RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS - The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment on Perceived Person

This chapter presents the main findings of the research. It consists of three sections.

The first session provides information on the characteristics of the sample in which the study was conducted. In the second session, the descriptive statistics of the study is provided. Lastly, the third section provides information about SPSS findings of the main study.

Descriptive Statistics Results Sample Characteristics

The research questionnaire was distributed and collected using two mediums, one is through hard copy and the other is through online. A total of 327 valid responses were collected from employees of The Gambia public sector.

The characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 4.1. Demographic variable items include gender, age, marital status, name of organization/institution, current position, tenure and educational level. Majority of the respondents were male (211) accounting for 64.5 percentage of the population, in the same vein, the female respondents totals to 116 accounting for 35.5 percentage.

The age of the respondents is from different groups, 79 respondents accounting for 24.2 is from the age bracket of 18~25, most of the respondents was from the ages of 26~35 with a respondent’s population of 125 accounting for 38.2 percentage, for the age bracket of 36~45, a total of 89 responses was collected adding to 27.2 percentage of the respondents, for the age bracket of 46 and above, 34 responses was collected which adds to 10.4 percentage.

For marital status item, a higher percentage of respondents were single (166) accounting for 50.8 percentage, in contrast, 161 of the respondents are married accounting for 49.2 percentage of the respondents.

For the educational background of the respondents, 207 respondents completed their high school education and acquired college certificate accounting for 63.3 percentage. 89 respondents got bachelor’s degree accounting for 27.2 percentage. 29 respondents acquired a master’s degree accounting for 9.5 percentage of the total respondents.

For the public sector institution in which the respondents work in, 111 respondents accounting for 33.9 percentage worked with educational institutions. 52 respondents accounting for 15.9 percentage of the respondents worked for the ministry of agriculture, 54 respondents accounting for 16.5 percentage worked for the ministry of health, 30 respondents

accounting for 9.2 percentage worked with the ministry of interior, 25 respondents accounting for 7.6 percentage worked for the ministry of transport, works and infrastructure. 55 respondents accounting for 13.1 worked for various parastatals.

For the current position of the respondents, 103 respondents accounting for 31.5 percentage are junior level staff, 102 respondents accounting for 31.2 percentage are middle level staff, and 109 respondents accounting for 33.3 percentage are senior level staff while 13 respondents accounting for 4.0 percentage are in the top level management.

The tenure of the respondents is of various range, 32 respondents accounting for 9.8 percentage spends less than one (1) year in their current organization, 88 respondents which accounts for 26.9 percentage spends between one (1) and three (3) years, 70 respondents accounting for 21.4 percentage spends between three (3) and five (5) years which 65 respondents accounting for 19.9 percentage spends between five (5) and ten (10) years and 72 respondents accounting for twenty two (22) percentage spends over ten (10) years in their current organization. See Table 4.1 for more details.

Table 4.1.

Results of the Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N=327)

Variable Description Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender Male Position Junior Level Staff

Middle Level Staff

29 Level of Education College Certificate

Bachelor’s Degree Name of Institution Ministry of Education

Ministry of Agriculture departments. The parastatals are institutions that are subsidies by the government but are run independently. See Table 4.2 for a list of ministries and departments covered in this study.

Table 4.2

Selected Departments

Ministry Department

Education Gambia College, Basic and Secondary Education, Higher Education, University of The Gambia

Agriculture Water Resource, Department of Forestry, Fisheries National Agriculture Research Institute

Health Food and Quality Assurance, National Nutrition Agency Interior The Gambia Police Force, The Gambia Immigration, Drug and

Law Enforcement Agency

(continued)

30 Transport National Road Authority, Lands and Survey, Physical planning Parastatals Gambia Revenue Authority, Gambia Ports Authority, Gambia, Radio and Television Services, Gambia Telecommunications Cellular Company Limited, Social Security and Housing Finance Cooperation, National Water and Electricity Company Gambia Civil Aviation Authority

Psychometric Characteristics of the Measurement

This section gives an overview of the mean and standard deviation of each of the study dimensions. The questions for this study have no reverse codes. For the questionnaire items and the fractional validity of measures are appropriate. The factorial validity analysis was within an acceptable fit indexes range. The analysis of the mean scores, standard deviations analysis of the variables is tabulated.

Descriptive Statistics Results of Person-organizational Fit

Perceived person-organization Fit was measured using 12 items of 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Table 4.2 gives the descriptive analysis of Person-organizational fit. From the analysis, the highest mean score was found to be

‘POF10’: I have the abilities and skills that my organization demanded from me (M=3.97).

