, managers demonstrate common
commitment to quality
3.46 0.62
CU2 I am satisfied with the communication with my hierarchy. 3.37 0.63 CU3 I am satisfied with the communication within my division. 3.35 0.57
CU4 I feel at ease talking with my coworkers. 3.46 0.67
CU5 I feel plenty adapted to my working styles 3.37 0.74
PE1 I talk up this organization to my friends 3.40 0.66
PE2 I am confident with the fact I can have an opportunity to get a better (job in this company
3.30 0.59
PE3 For me this is the best of all possible organizations for which to work
3.28 0.55
PE4 I really care about the fate of this organization 3.18 0.61 PE5 In order to keep working for this organization, I am ready to
accept any type of job assignment.
3.12 0.58
Note. N= 210 COM= Compensation; CUL= Culture; PE= Perspective of Evolution.
53
Findings: Cross-Cultural Adaptation
The table 4.3 shows that regarding Cross-Cultural Adaptation, foreign workers showed a high level of agreement on the section of Adaptation to the Lifestyle. This variable’s highest value being (3.60), which stated that “I never get irritated easily about people and things”. This indicates that the majority of respondent has a high degree adaptation to the lifestyle and feel at ease living in Taiwan. The section with the lowest agreement is Social Integration. This variable displays the lowest value of 3.27 (SI4), which presents “I have Taiwanese friends whom I consider to be my close friends.”. We can analyze this in a positive way as respondents display a global homogeneous and positive approach of their cross-cultural adaptation in Taiwan, demonstrating a low level of cultural problem to integrate themselve. For the section of language proficiency, foreign workers also display a general high level of agreement with the highest score being 3.57 (LP1). This item states: “I have a good comprehension of oral Chinese”.
Table 4.3.
Cross-Cultural Adaptation; Likert Scales, Mean, and Standard Deviation (SD); (n= 210)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
SI1 I feel good with the number of Taiwanese friends that I have 3.47 0.58 SI2 I have no problem to deal with the immigration. 3.50 0.32 teams or social parties with Taiwanese friends).
3.32 0.61
AL1 I never get irritated easily about people and things 3.60 0.67
AL2 I generally feel good about living in Taiwan. 3.50 0.61
AL3 I don’t feel homesick, at any moment 3.50 0.67
AL4 I had no difficulty to adapt to the food in Taiwan 3.46 0.68 AL5 I had no difficulty to adapt to the weather in Taiwan 3.40 0.58
LP1 I have a good comprehension of oral Chinese 3.57 0.66
LP2 I have a good speaking ability in Chinese 3.35 0.75
LP3 I have a good reading comprehension of Chinese 3.39 0.70 (continued)
54 Table 4.3. (continued)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
LP4 I have a good writing ability in Chinese 3.34 0.67
LP5 I don’t feel it’s a necessary to improve my Chinese proficiency to live in Taiwan
3.43 0.79
Note. N= 210 SI= Social Integration; AL= Adaptation to the Lifestyle; LP= Language Proficiency
Findings: Foreign Worker Characteristics
The table 4.4 shows that regarding their Characteristics, foreign workers showed a high level of agreement on the section of Personality. This variable’s the highest value being 3.47 (PER2), which stated that “I want to devote myself to people close to me.”. This indicates that the majority of the respondents have a high degree of implication and consideration for people around them. The section with the lowest agreement is Value, displaying the lowest value of 3.29 (VAL5), which presents “I think it is important that every person in the world should be treated equally.”. We can analyze this in a positive way as respondents display a high sense of devotion and willingness to work in optimum conditions. Plus, the items of the variable Values are also rather high, showing that foreign workers also consider having a rather high sense of moral responsibility.
Table 4.4.
Foreign Workers Characteristics; Likert Scales, Mean, and Standard Deviation (SD); (n= 210)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
VAL1 It is important for me to be rich. I want to have a lot of money and expensive things.
3.32 0.60
VAL2 It's important for me to show my abilities. I want people to admire what he does. VAL5 I think it is important that every person in the world should be
treated equally.
3.29 0.56
(continued)
55 Table 4.4. (continued)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
PER1 I like to do things in my own original way. 3.43 0.51
PER2 I want to devote myself to people close to me. 3.47 0.56
PER3 I like to be free and not depend on others 3.44 0.62
PER4 I try not to draw attention on myself. 3.45 0.62
PER5 I usually avoid doing anything people think is wrong. 3.39 0.55 Note. N= 210 VAL= Value; PER= Personality
Findings: Organizational Commitment
The table 4.5 shows that regarding organizational commitment, foreign workers showed a high level of agreement on the section of Affective Commitment. This variable’s highest value being 3.74 (AC1), which stated that “I enjoy discussing about my organization with people outside it.”. This indicates that the majority of respondents has a high degree of affective commitment, and actually work devoting themselves for affective reason, developing an emotional attachment to the organization. The section with the lowest agreement is Normative Commitment, displaying the lowest value of 3.21 (NC4), which presents “Things were better in the days when people stayed in one organization for most of their careers.”. We can analyze this in a positive way as respondents display a more emotional commitment approach, working and striving for their organizational for more affective than financial reasons. For the section of Continuance Commitment, foreign workers also display a high level of agreement with the highest score being 3.60 (CC1), stating “I feel that I have very few options to consider leaving this organization”.
