Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
i
MEASUREMENT OF EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT STRATEGIES
WITHIN AN AUDITING ENVIRONMENT
by
ADRIANA W BOTHA
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
MAGISTER TECHNOLOGIAE: HUMAN RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT
in the
Department of People Management and Development
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
TSHWANE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Supervisor: Mr Willie Pretorius
Co-supervisor: Dr Karel Lessing
February 2008
ii
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this dissertation submitted for the degree Magister
Technologiae: Human Resource Management, at Tshwane University of
Technology, is my own original unaided work and has not previously been
submitted to any other institution of higher education. I further declare that all
sources cited or quoted are indicated or acknowledged by means of a
comprehensive list of references.
Adriana W Botha
Copyright © Tshwane University of Technology 2007
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the following:
Tshwane University of Technology for enabling me to conduct the research;
My supervisor, Mr Willie Pretorius, for his guidance and support throughout this
project;
Deloitte and Synovate Loyalty for allowing me access to their data and research;
My husband, Rocher, for his encouragement and support; and
HIM who ultimately made this possible.
iv
ABSTRACT
EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN AN AUDITING
ENVIRONMENT
by
ADRIANA W BOTHA
SUPERVISOR: MR WILLIE PRETORIUS
CO-SUPERVISOR: DR KAREL LESSING
DEPARTMENT: PEOPLE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
DEGREE: MAGISTER TECHNOLOGIAE: HUMAN RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT
The purpose of this research project is to understand the concept of employee
(organisational) commitment through researching antecedents of employee
commitment focusing on attitudinal aspects, behavioural influences, and
consequences of commitment.
It can be argued that human resources strategies and management practices can
be used to influence employee (organisational) commitment. Empirical research
will determine whether the organisation’s directed action has the desirable effect of
changing employees’ attitudes towards human resources and management
v
practices and, therefore, ultimately increases employee commitment as motivated
through the theoretical research.
The impact of the organisation’s directed actions on employee attitudes towards
human resources strategies and management practices is determined by
comparing employee commitment results of the Global People Commitment
Survey for the year 2005 with the year 2006.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................1
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT ....................................................................3
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ...............................................................4
1.2.1 Theoretical research............................................................................4
1.2.2 Empirical research...............................................................................5
1.3 CHAPTER OUTLINE...........................................................................6
1.4 CONCLUSION.....................................................................................7
CHAPTER 2: EMPLOYEE ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT ..........................8
2.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................8
2.2 DEFINING EMPLOYEE ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT ...........8
2.3 ANTECEDENTS OF COMMITMENT..................................................9
2.3.1 Work-related attitudes .......................................................................10
2.3.1.1 Commitment as a work-related attitude ............................................12
2.3.1.2 Job satisfaction as a work-related attitude ........................................12
2.3.1.3 Job involvement as a work-related attitude.......................................13
2.3.2 Individual behavioural influences ......................................................15
vii
2.3.2.1 Attitude as an individual behavioural influence .................................16
2.3.2.2 Personality as an individual behavioural influence ...........................20
2.3.2.3 Values as an individual behavioural influence ..................................23
2.3.2.4 Expectancy as an individual behavioural influence...........................26
2.3.2.5 Motivation as an individual behavioural influence.............................30
2.3.2.6 Needs as an individual behavioural influence...................................33
2.3.2.7 Perception as an individual behavioural influence ............................37
2.4 CONSEQUENCES OF COMMITMENT IN THE WORKPLACE.......41
2.4.1 Work turnover as a consequence of commitment.............................41
2.4.2 Absenteeism as a consequence of commitment ..............................43
2.4.3 Productivity as a consequence of commitment.................................45
2.5 SUMMARY ........................................................................................47
CHAPTER 3: HUMAN CAPITAL STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE
COMMITMENT........................................................................................................48
3.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................48
3.2 INFLUENCING COMMITMENT ........................................................48
3.3 MODELS AND DISCUSSIONS OF HUMAN RESOURCES
STRATEGIES AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT
INFLUENCE COMMITMENT ............................................................52
3.3.1 Effect of communication on commitment ..........................................53
3.3.2 Effect of leadership on commitment..................................................58
3.3.3 Effect of organisational culture on commitment ................................62
3.3.4 Effect of recruitment on commitment.................................................68
3.3.5 Effect of development on commitment..............................................73
viii
3.3.6 Effect of performance management on commitment ........................77
3.3.7 Effect of reward (and recognition) on commitment ...........................81
3.4 SUMMARY ........................................................................................86
CHAPTER 4: METHOD OF RESEARCH..............................................................87
4.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................87
4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN........................................................................87
4.2.1 A posteriori quasi-experimental design .............................................87
4.3 SURVEY RESEARCH.......................................................................88
4.3.1 Survey Research Process.................................................................89
4.4 ADMINISTERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE.......................................90
4.5 POPULATION AND SAMPLING.......................................................91
4.6 STATISTICAL METHODS.................................................................92
4.6.1 Data analysis .....................................................................................93
4.6.2 Descriptive Statistics .........................................................................93
4.6.2.1 Frequency tables and graphs............................................................94
4.6.3 Comparative statistics .......................................................................94
4.6.3.1 Chi-square test ..................................................................................95
4.6.4 Commitment index scores.................................................................95
4.7 THE QUESTIONNAIRE.....................................................................96
4.7.1 Synovate Loyalty model of employee commitment...........................96
4.7.1.1 Dimensions of commitment ...............................................................97
4.7.1.2 Perceived commitment of the organisation to stakeholders .............98
4.7.1.3 Human resources management process areas ................................99
4.7.2 Synovate Loyalty data analysis and reporting.................................100
ix
4.7.2.1 Vulnerability analysis .......................................................................101
4.7.2.2 Impact scores ..................................................................................101
4.7.3 Validity .............................................................................................102
4.7.4 Reliability testing..............................................................................102
4.8 RESEARCH APPROACH ...............................................................103
4.8.1 Directed actions after 2005 .............................................................103
4.8.2 Approach to measure directed actions............................................106
4.9 SUMMARY ......................................................................................108
CHAPTER 5: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS ..................................................109
5.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................109
5.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR BIOGRAPHICAL
VARIABLES.....................................................................................109
5.3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR VARIABLES UNDER
INVESTIGATION.............................................................................112
5.4 COMPARATIVE STATISTICS ........................................................116
5.5 COMMITMENT INDEX SCORES ...................................................119
5.5.1 Overall commitment index scores ...................................................119
5.5.2 Less desirable commitment index scores under investigation........121
5.5.3 Comparison tables and chi-square statistics...................................122
5.6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS..............................................127
5.7 SUMMARY ......................................................................................129
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................131
6.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................131
x
6.2 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY............................................................132
6.2.1 Shortcomings of the research .........................................................133
6.2.2 Suggestions.....................................................................................137
6.3 CONCLUSION.................................................................................141
BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................................................................................144
ANNEXURE A.......................................................................................................155
Global People Commitment Survey ..................................................................155
ANNEXURE B.......................................................................................................167
Comparative statistics graphs...........................................................................167
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 5.1: Biographical distribution ..........................................................................110
TABLE 5.2: Variables under investigation .................................................................113
TABLE 5.3: Comparison statistics for criteria grouping...........................................117
TABLE 5.4: Overall commitment index scores .........................................................119
TABLE 5.5: Less desirable commitment index scores per question under
investigation ..............................................................................................121
TABLE 5.6: Chi-square comparisons .........................................................................124
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 2.1: Three basic components of attitudes...........................................18
FIGURE 2.2: Some major forces influencing personality .................................23
FIGURE 2.3: Expectancy theory........................................................................28
FIGURE 2.4: Basic motivational process ..........................................................31
FIGURE 2.5: A graphic comparison of four content theories of motivation ......32
FIGURE 2.6: The motivation process: a general model...................................36
FIGURE 2.7: The perceptual process − in individual interpretation ..................39
FIGURE 2.8: Factors that influence perception.................................................40
FIGURE 3.1: The communication process model .............................................55
FIGURE 3.2: The contribution of communication activities to real
managers’ effectiveness ..............................................................57
FIGURE 3.3: A framework for studying leadership ...........................................59
FIGURE 3.4: How cultures emerge ...................................................................65
FIGURE 3.5: The evolution of a positive culture ...............................................67
FIGURE 3.6: A systematic approach to recruitment and selection ...................72
FIGURE 3.7: Outcomes of employee development programmes.....................76
FIGURE 3.8: An integrated performance management cycle...........................79
FIGURE 3.9: Basic model of expectancy theory ...............................................81
FIGURE 3.10: Types and structure of rewards ...................................................84
FIGURE 4.1: Model of employee commitment..................................................97
FIGURE 4.2: Directed actions after 2005 ........................................................104
FIGURE 4.3: Approach to measure directed actions ......................................107
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Understanding employee commitment as an employee attitude is important
because it has an important effect on organisational performance, and this attitude
can be influenced by human resources policies and practices (Rayton, 2006:139).
The last decade, particular research interest in high-commitment models of human
resources management depicted that a bundle of human resources practices
focusing on employee commitment to the organisation ultimately would contribute
to organisational effectiveness (Dorenbosch, De Reuver & Sanders, 2006:275).
Despite the focus on, and consequences of, commitment, executives find it
problematic to understand the concept of employee (organisational) commitment
and how it can be influenced, measured, and managed (Crosby, 2000:2).
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:224) found that “research evidence
indicates that the absence of commitment can reduce organisational effectiveness.
People who are committed are less likely to quit and accept other jobs”. Hellriegel
and Slocum (2004:54-55) explain that strong commitment is often correlated with
high productivity and according to Bennett and Minty (2005:16-17) various
research studies have indicated that promoting employee commitment increases
employee retention and, in addition, makes a positive contribution to
organisational performance. Leather (2005:21) agrees that employee commitment
led to improved business performance.
Commitment can be influenced by a variety of psychological and work-related
variables such as individual behavioural influences, other work-related attitudes,
2
and human resources and management practices. Attempts to learn how require
an understanding of the antecedents of commitment. Ashkanasy, Wilderom, and
Peterson (2000:344) describe antecedents of commitment as intervening variables
that channel the occurrence and strength of different commitments.
Greenberg and Baron (2003:146) argue that work-related attitudes include lasting
feelings, beliefs, and behavioural tendencies toward various aspects of the job
itself, the setting in which the work is conducted, and/or the people involved.
Work-related attitude reflects in tendencies to respond. With this in mind, this
study will also explore individual behavioural influences.
According to Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:96), individual variables
influences work behaviour. Individual variables combined with various
organisational variables (resources, leadership, reward, job design, and structure)
will shape productive, non-productive, and counterproductive work behaviours.
“Our behaviour is shaped by our perceptions of why certain things happen.” It is
important to understand individual behavioural influences in order to shape
employee behaviour and, consequently, influence commitment.
Most organisations attempt to shape employee behaviour through policies,
procedures, and human resources management practices. Robbins (2005:538)
explains that an “organisation’s human resource policies and practices represent
important forces for shaping employee behaviour and attitudes” and according to
Bowditch and Buono (2005:53), focussing on relevant employee behaviours and
interactions, managers can begin to shape the outcomes they desire, such as
3
employee commitment. However, Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:203) (citing
James March and Herbert Simon, 1995) argue that management cannot change
individual behaviour directly, or by attempting to alter people’s personalities. It is
more effective and practical, they observed, to manipulate the premises on which
people make their own decision about how they will behave.
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
While research has shown that employee (organisational) commitment can be
influenced by human resources strategies and management practices, executives
still find it difficult to influence, measure, and manage employee (organisational)
commitment (Crosby, 2000:2).
Measuring employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies and
management practices will enable an organisation to direct specific actions
towards less desired scores, which will result in a more committed workforce and,
ultimately, contribute to organisational effectiveness. Comparing annual
commitment results will enable an organisation to measure the effectiveness of its
directed actions in the change of employee attitudes towards the organisation’s
human resources strategies and management practices.
Firstly, it is important to understand the concept of employee (organisational)
commitment and the intervening variables that channel the occurrence and
strength of commitment. Secondly, executives need to be aware of the
consequences of commitment. Thirdly, it is important to understand how
commitment can be influenced through human resources strategies and
4
management practices. Finally, one has to measure the impact of directed actions
through the change in employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies
and management practices.
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to provide theoretical and empirical research on
employee (organisational) commitment and to measure the impact of directed
actions through the change in employees’ attitudes towards human resources
strategies and management practices. Employee commitment results for the year
2005 will be compared to employee commitment results for the year 2006, using
the Global People Commitment Survey, within an auditing company.
The organisation (auditing company) directed specific actions towards less desired
commitment index scores in the hope of changing employees’ attitudes towards
human resources strategies and management practices and, ultimately, increasing
employee commitment.
1.2.1 Theoretical research
The research will focus on the concept of employee (organisational) commitment
through researching antecedents and consequences of employee commitment.
Emphasis is placed on attitudinal aspects and behavioural influences, and the
effect of human resources strategies and management practices on employee
(organisational) commitment.
5
Employee (organisational) commitment is multidimensional. Theoretical research
will focus on the defined research problem and objective of this study. Without the
understanding of the theoretical background of employee (organisational)
commitment, it would be very difficult for organisations to influence commitment
and, ultimately, improve organisational effectiveness.
Understanding the theoretical research will enable an organisation to direct
specific actions towards its human resources strategies and management
practices to change employees’ attitudes (and, consequently, behaviour) in the
hope of increasing employee (organisational) commitment.
1.2.2 Empirical research
The application of the measurement instrument determined the employees’
attitudes towards human resources strategies and management practices over a
period of time. Annual results were compared to assess the impact of directed
actions to change employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies and
management practices.
A quantitative research method in the form of collecting data and analysing the
data using statistical methods was used to support this study. Applied human
resources strategies and management practices were directed towards employee
(organisational) commitment, and the impact was measured (before and after) in
the hope of demonstrating a causal relationship between the variables.
Quantitative data analysis was used to identify patterns and relationships in the
data.
6
The Global People Commitment Survey was used as measuring instrument for the
purpose of comparison. The selective measuring instrument enabled a
comparison of employee commitment results of the Global People Commitment
Survey between the year 2005 and the year 2006. The target population
consisted of 800 and 850 employees for the year 2005 and the year 2006,
respectively, within a professional services organisation in the national auditing
service line. An invitation to participate in the Global People Commitment Survey
was sent out to the entire target population.
In order to fulfil the requirements of this research project, the selected sample
population met certain criteria, such as that (1) all selected employees were
included in the study and (2) the population was selected by means of profession,
regional office, and business unit.
Based on the study, hypothetical variables (commitment statements) will be
assessed, and only variation will be accounted for based on a comparison
between the data for the year 2005 and that for the year 2006. A null hypothesis
will be accepted as true. The null hypothesis H0 states that the responses for the
two years are the same (Data (2005) = Data (2006)). The p value will be
compared to the significance level (α), and on this basis, the null hypothesis will
either be rejected or not rejected.
1.3 CHAPTER OUTLINE
Chapter 2 contains a literature review, focusing on the concept and consequences
of employee (organisational) commitment. Chapter 3 deals with models and
7
discusses how human resources strategies and management practices combine
to promote and influence employee commitment. In Chapter 4, an overview is
given of the measuring of commitment and the method of investigation. In
Chapter 5, the results and outcome of the research conducted are reported and
the research findings discussed. The recommendations, shortcomings of the
research, and conclusions are presented in Chapter 6.
1.4 CONCLUSION
Through understanding the concept of employee (organisational) commitment,
including the antecedents of commitment, executives should be able to direct
human resources strategies and management practices towards achieving
organisational commitment levels that will ultimately contribute to a more effective
workforce.
8
CHAPTER 2: EMPLOYEE ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:224) found that “research evidence
indicates that the absence of commitment can reduce organisational effectiveness.
People who are committed are less likely to quit and accept other jobs”. Chapter 1
outlined the problem statement, the aim, and the research methodology. This
chapter will define employee organisational commitment and research
antecedents associated with employee organisational commitment. The benefits
of a committed workforce are recognised throughout this chapter as important
determinants of organisational effectiveness. The latter half of this chapter will
look at consequences of employee commitment.
2.2 DEFINING EMPLOYEE ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:227), Greenberg and Baron (2003:160), Wood,
Chapman, Fromholtz, Morrison, Wallace, Zeffane, Schermerhorn, Hund and
Osborn (2004:115), Robbins (2005:79), Nelson and Quick (2005:87) and Gibson,
Ivancevich, Donnelly and Konopaske (2006:184) refer to organisational
commitment as the extent to which an individual identifies with an organisation, is
committed to its goals, their level of involvement within the organisation and
wishes to maintain membership in the organisation.
Luthans (2005:217) found that organisational commitment is “(1) a strong desire to
remain a member of a particular organisation; (2) a willingness to exert high levels
9
of effort on behalf of the organisation; and (3) a definite belief in, and acceptance
of, the values and goals of the organisation”. Luthans (2005:217) further states
that “commitment is an attitude reflecting employees’ loyalty to their organisation
and is an ongoing process through which organisational participants express their
concern for the organisation and its continued success and well-being”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:224) collaborate by stating that
“commitment to an organisation involves three attitudes: (1) a sense of
identification with the organisation’s goals, (2) a feeling of involvement in
organisational duties, and (3) a feeling of loyalty to the organisation”.
Swanepoel, Erasmus, Van Wyk, and Schenk (2003:30) is of the opinion that
“employee commitment to an organisation’s success largely depends on the
employee’s perception of the extent to which their own needs and personal
objectives will be met through their continual commitment to the success of the
organisation”. Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:764) refer to commitment as a
“state of being in which individuals become bound to their actions and, through
these, to their beliefs. Commitment sustains action in the face of difficulties”.
Commitment can be influenced by a variety of psychological and work-related
variables. In an attempt to learn how, one requires some understanding of the
antecedents of commitment.
2.3 ANTECEDENTS OF COMMITMENT
Ashkanasy, Wilderom, and Peterson (2000:344) refer to antecedents of
commitment as intervening variables that channel the occurrence and strength of
10
different commitments and Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:94) point out that “an
antecedent precedes and is a stimulus to behaviour”. This view is supported by
Hornby (2005:53) in the Oxford Dictionary where an antecedent is defined as “a
thing or an event that exists or comes before another, and may have influenced it”.
Antecedents of commitment explore work-related attitudes and individual
behavioural influences in the hope of understanding, explaining, and predicting
human behaviour as intervening variables that channel the occurrence and
strength of different commitments. According to Greenberg and Baron (2003:160),
commitment can be seen as “people’s attitudes towards the organisations in which
they work and these attitudes influence their behaviour.”
Mullins (2005:335) explains that individuals have different abilities, personalities,
learning experiences and attitudes and therefore they perceive work in different
ways. Managements should attempt to match the needs of the individual with the
needs of the organisation in order to meet goals and achieve employee
satisfaction. It is, therefore, evident that antecedents of commitment can be
referred to as work-related or individual-related.
2.3.1 Work-related attitudes
Pfeiffer (1999:109) argues that “all types of work experiences influence employee
attitudes. Everything that happens to an employee at work affects his or her
attitude in some way. Any negative incident will have a small impact, but if there is
widespread negativity, it can cause an organisational-wide ‘bad’ attitude”.
11
Greenberg and Baron (2003:146) and Robbins (2005:78) refer to work related
attitudes as the attitudes we have toward our jobs, organisation or work
environment. Work related attitudes tap positive or negative evaluations that
employees hold about aspects of their work. Greenberg and Baron (2003:146)
explain that work related attitudes includes “lasting feelings, beliefs, and
behavioural tendencies toward various aspects of the job itself, the setting in which
the work is conducted, and/or the people involved. Work related attitudes have a
profound effect on the way we perform but also on the quality of life we experience
while at work”.
Van der Merwe (2006:32) explains that your mindset has an influence on people
around you; it can even change the atmosphere in your workplace if one person is
committed to acting. It is all about the kind of attitude you have. Hellriegel and
Slocum (2004:51) believe that “attitude-behaviour relationships can be
demonstrated by examining key work attitudes such as job satisfaction and
organisational commitment”.
According to Nelson and Quick (2005:87), job satisfaction and organisational
commitment are two important work attitudes that are strongly related. Increasing
job satisfaction is likely to increase commitment as well. Nelson and Quick
(2005:88) further explain that work attitudes are important, as they influence
organisational success. Robbins (2005:78) indicates that research regarding
work-related attitudes in organisational behaviour “has been concerned with three
attitudes: Job satisfaction, job involvement and organisational commitment”.
Each of the mentioned work-related attitudes will now be discussed.
12
2.3.1.1 Commitment as a work-related attitude
Robbins (2005:79), Luthans (2005:217), and Ivancevich, Konopaske, and
Matteson (2005:224) indicate that organisational commitment is a work-related
attitude. Commitment was already defined in Section 2.2 as “an attitude that
defines a sense of identification with a particular organisation and the degree of
involvement, reflecting an employee’s loyalty to his/her organisation”.
2.3.1.2 Job satisfaction as a work-related attitude
Greenberg and Baron (2003:146-155), Wood et al. (2004:115) and Robbins
(2005:29) define job satisfaction as people’s positive or negative feeling that an
individual holds towards his or her job. Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:51-54), in the
same manner, agrees that job satisfaction refers to feelings and reflecting attitudes
towards a job. The relationship between job satisfaction and various job
behaviours and other outcomes in the workplace is recognised. Hellriegel and
Slocum (2004:51-54) agrees that job satisfaction represents an outcome of the
work experience and leads to effective performance and in turn organisational
effectiveness.
Greenberg and Baron (2003:146-155) explains that job satisfaction is the “various
attitudes people hold toward their jobs. Job satisfaction exists to the extent that
the job outcomes (such as rewards) an individual receives matches those
outcomes that are desired.”
