學習意圖、職涯適應力及員工留職意願-以台灣Ｙ世代員工為例

全文

(1)Relationships among Learning Intention, Career Adaptability and Employee Retention of Generation Y in Taiwan. by Tzu-Huei Wang A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of. MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Major: International Human Resources Development. Advisor: Chih-Chien Steven Lai, Ph.D.. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan August, 2016.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research is devoting to everyone who has help me during this time, the immense gratitude is not enough to tell. Because of your support, the research can finished on time smoothly. All of the suggestions or encouragement did keep me forward in right direction. First, thanks to everyone who has help me to fill up the questionnaire and willing to being interviewing, because of your kindly help, I can collect data smoothly. Next, Dr. Lai’s family, Cathy, Aiko, Wiseman, and Tim, as long as I feel depressed and afraid of the progress of thesis, you gave me a lot of constant encouragement also cheer me up to met the deadline. Especially Cathy, every communication and discussion gave me a lot of ideas and momentums to balance my internship and academic requirement. Furthermore, the deepest appreciation is given to my advisor, Dr. Lai. Thanks for the guidance during these two years. Apart from the academic teaching as well as the experienced suggestions which benefit to our future career. Meanwhile, thanks to Dr. Shir-Tau Tsai, Dr. Pai-Po Lee and Dr. Yeh, because of the their informative advice, I can avoid potential problems and correct the mistakes effectively. I also want to express my gratitude to IHRD staff, because of your prompt help, my administrative problem can be solved. Secondly, the appreciation is go to my colleagues and supervisors in 3M Taiwan. During my internship, provide me the HR practice but also broaden my boundary and cultivate my global mindset, furthermore, establish a foundation of my career. Last but not least, the sincere appreciation is to my dear family as well as brother and sisters in church. Thanks for provide me freedom to manage both work and academic requirement. I am very treasure for your praying and blessings, your encouragement and support is the best cherish to me. Praise for Lord!.

(3) ABSTRACT Nowadays, the external business environment is become volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA). Generation Y is an age group that will dominate the workforce, also they need to construct their career in this changed world, thus, Generation Y is considered as the key target to maintain because they are the preservation and existence to the workforce in global. Simultaneously, their characteristics have been noticed because the cohort effect has influenced their concept of learning attitude, the philosophy of constructing career as well as their organizational commitment. The purpose of the study, therefore, was to explore the relationships among learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention, the differences of educational levels on learning intention and the gender differences on the level of employee retention. In terms of research methods, this research adopted quantitative approach and designed an online questionnaire to collecting data. A total of 349 valid respondents is collected and underwent t-Test, One-Way ANOVA, SEM to test the hypothesis as well as answer the research questions. The statistical results indicated that learning intention have significant influence to employee retention and career adaptability, however, career adaptability have no obvious relationship to employee retention, furthermore, the gender and educational levels have no difference on learning intention and employee retention. Based on the finding, suggestions are provided to human resources field, Generation Y and future research. It is hoped that these results may serve as a basis understanding of Generation Y toward learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention.. Keywords: Generation Y, learning intention, career adaptability, employee retention. I.

(4)

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................ I TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................... III LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. V LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................. VII CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 1 Background of the Study .......................................................................................1 Motivation of the Study .........................................................................................4 Purposes of the Study ............................................................................................5 Research Questions ...............................................................................................6 Delimitation ..........................................................................................................6 Definition of Key Terms ........................................................................................6. CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................ 9. Generation Y .........................................................................................................9 Learning Intention ............................................................................................... 12 Career Adaptability .............................................................................................. 17 Employee Retention ............................................................................................ 19 Hypothesis Development ..................................................................................... 22. CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY ...................................................... 27. Research Framework ........................................................................................... 27 Research Hypothesis............................................................................................ 28 Research Procedure ............................................................................................. 28 Research Sample ................................................................................................. 31 Data Collection .................................................................................................... 31 Measurement ....................................................................................................... 32 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 35 Validity and Reliability ........................................................................................ 37. CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS............................... 51. Results of Demographic Analysis ........................................................................ 51 Relationships of LI, ER and CA........................................................................... 57 Summary of Analysis Result ................................................................................ 63. CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 65. Conclusions .........................................................................................................65 Limitations .......................................................................................................... 66 III.

(6) Recommendations ............................................................................................... 66. REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 71 APPENDIX A: EXPERT REVIEW ....................................................... 77 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE ...................................................... 85 APPENDIX C: CFA MODEL OF LEARNING INTENTION ............... 91 APPENDIX D: CFA MODEL OF CAREER ADAPTABILITY ............. 93 APPENDIX E: CFA MODEL OF EMPLOYEE RETENTION .............. 95. IV.

(7) LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1.Chronological Generation Classification .....................................................3 Table 2.1.The Differences Definition of Gen Y...........................................................9 Table 3.1.Items Numbers of Career Adaptability Dimensions ................................... 34 Table 3.2.Index of Good Fit ...................................................................................... 36 Table 3.3.Exploratory Factor Analysis ...................................................................... 39 Table 3.4.LI Model Fit Summary ............................................................................. 41 Table 3.5.Multi-Group Comparison of Cross Validation of LI .................................. 42 Table 3.6.Learning Intention Variable Items ............................................................. 43 Table 3.7.CA Model Fit Summary ............................................................................ 45 Table 3.8. Multi-Group Comparison of Cross Validation of CA ................................ 45 Table 3.9.Employee Retention Variable Items........................................................... 46 Table 3.10.ER Model Fit Summary .......................................................................... 47 Table 3.11.Multi-Group Comparison of Cross Validation of ER ............................... 48 Table 3.12.Employee Retention Variable Items ......................................................... 49 Table 3.13.Cronbach’s Alpha of Measurements ........................................................ 50 Table 4.1.Descriptive Statistics on Sample Characteristics........................................ 53 Table 4.2.Descriptive of Educational Level of Learning Intention ............................ 54 Table 4.3.One-Way ANOVA Analysis of Educational Level on Learning Intention ... 55 Table 4.4.Summery of t-Test .................................................................................... 56 Table 4.5.Mean, Standard Deviations and Correlations of LI, ER, CA ...................... 58 Table 4.6.Model Fit Summary of Structural Equation Model .................................... 59 Table 4.7.Standard Coefficients of Structural Equation Modeling ............................. 60 Table 4.8.Result from Structural Equation Modeling ................................................ 60 Table 4.10.Hypothesis Testing Result Summary ....................................................... 63. V.

(8)

(9) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1. Framework of the theory of planned behavior .........................................13 Figure 2.2. Decision-making process of the potential learners .................................. 15 Figure 3.1. Research framework ............................................................................... 27 Figure 3.2. Research procedure ................................................................................ 30. VII.