56 Table 4.5.
Organizational commitment; Likert scales, mean, and standard deviation (SD); (n= 210)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
AC1 I enjoy discussing about my organization with people outside it. 3.74 0.59 AC2 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this
organization.
3.62 0.60
AC3 I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own 3.49 0.32 AC4 I feel like ‘part of the family’ at my organization 3.37 0.79 AC5 I think that I can not become as attached to another organization
as I am to this one
3.37 0.64
NC1 If I got another offer for a better job elsewhere I would not feel it is right to leave my organization.
3.50 0.62
NC2 I was taught to believe in the value of remaining loyal to one organization
3.38 0.66
NC3 I think that people these days move from company to company too often
NC6 Jumping from organization to organization seems unethical to me
57
The table 4.6 shows that regarding Employee’s Performance, foreign workers showed a high level of agreement on the section of Attitude and Stress. This variable’s the highest value being 3.64 AS1), which stated that “I don’t feel any nervosity or tension daily.”. This indicates that the majority of the respondents have a relatively good degree comfort when working. The lowest agreement is Group Cohesion, displaying the lowest value of 3.22 (GC2), which presents “I invite my teammates to do things with me”. We can analyze this in a positive way as respondents display a general good Employee’s Performance self-estimation approach, demonstrating a low level of anxiety and difficulty encountered at work. For the section of productivity, foreign workers also display a high-level of agreement with the statements, whose highest one is 3.63 (PRO1) stating: “My performances are generally higher than most workers on my job”.
Table 4.6.
Employee’s performance; Likert scales, mean, and standard deviation (SD); (n= 210)
Survey Questionnaires Mean SD
AS1 I don’t feel any nervosity or tension daily. 3.64 0.60
AS2 I feel integrated with my coworkers. 3.51 0.64
AS3 It is easy for me to motivate myself to do work. 3.51 0.71 AS4 I feel at ease with the responsibilities that are on me 3.46 0.65 (continued)
58
PRO1 My performances are generally higher than most workers on my job
PRO4 The quality of my work is recognized by my managers. 3.42 0.66
PRO5 I am always fully concentrated on my work 3.36 0.66
GC1 We all share the same commitment to our team’s goals 3.38 0.74
GC2 I invite my teammates to do things with me 3.22 0.72
GC3 I am going to keep in contact with my teammates later 3.30 0.75
GC4 Some of my best friends are on my team 3.37 0.72
GC5 I am happy with my team’s desire to win 3.31 0.75
Note. N= 210 AS= Attitude and Stress; PRO= Productivity; GC= Group Cohesion.
Discussion for Descriptive Statistics Analysis Correlation Analysis
Pearson coefficient correlation analysis was established. Furthermore, this test has also permitted to find the direction and the strength of linear relationship between variables. This test has to be proceed for the reason that if the correlation value is over the threshold .75, it is considered as problematic (Kennedy, 1989). The correlation table 4.7 shows that none of the value found by the researcher is greater than .75. Therefore, multicollinearity does exist in the model, as data has been validated by factor analysis. Thus it can be assumed the data of this research can till be used for further researches and the Pearson’s correlations values can be accepted. However, it is important to mention that multicollinearity does not affect the predictive power of equation of a model as a whole; it only affects the calculations regarding individual predictors (Khalaf, Manson, & Shukur, 2013).
59
Table 4.7.
Correlation Analysis (Main Study, n=210)
Note. COM= Compensation; CUL= Culture; PE= Perspective of Evolution; SI= Social Integration; AL= Adaptation to Lifestyle; LP= Language; VAL= Values; PER=
Personality; AC= Affective Commitment; NC= Normative Commitment; CC= Continuance Commitment; AS= Attitude and Stress; PRO= Productivity; GC= Group Cohesion. All constructs in the questionnaire were adapted from pre-validated measures in existing correlated researches.
COM CUL PE SI AL LP VAL PER AC NS CC AS PRO GC
COM 1
CUL .535*** 1
PE .408*** .448*** 1
SI .155* .282*** .140* 1
AL .353*** .327*** .216** .529*** 1
LP .311*** .310*** .265*** .357*** .447*** 1
VAL .299*** .333*** .328*** .310*** .229*** .258*** 1
PER .293*** .231*** .168* .317*** .224*** .381*** .301*** 1
AC .447*** .302*** .377*** .228*** .277*** .319*** .429*** .299*** 1
NC .322*** .365*** .347*** .319*** .257*** .365*** .477*** .534*** .468*** 1
CC .227*** .195** .150* .422*** .286*** .398*** .326*** .281*** .260*** .250*** 1
AS .173* .247*** .246*** .279*** .135* .109 .279*** .376*** .306*** .287*** .279*** 1
PRO .188** .206** .260*** .023 .012 .110 .126 .279*** .258*** .206** .425*** .355*** 1
GC .268*** .266*** .252*** .199** .244*** .224*** .084 .310*** .216** .298*** .342*** .371*** .401*** 1
60
Even though the pilot study (n=45) confirmed that the instrument was valid, the reliability and validity was tested again for the entire sample (n=210). Cronbach’s Alpha and composite reliability (internal consistency) values were obtained for the reliability of the data. For both of these measures, values above .70 indicate that factor analysis is appropriate. For validation test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test for Sphericity values are examined. Table 4.8 shows the results of this analysis, which provides the minimum requirements to conduct factor analysis.
