Exploring the relationship between participative organizational

Exploring the relationship between

participative organizational change

and employee satisfaction

Understanding the employee opinion about the influence of participation

in organizational change on employee satisfaction.

By Tom Aendenroomer Tilburg, August 2011

2

3

Master Thesis Organization Studies

Exploring the relationship between

participative organizational change

Understanding the employee opinion about the influence of participation

in organizational change on employee satisfaction.

Details of student

Name: T.C.W. Aendenroomer

ANR: S 193090

Names of the supervisors

Name supervisor: A. van der Zouwen PhD MCM

Name second reader: Drs. R. Pranger

Name of MTO evaluator: Drs. F.B. Tekle

Organization supervisor: Drs. P. van der Meulen

Title of the Master Thesis Circle

Interactive interventions for organizational change and learning.

Tilburg University

Department: Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences

Study: Organization Studies

Place and date: Tilburg, August 2011

4

5

‘Abstract’

Employee satisfaction has been linked to productivity, motivation, absenteeism and tardiness,

accidents, mental and physical health, and general life satisfaction (Landy, 1978). The number

of linkages may explain why employee satisfaction is one of the most extensively researched

subjects in Organizational Psychology (Judge & Church, 2000). Employee satisfaction refers

to employees' overall feelings about their jobs and is determined by feelings of specific job

aspects (Mueller & Kim, 2008). Measurements of employee satisfaction can be helpful in

identifying which specific aspects of a job require improvements (Kerber & Campbell, 1987).

Traditional research tools to measure the level of employee satisfaction do not take the

possible role of participation in organizational changes processes into account (BASAM,

1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011).

This research is an attempt to understand whether participation in organizational changes

should be taken into account anno 2011. This, since modern organizations often move in

turbulent environments and therefore organisational change is complex (Boonstra & Caluwé,

2007). Complex change processes and traditional top down change steering by management

have often not the expected and desired results (Boonstra, 2004b). Participation of

stakeholders in organizational change processes can be the solution (Zouwen, 2010), since

employees are important stakeholders in organizational change processes (Werkman et al,

2005) and change processes influence the employees of the organization on their turn

(Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010).

Since both job satisfaction and organizational change influence employees, a relation between

them is a logical possibility.

In order to explore this relationship, the following research question was posed:

Does participation of employees in organizational change influence the level of employee

satisfaction and if so, in what way are they related?

This research explored the relation of participation in change processes on employee

satisfaction, with use of multiple methods of data collection. Although employee satisfaction

is a temporary and personal state of mind of individual employees, this research found in a

modern organization evidence that participation in change processes influences the level of

employee satisfaction.

Key words: Employee satisfaction, Job satisfaction, Organizational change, participation in change processes

6

Table of Content (1)

I. Background Information…………………………………….………...….………..3

Abstract……………………………………………………...………….5

Table of Content……….……………………………...………………..6

II. Introduction………………..…..…………………………………………….……..8

I. Research problem……………………………………...….……………8

II. Aim and research question……………………………………………...9

III. Working Hypothesis……………………………………………..……10

III. Relevance……………………………………………..…………….....12

III. Theoretical Background………..................................................................………13

I. Employee satisfaction…………………………………………………13

II. Measuring employee satisfaction……………………………………..16

III. Employee satisfaction and organizational change…………...………..17

IV. Participative change………………………………………………..…18

V. Linking the concepts…………………………………………………..19

VI. Gaining access to, and researching at a public organization……….…20

IV. Research approach……………………………………………….……………….21

I. Research Design………………………………………………………21

Initial research design………………………….....…………..21

Actual research design………………………..……………….22

II. Data collection………………………………….…………..................23

III. Data Analysis……………………………………….……………...….27

IV. Sample strategy………………………………………..…………....…27

V. Research quality indicators………………………………….……...…29

7

Table of Content (2)

V. Findings………………………….....................................................................…..31

I. The Surveys……………………………………..………………….....31

II. The Card game……………………………………………………..….40

III. The Interviews………………………………………………………...41

VI. Conclusion………………………………...………………………….…………..47

I. Confirmation/Rejection of working hypothesis ……….……………..47

II. Answering the Research Question…………………...…….…………50

Participation as an instrument……..……………………..…..51

VII. Discussion…………………………….……………………………………….….54

VIII. Recommendations……………………………………….….…………………….58

Propositions……………………………...…………...…………...………......59

IX. Limitations………………………………….……….……………………………60

X. Personal reflection…………………………………………………………...……61

XI. References………………….……………………………………..……...……….62

XII. Appendices……………….……………………………………………….………67

I The survey………………………………...................................................…67

II Developing the survey……………………………………………..……….80

III Preliminary analysis of the surveys……………………………….……...104

IV The Cronbach dilemma……………..……………………………..…......104

V The card game……………………………………………………….....…116

VI The topic list for the interviews…………..............................................…117

VII The results of the interviews…………………………………...……..…118

VIII A summary of the research journal………………………...…………...122

8

II Introduction

The following chapter provides an introduction to this research. Subsequently, the research

problem, aim and research question, and the relevance will be introduced.

I. Research problem

A growing number of intervention methods used by change agents put an emphasise on the

importance of involving key stakeholders in the change process (Schruijer, 2006; Schruijer &

Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). Interactive and participative change

approaches developed since the 1980s and are commonly called ‘fourth generation

evaluation’ (Guba & Lincoln; Zouwen, 2010).

Research has shown that many traditional top-down processes did not deliver the desired

results because decision makers failed in attending to the interest of and information held by

key stakeholders (Bryson, 2003; Nutt, 2002; Zouwen, 2010). One of the key stakeholders in

change processes are the employees of the organization (Werkman et al, 2005). Although

many factors determine the productivity of employees for an organization, employee

satisfaction is especially important (Lock & Crawford, 1999). One of the positive things of a

high level of employee satisfaction for an organization is that employees are less absent and

intended to leave (Koys & Daniel, 2001). On top of this, there is a positive relationship

between employee satisfaction and job performance (Jones, 2006).

In the literature, participative change approaches are mostly treated as an instrument to

establish organizational change and may improve the outcomes of the process (Schruijer &

Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). So, if the participation of employees, as an

instrument in organizational change, should not be ignored nowadays one could argue that

employee participation could have an effect on the employee satisfaction of those employees

as well. This research will not treat participation in organizational change as an instrumental

to change something, but focusses on what participation in change means to employees of

organizations.

Assuming there was a lot of literature available about the relation between the two variables,

the quest to find an unexplored niche to make a relevant contribution had started. Therefore, it

was remarkable to ascertain that the ISI Web of Science and Tilburg University database did

not hold any previously done study about the relation between participative change and

employee or job satisfaction. Insights in this check can be found on page nineteen of this

thesis.

9

That no scientific publications were found is remarkable, especially because Patterson et al

(2010) found out that employee autonomy and control does have a positive influence on job

satisfaction. Since collective employee autonomy and control in change process have

cohesion with participative change it may be that some research is lacking on this topic.

This combined with a literature exploration for non-reviewed or non-scientific articles with

use of Google, which delivered two papers that say there is a significant influence of

participation in change and job satisfaction (Gomes, 2009; McMillan, 2009) a gap in the

scientific literature is revealed.

Therefore this thesis is an attempt to understand if participation of employees in

organizational change processes does influence the level of employee satisfaction?

If the answer to this question would be: Yes it does, current employee satisfaction

measurement kits (BASAM, 1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011) would be incomplete and may

be even invalid to measure the level of employee satisfaction in organizations which deal with

complex change processes nowadays. If the answer to this question would be: No it doesn’t,

the field of Organizational Change has the knowledge that higher employee satisfaction isn’t

a positive side effect of a participative change intervention.

Irrespectively towards the answer on the research question, there is an interest in

understanding the relation between participation in change processes and employee

satisfaction.

II. Aim and research question

The aim of this research is to understand one possible side effect of a participative change

intervention better and to check whether traditional employee satisfaction measurement tools

need revision. In some situations, participative change approaches have known benefits

(Zouwen, 2010). It may be that there are also has some currently unknown benefits, or maybe

even disadvantages. Since there is reason to assume that participation in change processes

may be a determinant of employee satisfaction (Gomes, 2009; McMillan, 2009), this should

be revealed.

In order to understand what determines employee satisfaction, existing literature is used to

understand the traditional factors that influence this dependent variable. As described in the

theoretical background section on nineteen of this thesis, existing scientific research does not

take participation of employees in organizational change into account as an independent

variable. Since no traces can be found that participation in organizational change is ever

considered as a possible determinant for employee satisfaction in questionnaires,

10

understanding if this is actually a lack or absence, is the goal of this research. If a relation

exists, the how, when and why questions will be addressed.

Another initial scope of this research is to make a first step in unravelling an “optimal”

strategy of change for employee satisfaction by questioning employees, since there is a

positive relationship between employee satisfaction and job performance (Jones, 2006).

This research explored the relation of participation in change processes on employee

satisfaction using multiple methods of data collection at a public service organization. This

will be explained in depth in the research approach section of this research.

The aim of the research as presented above lead to the following central research question:



The conceptual model is developed to clarify the research question, as shown in figure one

below.

Figure one “conceptual model”

III. Working hypothesis

To guide the research process the next working hypothesis were developed:

I. Participation of employees in organizational change increases the level of employee

satisfaction.

Participation of employees in organizational change processes leads to decisions

based on common ground. Lack of common ground leads to resistance to change and

furthermore it stimulates employees to cooperate. Top down change approaches may

create a feeling of subordination, while more participative approaches may create

better cohesion about the goals of the organizational change. Therefore, more

participation in of employees in organizational changes processes is likely to have a

positive influence on the level of employee satisfaction.

Participation of employees

in organizational change

Employee satisfaction

11

II. Employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes

have a lower level of employee satisfaction.

Employees that faced a lot of top down changes in the past are fed up with the

execution of tasks they don’t support. This in combination with the lack of autonomy

in decision making makes employees less satisfied with their work.

III. Employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes

need a more participative strategy of change (Werkman, 2006 as elaborated on

page 11) to be satisfied, as employees who already had the opportunity to

participate in past changes.

Employees who could deliver non or a narrow contribution to previous organizational

changes are not satisfied with a minor role in the change process. In order to be

satisfied, they need the feeling they are in “self” control.

IV. The task of the employee has no influence on the strength of the relation elaborated in

the first three working hypothesis.

It doesn’t matter if an employee for example has IT- or law related tasks, for the

influence of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction. It may be that

IT employees for example have higher employee satisfaction in general, but

discovering that is not the intention of this research. Expectation is that IT employees

do not rate participation in organizational change as more important for their level of

employee satisfaction, simply since they develop information and communication

technology instead of organizational policy.

V. There is a hierarchy within the factors that determine employee satisfaction.

No specific factor hypothesis will be given, but some factors are expected to be more

important than others. Not only that, but if for example the salary is at the minimum

level the employee doesn’t think that more autonomy is important for his level of

employee satisfaction. First, the wage should be increased. This is comparable with

the ideas of Maslow (1943) which will be discussed in the Theoretical Framework of

this thesis. Purpose of this working hypothesis is to explore what the place of

participation in organizational change has in this hierarchy.

12

IV. Relevance

The scientific relevance of this study lies in the lack of knowledge about the relationship

between participative change and employee satisfaction that was found after a literature

exploration as conducted on page nineteen. This knowledge is interesting for the field of

Organizational Change, Organizational Psychology and Human Resource Management. The

research gives more insights in the way of thinking of employees and what level of

participation in change they prefer. For the field of Organizational Change the results give

new insight in a possible side effects of Participative Change approaches.

Furthermore, this research opens possibilities for future research. Combining the different

ways of looking to participative change in a paradigm or investigating the hierarchy of job

demands are two options where this research could be helpful. In the final section of this

paper, propositions for future research will be given.

The practical relevance of this study for organisations, and government or public

organizations in particular, is a better understanding of the importance of employee

participation in change processes. Why respondents of this study are selected at a public

organization will be explained on page twenty.

Furthermore, the results of this research could bring new reasons for management to make use

of the Participative Change methods. The organization of study liked to have a clear picture of

the determinants.

At last, organizations are interested in keeping their employees satisfied (Koys & Daniel,

2001), since studies suggest that employee satisfaction plays a primary role in helping

companies achieve financial goals (Koys, 2003).

13

III Theoretical background

The following chapter gives a literature exploration of the concepts relevant for this study.

I. Employee satisfaction as a complex concept and it’s different mind-sets over time.

From Taylor towards Herzberg and further.

Today, for most employees in the Western world the times of hard-core Scientific

Management as introduced by Taylor (1911), are behind them. Rational efficiency, without

efficient working employees, may not be that efficient after all (Pruijt, 1997). In times were

Social Capital theories are rising (Hooghe & Stolle, 2003), social support and participation

are essential elements for organizations to gain legitimacy and use worker resources in an

efficient way (Fine, 2001). Hasle and Møller (2007) suggest that in spite of a highly

Taylorized work system, a better psychosocial work environment can be attained by a

goal-oriented effort to create better working relations and by preventing conflicts. Groups

with more social capital found out to have higher job satisfaction at both the individual and

the workplace level (Søndergaard et al, 2007). Several definitions of employee satisfaction

can be found in the literature. Even seemingly different concepts like; work/job satisfaction

and work/job attitudes are used sometimes as synonyms for employee satisfaction.

In this research employee satisfaction will be broadly defined as: “a pleasurable or positive

emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences” (Locke,

1976, p.1300).

Locke (1976) argues that appraisal of employee satisfaction should fulfil a central role.

Appraisal, sometimes referred to as: evaluation, prediction or rating makes knowing more

about employee satisfaction more meaningful (Berings & Steen, 2004). In research, many

different types of measuring employee satisfaction are used.

The field is born with Hawthorne

One of the early studies on employee behaviour are the Hawthorne Studies (Mayo, 1933).

This research elaborates the reactivity of employees in response to the fact that they are being

studied, despite the fact that there is no other experimental stimulus. Although some scientist

are critical about the way in which the experiment is done (Levitt & List, 2011), it is a first

attempt to understand the effects of employee feelings and behaviour.

14

Maslow and his need fulfilment

According to Maslow (1943), there are five needs who determine behaviour and lead to

satisfaction. With this theory Maslow tries to explain why humans act the way they do. The

result is a hierarchy of needs. Every human has needs, which he or she will try to fulfil. At the

base of the pyramid are physiological needs like health, food and sleep. When this need is

fulfilled safety, like shelter, becomes an important issue. On top of that belongings become a

need. Belongings are not necessarily materialistic, love and being part of a group are even

more important belongings. Then self-esteem and recognition are needs which a human will

try to fulfil. If all other needs are fulfilled the individual will try to achieve individual

potential, called self-actualisation. Maslow’s theory is not only important for the development

of the behavioural sciences, but has also been an important inspiratory for this research. The

existence of a hierarchy in employee satisfaction determinants will be explored, with special

attention to the possible place of participation in organizational change in this pyramid.

Herzberg’s factors

Forthcoming out of this, is the two factor theory of Herzberg (1959), inspired by the pyramid

of Maslow (1954). Herzberg (1959) adapts this hierarchy to employee satisfaction by making

a distinction between satisfiers/motivators and dissatisfiers (Mullins, 1995). Achievement,

recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement and growth are labelled as satisfiers

where company policy, supervision, relation with boss, work conditions, salary and

relationship with pears are possible dissatisfiers (Herzberg, 1959). If, for example, salary

scales are approved as fine by employees, this in itself will not lead to satisfied employees but

only creates a neutral state of mind (Mullins, 1995). The satisfier achievement for example,

does make employees more satisfied. Although the research by Herzberg (1959) may look

aged today, another study by Kovach (1987) showed that employers think they know what

motivates their employees, but practice has shown that this is often not the case.

Vroom’s expectations

Another leading theory in the field of employee satisfaction studies is the Expectancy Theory

(Vroom, 1964). The core idea of this theory is about that humans will decide to behave or act

in a certain way because they are motivated to select a specific behavior over other behavior

due to the expected results of that selected behavior. This means that the motivation of the

behavior selection will be determined by the desirability of the outcome. Vroom (1964) states

that the theory is about the cognitive process in the human brain about ranking different

15

motivational elements, and therefore not the desirability of the outcome solely, in decision

making.

The characteristic job of Hackman and Oldham

The Job Characteristics model is a widely spread model about five core factors that determine

employee satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Skill variety, task identity, task

significance, autonomy, and feedback are expected to impact the state of mind of an

employee. According to Hackman & Oldham (1976), not every employee rewards the

individual core factors as equally important and a combination of fulfilled factors lead to

higher employee satisfaction. This framework is especially important for this research, for

more reasons. Firstly, because working hypothesis five on page eleven is about understanding

about a more common hierarchy of factors, like Maslow (1943) which is not supported by the

Job Characteristic model. Secondly, because the five core factors do not at all exclude

“Participation in change processes” from being a determinant of employee satisfaction, since

the x-variable of this research may find its origin in core variable autonomy and task identity.

Salancik & Pfeffer’s social processes

Opinion, information and behavior of others influences people’s perception (Salancik &

Pfeffer (1978). The Social Information Processing theory states that social information is used

to make value judgments. Satisfaction is a continuous comparison of the individual with

others. This interesting theory undermines all working hypothesis, or not? This will be

discussed in depth, in the discussion section of this thesis.

Solomon’s opponent

According to Solomon (1980), for high satisfaction levels are continuously new stimuli

necessary. Employees and humans in general, become “spoiled” over time. Solomon states

that emotions are opposite pairs. Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction is such a pair, but this theory

has not much in common with Herzberg (1959). When the incentive satisfaction is triggered

by, for example, the possibility to modestly participate in the organizational change of the

employee’s organization. The next time a modestly participation style will not be good

enough for the employee to be satisfied. This theory is in contrast with working hypothesis

three on page eleven and will be addressed in the discussion section on page fifty-five of the

paper.