(10) CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter consists of background of the study, motivation of the study, purpose and questions of the study, delimitation and definition of key terms.. Background of the Study A generation can be generally identified by three overlapping effect: (a) life cycle effect, (b) period effect, and (c) cohort effect. Life cycle effect means when people getting older, their behavior and the way of thinking will resemble the senior in today. Period effect stand for the impact of major external environment event happened in certain period that exposes simultaneously to different generation (e.g. social movement; economic depression; technology advancement). Cohort effect comes after period effect and explains why does each age group different from each other. Cohort effect makes age groups different from another because the degrees of influence will be different depend on where is the stage of life cycle. The influences to specific generation make core value and work attitude discrepancy from another age group. Hung, Gu, and Yim (2008) defined generation as “the generational cohorts or groups, who belong to the same age group, experience or will experience accordingly the similar life experience in the years they may shape their lives.” View on predecessors, each of generation is classified by their distinctive trait, for example, Traditionalists, is generally born between 1900-1945, they suffered by wars and Great Depression in their whole lives, result in being thrifty and want permanency in their jobs because the financial security is of crucial importance for these people. They are authority-orientation and try to obey and hierarchy demand as much as they can. Baby Boomers (1946-1964) were the generation after Traditionalists, also called 1.

(11) workaholic generation. In that period of time, about 1 billion babies were born soon after the World War II. Because of crowed people pursue limited resources, the members of this generation had to be always individualist and competitive. Afterward, Generation X born between 1965 to 1979, who are the children of a workaholic generation, in the period of time, they experienced several remarkable event, such as Watergate Scandal, Vietnam War, First AIDS Cases, also the first personal computer were create. Furthermore, the rapidly advancing technologies enable them to learn news globally by broadcasting on TV. Because they faced an enormous changing world, they learnt to be high reliance and be more creative in order to grow in a restricted environment. Regarding their perspective of career plan, a chance of improving their career is the most important point in their business life, they value their personal career develop by assess the current company whether satisfy their development need. Compare to their parents, who start to pursue a flexible working hours, pleasant working environment, and possess sources to establish their own business. Based on the definition, Berkup (2014) listed a table to classify the generation from each other. As Table 1.1. showed, the duration of a generation has shortened sharply, researcher asserted the situation is caused by advanced-technology. Gen Y is the youngest generation that live together with technology which already affect the way of their communication or built their network with worldwide. especially the advanced information and communication technologies is change the pattern also cultivate Gen Y a distinctive trait. Regarding the population and influence of Gen Y, Erickson (2008) found that Gen Y represents a quarter of the population in world, and they will dominate the future workforce in a decade (Erickson, 2008). Moreover, The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also analyzed and forecasted that there will be approximately 70 million of the Gen 2.

(12) Y entering the workforce by 2015 and they will be 75 percent of all working professionals by 2030 (Axten, 2015). Nowadays, the youngest generation, have been 25 percent of global workforce and will be the domination of workforce in nearly future, Gen Y has been taking a critical role of sustain company’s competitive advantages, and be considered as target member of human resources development. Table 1.1. Chronological Generation Classification Generation Name. Chronological Generation Classification. Duration. Traditionalists. 1900 - 1945. 45 years. Baby Boomers. 1946 - 1964. 18 years. Gen X. 1965 - 1979. 14 years. Gen Y. 1980 - 1993. 13 years. Gen Z. 1993- ...... Apart from the worldwide situation, a report from Taiwan Executive Yuan analyzed that 4.94 million of the total population age 22-35 who have had occupied 21% in 2014. Several document and analysis evidenced the Gen Y will dominate workforce both global and Taiwan in nearly future. It’s a chance also a challenge to human resource practitioner, because the youngest generation have has different perspective toward both workplace and personal life. Recently there has been a growing interest in and recognition of the value of investigating Gen Y’s retention in organization, a number of research and article addressed that Gen Y possess the essential factors of company development and economic revival due to their numerous population (Barkhuizen, 2014; Hao, 2006; Luscombe, Lewis, & Biggs, 2013; Martin, 2005; Stanimir, 2015). According to Morrison (2012), Gen Y’s population is equal to their parent generation and more than twice workforce of pervious generation. A 3.

(13) press of Forbes estimated that Gen Y would be occupying 75 percent of the global workforce in 2025, and taking an important place and influencing it positively.. Motivation of the Study A famous saying said by US steel magnate, Andrew Carnegie “Take away my factories, my plants; take away my money; strip me of all these; but leave me my people, and in two or three years I will have them all again” (Gupta, 2007) clear express how critical is employee retention. Plenty of research has proved job satisfaction as one of key factor of high turnover caused, (e.g. Cotton & Tuttle 1986; Muchinsky & Morrow 1980; Trevor, 2001) even money earning considered as a direct influence on employee retention. Base on this, researches suggest some solution to enhance employee retention, for instance, Walker (2001) identified (a) compensation and appreciation of the performed work, (b) provision of challenging work, (c) chances to be promoted and to learn, (d) invitational atmosphere within the organization, (e) positive relations with colleagues, (f) a healthy balance between the professional and (g) good communications as the key factors of enhancing retention. Even though the widely discussion given to enhance employee retention, the problem of Gen Y retention is still an unsolved and knotty problem to employers, view on Yer’s traits, Gen Y do not afraid of becoming unemployed as they trust in their families who are ready to support them. The Gen Y, with its character open to change, do not have a difficulty in adapting to the new companies in which they are employed. Gen Y are considered as a high-potential generation and will stimulate organization to success, it’s necessary to gain more understanding of Gen Y retention intention. Moreover, the analysis of Taiwan’s Executive Yuan showed that the average of salary are much lower when considering 4.

(14) commodity price factors of the salary in average regular earnings of employees, therefore, the young generation will face a disappointment when they realize they may not be compensated what they contribute in the work place even though they are well-educated. As Gen Y workforce has dominate in nearly future, and technology-centered world strongly influenced Gen Y the way of communication, learning style, working ethic and concept of work-life balance, result in several managerial problem and challenge. The more attention is given to Gen Y, the more issue revealed related to Gen Y characteristics and retention problem. Some studies impute the problem of high turnover rate to external factors, such as organization environment, compensation, learning and developing opportunity, etc. However, according to Ajzen (1991) indicated that attitude toward behavior, subject norm and perceived behavior control as the main character to perform a behavior, which mean the reason of high turnover rate is not only result in external factors but also related to an individual attitude and personality. In this research, the attention is specific given to explore the relationship among learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention of Gen Y in Taiwan.. Purposes of the Study The main purposes of this research is to have further understanding of how strong does the learning intention, career adaptability influence the level of employee retention of Gen Y. Furthermore, since every generation have specific characteristics caused by cohort effect, this research also investigate how does the demographic difference (e.g. gender, educational level) impact on variables. The purposes of the study listed as followings: 1.. To explore the relationships among learning intention, career adaptability and retention of Gen Y in Taiwan. 5.

(15) 2.. To discover the variances of gender among learning intention and employee retention of Gen Y in Taiwan.. 3.. To discover the variances of educational levels on learning intention of Gen Y in Taiwan.. Research Questions Based on the background, the problems are aroused as below: 1.. Does learning intention and career adaptability affect the level of employee retention of Gen Y?. 2.. Are there significant differences between male and female on learning intention, and employee retention of Gen Y?. 3.. Are there significant differences between educational levels on the learning intention of Gen Y?. Delimitation According to the research topic, this research only focuses on Gen Y born between 1980 and 1993 with over one year working experience. The processors such as baby boomer and Gen X are excluded in this research. To provide an overall concept of the relationship among Gen Y learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention. This research has no industry limitation.. Definition of Key Terms This section describes the definition of Gen Y, learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention that applied to this study.. Gen Y 6.