Swanepoel et al. (2003:22-23) argue with this sentiment that job satisfaction stems
in part from actual workplace conditions and in part from an individual’s attitude
13
towards work in general. There is agreement that job satisfaction can have a
profound influence on organisational success. Mullins (2005:700) is of the opinion
that job satisfaction is usually linked to motivation and is more of an attitude then
an internal state.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:25) conclude that “job satisfaction
refers to the extent to which the organisation meets the needs of employees.
Measures of satisfaction can include employee attitudes, turnover, absenteeism,
tardiness, and grievances”.
Gibson et al. (2006:108) are of the opinion that “job satisfaction is an attitude that
individuals have about their jobs. It results from their perception of their job, based
on factors of the work environment, such as the supervisor’s style, policies and
procedures, work group affiliation, working conditions and fringe benefits”.
2.3.1.3 Job involvement as a work-related attitude
Ashkanasy, Wilderom, and Peterson (2000:331) point out that “the term
involvement has been used in the literature on organisations to refer to individuals’
attachments to both organisations and their jobs. Job involvement can be defined
as the degree to which a person’s work performance affects his self-esteem.
Employees who are highly involved in their jobs are also highly involved in their
organisations. This conceptualisation of involvement suggests that individuals
form bonds with organisations to the degree that their self-conceptions are
engaged in their jobs or organisations”.
14
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:227) and Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54) refers to job
involvement as the strength of an employees involvement and the extent to which
an individual is personally involved with his or her work and organisation. Wood et
al. (2004:115) confirms that job involvement is the degree to which a person is
“willing to work hard and apply effort beyond normal job expectations”.
Robbins (2005:79) refers to job involvement as the degree to which a person
“identifies psychologically with his or her job and considers his or her perceived
performance level important to self-worth. Employees with a high level of job
involvement strongly identify with and really care about the kind of work they do …
high job involvement has been found to be related to fewer absences and lower
resignation rates”. Wegge, Schmidt, Parkes, and Van Dick (2007:78-79) confirms
that employees who are low in job involvement and organisational commitment are
more absent from work then those with higher levels of job involved. They will
take every chance to withdraw from work whenever it is not penalised by
organisational policies.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:177) refer to job involvement as an
important individual difference. “People differ in the extent that (1) work is a
central life interest, (2) they actively participate in work, (3) they perceive work as
central to self-esteem, and (4) they perceive work as consistent with self-concept.
Individuals who are not involved in their work cannot be expected to realise the
same satisfaction as those who are”.
15
2.3.2 Individual behavioural influences
Perspectives on individual behavioural influences
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:48) are of the opinion that “behaviour always involves
an interaction of the person and the situation. Understanding individual
differences are important as it may explain more about their behaviour”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:77-78) found that “individual
differences have a direct effect on behaviour. Every person is unique because of
their background, individual characteristics, needs, and how they perceive the
world and other individuals. People who perceive things differently behave
differently. People with different attitudes respond differently to directives. People
with different personalities interact differently with bosses, co-workers,
subordinates, and customers. In a multitude of different ways individual
differences shape organisational behaviour, and consequently, individual and
organisational success”.
Demographic factors, abilities and skills, perception, attitudes, and personality are
major individual variables that influence work behaviour. These individual
variables combine with various organisational variables (resources, leadership,
reward, job design, and structure) to shape productive, non-productive, and
counterproductive work behaviours. Attributions we make about why an event
occurs influence our behaviour. Thus our behaviour is shaped by our perceptions
of why certain things happen (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, 2005:96).
Bowditch and Buono (2005:53) point out that state that managers can shape the
outcomes they desire by focussing on relevant behaviours and interactions.
16
Gibson et al. (2006:93) explain that the “analysis of individual behaviour …
requires consideration of variables that directly influence individual behaviour or
what an employee does … individual variables can include abilities and skills,
background, and demographic variables … an employee’s behaviour is complex
because it’s affected by a number of environmental variables and many different
individual factors, experiences, and events. Such individual variables as
abilities/skills, personality, perception, and experiences affect behaviour”.
It is evident from the above that people respond differently to situations due to
individual differences. It is important to understand individual behavioural
influences in order to shape behaviour. This section looks at seven individual
variables that influence behaviour.
2.3.2.1 Attitude as an individual behavioural influence
Defining attitude
Swanepoel et al. (2003:23) and Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:48) define attitude as
the degree of positive or negative feelings, beliefs and behavioural tendencies a
person has towards a particular object, such as a place, thing, situation or specific
people. Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:83) and Gibson et al.
(2006:104) agree that an attitude exert a specific influence on a person’s response
to people, objects, and situations with which it is related. They refer to an attitude
as a mental state of readiness learned and organised through experiences.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:48) explain that attitudes are individual differences
that reflect an individual’s background and personal experiences; it has a direct
17
affect on behaviour. Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:83) concur that
attitudes are determinants of behaviour because they are linked with perception,
personality, feelings and motivation.
Robbins (2005:78) is also of the opinion that “attitudes are evaluative statements –
either favourable or unfavourable – concerning objects, people, or events”.
Luthans (2005:205-206) is in agreement that an attitude can be defined as “a
persistent tendency to feel and behave in a particular way. The term attitude
frequently is used for describing people and explaining their behaviour”.
Attitude as an individual behavioural influence
Swanepoel et al. (2003:23) aver that “employees have positive job attitudes when
they have pleasant internal feelings about their jobs or certain aspects of their
jobs. Knowing to which aspects of a job employees respond either favourably or
unfavourably can provide a basis for job design decisions”. Managers can
reinforce positive features and improve or remove negative factors to influence the
desired behaviour.
As indicated in Figure 2.1, Greenberg and Baron (2003:146) explain that
“regardless of exactly how you might feel, the attitudes you express may be
recognised as consisting of three major components: an evaluative component, a
cognitive component, and a behavioural component. Attitudes have a great deal
to do with how we feel about something. The evaluative component of attitude
refers to our liking or disliking of any particular person, item, or event (what might
be called the attitude object or the focus of our attitude). Attitude also involves
18
knowledge – that is, what you believe to be the case about an attitude object.
These beliefs, whether they’re completely accurate or totally false, comprise the
cognitive component of attitudes. As you might imagine, the things you believe
about something and the way you feel about it may have some effect on the way
you are predisposed to behave.”
FIGURE 2.1: Three basic components of attitudes (Greenberg & Baron,
2003:146)
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:83) suggest that attitude has certain
implications for the manager. “First, attitudes are learned. Second, attitudes
define one’s predispositions toward given aspects of the world. Third, attitudes
provide the emotional basis of one’s interpersonal relations and identification with
others. And fourth, attitudes are organised and are close to the core or personality
… attitudes are subject to change … Attitudes are intrinsic parts of a person’s
personality. The behavioural component of an attitude refers to the tendency of a
person to act in a certain way toward someone or something.” Robbins (2005:78)
19
agrees that the behavioural component of an attitude refers to an intention to
behave in a certain way toward someone or something. Attitudes affect job
behaviour and determine what people do.
The more specific the attitude or the dependable variable we are measuring and
the more specific we are in identifying a related behaviour, the greater the
probability that the relationship can be identified (Robbins, 2001:68-78). Luthans
(2005:205-209) and Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:83) agree that
employee attitudes can be influence and changed.
The term attitude is frequently used to describe people and to explain their
behaviour. The behavioural component consists of a person’s tendency to behave
in a particular way (Luthans, 2005:205-209). Ivancevich, Konopaske, and
Matteson (2005:83) explain that “managers are often faced with the task of
changing their employees’ attitudes in order to get them to work harder and
achieve higher job performance. Attitudes can be changed. One such theory
proposes that people ‘seek congruence between their beliefs and feelings toward
objects’ and suggests that the modification of attitudes depends on changing
either the feelings or the beliefs. The theory proposes that cognition, affect, and
behaviour determine attitudes, and that attitude, in turn, determines cognition,
affect, and behaviour”.
Bowditch and Buono (2005:53) point out that “while an attitude may lead to intent
to behave in a certain way, the intention may or may not be carried out depending
20
on the situation or circumstances. At the same time, while attitudes do influence
behaviour, it is important to emphasize that behaviour also influences attitudes”.
Gibson et al. (2006:104) refers to attitudes as “important determinants of
behaviour because they’re linked with perception, personality, and motivation”. It
is evident that attitude influences behaviour. Ivancevich, Konopaske, and
Matteson (2005:83) comment that “attitudes are close to the core of personality …
attitudes are intrinsic parts of a person’s personality”. Personality is an individual
difference that influences individual behaviour.
2.3.2.2 Personality as an individual behavioural influence
Personality defined
Greenberg and Baron (2003:81) define personality as “the unique and relatively
stable pattern of behaviour, thoughts, and emotions shown by individuals”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:38) state that “personality represents personal
characteristics that lead to consistent patterns of behaviour”.
Wood et al. (2004:103) define personality as the “overall profile or combination of
traits that characterise the unique nature of a person”. Nelson and Quick
(2005:52) are of the opinion that personality is a “relatively stable set of
characteristics that influence an individual’s behaviour”. Luthans (2005:197) also
comments that “personality has been defined as observable patterns of behaviour
that last over time”.
Robbins (2005:100) defines personality as “a dynamic concept describing the
growth and development of a person’s whole psychological system ... and (citing
21
Gordon Allport) the dynamic organisation within the individual of those
psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his
environment”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:88) refer to an individual’s personality
as “a relatively stable set of feelings and behaviours that have been significantly
formed by genetic and environmental factors. It is a product of a number of forces
that together have helped shape the unique individual”. Gibson et al. (2006:113)
echo most of the above and define personality as “a relatively stable set of
characteristics, tendencies, and temperaments that have been significantly formed
by inheritance and by social, cultural and environmental factors. This set of
variables determines the commonalities and differences in the behaviour of the
individual”.
Based on the theoretical research, it can be agreed that personality represents
personal characteristics that lead to consistent patterns of behaviour.
Personality and its effect on behaviour
People are unique and possess a distinct pattern of traits and characteristics not
fully duplicated in any other person. This pattern of traits and characteristics tends
to be stable over time. Thus, if someone who is optimistic, confident, and friendly
today, the chances are good that he or she also showed these same traits and
characteristics in the past and will continue to show them in the future (Greenberg
& Baron, 2003:81).
22
An understanding of the concept of personality would help generate knowledge
that could improve a manager’s ability to make more accurate predictions of
human behaviour in organisations (Saiyadain, 2003:23). Saiyadain (2003:35)
explains that “the personality of the employees plays a key role in their work-
related behaviour”.
According to Wood et al. (2004:103), “understanding personality contributes to an
understanding of organisational behaviour by helping us to see what shapes
individuals, what they can do (competency) and what they will do (motivation). We
expect there to be a predictable interplay between an individual’s personality and
the tendency to behave in certain ways”. Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson
(2005:-90) and Gibson et al., (2006:113) explain that the major forces that shape
personality indicate that managers have little control over these determinants.
However, employee behaviour cannot be understood without considering the
concept of personality. “Personality is so interrelated with perception, attitudes,
learning and motivation that any analysis of behaviour is grossly incomplete unless
personality is considered”.
Gibson et al. (2006:113), refer to personality as the manner in which a person acts
and interacts. Figure 2.2 shows the determinants shaping personality and
indicates that managers have little control over them. Even though personality is
formed outside the organisation, it is still an important factor in workplace
behaviour. “An employee’s behaviour can’t be understood without considering the
concept of personality”.
23
FIGURE 2.2: Some major forces influencing personality (Gibson et al., 2006:113)
Personality factors will have a direct influence on job performance and
commitment (Westerman & Simmons, 2007:292). Personality affects individual
behaviour. Wood et al. (2004:103) explains that “values and norms play a
substantial role in the development of an individual’s personality and behaviour”.
Values are an individual variable that influences individual behaviour.
2.3.2.3 Values as an individual behavioural influence
Defining values
David (2001:128) defines values as “life-directing attitudes that serve as
behavioural guidelines”. Wood et al. (2004:111) define values as “broad
preferences concerning appropriate courses of action or outcomes. As such, they
reflect a person’s sense of right and wrong, or what ‘ought’ to be”. Buchanan and
24
Huczynski (2004:648) support this view and define values as “broad tendencies to
prefer certain states of affairs over others”.
Robbins (2005:70) contends that “values represent basic convictions that a
specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially
preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:39) and Gibson et al. (2006:32)
define values as “the conscious, affective desires or wants of people that guide
their behaviour”. Mullins (2005: 362) states that “values are concerned with what
‘should’ be and what is desirable”.
According to Gibson et al. (2006:107), values are defined as “the constellation of
likes, dislikes, viewpoints, shields, inner inclinations, rational and irrational
judgements, prejudices, and association patterns that determine a person’s view
of the world”.
Values and their effect on behaviour
According to Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:31), organisations are able
to operate efficiently only when shared values exist among the employees. An
individual’s personal values guide their behaviour on and off the job. Crosby
(2000:4-5) found that employee commitment is characterised by a strong belief
and acceptance of the organisational goals and values and Buchanan and
Huczynski (2004:648) explain that values provide a common direction for all
employees and act as guideline for their behaviour.
25
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:648) point out that “values are often unspoken but
can mould members’ behaviours. Many commentators agree that these values
are the elements that distinguish one organisation from another, since they affect
the basic assumptions of organisational culture”.
Robbins (2005: 70-71) explains that values “contain a judgemental element in that
they carry an individual’s idea as to what is right, good, or desirable … Values are
important as they lay the foundation for the understanding of attitudes and
motivation and because they influence our perceptions … Values generally
influence attitudes and behaviour”. Adonisi (2005:6) agree that values are
espoused as the reason for people’s behaviour, and the underlying assumptions.
Values are normally unconscious but exert a profound influence on how people
perceive, think, feel and therefore behave.
Potgieter (2006:36-37) suggests that employees’ personal values are aligned to
those of the organisation and Conradie (2007:37) agree that employees want their
personal values to be aligned to those of the organisation. Ivancevich,
Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:30-31) point out that for a person to be effective
in an organisation, their values must be compatible.
Affective commitment increases when the organisation and employees share the
same values and when the organisation emphasises values such as moral
integrity, fairness, creativity, and openness (Nelson & Quick, 2005:87). Mullins
(2005:150) refers to values as the “guidelines a person uses to make choices, and
within organisations, basic beliefs affect what decisions are made, how people
26
interact, and the kind of work practices that are pursued and developed. They
form the glue that binds an organisation’s culture … Organisations can increase
their integrity, coherence, and integration and improve their performance by
reaching consensus on shared values”.
DuBrin (2005:60) concludes that “a key factor influencing behaviour in
organisations is the values and beliefs of people. A value refers to the importance
a person attaches to something that serves as a guide to action”.
People are not born with a particular set of values; values are learned in the
process of growing up and can be influenced throughout life. The values of
employees mesh with those required of the job and organisation. When this state
of congruence exists, job performance is likely to be higher and employees will be
more confident to remain within the organisation (DuBrin, 2005:61-62).
Attitudes and behaviour can be different if values are not aligned to organisational
policies such a pay. Values influence goals that a person would like to achieve
during his or her life (Robbins, 2005:71). It is safe to assume that values have a
direct effect on expectancy. Expectancy is an individual variable that influences
individual behaviour.
2.3.2.4 Expectancy as an individual behavioural influence
Expectancy defined
Nelson and Quick (2005:120) define expectancy as “the belief that effort leads to
performance”. According to Wood et al. (2004:157), “expectancy is the probability
27
that the individual assigns to work effort being followed by a given level of
achieved task performance”. “People are motivated to work when they expect to
achieve things they want from their jobs” (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2004:130).
Robbins (2005:189) explains that Vroom’s “expectancy theory argues that the
strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an
expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the
attractiveness of that outcome to the individual”.
Gibson et al. (2006:148) define expectancy as “the individual belief concerning the
likelihood or subjective probability that a particular behaviour will be followed by a
particular outcome such as level of performance. That is, expectancy is the
perceived chance of something occurring because of behaviour”.
Taking all research definitions into account, it is apparent that “expectancy is the
probability of something occurring because of behaviour”.
Expectancy and its effect on behaviour
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:163) explain that “expectancy theory
assumes employees allocate their behaviour according to anticipated
consequences of actions. Workers weigh the information available to them and
make decisions according to the value of the consequences and their own
probabilities of achieving what they prefer”. Expectancy theory thus views
behaviour as the product of what employees believe will happen in the future.
28
Swanepoel et al. (2003:30) are of the opinion “that employees enter the
organisations with certain tacit expectations regarding the employment
relationship. They generally expect to receive something in addition to the formal
contractually-agreed upon salary, benefits and other conditions of employment;
these expectations relate to aspects such as the way they will be treated, the
nature of their work, the quality of their working life, and so on. Employees’ return
to the organisation, in terms of work behaviour, performance, commitment,
cooperation, loyalty, productivity etc, may largely be the result of how they
experience or perceive the fulfilment of those expectations”. Swanepoel et al.
(2003:335) also explain that expectancy theories are based on motivational
theories. “Expectancy theory of motivation holds that the tendency to act in a
certain way depends on the strength of the expectation that the act will be followed
by a given outcome and on the degree to which the person desires that outcome”.
The expectancy theory is illustrated in Figure 2.3 below.
FIGURE 2.3: Expectancy theory (Swanepoel et al., 2003:335)
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:254-255) found that expectancy theory “assumes
that we behave in ways that are instrumental to the achievement of valued goals
… Expectancy theory states that behaviour results from a conscious decision
making process based on expectations, measured subjective probabilities, that the
29
individual has about the results of different behaviours leading to performance and
to rewards. Expectancy theory helps to explain individual differences in motivation
and behaviour”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:130) argue that expectancy affects behaviour within
an organisation. People have expectations about their jobs that are based on their
needs, motivation and past experiences. These expectations influence how
people respond to an organisation and how they behave, including staying with the
same organisation or joining another, how hard they work and the quality of their
work. “To manage expectations, managers should try to determine the outcomes
that each employee values and link the specific performance they desire to the
outcomes desired by employees”.
Mullins (2005:489) concludes that the “underlying basis of expectancy theory is
that people are influenced by the expected results of their actions ... the choices of
behaviour are based on the expectancy of the most favourable consequences”.
Expectancy theories draw attention to the complexities of work motivation. They
provide further information in helping to explain the nature of behaviour and
motivation in the work situation and help to identify problems in performance.
Expectancy theory indicates that managers should pay attention to factors such as
the relationship between reward and performance and the application of
procedures, which include organisational procedures (Mullins, 2005:489-191).
30
According to Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:163), managers can use
expectancy theory in developing their own motivation programmes. There is a
strong relationship between expectancy and motivation. Motivation is an individual
variable that influences individual behaviour.
2.3.2.5 Motivation as an individual behavioural influence
Defining motivation
Saiyadain (2003:41) (citing Luthans, 1998) defines motivation as “a process that
starts with physiological or psychological deficiency or need that activates
behaviour or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive”. Hellriegel and Slocum
(2004:117) and Gibson et al. (2006:132) define motivation as the forces acting on
or within an individual to initiate and direct behaviour. Gibson et al. (2006:132)
explain that we use the concept of motivation to explain differences in the intensity
of behaviour and to indicate the direction of behaviour.
Robbins (2005:170) agrees when he defines motivation as “the processes that
account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward
attaining a goal”. Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:244) concludes in defining
motivation as “the cognitive, decision making process through which goal directed
behaviour is initiated, energised, and directed and maintained”.
Motivation and its effect on behaviour
According to Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:206), motivation involves “a host of
psychological processes that culminate in an individual’s desire and intentions to
behave in a particular way … The outcomes of motivation are generally assessed
31
in terms of the behaviours actually exhibited … behaviour is affected by motivation
…”. Luthans (2005:230) agrees that motivation is a process that starts with a
physiological and psychological efficiency or need that activates behaviour or a
drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive.
Organisational variables, such as productivity, absenteeism, labour turnover and
job satisfaction are commonly believed to be dependent on levels of motivation
(Swanepoel et al., 2003:339).
The purpose of motivational content theories is to explain what motivation is and
why people act in the way that they do. Why others refrain from doing certain
things and how to in a predictable and systematic way influence people to act in
the way we want them to. “In terms of the basic motivational processes, needs
give rise to tension, which in turn prompt behaviour directed at a specific goal
which is perceived as being desirable in that it will lead to need-fulfilment”
(Swanepoel et al., 2003:339). Figure 2.4 represents a basic motivational process.
FIGURE 2.4: Basic motivational process (Swanepoel et al., 2003:324)
Swanepoel et al. (2003:177) suggest that “the various theories on motivation
contain important information that makes up the building blocks on our frames of
32
reference regarding the management of employees as individuals and
understanding the behavioural consequences”.
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:260) support this argument by stating that
“managers are interested in theories of motivation as sources of alternative
methods for encouraging motivation and high performance”. Gibson et al.
(2006:132-134) describes motivation as an “explanatory concept” that we use to
make sense out of the behaviours we observe. Theories of motivation attempt to
explain and predict how individuals’ behaviour is aroused, sustained, and stopped.
Each of the four content theories on motivation explains the relationship between
motivation and behaviour from a slightly different perspective. None of the
theories can or should be used by managers as the sole basis for explaining or
inferring motivation (Gibson et al. 2006:144). Figure 2.5 indicates the four main
content theories of motivation.
FIGURE 2.5: A graphic comparison of four content theories of motivation
(Gibson et al., 2006: 145)
33
Mullins (2005:475-477) argues that when a person’s motivational driving force is
blocked and he/she is unable to satisfy his/her needs and expectations, there are
two possible sets of outcomes: constructive behaviour or frustration.
Constructive behaviour is a positive reaction to the blockage of a desired goal
and can take two main forms: problem-solving or restructuring. Problem-solving
is the removal of the barrier, and restructuring is the substitution of an alternative
goal. Frustration is a negative response to the blockage of a desired goal and
results in a defensive form of behaviour. Possible reactions to frustrations may be
aggression, regression, fixation, or withdrawal.