16

The employee satisfaction theories combined

When studying employee satisfaction became clear that a lot of cumulative, but also

contradictive theories exist. Employee satisfaction as a concept, is hard to distinguish from

motivation. Motivation is seen as a positive attitude of people towards their work (Veen,

Alblas & Geersing, 1991). Motivation is another concept which struggles with different views

and perspectives developed in the literature over the years. Only salary as motivation for

employees may be appropriate in the rational economic days (Taylor, 1911), today’s

employees need a bit more to stay motivated (Pruijt, 1997). Over the years, social capital

theories have emphasized the importance of social support and participation (Hasle & Møller

(2007). It is important to understand what drives employee satisfaction, since satisfied

employees work better, are less absent and will not leave the organization that much as

dissatisfied employees (Koys & Daniel, 2001).

II. Measuring employee satisfaction

During the literature search it became clear that there are many tools to measure employee

satisfaction. Therefore it was disappointing that it is really difficult to gain access to one.

Almost all employee satisfaction measurements, mostly surveys are protected.

Nevertheless, three existing surveys could be secured. Firstly, a basic, traditional

questionnaire about employee satisfaction named BASAM; Basis Vragenlijst Amsterdam

(Biessen, 1993), was used. The basic questionnaire was supplemented with scales of a more

integral EDMK survey; Extended Delft Measurement Kit (Roe et all, 2000). Because

BASAM and EDMK are more traditional surveys, some new scales were borrowed from

IVA; Tilburg Institute for Social Policy Research and Consultancy (Smeenk, 2007), a

colleague of Tilburg University. Property right prohibited the use of the whole IVA survey.

The actual survey and the way it’s structure is build is displayed in appendix I on page sixty-

seven and appendix II on page eighty.

The multi-question concepts used in the survey will be briefly described below:

All concepts below are about the respondent’s perception or need fulfilment and not

about the actual meaning and content of the concept.

Job content is about the tasks an employee has to execute. Although three different

departments were researched en compared, it is not focus what the differences in content are

but only if they result in a difference in the level employee satisfaction.

Salary & reward are about the material compensation an individual employee receives for its

efforts for the company. No actual values are given, only focus on perception of respondent.

17

Atmosphere and co-workers concerns a social preferable working environment.

Career and training opportunities are about the perception of the possibilities for an

employee to develop him- or herself for the future. Again, it is not about the actual

opportunities, the perception and therefore satisfaction is focus of study.

Work conditions addresses issues concerning safety, health and welfare during work.

Information & communication are about the satisfaction with all kinds of communication

within the organization. It is more about the actual stream of information then the technology

behind it. In other words, how satisfied is the respondent in general with the processing of the

classic Sender-Receiver theory during work, as displayed in figure two.

Figure two:

Visualization of the sender-receiver theory

http://condor.depaul.edu/dsimpson/pers/~wp0001.JPG

Acknowledgment is about the state or quality the employee feels being recognized by co-

workers and management.

Commitment refers to the degree an employee feels connected to the organization. Devotion

and dedication towards the organization’s “wellbeing”, without direct, accountable

declaration.

III. Employee satisfaction and organizational change

Employee satisfaction is also important in organizational change processes. Researchers

discovered that a misfit between humans, besides a structural, cultural and systemically

misfit, is one of the origins of organizational change failure (Boonstra, 2004b). Scientists who

approach organisations as open systems, add to this that the organisation is also continuously

influenced by its environment (Woodword, 1959; Boroş, 2009). The topic of change failure is

of significant importance since over seventy percent of the change processes in the

Netherlands do not have the desired outcome(s) (Boonstra, 2004a).

So, due to both internal and external influences, organisations face problems of multiple

dimensions and ambiguity, inherent dynamics and unpredictability (Delden, 2009). Change

agents often ignore these multidimensional problems and fail to come up with an integrated

solution (Boonstra & Caluwé, 2007). Employees are important stakeholders in the

organization (Schruijer & Vansina, 2004) not involving stakeholders may lead, among others,

in resistance to change. Resistance to change is one of the most common causes of change

failure (Boonstra, 2004b).

18

IV. Participative change

As discussed in the problem section of this thesis, a growing number of intervention methods

is aware of the need for an integrated solution were key stakeholders are involved (Schruijer,

2006; Schruijer & Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). These methods have a place

within social capital thinking (Hooghe & Stolle, 2003; Zouwen, 2010) and have elements of

participation by stakeholders. In this research, participative change is broadly defined as: a

whole range of approaches and methods with a certain degree of interactivity and

diversity of stakeholders (Zouwen, 2010).

Within change approaches the level of participation by stakeholders varies. Werkman (2006)

states that the change capacity depends on the change strategy that is used by the change

agent. In figure three below, different change strategies are connected with participation

levels and the development of change capacity.

Figure three: Change strategies and development of change capacity;

a table from van der Zouwen (2010; pp. 54,)based on Werkman (2006)

With every next level of participation, certain obligations for employees arise as well. The

Power strategy, which is a top-down approach has opposite characteristics as the Interactive

strategy, which is a bottom-up approach. This range of participation is used to understand the

influence of different participative change levels on employee satisfaction.

In this way, more information about a possible ‘optimal’ level of participation in change for

satisfied employees is found.

This research only measures what level of participation leads to what level of employee

satisfaction. There is no focus on the development of change capacity itself, the third line in

figure three.

19

Although the power of participative change approaches is in combining multiple stakeholders,

for this research the employees, as key stakeholders, are subject of study.

The employees are questioned about what they understand as participation and what level of

participation in change satisfies them most. Results were schematized and the working

hypothesis are answered by comparing the different opinions. This, to prevent a bias like the

one that is visualized in figure four below.

Figure four:

a cartoon by

Mark de Koning;

a figure from

van der Zouwen (2010; pp. 16)

V. Linking the concepts

Deliberately if the answer to the research question will be yes,… or no, ….. participation of

employees in organizational change and employee satisfaction are not such a strange couple

to research after all. Like discussed in the problem section of this research, it was remarkable

that no scientific literature about the influence of participative change was found after

conducting the steps that are described on figure five below.

Literature collection Literature selection

Databases “Search term” AND “search term”

ABI/Inform

Catalogue UvT

JSTOR,

ISI Web of Science,

Online Contents Book articles UvT

Online Contents Journal articles

UvT

Google Scholar (journals only)

participation

participation

participative




Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction

Work satisfaction

Work satisfaction

Work satisfaction

change

change

change

participation

change

participation

change

participation

Figure five “literature study”

The literature part of the research linked the two concepts hypothetically and theoretically

together. The last part of the theoretical framework will study the organization where the

actual research took place. Consecutively, the methodological framework will explain witch

steps were made to find out if employee participation in change processes has an influence on

employee satisfaction practise, and therefore deserves a place in upcoming literature.

20

VI. Gaining access to, and researching at a public organization

The actual name of the organization will not be mentioned, this was a constraint in order to

research that particular organization. Preferably the name of the organization was published,

but doing research is also a matter negotiating to gain access to an organization. Sometimes a

concession needs to be done.

From September onwards, the privately held organization Organise2Learn was contacted.

This organization was enthusiastic about the research proposal and was willing to cooperate.

They would arrange access to their clients, schools, to conduct the research. Unfortunately,

due to un-clarified, internal reasons they suddenly stopped the cooperation in February. This

was problematic for the continuation of the research.

Luckily, the researcher’s father’s network had a connection who was possibly willing to

cooperate in a scientific research. This public organization operating in a turbulent

environment with many organizational changes would be very suitable to conduct the

research. Since the connection was a member of the management team and the appearance of

favoritism should be avoided, many presentations followed to convince all stakeholders of the

importance of this research for the organization. For this reason, a whole employee

satisfaction research is done and not only the relevant items to answer the research question.

The next paragraph will briefly explains briefly the history, structure, tasks and goals of the

organization.

Although the organization is only founded in January 2002, it is a merger of several

organizations who existed since the 1960’s. In 2004 the organization had 22.900 employees,

since 2004 this drastically reduced due to budget cuttings (nu.nl, 2004). Even the supervisor

of the organization couldn’t give the exact number of employees.

Employees at the studied organization are familiar with organizational changes. The

organization is deliberately, obligatory and actively engaged to fit in the turbulent

environment, this to meet the demands of stakeholders.

This public organization is responsible for the execution of several insurances. The

headquarters in Amsterdam develops the policy for all departments true the Netherlands. Due

to its former bureaucratic structure, reorganization and continuous changes from upper hand

this organization seems an interesting starting point for investigating the influence of

participation in change on employee satisfaction. The departments that are focus of this study

are localized at the headquarters. All three departments together have approximately 200

employees, including management. Why the three departments are selected will be discussed

in the data collection section on page twenty-three of this thesis.

21

IV. Research approach

The following chapter gives a description of the way in which the research is done. Within the

methodological framework choices are mentioned and explained. Subsequently, the quality

indicators of this research are given.

I. Research Design

Initial design

The design of the study was in the first place a multiple case study design. Three departments

of one organization were studied. Multiple cases allow the researcher to capture possible

moderating or mediating variables on the relation which were not considered on forehand.

The choice to study one organization is mainly because of time constraints. Gaining access to

an organization is a time consuming activity and a substitute to compare different cases is

found. The three departments are so different that they are almost an organization on it selves

and in this way variations can still be compared. Results about the extent participation in

change (X) has an influence on employee satisfaction (Y) was compared for the three

departments.

A case study design is appropriate for in depth investigating of how a variable is related to

another (Yin, 2003; Baker, 1999) and ideal to develop new theory (Eisenhardt, 1989). The

three cases were selected to investigate if there are differences, and not because differences

are expected on forehand.

Furthermore, the research question will be answered by asking employee opinions about the

importance of participation in change and not investigating directly it’s influence on

employee satisfaction. Therefore the research is not based on cases who did a participative

change project and who didn’t. Measurement would be complex since success levels and time

after the intervention probably have a major moderating or even mediating role. The research

design is developed to measure the employee opinion about the satisfaction with the level of

participation in organizational changes. Furthermore, the general employee satisfaction will

be measured. In a later stage, participation satisfaction and employee satisfaction will be

compared and searched for deviations.

Broadly and in other words, it is tested if employees who are satisfied with the level of

participation in organizational change processes are more satisfied with their work in general.

22

Some elements of an cyclical action research project (Riel, 2007) are present. Results are

cumulated and follow up on each other. Several cycles are followed to answer the research

question.

In the first cycle, questionnaires are spread to the respondents of the three departments, then

results were analysed and possible differences between departments were distinguished.

These results are the base for the second cycle, during the interviews the questionnaires

results are discussed and respondents were asked to give any enlightening comments of how

and why they think the results are the way they are. The results found in cycle one will be

researched in depth and may be confirmed or rejected.

Actual research design

An adaptation to the initial research design was necessary. This because scales of the

questionnaires were not reliable enough to extract rich data as correlation and regression

analysis (Vocht, 2004). This will be elaborated in the results section of this paper. Only

individual items could be compared for the departments. This was a problem since nothing

could be said about the strength of the effect. A conclusion whether participation in

organizational changes has an effect on the level of employee satisfaction, but no results

about the strength and way of the relation would be a bit poor for a master thesis. To make

sure data can be obtained about the strength and way of the effect an adaptation to the

research design was made after the first cycle of surveys. This adaptation meant the

introduction of an experimental card game, which is more broadly elaborated in the data

collection section of this chapter.

The survey used in this research is based on existing questionnaires (BASAM, 1993; EDMK,

2000; IVA, 2011). A new developed scale to measure participation in change processes is

added and some extra items on request of the studied organization were introduced. The

origin of all questions is elaborated in Appendix II of this thesis on page eighty.

The respondents for the interviews are selected by a process called hermeneutic circling

(Guba & Lincoln, 1989). The process is explained in depth at the paragraph data collection.

This process begins with an open-ended interview with one employee of each department.

This respondent is asked to nominate a second respondent who he thinks may have a totally

other opinion about the spoken subjects. The goal of the whole process is to derive an

evaluative construction of the program’s impact which is both agreed upon by the various

stakeholders, and it is “informed” and “sophisticated,” (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).

23

Besides this, the research design is inspired by the naturalistic inquiry method (Erlandson,

1993). In Naturalistic Inquiry, just as in Action research projects, it is essential to involve

members of the practice under study in the research process from the very beginning

(Zouwen, 2010; Erlandson, et al., 1993; Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Patton, 2001).

The elements of an action research have a certain cohesion with the ideas of Adema (2010) in

(Van der Zouwen, 2010). Adema (2010) suggests that sending a standardized quantitative

questionnaire to a larger group of respondents and complete the research with qualitative open

interviews as validation of the results as an appropriate research design.

II. Data collection

The unit of analysis is on the department level and the organizational level. The unit of

observation will be employees of the departments within the organization. The data will be

collected at one organization, due to time- and accessibility constraints in public

organizations. Multiple departments are chosen to still be able to analyse possible variations.

The three departments

The three departments are selected since they differ in tasks and management of the

departments allowed cooperation of the research. Although no variations are expected on

forehand, the differences in tasks could have an effect on the influence of participation of

organizational change on the level of employee satisfaction.

Nr. 1 Advice & Design

The first department develops and makes ICT structures for both internal as external clients.

Most employees in this department have an ICT background.

Nr. 2 Policy & Law

The second department is responsible for all the legal and law enforcing procedures. Most

employees in this department have a law background.

Nr. 3 Realisation and administration

The third department is smaller in the number of employees than the first two and has the

more to monitor the processes after implementation at the client. Employees in this

department have a mixed background.

Although these three departments have other tasks, no different outcomes are expected on

forehand. The departments have never done a participative change intervention as such, so

24

they are expected to be more neutral towards their participation then employees who already

did an participative change trajectory. Furthermore, this is more interesting for the field of

LSI and change agents, as future agent for the organization. The reason to choose three

departments within the same organization is because of accessibility and validation of the

outcomes.

Surveys

The first method of data collection was spreading existing questionnaires to all members of

the different departments. This because developing a proper questionnaire is a profession on

itself. 161 questionnaires were printed on hard copy and put in envelops, each envelop

received an individual label with the name of the “possible” respondent on it. 61 copies for

the employees of department one “Advice & Design”, 31 copies for the employees of

department two “Policy & Law” and 69 copies for department three “Realisation &

Administration”. The secretary of each department made sure every employee received a

copy. The questionnaire used for this research is in Dutch and can be found in the appendix

one. The questionnaire is composed out of several existing questionnaires, only a few scales

were modified to fit the research question or to satisfy the organization where the research

took place. This modification process of the questionnaires is shown in appendix two. The

modification process was especially important since it delivered useful contributions for

future research as discussed in the recommendation section of this thesis. The results of this

questionnaires were analysed and compared for the three investigated departments. All

departments are from one organization, but vary in tasks, background and field. The name of

the organization will not be named, due to the possibility of confidential and sensitive

information coming from the research they like to stay anonymous.

Interviews

The second method of data collection was conducting open interviews with individuals. The

strategy for selecting respondents for the interviews is called hermeneutic circling (Guba &

Lincoln, 1989), and will be discussed in the data collection section of this research.

Although the conversations are called open interviews, a rough topic list based on the results

of the surveys was used. Results who needed in-depth explanations were selected, together

with questions that support the initial research question.

The interviews were not only about individual feelings. Respondents were asked whether they

could understand the survey results and could give reasons why the situation was like that.

25

Furthermore, interviewee two was confronted, after he gave his uncoloured opinion, with the

answers on behalf of participation in organizational changes of interviewee one. Interviewee

three was confronted with the answers of number one and two and so on. In this way, a broad

understanding with multiple perspective was created.

After conducting the interviews, a summary of the conversation was send back to the

respondents. This, in order to verify whether the researchers interpretation was the same as

the message of the respondent. This is called a member check (Zouwen, 2010a). This member

check is a commodity in qualitative research, and a technique who helps researchers to

improve accuracy, credibility, validity and transferability. In this research the quantitative

and qualitative quality indicators are used separately since the two methods are used in one

research. All respondent replied the member check and some had minor revisions.

Experimental card game

The third method of data collection was an experimental, intuitive game. The game was

played at the same moment as the second method of data collection, the interviews took place.

Although gaming is an appropriate tool for strategy and change (Geurts, Duke & Vermeulen,

2007), gathering data for a scientific research is not common. Furthermore, gaming is mostly

used for interactive purposes (Geurts, Altena & Geluk, 2006) and this is a solitaire game.

The game is played with all eight respondents, the same as the ones of the second method data

collection, the interviews. There are no right or wrong answers. Goal of the game is to

understand more about the hierarchy of job demands and their influence on employee

satisfaction. The items on the card game find their origin in the variables of the survey. They

are assumed to influence employee satisfaction (BASAM, 1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011).

Job content, Salary & reward, Carreer & training opportunities, Work conditions, Information

& Communication, Good leadership are existing variables. Balance work / private life is

added on the request of the studied organization. Those cards, together with a card about

Participation in organizational changes configure the base of the game.

Participants were asked to put the cards in an order. This order is defined by the degree in

which the participant rates each item on the level of employee satisfaction. The hierarchy

should be built on intuition, this means that there is a limited amount of time, 5 minutes, to

place the cards in an order. The place in the hierarchy for participation in change processes is

important to solve the survey problem. With this method of data collection a difference of

importance in variables who could influence employee satisfaction is displayed. The method

26

is developed to rank the influence of participation in organizational changes on employee

satisfaction. Since placing factors in a range is based on an intuitive feeling of an employee,

general categories of importance are established. 1-3 is very important, 4-6 is medium

importance and 7-9 is less important for employee satisfaction.

Figure six below illustrates two different results of the card game.

Figure six

“The game” in action

The three sources, surveys, card game and interviews, all methods of data collection made

data-triangulation possible (Hertog and Sluijs, 2000) and this contributes to the quality of the

research. One may argue that a new conceptual model is needed, since many other variables

are introduced. However, the variables Job content, Salary & reward, Carreer & training

opportunities, Work conditions, Information & Communication, Good leadership and Balance

work / private life are not focus of study, they only act to determine the strength of the effect

of participation in organizational change processes on employee satisfaction.

27

III. Data analysis

Questionnaires are marked, a different number for each department. In this way the individual

results of employees of the organization can be added to the department of the employee and

still stay anonymous.

First, an analysis of the outcomes for all departments together is done. This resulted in a

general idea of employee satisfaction at the organization and the common opinion of what

level of participation in change is preferred. Next, the outcomes of the three departments were

compared to find possible differences in results. These results were used to develop an initial

topic list for the interviews.