(16) This study defined Gen Y as those individuals born between 1980 and 1993. Gen Y also called as Millennials, Echo Boomers, the Digital Generation or Generation Me (Martin, 2005; Smith, 2010).. Learning Intention Kyndt, Govaerts, Dochy, and Baert (2011b) defined learning intention as a readiness or willingness to undertake a concrete action in order to neutralize an experienced discrepancy, and to reach a desired situation by means of training and education. This study adopted the definition.. Career Adaptability Savickas (1997) defined career adaptability as “the readiness of cope with the predictable tasks of preparing for and participating in the work role and with the unpredictable adjustment prompted by changes in work and working conditions” (p254). Career adaptability has four dimensions: concern, curiosity, confidence, and control. The definition of career adaptability from Savickas (1997) was employed in this study. Career concern. Concern means the essentially a future orientation, a sense that it is important to prepare for tomorrow. Individual who concerning about their own career will foster themselves looking forward and starting prepare for coming vocational tasks and occupational transition. An attitude of future orientation enables person become optimism about the achievability of future goals embedded in the construct, and well aware of the connecting experience between preferred occupation and present occupation. A belief in persisting difference experience provide people to explore possible selves. Most of all, the attitude and belief encourage people to promote advanced competencies in order to planning and preparing for the future. 7.

(17) Career control. Control is defined as an aspect of intrapersonal processes that stimulate self-regulation. Individual controlling enables people being conscientious, deliberate, organized and to use self-discipline and persistence to shaping themselves in performing vocational development tasks and making occupational transitions clearly. Career curiosity. In career construction theory, career curiosity means a sense of curiousness of exploring career information and simultaneously arouses motivation to seeking differences experiences and roles when exploring possible selves and alternative scenarios. The attitude of inquisitiveness enables people to scan the environment to learn more about self and situations. Career confidence. The person who is confidence means he or she possess certain ability to perform things successfully, feeling peaceful when encountering challenges and overcoming obstacles. In career construction theory, career confidence is a sense of self-efficacy, self-esteem, and feeling of encouragement.. Employee Retention Stauss et al. (2001) defined employee retention as “customer liking, identification, commitment, trust, readiness to recommend, and repurchase intentions, with the first four being emotional-cognitive retention constructs, and the last two being behavioral intentions.” This study adopted Stauss et al. (2001) as the definition of employee retention.. 8.

(18) CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW For offering foundational base of study, this chapter consists of importance of Generation Y, learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention.. Generation Y Definition Generality pertains to the definition of Gen Y roughly considered as whom born between 1970-2000, and the range of born year is the most common way to define Gen Y, see Table 2.1. However, their definition has been debated in the literature for decades, the birth years defining the Millennial generation are not precise because that are correspond roughly born year that between late 1970 to 2000s rather than universally accepted definition of Gen Y (Levenson, 2010).. Table 2.1. The Differences Definition of Gen Y Definition. Year. Generation Y born between approximately 1978 and 1995 Generation Y born between 1978 and 1988 Generation Y generally defined as people born between 1980 and the mid to late 1990s. Generation Y born between the years from 1980 to 2000. Defines Gen Y as those individuals born between 1977 and 1994. Generation Y called as millennial, who are born in 1980s-1990s.. 9. Author. 2002. Smola & Sutton. 2005. Martin. 2010. Levenson. 2012. Cekada. 2013. Luscombe et al.. 2014. Kilber et al..

(19) This study defined Gen Y as those individuals born between 1980 and 1993. Reasoning in accordance with the Taiwanese career path and education system. Approaches 80 percent of fresh graduate are complete their bachelor degree at 22 years old. Gen Y named variety but revealed their generation feature observably. Some researcher called them as Millennials, Gen Y, Echo Boomers (Smith, 2010) which is related to their born years’ feature; some are called them as Nexters, Generation www, the Digital Generation, Echo Boomers, N-Gens (Berkup, 2014; Martin, 2005) which is related to the advanced technology in their childhood. Others are called them as Non-Nuclear Family Generation, the Nothing-Is-Sacred Generation, the Feel-Good Generation, CyberKids, the Do-or-Die Generation, and the Searching-for-an-Identity Generation, Entitled Generation (Barford & Hester, 2011; Martin, 2005) and Generation Me, based on the observation of Gen Y characteristics.. Characteristics of Gen Y Mannheim (1970) asserted that cohort effect makes generations differentiate from another, because of specific social event (i.e., social movement, economic dynamic changing, or a breakthrough improvement of technology) during a their childhood and teenage period. Recent year, several studies stated that cohort effect leave deep impression on core value, belief, work ethic, and life style of an age group (Krahn & Galambos, 2014). Nowadays, the technology-centered world that has strongly influenced to the way of people communicated, absorbed knowledge, working approach, attitude, and expectation about their future. Besides, educational background, economic environment, social network, and perceptive of working are much more complex than previous generations (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). 10.

(20) The characteristics of Gen Y have been discussed and described in plenty of research worldwide. Several characteristics are related to Gen Y beliefs and attitudes. For example, Gen Y individuals value their personal life much more than their work life; they prefer the concept “work to live” rather than live to work, they also do not believe in work-life balance or integration. They are willing to work and solve problem in teams, value working flexibility, willing to embrace diversity and change, have comprehensive knowledge of technology and feel comfortable with technology (Bannon, Ford, & Meltzer, 2011; Cekada, 2012; Gavatorta, 2012; Kilber et al., 2014; Luscombe et al., 2013; Stanimir, 2015). Since Gen Y enter the workplace, the issues of management challenge, working attitude are in a spotlight, such as disloyalty, perceived neediness, overall casualness, short-term sight and sense of entitlement, most of all, the gap between employee and employer for long-term commitment cause management challenge in workplace. (Martin, 2005; Thompson & Gregory, 2012). In spite of previous studies stated criticism about Gen Y working attitude, several researches advocate Gen Y positive side and recognized their contribution (Fallon, 2009; Kilber et al., 2014; Martin, 2005; Tapscott, 2010). They believed that all the criticism about Gen Y is a stereotype, and not every single person alike the overall negative perspective. Besides, they indicated that Gen Y were proactive, independent and can thrive on rapid working advancement. They were well educated and grow up in the extremely competitive external environment, they have been cultivated to be autonomous, innovative, and were expected to make some change to the environment. To sum up, organizations should emphases on the reasons of management challenge among their young people in workplace and need to use the appropriate managerial style and 11.