Luthans (2005:230) concludes that the “key to understanding the process of
motivation lies in the meaning of, and relationship among, needs, drivers, and
incentives. In order to understand employees’ behaviour, these motives must be
recognised and studied”.
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:207) argue that “needs theories are based on the
premise that individuals are motivated by unsatisfied needs”. Needs are the first
step in the motivation process and have a direct effect on individual behaviour.
2.3.2.6 Needs as an individual behavioural influence
Defining needs
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:209) define needs as “physiological or psychological
deficiencies that arouse behaviour”. Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:117),
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:139) and Luthans (2005:230)
express the view that “needs are deficiencies that a person experiences at a
34
particular time”. Gibson et al. (2006:133) agree that a need is a “deficiency or lack
of something of value that an individual experiences at a particular point in time”.
Needs and their effect on behaviour
Crosby (2000:20) explains that “employees bring their needs, aspirations, and
hopes to their jobs, and become committed to employers that understand those
needs, aspirations and hopes and take concrete steps to help them materialise”.
Merisalo (2001:2) found that the ability of an employer to meet employee needs at
the various levels of the pyramid determines the employer’s ability to nurture
commitment and, by doing so, create a more secure future for the organisation.
Conway (2004:417) suggests that organisations seeking to promote commitment
might need to tailor human resources practices to suite employees’ needs.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:22) explain that “like values and attitudes, the needs of
employees form a major potential source of work performance differences.
Employers therefore have much to gain from attending to the needs of their
employees. Environment and culture develop certain needs in individuals. The
existence of a need can be deduced from an individual’s behaviour. For instance,
an individual may have an unsatisfied need. As a result, he/she develops a drive
to satisfy that need. This leads to the release of energy in the form of behavioural
patterns directed at a specific goal. When the goal is reached, the behaviour
directed at satisfying the need will cease. Other unsatisfied needs will now
become more important”.
35
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:117) found that needs are important as “the
motivational process begins with identifying a person’s needs”. As indicated in
Figure 2.6, needs often act as energisers or triggers for behavioural responses.
“The implication is that when need deficiencies are present, the individual is more
susceptible to a manager’s motivational efforts” (Ivancevich, Konopaske &
Matteson, 2005:139).
Luthans (2005:230) argues that needs are created whenever there is a
physiological or psychological imbalance. He is of the opinion that although
psychological needs may be based on a deficiency, sometimes they are not. “For
example, an individual with a strong need to get ahead may have a history of
consistent success. An incentive is used to alleviate a need and reduce the drive”.
Gibson et al. (2006:133; 184) found that when needs (deficiencies) are present;
the individual will seek to fulfil those needs and may be more susceptible to
managers’ motivational efforts. Organisations able to meet employees’ needs
may have a significant impact on commitment.
36
FIGURE 2.6: The motivation process: a general model (Ivancevich et al.,
2005:139)
Mullins (2005:483) explain that revisiting and developing Maslow’s hierarchy, the
dynamic between an individual and the organisation has to be explored, and a
new employee/employer social contract that enables organisations to improve
employee commitment and retention has to be proposed. Mullins (2005:483) lists
the five levels of workforce needs hierarchy as shown in a ‘Performance Pyramid’:
Safety/security – the need to feel physically and psychologically safe in the
work environment for commitment to be possible;
Rewards – the need for extrinsic rewards in compensation and benefits;
Affiliation – the intrinsic need for a sense of belonging to the work team or
organisation;
Growth – addressing the need for positive individual and organisational
change to drive commitment; and
Work/life harmony – the drive to achieve a sense of fulfilment in balancing
work and life responsibilities.
37
Mullins (2005:438) explains that individual needs “will affect the stimuli perceived
in the first instance, and then the way in which those stimuli are understood and
processed, and finally the response which is given”. Mullins (2005:37) further
explains that “the extent of the matches between individual and organisational
expectations also influences the willingness of employees to stay with the
organisation and of the organisation to continue to employ them. Successful
companies are those that have the ability to balance the unwritten needs of their
employees with the needs of the company”.
Mullins (2005:438) found that the needs of an individual will affect his/her
perceptions, and Gibson et al. (2006:102) indicate that perceptions are
significantly influenced by needs. Perception is an individual variable that
influences individual behaviour.
2.3.2.7 Perception as an individual behavioural influence
Defining perception
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:66) assert that “perception is the process by which
people select, organise, interpret, and respond to information from the world
around them. This information is gathered from the five senses: sight, hearing,
touch, taste, and smell”. Robbins (2005:134) agrees and defines perception as
“the process by which individuals organise and interpret their sensory impressions
in order to give meaning to their environment. However, what one perceives can
be substantially different from objective reality”.
38
How people interpret things in the outside world depends on their perceptions. It
is important to understand that people will act on the basis of these perceptions
DuBrin (2005:47). Mullins (2005:437) agrees that perception gives rise to
individual behavioural responses. The process of perception explains the manner
in which Individuals select and organise information (stimuli) from the environment
around us to provide meaning. Gibson et al. (2006:99) conclude by defining
perception as “the process by which an individual gives meaning to the
environment. It involves organising and interpreting various stimuli into a
psychological experience”.
Perception and its effect on behaviour
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:66) explain that “different people perceive a situation
differently, both in terms of what they selectively perceived and how they organise
and interpret the things perceived. People’s interpretations of their environments
affect their responses”. Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:49-50) then found that
“individuals based their decisions on their perception of the external environment.
Human perception is selective; with some factors given prominence and often
filtered out … the same environment may thus be perceived differently by different
people”.
Based on individual perceptions, each person makes personal/individual choices
and responds differently. People see their work and organisations in their own
unique way and respond behaviourally according to their interpretation.
Understanding perceptual interpretation will help managers to explain behaviour
39
(Ivancevich, Konopaske & Matteson, 2005:110). Figure 2.7 illustrates the basic
framework and elements of perception operating a cognitive process.
FIGURE 2.7: The perceptual process − in individual interpretation (Ivancevich et
al., 2005: 111)
According to Luthans (2005:168), perception is a unique interpretation of a
situation and not an exact recording. Perception is largely learned and because
no one has the same learning and experience, perception will differ. The same
situations/stimuli may produce very different reactions and behaviours. But
Robbins (2005:134) contends that a number of factors operate to shape and
sometimes distort perception as indicated in Figure 2.8. “These factors can reside
in the perceiver, in the object or target being perceived, or in the context of the
situation in which the perception is made”
40
FIGURE 2.8: Factors that influence perception (Robbins, 2001:124)
Gibson et al. (2006:99-100) express the view that “individuals use five senses to
experience the environment … Organising the information from the environment
so that is makes sense, is called perception … Perception helps individuals select,
organise, store, and interpret stimuli into a meaningful and coherent picture of the
world. Because each person gives her own meaning to stimuli, different
individuals ‘see’ the same thing in different ways. The way an employee sees a
situation often has much greater meaning for understanding behaviour than does
the situation itself”. According to Brammer, Millington, and Rayton (2007:52),
employee perception of an organisation influences the degree to which the
employee is committed to that organisation.
Wandrag (2007:34) explains that “thoughts, words and actions are all driven by the
perceptions we have of others and ourselves”.
41
Research done by Robertson, Wing-Hung Lo, and Tang (2003:2) indicates that
“commitment has been found to be related to a variety of attitudinal and
behavioural consequences among employees”. The next section will explore
consequences of commitment in the workplace.
2.4 CONSEQUENCES OF COMMITMENT IN THE WORKPLACE
Gibson et al. (2006:184) explain that committed employees are less likely to quit
their jobs, it was mentioned earlier that Greenberg and Baron (2003:156) indicate
that the more highly committed employees are to the organisation, the less likely
they are to be absent, and Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54-55) agree that strong
commitment is often correlated with high productivity. Each of the mentioned
commitment consequences will now be discussed.
2.4.1 Work turnover as a consequence of commitment
Work turnover defined
Wood et al. (2004:116) define turnover as “the decision by people to terminate
their employment”, and Robbins (2005:28) defines turnover as “the voluntary and
involuntary permanent withdrawal from an organisation”.
Perspectives on turnover
Merisalo (2001:2) found that turnover is less among committed employees and
(Robbins, 2001:236) is of the opinion that turnover in a group will be greatest
amongst those with dissimilar experiences because communication is more
difficult. According to Robbins (2001:236) it is projected that “in a department or
42
separate work groups in which a large portion of members entered at the same
time, there is considerably more turnover among those outside the cohort”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54) explain that “managers are interested in the
relationship between organisational commitment and job behaviour because the
lack of commitment often leads to turnover. The stronger the commitment to the
organisation the less likely the person is to quit”.
According to Robbins (2005:28), “a high rate of turnover results in increased
recruiting, selection and training cost … a high rate of turnover can also disrupt the
efficient running of an organisation when knowledgeable and experienced
employees leave and replacements must be found and prepared to assume
positions of responsibility … when turnover is excessive, or when it involves
valuable performers, it can be a disruptive factor, hindering the organisation’s
effectiveness”.
Turnover can be very expensive. It is estimated that turnover costs range from a
conservative 30% of annual salary plus benefits to as much as 150% of a worker’s
yearly pay (Mohonathan, 2007:22). Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson
(2005:223) agree that a high turnover rate means more expense for an
organisation. The issue of turnover needs to focus on the frequency and on who
is leaving as some organisations would benefit if disruptive and low performers
quit.
43
Gibson et al. (2006:184) assert that “committed people are less likely to quit and
accept other jobs. Thus, costs of high turnover aren’t incurred”.
An individual’s level of organisational commitment can be an indicator of turnover
(Robbins, 2005:79). Luthans (2005:215) found that commitment to the
organisation plays a key role in turnover. Even satisfied employees are willing to
leave if the opportunities elsewhere promise to be better. However, a recent
article, published by The Hay Group (2006:22), points out that, in companies with
high turnover, you can assume higher than normal levels of dissatisfied employees
whose attitudes and behaviours affect the bottom line.
Pienaar (2007:21) explain that the factors that separate you from your competitors
today are the skills, knowledge, commitment, and abilities of the people who work
for you. High turnover is expensive as it cost money to replace people. Also
taking into account when you lose people, you lose knowledge, experience, and
customer relationships. Friedman (2005:15) explains that employers should also
be aware of ‘spiritual turnover’. People being physically present but disengaged.
Research shows that there is a direct relationship between engagement at work,
performance, and productivity.
2.4.2 Absenteeism as a consequence of commitment
Absenteeism defined
Wood et al. (2004:116) describe absenteeism as “the failure of people to attend
work on a given day”. Robbins (2005:20) defines absenteeism as “the failure to
report to work”. Mahomedy (2006:30), citing Macmillan Dictionary, defines
44
absenteeism as the “habit of not being at school or work when you should be,
usually without a good reason”.
Perspectives on absenteeism
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:186) suggest that “employees go to work
because they’re motivated to do so; the level of motivation remains high if an
individual feels that attendance leads to more valued rewards and fewer negative
consequences than alternative behaviours. Managers appear to have some
influence over attendance behaviour. They have the ability to punish, establish
bonus systems, and allow employees participation in development plans. Whether
these or other approaches reduce absenteeism is determined by the value of the
rewards perceived by employees, the amount of the rewards, and whether
employees perceive a relationship between attendance and reward”.
Robbins (2001:20; 69) is of the opinion that it is important for organisations to keep
absenteeism low, as it is costly. It is “difficult for organisations to operate smoothly
and to attain their objectives if employees fail to report for their jobs”.
Absenteeism has a direct impact on organisations’ effectiveness and efficiency.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:223) explain that “absenteeism … is
a costly and disruptive problem facing managers. It is costly because it reduces
output and disruptive because it requires that schedules and programmes be
modified ... employees go to work because they are motivated to do so. The level
of motivation will remain high if an individual feels that attendance will lead to more
valued rewards and fewer negative consequences than alternative behaviours”.
45
Greenberg and Baron (2003:156-163) found that the more highly committed
employees are to the organisation, the less likely they are to be absent. Being
committed leads people to show up when they are supposed to.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54) display the same sentiments and agree that
strong commitment also is often correlated with low absenteeism. Paulson
(2007:47) found that absenteeism had an enormous impact on overall
organisational productivity. Smanjak (2007:19-20) agree and claims that
absenteeism “has a material effect on the bottom line of almost every organisation
… and also on staff morale. Many organisations implement behavioural
programmes to curb unscheduled absences”. Kristensen, Juhl, Eskildsen,
Nielsen, Frederiksen, and Bisgaard (2006:1645-1650) found that, in human
resources studies, the primary purpose is to predict absenteeism through
motivationally based variables such as job satisfaction and commitment. Lilford
(2005:4) suggests that the “most effective way of proactively monitoring
productivity … is to have an effective absenteeism management system in place”.
2.4.3 Productivity as a consequence of commitment
Productivity defined
Wood et al. (2004:8) define productivity as “a summary measure of the quantity
and quality of work performance, which also accounts for resource use”. Robbins
(2005:27) defines productivity as “a performance measure that includes
effectiveness and efficiency”.
46
Perspectives on productivity
Burton (2001:13-14) explains that “we live in a time when employee motivation,
commitment, innovation and openness to change are essential for business
survival and success. Research has shown that customer service begins inside
an organisation with the way employees are treated, valued, respected,
empowered and rewarded. For this reason organisational results are linked to the
way organisations manage and motivate their people. The fact is that you cannot
achieve business success without employee commitment”.
According to Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54-55), strong commitment is often
linked with relatively high productivity. Committed employees tend to be more
goal directed and waste less time while at work, which has a positive impact on
productivity. Nelson and Quick (2005:87) agree that commitment is related to
higher quality of work, increased productivity, and enhanced performance.
Ivancevich, Konopaske and Matteson (2005:402) explain that committed
employees will exert extraordinary effort to carry out work requests and are more
dependable. Forman (2005:137) acknowledge that there is a strong positive
relationship between employee commitment and productivity. Commitment is
critical and vital for organisational effectiveness.
An article published in Compensation & Benefits for Law Offices (2006:2) explain
that those organisations that implemented human resources practices that showed
high commitment towards employees were more productive than their industry
peers that did not use such practices. Rice (2007:15) explains that engaged
employees are committed and, therefore, more productive.
47
2.5 SUMMARY
In this chapter, the theoretical and literature study on organisational (employee)
commitment was discussed. Antecedents associated with employee
organisational commitment were explored to understand the influences of a variety
of psychological and work-related variables. The effect of individual behavioural
influences and work-related attitudes on commitment and the consequences of
commitment for organisational effectiveness are evident in this chapter. The
benefits of a committed workforce are recognised throughout this chapter as
important determinants of organisational effectiveness. Chapter 3 of this study will
explore and define the theoretical framework on human capital strategies to
promote commitment.
48
CHAPTER 3: HUMAN CAPITAL STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE
COMMITMENT
3.1 INTRODUCTION
According to Robbins (2005:538), “an organisation’s human resource policies and
practices represent important forces for shaping employee behaviour and
attitudes”. In Chapter 2, Bowditch and Buono (2005:53) explain that “by focussing
on relevant behaviours and interactions, managers can begin to shape the
outcomes they desire …”, such as employee commitment. Msomi (2005:26)
explains that human resources professionals must create practices that make
employees more productive and committed and, therefore, organisations more
effective. Sulcas (2007:12) argues that central to the ongoing success of an
organisation are committed employees and that human resources practices can
assist in developing commitment. Willemse (2007:17) suggests that human
capital specialists should be assisting management in understanding what is
important to employees in order to retain talent and to enhance employee
commitment. This chapter deals with models and a discussion of how human
resources strategies and management practices combine to promote and
influence employee commitment.
3.2 INFLUENCING COMMITMENT
Kinnear and Sutherland (2001:16-18) point out that in this “knowledge economy an
organisation’s most important asset is the energy and loyalty of its people, the
intellectual capital that, unlike machines and stock, can quit and work for the
49
competition”. Human resources need to help managers understand the drivers of
commitment. It is the line managers, however, who have to apply and drive
strategies through strategic programmes, policies, and procedures that will create
and sustain employee commitment. Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:227) suggest that
increased job satisfaction may elicit higher levels of commitment. Taylor (2005:28-
29) suggest that human resources should deliver practical people management
solutions to the challenges facing their organisation, such as employee
commitment.
According to an article published by Personnel Today (2006:95), IRS survey
results revealed that “ethical employment policies have the greatest impact on
employee commitment and loyalty”. Kelly (2007:27) found that organisations with
more mature human capital processes have been shown to have the highest
levels of employee commitment.
Robbins (1986:491) explains that employee commitment can be influenced:
“Since employees behave based on their perceptions of the world rather than its
reality, perceptions are a powerful moderator of employee commitment; a poor job
match will sub-optimise the employee’s ability and reduce motivation; the right
leadership style (congruent with the employee’s needs) will stimulate higher
productivity; organisational structure, policies and procedures and culture
influence an employee’s productivity; the organisation’s performance evaluations
and reward system are a critical element impacting on motivation and eventually
productivity; if the evaluation system is seen as unfair, motivation will decline;
similarly, if rewards are not productivity based, they will not reinforce the right
50
behaviour; organisational culture is a strong force influencing employee motivation
and productivity; etc.” All of these have a direct effect on organisational
effectiveness.
Today, companies recognise the importance of creating an environment and
culture where employees feel motivated and committed. This leads to the delivery
of superior quality and value to customers and in turn increases organisational
effectiveness (Crosby, 2000:3). Robbins (2001:519) suggests that human
resources practices reinforce organisational culture and assist managers to create
an environment conducive to motivating and creating employee commitment.
“The selection process, performance evaluations, training and career development
activities, and promotions procedures ensure that those hired fit in with the culture,
reward those who support it, and penalise those who challenge it”.
Crosby (2000:3) explains that “employees have opinions about the organisation’s
performance in key process areas that relate to human resources management.
Those evaluations influence the perception of the organisation’s commitment to
different stakeholder groups which, in turn, impacts the degree of employee
commitment to the organisation …”. “If work experiences are truly pre-eminent,
this bodes well for the organisation’s ability to ‘manage commitment’ by impacting
employees’ perceptions of human resource practices” (Crosby, 2000:7).
Ashkanasy, Wilderom, and Peterson (2000:348) argue that “organisational
commitment is often understood as an attribute of individual thinking and
behaviour toward an organisation. However, organisational commitment is social
51
commitment in the sense that organisations need to influence and control the
commitment of their members toward objects relevant for organisational success”.
Mullins (2005:746) explains that the “efficiency and performance of employees,
and their commitment to the objectives of the organisation, are fostered by good
human relationships at work. This demands that proper attention be given to
human resource management and harmonious employment relations. The
manager needs to understand the importance of good managerial practices and
how to make the best use of people. The promotion of good human relations is an
integral part of the process of management and improved organisational
performance”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:169) contend that winning employee
commitment requires a comprehensive, multifaceted management system,
consisting of an integrated and internally consistent package of concrete actions,
policies and procedures. Nelson and Quick (2005:87), agrees that organisational
conditions encourage commitment.
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:203) (citing James March and Herbert Simon
(1995)) argue “that management cannot change individual behaviour directly, or
by attempting to alter people’s personalities. It is more effective and practical, they
observed, to manipulate the premises on which people make their own decision
about how they will behave”. In order to obtain commitment, managers should
focus on how they can manipulate the premises – the underlying assumptions that
influence the day-to-day decisions of employees. This can be achieved through
52
different human resources strategies and management practices that reinforce
desirable and undesirable behaviour.
3.3 MODELS AND DISCUSSIONS OF HUMAN RESOURCES STRATEGIES
AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT INFLUENCE COMMITMENT
Dorenbosch, De Reuver, and Sanders (2006:274-291) found that the role of
human resources is positively related to the commitment strength within an
organisation.
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:400) point out that communication is the
common thread that ties people, plans, strategies, and commitment together.
Robbins (2001:340) explains that followers will exhibit extraordinary commitment
and loyalty to their leaders, and Robbins (2005:489) asserts that organisational
culture facilitates the generation of commitment. Greenberg and Baron (2003:166-
167) contend that companies that show their employees that they care enough to
work hard to attract (recruit) them are likely to find those individuals strongly
committed to the organisation. Crosby (2000:1) points out that employee
commitment are affected by and can be improved through development activities.
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:227) suggest that committed employees are committed
to organisational goals and that higher commitment can facilitate higher
productivity (performance). Greenberg and Baron (2003:165) explain that reward
strategies are used to create employee commitment in organisations.
Models and discussions of human resources strategies and management
practices that influence commitment will now follow.
53
3.3.1 Effect of communication on commitment
Communication defined
Swanepoel et al. (2003:669) are of the opinion that “communication can generally
be viewed as the process of conveying and sharing information between
interacting people”.
Wood et al. (2004:285) define communication as an “interpersonal process of
sending and receiving symbols with meaning attached to them”. Nelson and
Quick (2005:153) refer to communication as “the evoking of a shared or common
meaning in another person”. Robbins (2005:299) defines communication as “the
transference and understanding of meaning”.
Gibson et al. (2006:427) conclude by defining communication as “the transmission
of information and understanding through the use of common symbols”.
Perspectives on communication
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:400) point out that “good communication
is the common thread that ties people, plans, strategies, and commitment – in
other words, the entire organisational fabric – together”.
David (2001:135) argues that communication is a major component in motivation.
Management processes becomes a lot easier when subordinates are encouraged
to discuss their concerns, reveal their problems, provide recommendations, and
give suggestions. Managers can influence their people to commit themselves to
the organisation though effective communication. According to Robbins
54
(2005:299) motivation can be stimulated through the formation of specific goals,
feedback on progress toward the goals, and reinforcement of desired behaviour –
all of which requires communication.
Robbins (2005:299) explain that “communication serves four major functions
within a group or organisation: control, motivation, emotional expression, and
information … Communication fosters motivation by clarifying to employees what
is to be done, how well they are doing, and what can be done to improve
performance if it’s subpart ...”.