The analysis of the interviews is done by cumulating opinions of respondents in search for a

general opinion. The opinion of individual employees have no special role in this research,

unless this opinion makes a nuance in the general opinion about the topic. By doing this the

results are a better reflection of the population. This increases the generalizability of the

research as discussed in research quality indicator section of this thesis.

For the data reduction, open interviews with department members of the organization will be

recorded on tape and after that will be typed out in summative transcripts. Since transcription

involves a degree of transformation and interpretation of the data (Gibbs, 2007), the

transcripts were send back to the respondents with the question whether they like to verify

them.

The card game was analysed after the respondent finished it. Results were discussed with the

respondents to understand the meaning behind the placement. The interviews were held in

approximately 45 minutes, were as the card game took place in fifteen minutes. There was a

little variation since some discussion topics were discussed during the card game, where as

they were meant to be treated during the open interviews, and the other way around.

IV. Sample strategy

The three departments, as discussed in the data collection section of this research, are selected

on base of diversity in tasks and accessibility. A well thought sample strategy to increase the

response rate of the questionnaires was not particularly necessary, since management teams of

the organization had a positive attitude towards this research and they promised to stimulate

their employees to respond. Nevertheless, separate meetings with members from all three

departments were organised to increase the response rate. Presentations were given to inform

the employees about the importance of the research. Besides this, a reminder email was sent

two days before the hand in deadline for the surveys.

28

The sample strategy for the interviews was hermeneutic circling (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).

Figure seven below describes the path of finding the optimal respondents for the interviews.

Figure seven

Steps to the answers

The first interviewee was selected by voluntary subscription. To increase the diversity in

opinions and therefore the quality of the interview results all respondents were asked if they

know someone who was likely to think totally different about the issues. This determined

every time the next interview and step in figure seven. Unfortunately, this person was not

willing to cooperate with the research. The dead end was solved by selecting a respondent by

voluntary subscription again, but this time an employee of another department was selected.

This process continued until no new information was heard and a saturation point was reached

(Glesne & Pechkin, 1992).

29

V. Research quality indicators

Since this research uses both quantitative en qualitative methods, the research indicators are

used separately. The survey data are gathered with respect to the quantitative research

indicators, whereas the card game is qualitative. The interviews are conducted with respect to

both research quality indicators.

Quantitative research indicators for multiple case studies

The proper research indicators for multiple case studies are construct validity, external

validity and reliability (Yin, 1994).

With construct validity is meant the level of which the research measures the underlying

theoretical concepts in a proper way (Yin, 1994). This is an issue with both the dependent as

the independent variable. When researching employee satisfaction it is important that this

concept is actually measured and not, for example, is disturbed by the respondents mood on

that particular day. Therefore, already existing surveys are used and the adaptation needed to

measure participation in organizational change are separated from the other survey scales.

Furthermore, the reliability of scales measures if the scales measure the same concept (Vocht,

2004). The scale that measured participation in change processes seemed not reliable enough

(Pallant, 2007). Therefore, no conclusion could be derived from the correlation and regression

analysis of this research. This to prevent a possible construct related bias.

The external validity of this research was not the highest priority. Since this research intended

to be a step up for further studies, future research should show the generalizability of the

results. However, the choice for the three departments increases the external validity within

governmental organizations.

The last quality indicator that will be discussed is the reliability of the research. Reliability is

about the demonstration that the performed operations of a study can be repeated with the

same results (Yin, 1994). To ensure this all steps taken in this research are described in detail.

The appendices deliver all background information and reasoning. This increases

transparency of the research.

30

Qualitative research indicators

Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are important quality indicators

for qualitative research (Erlandson et al., 1993).

The credibility of the research was enhanced by making use of triangulation. This means the

use of multiple sources of evidence for the data collection makes the findings of this research

more convincing and accurate (Yin, 1994). Surveys, interviews and a card game is used to

gather data. Member checks are done to verify the data and interpretations to increase the

credibility of the research (Zouwen, 2010a)..

Transferability describes the process of applying the results of research in one situation to

other similar situations. This is enhanced by the method of hermeneutic circling (Guba &

Lincoln, 1989). This makes the sample a better reflection of the population. Although the

results are statistically tested, generalization of the results should be done carefully.

The use of a research journal contributes to the dependability, because it allows the possibility

to conduct an external check on the consistency of the research process (Erlandson et al.,

1993). By clearly describing the methodological part, replicating the study should become

more easy (Baker, 1998).

31

V. Findings

This chapter represents the results. Subsequently, the results of the surveys, card game and

interviews will be elaborated.

I. The surveys

Preparation of the data file

With the deadline for handing in the questionnaires in sight, some steps needed to be taken in

order to start the actual analysis of the data in SPSS. The first step was to transform the

codebook given in appendix II into an SPSS data file. This, to be able to enter the data

obtained by the questionnaires. The next step was to check and correct the errors in the data

file to make sure that our data does not show a distorted view of the reality (Pallant, 2007).

Entering and checking the data

Now the data file was ready to enter the actual data. After this, a check for possible errors was

done to see if there were some strange data visible. Errors must be removed from the data file

before the start of the analysis, otherwise they can distort the results (Pallant, 2007). Most

items in the survey had a 5-point scale. Value one means totally disagree, were value five

means totally agree. Value 0 is no opinion. So, most items had a possible range of values from

0-5. If for example, value 6 is filled in in the data file, this is a value outside of the range of

possible values and therefore an error to remove . With the frequency option in the descriptive

statistics menu an output was created, this is an easy way to see whether all the minimum and

maximum values of the variables are correct and no data were missing. Furthermore, an

interesting note is that some respondents marked two values within one item. When two

values were circled, the valuable was treaded as missing, no opinion.

Also the open questions were checked for errors. One respondent filled in an age of 300, this

is very unlikely and therefore the item should be removed. After a check with all the items of

that particular respondent the decision was made to remove all the items of the respondent’s

survey. This, because the respondent marked both male and female as sex. This is the only

survey who was removed from participation in the analysis.

32

The first insights after manipulating the data

With a response rate of sixty-eight percent, the number of respondents who filled in the

questionnaires was far above the average of fifty-six percent (Barurch & Holton, 2008). The

three studied departments scored respectively eighty-five, ninety-two and forty-two percent.

This nice response rate was as expected, since higher management of the organization asked

the employees to fill in the questionnaire and on top of that some presentations were held to

increase the support for the research. The below average response rate of one department was

also expected since many employees had external duties during the hand-in period of the

questionnaires. The total number of questionnaires which were retoured was hundred ten.

With ninety-five people who filled in the survey who gave a grade for their level of employee

satisfaction the mean was a 7.41. This grade is according to the ten-point scale ample or

above average (Ifrah, 1994). The deviation of the grade is visualised in figure eight at the

bottom of the page. Three people were not satisfied at all with their jobs and gave the grade

5.0, the lowest grade of all respondents in this research. Eleven people gave the grade 6.0 and

thirty-two people gave an 7.0. These people were quite satisfied with their jobs. The other

forty-two people were very satisfied with a grade of 8.0 and even seven people gave a 9.0 for

their level of job satisfaction. The pending ten people did not fill in a grade. The grades were

not normally distributed. In general, people in this organization are satisfied with their jobs.

This is double checked by the satisfaction item number one displayed on page 104. Forty-four

per cent of the respondents is satisfied with the work in general, and thirty-seven per cent

agrees a bit with the statement. This is in line with the grade for employee satisfaction.

Figure eight: Grades for employee satisfaction

33

Figure nine: Grade for the organization

Ninety-three respondents gave a grade for the studied organization as a whole, as displayed in

figure nine above. The mean was 6,53, this is much lower than the grade for the first question.

Since the questionnaire doesn’t give any insight in the underlying reason(s) for this, the link

between the two items will be studied more in depth during the interview sessions. Some of

the respondents gave low grades (Ifrah, 1994) for the organization as a whole, so this fact

should not be ignored.

34

Preliminary results of the questionnaires

The upcoming figures visualize the preliminary findings (Pallant, 2007) in the SPSS output

and correspond with the description of the item results above them. Only items relevant to

the research question will be discussed. All items are checked for each department and all

together. When an item varies significantly this is mentioned in that particular section.

Q2. Over 39,4 % of the respondents was neutral about the possibilities for involvement in

organizational changes in the studied organization. This is combined with 33 % who is only a

bit satisfied with the participation possibilities. The score on the item satisfaction with

participation in change processes within the organization is therefore neutral unto slightly

positive, as displayed in figure ten below.

Frequency Percent

Not relevant/ don't know 5 4.6

Totally disagree 6 5.5

Disagree a bit 15 13.8

Neutral 43 39.4

Agree a bit 36 33.0

Totally agree 4 3.7

Total 109 100.0

Q3. The last item was about participation on the individual level. Therefore, the next item

that will be discussed is about the general attitude towards co-workers and there level of

participation in organizational change processes. 63, 3 % of the respondents agrees more or

less with the statement that employees should be more involved in organizational changes.

Figure eleven below illustrates these findings.

Frequency Percent

Not relevant / don't know 4 3.7


Neutral 28 25.7

Agree a bit 45 41.3

Totally agree 24 22.0

Total 109 100.0

Figure ten:

Answer percentage question two

“I'm satisfied with the possibilities for

involvement in organizational changes”

Figure eleven:

Answer percentage question three

“Employees should be more involved in

organizational changes”

35

Q4. Over 80 % is accepting some extra responsibilities that a participative change approach

may bring along. 13,8 % is neutral and only 2,8 is not willing to accept all the responsibilities

that participation in organizational changes can bring for employees.

Frequency Percent



Neutral 15 13.8

Agree a bit 53 48.6


Total 109 100.0

Q5. When asking the respondents of the current situation in the organization about the

openness of management towards new ideas and opinions by employees 72,3% thinks this

could be better.

Frequency Percent

Not relevant / don't know 1 .9


Neutral 21 19.3

Agree a bit 57 52.3


Total 109 100.0

Q6. However 25,7 % of the respondents thinks most former change processes were not

typically bottom up nor top down, 64,2 % has the opinion that most change are set in a top

down manner.

Frequency Percent




Neutral 28 25.7

Agree a bit 45 41.3


Total 109 100.0

Q7. The next item is scattered so further analysis is needed to come up with results. On the

question of employees are satisfied in general about the organizational changes of the last two

years 34, 9 % is not so satisfied, 24,8 % neutral and 32,2 % is satisfied.

Figure twelve:

Answer percentage question four

“I think it is important to participate in

organizational changes, even if this

brings responsibilities”

Figure thirteen:

Answer percentage question five

“The management should listen more to

the ideas and opinions of me and my co-

workers”

Figure fourteen:

Answer percentage question six

“Organizational changes processes are

mostly top-down in this organization”

36

Frequency Percent




Neutral 27 24.8

Agree a bit 32 29.4

Totally agree 3 2.8

Total 109 100.0

Q8. 56 % agrees with the statement that if employees were able to participate more, the

results of the organizational change were even better. 22 % was neutral and 13,8 % thought it

was not relevant. Figure sixteen below illustrates these findings.

Frequency Percent


Totally disagree 1 .9


Neutral 24 22.0

Agree a bit 38 34.9


Total 109 100.0

Q9. One of the most important questionnaire items for the research is the direct question if

participation in change processes will lead to higher work satisfaction of the respondent.

Although 41,3 % thinks this is the case, 36,7 % is neutral about this statement.16,5 % does

not see a direct relation. Figure seventeen visualizes the findings.

Frequency Percent




Neutral 40 36.7

Agree a bit 35 32.1


Total 109 100.0

Q10. When asking if the organization would be graded higher if the respondent could

participate more in organizational changes 43,1 % of the respondents agrees, 33 % is neutral

and 38,5 disagrees. More research is needed to clarify the underlying reasons.

Figure fifteen:

Answer percentage question seven

“ In general I'm satisfied with the

organizational changes of the last two

years”

Figure sixteen:

Answer percentage question eight

“If employees were able to participate

more, the results of the organization

changes were even better”

Figure seventeen:

Answer percentage question nine

“If I could participate more in

organizational changes I was more

satisfied”

37

Q11. The next question is the reversed version of Q8. Results are not as expected. 38,5 %

thinks that if employees were able to participate more, the results of the organizational change

were better. 33 % was neutral and 20,2 % does not think this would make a difference. More

research is needed to check validity of the answers and the explanation.

Frequency Percent




Neutral 36 33.0

Agree a bit 17 15.6

Totally agree 5 4.6

Total 109 100.0

Q12. Over 72 % disagrees with the statement that participation in change processes will lead

to commotion. Only 7,3 % agrees more or less with this statement.

Frequency Percent




Neutral 17 15.6

Agree a bit 6 5.5

Totally agree 2 1.8

Total 109 100.0

The results of the questionnaires are used to establish a topic list for the interviews. The topic

list for the interviews is in appendix four. Furthermore, the results will be used for

triangulation purposes in the conclusion section of this thesis.

Frequency Percent




Neutral 39 35.8

Agree a bit 36 33.0


Total 109 100.0

Figure eighteen:

Answer percentage question ten

“ If I could participate more in

organizational changes I graded the

organization higher”

Figure nineteen:

Answer percentage question eleven

“More participation in organizational

changes will not lead to better

organizational changes”

Figure twenty:

Answer percentage question eleven

“More participation in changes

processes will lead to commotion”

38

Differences between departments

The results of the surveys that are discussed on the previous pages do not differ significantly

for the three departments. Although the type of work differs for each department the

satisfaction levels and thoughts about participation in organizational changes appear to be

almost the same, according to the results of the surveys. In the discussion section of this thesis

the absence of quantitative differences between departments will be elaborated further. So far,

the task of employees has no influence on the relation between participation in organizational

change and employee satisfaction. However, at this moment it was too early to make a

general quantitative data conclusion, since regression analysis could show yet undiscovered

results.

The reliability of scales and recoding

In the previous section the scores of individual items was discussed. Questionnaires have

often more information to give then independent items and their scores. Results about the

relation between the items is measured in terms of correlation and regression (Vocht, 2004).

Before it is possible to start these analysis it is needed to check the reliability of a scale. In

order to check the reliability of a scale some items needed to be reversed. This process is

displayed in appendix IV from page 105 onwards and items are called REV. The next step

was to measure the scale’s internal consistency. This is needed because the individual items

need to measure the same construct. This research uses the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of a

scale. Ideally, the Cronbach’s alpha should be above 0,7 (Pallant, 2007). Only variable three

“Salary & reward” and variable five “Carreer and training” had a Cronbach’s alpha of

respectively 0,883 and 0,863 and no items needed to be removed.

Variable two Job content had an initial alpha of 0,887 but since item PREV had a negative

contribution to the corrected item-total correlation this item was deleted. Therefore the

Cronbach’s alpha is even higher with 0,889. Variable six “atmosphere and co-workers” had

an initial alpha of 0,730. Since the original items H and I needed to be reversed those are

deleted from the scale. IREV is unfortunately still a strange item so it is deleted. The alpha is

set on 0,815. Variable seven work conditions had an initial alpha of 0,596 which is poor. Item

E7 was deleted and the alpha was 0,687. Still not above 0,7, but the number of items is lower

than 10 so it is acceptable (Pallant, 2007). Variable eight information and communication had

a Cronbach’s alpha of 0,839. Item G8REV was deleted because it had a negative contribution

to the corrected item-total correlation and the new alpha is set on 0,862. This is quite the same

for variable ten commitment were as item F10 is deleted. The new Cronbach’s alpha is 0,838.

39

In variable fourteen satisfaction of minor work aspects, item B14REV was deleted so the

Cronbach’s alpha is 0,871.

Above the variables with acceptable Cronbach’s alpha’s after modification were discussed.

The upcoming variables are deleted from the study since acceptable levels could not be

created. Although variable nine acknowledgement consists out of less 10 items the

Cronbach’s alpha is really low with 0,593. When item a13 is removed the alpha would

improve to 0,629 but this is still not enough. This, in combination with a minor importance of

the variable for this research has led to complete re-movement of the variable that measure’s

acknowledgement. The same problem was with variable thirteen, who should measure the

balance between work and private life. With a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0,573, the whole variable

is deleted from this research. So, no further findings besides individual items, about the

balance will be discussed in this thesis.

Modification of scales

One of the worst variables in terms of consistency is the most important one for this research.

Variable twelve, who should measure participation in organizational changes has a

Cronbach’s alpha of 0,505. Even with item D12REV removed it is still not high enough with

0,558. Since this is a real problem for the further analysis the variable was split into two

variables. The level of participation in past changes and the importance of participation in

changes. This is done by reasoning. Unfortunately, the two new variables still not measure the

same concepts. With a Cronbach’s alpha of 0,262 and 0,622 the reliability of the scale is still

not adequate.

No Sumscores, now what?

The initial idea of the research was to calculate the sum scores to see differences in the

importance of variables in relation with employee satisfaction. Since this was not an option

anymore, a creative solution was found.

To ensure some results about the strength of the effect and a range of importance became

visible a card game was developed.

The card game is explained in the methodological framework one page twenty-five , the

results will be explained in the upcoming paragraph and the findings are visualised in

appendix V on page 119.

40

II. The Card game

The card game is developed to understand a range in factors that are important for an

employee’s individual work satisfaction. When understanding this, more can be said about the

strength and direction of the effect from participation in change processes on employee

satisfaction. This experimental game is developed since the failure of creating reliable survey

scales like discussed in the previous paragraph.

The nine factors printed on card were the same as the variables of the questionnaire, like

discussed in the theoretical framework on page sixteen of this thesis.

Blanc cards were given to the respondents with the message that they could write additional

important factors on it. More detailed information about the development and rules of the card

game can be found in the methodological section on page twenty-five of the research.

Results

The first eye opener was that none of the respondents wrote additional factors that are

important for employee satisfaction on the blank cards.

Since placing factors in a range is based on an intuitive feeling of an employee, general

categories of importance are established. 1-3 is very important, 4-6 is medium importance and

7-9 is less important for employee satisfaction.

2 respondents rated participation in organizational change of high importance for their

employee satisfaction. 3 respondents rated participation in change processes of medium

importance and 3 employees thought it was less important.

Cards alone leave too much room for interpretation of the research, therefore respondents

were asked to give an explanation why they ordered the cards the way they did.