(21) motivate better performance in organizations (Tapscott, 2010).. Learning Intention Derivation of Learning Intention The theory of planed behavior interpreted the way of people forming an intention, which will lead to an actual behavior. Ajzen (1991) indicated attitude toward behavior, subject norm and perceived behavior control as the main character to perform a behavior, the pattern gained a lot of recognition in worldwide in decades. An attitude means person’s opinion about whether a behavior is positive or negative. A subjective norm describes the social pressure an individual feels of arising from one’s perception to perform or not perform the behavior at hand. Perceived behavior control was widely used in physiological field, for example, the theory of self-efficacy. Perceived behavior control is refers to people’s perception of the ease or difficulty of performing the behavior of interest, in other word, people take their self-control ability as a motivator of performing a behavior. As the Figure 2.1. showed below, perceived behavioral control is both direct influence behavior and indirect influence behavior by behavioral intention. The direct path from perceived behavioral control to behavior is assumed to reflect the actual control an individual has over performing the behavior. The indirect path happened if their intentions of performing the behaviors are low, (even if they have delightful attitudes and/or positive subjective norms concerning the performance of the behavior) which is result in people believe they have little control over performing the behavior because of a lack of requisite resource.. 12.

(22) Figure 2.1. Framework of the theory of planned behavior. Adapted from “The theory of planned behavior” by Ajzen, I. 1991, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), p.182. Copyright 2016 by Elsevier B. V.. In 1991, Ajzen found that expectancy of success is similar to the concept of perceived behavior control. Expectancy of success was defined as “perceived probability of succeeding at a given task.” It’s similar to perceived behavior control because it refers to a specific behavior context and generalized tendency. In addition, self-efficacy theory is one of the most known for conduct perceived behavior control, the mainly idea is self-efficacy can influence choice of activities, preparation for an activity, effort expended during performance, as well as thought patterns and emotional reactions (Bandura, 1986, 1991). Furthermore, Zimmerman (2000) stated that the one who have higher self-efficacy beliefs support themself a system of self-regulatory to motivate through learning process. The system of self-regulatory including goal setting, 13.

(23) self-monitoring, self-evaluation and strategy use. In other words, the theory of planned behavior generated a more mineral framework of the relations among beliefs, attitude, intentions, and behavior by placing the construct of self-efficacy belief or perceived behavior control.. Learning Intention Context Based on the context of intention, this attention of learning intention is specific given to learning in workplace and applies the concept of the theory of planned behavior to denote learning intention. Learning intention conceptually defined as a wiliness of participating in learning activities, because the intention of engaging to particular learning activities can be considered as a strong indicator for actual behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Learning intention is an inner drive of employee to participate a learning activity provided by employer and was considered a proximal determinant of participation in education and training. Furthermore, Maurer, Weiss, and Barbeite (2003) indicated specifically that the intention to participate in learning activities was a robust predictor of actual participation in those learning activities. Kyndt et al. (2011b) defined learning intention as a readiness or willingness to undertake a concrete action in order to reach a desired situation by means of training and education program.. Based on previous research, learning intention is clearly. indicated to participate learning activities physically, rather than on-line learning or self-learning. Baert et al. (2006) also put forward a rational decision-making process that is consider attitudes toward learning and subjective social norms of employees. The development of a learning intention centralizes the decision-making process of the individual, which is considered to be an increasing articulation of an educational need. As the Figure 2.2. showed, 14.

(24) the decision-making process is initialed at a need, then the need produce educational need, learning intention, educational demand, afterward, educational participation. Thus, a learning intention is realized on educational participation.. Figure 2.2. Decision-making process of the potential learner. Adapted from “Towards the conceptualization of learning climate” by H. Baert et al., 2006. In R. Vieira de Castro, A. V. Sancho, & P. Guimaraes (Eds.) Adult Education: New Routes in a New Landscape, p.95. Copyright 2006 by University of Minho.. Learning Intention of Gen Y Regarding learning intention of Gen Y, the youngest group in organization. Since they are going to represent an organization’s future in next decades, the intention of learning is important to concern. The learning style has changed since Yers are natural on advanced technology and the abundant resources of learning is convenience to reach as long as they initiative to approach it. Gen Y used to explore the Internet to learn new things, pay a lot of attention to reach what they are interesting. Thus, attend the structured training course physically is not the interest to Gen Y if they didn’t realized how important to their individual career development. A training make them spend additional time to dealing with work responsibility, most of people therefore rather to take online activities than take part of a training course. However, for long-term consideration, learning intention is an essential factor for Gen Y’s career development, because the purpose of training courses is to help organization become more profitable by eliminating the gap between desired status and current status, then. 15.

(25) meet the development goal. Thus learning intention can be considered as the foster of organization development. Regarding Socio-demographic characteristics, the attention is given to gender differences toward learning intention of Gen Y, according to Sanders et al. (2011) finding, female had higher learning intentions than male. Elman and O’Rand (2002) further investigate the willingness to retrain in order to increase job insecurity. They found that female have more willingness to retrain because they are the group that have more risky of losing its job. On the contrary, Greenhalgh and Mavrotas (1994) and Zoogah (2010) did not find gender differences on learning intention. Therefore, it is lack of literature evidence of the gender discrepancy of learning intention of Gen Y. Speak of educational level difference on learning intention, it is found that an employees without college degree are less likely to engage in future activities, on the other hand, the employee who obtained degree-level qualifications showed a higher learning intention. Greenhalgh and Mavrotas (1994) found that employees who obtained degree-level qualifications demonstrate a higher learning intention. Elman and O’Rand (2002) showed that employees without a college degree are less likely to engage in future learning activities. Kyndt et al. (2011b), whose study focused on low-educated employees, that is, those without a starter’s qualification for higher education, found that those employees without any form of educational degree had the lowest learning intentions Based on the previous research, the connection between learning intention and gender difference of Gen Y is remain unclear, the current research will test the differences and present in chapter IV. To conclude, an effective learning is like a coin of two sides; one is learning opportunity 16.

(26) provided by supervisor, another side is a wiliness of learning drive by employee selves. Regarding the learning opportunity in business, the upper administration need to aware that learning and development opportunity take a critical factor of organization development in order to succeed in the rapid business environment. On the other hand, company competitive advantage as well as cultivated and established by employee initiative and proactive to participate in learning activities. In others words, the effectiveness of training outcome is relay on employee’s initiative on self-learning, in other word, the training outcome will not be useful or applicable if employee lacking of learning intention to take the chances to learn. (Kyndt et al., 2013). Career Adaptability According to the career construction theory proposed by Savickas (2005), it explains the process of individuals build their career by construct themselves, impose direction on their vocational behavior, and make meaning of their career in a same age group. To denote the perspective of career constructions, Savickas (2005) used the roles of playing a film as a metaphor: (a) Self as actor. The perspective describes a story about occupations’ order from being a student to retirement, (b) Self as agent. The perspective on agent put emphasis on strivings and adaptations pursued by the occupant plot, and (c) Self as author. The perspective on self as author delineates individuals’ reflection on their own life stories. Adaptability indicated the personality traits of flexibility and willingness to change. In psychosocial construct theory, career adaptability denoted the individual’ willingness of taking part in both predictable and unpredictable tasks which is under changing work circumstance. 17.