There is a direct link between communication and employee satisfaction: the less
the uncertainty, the greater the satisfaction. “Distortions, ambiguities, and
incongruities all increase uncertainty and, hence, they have a negative impact on
satisfaction … Whatever the sender’s expectations, the decoded message in the
mind of the receiver represents his or her reality. And it is this ‘reality’ that will
determine performance, along with the individual’s level of motivation and his or
her degree of satisfaction” (Robbins, 2005:323).
A purpose, expressed as a message to be conveyed, is needed before
communication can take place. This message passes between a “source (the
sender) and a receiver. The message is encoded (converted to symbolic form)
and is passed by way of some medium (channel) to the receiver, who retranslates
(decodes) the message initiated by the sender. The result is transference of
meaning from one person to another” (Robbins, 2005:300). Figure 3.1 depicts the
communication process.
55
FIGURE 3.1: The communication process model (Robbins, 2005:300)
“The sender initiates a message by encoding a thought. The message is the
actual physical product from the sender’s encoding … The channel is the medium
through which the message travels ... The receiver is the object to whom the
message is directed. But before the message can be received, the symbols in it
must be translated into a form that can be understood by the receiver. This is the
decoding of the message. Noise represents communication barriers that distort
the clarity of the message. Noise sources include perceptual problems,
information overload, semantic difficulties, or cultural differences … Feedback is
the check on how successful we have been in transferring out messages as
originally intended” (Robbins, 2005:300). Robbins (2001:285) points out that skill,
attitudes, knowledge, and the social-cultural system are four conditions that affect
the encoding of a message.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:669) explain the importance of communicating to
subordinates. The quality of labour and employee relations depends upon the
nature and quality of the communication between all the parties involved. Bakos
(2007:33) agree and suggests that open and transparent communication is key to
retention and commitment. Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:178; 203) found that
communication is central to understanding organisational behaviour and state that
56
companies do not pay enough attention to communication which results in
absenteeism, staff turnover, low productivity and disputes.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:443) point out that “there are
numerous barriers to effective communication. Among the more significant are
frame of reference, selective listening, value judgments, source credibility, filtering,
in-group language, status differences, time pressures, and communication
overload. Improving organisational communication is an ongoing process.
Specific techniques for doing this include following up, regulating information flow,
utilising feedback, empathy, repetition, encouraging mutual trust, effective timing,
simplifying language, effective listing, using the grapevine, and promoting ethical
communication”.
Communication is an integral part in the field of organisational behaviour but
mostly neglected by management. Effective communication is a basic prerequisite
for the attainment of organisational strategies and human resource management.
Communication plays an important role in managerial and organisational
effectiveness as indicated in figure 3.2 (Luthans, 2005:315).
57
FIGURE 3.2: The contribution of communication activities to real managers’
effectiveness (Luthans, 2005:315)
Bowditch and Buono (2005:115) conclude that communication is one of the
fundamental processes of management. “From a managerial perspective,
communication can be analysed in terms of three broad functions: (1) production
and regulation (communication focused on getting the work done and meeting
organisational output objectives such as quality control); (2) innovation (messages
about new ideas and changing procedures that help the organisation adapt and
respond to its environment); and (3) socialisation and maintenance
(communication focused on the means of getting the work done rather than on the
work itself, and on the personal involvement, interpersonal relationships,
motivation of individuals in the organisation). Each of these functions is important
for an effectively and efficiently managed organisation”.
58
Communication plays a major part in persuading employees to work in the interest
of the organisation and to align expectations. Robbins (2005:332) explain that
leaders align people though communication and have the ability to influence a
group. Communication channels reinforce desirable behaviour and, consequently,
influence commitment.
Bothma (2007:20) claims that if you involve people through communication, you
will get their support and commitment; ignore them at your own peril.
3.3.2 Effect of leadership on commitment
Leadership defined
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:250) are of the opinion that “leadership is the process
of developing ideas and a vision, living by values that support those ideas and that
vision, influencing others to embrace them in their own behaviours, and making
hard decisions about human and other resources”.
Hamlyn (2005:43) explain that “leaders create vision and develop strategies,
engage, motivate and inspire people, build trust and have courage”.
Mullins (2005:316) explains that leadership is essentially the “relationship through
which one person influences the behaviour or actions of other people”. Robbins
(2005:323) defines leadership as “the ability to influence a group toward the
achievement of goals”. Gibson et al. (2006:313) conclude by defining leadership
as “an interaction between members of a group. Leaders are agents of change,
persons whose acts affect other people more than other people’s acts affect them.
59
Leadership occurs when one group member modifies the motivation or
competencies of others in the group”.
Perspectives on leadership
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:271-273; 308) suggest that “leaders are
individuals who influence other individuals to do what they might not do in the
absence of the leaders’ influence … A leader can make a difference in measures
of organisational effectiveness: productivity, efficiency, quality, flexibility,
satisfaction, competitiveness, and development … Leader behaviour has an effect
on the followers’ performance and job satisfaction … people develop positive
attitudes towards objects that are instrumental in satisfying their needs … for
example a leader and the other way around” as indicated in Figure 3.3.
Individuals may view the leader as effective or ineffective according to the
satisfaction they derive from the total work experience.
FIGURE 3.3: A framework for studying leadership (Gibson et al., 2000:273)
60
“Leadership plays a central part in understanding group behaviour, for it’s the
leader who usually provides the direction toward goal attainment” (Robbins,
2001:340). There are various leadership theories. “The original search for a set of
universal leadership traits failed … the behavioural approach’s major contribution
was narrowing leadership into task-oriented and people-oriented styles. But no
one style was found to be effective in all situations. A major breakthrough in our
understanding of leadership came when we recognised the need to develop
contingency theories that included situational factors” as indicated in Figure 3.3
(Robbins, 2001:340).
Robbins (2001:340) explains that “more recently, neocharismatic theories have
gained increased acceptance. As we learn more about the personal
characteristics that followers attribute to charismatic and transformational leaders,
and about the conditions that facilitate their emergence, we should be better able
to predict when followers will exhibit extraordinary commitment and loyalty to their
leaders and to those leaders’ goals”. Robbins (2001:327) later states that
neocharismatic theories also refer to a “final set of leadership theories that
emphasise symbolism, emotional appeal, and extraordinary follower commitment”.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:358) explain that “leaders have the ability to communicate
an extraordinary focus of commitment. Leaders manage attention through a
compelling vision or picture that provides focus for people”. Hellriegel and Slocum
(2004:278) support this argument and agree that “leaders can get followers
involved in, and eventually committed to, a vision of a future state”.
61
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:747) explain that “effective leaders adapt their
style to fit the organisational and cultural context in which they operate.
Considerate behaviour reduces labour turnover and improves job satisfaction.
Initiating structure improves performance but reduces job satisfaction. Effective
leaders combine consideration when initiating structure”. Manion (2004:167)
found that leaders who understood the concept of organisational commitment and
key factors that result in commitment could consciously choose behaviours to
support this process.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:250) comment that “organisational effectiveness and
success are greatly influenced by the quality of its leadership ... Today’s
leadership should be able to mobilise ideas and values that energise other people.
And in today’s world, that’s less and less through command and control, and more
and more through changing people’s mindsets and hence altering the way they
behave”. Kerrigan (2005:19) explain that “if senior management adopted values
based strategies and people centred practices, we would be able to kick-start
processes that win the hearts and minds of our employees …”.
According to Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:492), “there are three
important variables with which every leader must deal: (1) the people who are
being led, (2) the task that the people are performing, and (3) the environment in
which the people and the task exist … All leaders of effective groups share four
characteristics in common: (1) they provide direction and meaning to the people
they are leading, (2) they generate trust, (3) they favour action and risk taking.
That is, they are proactive and willing to risk failing in order to succeed, and (4)
62
they are purveyors of hope. In both tangible and symbolic ways they reinforce the
notions that success will be attained”.
Truter (2007:18) found that significant organisational change occurs only when
there is top-down commitment from organisational leadership. Erasmus (2007:29)
adds that a leader’s attitude will influence the group environment and therefore
can increase the levels of commitment. Ayers (2007:16) agree that you need
committed leaders to get people engaged and committed. De Beer (2007:12)
suggests that leaders evoke commitment; they understand what makes people
tick. Naidoo (2007:46) is of the opinion that top management, as the
organisation’s leadership, influences dedication and commitment.
Hattingh (2007:28) suggests that “people are attracted to, and incentivised to stay
with, companies where the leadership has presence, stature, impact, compassion,
integrity and energy”. Nelson and Quick (2005:371) (citing Edgar Schein) found
that “leaders play crucial roles in shaping and reinforcing culture”. Organisational
culture reinforces desirable behaviour and, consequently, influences commitment.
3.3.3 Effect of organisational culture on commitment
Organisational culture defined
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:378) and Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson
(2005:42) refer to organisational culture as what employees perceive and how this
perception creates a pattern of beliefs, expectations, ideas, values, attitudes, and
behaviours shared by the members of an organisation that evolve over time.
Robbins (2005:485) refers to organisational culture as “a system of shared
63
meaning held by members that distinguishes the organisation from other
organisations”.
DuBrin (2005:294) refers to organisational culture as “a system of shared values
and beliefs that influence worker behaviour”. ShamRao (2005:6) agrees and
explain that organisational culture will define the attitudes of employees towards
the organisation, organisational property, and other workers. These attitudes will
be observable in how people behave.
Gibson et al. (2006:31) conclude in defining organisational culture as what
“employees perceive and how this perception creates a pattern of beliefs, values
and expectations”. According to Teke (2005:36), organisational culture is creating
a distinct sense of “the way we do things around here”. According to Gibson et al.
(2006:31) (citing Edgar Schein), organisational culture can be defined as “a
pattern of basic assumptions – invented, discovered, or developed by a given
group as it learns to cope with the problems of external adaptation and internal
integration – that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to
be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in
relation to those problems”.
Perspectives on organisational culture
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:30-31) explain that organisational culture
influences behaviour and drives expectations. An employee would like to work in
an organisation that indicates the same type of values that he/she has, and
therefore, culture has a direct effect on attracting talent and retaining talent
64
through commitment. The culture and brand are part of selling the organisation as
a preferred employer.
Crosby (2000:7-10) suggests “that human resource management policies and
practices symbolically communicate the organisation’s values to participants.
Policies and practices become part of the culture by signalling ‘who and what is
important around here’. Culture, in turn, serves as a guide to employee behaviour
… It remains an empirical issue as to how human resource management activities
and culture combine to influence employee commitment. In fact, there may well
be different patterns of human resource management process performance and
stakeholder salience perceptions that motivate employees to attach to and support
organisations. That expectation would be in-line with the contingency and
configurational approaches to human resource management which concern the
consistency of human resource management practices and their fit with
organisational goals, strategy, and structure”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:381) found that when members of the same
organisation shares knowledge and assumptions as they discover or develop
ways of coping with issues of external adoptions and internal integration,
organisational culture emerges. Figure 3.4 shows a common pattern in the
emergence of organisational cultures.
65
FIGURE 3.4: How cultures emerge (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2004:381)
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:383) explain that “the way in which an organisation
functions and is managed may have … consequences for maintaining and
changing organisational culture. The organisation hires individuals who seem to fit
its culture; the organisation then maintains its culture by removing employees who
consistently or markedly deviate from accepted behaviours and activities”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:392-393) further explain that “organisational culture
involves a complex interplay of formal and informal systems that may support
either ethical or unethical behaviour. Formal systems in general include
leadership, structures, policies, reward systems, orientation and training
programmes, and decision-making processes. Informal systems include norms,
heroes, rituals, language, myths, sagas, and stories”.
Robbins (2005:489) asserts that organisational culture impacts on behaviour and
that a strong culture should be associated with reduced turnover. “Culture
performs a number of functions within an organisation. First, it has a boundary-
defining role; that is, it creates distinctions between one organisation and others.
Second, it conveys a sense of identity for organisation members. Third, culture
facilitates the generation of commitments to something larger than one’s individual
self-interest. Fourth, it enhances social system stability. Culture is the social glue
66
that helps hold the organisation together by providing appropriate standards for
what employees should say and do. Finally, culture serves as a sense-making
and control mechanism that guides and shapes the attitudes and behaviour of
employees”.
Organisational culture exerts influence on individual, group, and organisational
processes; it involves shared values, expectations and attitudes among
employees within the same organisation (Ivancevich, Konopaske & Matteson,
2005:42). Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:45-46) further explain as
indicated in Figure 3.5, that the evolution of a positive culture mode, emphasises
an array of methods and procedures that managers can use to foster a cohesive
culture. The word home is highlighted, which suggests the importance of history,
oneness, membership and exchange among employees. Creating or changing a
culture is very complex. Making it even more complex is the fact that cultures can
be hidden so that they cannot be adequately diagnosed, managed, or changed.
67
FIGURE 3.5: The evolution of a positive culture (Ivancevich et al., 2005:47)
Luthans (2005:123) found that some organisational cultures may be the direct, or
at least indirect, result of actions taken by the founders. However, this is not
always the case. Sometimes founders create weak cultures, and if the
organisation is to survive, a new top manager must be installed who will “sow the
seeds for the necessary strong culture”. DuBrin (2005:297) points out that
“depending on its strength, organisational culture can have a pervasive impact on
organisational effectiveness. Employees of an organisation with a strong culture
will follow its values with little questioning”.
Mullins (2005:896-897) explain that the “applications of organisational behaviour
and the effective management of human resources are dependent … on the
characteristic features of the individual organisation – and its culture. The
68
pervasive nature of culture in terms of ‘how things are done around here’ and
common values, beliefs and attitudes will therefore have a significant effect on
organisational processes such as decision-making, design of structure, group
behaviour, work organisation, motivation and job satisfaction, and management
control”.
Rabson (2007:27) suggests that “organisational culture constitutes the company’s
identity … By creating a common culture, not only is a sense of pride among staff
created, but also a sense of belonging and ownership”. Van Rooyen (2006:4-5)
suggest that an organisation’s culture “reflects specific expectations, values and
traditions of how things should be done, and by whom”.
Leaders can reinforce organisational culture through the selection of newcomers
to the organisation. Unconsciously, leaders often recruit individuals who are
similar to current organisational members (Nelson & Quick, 2005:372). Desirable
behaviour can be reinforced through recruitment and can, consequently, influence
commitment.
3.3.4 Effect of recruitment on commitment
Recruitment defined
Firer (2002:30) defines recruitment as the “searching for, and obtaining, potential
job candidates in sufficient numbers, and at the right cost, for the organisation to
select the most appropriate people to fill its jobs. In addition to job needs, the
recruitment activity should be concerned with fulfilling the needs of the job
candidates”.
69
Swanepoel et al. (2003:259) refer to recruitment “as those activities in human
resource management which are undertaken in order to attract sufficient job
candidates who have the necessary potential, competencies and traits to fill job
needs and to assist the organisation in achieving its objectives”.
Perspectives on recruitment
Human resource needs are based on organisational objectives and strategies,
taking into account increase in demand for the organisations products or services
(Robbins & Coulter 1999:344-345). Cabot and Steiner (2007:19) found that by
developing a strategic human resources plan that fosters a reputation as a great
place to work, you attract a more committed workforce. Firer (2002:30-31)
explains that an effective recruitment strategies are not only to attract individuals
to the organisation but also to retain them once they are hired. Recruitment is
influenced by the internal and external environment, which also influences an
organisation’s business and in turn recruitment strategy. The survival or progress
of an organisation depends on its ability to identify, recruit, select, train and retain
the right people.
Mengel (2001:32), Managing Director of CHART DBM South Africa and career
management specialist, points out that “in many situations, employee turnover is
due to issues of ‘chemistry’ or ‘fit’ within an organisation. Employers are now
coming to adopt the strategy of ‘hire for traits, train for skills’. According to a study
by Harvard University, nearly 80% of turnover is due to hiring mistakes. Poor
hiring decisions can cost the organisation up to 90% of the unsuccessful recruit’s
70
salary. Add to this the cost of disruption and productivity loss, and a poor hiring
decision can turn into a very expensive mistake”.
Organisations aim to attract and to retain the interest of suitable applicants and to
project a positive image of the organisation to outsiders though the application of
their recruitment process. The recruiter plays a major role in gaining the
prospective employee’s commitment to the organisation right from the beginning
(Swanepoel et al., 2003:259; 264).
Babb (2006:21) suggests that organisations need to consider the impact of their
culture and climate on their ability to attract and retain employees. According to
Bywater (2005:27), it is a benefit to the organisation’s employers’ brand if the
candidates have the perception that they are being taken seriously and that the
organisation have a transparent, fair and robust recruitment process. Mullins
(2005:795-796) agrees that the manner in which staff are appointed is a major
factor in determining the behaviour and performance of the workforce.
Greenberg and Baron (2003:166-167) contend that “recruiting new employees is
important not only insofar as it provides opportunities to find people whose values
match those of the organisation but also because of the dynamics of the
recruitment process itself. Specifically, the more an organisation invests in
someone by working hard to lure him or her to the company, the more the
individual is likely to return the same investment of energy by expressing
commitment toward the organisation. In other words, companies that show their
employees they care enough to work hard to attract them are likely to find those
71
individuals strongly committed to the company … The way we are treated by
organisation officials during the recruitment process sends strong messages about
the extent to which the organisation is interested in us. This interest, in turn,
influences our own commitment toward the organisation”.
Mullins (2005:795-796) suggests that “whatever the nature of the organisation, the
effectiveness of its operations and functions inevitably depends very largely upon
the employees it employs … The manner in which staff are appointed is a major
factor in determining … the behaviour and performance of the workforce … If the
organisation is to become the employer of choice the answer does not lie in strong
recruitment practices alone. The real response is holistic or systemic − getting
every part of the organisation in sync with this goal. At the organisational level, it
includes looking at all your human resources, human resource development and
organisational development systems and strategies to ensure they are working
together to create an environment in which the best people will thrive”.
Mullins (2005:800-801) found that one of the many adverse consequences of poor
recruitment and selection is the possibility of a high level of employee turnover.
“Recruiting people who are wrong for the organisation can lead to increased
labour turnover, increased costs for the organisation, and lowering of morale in the
existing workforce. Such people are likely to be discontented, unlikely to give of
their best, and end up leaving voluntarily or involuntarily when their unsuitability
becomes evident. They will not offer the flexibility and commitment that many
organisations seek. Managers and supervisors will have to spend extra time on
further recruitment exercises, when what is needed in the first place is a
72
systematic process to assess the role to be filled, and the type of skills and
abilities needed to fill it … The need is for a planned and systematic approach to
recruitment and selection”, as indicated in Figure 3.6.
FIGURE 3.6: A systematic approach to recruitment and selection (Mullins,
2005:801)
The challenge for most organisations is to position the company and the job in
such as way that the right – not all – candidates are interested in the opportunity.
If this does not happen, the recruitment process may be lost before it begins.
Companies with strong corporate identities have proven to recruit more effectively.
Organisations also compete for the strongest employment brand due to the
73
benefits that such a brand has to offer. To create such a brand, an organisation
needs to focus inwardly on employees, not externally on customers (Forman
2005:54-55).
Newly hired employees must be enhanced and developed. Companies that ignore
this function not only risk falling behind, buy they risk losing their newly hired talent
(Forman, 2005:77). Ncongwane (2007:34-37) found that human resources
executives stated that the single greatest challenge in workplace management
was creating or maintaining their organisation’s ability to compete for talent.
Organisations need to ensure that they are able to attract and retain talent.
Employee development influences commitment and reinforces desirable
behaviour.
3.3.5 Effect of development on commitment
Development defined
Kreitner and Kinicki (2001:57) refer to development as the “focus on preparing
diverse employees for greater responsibility and advancement”. Mullins
(2005:474) defines development as “the motivations for self-improvement …
development of the individual and organisation through training and education”.
Perspectives on development
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:184) found that “personal growth of any
individual is unique. Individuals experiencing such growth can sense their
development and see how their capabilities are being expanded. By expanding
74
their capabilities employees can maximise or at least satisfy skill potential.
Individuals can become dissatisfied with their jobs and organisation if not allowed
or encouraged to develop their skills”.
Crosby (2000:1) explains that employee commitment is affected by and can be
improved through career development activities. Organisations can create
commitment by taking concrete steps to help employees develop their abilities and
achieve their potential (Crosby, 2000:20). Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson
(2005:167) also suggest that “employees bring their needs, aspirations, and hopes
to their jobs, and become committed to employers that take concrete steps to help
them develop their abilities and achieve their potential”.
Robbins (2001:448-451) contends that when individuals feel that the organisation
does not care, they withdraw their commitment and energy. It is important,
therefore, that managers demonstrate their interest in the long-term success and
growth of their direct reports. Any organisation that allows itself to be a bystander
to the development of talent will not be able to remain competitive in this rapidly
changing world.
Kinnear and Sutherland (2001:17) assert that “development is a crucial focus for
employees. Employees place high value on continued learning because that is
what is going to keep them marketable”. Mengel (2001:33) explains that “the irony
in retaining good employees is that the more they feel they are able to grow and
become more marketable, the more likely they are to stay. The more easily
75
accessible and relevant the growth opportunities you can offer, the greater the
likelihood that turnover rates will decline”.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:184) suggest that investment in employees should be seen
as a means to engendering commitment, rather than as a means of containing
cost and imbuing only loyalty. Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:54) point out that
employee commitment can be influence positively when providing an employee
with the opportunity for advancement.
Forman (2005:77) suggests that “employees expect companies to provide
challenging and meaningful development programmes; if these programmes do
not exist or are curtailed, then employees may leave to find more fertile pastures
…”. Forman (2005:82) argues that “there should be a direct and discernable link
between the strategy of the company and development programmes …
Understanding the overall strategy is an important key to employee commitment”.
Forman (2005:80) found that “from a company perspective, employee
development programs play an important role in perpetuating company culture,
key values, and ‘our way of doing things’ … From an employee perspective, there
are four primary outcomes of most employee development programs”, as indicated
in Figure 3.7.