It became clear that every respondent in essence thought it is important to participate in

organizational change processes. All explained that employee satisfaction is a combination of

factors. If one of those is absent it is really hard to be satisfied.

On the other hand, none of the employees thought it was possible to fulfill all factors in an

optimal way. So, a realistic balance is enough to be a satisfied employee.

Participation in change processes was never the most important factor that determines

employee satisfaction. It was also never the factor with the lowest importance.

Interesting result was that six employees stated that the variable communication and

information correlated in a negative way with participation in change processes. This means

that if management informs them well about upcoming organizational changes the actual

41

participation is less important. Those employees prefer a clear path of the processes above the

cooperation on the creation of the path. This remarkable results will be elaborated in depth in

the conclusion section of this thesis.

All respondents said the way of placing the cards is really dependent on path of life and past

change experiences. When older respondents were young they agreed that other variables had

a greater influence on their employee satisfaction then the current and with the years some

other variables become more important than they were in the past.

In general, employees who had much top-down change experience are discouraged to

participate in organizational change and therefore think it has positive influence on their

employee satisfaction. This will be explained in the upcoming interview result section.

III. The Interviews

Although the initial primary source of data collection were the surveys, the interviews and

card game delivered in-depth, qualitative information to answer the working hypothesis and

research question. A schematic of answers to the interview questions is given on page 119.

Eight interviews were held, this was enough to reach a saturation point. Saturation refers to a

point when no new information was collected during the interviews (Glesne & Pechkin,

1992).

Past organizational changes

All respondents have a history with organizational changes. Even the respondents who say

they work for a relatively short period within the organization, between two and four years,

had quite a few changes. In contrast with the survey results, were half of the respondents was

satisfied, all respondents think a lot of organizational changes could have gone better. Two

basic reasons are given and those are quite linear. Too much changes and too much failed

changes. Too much means that the follow up already starts when the primary change is not

finished are evaluated yet. This is frustrating 75 % of the respondents, they say that this has a

direct negative influence on their level of work satisfaction. The number of failed changes is

caused by internal and external variables. Failed changes due to external causes are not so

negative for the level of employee satisfaction as internal causes.

The way of changing is top-down, only one participant answered it as a combination. He said

that although the structure is top-down, everyone could make suggestions for the change

process and post them by management. Some agreed with this opinion, others say that the

management never listens to ideas of individual employees. One respondent stated that

42

management sees you as a nosey parker, which is not good for your career. Others didn’t

think the situation was that worse.

The absence of chemistry and the overdose of control and politics

Another remarkable result coming out of the interviews is the relation employees of the

organization have with the management team. Although this is not focus of the research,

respondents do link it on both participation and employee satisfaction.

Team leaders, middle and higher management together, form the management team for all the

employees who were subject of study. Respondents think the management team is an

incoherent whole. The absence of clear organizational goals, vision and scope, together with

lack of management and communication skills are the most important determinants for this

incoherent whole, according to the employees. Employees feel themselves as victims of the

situation.

“Het management is vooral heel druk met zichzelf in stand houden”. “Management is very

busy keeping their own positions alive”. This means that there are continuous conflicts about

how, when and what to change.

In this kind of organizational climate employees have no trust that management will be open

for participative changes approaches. This created employees who are passive towards

everything. Their main focus is on the core tasks, but organizational wellbeing is not relevant

anymore. “Ze doen maar”,”linksom of rechtsom, ik blijf toch wel ongeveer het zelfde doen”.

“I don’t care what they do, left or right, my work stays kind of the same anyway”. In this

organization, organizational change is clearly a topic only for the management team. Normal

employees are fed up with the management team and their organizational changes.

Employee satisfaction as a whole

When researching the role of participation in organizational changes on the level of employee

satisfaction many other variables were named by respondents. A selection of those, namely,

the ones that are mentioned by more or all respondents and the variables marked as extremely

important by a respondent will be discussed on the next page.

Since these relations was not focus of this research, the relations are not researched in an

exhaustive and proper way, so more research is needed to verify the relations. Some will be

taken into account as recommendations for future research.

First of all, employees find interesting work unanimously very important, for work

satisfaction. In the studied organization interesting work is fully fulfilled and therefore people

43

can live with the management problems like discussed above. One respondent thinks even

repetitive work can still be interesting and another employee said it’s the only determinant for

his satisfaction.

Having clear responsibilities is for some employees important more important than others.

The studied organization has clear responsibilities for employees according to half of the

respondents, and half of the employees does not think this influences employee satisfaction.

No results came unfortunately out of this question. One interesting note is, that some

employees see freedom in task as the opposite of having clear guidelines.

Reward is not a problem in this organization. In general, employees do not think that more

salary leads to more satisfaction for them. Some say that the reward is fine, but some

employees receive more than others, without a clear and deviating task specification. This

leads to an ambition drop of that particular employee whose salary is lower than the salary of

the colleague.

There are enough education possibilities, although most employees think that they could be

promoted in a better way. It is difficult for employees to find a proper education and when

this is found, a lot of exhaustive rules make the step for employees more difficult.

Mobility within the organization is for some more important than others. The respondents

who think it is important for their satisfaction think that there are enough possibilities for

mobility, when the individual employee differentiates itself from the mass and communicates

it’s need. Others, who think mobility perspective is less important for their satisfaction, think

there are not that much possibilities. So, what is this relation? When there are not so much

possibilities for mobility in an organization, employees automatically rate this as less

important for their work satisfaction or when an employee thinks mobility is important they

create their own chances. More research is needed to understand this relation.

The perspective of the possibility of easily changing jobs is also undetermined. It may be that

there is a relation with the education possibilities but more research is needed to understand

the extend of this relation.

Most employees think that information and communication is important for work satisfaction.

There is no direct relation with participation in organizational change processes. This means it

is unsure if good communication by, among others, management makes the need for

participation in organizational change lower. Although the information and communication in

the studied organization is on its own rated as okay, there is too much information and

therefore it is a bit unclear.

44

High levels of bureaucracy have, according to the interviewees, a negative relation with

employee satisfaction.

Stress levels do not influence the level of employee satisfaction at all. Respondents think it is

the responsibility of the individual employee. What is said, that team leaders should be more

involved when an employee sets himself under pressure.

The cooperation between the three departments is not optimal. The relation with employee

satisfaction could not be determined. Some suggestions were made to improve the

cooperation, but those are not in the scope of this research.

Balance between work and private life is for every respondent important, but this balance is

so personal that it cannot be defined easily. More research is needed to understand the relation

with employee satisfaction.

Preferences for change

In some organizations and environments particular change approaches are more successful

than others (Pool & Ven, 2004). A change method who searches for common ground is the

participative change approach family. Is the introduction of these methods dependent on the

common ground there is within the organization for these types of approaches? More about

this in the discussion section of this thesis.

The point of this paragraph is to clarify that employees of the studied organization are so

passive in their need for participation in organizational changes processes that some do not

recognize the need for participative approaches.

Why this happened in the studied organization was one of the main questions during the

interviews.

On the interview questions the reason became clear why that much employees were neutral

about possibilities to participate in organizational change. The reasons can be found inside

and outside the organization.

The inside causes, which are already discussed in the previous section of this paper can be

found in a management attitude, and therefore reference to unsuccessful changes. The outside

causes became visible with the card game. The importance of participation in organizational

is determined by the stage of career of an individual employee.

45

Determinants for the importance of participation in organizational changes

The introduction of stage of career or age as a mediator by respondents differs from the

expectations by the working hypothesis. So, the mid-research hypothesis became that

experience with organizational changes in the past and career stage of the employee together

influence the need for participation in organizational change. The way this need is satisfied

has an influence on the employee satisfaction level.

If this is true, what kind of categories can be made was one of the problems. Employees target

two types of employees within the studied organization. Employees who work relatively short

at the organization, have ambition and care for the organization. Employees who work there

for a long period of time for the organization and only care about their main tasks and nothing

more.

Like almost always, the truth isn’t black or white but somewhere in the middle. After some

questions interviewees recognized some people who didn’t fit in the first, nor in the second

category. Therefore, a transition category is taken into account.

For the change experience, developing categories was more difficult. Although there was a

common understanding of the strength of the effect, the boundaries became not very clear

during the interviews. The only difference that can be made about experience with

organizational change is that the individual employee has many experience with top down

changes or less experience.

Strength of the influence

The next step was to unravel the differences in strength of effects. Six out of eight

interviewees were convinced that older employees per definition have less need for

participation in organizational changes then younger. As cause they call freedom of choices in

adolescence. The older generation, fifty years and above, is not that familiar with giving

opinion and is more used to authority then the younger generation. Furthermore, when the age

of an employee is higher, the less years this employee need to work before it’s retirement.

Participation in change costs energy and the older an employee becomes, the less energy he or

she wants to stick in something which is decreasing in relevance. The younger generation has

the opposite motives. From their childhood on they learn to have an opinion about everything

and with a lot of working time in perspective, top-down change only is hard to accept. This is

said, or confirmed, by six out of eight interviewees and is in conflict with the working

hypothesis on page eleven.

46

The strength of the top-down experience effect is exactly the opposite of my own

expectations. When employees had much unsuccessful top down changes in their career I

personally thought they would scream for more participation. The opposite appears to be true

in the studied organization. The more top-down changes people experienced, the more passive

they became on behalf of organizational change. For people who worked relatively short for

the organization or who had not so much working experience in general was participation

more essential for work satisfaction.

Differences for departments

In line with the results of the questionnaires, no differences in both employee satisfaction and

need for participation is perceived for the three different departments. The interviews made

clear that the task and duties of the departments vary. This has an influence on the variable

challenging work and on task clearness, but not the relevant variables for this research.

The next chapter searches for cohesion in the results and formulates an answer to the working

hypothesis, mid-research hypothesis and finally the research question.

47

VI. Conclusion

In the chapter below the answers to the working hypothesis and research question are

formulated, furthermore the results are interpreted onto a higher level of abstraction. The

different angles of incidence are elaborated subsequently to answer the research question.

I. Working hypothesis

Confirmed working hypothesis

Working hypothesis I. Participation of employees in organizational change has

a positive influence on the level of employee satisfaction.

When interpreting the quantitative results of this research only, hypothesis one was

undetermined. With use of the relevant survey questions not enough evidence, or contra

evidence, was found to confirm or to reject the statement.

However, the card game pointed out there was a positive influence, since all respondents

connected participation in change processes with a higher level of employee satisfaction on

the individual level. This was confirmed during the interviews. Unfortunately, the mechanism

behind the direct effect of participation in organizational change on employee satisfaction is

not exactly clear yet. This is, amongst others, because the mechanism theory is disturbed by

working hypothesis two, which is not confirmed. Working hypothesis II suggests that

employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes have a

lower level of employee satisfaction. This will discussed extensively in the propositions for

future research section of this paper on page fifty-nine.

Working hypothesis IV. The task of the employee has no influence on the

strength of the relation elaborated in hypothesis one (II + III excluded since they

were not confirmed).

The quantitative data were not suitable to answer this working hypothesis by reliability issues

as discussed in the methodological framework of this thesis. No differences between

departments were found in the qualitative results. What became clear is that the actual task

does not matter at all. The current tasks of an employee are only a piece of the much greater

pie, total job experiences of an employee. All job experiences together created a reference for

the employee. This reference does have an effect on the strength of participation in

organizational change on employee satisfaction. This will be discussed in the research

48

question paragraph of the conclusion. Some propositions for future research were derived

with use of this working hypothesis, like discussed in the eponymous section of this research.

V. There is a hierarchy of factors that determine employee satisfaction.

As discussed already in the results section of this thesis, the quantitative results could not be

transformed as planned, this means that no relevant results for this working hypothesis could

be derived out of the data. Nevertheless, this working hypothesis is confirmed. The card game

demonstrated the existence of a factor hierarchy that determines employee satisfaction. In the

discussion section of this thesis the hierarchy of factors will be discussed.

Rejected working hypothesis

II. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change

processes have a lower level of employee satisfaction.

None of the methods used for data collection gave a result that confirmed this working

hypothesis. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change processes

do not have significantly lower levels of employee satisfaction.

The qualitative results explained the mechanism behind it. At first sight, this seems

contradictive with the confirmed working hypothesis one, but the a positive effect when

present does not always mean a negative effect when absent. It seems that not being able to

participate in organizational changes has negative impact on the variable commitment, but not

on the level of employee satisfaction. Other factors can compensate the absence of

participation in organizational changes.

Unconfirmed working hypothesis

III. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change

processes need a more participative strategy of change (Werkman, 2006 as

elaborated on page 11) to be satisfied, then employees who already had the

opportunity to participate in past changes.

The suitable quantitative data could not support this working hypothesis, nor as the card game

did. During the interviews became clear that there may be a weak effect, but no hard evidence

could be collected. This hypothesis will be discussed in the recommendations for future

research section on page fifty-eight of this thesis.

49

Mid-research hypothesis

I. Experience with organizational changes in the past and age of the employee

together influence the need for participation in organizational change

Although the variables age and career stage initially were not considered as determinants, the

qualitative part of the research discovered their role as mediator. For this reason, there is no

quantitative data available to support this hypothesis. The first two respondents of the card

game and interviews suggested this relation and all other respondents confirmed. Therefore,

the mid-research hypothesis is confirmed.

This will be discussed in the following section that answers the research question.

50

II. Research question



The answer to this question is simple and complex at the same time. Working hypothesis one,

confirmed there is a positive relation between the level of participation in organizational

change processes and employee satisfaction. This is the simple answer to the first part of the

research question.

Like most things in life, the truth is more complex. Although employees of an organization do

appreciate a management that is open for suggestions and even better, ask them how, what

and when they like to change, the strength of this relation depends on the person. The mid-

research hypothesis confirmed that beside some individual personal characteristics, stage of

career together with reference of former change processes determine the strength of the

relationship.

Figure twenty-one below illustrates the link between experience with top down-changes and

career stage. Furthermore, an expected choice of ideal change strategy is given. This is based

on the type of change strategies given by van der Zouwen (2010), as discussed on page

eighteen of this thesis.

Strength of participation in organizational change processes on employee satisfaction

Top-down

change

experience

LESS

MANY

Effect

strength

Expected initial choice

for change strategy

Effect

strength

Expected initial choice

for change strategy

Junior (-35) STRONGER Interactive STRONGER Interactive /

programmatic

Mid-career

(35-50)

STRONGER Programmatic /

negotiation

WEAKER Systematic / Power

Senior (50+) MID-LOW Negotiation / Systemic WEAKER Systematic / Power

Figure twenty-one Conclusion figure

51

The central mechanism behind the figure above is that people who didn’t follow a career path

with the chance to participate much, it doesn’t have much meaning for them after a while

anymore. They develop a passive attitude towards organizational changes, however they

ideally think that more participation would be a nice thing. For their employee satisfaction

other things like: challenging work, low stress levels and good leadership is more important

than participation in organizational changes. Mid-career or senior employees who didn’t have

much top-down change experience admit that they would like to have an employer who

listens to the employee, but a participative way of changing is not necessary for employee

satisfaction.

Employees whose career is in its infancy are ambitious and need higher levels of participation

in organizational changes to be satisfied employees. For Junior employees it doesn’t matter if

they had quite a lot of top down organizational changes in the past, they see participation as a

must for employee satisfaction.

The conclusion that need for participation in change processes is, among others, career stage

and experience dependent may look like a critical note towards preachers of participative

change approaches. Weisman (2006) states that Interactive or Programmatic change

approaches have a higher development of change capacity then Systematic or Power

strategies. When reading the figure on page fifty the idea could pop up that if an organization

has with many senior employees who had already experience with many top down

organizational changes, the best way for an upcoming change process is the Systematic or

Power strategy. This would be in contrast with the ideas of Weisman (2006). This assumption

is not valid as such. This research is about employee satisfaction and is not an about

successful organizational change or development of change capacity. What can be read in the

table is that senior employees who had many top-down experience are not familiar with

participative change approaches and therefore do not understand the need for it in the

beginning. Therefore, it may be a great challenge to involve those employee in the change

process. This process will be related to the literature in the discussion section on page fifty-

four of this thesis.

Participation as an instrument for more successful change

There is a direct positive effect of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction.

For all kind of employees successful change has a strong influence on the level of employee

satisfaction. Successful change is not exactly defined, since it only has to be a successful

52

change according to the respondent no matter what factors make the change successful. This

relation is visualized in twenty-two below.

Figure twenty-two Indirect Effect

This relation was not focus of study, but cannot be ignored. Employees have a strong believe

that more participation in change processes or better, participative change approaches

influence the outcome of a change process in a positive way. This relation will be linked to

the literature in the discussion section fifty-seven of this thesis.

Participation in organizational changes as a part of many variables that determine employee

satisfaction

In order to measure the level employee satisfaction many other variables were taken into

account. These frequently tested variables originally in psychology and HRM-studies. Job

content, salary & reward, career and training opportunities, atmosphere and co-workers, work

conditions, information & communication, acknowledgment, commitment, participation in

organizational changes and the balance between work and private life were tested.

Although they have no central part in this research it became clear some variables can

compensate one other.

Since participation is a new variable in this kind of research, it was the focus to clarify its

compensation variables. Unfortunately, no conclusion can be made about this. What can be

said is, that employee satisfaction can be high, even though there is none or less participation

in organizational changes.

There is no overall, optimal level of participation

One of the research goals was to unravel an “optimal” level of participation for employee

satisfaction. As discussed above, there is none in general. Organizations differ, employees

differ, environments differ and changes differ. On top of that, this research is about opinions

Participation of employees

in organizational change


Better, more successful

change

53

of employees, without having them actually participate in all types of change strategies

(Werkman, 2006).

There is no optimal level of participation in organizational changes for the studied

organization

The results of the interviews showed that most previous organizational changes in this

organization could be called Power or Systematic strategies of change ( Werkman, 2006).

Solely based on the results of this research, the optimal level of participation in organizational

changes for the studied organization in the future will be, Negotiation (Werkman, 2006). The

political climate, strong hierarchy and top-down culture causes the level of participation by

employees in changes processes is with the Negotiation style the maximum which is

acceptable by all management layers.