(27) Savickas (1997) have had established a fundamental concept of career adaptability and defined as “the readiness of cope with the predictable tasks of preparing for and participating in the work role and with the unpredictable adjustment prompted by changes in work and working conditions”. In 2012, Savickas advanced structured a model and proposed four major dimensions to assess individual’s career adaptability. These dimensions represent general adaptability resources and strategies of individuals when they are manage critical tasks, transition, and traumas as they construct their career. Those four dimensions are: (a) Career concern, (b) Career control, (c) Career curiosity, and, (d) Career confidence. Career concern. Career concern is a fundamental dimension of career adaptability, means essentially a future orientation, a sense that it is important to prepare for tomorrow. Individual who concerning about their own career will foster themselves looking forward and starting prepare for coming vocational tasks and occupational transition. An attitude of future orientation enables person become optimism about the achievability of future goals embedded in the construct, and well aware of the connecting experience between preferred occupation and present occupation. A belief in persisting difference experience provide people to explore possible selves. Most of all, the attitude and belief encourage people to promote advanced competencies in order to planning and preparing for the future. Career control. In career construction theory, define control as an aspect of intrapersonal processes that stimulate self-regulation. Individual controlling enables people being conscientious, deliberate, organized and to use self-discipline and persistence to shaping themselves in performing vocational development tasks and making occupational transitions clearly. 18.

(28) Career curiosity. In career construction theory, career curiosity means a sense of curiousness of exploring career information and simultaneously arouses motivation to seeking differences experiences and roles when exploring possible selves and alternative scenarios. The attitude of inquisitiveness enables people to scan the environment to learn more about self and situations. Career confidence. The person who is confidence means he or she possess certain ability to perform things successfully, feeling peaceful when encountering challenges and overcoming obstacles. In career construction theory, career confidence is a sense of self-efficacy, self-esteem, and feeling of encouragement. To sum up, it is a progress of exploring and seeking experience, people execute an action and choose a suitable education and occupation.. Employee Retention Nowadays, VUCA world has become a best description of external business environment; VUCA is represent volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. Indeed, the tremendous global economic changed, rapidly technological innovation has formed a dynamic and unpredictable world. Based on the impact of external environment, companies need to be able to anticipate technological innovation and be able to compete with other companies worldwide by considering employees’ knowledge and skills as an asset to companies (Burke & Ng, 2006). Having and retaining skilled and employees is significant link to the continuous learning and development of the employees, which is critical to retention process, as Hiltrop (1999) stated, employees’ knowledge and skills have become the key for companies to be economically competitive. Gberevbie (2008) further found that adopting and implementing appropriate retention 19.

(29) strategies would achieve organizational terminal goal and remain employees successfully, Workforce Planning for Wisconsin State Government (2005) defined employee retention as “.... a systematic effort to create and foster an environment that encourages employees to remain employed by having policies and practices in place that address their diverse needs.” In terms of the definition, several researches aimed to investigate the factors of employee retention, these factors can roughly divide into three dimensions, social, mental, and physical. The social dimension is refers to the internal contact and external contact among employees, the mental dimension is refers to the opportunity that employee could apply their knowledge flexibility and see the result of their efforts, which can help them in retaining the valuable resources. The physical dimension refers to working conditions and compensation. Several research provide some factors that all included in the three dimensions, for example, Walker (2001) listed seven factors of retention: (a) compensation and appreciation of the performed work, (b) provision of challenging work, (c) chances to be promoted and to learn, (d) invitational atmosphere within the organization, (e) positive relations with colleagues, (f) a healthy balance between the professional and (g) good communications. Plus, Cascio (2005) suggested that recognizing employees’ performance, establishing harmonious working atmosphere, provide a safe and healthy working environment. Apart from the organizational systematic effort of retention people, the aspect of personal factors also considered as a critical element of employee retention. Curtis and Wright (2001) supported that if employees who with a high organizational commitment and value the sense of membership, agree with its objectives and value systems, are more likely to remain in an organization, also be well-prepared to align the organizational value. Furthermore, Stauss et al. (2001) defined retention with same concept, “customer liking, 20.

(30) identification, commitment, trust, readiness to recommend, and repurchase intentions, with the first four being emotional-cognitive retention constructs, and the last two being behavioral intentions.” As the definition, it is focus on the employee’s mental contract with organization, and tends to emphasize employee take the initiative to be to part of organization. In the research point of view, retention is an initiative of individual that can keep them stay in an organization by managerial approach. Thus, the current paper adopts the definition of employee retention from Stauss et al. (2001), which is an anchor for retention investigation of Gen Y. Gen Y will occupy the primary population in workforce both in global, thus, the characteristic is necessary to considered when organization are going to set up a retention strategy. Gen Y tend to switching jobs or careers in terms of “search interesting”, and account for 60% of Gen Y have changed jobs at least once when they are just getting into workplace not so long, “job hopping” become a common stereotype and impression to Gen Y (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). In addition, people need to remain a job for 33.6 months to be proficient, and do not unemployed more than 4.5 months because people will custom the status of unemployment by staying at home, and afraid of get into wok place after a long time stay at home, further become a problem to society. View on Gen Y characteristic, researcher found that the Yers are not afraid of becoming unemployed because they believe in their families can support them during that time. On the other hand, Gen Y is open to change, no difficulty in adapting new companies in which they are employed (Berkup, 2014). In other words, the problem of Gen Y retention is partially result in low organizational commitment, to be more clearly, Gen Y’s characteristics make the psychological contract not easy to build.. 21.

(31) Hypothesis Development Based on above literature review, here are three hypothesis developed as followings.. Learning Intention and Career Adaptability Tolentino (2013) denoted career concern to a long-term or short-term perspective towards the future preparation, for instance, developing a career vision. Career control indicates a sense of ownership and responsibility to manage one's career. Career curiosity refers to an inquisitive of exploring possible selves and opportunities in one's environment. Lastly, career confidence pertains to the pursuit of aspirations and anticipation of success in face of obstacles. In previous research, Kyndt et al. (2013) identified self-efficacy and career-related variables (i.e. self-directedness in career processes) as the most consistent antecedents of an employee’s learning intention. Furthermore, as the discussion in literature review, self-efficacy is a derivation theory of intention, and career-related variables indicate self-directedness, self-control and readiness to cope with complex tasks. In other words, people who thinking more consciously about their own career, the higher does the intention to learn will be (Maurer et al., 2003; Noe, 1996; Rowold & Shilling, 2006; Sanders et al., 2011; Tharenou, 1997). Furthermore, Raemdonck (2006) and Kyndt et al. (2013) found that self-directedness correlated positively with the intention to participate in future learning activities. On the other hand, Noe and Wilk (1993) proved that employees who enroll development activities, the more likely they are also have engaged in career exploration. Ajzen (1991) established a clear concept of learning intention that indicated a person’s intention to learn is impacted by the attitude toward learning and the point view of subjective social norm. An attitude can be seen as the personal balance of the advantages, disadvantages, 22.