76
FIGURE 3.7: Outcomes of employee development programmes (Forman,
2005:81)
Employees are more committed to employers who are committed to their long-
term career development. In order to create employee commitment, organisation
should provide their employees with the experience they needs – even craves − at
each stage of their career. Employee commitment will depend on the employers’
ability to fulfil the employees’ personal career aspirations. Commitment is higher
among employees who believe that their development needs are met (Ivancevich,
Konopaske, & Matteson 2005:166).
The type of human resources strategies and policies is pertinent in encouraging
employee development and a learning climate in the organisation. Employees
should feel that their efforts to learn and develop are rewarded (Mullins,
2005:402). Employees are looking for employers who can provide them with
growth and learning opportunities. Therefore employers must consistently seek
out opportunities to invest in and build employee commitment through extensive
training and development programmes (Kheswa, 2006:13). Mullins (2005:422)
agrees and states that “managers need to demonstrate their commitment to their
77
subordinates by encouraging a climate of learning and self-development”.
However, Forman (2005:81) is of the opinion that development programmes
should be driven by performance needs and, in the broader perspective, on
improving performance.
Performance management reinforces desirable behaviour and, consequently,
influences commitment.
3.3.6 Effect of performance management on commitment
Performance management defined
Dubois (2005:3) defines performance as “a deliberate and purposeful action or set
of actions that an individual takes in order to achieve a desired result or output of
some kind that is of value to the individual or to others”.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:375) describe performance management as a “process
which significantly affects organisational success by having managers and
employees work together to set expectations, review results and reward
performance. As such, performance management can be regarded as an ongoing
process that involves the planning, managing, reviewing, rewarding and
development of performance”.
Forman (2005:109) argues that “performance management is the process of
assessing, developing and incentivising employees to enhance their skills and
capabilities, further their careers and strengthen the organisation”. Ivancevich,
78
Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:206) conclude in defining performance as the
“desired results of behaviour”.
Perspectives on performance management
Firer (2002:30) contends that performance management “involves a series of
processes to manage employees’ performance. It includes a number of
components including work and job design, reward structures, the selection of
people to do the work, the training and induction of these people into the way the
work is done, the assessment of how employees are doing their work and policies
for rewarding and improving performance … The results of performance
management can provide information, which can be used to improve business”.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:375) found that “the theoretical foundation of the
performance management approach may be operationalised within an integrated
cycle of separate but related managerial processes”, as illustrated in Figure 3.8.
79
FIGURE 3.8: An integrated performance management cycle (Swanepoel et al.,
2005:375)
Swanepoel et al. (2003:375-376) further explain that “the concept of performance
management is a more broadly framed and integrative view of performance
appraisal, where performance ratings are de-emphasised, relative to the planning,
reviewing, allocating of resources, and problem solving aspects of that process …
Performance management is a process of managing behaviour and an
organisation intervention strategy”.
According to Brennan (2004:50), an effective performance management system is
a powerful way to increase employee commitment.
80
Robbins (2005:525) explains that performance evaluation systems influence
behaviour. “Evaluations provide input into important decisions such as
promotions, transfers, and terminations ... To maximise motivation, people need to
perceive that the effort they exert leads to a favourable performance evaluation
and that the favourable evaluation will lead to the rewards that they value”.
Forman (2005:109) argues that “there is both an individual and an organisational
side to performance management. For an individual, an effective performance
management system provides ongoing feedback on performance and the resulting
benefit, reward and development programs that are now provided. For the
organisation, an effective performance management system provides essential
information about how employees (as a group) are aligned with organisational
strategy and initiatives, and how well organisational objectives are being
achieved”.
Mullins (2005:490-493) explain that expectancy theories (Vroom, Porter, and
Lawler) indicate a strong relationship between motivation and performance.
“Performance outcomes acquire valence because of the expectation that they will
lead to other outcomes as an anticipated source of satisfaction. It is the
relationship between a chosen course of action and its predicted outcome …
Performance depends not only on the amount of effort exerted but also on the
intervening influences of the person’s abilities and traits, and their role
perceptions”. The process of performance management involves a continuous
judgement on the behaviour and performance of employees, as illustrated in
Figure 3.9.
81
FIGURE 3.9: Basic model of expectancy theory (Mullins, 2005:491)
Dunkel (2007:14) found that employee commitment is a key driver of performance
and that human resources can develop measures to track such metrics as
employee commitment.
According to Robbins (2001:171-172), performance management and reward
strategies are interdependent. Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:153) are of the
opinion that “when an employee attains a high level of performance, rewards can
become important inducements for the employee to continue to perform at that
level”. It is evident from the above that reward reinforces desirable behaviour and,
consequently, influences commitment.
3.3.7 Effect of reward (and recognition) on commitment
Reward defined
82
Rewards can be classified into two broad categories: extrinsic and intrinsic.
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:182) define extrinsic rewards as “rewards
external to the job, such as pay, promotion, or fringe benefits” and intrinsic
rewards as “those that are part of the job itself, such as the responsibility,
challenge, and feedback characteristics of the job”.
Hellriegel and Slocum (2004:96) define a reward as “an event that a person finds
desirable or pleasing”.
Perspectives on reward
Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:179) found that “the main objectives of
reward programs are (1) to attract qualified people to join the organisation, (2) to
keep employees coming to work, and (3) to motivate employees to achieve high
levels of performance”. Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (2000:186) further
found that “researchers and managers agree that extrinsic and intrinsic rewards
can be used to motivate job performance … If rewards are to motivate: the reward
must be valued by the person, and they must be related to a specific level of job
performance”.
Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2005:224) refer to intrinsic rewards as
important for the development of employee commitment. “Organisations able to
meet employees’ needs by providing achievement opportunities and by
recognising achievement when it occurs have a significant impact on
commitment”.
83
Reward and recognition strategies are used to create employee commitment.
When organisations link their performance to employee rewards, employees are
likely to be highly committed. A profit-sharing plan is an example of an incentive
plan in which employees receive bonuses in proportion to the organisation’s
profitability and employees’ individual performance (Greenberg & Baron,
2003:165).
Swanepoel et al. (2003:527) argue that “the underlying assumption of profit-
sharing plans is that they increase employee commitment and identification with
the organisation and its profit goal and, consequently, lead to increased
productivity and cost savings. Profit-sharing plans essentially allow employees to
share in the financial success of an organisation by distributing a portion of the
profits back to the employees”.
Coetzee (2006:42-43) explains that failure to give praise and recognition is the
number one cause of dissatisfaction among employees. Boardman (2007:26) is of
the opinion that people do what you reward them to do, and therefore, it is
important to recognise good performance. Sims (2007:12-14) found that
recognition produces superior job satisfaction. The sense of recognition and
achievement the workers experience by being “part of things” translates into better
performance. Theories of positive reinforcement tell us that rewarded behaviours
are repeated.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:487) contend that “the utilisation of rewards can therefore
be a very important and powerful tool for shaping and determining work behaviour
aimed at attaining the strategic objectives of an organisation. Rewards such as
84
pay and benefits which people gain from an employment relationship are highly
important to individuals since they can meet many needs. Satisfaction of needs
can range from the most basic human needs for food and shelter to those signs of
achievement, status and power. A multitude of possible rewards can be included
in an overall reward system with various categories”. Common categories are
indicated in Figure 3.10.
Intrinsic
Extrinsic
Rew
ards
• More responsible• Opportunities for personal growth• Participation in decision-making• More interesting work• Autonomy• Task completion
Financial Non-financial
Performance-related
• Commission• Performance
bonuses• Merit pay• Incentive
schemes• Achievement
awards• Stock ownership• Share options
Membership-related
• Basic salary• Retirement
benefits• Car allowances• Medical aid• Thirteenth
cheque• Subsidised
canteen• Vacation• Profit-sharing• Work-life
programmes
Status rewards
• Location of office• Office furnishings• Assignment
parking• Own secretary• Public recognition• Commendations• Convenience
services
Social rewards
• Praise• Compliments• Friendly greetings• Dinner invitation• Pat on back• Social gatherings
FIGURE 3.10: Types and structure of rewards (Swanepoel et al., 2003:489)
Buchanan and Huczynski (2004:120) point out “that rewards such as money and
recognition can be used by managers as a positive reinforcement to strengthen
85
desired behaviours and weaken dysfunctional behaviours”. According to De
Chalain (2006:10), employees’ perceptions can be influenced through rewards.
Robbins (2005:189-190) refers to the expectancy theory, explaining that “an
employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when he or she believes
that effort will lead to a good performance appraisal; that a good appraisal will lead
to organisational rewards such as a bonus, a salary increase, or a promotion; and
that the rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal goals”. It is important that
reward is tailored to employees’ needs, and it is incorrect to assume that all
employees want the same thing; differentiating rewards motivates employees.
Organisations use a variety of rewards such as pay, transfers, promotions, praise,
and recognition to attract and retain people and to motivate them to achieve their
personal and organisational goals. These rewards are considered important by
employees and therefore they have a significant effect on behaviour and
performance (Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson, 2005:205). The number one
driver behind remuneration practices is retention (Harraway, 2006:15). Bussin
(2007:17) agree and stats that research shows that remuneration is 25% of the
‘stay’ decision.
Mullins (2005:405) explains that “how organisations reward their employees
makes a statement about what they value. A critical aspect for reward
management is to know how different pay practices affect organisations and their
employees’ behaviour”.
86
3.4 SUMMARY
Through the theoretical and literature study in this chapter, the importance of
sound human resources strategies and management practices for a committed
workforce has become evident. Influences of human resources strategies and
management practices on employees’ attitudes and, ultimately, behaviour have
been put into perspective. The theory relates to the cause-effect chain that
channels consequences of commitment. Human resources need to assist
executives to understand the dynamics of commitment within an organisation.
The measurement of commitment will be discussed in Chapter 4.
87
CHAPTER 4: METHOD OF RESEARCH
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is to embark on a quantitative study to measure the
impact of the organisation under investigation’s directed actions to change
employee attitudes towards human resources strategies and management
practices and, consequently, commitment levels, based on theoretical research.
In this chapter, the research methodology, measuring instrument, and statistical
analysis that will be used to support the research objectives are discussed.
4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
4.2.1 A posteriori quasi-experimental design
A posteriori post hoc comparison refers to a comparison of means which has not
been pre-planned but allows the researcher to analyse the data concerned to
ascertain the differences attributable to various independent variables which have
given rise to significant F-ratios. F-ratio is an test statistics formed by the ratio of
test mean-square estimates of the population error variance (Shavelson,
1981:469). A posteriori comparison may be defined as a “hypothesis testing of the
differences among population means carried out following an analysis of variance”
(Bohrnstedt & Knoke, 1988:234). The basic requirement for using post hoc
comparisons is that the overall F in the analysis of variance must be significant. A
quasi-experimental design is a research plan that has some of the validity features
88
of an experimental design. The researcher does not necessarily assign subjects
randomly to treatment and control conditions and manipulations of the
independent variables are quite difficult, if not impossible under certain
circumstances (Dooley, 1990:198).
4.3 SURVEY RESEARCH
Martins (2005:34) explain that the first important aspect of any organisational
survey is to understand what should be measured, how and why. According to
Robbins (2005:83) “the knowledge of employee attitudes can be helpful to
managers in attempting to predict employee behaviour … the most popular
method to obtain this knowledge is through the use of attitude surveys”.
Swanepoel et al. (2003:779) explain that “employee attitude surveys are
systematic research-based ways of collecting and analysing information about
what employees feel and think about aspects like their work, their superiors and
management, the organisation in general or any other aspect relating to or
potentially impacting on their employment relationships”. Gibson et al. (2006:489)
explain that an “attitude survey is a useful diagnostic approach if the potential
focus of change is the total organisation”.
The Global People Commitment Survey is a recognised employee commitment
survey instrument that is owned by Synovate Loyalty, a global market research
organisation with representing offices worldwide. The Global People Commitment
Survey was used in the year 2005 as well as in the year 2006 and had been
89
developed jointly by Deloitte and Synovate Loyalty (then called Symmetrics
Marketing) in 1999.
4.3.1 Survey Research Process
The Global People Commitment Survey was used to gather the information. The
organisation under investigation sent out an informal letter announcing the study.
This study was conducted in the year 2005 and again in the year 2006.
Instructions stipulated that the Global People Commitment Survey could be
accessed online through a secure website, which could be reached from any
computer with online access. Respondents were invited to participate through
email and follow a link in the email to reach the online survey. All participants
were assured that their responses would remain confidential. In order to preserve
and reinforce employee confidentiality, a single common link was sent to all
respondents. No individual passwords or PINs were given, as some respondents
felt that this would allow the organisation to identify their individual answers.
To measure commitment, respondents were asked to indicate their degree of
agreement with a series of statements using a five point Likert scale (strongly
agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree).
Respondents rated the organisation’s performance in each of the human resource
management process areas using the five point evaluative (likert) scale (excellent,
very good, good, fair, poor). They rated the process areas overall and across a
series of specific attributes.
90
4.4 ADMINISTERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Synovate Loyalty processed all results and generated the reports on behalf of the
organisation. Separate reports were generated for every service line at a national
and regional level. Reports used for this study include the ‘topline reports’ for the
year 2005 and the year 2006, reflecting performance-only data for each question
in the survey for the organisation under investigation, a total, and up to 18
subgroups (also called data ‘breaks’ or ‘cuts’) such as male, female, and other
demographic groups. The ‘full reports’ for the year 2005 and the year 2006 are
PowerPoint files, which include some performance data as well as analysis such
as commitment indices, organisation-wide priorities of interaction areas,
vulnerability analysis, stakeholder analysis, attribute priority, and summaries.
The ‘verbatim comments file’, which is an Excel file that includes all respondent
comments from the open-ended question(s) included in the online survey, was
also taken into account. Some demographic information may be included for each
comment, but in order to protect employee confidentiality, demographic groups
with fewer than 10 respondents cannot be included. Response rates (or
participation rates) were based on the number of respondents divided by the
headcount for that demographic. Pautz (2006:5) explains that while there is no
hard cut-off for a response rate, most organisations aim for a minimum of 70%
employee participation.
Pautz (2006:3) explains that Synovate Loyalty recommends using a five-point
excellent-to-poor scale for measurement of performance because “the scale is not
balanced, but instead provides more favourable rating points (Excellent, Very
91
Good, and Good) than other points (Fair, Poor). We need more granularities at
the top end of the scale in order to detect up and down movement more finely.
Ratings on this scale indicate the degree of performance-expectations fit, weighted
by the value that respondents attach to the specific (underlying) performances …
Allowing respondents to select Don’t Know/Doesn’t Apply results in a truer
measure of each question, since those who feel they cannot judge a particular
item are allowed to skip the question rather than feel forced to ‘guess’”.
4.5 POPULATION AND SAMPLING
Wegner (2000:4) explains that a population is the collection of all the observations
of a random variable under study and about which one is trying to draw
conclusions in practice. A population must be defined in very specific terms to
include only those sampling units with characteristics that are relevant to the
problem. A subset of the population on which observations are made or
measurements are taken is referred to as a sample. A sampling unit is the
item/individual being measured or counted with respect to the random variable(s)
under study.
The organisation under investigation is a professional services organisation,
specialising in more than one discipline. The focus of this study will be on the
national audit service lines, as these service lines are considered the heart of the
organisation. The national audit service lines are represented through regional
offices in Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town, Natal, and Port Elizabeth, with the
biggest office being Johannesburg. Job levels vary from partner to principal,
senior manager, manager, assistant manager, supervisor, trainee accountant, and
92
administrative staff members. The majority of employees from assistant manager
upwards are qualified chartered accountants. Trainee accountants serve their
three-year traineeship in the hope of becoming fully qualified chartered
accountants.
The target population consisted of 800 and 850 employees for the year 2005 and
the year 2006, respectively, within a national auditing environment. The target
population included employees within the national audit service line across all job
levels. All selected employees were included in the study. The population was
selected by means of profession, regional office, and business unit.
The whole population targeting the strata with characteristics that were relevant to
the problem was used as research information. The target population consisted of
800 employees for the year 2005 and 850 employees for the year 2006. The
sample sizes of respondents were 564 and 641 for the year 2005 and the year
2006, respectively. Thus, the total sample size was 1 205.
4.6 STATISTICAL METHODS
The purpose of the study was not to determine the level of commitment (as it had
already been measured and determined), but rather the impact of directed action
to change employees’ attitudes towards human resources and management
practices through comparing the year 2005 commitment results with the year 2006
commitment results. For comparison purposes, statistical tests were applied to
determine which changes across all scores were statistically significant.
93
To serve the purpose of this research, descriptive and inferential statistics were
used to analyse the data. The data was analysed by using the SAS computer
program.
4.6.1 Data analysis
The data was provided as summarised percentage tables for each variable
(question/statement) with totals for each biographical variable, in Excel format.
After these tables (percentages) had been transformed into the correct format for
analysis purposes, they were then imported into SAS through the SAS ACCESS
module. The actual frequencies per category were determined by multiplying the
total by the percentage in each category and rounding the figures. This exercise
was necessary in order to do statistical analysis on the data.
Descriptive statistics and comparative statistics for comparing data of the year
2005 with the year 2006 were conducted using the chi-square test.
4.6.2 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are statistics used to summarise data (Rose-Innes, 2004:2).
Wegner (2000:5) states that “when large volumes of data have been gathered
from a variety of sources, there is a need to organise, summarise and extract the
essential information contained within this data for communication to
management. This is the role of Descriptive Statistics. It aims to identify the
essential characteristics of a random variable and produce a profile of its
behaviour. This is achieved through summary measures”.
94
As descriptive statistics, the frequency tables displayed in Sections 5.2 and 5.3
show the distribution of biographical variables/criteria groups and statement
responses for the year 2005 and the year 2006.
4.6.2.1 Frequency tables and graphs
Frequency tables and graphs were compiled on the variables
(questions/statements) in order to show the distribution of the responses and any
statistical differences between the biographical categories if they occurred. Cross-
analysis of variables, where necessary, with statistical probability to indicate the
magnitude of these probabilities, was also performed.
4.6.3 Comparative statistics
Wegner (2000:7) found that “data type is determined by the nature of the random
variable which the data represents”. In the data comparison study for the research
objective, data used is interval-scaled data. Interval-scaled data is associated with
quantitative random variables. Differences can be measured between values of a
quantitative random variable. A wide range of statistical techniques can be
applied to interval-scaled data, as it possesses numeric (measurement) properties.
Comparative statistics for comparing data of the year 2005 and the year 2006
using the chi-square test are displayed in Section 5.5.3.
95
4.6.3.1 Chi-square test
The chi-square (two-sample) test is probably the most widely used nonparametric
test of significance that is useful for tests involving nominal data, but it can be used
for higher scales as well, such as cases where persons, events, or objects are
grouped into two or more nominal categories such as ‘yes-no’ or cases A, B, C, or
D. The technique is used to test for significant differences between the observed
distribution of data among categories and the expected distribution. It must be
calculated with actual counts rather than percentages (Cooper & Schindler,
2001:499).
SAS computes a p value (probability value) that measures statistical significance,
which automatically incorporates the chi-square values. Results will be regarded
as significant if the p values are smaller than 0.05, because this value represents
an acceptable level on a 95% confidence interval (p ≤ 0.05). The p value is the
probability of observing a sample value as extreme as, or more extreme than, the
value actually observed.
A difference has statistical significance if there is good reason to believe that the
difference does not represent random sampling fluctuations only. Results will be
regarded as significant if the p values are smaller than 0.05, because this value is
used as cut-off point in most behavioural science research.
4.6.4 Commitment index scores
Pautz (2006:9-14) from Synovate Loyalty explain that in “FY06, Commitment Index
scores ranged from 66 to 84, with 74 being the average … The Global People
96
Commitment Survey consists of a commitment index and is numbered from 0 to
100 that represent the level of commitment that respondents have to the
organisation”. Pautz (2006:9-14) explains that “the higher the commitment score,
the higher the level of commitment … with 74 being the average, a first-time
participant in the Global People Commitment Survey, should strive for a score in
the low 70s. Organisations with a history of participation in the Global People
Commitment Survey should base their CI target on an examination of past
performance patterns as well as an assessment of initiatives that might impact
people commitment … The Strongly Agree / Agree score is used to indicate the
level of commitment. The commitment index is calculated at the individual
responded level”.
4.7 THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Crosby (2000:10) from Synovate Loyalty explains that “each item in the
questionnaire is mapped to a particular concept in their commitment model” as
indicated in Figure 4.1.
4.7.1 Synovate Loyalty model of employee commitment
Synovate Loyalty (2006:1) explains that “the Employee Commitment Model (see
Figure 4.1) is based on the concepts of mutual commitment and reciprocity”.
According to the Synovate Loyalty model, employees have opinions about the
organisation’s performance in key process areas that relate to human resources
management and management practices. Those evaluations influence the
97
perception of the organisation’s commitment to different stakeholder groups,
which, in turn, impacts the degree of employee commitment to the organisation.
Attitudinal Commitment
-Affecting Attachment Switching
-Alternatives-Switching Costs
• Senior Mgmt. of the Firm
• Management of Change
• Firm Communications• Supervisor/Manager• Developing Our People• Training and Education• Performance
Evaluations• Recognizing Success• Compensation &
Benefits• Flexibility and Choice• Client Relationship
Mgmt.• Hiring and Staffing• Supporting Diversity
People Orientation
Financial Orientation
Community Orientation
Client Orientation
People Interaction Areas Perceived Commitment of the Firm to Stakeholders
People Commitment to the
Firm
Willingness To Be
Proactive
Intent to Stay
FIGURE 4.1: Model of employee commitment (Synovate Loyalty, 2006:1-2)
4.7.1.1 Dimensions of commitment
Synovate Loyalty (2006:1-2) explain that employee commitment is composed of
three major elements. Attitudinal commitment refers to the different reasons why
employees may feel attached to the organisation. These include:
Positive affect: employees like and identify with the organisation, feel a strong
sense of belonging, and internalise its goals and values;
Switching costs: employees feel that switching jobs would be too costly,
inconvenient, or risky; and
Switching alternatives: employees feel “locked into” the job due to a
perceived lack of alternatives;
98
In terms of behavioural outcomes, employees exhibiting high attitudinal
commitment are less prone to voluntary turnover.