This means that on average, participants perceived that they have above average abilities and skills that their organizations demanded from them. The lowest mean score was found to be

‘POF8’: My organization meets all my expectations (M=2.72). This means that participants perceived that their organizations meet their expectations below average. Participants were more fairly consistent in answering item ‘POF5’: I believe that there is a strong congruence (similarity) between my organization and my personal values, since it has the lowest standard deviation (SD=1.047). Participants were least more consistent in answering the items ‘POF1’:

The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values (SD=1.265), ‘POF4’: I can work in this organization without giving up my principles (SD=1.265), and ‘POF9’: The number of organizations to satisfy my needs better than my present organization is less (SD=1.265). See Table 4.3

Table 4.2. (continued)

31 Tables 4.3.

Descriptive Statistics Results of Person-Organizational Fit

Code Questionnaire Items Mean Std. Dev.

POF1 The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values

3.02 1.265

POF2 My personal values match my organization's values and culture

2.95 1.225

POF3 My organization's values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life

3.27 1.123

POF4 I can work in this organization without giving up my principles

3.52 1.265

POF5 I believe that there is a strong congruence (similarity) between my organization and my personal values

3.32 1.047

POF6 In my organization, there are a lot of people we exhibit similar behaviour related to the work

3.34 1.073

POF7 I can say that I share common feelings with my workmates on many points

3.53 1.065

(continued)

32 Tables 4.3. (continued)

POF8 My organization meets all my expectations

2.72 1.217

POF9 The number of organizations to satisfy my needs better than my present organization is less

3.09 1.265

POF10 I have the abilities and skills that my organization demanded from me.

3.97 1.092

POF11 My education and personal skills about my job are compatible with the needs of my organization

3.87 1.106

POF12 I am very different from the profile of a typical employee in my

organization, but I believe that my principles of creating difference added richness to my workplace

3.45 1.144

Note: N=327; POF= Person-Organizational Fit; Std. Dev. = Standard Deviation; the 5-point Likert scale is used (lowest scores indicates disagreement (1) and the highest scores means agreement (5) to each statement)

Descriptive Statistics Results for Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment was measured using 13 items of a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Table 4.4 gives the descriptive analysis of organizational commitment.

33 Table 4.4.

Descriptive Statistics Results of Organizational Commitment

Code Questionnaire Items Mean Std. Dev

OC1 1. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization

3.02 1.265

OC2 2. I enjoy discussing my organization with people outside it 3.48 1.195 OC3 3. I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own 3.43 1.183 OC4 4. I feel part of the family in this organization 3.57 1.025 OC5 5. I feel emotionally attached to this organization 3.50 1.085 OC6 6. This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me 3.51 .968 OC7 7. It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right

now, even if I wanted to

3.37 1.111

OC8 8. Too much in my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organization now

3.04 1.233

OC9 9. Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire

3.25 1.144

OC10 10. One of the few serious consequences of leaving this organization would be the scarcity of available alternatives

3.11 1.198

OC11 11. One of the major reasons I continue to work for this

organization is that leaving would require considerable personal sacrifice another organization may not match the overall benefits I have

3.13 1.357

OC12 12. One of the major reasons I continue to work for this organization is that I believe that loyalty is important and therefore feel a sense of moral obligation to remain

3.33 1.301

OC13 13. If I got another offer for a better job elsewhere, I would not feel it was right to leave my organization

2.95 1.224

Note: 1. N=327, 2. OC= Organizational Commitment 3. Std. Dev. = Standard Deviation 4. The 5-point Likert scale is used (lowest scores indicates disagreement (1) and the highest scores means agreement (5) to each statement)

Descriptive Statistics Results for Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction was measured by using MSQ short questionnaire with 20 item of 5-point Likert scale ranging from very dissatisfied (1) to very satisfied (5). Table 4.3 gives the descriptive analysis of job satisfaction. See Table 4.5.

Table 4.5.

Descriptive Statistics Results of Job Satisfaction

Code Questionnaire Items Mean Std. Dev

JS1 Being able to keep busy all the time 3.17 1.070 JS2 The chance to work alone on the job 3.06 1.118 JS3 The chance to do different things from time to

time

3.76 .887

JS4 The chance to be "somebody" in the community

3.77 .994

JS5 The way my boss handles his/her workers 3.11 1.244 JS6 The competence of my supervisor in making

decisions

3.26 1.158

JS7 Being able to do things that don't go against my conscience

3.31 1.107

JS8 The way my job provides for steady employment

3.39 1.048

JS9 The chance to do things for other people 3.73 .960 JS10 The chance to tell people what to do 3.60 1.010 JS11 The chance to do something that makes use of

my abilities

3.40 1.251

JS12 The way company policies are put into practice

3.05 1.315

JS13 My pay and the amount of work I do 2.96 1.225 JS14 The chances for advancement on this job 3.23 1.178 JS15 The freedom to use my own judgment 3.23 1.093 JS16 The chance to try my own methods of doing

the job

3.34 1.029

(continued)

35 Table 4.5. (continued)

JS17 The working conditions 3.13 1.073

JS18 The way my co-workers get along with each other

3.47 1.099

JS19 The praise I get for doing a good job 3.63 .937 JS20 The feeling of accomplishment I get from the

job

3.77 .825

Note: 1. N=327

2. JS= Job Satisfaction

3. Std. Dev. = Standard Deviation

4. The 5-point Likert scale is used (lowest scores indicates dissatisfaction (1) and the highest scores means satisfaction (5) to each statement)

Correlation Among the Variables

This section presents analysis results of the multiple and linear regression and the results of the hypothesis respectively.