(32) costs, and benefits of the educational participation. The attitude of the learners relates to the concerning and expectations of the behavior and the prediction of the counterpoise between positive and negative result in participating in a learning activities. The subjective social norms is sourced from two factors: the perception of the beliefs of significant others and the tendency the individual has to conform. The perceived behavioral control is refers to the self-motivation drives by the concept of being trained. Therefore, this research expectation is that learning intention positively influences on the career adaptability of Gen Y. Thus, the established hypothesis: H1: Learning intention positive influences career adaptability of Gen Y.. Learning Intention and Employees Retention Learning in workplace is relates to both sides of learning opportunities provided by organization, and the initiative taken by employees. Given that employee retention has proven to be important for the functioning of a company to maintain competitive advantages, for example, Handy (2008) suggested that proper innovation, and assimilation of new knowledge is essential for survival in any work environment. Several previous study have investigated the use of performance goal orientation and learning goal orientation, the finding identify learning goal orientation is positively connected to a higher motivation to learning, better training performance and task performance (Brett & VandeWalle, 1999; Colquitt & Simmering, 1998; Seijts et al., 2004). Furthermore, D’Amato (2008) also discovered the relationship between learning goal orientation and employee retention, the younger generations prefer to learn within the current organization, rather than changing job for the eagerness of learning itself. 23.

(33) As mentioned at the literature review, employee retention factor can be roughly divided into three dimensions, physically, social and mental. In this research, learning intention is categorized as one of the factors belongs to mental dimensions. Because learning intention sources from an individual’s free well in work-related learning, it is a self-motivate that can help employee proactive seeking developing opportunity in current organization. Furthermore, researchers investigated the relationship between appreciative learning and working climate and intention to stay, found out that employees who feel appreciated by their supervisors and peers, also receive adequate learning opportunities, having more intention and possibility to stay working in the organization (Kyndt et al., 2011a). Kyndt et at. (2009) conducted an investigation related to personal factors and organizational factors on employee retention, result showed that level of education, seniority, self-perceived leadership skills, and learning attitude and some organizational factors such as appreciation and stimulation, and pressure of work are of great relevance in employee retention. In the context, learning attitude has proven relevance with retention. A positive learning attitude more likely lead a higher degree of resistance to stress, and feel appreciate of what they encountered, they will take every situation as an learning opportunity, consequence, the increase of organizational commitment and engagement positive impact employees intention of retention. Therefore, this research expectation is that the learning intention positively influences employee retention. Thus, the established hypothesis: H2: Learning intention positive influences employee retention of Gen Y.. Career Adaptability and Employee Retention. 24.

(34) Career adaptability can be denoted to the concept of career competency that make people knowing-why, knowing how, and knowing-whom to developing one’s career (Fleisher, 2014). Adaptability resources facilitate the capacity to “solve unfamiliar, complex, and ill-defined problems presented by vocational tasks, occupational transitions, and work traumas”, thereby promoting desirable career outcomes (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). Viewing the previous research, it was found that several scholars suggested that career adaptability resources help preventing person-job mismatch, underemployment and positively influence employee retention. (Gutman & Schoon, 2012; McKee-Ryan & Harvey, 2011; Takase, Nakayoshi, & Teraoka, 2012). Furthermore, Ferreira (2012) implicated that career adaptability may potentially influence on attraction, retention and intention to leave, Joāo and Coetzee (2012) tested the relationship by standardized canonical correlation analysis and approved that individuals who are highly concerned about their careers would also tend to be more concerned about the nature of their jobs. Chan & Mai (2015) implicated that when the employees are more adaptable to the job, they will likely develop the sense of satisfaction with their career and have less tendency to think about leaving the job. Therefore, this research expectation is that learning intention positively influences on the career adaptability of Gen Y. Thus, the proposed hypothesis: H3: Career Adaptability positive influences employee retention of Gen Y.. 25.

(35)

(36) CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY In this chapter, research methods are described as following. Include research framework, research method, research procedure, research sample and measurement of variables.. Research Framework The framework of this study was constructed from the previous literature review. The framework is aligning with the purpose of the study and investigating possible antecedents that affect the employee intention of Gen Y. Learning intention is selected as the independent variable, while the employee retention is the dependent variable. In addition, career adaptability as mediator of learning intention and employee retention. The research framework of this study was shown as Figure 3.1.. Learning Intention. H2. H1. Career Adaptability. Employee Retention. H3. Figure 3.1. Research framework. 27.

(37) Research Hypothesis Based on the reviewing of literature the hypotheses of this study were proposed as below: Hypothesis 1: Learning intention positive influences career adaptability of Gen Y. Hypothesis 2: Learning intention positive influences employee retention of Gen Y. Hypothesis 3: Career adaptability positive influences employee retention of Gen Y.. Research Procedure The Figure 3.2. as below describe all the steps of the research procedure 1.. Review literature The research reviewing literature and to gain conceptive recognize of Gen Y. During reviewing, researcher browsing exist problem and research scarcity of Gen Y workforce in Taiwan.. 2.. Identify Research Topic Based on the previous step, determine research topic is a significant step to the following step. In this step, researcher described the research background, variables, definition of key terms and the purposes of the study.. 3.. Develop research questions and framework After reviewing literature and identify research purpose, research conducted the framework of research to determine the variables employed. Meanwhile, research questions were proposed in accordance to research purposes and framework.. 4.. Develop Research Instrument Based on the variables conducted in research framework, instruments of variables are in. 28.

(38) reference to Knydt (2009), Savickas & Porfeli (2012), and Govaerts et al. (2011) to test each variables connection between each others. 5.. Conduct Expert Review and Pilot Test To confirm the validity and reliability of research, an expert review and pilot test were conducted.. 6.. Analysis Data After the context and instruments review by expert and go through pilot text, the data will collect and analyze.. 7.. Conclude Research Finding As analysis result, conclude the finding and provide concrete suggestion to managers will be conduct in this step.. 29.

(39) 1. Review Literature. 2. Identify Research Topic. 3. Develop Research Question and Purpose. 4. Develop Research Instruments. 5. Conduct Expert Review and Pilot Test. 6. Analyze Data. 7. Conclude Research Finding Figure 3.2. Research procedure. 30.

(40) Research Sample This study focuses on employee learning intention, career adaptability and retention intention of Gen Y in Taiwan, to approach target population, convenience sampling were conducted via online questionnaire link. Target population was identified by requirements as below: 1.. Taiwanese and have full time job (permanent and contingent), exclude part-time job.. 2.. Aged 22-35 (born between 1980-1993). Data Collection Data collection was conducted throughout the months between March and May, 2016. Firstly, researcher share the questionnaire link in Google Form to people who is Gen Y in the researcher’s personal network, second, a snowball sampling technique was employed by asking people to share the link to their personal network they can reach. This research collected total 397 online questionnaires, however, 48 questionnaires were regarded as invalid because respondents were not matching up the criteria of age or employment type. The valid questionnaires are 349 to data analysis.. 31.