Negotiation style is also the optimal way to change according to the employees. They are

simply not used to more participative styles and do not recognise the benefits of it. Although

younger employees have a need for participation, the overrepresented older employees have

no need for participation in change processes. With the Negotiation style some employees can

participate, were others don’t have to. But, this is not a good and complete representation of

reality.

The conclusion that Negotiation is the optimal strategy to change this organization would be

wrong. It is not possible to determine an optimal level of participation in organizational

change for this organization, based on the findings of this research. The research method

appeared not appropriate to determine an optimal level.

This will be explained in depth in the upcoming discussion section of this research.

54

VII. Discussion

In the this chapter, the place of the research within the literature fields will be discussed.

Furthermore, it includes a personal opinion of the researcher and contributions of this paper.

Participation in organizational changes and its influence on employee satisfaction is by no

means an easy topic to study. The relation hasn’t been studied before, as elaborated in the

theoretical framework of this paper. Employee satisfaction is hard to grasp and continuously

influenced by many other variable aspects (Mueller & Kim, 2008).

Not all research goals could be reached, but some unexpected results compensated this

disappointment. Personally I think the failures can be very instructive for both science as

organizations. The discussion section will start with elaborating what went wrong during the

research process and place of the research in the literature.

Although the results may look as a practical test of witch strategy of change (Werkman, 2006)

would be best for the studied public organization, the opposite is true. Firstly, the topic will

not be that relevant for science. Secondly, the research method would be inconvenient since

employees of the organization are not familiar with the most participative change approaches.

So, why do I end my conclusion with it?

The answer to this question lies in the next sentence: “People don’t always know what they

think, but think that they know”. Although it is important to understand what people think

about how they would react in certain circumstances, you can’t measure how they did if the

situation didn’t occur. This is exactly what happened in this research. Asking what level of

participation in organizational change processes the employee prefers, to someone who

probably doesn’t know what participation actually means. This is somewhat the same like

asking an eskimo if he thinks he will be a good camel rider in a desert environment.

It may not be very useful to know what an eskimo thinks of camel driving, but it is useful to

know what levels of participation employees prefer before having dealt with different change

approaches. The “optimal” Negotiation approach in the conclusion should be interpreted as

the change approach which has on forehand the most common ground by employees of the

organization. According to the Expectancy Theory explained on page fourteen (Vroom,

1964), this result is a reflection of the cognitive process of an employee to increase the chance

on the most desirable outcome. Other factors determine whether the “chosen” strategy is the

“optimal” strategy of organizational change.

55

Therefore, the determination of an “optimal” strategy of change in terms of employee

satisfaction on forehand of the process is a myth.

This research is therefore not in contradiction with the model of (Werkman, 2006). The

research was about asking employees about their opinion and not if this actually is the best

way to do it. Development of change capacity and environment is not researched.

Furthermore it is possible that if employees get the experience with participative changes,

their state of mind about it might change. This result can be in line with the Opponent Theory

of Solomon explained on page fifteen (1980). Experience influences expectations for the

future. More research is needed if participation in change leads to “spoiled” stakeholders.

Every next time a more participative change strategy is necessary to be satisfied.

This bring us to another delicate question. Is it a good idea for management to start a change

approach that searches for common ground when there is no common ground to start such a

change approach?

Card Game

The card game revealed there is a pyramid of needs in work satisfaction. It is not such need as

meant in the Hierarchy of Needs developed by Maslow (1943) as discussed in the theoretical

framework of this research and displayed in twenty-three below.

Figure twenty-three Maslow’s Pyramid

Retrieved from: http://www.timlebon.com/maslow.htm

56

When starting this research I thought there was a hierarchy in job demands, as stated in

working hypothesis five. First employees need salary and interesting work, when these are

fulfilled participation in organizational changes becomes important. Although there is some

kind of hierarchy, no universal pyramid could be confirmed by the results of this research.

There is a pyramid of needs for employee satisfaction, but this pyramid differs for individuals.

Still, some commodities were found. This is in line with the two factor theory of Herzberg

(1959) as discussed in the theoretical framework of this research and displayed in figure

twenty-four.

Figure twenty-four 2-factor Theory

Retrieved from:

http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/

herzberg/

According to Herzberg, employees are not satisfied with only the lower-order needs at work,

like salary and a good relationship with pears. On the long run employees have higher-level

needs like growth and advancement. This is in line with the pyramid developed by Maslow

(1954), only this variant has less different levels.

Participation in change processes is about achievement, recognition, responsibility and

sometimes advancement. These are all satisfiers according to Herzberg. This research is not

about proving the existence of satisfiers or dissatisfiers, but participation in change has the

characteristics of a satifier.

The widely spread Job Characteristics model about five core factors that determine employee

satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) is still standing, although only five global factors to

determine employee satisfaction is poor anno 2011. All factors used in the survey can be

fitted into skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback, but the use of

the tested nine factor-survey has led to more detailed results in this research.

57

Participation in organizational changes as a tool for successful change

A lot is written about the positive influence of participation for the outcome of change

processes. This study has shown that the outcome of change processes is far more important

for most employees than the participation in the process itself. This is discussed in the

conclusion section of this research.

Employee satisfaction linking to participation is therefore disputable, since the determinant

successful change has a much stronger effect. Successful change is about the perception the

employee has about the result.

Participation in change, employee satisfaction and Organization Studies

A lot has changed for employees since the scientific management is left behind (Taylor,

1911). A lot is changed for employees during that time. Employers understand the importance

of satisfied employees more than ever before.

Salancik & Pfeffer’s (1978) Information Processing Theory explains a continuous comparison

of the individual with others. In this research no evidence is found that there are dominating

collective patterns in the development of employee satisfaction which undermine the factors

of the individual employee.

However, organizational change is changing (Boros, 2009). A wide range of new approaches

and methods are developed the last twenty years. This may rise the question whether

determinants for employee satisfaction are changing too. For most it is, for some it isn’t. Still,

it is important to recognize the trend. Some publications may be outdated by all new

developments. For organizations continuously development is important, for science, and

organization studies in particular, the monitoring of these developments is important to stay

relevant. This research contributes in keeping this circle round.

58

VIII. Recommendations

This section presents recommendations for future studies. Propositions and new insights will

be discussed.

The first and for future research most important recommendation is to: Never add a new

variable to an already existing and tested questionnaire. Even with a pilot the Cronbach’s

alpha was not good enough to start with a regression analysis. Since this variable was core to

the analysis in depth survey results lack in this research. The way the used survey is

established can be seen in Appendix II on page eighty, the reliability of the scales is displayed

in Appendix IV on page 104. I strongly recommend future researchers of employee

satisfaction and participation in organizational changes processes, together or separately, to

understand what happened in this process in order to improve the tools for data collection.

Study the exact strength of the relationship age, stage career with participation need. Future

research should find out what the exact strength of the effect is, because higher or lower is not

that concrete.

The pilot with the card game was a success. Participants understood and liked the game. The

game provided evidence of a variable hierarchy in job demands. The card game should be

played with more respondents to come up with data who are more generalizable.

Future researchers should do this study at a privately owned organization. Public organization

may be organized in a different way and operate in another environment. In this way data can

be compared and relevance of the topic will be increased.

Another recommendation for future research is to conduct this research in an organization

who did a participative change trajectory. This gives the opportunity to compare the actual

influence on employee satisfaction and not only the expected influence by employees.

59

Propositions for future research

1. Participation in organizational change processes needs to be a variable in future

employee satisfaction researches

2. The influence of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction in other

organizations, sectors and privately owned organizations

3. Participation in organizational change processes has an indirect positive influence

employee satisfaction via successful change.

4. Participation in organizational change processes and the influence on employee

satisfaction is mediated by experience and career stage

5. Participation in organizational change processes is a satisfier (Herzberg, 1959)

6. There is no universal hierarchy of job demands and it is career stage dependent.

60

IX. Limitations

When assessing this research, the following limitations should be taken into account.

The first limitation of this thesis is that all results are based on a limited amount of data. A

research with 110 respondents and 8 interviews is a small sample of the almost seven billion

people and millions of organizations in the world. Although, the research is done with care to

maximize the generalizability more research is needed to reflect reality.

The second limitation of this thesis is that the research is done in one organization. Besides

this, the organization has the characteristics of a government organization and its employees

may have a different attitude towards job demands then employees of a profit organization.

The third limitation of this thesis is the amount of time available for the research. Although a

master thesis is an ambitious project for a student, it is no dissertation or long-term funded

research project.

The fourth limitation of this thesis is the failure to yield interdependence of results who

determine employee satisfaction. If this was possible, the research had more valuable results

to the fields of Organization studies, HRM and participative change.

The fifth limitation is about the card game. This tool is experimental and not tested before.

The sixth limitation is about the interviews. Two times the path of hermeneutic circling was

terminated by selected interviewees who could not participate in the research.

The seventh limitation of this research is about the non-response of the questionnaires. With

62 employees who did not fill in the surveys valuable data is missing.

61

X. Personal reflection

This chapter will describe the personal experiences of the researcher during the process.

Last academic year was the greatest challenge in my educational life. The master

Organization Studies is an intellectual journey with the master thesis as highest top. As a real

adventurer I planned the journey well, with the appropriate baggage on my neck. Even the

means of transportation, an organization to do the research, was almost arranged for certain.

Unfortunately, the destination needed to be changed when I received a go major for my IRP

and in the same week the means of transportation left me alone. The prepared adventure trip

was suddenly a survival on bare feet. Three problematic weeks gone by in which I struggled

to find a path that lead to the end of the academic jungle. The studied government

organization was willing to cooperate if I would do an employee satisfaction research for

them. In a desperate survival this means of transportation may be good enough to reach my

goals if this was a possible vehicle to reach the destination. Luckily, the second version of the

destination plan, the IRP was good enough.

The following weeks was no survival anymore. It may not even be an adventure trip. I was

the researcher and with my white jacket and safety glasses I explored the organization. Bad

luck again, when my surveys were not that useful as expected. How to fix this? The game,

together with the interviews was the solution to this problem. The next problem came when

the organization started to push for results, in the same period as the deadline for the master

thesis. The last weeks were exhausting. Finishing the master thesis and the organizational

research, together with working for a taxi organization was a work load of over 85 hours a

week.

This paragraph, the last of my master thesis, is hopefully the beginning of a period with a bit

more time to relax. After that, my career journey will hopefully start. Would it be an even

greater challenge then this educational adventure?

My special gratitude’s go out to Tonnie, Rob, Fetene, Pieter, Nelly, Sanne, Martin, Jaap, Said,

Rik, Elwin, Niels, Jelle, Jo, Hannie, Yvette, Laurie, Anne and all respondents of the research.

Thanks for your contribution to this Master Thesis.

62

XI. References

In this chapter all sources used for this research are given.

Baker, T.L. (1998). Doing social Research. New York: MC Graw-Hill.

Baarda, D.B., Goede, M.P.M., Kalmijn, M. (2007a). Basisboek enquêteren. Groningen:

Wolter-Noordhoff

Baarda, D.B., Goede, M.P.M., Kalmijn, M. (2007b). Basisboek interviewen. Groningen:

Wolter-Noordhoff

Baruch, Y., Holton, B. (2008). Survey rate levels and trends in organizational research.

Human Relations 61 (8) 1138-1160 Tallahassee: Florida state University

Berings, D., Steen, T. (2004). Mens en organisatie. Antwerpen: De Boeck.

Biessen, P. G. A., Gilder, D. (1993). BASAM; Basisvragenlijst Amsterdam.

Amsterdam: Pearson

Boonstra, J. J. (2004a). Introduction. In J. J. Boonstra (Ed.), Dynamics of Organizational

Change and Learning (1-21). Chichester: Wiley.

Boonstra, J. J. (Ed.). (2004b). Dynamics of Organizational Change and Learning. Chichester:

Wiley

Boonstra, J. J., Caluwé, L. d. (Eds.). (2007). Intervening and Changing: Looking for

Meaning in Interactions. Chichester: Wiley

Boroş, S. (2009). Exploring Organizational Dynamics. London: SAGE

Bryson, J. M. (2003). What To Do When Stakeholders Matter: A Guide to Stakeholder

Identification and Analysis Techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53.

Chi, C.G., Gursoy, D. (2008). Employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction and

Financial performance: An empirical examination. International journal of Hospitality

management 245-253. Pullman: Washington

Delden, P. van. (2009). Samenwerking in de publieke dienstverlening: ontwikkelingsverloop

en resultaten. Delft: Eburon

Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of

Management Review, vol. 14(4), 532-550.

Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing Naturalistic

Inquiry: A Guide to Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Fine, B. (2001). Social Capital versus Social Theory: Political economy and social science at

the turn of the millennium. London: Routledge

63

Geurts, J.L.A., Altena, J., Geluk, B. (2006). Interventie door interactie: Een vergelijkende

beschouwing. M&O, Tijdschrift voor Management en Organisatie, 60(3/4), 322-351

Geurts, J.L.A., Duke, R.D., Vermeulen, P.A.M. (2007). Policy gaming for strategy and

change. Long Range Planning, 40(6), 535-558

Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data, London: Sage Publications

Glesne, C., Peshkin. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White

Plains, New York: Longman.

Gomes, D. R. (2009). Organizational change and job satisfaction: the mediating role of

organizational commitment. Comunicação e ciências empresariais. Retrieved from:

www.exedrajournal.com/docs/01/177-196.pdf

Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Beverly Hills: SAGE.

Groot, S.A. (2005). Presteren met professionals: prestatieverbetering binnen kennisintensieve

organisaties. Amsterdam: Kluwer

Hackman, J. R., Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work:

Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279

Hasle, P., Møller, N. (2007). From conflict to Shared Development: Social Capital in a

Tayloristic Environment. Denmark

Hertog, F., Sluijs, E. (2000). Onderzoek in organisaties, Een methodologische

Reisgids. Assen: Van Gorcum & Comp

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. & Snyderman, B.B. 1959, The Motivation to Work. New York:

John Wiley

Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business

Review, 52-62

Hooghe, M., Stolle, D. (2003). Generating Social Capital: civil society and institutions in

comparative perspective. New York: Palgrave

Ifrah, G. (1994). Histoire universelle des chiffres. L'Intelligence des hommes racontée

par les nombres et les calculs Paris: Laffont

Jones, M. (2006). Which is a better predictor of job performance: job satisfaction or life

satisfaction? Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 15 (6), 77-97

Judge, T. A., Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice Oxford :

Blackwell.

Kerber, K. W., Campbell, J. P. (1987). Job satisfaction: Identifying the important parts among

computer sales and service personnel. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1(4),

337-352

64

Kovach, K. A. (1987). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different

answers. Business horizons.

Koys, B., Daniel, J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship

behaviour and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal

study Retrieved from:

http://www.keepem.com/doc_files/clc_articl_on_productivity.pdf

Koys, D. (2003). How the achievement of human-resources goals drives restaurant

performance, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 44 (1), 17–24

Landy, F. J. (1978). An opponent process theory of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 63(5), 533-547

Levitt, S. D., List, J. A. (2011). "Was There Really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne

Plant? An Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments". American Economic

Journal: Applied Economics 3 (1): 224–238

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.),

Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Lok, P., Crawford, J. (1999). The relationship between commitment and organizational

culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and

development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20- 7, 365-74

Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 50 (4)

Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of industrial civilization. New York: Macmillan.

McMillan, A. (2010). Participative Management. Retrieved from

http://www.enotes.com/management-encyclopedia/participative-management

Mueller, C. W., & Kim, S. W. (2008). The contented female worker: Still a paradox?

Justice: Advances in group processes, 25 117-150. Bingley, UK: Emerald

Mullins, J. (1995). Management and organisational behaviour. London: Pitman Publishing

Nutt, P. (2002) Why Decisions Fail: Avoiding the Blunders and Traps That Lead to

Debacles, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS Survival manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS.

London: Open University Press

Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Southand Oaks: SAGE.

Pool, M. S., Ven, A, H, vd. (2004). Handbook of Organizational Change and Innovation.

New York : Oxford

65

Pruijt, H.(1997) Job Design and Technology. Taylorism vs. Anti-Taylorism, London

Riel, M. (2007) Understanding Action Research, Center For Collaborative Action Research.

Pepperdine Univerity. Retrieved on 19 February 2011 from

http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/ccar/define.html

Roe, R. A., Zinovieva, I., L., Dienes, E., Ten Horn, L., A. (2000). A Comparison of

Work Motivation in Bulgaria, Hungary, and the Netherlands: Test of a Model. Applied

Psychology: an International Review, 49, 658-687.

Salancik, G. R., Pfeffer, J. (1978). A Social Information Processing Approach to Job

Attitudes and Task Design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 2, 224-253 Johnson

: Cornell

Solomon, R.L. (1980). The Opponent-Process Theory of Acquired Motivation: The Costs of

Pleasure and the Benefits of Pain. American Psychologist, 35, 8, 691–712

Schruijer, S. G. L. (2006). Research on Collaboration in Action. International Journal of

Action Research, 2(2), 222-242

Schruijer, S. G. L., Vansina, L. (2004). The Dynamics of Multiparty Collaboration and

Leadership. In T. Camps, P. Diederen, G.-J. Hofstede & B. Vos (Eds.), The Emerging

Worlds of Chains and Networks: Bridging Theory and Practice (pp. 219-234). The

Hague: Reed Business Information

Smeenk, S.G.A. (2007). Professionalism versus managerialisim? A study on HRM practices,

organisational commitment, and quality of job performances among university

employees in Europe. Paper dissertation Nijmegen : Radboud University Press

Søndergaard, T., Hasle, P., Pejtersen, J.H., Olesen, K.G. (2007) Organisational social capital

and the health and quality of work of the employees; two empirical studies from

Denmark. International Congress on Social Capital and Networks of Trust on 18 – 20.

October 2007

Taylor, F.W. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management. New York : Harper & brothers.

Veen, P., Alblas, G., Geersing, J. (1991). Mensen en organisaties; een inleiding in de

organisatiepsycholgie. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum BV.

Vocht, A. de. (2004). Basishandboek SPSS 12 Amsterdam: Bijleveld

Volkskrant (2010). retrieved from:

http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2664/Nieuws/archief/article/detail/1017290/2010/08/2

4/Niemand-houdt-van-x.dhtml

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation.. New York: Wiley.