Table 4.8.
Factor loadings and internal consistency reliability analysis via PLS (Main Study n=210) Constructs Number of
61
62
63
Table 4.8 shows the result for all constructs, which are higher than the acceptable level .70, indicates the data is reliable to be used for analysis. The factor loadings are almost all above 0.5 which is the expected result. This also demonstrated that all the scales have a high level of internal consistency and reliability. Focusing on the variable Work Satisfaction, we can observe that the factors the most dominant are almost equally Compensation and Perspective of Evolution, whereas the variable Culture has a lower factor loading in the overall. Focusing on Cross-cultural adaptation, we can observe that the dominant factor is Language proficiency, followed by Adaptation to Lifestyle. Concerning the variable of Characteristics, we can see that the variable Personality has the higher factor loading. For the construct of Commitment, the dominant factor is almost equally Affective and Normative Commitment, whereas Continuance Commitment has a lower factor loading in the overall. Within the variable of Employee’s Performance, the most dominant factor is in order Productivity, Attitudes and stress and finally Group Cohesion. We can also take note on 3 items (2 from Continuance Commitment and 1 from Group Cohesion) has a low factor loading which could be eliminated or improved.
Results of Hypotheses Testing
In order assess the measurement model, the researcher has used the Cronbach’s Alpha’s approach through Smart PLS. As shown in the table 4.9, all the values of Cronbach’s Alpha from each construct are above than .70 (Work Satisfaction, Cross-Cultural orientation, Foreign Worker Characteristic, Organizational Commitment and Employee’s Performance).
64 Table 4.9.
PLS Cronbach's Alpha, Internal Consistency and R2 in this Study
Constructs Number of
Cross-Cultural Adaptation 15 0.857 0.880 0.526
Foreign Worker relationship between two variables. The bootstrapping 500x method was effected in order to verify the correct significance of the path coefficients. Therefore, it is possible to examine the relationship between all variables. In the present research, the four paths (work satisfaction to organizational commitment, cross-cultural adaptation to organizational commitment, foreign worker characteristics to organizational commitment, organizational commitment to employee’s performance) all proved to be significant. According to Hair et al. (2011), the t- values of each variable for two-tailed must be 1.65, 1.96 and 2.58. This will assess the significance into weak group: moderate and strong. The result of PLS testing in table 4.10 also shows that all path coefficients for variables are significant. Consequently, they were considered as meaningful on the basis of guidelines provided by previous researches. These paths also gave an overview of the magnitude and direction of effects
In regards to the effects of each variable, the results showed that there is a positive significant effect between Work Satisfaction and Commitment (ß = .290, t = 5.833, p < .001).
Thus, null hypothesis 1 was accepted. Cross-Cultural Adaptation also has positive significant effects towards Commitment (ß = .238, t = 4.590, p < .001). Therefore, null hypotheses 2 was
65
also accepted. Plus, Foreign Workers Characteristics also has positive significant effects towards Commitment (ß = .389, t =8632, p < .001). Therefore, null hypotheses 3 was also accepted. Finally, the variable Commitment also has positive significant effects towards Performance (ß = .547, t =15,482, p < .005). Therefore, null hypotheses 4 was also accepted.
Table 4.10.
PLS Path Analysis Results (Main Study n=210)
Path Hypothesis β-path Adaptation; FWC= Foreign Worker Characteristics; COM= Commitment; PER=
Performance.
Appendix B displays the results of the structural model that can describe the variance in organizational Commitment and Employee’s Performance. The variance of the r-square, demonstrates the overall impact of the effect of the 2 variables. The coefficient of determination, R2 is 0.495 for Organizational commitment. This means that Commitment is explained 50% of variance from. For Employee’s Performance the coefficient of determination, R2 is 0.239 which indicates that this variable is explained 24% of the variance by Organizational Performance.
PLS Finding Summary
The result of PLS findings shows that the three variables Work Satisfaction, Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Foreign Workers Characteristics has a significant positive effect on the Commitment of foreign workers, which has a significant positive effect on the foreign workers Performance. This concludes that all null hypotheses proposed in the research are accepted. Table 4.11 summarizes the research results.
66 Table 4.11.
Hypotheses Testing Results
Null Hypotheses Outcome
H1 Work Satisfaction has a positive effect over job commitment. Accepted H2
H3 H4
Cross-cultural adaptation has a positive effect over job commitment.
Foreign worker characteristics have a positive effect over job commitment.
Commitment has a positive effect over performance.
Accepted Accepted Accepted
67