(41) Measurement The measurements conducted in this research describe as below. The completed questionnaire and all each of measurement items can be seen in the Appendix B: Questionnaire.. Demographic Factors Personal dimension included six items, gender, born year, position, type of employment, educational level, and industry. Gender. Gender is conducted as a variables of distinguishing male and female differences on learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention. Born year. A blank column for respondent to fill out their born year, it is the first criteria for researcher to identify the target population (1980-1993), respondent who out off the range is identified as invalid questionnaire. Position. Position is to indicate respondents’ current position in company, which is including two categories, management and non-management. Type of employment. Type of employment is the second criteria to identify target population. Which is including three categories, permanent, contingent, and part-time job. Respondent who employed part-time job is identify as invalid questionnaire. Educational level. To indicate respondents educational level: High School or below, Bachelor or College level and Masters Degree or above. Industry: To indicate respondents’ industry of current company, which is include education, technology, service, finance and insurance and others. Information related to work tenure. It is included three items, to identify low performance of retention. 32.

(42) Seniority. To show how long the respondents have work for the current job. The data is measured in a monthly basis. It is an anchor to identify respondents’ degrees of retention wiliness. Total working experience. Total working experience is to show how long the respondents start to work. Amount of companies have respondents worked for. The information is collected to show respondents work for ho many companies.. Learning Intention Learning intention is an independent variable in the research. The instrument for learning intention was integrated Govaerts et al. (2011) learning intention and Kyndt et al. (2009) learning attitude. Sample items stated as following: “I Intend to talk with persons in my surroundings about job-related courses or training that I could follow.” Learning attitude sample items stated as following: “If I get the chance to learn, I will definitely take it. ”All of the items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging (1=strongly disagree , 5=strongly agree.) The higher score means higher learning intention.. Career Adaptability Career adaptability is a mediator in this research. Career adaptability was widely employed to plenty research and various target population. The instrument of career adaptability in this research is derived from Career Adapt-Abilities Inventory (CAAI) International Version 2.0, which is developed by an international work team that gathered 18 countries’ researcher and employed in Savickas and Porfeli (2012). CAAI version 2.0 was included four dimensions: career concern, career control, career curiosity and career confidence. These four dimension provide a clear acknowledge of 33.

(43) workforce occupational transitions, developmental tasks, and work traumas. Some sample item statements are: “Thinking about what my future will be like,” ”Making decisions by myself ,” ” Observing different ways of doing things,” and ” Taking care to do things well”. Respondent based on their different strength when they build up their career to rate each items in dimensions from 1 represent “Not strong” to 5 represent “Strongest”. The higher score means the stronger competency of career adaptability. Each dimension consists of six items, thus, 24 items totally this variable. In order to avoid social desirability bias, these four dimensions of career adaptability were designed in non-sequential order. Table 3.1. Items Numbers of Career Adaptability Dimensions Dimensions. Item No.. Career concern. 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44. Career control. 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45. Career curiosity. 26, 30, 34, 38, 42, 46. Career confidence. 27, 31, 35, 39, 43, 47. Employee Retention To assess retention intention, the measurement developed by Kyndt et al. (2009) is employed in this study. Sample item stated as below: “I’m planning on working for another company within a period of three years.” and “Within this company my work gives me satisfaction.” All of the items are rated on a 5-point Likert’s scale ranging (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree.) The higher score represented the higher level of employee retention. 34.

(44) Data Analysis The statistic software of IBM SPSS 22 for iOS was used in this study to analyze the data. The analysis method included as below. Also, the questionnaire was list in appendix B.. Demographic Information Analysis Descriptive analysis provides the frequency distribution and percentage number for examining participants’ distribution pattern of demographic in detail. Descriptive analysis will be the criteria to identify the target participant and find out errors, outlier, and the distribution of the data.. T-Test T-test was employed to compare the differences between two groups’ means and standard deviation. In this research, gender was tested to find the differences among learning intention and employee retention.. One-Way ANOVA The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is observed to determine whether there are any significant differences between the means of three or more independent (unrelated) groups. In this research, One-Way ANOVA is employed to test the educational level differences on learning intention.. Person Correlation Analysis The analysis of correlation was conducted to examine the strength of the relationship between learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention, researcher determine the relationship of variables by observing correlation coefficients.. 35.

(45) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a statistical technique widely applies in the behavioral science, it also considered as a combination of factor analysis and regression or path analysis among variables. Path diagram were produced along with beta coefficient and model fit to examine the relationship between observed variables. In this research, AMOS (Analysis of Moment Structure) was employed to carrier out CFA and path analysis in order to verifying hypothesis. Outputs for this research included X2/df, RMR, GFI, AGFI, RMSEA, AVE and CR to examine measurement model’s goodness of fit. The detailed introduction of each index of good fit as Table 3.2.. Table 3.2. Index of Good Fit. X2/df. Good Fit. Acceptable Fit. 2-5. <5. Wheaton et al. (1977). 0≤2 Root Mean Square Error or. 0≤.05. Approximation (RMSEA) Goodness-of-fit Statistic. >.90. Tabachnick & Fidell (2007) .05-.01. Schumacker & Lomax, (2004). .05≤.08. Maccallum et al. (1996). >.80. Tabachnick & Fidell (2007). (GFI) Adjusted goodness of fit. Torkzadeh (1994) >.90. >.80. (AGFI) Root Mean Square Residual. Sources. Tabachnick & Fidell (2007) Torkzadeh (1994). <.05. Kline (2005). (RMR). 36.

(46) Validity and Reliability The test validity and reliability of measurement, this study went through a process of expert review, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Cronbach’s Alpha. The purpose is to ensure the content validity, construct validity and reliability of measurements before main study. The detail described as following context.. Experts Review An experts review was employed to confirm content validity of the measurements. In this research, there are two experts from academic field to review the items. There are some suggestion is accepted, for example, “The work I’m doing is very important to me” is deleted because it is considered as an inconsistent item. Moreover, the Chinese translation of “I have checked out a job in another company previously ” and “Taking responsibility for my actions.” is revised in order to be more comprehensive to respondents. However, some suggestions are not accepted due to the different situation of this research. First, the measurement of learning intention is recommended as not suitable to apply because the original measurement have low reliability and validity, however, the current research still remain the measure due to the different respondent of that questionnaire. Second, experts suggested that the item of age change open text to categorize into groups “<20, 20~29, 30~39, 40~49 and >50” however, this research planed to target Gen Y, aged below 35, thus, the open text is remaining. Details refer to Appendix A.. 37.

(47) Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was carried out all measurements to confirm that question items fall under appropriate dimensions, EFA was conducted with all variables to see if there were cross factor loading and low factor loading among all variables in this study. In this research, there were one hundred respondents were employed .KMO and Bartlett’s Test was tested to determine if these items are suitable for doing factor analysis. According to Kaiser (1974), designates levels as follows: A measure >.9 is marvelous, >.8 is meritorious, >.7 is middling, >.6 is mediocre, >.5 is miserable, and <.5 is unacceptable. Bartlett“s Test of Sphericity is a measure of the multivariate normality of set of distribution and should be significant (p<.001). In this research, the value of KMO Measure of Sampling Adequacy was .704, means middling, and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was significant (Sig=.000>.05). EFA was conducted with all variables to see if there were cross factor loading and low factor loading among all variables in this study. According to Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, and Strahan (1999), in a simple factor structure each item has a relatively strong loading one factor (e.g., > .5). Therefore, in this study, items with factor loading lower than .5 and cross-loaded were deleted. Table 3.3. showed all the factor loadings of all the variables.. 38.