66

Werkman, R. A. (2006). Werelden van Verschil: hoe actoren in organisaties vraagstukken in

veranderprocessen hanteren en creëren. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam

Werkman, R. A., Boonstra, J. J., Elving, W. J. L. (2005). Complexiteit en weerbarstigheid

in veranderprocessen. Management & Organisatie, 5, 5-29

Weisbord, M. R., Janoff, S. (1995). Future Search: An Action Guide to Finding Common

Ground in Organizations and Communities. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Woodward, J. (1958). Management and Technology. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary

Office

Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research, Design and Methods, Newbury Park, Sage

Zouwen, A. v. d. (2010). Effective use of large scale interventions. Working

paper/dissertation, Tilburg University, Tilburg

Zouwen, A. v.d. (2010a). Practice what you preach: Large group conferences as member

check in intervention research. Profile. International Journal of Change, Learning,

Dialogue, 19, 37-42

67

XII. Appendices

I. “The questionnaire”

X is bijzonder benieuwd naar uw mening omtrent uw tevredenheid met het werk.

Het invullen van deze vragenlijst gaat anoniem en kost u ongeveer vijftien minuten.

Resultaten zullen zowel intern gebruikt worden voor inzicht en waarborging,

als extern voor een afstudeeronderzoek ‘Organization Studies’ aan de Universiteit Van Tilburg.

Tips voor het invullen van de vragenlijst

Op de volgende bladzijden staan per onderwerp enkele uitspraken. Het is de bedoeling dat u over elke

uitspraak uw mening geeft, tenzij een uitspraak niet op u van toepassing is.

Voorbeeld:

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met de onderstaande uitspraak?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik zorg voor meer plezier in het werk bij mijn

collega’s � � � � ��

Als u zich volledig kunt vinden deze stelling, kleurt u het vijfde vakje ‘helemaal mee eens’ zwart, zoals in

het bovenstaande voorbeeld gebeurd is. Vakje twee van links staat voor oneens tot en met een beetje

oneens en het vierde vakje staat voor een beetje mee eens tot en met eens. Als u het moeilijk vindt om te

kiezen omdat u het niet eens, maar ook niet oneens bent met de uitspraak, dan kleurt u het vakje

‘Neutraal’ zwart.

Deze vragenlijst bevat ook open vragen. Vult u a.u.b. uw antwoord in op de stippellijnen.

Alle vragen in deze vragenlijst hebben betrekking op uw eigen situatie en gevoel. Uw mening staat

centraal. Denk niet te lang over elke vraag na, er zijn geen goede of foute antwoorden!

Wilt u proberen om alle vragen in te vullen?

Succes met het invullen van de vragenlijst!

Enquête

Medewerkerstevredenheid

68

1) Algemeen

In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende algemene stellingen over uw tevredenheid?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Over het algemeen ben ik tevreden met mijn

werk � � � � � �

b. Als u uw tevredenheid met het werk in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg ontevreden) en de

10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken, welk cijfer geeft u dan?

…………………

c. En welk rapportcijfer geeft u aan X als organisatie?

…………………

2) Houding ten opzichte van taakinhoud

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik heb afwisselend werk � � � � � �

b. Het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk of ik mijn

werk goed uitvoer of niet � � � � � �

c. Ik kan mijn werk van begin tot eind helemaal

zelf uitvoeren � � � � � �

d. Over het algemeen lever ik goede prestaties � � � � � �

e. Het werk wat ik doe is belangrijk voor X � � � � � �

f. Ik mag zo zelfstandig werken als ik wil � � � � � �

g. Ik weet in mijn werk direct of ik het goed doe � � � � � �

h. Ik heb mogelijkheden om mijn werk naar eigen

inzicht te organiseren � � � � � �

i. De werkzaamheden die ik verricht verschillen

per week van elkaar � � � � � �

j. Ik kan uit de vooruitgang van mijn werk

opmaken of ik goed presteer � � � � � �

k. Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor mijn

afdeling � � � � � �

l. Ik vind mijn taken zinvol � � � � � �

m. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheid om iets voor een

ander te betekenen (kennis over te dragen) � � � � � �

69


Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

m. Ik weet waartoe ik bevoegd ben (waarover ik

wel/niet mag beslissen) � � � � � �

n. Ik heb weinig vrijheid in het bepalen van HOE

ik mijn werk zal uitvoeren � � � � � �

o. Ik moet voor de kleinste beslissingen

toestemming vragen � � � � � �

p.

1

Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor de

medewerkers in de uitvoering � � � � � �

p.

2

Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor collega’s

van InformatieManagement � � � � � �

p.

3

Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor de

collega’s van andere divisies/afdelingen � � � � � �

q. Ik weet waarvoor ik verantwoordelijk ben � � � � � �

r. Het is mij doorgaans duidelijk wie binnen IM-U

waarvoor verantwoordelijk en bevoegd is � � � � � �

s. Ik weet vrij snel of ik op het goede spoor zit met

mijn werk � � � � � �

t. In het geheel van de X activiteiten is mijn

bijdrage goed te herkennen � � � � � �

u. Het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk wat mijn

taken zijn � � � � � �

v. De vrijheid van handelen die mijn directe

leidinggevende mij toestaat is goed � � � � � �

w. In mijn werk kan ik de taken (waaraan ik begin)

helemaal afronden � � � � � �

x. De werkzaamheden die ik verricht vallen voor

het grootste deel binnen mijn

functieomschrijving

� � � � � �

y. Het is mij doorgaans duidelijk aan wie ik

verantwoording dien af te leggen � � � � � �

70

3) Beloning

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over beloning?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming met de

inspanningen die ik lever � � � � � �

b. In vergelijking met collega’s binnen IM-U

verdien ik voldoende � � � � � �

c. Ik verdien voldoende in vergelijking met wat

buiten X in vergelijkbare functies/ organisaties

wordt verdiend � � � � � �

d. Mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming met mijn

verantwoordelijkheden � � � � � �

e. Ik verdien voldoende gezien mijn kennis en

vaardigheden � � � � � �

f. Ik ben tevreden met het salarisniveau waarop ik

ben ingeschakeld � � � � � �

4) Leiderschap & Management

a. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseren het hogere X management

(raad van bestuur, directeuren e.d.) het beste?

Maximaal 1 vakje inkleuren

1. �� Laissez-faire management: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers en geen

aandacht voor de belangen van X

2. �� Management of people’s needs: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar

geen aandacht voor de belangen van X

3. �� Management of efficiency: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar volledige


4. �� Middle management: weinig aandacht voor de medewerkers en weinig aandacht

voor de belangen van het X

5. �� Ideal management: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers en volledige

aandacht voor de belangen van het X

b. Als u uw tevredenheid over het hogere X management in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg

ontevreden) en de 10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken, welk cijfer geeft u dan?

…………………

71

c. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseren de managementstijl

van de afdelingsmanagers en hoofd IM-U het beste?









voor de belangen van X



d. Als u uw tevredenheid over de afdelingsmanagers en hoofd X in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg

ontevreden) en de 10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken,

welk cijfer geeft u dan?

…………………

e. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseert de managementstijl van mijn teamleider het

beste?









voor de belangen van X



72

5) Loopbaan- en scholingsmogelijkheden

In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Er zijn voldoende doorgroeimogelijkheden

binnen X � � � � � �

b. Binnen IM-U is er aandacht voor mijn

persoonlijke wensen op het gebied van

doorstroming naar andere functies � � � � � �

c. Het is mij duidelijk welke

loopbaanmogelijkheden er voor mij binnen X

openstaan � � � � � �

d. Er zijn voldoende mogelijkheden voor

horizontale mobiliteit (veranderen van functie op

hetzelfde niveau) � � � � � �

e. Er zijn voldoende mogelijkheden om een cursus

of opleiding te volgen � � � � � �

f. Ik ben tevreden met de scholingsmogelijkheden

binnen X � � � � � �

g. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om zelf invloed

uit te oefenen op verbeteringen in mijn werk � � � � � �

h. Ik ben tevreden met de ondersteuning van mijn

leidinggevende wat betreft mijn loopbaan en

scholing � � � � � �

i. De kennis en kunde die ik in mijn functie binnen

X heb opgebouwd is ook elders heel bruikbaar � � � � � �

6) Sfeer en collega’s


Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik vind dat wij op onze afdeling goed

samenwerken � � � � � �

b. De sfeer op onze afdeling is goed � � � � � �

c. Er is sprake van eilandvorming door de

verschillende afdelingen � � � � � �

d. Ik kan met problemen terecht bij mijn collega’s � � � � � �

73


Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

e. De verschillende afdelingen steunen elkaar bij

het uitvoeren van het werk � � � � � �

f. De procesdomeinen zorgen voor eilandvorming

binnen een afdeling � � � � � �

g. De collega’s op mijn afdeling luisteren naar

ideeën, meningen en suggesties van elkaar � � � � � �

h. Tussen de afdelingen komen regelmatig

conflicten voor � � � � � �

i. Mijn collega’s bij IM-U zijn TE lief voor elkaar � � � � � �

j. Er is veel contact tussen de verschillende

afdelingen � � � � � �

k. De medewerkers op mijn afdeling steunen elkaar

bij het werk � � � � � �

l. De sfeer tussen de verschillende afdelingen is

goed � � � � � �

m. In mijn team komen nauwelijks conflicten voor � � � � � �

n. Mijn collega’s op mijn afdeling durven elkaar de

waarheid te zeggen � � � � � �

o. Afdelingen werken onderling goed samen � � � � � �

7) Arbeidsomstandigheden

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over uw arbeidsomstandigheden?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik heb in mijn werk vaak met tijdsdruk te maken � � � � � �

b. Ik kan de hoeveelheid werk die ik heb goed aan � � � � � �

c. Ik moet vaak in mijn werk te veel taken

gelijktijdig uitvoeren � � � � � �

74

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

d. Ik ervaar een hoge werkdruk � � � � � �

e. Mijn werk is geestelijk inspannend � � � � � �

f. Ik kom wel eens gestrest thuis van mijn werk � � � � � �

g. Ik ben tevreden met mijn werkplekinrichting � � � � � �

h. De werkruimte waar ik mijn taken uitvoer,

beoordeel ik als goed � � � � � �

i. Het management van X doet voldoende aan

stressbeteugeling � � � � � �

j. Het management van X doet voldoende aan

vitalisering � � � � � �

8) Communicatie en informatie

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over de communicatie en

informatievoorziening?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over de toekomst

van X � � � � � �

b. Op mijn afdeling is altijd iedereen goed

geïnformeerd � � � � � �

c. Er is voldoende openheid binnen IM-U � � � � � �

d. Ik vind dat er voldoende overlegmomenten zijn

met andere afdelingen � � � � � �

e. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over

veranderingen bij X � � � � � �

75

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over de communicatie en

informatievoorziening?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

f. Ik ben tevreden met mijn inspraakmogelijkheden

binnen X � � � � � �

g. Ik krijg veel overbodige informatie � � � � � �

h. Er wordt voldoende naar mij geluisterd � � � � � �

i. Ik ben tevreden over de snelheid waarmee ik op

de hoogte word gesteld van de veranderingen � � � � � �

j. Afspraken met medewerkers van andere

afdelingen worden door hen goed nagekomen � � � � � �

k. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over de

veranderingen op mijn afdeling � � � � � �

l. Andere afdelingen zijn goed geïnformeerd als je

naar ze toegaat met vragen � � � � � �

m. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over andere

afdelingen binnen X � � � � � �

9) Erkenning en waardering

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over erkenning en waardering?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd wordt door

mijn leidinggevende � � � � � �

b. Ik voel me gewaardeerd door mijn collega’s � � � � � �

c. Ik hecht grote waarde aan wat collega’s vinden

van mijn werk � � � � � �

d. Ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd wordt door

de medewerkers van X � � � � � �

e. Ik krijg erkenning voor mijn werk � � � � � �

76

10) Betrokkenheid

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over betrokkenheid?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik heb een gevoel van trots dat ik voor X werk � � � � � �

b. Ik ben persoonlijk sterk betrokken bij X � � � � � �

c. Ik wil in mijn werk graag iets bereiken voor X

en niet alleen voor mezelf � � � � � �

d. Ik voel me thuis in deze organisatie � � � � � �

e. Ik wil nog lang bij X blijven werken � � � � � �

f. Ik ben persoonlijk meer betrokken bij IM-U, dan

bij X als geheel � � � � � �

11) Persoonlijke medezeggenschap

In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen over uw individuele medezeggenschap?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. De medezeggenschap op X niveau functioneert

goed (het hogere echelon luistert naar de goede

ideeën van de lagere(n) � � � � � �

b. De medezeggenschap binnen X functioneert

goed � � � � � �

c. Ik hecht veel belang aan medezeggenschap � � � � � �

77

12) Participatie in organisatieveranderingen

In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over participatie in geplande

organisatieveranderingen?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik

betrokken word bij de geplande veranderingen � � � � � �

b. Medewerkers van X zouden meer betrokken

moeten worden bij de geplande veranderingen � � � � � �

c. Ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden

bij veranderingen, ook als dit extra

verantwoordelijkheden met zich meebrengt � � � � � �

d. Het management zou bij veranderingen meer

moeten luisteren naar de ideeën, meningen en

suggesties van mij en mijn collega’s � � � � � �

e. Bewust uitgevoerde veranderingen worden

vooral top-down ingezet (weinig inspraak

personeel) � � � � � �

f. Over het algemeen ben ik tevreden over de

veranderingen waarmee ik de afgelopen twee

jaren te maken heb gehad bij X � � � � � �

g. Als medewerkers meer waren betrokken, waren

de resultaten van de veranderingen nog beter

geweest � � � � � �

i. Als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij

veranderingen, zou ik meer plezier hebben in

mijn werk � � � � � �

j. Als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij

veranderingen, zou ik nog meer tevreden zijn

over werken bij X � � � � � �

k. Meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal

niet zorgen voor betere resultaten � � � � � �

l. Het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan

mij vroeg hoe ik tegen bepaalde zaken aankijk � � � � � �

m. Het zal vooral onrust opleveren om

medewerkers meer te betrekken � � � � � �

78

13) Balans werk/privé

In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen over de balans tussen uw werk en privé?

Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik heb voldoende invloed op mijn werktijden � � � � � �

b. Ik kan mijn werktijd goed afstemmen op mijn

privésituatie � � � � � �

c. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om verlof op te

nemen wanneer mij dat uitkomt � � � � � �

d. X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om in deeltijd

te werken als medewerkers dat willen � � � � � �

e. X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden voor

medewerkers om hun takenpakket (tijdelijk) aan

te passen, wanneer privéomstandigheden dat

vragen

� � � � � �

f. Ik combineer mijn werk zonder problemen met

mijn zorgtaken thuis � � � � � �

In het begin hebben we u gevraagd naar uw algemene tevredenheid. Tevens hebt u uw mening gegeven over de

verschillende deelaspecten van uw werk en werksituatie. Nu volgen er nog wat samenvattende vragen over de

deelaspecten van uw werk.

14) Tevredenheid over de deelaspecten van het werk


Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

a. Ik ben enthousiast over de pilots van het nieuwe

werken bij X � � � � � �

b. Ik ben bang voor wat er tussen nu en twee jaar

kan gebeuren bij X � � � � � �

c. Ik ben tevreden over mijn beloning � � � � � �

d. Ik ben tevreden met mijn leidinggevende � � � � � �

e. Ik ben tevreden over de loopbaanmogelijkheden

binnen X � � � � � �

f. Ik ben tevreden over de scholingsmogelijkheden

binnen X � � � � � �

g.

1

Ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn

collega’s van X � � � � � �

79


Helemaal

oneens

Neutraal Helemaal

eens

Weet

niet/

n.v.t.

g.

2

Ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn

collega’s van InformatieManagement � � � � � �

h. Ik voel me veilig om mijn werkplek � � � � � �

i. Ik heb binnen mijn werkzaamheden voldoende

deelgebieden waarin ik kan excelleren � � � � � �

j. Ik ben tevreden over de communicatie binnen X � � � � � �

k. Ik ben tevreden met de inspraakmogelijkheden

bij X � � � � � �

l. Ik ben tevreden met de informatie die ik krijg

binnen X � � � � � �

m. Ik ben tevreden over de waardering die ik krijg � � � � � �

n. Ik ben tevreden over de mate van betrokkenheid

bij veranderingen � � � � � �

o. Ik ben tevreden over de veranderingen � � � � � �

p. Ik ben tevreden met de mate van plezier in mijn

werk � � � � � �

Bedankt voor het invullen van de vragenlijst!

Als de resultaten van de vragenlijsten bekend zijn, zullen er interviews worden gehouden om meer diepte

informatie te verkrijgen omtrent uw tevredenheid met het werk. De individuele resultaten zullen niet aan uw

leidinggevende gepresenteerd worden, u blijft dus anoniem. De persoonlijke gegevens die u invult bij de

volgende vraag zullen dan ook uitsluitend gebruikt worden als controlevariabelen bij het onderzoek voor de

Universiteit van Tilburg.

15) a Wat is uw geslacht? � Man � Vrouw

b Wat is uw leeftijd?

…………………

Het kan zijn dat er komende weken contact met u wordt opgenomen voor het maken van een interviewafspraak.

Wilt u zelf iets kwijt, of meer informatie omtrent het onderzoek, neem dan contact op met ondergetekende.

mvg

Tom Aendenroomer Bsc.