Correlation analysis was conducted to provide the results of the relations between the demographic variables, independent variables, and the dependent variables in a respective manner. The relationships between the variables in this study were examined using Pearson coefficients See Table 4.6 for more details.

Table 4.6.

Correlation Analysis Results

Variables Mean S.D POF OC

POF 3.33 0.544

OC 3.28 0.565 .511**

JS 3.36 0.449 .346** .535**

Note: N= 327; *p< .05, ** p<.001; POF= Person-Organizational Fit, OC=

Organizational Commitment, JS = Job Satisfaction,

Person-Organization Fit with Current Position

The results for the chi-square test for person-organization fit and position shows that there is an association between person-organization fit and the position of an employee in an organization p value .030. See Table 4.7 for more details.

Table 4.7.

Chi-Square Results of Person-Organization Fit and Current Position

Value df

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 77.497 56 .030

Likelihood Ratio 86.782 56 .005

Linear-by-Linear Association 5.426 1 .020

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 56 cells (64.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .31.

Person-Organization Fit and Level of Education

The results for the chi-square test for person-organization fit and position shows that there is an association between person-organization fit and the level of education of an employee in an organization p value .005. See Table 4.8 for more details.

Table 4.8.

Chi-Square Results of Person-Organization Fit with Level of Education

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 87.438 56 .005

Likelihood Ratio 96.012 56 .001

Linear-by-Linear Association 3.430 1 .064

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 64 cells (73.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .09.

Person-Organization Fit and Tenure

The results for the chi-square test for person-organization fit and tenure shows that there is an association between person-organization fit and the tenure of an employee in an organization p value .000. See Table 4.9 for more details.

Table 4.9.

Chi-Square Results of Person-Organization Fit and Tenure

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 183.369 112 .000

Likelihood Ratio 188.068 112 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 1.868 1 .172

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 130 cells (89.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10.

Organizational Commitment and Current Position

The results for the chi-square test for organizational commitment and position shows that there is an association between organizational commitment and the position an employee has in an organization p value .001. See Table 4.10 for more details.

Table 4.10.

Chi-Square Results of Organizational Commitment and Current Position

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 110.220 68 .001

Likelihood Ratio 125.629 68 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association .712 1 .399

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 84 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .31.

Organizational Commitment and Educational Level

The results of the chi-square test for organizational commitment and level of education shows that there is an association between organizational commitment and the level of education of an employee in the organization p value .000. See Table 4.11 for more details.

Table 4.11.

Chi-Square Results of Organizational Commitment and Level of Education

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 121.607 68 .000

Likelihood Ratio 121.531 68 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association .048 1 .826

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 84 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .09.

Organizational Commitment and Tenure

Table 4.12.

Chi-Square Results of Organizational Commitment and Tenure

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 196.911 136 .000

Likelihood Ratio 211.614 136 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.043 1 .153

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 166 cells (94.9%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10.

Job Satisfaction and Current Position

The results for the chi-square test for job satisfaction and position shows that there is an association between job satisfaction and the position an employee’s holds in an organization p value .060. See Table 4.13 for more details.

Table 4.13.

Chi-Square Results of Job Satisfaction and Current Position

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 100.512 80 .060

Likelihood Ratio 120.383 80 .002

Linear-by-Linear Association 8.524 1 .004

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 105 cells (85.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .31.

Job Satisfaction and Level of Education

The results for the chi-square test for job satisfaction and level of education shows that there is an association between job satisfaction and the education an employee has in an organization p value .001. See Table 4.14 for more details.

Table 4.14.

Chi-Square Results of Job Satisfaction and Level of Education

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 219.963 160 .001

Likelihood Ratio 239.889 160 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.048 1 .152

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 197 cells (96.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10.

Job Satisfaction and Tenure

The results for the chi-square test for job satisfaction and tenure shows that there is an association between job satisfaction and the tenure an employee’s holds in an organization p value .001. See Table 4.15 for more details.

Table 4.15.

Chi-Square Results of Job Satisfaction and Tenure

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 219.963 160 .001

Likelihood Ratio 239.889 160 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.048 1 .152

N of Valid Cases 327

a. 197 cells (96.1%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .10.