(48) Table 3.3. Exploratory Factor Analysis Variables. Item. Concern. Curiosity. Career Adaptability. Control. Confidence. Employee Retention. ER1 ER2 ER3 ER4 ER5 ER6 ER7 ER8 ER9 ER10. Factor Loading 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6. Reason for Deleting Item. 0.814 0.704 0.894 Delete 0.72 0.741. Low factor loading. 0.807 0.771 0.63 0.784 0.809 0.817 Delete Delete 0.667 0.688 0.762 0.684. Cross loaded Cross loaded. 0.711 0.621 0.754 0.784 0.809 0.883 0.85 0.671 Delete 0.734 0.897 0.909 0.773 0.717 0.864 0.844. Cross loaded. (continued). 39.

(49) Table 3.3. (continued) LI1 LI2 LI3 LI4 LI5 LI6 Learning Intention LI7 LI8 LI9 LI10 LI11 LI12. Delete 0.798 0.886 0.86 0.676 0.613 Delete Delete 0.774 Delete 0.733 Delete. Cross loaded. Cross loaded Low factor loading Cross loaded Cross loaded. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was employed to confirm the data have same result from the resources of measurement. In order to ensure the instrument met construct validity, 249 participants were conducted to CFA, which is excluded the portion conducted to EFA. Regarding to process of conducting CFA, the index in model fit was observed and if the majority of index out off acceptable range, regression weight and modification indices were examined for selection of possible items to delete. Afterward, the modified items was rerun in CFA, and then check the index again, the process is repeated until the index of measure satisfied measurement fit. Following context showed the CFA and index of each measurement respectively. CFA for learning intention. The measurement run though Exploratory Factor Analysis remaining 7 items for CFA. All 7 items of learning intention run through confirmatory Factor Analysis but the index were under satisfactory model fit. Therefore, the table of Squared Multiple Correlations and Modification Indices was examined to identify which items need to 40.

(50) be deleted in order to have an ideal model fit. Items that have lowest factor loading or highest value in modification indices were removed, and remaining items underwent CFA to confirm the construct validity again. After deleting 1 item, the result of remaining 6 items showed satisfactory model fit and therefore underwent a measurement model fit test. A summary of model fit for original and modified output was showed as Table 3.3. The original and deleted items of learning intention refer to Table 3.5. The CFA model of learning intention in standardized regression weights was illustrated at Appendix C. Table 3.4. LI Model Fit Summary LI Variable Full items list (7) Modified Items(6). X2. df. P. X2/df. RMR. GFI. 74.839. 14. .000. 5.346. .042. .911. .821. .132. .413. .821. 26.543. 9. .000. 2.949. .028. .964. .916. .089. .45. .821. AGFI RMSEA AVE. CR. As the Table 3.4. showed, the model fit better after modified the structure model. Not only X2/df, RMR and RMSEA all decreased but also GFI and AGFI increased to met satisfactory model fit. Plus, CR remain the same after modified. However, AVE did slightly increased but remained below the adequate figure of .50 for goodness of fit, it’s becoming a limitation of this study. To ensure the modified measurement model has cross-validity, a multi-group comparison of the randomly split sample was conducted. As Table 3.6. showed, measurement weights, structural covariances and measurement residuals were examined, the insignificant p-value indicate constraining random split samples into two equal part does not significantly. 41.

(51) weaken the model fit, which means the modified measurement model was successfully cross validated with two random sample groups.. Table 3.5. Multi-Group Comparison of Cross Validation of LI Model. df. CMIN. P. NFI. IFI. Delta-1 Delta-2. RFI. TLI. rho-1. rho2. Measurement weights. 12. 12.117. .436. .004. .004. -.005. -.006. Structural covariances. 16. 16.912. .391. .005. .006. -.007. -.007. Measurement residuals. 32. 40.604. .142. .013. .014. -.011. -.011. 42.

(52) Table 3.6 Learning Intention Variable Items Items. Description. Status. I intend to talk with persons in my surroundings about job-related LI1. LI2. courses or trainings that I could follow.. Deleted. I intend to participate in a job-related learning activity within the next year. I intend to look for information about job-related courses and. LI3. LI4. LI5. learning activities that I could participate in. Sometimes I think about following a job-related training within the next year. I intend to talk with my executive about job-related courses or trainings that I could follow.. LI6. If I get the chance to learn, I will definitely take it.. LI7. I think it is important to learn throughout my life.. LI8. When I want to learn something that can be useful in the workplace, I take the initiative.. Deleted Deleted. To gain insight into a complex problem, I let my imagination run LI9 LI10. free, even when a solution does not seem to be close at hand. I love undertaking activities on my own initiative.. Deleted Deleted. Some subjects that arise during work are so interesting that I LI11. investigate them further, even when it is not necessary for my work.. LI12. I love to accept complex and challenging tasks.. 43. Deleted.

(53) CFA for career adaptability. The measurement of Career Adaptability run through Exploratory Factor Analysis remaining 21 items in four dimensions for Confirmatory Factor Analysis. All 21 items of learning intention run through confirmatory Factor Analysis but the index were under satisfactory model fit. Therefore, the table of Squared Multiple Correlations and Modification Indices was examined to identify which items need to be deleted in order to have an ideal model fit. Items that have lowest factor loading or highest value in modification indices were removed, and remaining items underwent CFA to confirm the construct validity again. After deleting 5 item, the result of remaining 16 items showed satisfactory model fit. A summary of model fit for original and modified output was showed as Table 3.7. The CFA model of career adaptability in standardized regression weights was illustrated at Appendix D. As the Table 3.7. showed, in over all, the model fit is slightly improve after modified, X2/df, RMR and RMSEA all decreased, on the other hand, GFI, AGFI all increased, however, it yet above the satisfactory model fit, it is considered as limitation in this study. Moreover, AVE slightly improved and CR decreased but remained acceptable. Again, Multi-group comparison result for career adaptability cross validation of measurement model is shown in Table 3.8. P-value also revealed that the constraining randomly split samples into two equal does not significantly worsen the model fit, the modified measurement has cross validity with two sample groups. A list of full item and deleted item showed as Table 3.9.. 44.

(54) Table 3.7. CA Model Fit Summary X2. LI Variable Full items list (21) Modified Items (16). df. P. X2/df RMR GFI AGFI RMSEA AVE CR. 675.69 189 .000/ 3.575 0.049 0.788 0.741. 0.102. 0.54 0.96. 327.807 104 .000/ 3.152 0.4 0.855 0.811. 0.093. 0.57 0.952. Table 3.8. Multi-Group Comparison of Cross Validation of CA NFI. IFI. RFI. TLI. Delta-1. Delta-2. rho-1. rho2. .436. .004. .004. -.005. -.006. 16.912. .391. .005. .006. -.007. -.007. 40.604. .142. .013. .014. -.011. -.011. Model. df. X2. P. Measurement weights. 12. 12.117. Structural covariances. 16. Measurement residuals. 32. 45.