Afstudeeronderzoek mastersopleiding Organization Studies

[email protected]

80

II. “Analysis codebook and origin of the items”

CODEBOOK QUESTIONAIRE

PARTICIPATION IN CHANGES��EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION

Vari-

able

Variable-label Value-label Measur

e

Source Modified

Name

:

a1 Over het algemeen

ben ik tevreden met

mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

b1 rapportcijfer

tevredenheid in het

werk

Nominal developed Item added

c1 rapportcijfer uwv

geheel

Nominal developed RequestUW

V

a2 ik heb afwisselend

werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

b2 doorgaans duidelijk of

ik werk goed uitvoer

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

c2 ik kan mijn werk van

begin tot eind helemaal

zelf uitvoeren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

d2 over het algemeen

lever ik goede

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

81

prestaties 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

e2 het werk wat ik doe is

belangrijk voor UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

f2 ik mag zo zelfstandig

werken als ik wil

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

g2

ik weet direct of ik het

goed doe

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

h2 ik heb mogelijkheden

om mijn werk naar

eigen inzicht te

organiseren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

i2 de werkzaamheden die

ik verricht verschillen

per week van elkaar

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Day replaced

for week

j2 ik kan uit de voortgang

van mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

82

opmaken of ik goed

presteer

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

k2 het werk wat ik doe is

van belang voor mijn

afdeling

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

l2 ik vind mijn taken

zinvol

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

m2 ik heb voldoende

mogelijkheden om iets

voor een ander te

betekenen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

n2 ik weet waartoe ik

bevoegd ben

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

o2 ik heb weinig vrijheid

in het bepalen van

HOE ik mijn werk zal

uitvoeren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

p2

ik moet voor de

kleinste beslissingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

83

toestemming vragen 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

q2.1 werk belang

medewerkers

uitvoering

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Differentiatio

n made

q2.2 werk van belang

collega's IM

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed Item added

q2.3 werk van belang voor

andere divisies

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens


r2 ik weet waarvoor ik

verantwoordelijk ben

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

s2 het is mij doorgaans

duidelijk wie

waarvoor

verantwoordelijk is

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

t2 ik weet vrij snel of ik

op het goede spoor zit

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

84

met mijn werk 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

u2 in het geheel van de

UWV activiteiten is

mijn bijdrage goed te

herkennen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

v2 het is voor mij

doorgaans duidelijk

wat mijn taken zijn

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

w2 de vrijheid van

handelen die mijn

directe leidinggevende

mij toestaat is goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

x2 in mijn werk kan ik de

taken helemaal

afronden

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

y2 de werkzaamheden die

ik verricht vallen

binnen

functieomschrijving

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

z2 het is mij doorgaans

duidelijk aan wie ik

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

85

verantwoording dien af

te leggen

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

a3 mijn inkomen is in

overeenstemming met

de inspanningen die ik

lever

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

b3 in vergelijking met

collega's binnen IM-U

verdien ik voldoende

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

c3 ik verdien voldoende

in vergelijking met wat

buiten UWV verdiend

word

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

d3 mijn inkomen is in

overeenstemming met

mijn

verantwoordelijkheden

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

e3 ik verdien voldoende

gezien mijn kennis en

vaardigheden

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

f3 ik ben tevreden met het

salarisniveau waarop

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

86

ik ben ingeschakeld 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

a4 leiderschapsstijl hoger

UWV management

1 = laissez-fair

2 = management

of people’s needs

3 = management

of efficiency

4 = middle

management

5 – ideal

management

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

b4 cijfer hoger UWV

management

Nominal developed Request of

UWV

c4 leiderschapsstijl

afdelingleiders

1 = laissez-fair

2 = management

of people’s needs

3 = management

of efficiency

4 = middle

management

5 – ideal

management

Scale developed Differentatio

n added

d4 cijfer afdelingleiders Nominal developed Reguest

UWV

e4 leiderschapsstijl

teamleiders

1 = laissez-fair

2 = management

of people’s needs

3 = management

of efficiency

4 = middle

management

5 – ideal

management


n added

a5 er zijn voldoende

doorgroeimogelijkhede

n binnen UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

b5 binnen IM-U is er

aandacht voor mijn

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

87

persoonlijke wensen

doorstroming

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

for UWV

c5 het is mij duidelijk

welke

loopbaanmogelijkhede

n openstaan

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

Personalized

for UWV

d5 voldoende

mogelijkheden voor

horizontale mobiliteit

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

e5 er zijn voldoende

mogelijkheden om een

cursus of opleiding te

volgen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

f5 ik ben tevreden met de

scholingsmogelijkhede

n binnen uwv

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

g5 voldoende

mogelijkheden zelf

invloed uit te oefenen

op verbeteringen in

werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

h5 ik ben tevreden met de

ondersteuning van

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

88

mijn leidinggevende 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

I5 kennis en kunde ook

elders heel bruikbaar

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed Request

UWV

a6 ik vind dat wij op onze

afdeling goed

samenwerken

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

b6 de sfeer op onze

afdeling is goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

c6 er is sprake van

eilandvorming door de

verschillende

afdelingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

d6 ik kan met problemen

terecht bij mijn

collega's

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

e6 de verschillende

afdelingen steunen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

89

elkaar bij het uitvoeren

van het werk

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

f6 de procesdomeinen

zorgen voor

eilandvorming binnen

een afdeling

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens


UWV

g6 de collega's op mijn

afdeling luisteren naar

ideeën, meningen van

elkaar

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

h6 tussen de afdelingen

komen regelmatig

conflicten voor

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

i6 mijn collega's bij IM-U

zijn TE lief voor elkaar

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

j6 er is veel contact

tussen de verschillende

afdelingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

k6 de medewerkers op

mijn afdeling steunen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

90

elkaar bij het werk 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

l6 de sfeer tussen de

verschillende

afdelingen is goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

m6 In mijn team komen

nauwelijks conflicten

voor

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

n6 mijn collega's op de

afdeling durven elkaar

de waarheid te zeggen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

o6 afdelingen werken

onderling goed samen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

a7 ik heb in mijn werk

vaak met tijdsdruk te

maken

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

b7 ik kan de hoeveelheid

werk die ik heb goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale EDMK NO

91

aan 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

c7 ik moet in mijn werk

vaan teveel taken

gelijktijdig uitvoeren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

d7 ik ervaar een hoge

werkdruk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

e7 mijn werk is geestelijk

inspannend

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

f7 ik kom wel eens

gestrest thuis van mijn

werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

g7 ik ben tevreden met

mijn

werkplekinrichting

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale EDMK NO

h7 de werkruimte waar ik

mijn taken uitvoer,

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale EDMK NO

92

beoordeel ik als goed 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

i7 het management van

IM-U doet voldoende

aan stressbeteugeling

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens


UWV

j7 het management van

IM-U doet voldoende

aan vitalisering

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed Reguest

UWV

a8 ik krijg voldoende

informatie over de

toekomst van UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

b8 op mijn afdeling is

iedereen goed

geïnformeerd

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

c8 er is voldoende

openheid binnen IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

d8 ik vind dat er

voldoende

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale BASAM NO

93

overlegmomenten zijn

met andere afdelingen

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

e8 ik krijg voldoende

informatie over

veranderingen bij

UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


f8 ik ben tevreden met

mijn

inspraakmogelijkheden

binnen IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

g8 ik krijg veel

overbodige informatie

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

h8 er word voldoende

naar mij geluisterd

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

i8 ik ben tevreden over

de snelheid op de

hoogte gesteld

veranderingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

Scale BASAM NO

94

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

j8 afspraken met

medewerkers van

andere afdelingen

worden door hen goed

nagekomen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

k8 ik krijg voldoende

informatie over de

veranderingen op

mijn afdeling

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


n

Item added

l8 andere afdelingen zijn

goed geïnformeerd als

je naar ze toegaat met

vragen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

m8 ik krijg voldoende

informatie over andere

afdelingen binnen

UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

a9 ik weet dat mijn werk

gewaardeerd wordt

door mijn

leidinggevende

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

b9 ik voel me

gewaardeerd door mijn

collega's

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

Scale BASAM NO

95

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

c9 ik hecht grote waarde

aan wat collega's

vinden van mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

d9 ik weet dat mijn werk

gewaardeerd wordt

door de medewerkers

van UWV in werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

e9 ik krijg erkenning voor

mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

a10 ik heb een gevoel van

trots dat ik voor UWV

werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

b10 ik ben persoonlijk

sterk betrokken bij

UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

c10 ik wil in mijn werk

graag iets bereiken

voor mezelf

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

96

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

d10 ik voel me thuis in

deze organisatie

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA NO

e10 ik wil nog lang bij

UWV blijven werken

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA NO

f10 ik ben persoonlijk

meer betrokken bij IM-

U, dan bij UWV als

geheel

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

a11 de medezeggenschap

op UWV-niveau

functioneert goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES request

by UWV

b11 de medezeggenschap

binnen IM-U

functioneert goed

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES request

+

personalized

for UWV

c11 ik hecht veel belang

aan

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

Scale IVA NO

97

medezeggenschap 1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

a12 ik ben tevreden over

de mate waarin ik

betrokken word bij

veranderingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed No adequate

scale found

b12 medewerkers van

UWV zouden meer

betrokken moeten

worden bij

veranderingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

c12 ik vind het belangrijk

om betrokken te

worden, ook als dit

extra

verantwoordelijkhede

n

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed Request by

UWV

d12 het management zou

meer moeten

luisteren naar

suggesties van mij en

collega's

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

e12 bewust uitgevoerde 0 = weet niet / Scale developed No adequate

98

veranderingen

worden vooral top-

down ingezet

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

scale found

f12 over het algemeen

tevreden over

veranderingen

afgelopen jaren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


UWV

g12 meer betrokkenheid

van medewerkers,

betere resultaten

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

h12 als ik meer zou

worden betrokken bij

veranderingen, zou ik

nog meer tevreden

zijn met mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

i12 als ik meer zou

worden betrokken bij

veranderingen, zou ik

meer tevreden zijn

over IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

99

j12 meer inspraak in

organisatieveranderi

ngen zal niet zorgen

voor betere resultaten

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

k12 het zou vreemd zijn

als mijn

leidinggevende aan

mij vroeg hoe ik

tegen bepaalde zaken

aankijk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


l12 het zou vooral meer

onrust opleveren om

medewerkers meer te

betrekken

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

a13 ik heb voldoende

invloed op mijn

werktijden

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA NO

b13 ik kan mijn werk goed

afstemmen op mijn

privé-situatie

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA NO

c13 ik heb voldoende

mogelijkheden om

verlof op te nemen als

mij dat uitkomt

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

Scale IVA NO

100

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

d13 IM-U biedt voldoende

mogelijkheden om in

deeltijd te werken als

medewerkers dat

willen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

e13 IM-U biedt voldoende

mogelijkheden om

takenpakket aan te

passen wanneer privé-

omstandigheden dat

vragen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA YES

personalized

for UWV

f13 ik combineer mijn

werk zonder

problemen met mijn

zorgtaken thuis

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale IVA NO

a14 ik ben enthousiast over

de pilots van het

nieuwe werken bij

UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale developed Request by

UWV

b14 ik ben bang voor wat

er binnen nu en 2 jaar

kan gebeuren bij UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

by UWV

c14 ik ben tevreden over

mijn beloning

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

Scale BASAM NO

101

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

d14 ik ben tevreden met

mijn leidinggevende

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

e14 ik ben tevreden over de

loopbaanmogelijkhede

n binnen UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

by UWV

f14 ik ben tevreden over de

scholingsmogelijkhede

n binnen UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

g14.1 ik ben tevreden over de

samenwerking met

mijn collega's van

UWV

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

differentation

made

g14.2 ik ben tevreden over de

samenwerking met

mijn collega's van IM-

U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens


n added

h14 ik voel me veilig op

mijn werkplek

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens


UWV

102

5 = helemaal eens

i14 ik heb binnen mijn

werkzaamheden

voldoende

deelgebieden om te

excelleren

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens


UWV

j14 ik ben tevreden over de

communicatie binnen

IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

k14 ik ben tevreden met de

inspraakmogelijkheden

binnen IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

l14 ik ben tevreden met de

informatie die ik krijg

binnen IM-U

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM YES

personalized

for UWV

m14 ik ben tevreden over de

waardering die ik krijg

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

n14 ik tevreden over de

mate van

betrokkenheid bij

veranderingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens


103

5 = helemaal eens

o14 ik ben tevreden over

de veranderingen

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens


scale found

p14 ik ben tevreden met

mijn werk

0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk

oneens

3 = neutraal

4 = redelijk

oneens

5 = helemaal eens

Scale BASAM NO

a15 Man/vrouw 0 = Man

1 = Vrouw

Scale developed Control item

b15 leeftijd Nominal developed Control item

c15 Afdeling + team 0 = weet niet /

n.v.t.

1 = helemaal

oneens

2 = redelijk oneens

Scale developed Control item

104

III. “Preliminary analysis of the questionnaire”

1. In general I'm satisfied with my work

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Not relevant/don't knwo 3 2.8 2.8 2.8

Totally disagree 1 .9 .9 3.7

Disagree a bit 2 1.8 1.8 5.5

Neutral 14 12.8 12.8 18.3

Agree a bit 41 37.6 37.6 56.0

Totally agree 48 44.0 44.0 100.0

Total 109 100.0 100.0

IV. The cronbach dillema “Reliability of scales”

Variable two: Job content

Case Processing Summary

N %

Cases Valid 109 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Total 109 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the

procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.887 28

105

Item-Total Statistics

2. Job content Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if

Item

Deleted

ik heb afwisselend werk 103.2018 169.292 .480 .883

doorgaans duidelijk of ik werk goed uitvoer 103.7248 164.868 .577 .880

ik kan mijn werk van begin tot eind helemaal zelf uitvoeren 104.0642 164.209 .457 .883

over het algemeen lever ik goede prestaties 103.2844 172.446 .260 .886

het werk wat ik doe is belangrijk voor X 103.5138 169.011 .381 .884

ik mag zo zelfstandig werken als ik wil 103.6514 163.266 .562 .880

ik weet direct of ik het goed doe 104.3028 165.954 .471 .882

ik heb mogelijkheden om mijn werk naar eigen inzicht te organiseren 103.5780 166.265 .467 .883

de werkzaamheden die ik verricht verschillen per week van elkaar 104.0000 167.222 .345 .886

ik kan uit de voortgang van mijn werk opmaken of ik goed presteer 104.3028 158.065 .651 .878

het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor mijn afdeling 103.4404 166.434 .551 .881

ik vind mijn taken zinvol 103.3394 165.708 .643 .880

ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om iets voor een ander te betekenen 103.5596 161.897 .641 .879

ik weet waartoe ik bevoegd ben 103.9083 159.269 .600 .879

werk belang medewerkers uitvoering 103.3119 172.161 .209 .888

werk belang collega's IM 103.7248 164.683 .520 .881

werk belang voor andere divisies 103.9174 170.336 .242 .888

ik weet waarvoor ik verantwoordelijk ben 103.4587 163.269 .606 .880

het is mij doorgaans duidelijk wie waarvoor verantwoordelijk is 104.5229 159.955 .532 .881

ik weet vrij snel of ik op het goede spoor zit met mijn werk 103.8349 164.454 .501 .882

in het geheel van de X activiteiten is mijn bijdrage goed te herkennen 104.3853 163.221 .500 .882

het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk wat mijn taken zijn 103.6697 162.316 .691 .878

de vrijheid van handelen die mijn directe leidinggevende mij toestaat is goed 103.3853 168.813 .398 .884

in mijn werk kan ik de taken helemaal afronden 104.0092 165.213 .491 .882

de werkzaamheden die ik verricht vallen binnen functieomschrijving 104.0000 166.407 .368 .885

het is mij doorgaans duidelijk aan wie ik verantwoording dien af te leggen 103.7798 161.729 .498 .882

ik heb weinig vrijheid bepalen HOE ik werk zal uitvoeren 103.8257 171.238 .216 .888

PREV kleinste beslissingen toestemming 105.8807 185.939 -.358 .899

106

3. Variable three: Salary and reward


N %


Excludeda 0 .0

Total 109 100.0


procedure.


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.883 6


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming

met de inspanningen die ik lever

16.38 29.478 .652 .869

in vergelijking met collega's binnen

IM-U verdien ik voldoende

16.55 26.935 .747 .853

ik verdien voldoende in vergelijking

met wat buiten X verdiend word

16.52 29.474 .516 .895

mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming

met mijn verantwoordelijkheden

16.36 28.343 .803 .847

ik verdien voldoende gezien mijn

kennis en vaardigheden

16.41 28.189 .761 .852

ik ben tevreden met het salarisniveau

waarop ik ben ingeschakeld

16.40 28.299 .728 .857

107

Variable five: carreer and trainingopportunities


N %


Excludeda 0 .0

Total 109 100.0


procedure.


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

er zijn voldoende

doorgroeimogelijkheden

binnen X

28.18 47.114 .548 .853

binnen X is er aandacht

voor mijn persoonlijke

wensen doorstroming

28.84 44.040 .613 .847

het is mij duidelijk welke

loopbaanmogelijkheden

openstaan

28.57 44.266 .617 .846

voldoende mogelijkheden

voor horizontale mobiliteit

29.03 44.675 .541 .856

er zijn voldoende

mogelijkheden om een

cursus of opleiding te

volgen

27.68 46.646 .727 .840

ik ben tevreden met de

scholingsmogelijkheden

binnen X

27.87 45.094 .786 .833

voldoende mogelijkheden

zelf invloed uit te oefenen

op verbeteringen in werk

27.99 47.880 .606 .849

ik ben tevreden met de

ondersteuning van mijn

leidinggevende

28.33 43.760 .697 .838

kennis en kunde ook elders

heel bruikbaar

28.33 50.371 .315 .874


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.863 9

108

Variable six: atmosphere and co-workers


Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbac

h's

Alpha if

Item

Deleted

de sfeer op onze afdeling is goed 48.1667 37.736 .646 .689

ik kan met problemen terecht bij mijn collega's 48.3111 40.127 .343 .716

de verschillende afdelingen steunen elkaar bij het

uitvoeren van het werk

49.1667 36.612 .688 .682

de collega's op mijn afdeling luisteren naar ideen,

meningen van elkaar

48.3778 37.721 .627 .690

H. tussen de afdelingen komen regelmatig

conflicten voor

49.6000 51.479 -.522 .802

I mijn collega's bij IM-U zijn TE lief voor elkaar 49.3222 47.075 -.254 .772

er is veel contact tussen de verschillende

afdelingen

49.0333 39.336 .406 .709

de medewerkers op mijn afdeling steunen elkaar

bij het werk

48.2778 37.956 .615 .692

de sfeer tussen de verschillende afdelingen is goed 48.5889 39.593 .466 .706

In mijn team komen nauwelijks conflicten voor 48.3333 36.652 .617 .686

mijn collega's op de afdeling durven elkaar de

waarheid te zeggen

48.7889 38.595 .367 .713

afdelingen werken onderling goed samen 49.2778 36.315 .647 .683

eilandvorming 49.7556 37.602 .445 .703

procesdomeinen eilandvorming 49.7556 38.322 .422 .707

H.REV regelmatig conflicten 48.7333 40.085 .257 .725

IREV te lief 49.0111 44.079 -.027 .751


N %

Cases Valid 90 82.6

Excludeda 19 17.4

Total 109 100.0


procedure.