4.7.1.2 Perceived commitment of the organisation to stakeholders
Synovate Loyalty (2006:1-2) found that these perceptions reflect the employee’s
impression of “who and what’s important around here”. Their model identifies four
critical perceptions in this regard:
Employee focus: extent to which the organisation is perceived as committed
to its employees, that is, are they valued, respected, empowered, involved?
Client focus: extent to which the organisation is externally focused on the
needs of its clients/customers.
Community focus: extent to which the organisation strives to be a good
corporate citizen; and
Financial focus: extent to which the organisation is oriented toward financial
results, its shareholders, and the broader financial community.
All four of these perspectives have been shown to influence employee
commitment. While companies may emphasise one dimension more than others,
successful companies are able to find a balance between the four perspectives.
From their standpoint, employees want the organisation to manage its client,
community, and financial relations, but not at the expense of employee interests
(Synovate Loyalty, 2006:1-2).
Nelson and Quick (2005:87) confirm this in defining commitment as “the strength
of an individual’s identification with an organisation”, as well as Robbins
99
(1986:491) who explains that “employees behave based on their perceptions of
the world rather than its reality”. Swanepoel et al. (2003:30) summarise these
thoughts and suggest that “employee commitment to an organisation’s success
largely depends on the employees’ perception of the extent to which their own
needs and personal objectives will be met through their continual commitment to
the success of the organisation”.
4.7.1.3 Human resources management process areas
Synovate Loyalty (2006:1-2) suggests that, ultimately, employee commitment
depends on the way in which the organisation interacts with the employee in key
process areas. The policies, programmes, and practices that are endorsed by
management convey who/what is important to the organisation, and actions often
speak louder than words. When employees can point to concrete examples of
steps that have been taken to secure their commitment, they will be more
committed to the organisation. This is the most controllable aspect of the model
from a management perspective. An advantage of a process-oriented view of
human resources management is that it is consistent with how many organisations
allocate their resources (for example, people and budget). When investing
resources to improve specific human resources management processes,
management needs to consider the impact this will have on employee commitment
(and, ultimately, customer loyalty and business performance).
Symmetrics Marketing Corporation (1999:1-5) explains that “unlike most employee
opinion surveys in the marketplace today, ‘employee commitment plus’ goes
beyond simply reporting employee attitudes (about their job, boss, compensation,
100
etc.). It is designed to assess, explain, and predict employee behaviours - in
particular, their commitment to their job and to their organisation, its values and
strategic direction, and its customers”.
4.7.2 Synovate Loyalty data analysis and reporting
According to Pautz (2006:1-8), the data collected in the survey is first examined
and “cleaned” to ensure that it is usable for reporting (for example, if a respondent
selected “Don’t Know/Does Not Apply” to every question in the survey, his/her
responses are typically removed from the data). Then the data is filtered by the
requested demographic groupings (for example, gender) to obtain performance
scores for each question. These filtered results are closely examined to ensure
that there are a sufficient number of respondents (10 or more) within each
demographic break for reporting. If there are demographic breaks that have fewer
than 10 respondents, it might be necessary for Synovate Loyalty to collapse or
combine demographic breaks for reporting purposes.
Vulnerability segments are analysed for organisation-wide data and segments.
Stakeholder analysis is performed at the organisation-wide level and for
segments. Impact scores for all interaction areas and attributes are determined
through statistical analyses and are combined with performance scores to create
priority rankings for organisation-wide data and segments as requested. Pautz
(2006:6-8) explain that “performance scores are percentage numbers (from 0% to
100%) representing employee responses to actual survey questions”. Priority
assignments of high/medium strength are made via a close examination of the
rankings.
101
4.7.2.1 Vulnerability analysis
Pautz (2006:6-10) explains that the “vulnerability analysis is a measurement of the
relative proportion of respondents that fall into different vulnerability categories.
Based on measurement of respondents’ intent to stay and willingness to be
proactive, they are classified into one of the following groups: Truly Dedicated
(high intent to stay and high proactive), Traditional Loyal (high intent to stay and
low proactive), Strivers (low intent to stay and high proactive), and Disconnected
(low intent to stay and low proactive). Analysis is based on responses to 5 of the
commitment questions – those five questions in the ‘proactive’ and ‘intent to stay
dimensions’”.
Pautz (2006:6-10) explains that “respondents are classified into one of four
vulnerability groups based on whether they have high or low willingness to be
proactive, and whether they have high or low intent to stay with the organisation.
This calculation is done at the individual respondent level. In the vulnerability
analysis, the ‘high intent to stay’ group includes those who ‘strongly agree’ or
‘agree’ with the question ‘I plan to work for Company X for many more years’. The
‘low intent to stay’ group includes all other employees, even those who responded
‘don’t know’ or ‘doesn’t apply’”.
4.7.2.2 Impact scores
Pautz (2006:8-12) explains that “impact scores represent the strength of
association (or relationship) between attributes and an overall interaction area or
an interaction area and people commitment. The impact scores are coefficients
(which can range from 0.00 to 1.00). For Overall Interaction areas, those with
102
higher impacts have higher correlation with people commitment. For attributes,
those with higher impacts have greater influence on the overall rating of the
interaction area”.
4.7.3 Validity
Although the data received was already in a presentation stage (summaries and
descriptive statistics), it could be accepted as a true indication of the situation
within the organisation, due to reliability testing by Synovate Loyalty making use of
item analysis.
4.7.4 Reliability testing
A reliability test (Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient) is usually done to determine the
reliability of the data. Cronbach’s Alpha is an index of reliability associated with
the variation accounted for by the true score of the ‘underlying construct’.
Constructs are the hypothetical variables (statements) that are being measured
(Cooper & Schindler, 2001:480-499).
According to Synovate Loyalty (staff commitment survey for the year 2005 and the
year 2006), an item analysis to determine the internal consistency was done on
the raw data. Due to the fact that only summary tables were received to analyse,
the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficients could not be determined.
103
4.8 RESEARCH APPROACH
Specific actions were directed towards less desirable commitment index scores
organisation-wide and at a service-line level, in the hope of changing the
employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies and management
practices where a low commitment score was indicated. Directed action
organisation-wide as well as for the national audit service lines will be discussed to
assess the impact of the directed actions on the employees’ attitudes towards
human resources strategies and management practices.
4.8.1 Directed actions after 2005
The first commitment survey results were published in November 2005. As
mentioned, the organisation as well as each service line directed specific actions
towards less desirable commitment index scores, in the hope of changing the
employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies and management
practices (see Figure 4.2). Organisational directed actions were scoped and
designed at an organisational level. Each service line was responsible for
implementing and incorporating organisational directed actions into its service line
directed actions.
104
FIGURE 4.2: Directed actions after 2005 (Own source)
The organisational leadership structure as well as organisational leaders in key
positions changed towards the beginning of the year 2006. The organisation’s
strategic themes were amended to include focus areas such as organisational
culture change, learning and development, reward, recognition, compensation,
and benefits. Audit service line leadership also changed in the Pretoria, Natal, and
Johannesburg regions towards the year 2006. The Johannesburg leadership
structure changed with more people-focused roles and a smaller span of control.
Once again, as mentioned before, the organisational culture change initiative was
designed as an organisation-wide initiative, and each service line was responsible
105
for implementing and incorporating this initiative, with key strategies and practices
such as reward and performance management strategies. The culture change
initiative focused on driving desired behaviour, and competence-based models
were designed to recognise and reward the desired behaviour in line with the
culture change initiative. Each service line was responsible for incorporating these
competencies into its performance management model to reward employees
accordingly. The audit service line reviewed its performance management
documents and processes across all job levels (excluding trainee accountants)
and contracted new performance contracts with each employee. Policies,
procedures, and guiding principles were amended. The trainee accountant
performance management process, procedure, competencies, as well as the
measurement system were amended to comply with the newly set SETA (SAICA)
requirements and to incorporate organisation-wide initiatives such as the culture
change programme.
Compensation and benefits were reviewed per service line, per job level, on an
annual basis and benchmarked against the South African market. Benchmarking
results were used to determine market competitiveness, salary bands, and the
average salary increase percentages per job level and to amend employment
benefits (such as medical aid) where needed. Benchmarking results were also
taking into account for pre- and post-increase evaluations. The focus of the
organisation’s compensation and benefit strategy was to promote employee
retention and attraction of new hires on an ongoing basis.
106
The organisation placed a lot of emphasis on communication, and various
awareness campaigns were launched at an organisational level and per service
line to communicate directed actions towards organisational culture change,
performance management processes, reward and recognition processes, market
benchmarking results, and leadership changes. The audit service line set up
various forums to facilitate regular communication across different job levels
towards the year 2006. Regular communication and process owners were the
drivers behind change management.
Learning and development programmes were reviewed on an annual basis, with
generic organisation-wide offerings and service-line-specific offerings. Each year
service lines assessed the learning and development offerings according to their
specific needs and requested amendments or new offerings to support their
existing and upcoming training needs. As part of the audit service line
management development programme, all managers attended a management
assessment centre and a five-day management development programme. Even
though this was not a new directed action, it became a key focus area for the audit
service lines after the commitment results had reflected the immediate
supervisor/manager as a less desired commitment score.
4.8.2 Approach to measure directed actions
The organisation under investigation conducted the same commitment study in the
year 2006 to measure employee attitudes towards key human resources
strategies and management practices after directing specific actions to change
employee attitudes (see Figure 4.3). Once again, the Global People Commitment
107
Survey was used as measuring instrument for the purpose of comparison. The
selective measuring instrument enabled a comparison between the employee
commitment results of the Global People Commitment Survey for the year 2005
and the year 2006 and will, therefore, be able to provide the necessary information
to research the study objective. The target population consisted of 800 and 850
employees for the year 2005 and the year 2006, respectively, within a professional
services organisation in the national auditing service lines. The impact of
organisation-wide and service line directed action will only be assessed for the
defined target population.
FIGURE 4.3: Approach to measure directed actions (Own source)
The study was conducted to determine whether the organisation’s directed action
had the desirable effect of changing employees’ attitudes towards human
resources and management practices (see Figure 4.3) and, therefore, of
108
ultimately increasing employee commitment, as argued through the theoretical
research in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 of this document. To assess the impact of
directed actions, hypothetical variables (commitment statements) of the less
desirable commitment scores will be assessed, and only variation will be
accounted for based on a comparison of the data for the year 2005 and the year
2006.
4.9 SUMMARY
The purpose of the study was not to determine the level of commitment (as it had
already been done and the result was known), but rather the impact of directed
action to change employees’ attitudes towards human resources and management
practices through comparing the year 2005 commitment results with the year 2006
commitment results.
The practical process of the measurement of commitment was discussed in this
chapter. The Global People Commitment Survey that had been developed jointly
by Deloitte and Synovate Loyalty (then called Symmetrics Marketing) in 1999 was
discussed as measuring tool and the reliability and validity tested by Synovate
Loyalty.
109
CHAPTER 5: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The aim of this chapter is to present the results of the survey data collected.
Through theoretical research, it can be argued that human resources strategies
and management practices influence employee commitment. The effect of
specific human resources strategies and management practices on employee
commitment was determined by comparing the results of the Global People
Commitment Survey for the year 2005 with those for the year 2006. Descriptive
statistics and frequency tables show the distribution of biographical variables,
criteria groups and statement responses for the year 2005 and the year 2006.
Comparative statistics compare data for the year 2005 with the year 2006, making
use of the Chi-Square test.
5.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR BIOGRAPHICAL VARIABLES
Table 5.1 shows all the biographical variables in the survey for the year 2005 and
the year 2006, with the frequencies in each category and the percentage out of
total surveys.
110
TABLE 5.1: Biographical distribution
Variables Categories Frequency 2005
Percentage out of sample total
Frequency 2006
Percentage out of sample total
Biographical variables/sort criteria according to audit Johannesburg 238 42.3% 250 39.0% Pretoria 102 18.1% 113 17.6% Cape Town 84 14.9% 84 13.1% KwaZulu-Natal (Durban, PMB, Richards Bay)
98 17.4% 157 24.5%
1. Area
Port Elizabeth/East London 41 7.3% 37 5.8% Partner 57 10.1% 71 11.1% Principal/associate/senior manager/ manager
89 15.8% 114 17.8%
Assistant manager/supervisor/(senior) consultant/(senior) specialist
11 2.0% 18 2.8%
Trainee accountant/intern 368 65.2% 384 60.1%
2. Level
Support/administrative/general staff 39 6.9% 52 8.1% Male 286 50.7% 334 52.4% 3. Gender Female 278 49.3% 304 47.6% African black 82 17.7% 115 18.0% Coloured/Indian 107 19.2% 153 24.0%
4. Race
White 369 66.1% 370 58.0% < 3 years 397 70.4% 427 66.7% 3-5 years 51 9.0% 64 10.0%
5. Tenure
6 years + 116 20.6% 149 23.3%
The area variable reflects the number of respondents (frequency) who completed
the survey per regional area for the year 2005 and the year 2006 and the
percentage they represent out of the total sample group. The Johannesburg and
Pretoria regions increased in number of respondents in the year 2006; however,
their percentage of representation out of the total sample group declined in the
year 2006. The Cape Town number of respondents in the year 2005 and the year
2006 remained unchanged; however, their percentage of representation out of the
total sample group declined in the year 2006. KwaZulu-Natal increased in number
of respondents in the year 2006, as well as in their percentage of representation
out of the total sample group. Port Elizabeth/East London’s number of
respondents decreased in the year 2006, and so did their percentage of
representation out of the total sample group.
111
The level variable reflects the number of respondents (frequency) per job level
who completed the survey for the year 2005 and the year 2006 and the
percentage they represent out of the total sample group. The partner, principal/
associate/senior manager/manager, assistant manager/supervisor/senior
consultant/consultant, and support/administrative/general staff job levels increased
in number of respondents in the year 2006; so did their percentage of
representation out of the total sample group. The trainee accountant/intern job
level decreased in number of respondents in the year 2006; so did their
percentage of representation out of the total sample group.
The gender variable reflects the number of respondents (frequency) per gender
who completed the survey for the year 2005 and the year 2006 and the
percentage they represent out of the total sample group. The male gender
increased in number of respondents in the year 2006; so did their percentage of
representation out of the total sample group. The female gender as well as their
percentage of representation out of the total sample group decreased.
The race variable reflects the number of respondents (frequency) per equity group
who completed the survey for the year 2005 and the year 2006 and the
percentage they represent out of the total sample group. The African black and
Coloured/Indian racial groups increased in number of respondents in the year
2006; so did their percentage of representation out of the total sample group. The
white race group had a slight increase in number of respondents in the year 2006;
however, their percentage of representation out of the total sample group declined.
112
The tenure variable reflects the number of respondents (frequency) per number of
years of service who completed the survey for the year 2005 and the year 2006
and the percentage they represent out of the total sample group. The > 3 years of
service group increased in number of respondents in the year 2006; however, their
percentage of representation out of the total sample group declined. The 3-5
years and 6 years + of service groups increased in number of respondents in the
year 2006; so did their percentage of representation out of the total sample group.
It is important to measure variables in biographical distributions, as a significant
change of people movement may affect the outcome of a study and also the
internal validity. The biographical variables (criteria groups, as they are called in
the Global People Commitment Survey) did not differ significantly between the two
years. In the absence of significant changes, it can be accepted that the
distributions of the biographical variables are more or less similar for the two
years.
5.3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR VARIABLES UNDER INVESTIGATION
Table 5.2 shows all the variables (questions/statements) under investigation in the
survey for the year 2005 and the year 2006, with the calculated frequencies in
each category and the percentage out of the total surveys. Categories refer to the
survey rating scale. Frequency refers to the number of respondents per category.
Percentage out of total refers to the percentage of respondents per category per
variable (question/statement). This table will be used to compare hypothetical
variables (commitment statements) and assess variations based on a comparison
between the data for the year 2005 and the year 2006. The purpose of descriptive
113
statistics and frequency tables is to show the distribution of statement responses
for the year 2005 and the year 2006.
TABLE 5.2: Variables under investigation
Variables Categories Frequency 2005
Percentage out of total
Frequency 2006
Percentage out of total
General feelings about the organisation Strongly agree 118 20.9% 135 21.1% Agree 316 56.0% 365 56.9% Neither agree nor disagree
85 15.1% 83 13.0%
Disagree 34 6.0% 45 7.0%
A1. I feel a strong sense of belonging to Company X.
Strongly disagree
11 2.0% 13 2.0%
Strongly agree 106 19.0% 115 18.2% Agree 273 49.0% 313 49.5% Neither agree nor disagree
128 23.0% 147 23.3%
Disagree 39 7.0% 38 6.0%
A4. The reason I prefer Company X to others is because of what it stands for, that is, its values and beliefs.
Strongly disagree
11 2.0% 19 3.0%
Organisational leadership Strongly agree 67 12.1% 70 11.0% Agree 234 42.4% 285 45.0% Neither agree nor disagree
195 35.3% 209 33.0%
Disagree 50 9.1% 63 10.0%
C1. Overall rating of organisational leadership is positive.
Strongly disagree
6 1.1% 6 1.0%
Management of change Strongly agree 39 7.0% 44 7.1% Agree 195 35.1% 224 36.0% Neither agree nor disagree
222 39.9% 236 37.9%
Disagree 78 14.0% 93 15.0%
C2. Overall rating of the organisation’s management of change is positive.
Strongly disagree
22 4.0% 25 4.0%
Organisational communication Strongly agree 56 10.0% 70 11.1% Agree 202 36.0% 210 33.3% Neither agree nor disagree
219 39.0% 255 40.4%
Disagree 62 11.1% 83 13.2%
C3. Overall rating of the organisation’s communication with its people is positive.
Strongly disagree
22 3.9% 13 2.1%
Your immediate supervisor/manager(s) Strongly agree 56 10.0% 64 10.1% Agree 184 33.0% 211 33.3% Neither agree nor disagree
190 34.1% 211 33.3%
Disagree 100 17.9% 115 18.2%
C4. Overall rating of your immediate supervisor/ manager(s) is positive.
Strongly disagree
28 5.0% 32 5.1%
Developing our people Strongly agree 56 9.9% 70 11.0% C5. Overall rating of the
organisation in developing Agree 191 33.7% 204 32.0%
114
Variables Categories Frequency 2005
Percentage out of total
Frequency 2006
Percentage out of total
Neither agree nor disagree
219 38.6% 274 43.0%
Disagree 79 13.9% 70 11.0%
our people is positive.
Strongly disagree
22 3.9% 19 3.0%
Learning and education Strongly agree 124 22.0% 120 19.0% Agree 253 44.9% 285 45.0% Neither agree nor disagree
146 25.9% 178 28.1%
Disagree 34 6.0% 44 7.0%
C6. Overall rating of the learning and education that the organisation provides is positive.
Strongly disagree
6 1.1% 6 1.0%
Performance management Strongly agree 22 4.0% 32 5.1% Agree 129 23.0% 165 26.0% Neither agree nor disagree
207 37.0% 260 41.0%
Disagree 129 23.0% 120 18.9%
C7. Overall rating of the performance management process is positive.
Strongly disagree
73 13.0% 57 9.0%
Recognising success Strongly agree 33 6.0% 32 5.0% Agree 128 23.1% 158 24.8% Neither agree nor disagree
216 38.9% 258 40.5%
Disagree 139 25.0% 132 20.7%
C8. Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success is positive.
Strongly disagree
39 7.0% 57 9.0%
Compensation and benefits Strongly agree 22 4.0% 32 5.1% Agree 88 15.9% 101 16.0% Neither agree nor disagree
166 30.1% 239 37.9%
Disagree 182 33.0% 170 27.0%
C9. Overall rating of compensation and benefits is positive.
Strongly disagree
94 17.0% 88 14.0%
Hiring and staffing Strongly agree 73 13.1% 69 11.1% Agree 212 38.0% 233 37.4% Neither agree nor disagree
195 35.0% 233 37.4%
Disagree 61 10.9% 69 11.1%
C12a. The organisation is able to attract good people.
Strongly disagree
17 3.0% 19 3.0%
Strongly agree 28 5.0% 25 4.0% Agree 105 18.7% 119 19.0% Neither agree nor disagree
167 29.8% 188 30.0%
Disagree 139 24.8% 144 23.0%
C12d. The organisation is able to keep the best people with the organisation.
Strongly disagree
122 21.8% 150 24.0%
Strongly agree 28 5.0% 32 5.1% Agree 139 25.0% 164 25.9% Neither agree nor disagree
228 41.0% 272 43.0%
Disagree 122 21.9% 114 18.0%
C12f. The organisation develops and communicates clear job expectations.
Strongly disagree
39 7.0% 51 8.1%
115
There is no significant difference in the distribution of statement responses
between the year 2005 and the year 2006 for these questions: (A1) I feel a strong
sense of belonging to Company X; (A4) The reason I prefer Company X to others
is because of what it stands for, that is, its values and beliefs; (C1) Overall rating
of organisation leadership is positive; (C2) Overall rating of the organisation’s
management of change is positive; (C3) Overall rating of the organisation’s
communication with its people is positive; (C4) Overall rating of your immediate
supervisor/manager(s) is positive; (C6) Overall rating of the learning and education
that the organisation provides is positive; (C12a) The organisation is able to attract
good people; and (C12d) The organisation is able to keep the best people with the
organisation.