The Relationship between Person-Organization Fit, Job Satisfaction and Organization Commitment

The bivariate correlation analysis which is a measure of linear correlation between two variables, X and Y was used in this analysis, its supports a significant relationship between the variables in this study. This study conducts a linear as well as multiple regression to find the effect of person-organizational fit, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and the mediating effect of person-organization fit on organizational commitment and job satisfaction.

Below is an explanation of the effect of the relationship between and among the study variables.

Person-Organization Fit and Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis 1 of this study tested the relationship between perceived person-organization fit and job satisfaction on whether there exists a positive relationship. In

examining this relationship, person-organization fit served as the independent variable while job satisfaction was the dependent variable. The results show that R²= .120, which means person-organization fit variable explained approximately 12% in job satisfaction variable.

41 The F value of 44.188 (p < .001), indicating that there is a significant positive relationship between the two variables. See Table 4.16 for more details.

Table 4.16.

Linear Relationship between Person-Organization Fit and Job Satisfaction

MODEL

Note: 1. Predictor (Constant) Person-Organizational Fit 2: Dependent variable: Job Satisfaction

3: ***p<.001

Person-Organization Fit and Organizational Commitment

Hypothesis 2 of this study tested the relationship between person-organization Fit and organizational commitment on whether there exists a positive relationship. In examining this relationship, perceived person-organization fit served as the independent variable while organizational commitment was the dependent variable. The results show that R² = .261, which means that 26% perceived person-organization fit explains approximately 26% in the variations between the relationship of perceived person-organization fit and organizational commitment in The Gambia public sector. The F Value of 114.737 (p < .001) which implies that there is a positive significant relationship between perceived person-organization Fit and organizational commitment in The Gambia public sector. Empirical evidence has shown that a high level of person-organization fit is related to a number of positive outcomes. A correlation was found between person-organization fit and work attitudes such as OC (Boxx et al., 1991; Bretz & Judge, 1994; Chatman, 1991). In a recent meta-analysis by Kristof-Brown et al. (2005) and Vilela et al. (2008), it was found that perceived person-organization fit has a significant positive relationship with organizational commitment. In summary, Kristof-Brown et al. (2005), studies have proven that OC correlates very strongly with perceived person-organization fit which is proven by the results of this study. See Table 4.17 for more details.

42 Table 4.17.

Linear Relationship between Person-Organization Fit and Organizational Commitment

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

Adjusted R²

B Std. Error Beta R²

1 (Constant)

1.514 .167 9.044 .000

.261 .259 114.737**

POF .530 .049 .511*** 10.712 .000

Note: 1. Predictor (Constant) Person-Organizational Fit 2: Dependent variable: Organizational Commitment 3: ***p<.001

Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis 3 of this study was tested whether there is a positive relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction. This study has proven that hypothesis that there is a significant positive relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Previous studies have proven this example includes for example, using data from a non-experimental study, Williams and Hazer (1986) tested several such models. The test of one provided evidence consistent with the view that job satisfaction causes organizational commitment. However, the test of another yielded slight support for the view that organizational commitment causes job satisfaction. Some researchers have argued that organizational commitment causes job satisfaction (Bateman & Strasser, 1984; Koslowsky, 1991; Lance, 1991; Wiener & Vardi, 1980). For example, Koslowsky (1991) used structural equation modelling (SEM) procedures to analyse data from a non-experimental study of the job satisfaction-commitment relation. Results of the analysis were used to argue that organizational commitment causes job satisfaction. See Tables 4.18 for more details.

43 Tables 4.18.

Linear Relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction

MODEL

Unstandardized Coefficients

StandardizedC oefficients

Beta t Sig.

R² Adjusted R² F

1 Constant 1.972 .124 15.871 .000 .286 .284 130.213***

OC .425 .037 .535*** 11.411 .000

Note: 1. Predictor (Constant) Organizational Commitment 2: Dependent variable: Job Satisfaction

3: ***p<.001

Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results of the Variables

Mediating effects are often tested using hierarchical multiple regression (HMR) procedures. The most frequently cited and one of the most widely used procedure was described by Baron and Kenny (1986). A mediator is a variable that transmits the effects of an independent variable to a dependent variable.

Following on the guidelines of Baron and Kenny (1986) on mediation relationships between and among variable analysis, the mediation relationships of the variables of this study was proven to be valid due to the following requirements by Baron and Kenny (1986): (a) variations in levels of the independent variable significantly account for variations in the presumed mediator (i.e. Path a), (b) variations in the mediator significantly account for variations in the

在文檔中 The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment on Perceived Person-Organization Fit and Job Satisfaction in the Public Sector of The Gambia (頁 34-53)