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.730 16

109

Variable seven: work conditions


Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

ik kan de hoeveelheid werk die

ik heb goed aan

24.7248 21.979 .313 .562

E7mijn werk is geestelijk

inspannend

24.3853 28.443 -.348 .687

ik ben tevreden met mijn

werkplekinrichting

24.8532 20.941 .333 .554

de werkruimte waar ik mijn

taken uitvoer, beoordeel ik als

goed

24.8991 20.795 .398 .539

het management van X doet

voldoende aan

stressbeteugeling

26.1560 19.800 .397 .535

het management van X doet

voldoende aan vitalisering

26.2661 19.234 .398 .533

A7REV tijdsdruk 26.4679 22.011 .318 .561

C7REVteveel taken tegelijk 26.0642 22.931 .182 .591

D7REVhoge werkdruk 25.9083 21.140 .414 .539

F7REVgestresst thuis van werk 25.9083 21.232 .327 .556


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.596 10

110

Variable eight: information and communication


Scale Mean

if Item

Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if

Item

Deleted

ik krijg voldoende informatie over de toekomst van X 36.6981 57.641 .563 .823

op mijn afdeling is iedereen goed geïnformeerd 37.2736 58.010 .469 .829

er is voldoende openheid binnen X 37.2075 57.042 .533 .825

ik vind dat er voldoende overlegmomenten zijn met andere afdelingen 37.6226 56.028 .507 .827

ik krijg voldoende informatie over veranderingen bij X 36.7642 56.601 .673 .817

ik ben tevreden met mijn inspraakmogelijkheden binnen X 37.1226 55.671 .523 .826

er word voldoende naar mij geluisterd 36.8962 56.894 .597 .821

ik ben tevreden over de snelheid op de hoogte gesteld veranderingen 37.0849 56.955 .670 .818

afspraken met medewerkers van andere afdelingen worden door hen goed

nagekomen

37.5755 57.866 .429 .833

ik krijg voldoende informatie over de veranderingen op mijn afdeling 36.9340 56.977 .593 .821

andere afdelingen zijn goed geinformeerd als je naar ze toegaat met vragen 37.6509 58.248 .396 .835

ik krijg voldoende informatie over andere afdelingen binnen X 37.6604 57.693 .593 .822

G8REVveel overbodige info 37.5849 67.197 -.070 .862

Variable nine: acknowledgement


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

A10ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd

wordt door mijn leidinggevende

15.01 7.750 .241 .601

A11ik voel me gewaardeerd door mijn

collega's

14.77 7.382 .538 .458

A12ik hecht grote waarde aan wat

collega's vinden van mijn werk

15.00 8.315 .242 .590

A13ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd

wordt door de medewerkers van X

15.52 7.196 .230 .629

A14ik krijg erkenning voor mijn werk 15.22 6.747 .647 .394


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.839 13


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.593 5

111

Variable ten: Commitment


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.731 6


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if Item

Deleted

ik heb een gevoel van trots dat ik voor X werk 18.01 12.898 .615 .645

ik ben persoonlijk sterk betrokken bij X 17.67 13.020 .672 .631

ik wil in mijn werk graag iets bereiken voor mezelf 17.39 12.482 .652 .632

ik voel me thuis in deze organisatie 17.37 14.401 .639 .654

ik wil nog lang bij X blijven werken 17.50 15.308 .442 .701

F10ik ben persoonlijk meer betrokken bij X, dan

bij X als geheel

18.26 18.563 -.038 .838

Variable eleven: Personal participation


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

de medezeggenschap op X-

niveau functioneert goed

6.06 4.367 .553 .447

de medezeggenschap

binnen X funtioneert goed

5.90 4.462 .562 .434

C11ik hecht veel belang

aan medezeggenschap

4.71 6.450 .323 .735


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.661 3

112

Variable twelve: Participation in organizational changes


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.505 12


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Correcte

d Item-

Total

Correlati

on

Cronbach'

s Alpha if

Item

Deleted

ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik betrokken word bij

veranderingen

32.1759 24.558 .177 .487

medewerkersv van X zouden meer betrokken moeten worden bij

veranderingen

31.5370 23.204 .298 .455

ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden, ook als dit extra

verantwoordelijkheden

31.1389 22.906 .444 .427

bewust uitgevoerde veranderingen worden vooral top-down

ingezet

31.5000 26.533 -.003 .532

over het algemeen tevreden over veranderingen afgelopen jaren 32.5370 25.298 .057 .524

meer betrokkheid van medewerkers, betere resultaten 31.9259 19.434 .423 .396

als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer

tevreden zijn met mijn werk

32.0278 21.579 .456 .408

als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer

tevreden zijn over X

31.9907 21.617 .446 .410

meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal niet zorgen voor

betere resultaten

32.6296 26.310 -.004 .536

het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan mij vroeg hoe ik

tegen bepaalde zaken aankijk

33.5278 25.467 .163 .491

het zou vooral meer onrust opleveren om medewerkers meer te

betrekken

33.3148 25.582 .100 .506

D12REVmeer luisteren naar idee 33.1389 28.887 -.218 .558

113

Variable twelve A: Participation in past changes


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if

Item Deleted

ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik betrokken

word bij veranderingen

10.3113 5.435 .372 -.024a

over het algemeen tevreden over veranderingen

afgelopen jaren

10.6887 5.131 .295 .018

meer betrokkenheid van medewerkers, betere

resultaten

10.0377 7.599 -.176 .573

top down 11.1604 6.441 .230 .136

meer luisteren naar idee 11.2736 7.477 .080 .254

a. The value is negative due to a negative average covariance among items. This violates reliability model assumptions. You

may want to check item codings.

Variable twelve B: Importance of participation in changes


Scale

Mean

if Item

Delete

d

Scale

Variance if

Item

Deleted

Correcte

d Item-

Total

Correlati

on

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

medewerkers van X zouden meer betrokken moeten worden bij veranderingen 16.55 12.602 .392 .533

ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden, ook als dit extra verantwoordelijkheden 16.17 11.923 .594 .468

als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer tevreden zijn over 17.06 11.515 .519 .481

als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer tevreden zijn over IM-U 17.02 11.722 .482 .496

meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal niet zorgen voor betere resultaten 17.65 15.248 .033 .662

het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan mij vroeg hoe ik tegen bepaalde zaken

aankijk

18.54 14.917 .190 .598

het zou vooral meer onrust opleveren om medewerkers meer te betrekken 18.33 15.279 .080 .634


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.262 5

114

Variable thirteen: Balance work/private life


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

ik heb voldoende invloed op mijn werktijden 19.12 17.550 .341 .535

ik kan mijn werk goed afstemmen op mijn privesituatie 19.24 16.572 .485 .496

ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om verlof op te

nemen als mij dat uitkomt

19.20 16.348 .487 .491

X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om in deeltijd te

werken als medewerkers dat willen

19.83 13.250 .341 .518

X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om takenpakket aan

te passen wanneer priveomstandigheden dat vragen

20.37 13.642 .200 .625

ik combineer mijn werk zonder problemen met mijn

zorgtaken thuis

19.94 14.478 .342 .513


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.573 6

115

Variable fourteen: Satisfaction of minor work aspects


Scale

Mean if

Item

Deleted

Scale

Variance

if Item

Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

ik ben enthousiast over de pilots van het nieuwe werken bij X 55.6759 92.632 .222 .873

ik ben tevreden over mijn beloning 54.0926 93.019 .414 .850

ik ben tevreden met mijn leidinggevende 53.7315 93.656 .458 .848

ik ben tevreden over de loopbaanmogelijkheden binnen X 54.0000 86.897 .726 .834

ik ben tevreden over de scholingsmogelijkheden binnen X 53.6111 91.174 .533 .844

ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn collega's van X 53.7130 92.618 .596 .842

ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn collega's van IM-U 53.8519 95.211 .501 .847

ik voel me veilig op mijn werkplek 53.2037 98.631 .298 .854

ik heb binnen mijn werkzaamheden voldoende deelgebieden om te

excelleren

53.5648 97.033 .380 .851

ik ben tevreden over de communicatie binnen X 54.5093 90.663 .681 .838

ik ben tevreden met de inspraakmogelijkheden binnenX 54.6852 90.236 .605 .841

ik ben tevreden met de informatie die ik krijg binnen X 54.3704 90.048 .716 .837

ik ben tevreden over de waardering die ik krijg 53.9815 91.439 .613 .841

ik tevreden over de mate van betrokkenheid bij veranderingen 54.5185 90.906 .621 .841

ik ben tevreden over de veranderingen 54.9537 90.979 .562 .843

ik ben tevreden met de mate van plezier in mijn werk 53.6759 94.315 .527 .846

B14REV bang voor gebeuren 54.3056 102.962 -.010 .871


Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.855 17

116

V. Card Game

Below the collage of game results pictures is given.

117

VI. Initial topic list interviews

The interviews started with a brief description of the research, anonymity and goal of the

interview. The following ten minutes were used to ask questions which were not developed

for this research, but to investigate the degree of employee satisfaction for the organization.

Some of these variables are discussed in the result section of this paper. The game is played,

most of the times in the first half of the interviews, this brought value data for employee

satisfaction. Topic list for Y variable was not necessary.

Topics:

What is your general idea about the organizational changes of the last two years?

What went well, what could have gone better?

Is it possible for employees to participate in organizational changes, what is your opinion?

If employees were more involved, would the changes have been better?

If you could participate more in organizational changes, would you be more satisfied?

118

VII. Interview Results Figure Variable Respondent nr. Agree or disagree

with results Why? Improvement

1. interesting work 1

2

3

4

5

7 8

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree Agree

X

Important for employee satisfaction

Only important

determinant of employee satisfaction

X

X X

But doesn’t matter if it is

repetitive

X

X

X

X

X

X

2.clear responsibilities 1

2

3

5

6 7

8

Agree, but

Agree

Disagree

Disagree, but

Agree, but Disagree

Disagree

Interpretation of

responsibilities variates X

Different interpretation

which leads to frustration It’s a good thing to have

freedom

Same as 1 Same as 3

A bit chaos is fun

More steering of

management

X

Task of management to address issues

X

3. Reward 1 2

3

5 6

7

8

Agree Agree, but

Agree, but

Agree Agree

Disagree

Agree

X Employee does more than

expected

No extra salary for extra task

X

Mory salary is not more satisfaction

Too much tasks for salary

X

X They could give more

salary, but not necessary

Ambition is dead

X

More salary

X

4. Education 1

2

3

4

5

6 7

8

Agree but

Agree, but

Disagree

Agree

Undetermined

Agree, but Agree but

Disagree

Employee itself needs to put a lot of effort in it

More attention from management for talents

Only optional

Employee doesn’t want it

anymore

X See one

See one No budget for education

Team coach should be more involved in individual

employee. Currently to

much window dressing Same as 1, because it is

better for everyone

Task of team coach and HRM

Age

X

Make it easier

5. Mobility within

organization

1

2 3

4

6

Undetermined

Undetermined Agree, but

Agree, but

Agree

Yes, there is attention

from management, but no possibilities

X

Since cuts more difficult Employees choose for

certainty

Individual responsibility Not possible

Create own possibilities

X No solution

Not ideal, but not a bad thing

119

7

8

Disagree

Agree

Inform employees about

jobs Help from team coach

6. Mobility towards other

organizations

1

2

3 4

5

6

8

Disagree

Undetermined

Undetermined Agree

Disagree

Agree, if

Undetermined

Specific knowledge in

sector X

X

But job hopping is not the style of personnel

Knowledge to specific

Employees uses possibilities for education

X

Stimulate additional

education (4) X

X

It should not be improved

X

X

7. Information and communication

1

3

4 5

6

7

8

Disagree

Agree, but

Disagree Agree

Agree, but

Disagree

Undetermined

Very turbulent management decision, but

also very turbulent climate.

It takes to much time to

find the information Really poor

You can find everything

It takes to much time to

read Really poor

It is there, but really hard

to find

Make specific choices and follow these.

No influence on climate Team coach should update

employees

Same as 1 What you can’t find doesn’t

matter for your work

Inform

Summary updates on the intranet

8. High bureaucracy 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Disagree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Focus is on production

instead of quality To much control

Organizational change causes this

Control culture should be

open culture

Structure is ideal

Create open culture

Search common ground

Don’t play the parent, act

like a coach

Skip management layers

Give more freedom

Don’t change without

common ground Skip management layer

Just do what management

tells you.

Skip management layers

More participation = less management

Listen to spontaneous

advices

9. Stress 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Disagree

Disagree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Not a stressed person

Not a stressed person

Not a stressed person, but

Span of control of

management is to big But that’s up to person

Own responsibility

Too less steering

Too much pressure

X

X

Management should say

No sometimes Increase nr team coaches

Dismiss additional tasks

Management should take more time for the

individual

Team coach should have more attention

10. Cooperation of 1 Agree Lack of control More intra department

120

departments

2

3 5

7

8

Agree

Agree Disagree

Agree

Agree

Lack of steering

X Cooperation is totally

unnecessary

Lack of web meetings Lack of steering

meetings

Not more, but more

efficient meetings X

Just do your work people

See two

11.Balance work/private

life

1

2

4

5

7

8

Agree, but

Undetermined

Agree

Undetermined

Agree, but

Agree

ICT structure works

frustrating + bad

performance Own responsibility

No balance is problem

employee satisfaction Own responsibility

See one

X

Possibility to log on at

home

X

Stimulate the new way of

working

X

X

12. top down culture 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

No participation of employees

Preference for bottom up

This is wrong

Too much management

Bottom up would be

messy Even if you want it is not

possible to participate

Stimulate creativity Create common ground

Before starting new projects first ask the

employees how & what

Common ground for new changes

It creates passive

employees Direct report of team coach

towards department chef

(Bottum up) Stick to this way

Listen more to employees

Give freedom

Listen to employees

13. Why are people

neutral about possibilities

for participation?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Agree, because

management created this

Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

?

Agree

?

Lack of steering on

organizational change.

2 types of people created

by management

Too much stupid changes

Sick of changes

It is not important at all Do not understand those

people

People feel not taken serious

X

Choose instead of switch.

Before choice as

employees Stimulate passive

employees to create

common ground Passive attitude

Common ground Just listen to the boss

Listen and vote

X

14. satisfaction about past

changes

1

2

? so many changes

Many unsuccessful

changes

Agree

X

Changes would be better with more participation

Change in its core is no

problem

X

Search common ground before start organizational

change, then hold on to it But monitor, evaluate and

steer!

Same as 3

121

3

4

5

6

7

Agree

? so may changes Many unsuccessful

changes

Sick of change

Too much

X

More participation of

employees

More participation

X

Admission to privileged sessions

Sort of a LSI session

15. more participation =

more satisfaction

1

2

3

4

5 6

7

8

Undetermined

Disagree

Agree

Agree

Disagree Agree

Undetermined

Undetermined

Not as such, other factors

important There is some relation,

but other factors are more

important More participation =

better change

Direct effect

Not important Direct effect

Better change lead to

employee satisfaction

Other factors are also important

X

For example successful

changes

Better change = higher

satisfaction

Search common ground.

Maslow’s pyramid

Then management takes

employees serious

16. Informal meetings 3

4

5

6

8

No success at the

moment No success

No success

Succes

Succes

Mistrust about motives

Dislike activities

Team building should go

automatic, not forced Very nice way to be

informal

Fun, but it’s peoples own choice

Everybody should be

honoust Find interesting ones

Do not oblige these

activities

17. cyclical change 5

7

Agree

Agree, but

Does not believe in

change at all, accept ict change

Without change no

survival

122

VIII. A summary of the research journal

Date Activities Notes

Week 49 IRP writing

Sending progress to organization

Week 50 16-12-2010 Circle meeting 5

Week 51 IRP writing

Week 52 IRP writing


Week 2 14-1-2011 IRP hand in 1st time

organization stops to cooperate

Received go major

From grave 2 cradle

Week 3 Evaluating what went wrong

Desperate brainstorming + contacting organizations

Week 4 25-2-2011 organization appointment Eindhoven

27-2-2011 organization appointment Amsterdam

28-2-2011 organization appointment Heerlen

Negative outcome

Positive outcome

Positive outcome

Week 5 Finding a match between research and organizations

Decision made to continue with Amsterdam

IRP literature study

Week 6 IRP literature study + writing

Week 7 IRP writing

16-2-2011 Green light for research plan @ new organization

17-2-2011 Circle meeting 7

Week 8 IRP writing

First draft questionnaire

Using literature

Week 9 28-2-2011 IRP hand-in 2 time Received Go

Week 10 Second draft questionnaire

Start writing codebook

Organization comments + literature


Third draft questionnaire

developing additional scales

Week 12 Fourth draft questionnaire

Fifth draft questionnaire

Finish codebook

24-3-2011 Presentation for almost whole crew A&O

organization comments

higher management comments

to increase number of respondents

Week 13 Spread questionnaires

Thesis writing

31-3-2011 Presentation for almost whole crew B&I + R&B

Collecting questionnaires

Document preparation

to increase number of respondents


5-4-2011 Send reminder to respondents

7-4-2011 Final date to hand in questionnaires

8-4-2011 Collecting questionaires

Refreshing SPSS skills

Week 15 Refreshing SPSS skills

Analyzing data (Preliminary analysis)

Analyzing data (Reliability check)

Analyzing data (Regression)

Developing interview questions & planning the interviews

123

Week 16 Interviews

Week 17 Interviews

Transcription

Week 18 Interviews

Transcription

3-5-2011 Circle meeting

Week 19 Transcription

Writing

Week 20 Writing

Week 21 Debriefing organization

Week 22 Writing

Week 23 Writing

Week 24 14-6-2011 IRP- defence

Week 25 24-6-2011 Deadline

Week 26 X

Week 27 X

Week 28 Feedback changes

Week 29 Rewriting

Week 30 Rewriting

Week 31 Rewriting

Week 32 12-8-2011 Revision Deadline

Documents

Exploring the relationship between participative organizational