There seems to be a noticeable difference in the distribution of statement
responses between the year 2005 and the year 2006 for these questions: (C5)
Overall rating of the organisation in developing our people is positive − the
percentage of responses in the ‘Neither’ category increased by 4.4% in the year
2006; (C7) Overall rating of the performance management process is positive −
the percentage of responses in the ‘Agree’ and ‘Neither’ categories increased, on
average, by 4% in the year 2006, and the percentage of responses in the
‘Disagree’ and ‘Strongly disagree’ categories decreased, on average, by 4% in the
year 2006; (C8) Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success is
positive − the percentage of responses in the ‘Disagree’ category decreased by
4.3% in the year 2006; (C9) Overall rating of compensation and benefits is positive
− the percentage of responses in the ‘Neither’ category increased by 7.8% in the
year 2006, and the percentage of responses in the ‘Disagree’ and ‘Strongly
116
disagree’ categories decreased by 6% and 3% in the year 2006; and (C12f) The
organisation develops and communicate clear job expectations − the percentage
of responses in the ‘Disagree’ category decreased by 3.9% in the year 2006, with
a slight increase in the ‘Neither’ category.
The level of significance in the percentage of responses between the year 2005
and the year 2006 will be determined through chi-square statistics (please see
Section 5.5.3).
The ‘Neither’ category has increased for nine questions out of 14 between the year
2005 and the year 2006. The average of the ‘Neither’ category is 33% for the year
2005 and 34.4% for the year 2006, with eight questions out of 14 above 35% for
the year 2005 and the year 2006.
5.4 COMPARATIVE STATISTICS
The comparative statistics compare data for the year 2005 with that for the year
2006 by making use of the chi-square test. The biographical variables (criteria
groups, as they are called in the Global People Commitment Survey) did not differ
significantly between the two years. Thus any statistical differences that occur in
the statements cannot be attributed to the biographical variables.
When comparing the total responses of the year 2005 and the year 2006,
‘performance management’ (p = 0.0401) and ‘compensation and benefits’ (p =
0.0223) were the only statements where there was a statistically significant
movement from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’. To determine which criteria
groups had a significant movement, the comparison was repeated for each criteria
117
group. Table 5.3 shows the criteria groups that had a statistically significant shift
(p < 0.05) from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’. Chi-square (value and
probability) statistics were done between the two years for each criteria group to
draft comparison tables.
TABLE 5.3: Comparison statistics for criteria grouping
Variables Criteria group
Categories Frequency 2005
Percentage out of total
Frequency 2006
Percentage out of total
Performance management Agree 11 13.4% 25 30.1% Neither 36 43.9% 33 39.8%
Cape Town
Disagree 35 42.7% 25 30.1% Agree 23 23.5% 51 32.7% Neither 32 32.7% 68 43.6%
KwaZulu-Natal
Disagree 43 43.9% 37 23.7% Agree 92 25.0% 111 29.3% Neither 125 34.0% 169 44.6%
Trainee
Disagree 151 41.0% 99 26.1% Agree 72 26.4% 96 32.0% Neither 96 35.2% 123 41.0%
Female
Disagree 105 38.5% 81 27.0% Agree 18 22.5% 39 34.5% Neither 21 26.2% 45 39.8%
African
Disagree 41 51.2% 29 25.7% Agree 27 25.2% 52 33.8% Neither 28 26.2% 59 38.3%
Coloured/ Indian
Disagree 52 48.6% 43 27.9% Agree 99 25.1% 135 31.5% Neither 138 34.9% 187 43.7%
C7. Overall rating of the performance management process is positive.
< 3 years
Disagree 158 40.0% 106 24.8% Recognising success
Agree 25 31.7% 33 29.7% Neither 22 27.8% 50 45.1%
African
Disagree 32 40.5% 28 25.2% Agree 22 21.0% 53 35.1% Neither 38 36.2% 51 33.8%
C8. Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success is positive.
Coloured/ Indian
Disagree 45 42.9% 47 31.1% Compensation and benefits
Agree 44 18.8% 57 22.9% Neither 61 26.1% 87 34.9%
Johannesburg
Disagree 129 55.1% 105 42.2% Agree 47 13.1% 49 13.0% Neither 97 26.9% 155 41.0%
Trainee
Disagree 216 60.0% 174 46.0% Agree 49 18.2% 48 16.1% Neither 83 30.9% 131 44.0%
Female
Disagree 137 50.9% 119 39.9% Agree 14 17.9% 13 11.6% Neither 13 16.7% 40 35.7%
C9. Overall rating of compensation and benefits is positive.
African
Disagree 51 65.4% 59 52.7%
118
Variables Criteria group
Categories Frequency 2005
Percentage out of total
Frequency 2006
Percentage out of total
Agree 17 16.2% 31 20.4% Neither 26 24.8% 56 36.8%
Coloured/ Indian
Disagree 62 59.0% 65 42.8% Agree 54 14.0% 59 14.0% Neither 108 28.0% 171 40.4%
< 3 years
Disagree 224 58.0% 193 45.6%
On the overall rating of performance management, the criteria group Cape Town
experienced a movement from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ to ‘Agree’ between the year
2005 and the year 2006. The criteria groups KwaZulu-Natal, trainees, female,
African, Coloureds, and tenure < 3 years experienced a movement from ‘Disagree’
to ‘Agree’ between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category
‘Neither’ increased.
On the overall rating of the organisation in recognising success, for the criteria
group Africans, the ‘Neither’ category increased; while there was a movement
away from ‘Disagree’, there was also a movement away from ‘Agree’ between the
year 2005 and the year 2006. The criteria group Coloureds and Indians had a
movement from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ to ‘Agree’ between the year 2005 and the
year 2006.
On the overall rating of compensation and benefits, the criteria groups
Johannesburg and Coloureds/Indians experienced a movement from ‘Disagree’ to
‘Agree’ between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category
‘Neither’ increased. For the criteria groups trainee and tenure > 3 years, the
‘Neither’ category increased; while there was movement away from ‘Disagree’,
‘Agree’ remained stable between the year 2005 and the year 2006. For the criteria
groups female and African, the ‘Neither’ category increased; while there was a
119
movement away from ‘Disagree’, there was also a movement away from ‘Agree’
between the year 2005 and the year 2006.
As explained previously, ‘performance management’ (p = 0.0401) and
‘compensation and benefits’ (p = 0.0223) were the only statements that had a
statistically significant movement from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’ between
the year 2005 and the year 2006. Criteria groups with significant movements that
had a statistically significant shift (p < 0.05) from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’
are included in Table 5.3.
Note must be taken that some of the cells had zero expected counts for some of
the statements and that the chi-square test might not be valid in those cases.
5.5 COMMITMENT INDEX SCORES
The commitment index is calculated at the individual respondent level. The year
2006 was the second year that Company X conducted the Global People
Commitment Survey. Only the ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’ scores are used to
indicate the level of commitment.
5.5.1 Overall commitment index scores
Table 5.4 reflects the overall commitment scores achieved per region, job level,
gender, race and tenure. The organisation did achieve an overall commitment
score of 74 for the year 2005 and 75 for the year 2006 as indicated in Table 5.4.
120
TABLE 5.4: Overall commitment index scores (Synovate Loyalty)
People Commitment Survey 2006
Commitment indexTotal
Answering
Commitment Index (0 - 100 scale)
Total Answering
Commitment Index (0 - 100 scale)
641 74 564 75Employee CommitmentSort Criteria:
JHB 250 72 238 72Pretoria 113 78 102 80
Cape Town 84 73 84 76KZN (Durban, PMB, Richards Bay) 157 73 98 75
Port Elizabeth / East London 37 80 41 79Partner 71 85 57 87
Principal / Associate / Senior Manager /Manager 114 76 89 79
Asst Mnr / Super / (Snr) Con / (Snr) Spec 18 77 11 76Trainee Accountant / Intern 384 71 368 72
Support / Administrative / General staff 52 77 39 77Male 334 74 286 76
Female 304 74 278 74African Black 115 71 82 72
Coloured / Indian 153 74 107 74White 370 76 369 76
Tenure less than 3 years 427 72 397 72Tenure 3 - 5 years 64 74 51 77Tenure 6 years + 149 80 116 84
Note: Groups with a base (total answering) below 10 respondents have not been reported.
People Commitment Survey 2005South Africa: Audit South Africa: Audit
The partner, principal/associate/senior manager, and tenure 6 years +
commitment index scores are noticeable higher than the average and overall
commitment index scores.
With reference to the purpose of this study (please refer to Section 1.2), results will
only focus on the less desired commitment index scores where action was
directed (please refer to Section 4.6.4 and Section 4.8) to change employees’
attitudes towards human resources strategies and management practices between
the year 2005 and the year 2006.
121
5.5.2 Less desirable commitment index scores under investigation
Table 5.5 reflects the less desirable commitment index scores per question under
investigation between the year 2005 and the year 2006. The organisation directed
specific actions (see Section 4.8) towards the less desired commitment index
scores questions in the hope of changing employees’ attitudes towards human
resources strategies and management practices.
TABLE 5.5: Less desirable commitment index scores per question under
investigation
122
5.5.3 Comparison tables and chi-square statistics
The chi-square technique is used to test for significant differences between the
observed distributions of data among categories. It is calculated on the actual
counts.
Chi-square value and probability between the two years for all the
respondents
123
The organisation directed actions towards less desirable commitment scores in the
hope of changing employee attitudes towards human resources strategies and
management practices. The study was conducted to determine whether the
organisation’s directed action had the desirable effect of changing employees’
attitudes towards human resources and management practices. To assess the
impact of directed actions, hypothetical variables (commitment statements) of the
less desirable commitment scores will be assessed, and only variation will be
accounted for based on a comparison between data for the year 2005 and that for
the year 2006.
Results will be regarded as significant if the p values are smaller than 0.05,
because this value represents an acceptable level on a 95% confidence interval (p
≤ 0.05). The chi-square results below show the comparisons made between the
year 2005 and the year 2006. They give the actual frequencies and the
percentage out of the total number of respondents, which is the percentage of
respondents in that category; for instance, respondents who agreed = 434 out of
the great total = 564 (2005) + 642 (2006) = 1 205. The row percentages are the
number in that category out of the total for that year; for example, it is the
percentage of 434 respondents who agreed in the year 2005 out of the total
number of respondents (564) in that year. The column percentages show the
percentage, for instance, those for the year 2005 who agreed out of the total
number of those who agreed, for example, the percentage of 434 out of 934. The
chi-square results are used to compare the response over the period of two years.
They also reflect the test statistics to show whether there was a significant
difference between the two years or not.
124
Probability is the p value as previously described in this document. Value is the
chi-square value calculated from the frequency table and looked up in a table
according to DF (degrees of freedom), which is calculated by (rows - 1) * (columns
- 1) = (2 - 1) * (3 - 1) = 1 * 2 = 2.
The ‘Strongly agree’ and ‘Agree’, ‘Disagree’ and ‘Strongly disagree’ are
aggregated as in chi-square results below, the reason being that, in some cases,
the expected count in the cells was less than 0.05 (< 0.05), which could relate to
an invalid chi-square result.
Comparison of the year 2005 and the year 2006
Results will only be regarded as statistically significant (different) if the p values
are smaller than 0.05, because this value represents an acceptable level on a 95%
confidence interval (p ≤ 0.05).
The chi-square results show the comparisons made between the year 2005 and
the year 2006. As mentioned before, the chi-square results are used to compare
the response over the period of two years. They also reflect the test statistics to
show whether there was a significant difference between the two years or not.
TABLE 5.6: Chi-square comparisons
125
QUESTION=A1 QUESTION=A4
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 434 85 45 564 2005 379 128 50 557
36.02% 7.05% 3.73% 46.80% 31.88% 10.77% 4.21% 46.85%76.95% 5.07% 7.98% 68.04% 22.98% 8.98%46.47% 50.60% 43.69% 46.96% 46.55% 46.73%
2006 500 83 58 641 2006 428 147 57 63241.49% 6.89% 4.81% 53.20% 36.00% 12.36% 4.79% 53.15%78.00% 12.95% 9.05% 67.72% 23.26% 9.02%53.53% 49.40% 56.31% 53.04% 53.45% 53.27%
Total 934 168 103 1205 Total 807 275 107 118977.51% 13.94% 8.55% 100.00% 67.87% 23.13% 9.00% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 1.4138 0.4932 Chi-Square 2 0.0151 0.9925
QUESTION=C1 QUESTION=C2
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 301 195 56 552 2005 234 222 100 556
25.40% 16.46% 4.73% 46.58% 19.86% 18.85% 8.49% 47.20%54.53% 35.33% 10.14% 42.09% 39.93% 17.99%45.88% 48.27% 44.80% 46.61% 48.47% 45.87%
2006 355 209 69 633 2006 268 236 118 62229.96% 17.64% 5.82% 53.42% 22.75% 20.03% 10.02% 52.80%56.08% 33.02% 10.90% 43.09% 37.94% 18.97%54.12% 51.73% 55.20% 53.39% 51.53% 54.13%
Total 656 404 125 1185 Total 502 458 218 117855.36% 34.09% 10.55% 100.00% 42.61% 38.88% 18.51% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 0.7491 0.6876 Chi-Square 2 0.5208 0.7707
QUESTION=C3 QUESTION=C4
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 258 219 84 561 2005 240 190 128 558
21.64% 18.37% 7.05% 47.06% 20.15% 15.95% 10.75% 46.85%45.99% 39.04% 14.97% 43.01% 34.05% 22.94%47.96% 46.20% 46.67% 46.60% 47.38% 46.55%
2006 280 255 96 631 2006 275 211 147 63323.49% 21.39% 8.05% 52.94% 23.09% 17.72% 12.34% 53.15%44.37% 40.41% 15.21% 43.44% 33.33% 23.22%52.04% 53.80% 53.33% 53.40% 52.62% 53.45%
Total 538 474 180 1192 Total 515 401 275 119145.13% 39.77% 15.10% 100.00% 43.24% 33.67% 23.09% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 0.3242 0.8504 Chi-Square 2 0.0685 0.9663Sample Size = 1192 Sample Size = 1191
C3. Overall rating of the firm’s communication with its people is positive?
C4. Overall rating of your immediate supervisor / manager(s) is positive?
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
Sample Size = 1185 Sample Size = 1178
C2. Overall rating of the firm’s management of change is positive?C1. Overall rating of firm leadership is positive?
A1. I feel a strong sense of belonging to Company X?
Sample Size = 1205
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
A4. The reason I prefer Company X to others is because of what it stands for, that is, its values and beliefs?Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
Sample Size = 1189
126
QUESTION=C5 QUESTION=C6
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 247 219 101 567 2005 377 146 40 563
20.51% 18.19% 8.39% 47.09% 31.52% 12.21% 3.34% 47.07%43.56% 38.62% 17.81% 66.96% 25.93% 7.10%47.41% 44.42% 53.16% 48.21% 45.06% 44.44%
2006 274 274 89 637 2006 405 178 50 63322.76% 22.76% 7.39% 52.91% 33.86% 14.88% 4.18% 52.93%43.01% 43.01% 13.97% 63.98% 28.12% 7.90%52.59% 55.58% 46.84% 51.79% 54.94% 55.56%
Total 521 493 190 1204 Total 782 324 90 119643.27% 40.95% 15.78% 100.00% 65.38% 27.09% 7.53% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 4.2376 0.1202 Chi-Square 2 1.1812 0.554
QUESTION=C7 QUESTION=C8
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 151 207 202 560 2005 161 216 178 555
12.65% 17.34% 16.92% 46.90% 13.51% 18.12% 14.93% 46.56%26.96% 36.96% 36.07% 29.01% 38.92% 32.07%43.39% 44.33% 53.30% 45.87% 45.57% 48.50%
2006 197 260 177 634 2006 190 258 189 63716.50% 21.78% 14.82% 53.10% 15.94% 21.64% 15.86% 53.44%31.07% 41.01% 27.92% 29.83% 40.50% 29.67%56.61% 55.67% 46.70% 54.13% 54.43% 51.50%
Total 348 467 379 1194 Total 351 474 367 119229.15% 39.11% 31.74% 100.00% 29.45% 39.77% 30.79% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 9.1936 0.0101* Chi-Square 2 0.8101 0.6669
QUESTION=C9 QUESTION=C12A
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 110 166 276 552 2005 285 195 78 558
9.31% 14.04% 23.35% 46.70% 24.13% 16.51% 6.60% 47.25%19.93% 30.07% 50.00% 51.08% 34.95% 13.98%45.27% 40.99% 51.69% 48.55% 45.56% 46.99%
2006 133 239 258 630 2006 302 233 88 62311.25% 20.22% 21.83% 53.30% 25.57% 19.73% 7.45% 52.75%21.11% 37.94% 40.95% 48.48% 37.40% 14.13%54.73% 59.01% 48.31% 51.45% 54.44% 53.01%
Total 243 405 534 1182 Total 587 428 166 118120.56% 34.26% 45.18% 100.00% 49.70% 36.24% 14.06% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 10.8417 0.0044** Chi-Square 2 0.8938 0.6396
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
Sample Size = 1182 Sample Size = 1181
Sample Size = 1194 Sample Size = 1192
C9. Overall rating of compensation and benefits is positive? C12A. The firm are able to attract good people?
C7. Overall rating of the performance management process is positive?
C8. Overall rating of the firm in Recognizing Success is positive?
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency /Percent / Row Pct
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
Sample Size = 1204 Sample Size = 1196
C5. Overall rating of the firm in developing our people is positive?
C6. Overall rating of the learning and education the firm provides is positive?
127
QUESTION=C12D QUESTION=C12F
Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total Col Pct Agree Neither Disagree Total2005 133 167 261 561 2005 167 228 161 556
11.20% 14.07% 21.99% 47.26% 14.05% 19.18% 13.54% 46.76%23.71% 29.77% 46.52% 30.04% 41.01% 28.96%48.01% 47.04% 47.03% 46.01% 45.60% 49.39%
2006 144 188 294 626 2006 196 272 165 63312.13% 15.84% 24.77% 52.74% 16.48% 22.88% 13.88% 53.24%23.00% 30.03% 46.96% 30.96% 42.97% 26.07%51.99% 52.96% 52.97% 53.99% 54.40% 50.61%
Total 277 355 555 1187 Total 363 500 326 118923.34% 29.91% 46.76% 100.00% 30.53% 42.05% 27.42% 100.00%
Statistic DF Value Prob Statistic DF Value ProbChi-Square 2 0.0821 0.9598 Chi-Square 2 1.2566 0.5335Sample Size = 1187 Sample Size = 1189
C12D. The firm are able to keep the best people with the firm?
C12F. The firm develops and communicate clear job expectations?
Frequency / Percent / Row Pct Frequency / Percent / Row Pct
The results of the comparison between the year 2005 and the year 2006 are not
regarded as statistically significant (different) in all the questions, except for
questions C7 and C9, where the p value is less than 0.05. The results of the
comparison between the year 2005 and the year 2006 are regarded as statistically
significant (different), as the p values are smaller than 0.05. This value represents
an acceptable level on a 95% confidence interval (p ≤ 0.05).
5.6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Although there may have been a positive shift in employees’ attitudes towards
some of the statements, from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’ from the year
2005 to the year 2006, it was not statistically significant. However, ‘performance
management’ and ‘compensation and benefits’ were statistically significant and
were positively affected by human resources strategies and management
practices in an effort to improve commitment in the organisation (see Section 4.8).
There may be other causes for the indication of improved attitudes, but that can
only be determined by further studies. Note must be taken that some of the
significant shifts are from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’, and this may confuse the issue in
128
terms of whether this is positive for the organisation or whether it might be that the
human resources strategies and management practices made people more
unsure. It is also possible that it is too early to reap any benefits from improved
management practices and human resources strategies.
The majority of criteria groups indicated a more positive attitude towards
variables/statements in the year 2006, with the ‘Disagree’ category decreasing and
the ‘Neither’ category increasing. The ‘Neither’ category percentages are
noticeably high in relation to the other category percentages. The high
percentages in the ‘Neither’ category may reflect a disengaged workforce. This
could be a classical case of Herzberg’s motivational theory. According to
Herzberg, if the ‘hygiene’ factors are absent, it could cause dissatisfaction. Proper
attention to the hygiene factors will tend to prevent dissatisfaction, but does not, by
itself, create a positive attitude or motivation to work. The opposite of
dissatisfaction is not satisfaction but, simply, no dissatisfaction (Mullins, 2005:485).
Taking Herzberg’s theory into account, the high ‘Neither’ category may reflect that
employees are not necessarily dissatisfied (for example, disagreeing with the
variable/statement), but that they are not satisfied either (for example, a positive
attitude towards the variable/statement).
The biographical variables had the same distribution for both the years. Thus any
conclusion made for difference between the years cannot be explained by
difference between the biographical variables, because there were no differences.
129
The differences in the statements ‘performance management’ and ‘compensation
and benefits’ can be explained by a real shift due to changes in responses
between the two years. These changes could be due to management practices
and human resources strategies that had been employed since the year 2005 (see
Section 4.8).
5.7 SUMMARY
The objective of the study was to determine whether the organisation’s directed
action had had the desirable effect of changing employees’ attitudes towards less
desirable human resources and management practices. In Chapter 5, the results
of the statistical analysis were presented. Conclusions drawn were validated by
the statistical analysis and explanations of all variables, and their outcomes were
compiled. Gross analysis of variables was made, where necessary, with statistical
probability attached to indicate the magnitude of these probabilities.
The biographical variables (criteria groups, as they are called in the Global People
Commitment Survey) did not differ significantly between the two years. In the
absence of significant changes, it can be accepted that the distributions of the
biographical variables were more or less similar for the two years.
When comparing the total responses of the year 2005 with the year 2006,
‘performance management’ (p = 0.0401) and ‘compensation and benefits’ (p =
0.0223) were the only statements where there was a statistically significant
movement from ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ and ‘Agree’. To determine which criteria
groups had a positive movement, the comparison was repeated for each criteria
130
group. The criteria groups that had a statistically significant shift in their rating of
overall performance management were Cape Town, KwaZulu-Natal, trainees,
females, Africans, Coloureds/Indians, and tenure < 3 years. The criteria groups
that had a statistically significant shift in their rating of overall compensation and
benefits were Johannesburg, trainees, females, Africans, Coloureds/Indians, and
tenure < 3 years.
Recommendations were identified for future success. The recommendations are
presented in Chapter 6.
131
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The study’s problem statement postulated that despite the focus on, and
consequences of, commitment, executives find it difficult to influence, measure,
and manage employee (organisational) commitment.
The purpose of the study was, firstly, to provide theoretical and empirical research
on employee (organisational) commitment and, secondly, to determine whether
the organisation’s directed action had had the desirable effect of changing
employees’ attitudes towards human resources and management practices. The
theoretical research focused on the concept of employee (organisational)
commitment through researching antecedents and consequences of employee
commitment. Emphasis was placed on attitudinal aspects and behavioural
influences and the effect of human resources strategies and management
practices on employee (organisational) commitment. Through theoretical
research, it was argued that human resources strategies and management
practices could influence employee commitment.
As empirical research, the change in employee attitudes towards human
resources strategies and management practices between the year 2005 and the
year 2006 was measured through the application of the assessment instrument,
the Global People Commitment Survey. The study conducted focused on the
comparison of less desirable commitment scores of employees’ attitudes towards
human resources and management practices for the year 2005 and the year 2006.
132
Data was collected in the year 2005 and the same data again in the year 2006
from employees in a professional services organisation in the national audit
service lines across all job levels in order to measure the impact of directed human
resources and management practices. The organisation had directed specific
actions (see Section 4.8) towards the less desired commitment scores in the hope
of changing employees’ attitudes and, ultimately, increasing employee
commitment after the first commitment survey in the year 2005.
6.2 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
The Global People Commitment Survey was used, which had been developed
jointly by Deloitte and Synovate Loyalty (then called Symmetrics Marketing) in
1999. In assessing the impact of directed actions, hypothetical variables
(commitment statements) of the less desirable commitment scores were
assessed, and only variation was accounted for based on a comparison between
the data for the year 2005 and the year 2006.
The p value was compared to the significance level (α) of 0.05 and where the p
value was lower than 0.05 the result of the comparison between the year 2005 and
the year 2006 was regarded as statistically significant (different).
The majority of the measurements reflected that the responses for the two years
were the same (Data (2005) = Data (2006)). This signifies that the impact of the
directed actions (see Section 4.8) was limited, if it had an impact at all. An impact
on ‘performance management’ (p = 0.0401) and ‘compensation and benefits’ (p =
0.0223) was noted and the result of the comparison between the year 2005 and
133
the year 2006 was regarded as statistically significant (different). It is noticeable
that these were the two areas where there was a definite strategy change (see
Section 4.8); however, there was not enough evidence to prove that the rejected
hypothesis was due to a change in human resources strategy or management
practices.
The ‘Neither’ category was exceptionally high, with an average of 33% for the year
2005 and 34.4% for the year 2006.
6.2.1 Shortcomings of the research
Employee (organisational) commitment is multidimensional, and it is possible that
certain organisational and individual variables are related to different forms of
commitment. For the purpose of this study, it was necessary to limit the focus to
the concept, antecedents, consequences, and strategies that influence employee
(organisational) commitment. Buckingham and Coffman (1999:11-12) believe that
“talented employees may join an organisation because of its charismatic leaders,
its generous benefits, and its work-class training programmes, but how long that
employee stays and how productive he is while he is there is determined by his
relationship with his immediate supervisor”. Taking this statement into account, it
is possible that human resources strategies may not weigh as much when it
comes to employee commitment. There may be other factors that weigh even
more and that deserve more attention.
The impact of human resources and management practices on employee
commitment can only really be measured if the actual employee commitment
134
levels among a workforce are assessed. Due to the size of the actual employee
commitment levels reports received from Synovate Loyalty for the year 2005 and
the year 2006, this study was limited to focusing only on the less desirable scores
that had a direct relation to human resources and management practices. It is
arguable that valuable information may have been overlooked due to the limited
focus; however, the purpose of this study was to measure the impact on
employees’ attitudes towards human resources strategies and management
practices (that ultimately contribute to employee commitment) due to directed
actions and not to compare all variables of employee commitment levels.
Although there had been shifts for some of the statements from the year 2005 to
the year 2006, it is uncertain whether these were due to human resources
strategies and management practices, especially in the light of this being only the
second year that the organisation under investigation had conducted the Global
People Commitment Survey. There may be other causes for the shifts of some of
the statements between the year 2005 and the year 2006 that can only be
determined through further studies.
The research method, ex post facto, also has certain limitations, as it focuses,
firstly, on the effect and then attempts to determine what caused the observed
effect. As explained in an Internet article (Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, and
Ex Post Facto (Causal-Comparative) Research, 2006), it is possible that the cause
effect was not due to the directed actions, but due to other circumstances such as:
History: another event occurs during the time of the experiment that might
cause the difference;
135
Maturation: people naturally change and evolve over time. This may cause
the difference in attitude; and
Mortality: some people drop out during an experiment, leave the
organisation, and are replaced with new entrants. This may affect the
outcome.
It may be premature to measure the impact of directed actions towards human
resources strategies and management practices within a time period of less then
12 months. This may also have contributed to the increased ‘Neither’ scores in
most of the questions (see Section 6.2), as the ‘Neither’ category percentages
were exceptionally high in relation to the other category percentages. It is possible
that employees had noticed change, however, and were uncertain what to think
about this change, as it was still early days. This could also be an indication of a
low employee engagement/involvement level. As explained in Section 5.6,
according to Herzberg theory of motivation, if the “hygiene” factors are absent, it
could cause dissatisfaction. Proper attention to the hygiene factors will tend to
prevent dissatisfaction, but does not, by itself, create a positive attitude or
motivation to work. As mentioned, the opposite of dissatisfaction is not
satisfaction but, simply, no dissatisfaction (Mullins, 2005:485). It is possible that
employees were not necessarily dissatisfied and, therefore, did not disagree with
the statements; however, they were not satisfied either, and therefore, they did not
reflect a positive attitude towards the variables/statements. This theory can only
be determined by further studies.
136
Also noticeable is that 65.2% of respondents for the year 2005 and 60.1% for the
year 2006 consisted of trainee accountants. This has a direct correlation to
tenure, where employees with less than three years (< 3 years) of service
represented 70.4% in the year 2005 and 66.7% in the year 2006. Mortality, as
previously explained, could be a possible limitation of this study. Trainee
accountants are only employed for a period of three years. During their three
years of training, they are exposed to specific learning programmes and a
prescribed performance management approach. Drastic changes were made to
the trainee performance management framework in the middle of the year 2006
(see Section 4.8). Compensation and benefits for trainee accountants also differ
from those for employees in the rest of the organisation. Trainee accountants’
attitudes toward human resources strategies and management practices are just
as important as those of the rest of the organisation’s employees; however, it is
possible that their needs are different from those of other employees within the
organisation, and therefore, different actions may be needed to change their
attitudes towards human resources and management practices. It may be useful
to further explore the relationship between employee attitudes towards human
resources strategies and management practices, taking into account different
career stages and the difference in generations. It may be expected that the
human resources practices associated with commitment during the early career
stage when defined by employee age or contract of employment, such as
learnerships, may vary from those associated with commitment when defined by
organisational tenure. This relationship can only be determined by further studies.
137
The employee commitment measuring instrument (the Global People Commitment
Survey) may also be a possible shortcoming in the measurement of employee
commitment. There are other dimensions to employee commitment that cannot be
assessed through the applied measuring instrument, such as the effect of
individual behavioural influences on employee commitment, as discussed in
Chapter 2. Buckingham and Coffman (1999:11-12) may be correct in stating that
how long an employee stays with an organisation depends on the relationship with
his/her immediate supervisor. Buckingham and Coffman (1999:197-203) explain
that great managers take time to get to know their people. Buckingham and
Coffman (1999:15) recognise that everyone is different, and therefore, you cannot
treat everyone the same. It is possible that human resources strategies and
management practices are based on a “one size fits all” approach, instead of
recognising individual needs and differences.
6.2.2 Suggestions
An understanding of the relationship between employees’ attitudes towards human
resources strategies and management practices and employee commitment may
be useful in determining whether directed actions towards improved human
resources strategies and management practices may have had a desirable effect.
The concept of employee (organisational) commitment and the intervening
variables that channel the occurrence and strength of commitment were explored
in this study.
For further studies, it is recommended to:
138
Consider the influences on, and effect of, the different types of employee
commitment (affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative
commitment), as explained in Section 2.2;
Investigate the weight of human resources strategies and management
practices as an influence on employee commitment;
Be aware of possible research limitations such as history, maturation, and
mortality (as explained in Section 6.2) and their impact on the study;
Wait at least 24 months before measuring change in employees’ attitudes.
To expect a change in 12 months may be premature; and
Take into account the needs of employees in different career stages and the
needs of different generations and their effect on employee commitment.
Employees in their earliest career stages may be more interested in learning
and development than employees at the end of their career. Employees’
needs may differ and, therefore, also the organisation’s directed actions in
the form of policies and procedures.
Human resources strategies and management practices should be directed
towards high-priority areas for the highest impact, as discussed in Chapter 3. The
comparison of priority grids is one of the most powerful criteria from which an
organisation can draw comparisons. The less desired commitment index scores
for the year 2006 (Table 5.5) suggest that the following dimensions need urgent
attention:
Compensation and benefits (21%) – upward shift from 20% in the year 2005;
139
Keeping the best people within the organisation (23%), which is a clear
indication that the employees perceive the organisation as having a retention
problem – downward shift from 24% in the year 2005;
Recognising success (30%) – upward shift from 29% in the year 2005; and a
tie between
Performance management (31%) – upward shift from 27% in the year 2005;
and
Developing and communicating clear job expectations (31%) – upward shift
from 30% in the year 2005.
Overall, the percentages in the ‘Neither’ category were exceptionally high. This is
a concern, as it could skew the results, and employees seemed to be very
comfortable not to express their opinions. It is also possible that employees were
confused, whatever the reason. The organisation should try to bring this score
down.
Should the high ‘Neither’ category be addressed, it could shift the results
drastically in the following year, which would affect the consistent baselines for
monitoring progress. The high percentages in the ‘Neither’ category confuse the
issue in terms of whether it could lean to the positive side for the organisation or
the negative side. Should the survey be positioned in such a way that the ‘Neither’
category percentage comes down for the next study, it will affect the true reflection
of the comparison results. It may result in vast shifts that are not due to changed
attitudes towards human resources strategies and management practices, but
rather forced decision-making. This is not the intent of Synovate Loyalty, as
140
explained by Pautz (2006:3), that “allowing respondents to select Don’t
Know/Doesn’t Apply results is a truer measure of each question, since those who
feel they cannot judge a particular item are allowed to skip the question rather than
feel forced to ‘guess’”. However, as mentioned, the ‘Don’t know/Doesn’t apply’
(‘Neither’ category) results were exceptionally high and should be a concern for
the organisation.
A high percentage in the ‘Neither’ category may also reflect disengagement. It is
possible that the workforce was unsure what to think or had a loss of interest.
Being unsure may also be due to current change initiatives. The only way of
finding out the true meaning of the employee attitude and perception in this
category is through further investigation.
The objective of this study was to measure the impact of directed actions, to
change employees’ attitudes towards less desired commitment scores, and
ultimately to increase employee commitment. According to Pautz (2006:14), “it is
a widely held belief that in order to maintain and improve outstanding employee
engagement practices, organisations must always measure themselves against
internal best practices”.
Historical data can serve as one of the most valuable comparative tools when
reporting survey data. To ensure sustained success, a work environment must
conduct an assessment, establish baselines, and monitor progress. Historical
data is the key to establishing consistent baselines and monitoring progress. The
141
results from an organisation’s initial survey will establish a baseline from which the
organisation can measure how (and in what areas) improvement has occurred.
It is suggested that another comparison be conducted in an added year’s time and
that results be compared over a period of at least two years (24 months). It is also
suggested that the study be broadened to measure the effect of individual
behavioural influences on employee commitment.
Pautz (2006:9), for Synovate Loyalty, suggests that it is not recommended to
compare results to other industries or organisations, as these results may be
sample-biased, old data collected under different social-economic circumstances,
item-level differences, scale differences, etc. Fundamentally, looking at any
industry benchmark database is not comparing ‘apples to apples’ and, therefore, is
of limited value. Internal benchmarking may be insightful, and comparison to high-
performing functions or groups within a member organisation may prove useful in
assessing best practices.
6.3 CONCLUSION
Through the theoretical research, it can be argued that employee (organisational)
commitment affects organisational effectiveness for various reasons, and
therefore, it can be assumed that executives are concerned with understanding
the concept, influences, measurement, and management of employee
(organisational) commitment.
142
It has been argued in this study that employee (organisational) commitment can
be influenced through human resources strategies and management practices.
Changing employees’ attitudes towards human resources and management
practices will result in changed behavioural tendencies toward various aspects of
one’s job, as attitudes are reflected in tendencies to respond, as previously
discussed in this study.
Being aware of less desired commitment scores, organisations can attempt to
change employees’ attitudes and, ultimately, to shape employee behaviour
through directed actions in the form of customised policies, procedures, human
resources strategies, and management practices in the hope of increasing
employee commitment levels and, ultimately, organisational effectiveness.
This study improves our understanding of the connection between human
resources strategies/management practices and employee (organisational)
commitment. Organisations seeking to promote commitment might need to tailor
human resources practices to suite employees’ needs. To attain success,
organisations must innovate in human resources management, notably by
applying practices that favour the adoption of positive attitudes and behaviours
toward the organisation.
The research objective of this study, to measure the impact of directed actions to
change employees’ attitudes towards less desired commitment scores and,
ultimately, to increase employee commitment, was achieved to a limited extent.
143
Knowing the true reason for the change (or where there was no change) is
unknown.
144
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ADONISI, M. 2005. Antecedents of an organisational culture that fosters
corporate entrepreneurship. People Dynamics, August 2005. Vol. 23, No. 8. p. 6.
ASHKANASY, N.M., WILDEROM, P.M. & PETERSON, M.F. 2000.
Organisational culture and climate. Sage Publications, Inc.
AYERS, K. 2007. Why worker engagement is not enough. Manufactures
Monthly, February 2007. p. 16 (article).
BABB, S. 2006. Diversity and learning. HR Future, November 2006. p. 21.
BAKOS, B. 2007. Get the best fish in the talent pool. HR Future, June 2007. p.
32-33.
BENNETT, K. & MINTY, H. 2005. The manager as a career coach. HR Future,
June 2005.
BOARDMAN, T. 2007. People are all you’ve got. HR Future, May 2007. p. 26.
BOHRENSTEDT, G.W. & KNOKE, D. 1988. Statistics for social data analysis.
2nd Edition. Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers, Inc.
BOTHMA, R. 2007. Implementing HR solutions. HR Future, May 2007. p. 20.
BOWDITCH, J.L. & BUONO, A.F. 2005. A primer on organizational behavior.
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
145
BRAMMER, S., MILLINGTON, A. & RAYTON, B. 2007. Do CSR policies affect
employees’ commitment to their organisation? People Management, 9 February
2006. p. 52. Available from: Business Source Corporate, Ipswich, MA.
BRENNAN, M. 2004. Flying in formation: The organisational commitment of
training and development. Chief Learning Officer, March 2004. Vol. 3, Issue 3. p.
50-52. Available from: Business Source Corporate, Ipswich, MA.
BUCHANAN, D. & HUCZYNSKI, A. 2004. Organisational behaviour an
introductory text. Prentice Hall.
BUCKINGHAM, M. & COFFMAN, C. 1999. First, break all the rules. Simon &
Schuster UK Ltd.
BURTON, L. 2001. Managing motivation. People Dynamics, August 2001. p.
13-14.
BUSSIN, M. 2007. Ticket into the remuneration stadium. HR Future, June 2007.
p. 16-17.
BYWATER, J. 2005. Objective assessment: a 50/50 win for candidates and
recruiters. SHL. People Dynamics, June 2005. Vol. 23, No. 6. p. 27.
CABOT, S.J. & STEINER, J.M. 2007. Make your company a great place to work.
Leadership Excellence, March 2007. Vol. 24, Issue 3. p. 19.
COETZEE, M. 2006. The behaviour of a person of influence. HR Future,
November 2006. p. 42-43.
146
COMPENSATION & BENEFITS FOR LAW OFFICES. 2006. Establishing a link
between HR management and organisation profitability. Compensation & Benefits
for Law Offices, January 2006. Vol. 6, Issue 1. p. 2-4.
CONRADIE, D. 2007. What makes employees tick? HR Future, June 2007. p.
37.
CONWAY, E. 2004. Relating career stage to attitudes towards HR practices and
commitment: Evidence of interaction effects? European Journal of Work &
Organisational Psychology, December 2004. Vol. 13, Issue 4. p. 417-446.
COOPER, D.R. & SCHINDLER, P.S. 2001. Business research methods. 7th
edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
CROSBY, L.A. 2000. A managerial model of employee commitment. Symmetrics
Marketing Corporation.
DAVID, F.R. 2001. Strategic management concepts. 8th edition. Prentice-Hall,
Inc., New Jersey.
DE BEER, E. 2007. Immature leaders go off like milk. People Dynamics, June
2007. Vol. 25, No. 6. p. 12.
DE CHALAIN, M. 2006. Change management in remuneration interventions.
People Dynamics, January 2006. Vol. 24, No. 1. p. 10.
DOOLEY, D. 1990. Social research methods. 2nd Edition. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
147
DORENBOSCH, L., DE REUVER, R. & SANDERS, K. 2006. Getting the HR
message across: The linkage between line, HR consensus and “commitment
strength” among hospital employees. Management Revue, 2006. Vol. 17, Issue
3. p. 274-291.
DUBOIS, D.D. 2005. What are competencies and why are they important.
People Dynamics, July 2005. Vol. 23, No. 7. p. 3.
DUBRIN, A.J. 2005. Fundamentals of organisational behaviour. Thomson,
South-Western.
DUNKEL, L. 2007. The soft stuff is the hard stuff. Leadership Excellence, July
2007. Vol. 24, Issue 7. p. 14-15.
ERASMUS, L. 2007. John Smit on leadership. HR Future, June 2007. p. 28-29.
Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, and Ex Post Facto (Causal-Comparative)
Research report. 2006. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee578/experiments.ppt. [Accessed
12/11/2007]
FIRER, S. 2002. The right staff. People Dynamics, February 2002. p. 28-31.
FORMAN, D.C. 2005. Principles of human capital management. Human Capital
Institute.
FRIEDMAN, M. 2005. Resilience for performance. People Dynamics, September
2005. Vol. 23, No. 9. p. 15.
148
GIBSON, J.L., IVANCEVICH, J.M. & DONNELLY, J.H., Jr. 2000. Organisations
behavior structure processes. Irwin McGraw-Hill.
GIBSON, J.L., IVANCEVICH, J.M., DONNELLY, J.H., Jr. & KONOPASKE, R.
2006. Organisations behavior structure processes. Irwin McGraw-Hill.
GREENBERG, J. & BARON, R. 2003. Behaviour in organisations. Prentice-Hall.
HAMLYN, J. 2005. Less management, more leadership needed. HR Future,
June 2005. p. 43.
HARRAWAY, R. 2006. “Beyond pay” retention. HR Future, November 2006. p.
14-15.
HATTINGH, B. 2007. TRM the new frontier. HR Future, August 2007. p. 28-29.
HAY GROUP INC. 2006. Why productive workers leave. People Dynamics,
February 2006. Vol. 24, No. 2. p. 22.
HELLRIEGEL, D. & SLOCUM, J.W., Jr. 2004. Organisational behaviour.
Thomson, South-Western.
HORNBY, A.S. 2005. Oxford advance learner’s dictionary of current English.
Oxford University Press.
IVANCEVICH, J.M., KONOPASKE, R. & MATTESON, M.T. 2005. Organisational
behaviour and management. McGraw-Hill, Irwin.
KELLY, M. 2007. The road to high performance. HR Future, October 2007. p.
27.
149
KERRIGAN, M. 2005. People centred strategies. HR Future, March 2005. p. 19.
KHESWA, P.T. 2006. Starring role for T&D in staff retention. HR Future, August
2006. p. 13.
KINNEAR, L. & SUTHERLAND, M. 2001. Don’t let your competitive advantage
wait. People Dynamics, February 2001. p. 16-18.
KREITNER, R. & KINICKI, A. 2001. Organizational behavior. 5th edition. Irwin
McGraw-Hill.
KRISTENSEN, K., JUHL, H.J., ESKILDSEN, J., NIELSEN, J., FREDERIKSEN, N.
& BISGAARD, C. 2006. Determinants of absenteeism in a large Danish bank.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, September 2006. Vol. 17,
Issue 9. p. 1645-1658.
LANDMAN, W.A. 1988. Navorsingsmetodologiese grondbegrippe. Pretoria:
Serva.
LEATHER, D. 2005. Happy employees, happy customers. People Dynamics,
April 2005. Vol. 23, No. 4. p. 21.
LILFORD, N. 2005. High cost of absenteeism bites deep. People Dynamics,
September 2005. Vol. 23, No. 9. p. 4.
LUTHANS, F. 2005. Organisational behaviour. McGraw-Hill, Irwin.
MAHOMEDY, Y. 2006. Workers going missing. HR Future, November 2006. p.
30.
150
MANION, J. 2004. Strengthening organisational commitment. Health Care
Manager, April – June 2004. Vol. 23, Issue 2. p. 167-176. Available from:
Business Source Corporate, Ipswich, MA.
MARTINS, N. 2005. Organisational survey trends. HR Future, October 2005. p.
34.
MENGEL, D. 2001. Top ten ways to retain high performance. People Dynamics,
October/November 2001. p. 32-33.
MERISALO, L. 2001. Editor’s corner. Health care registration: The newsletter
for health care registration professionals, October 2001. Vol. 11, Issue 1. p. 2.
MOHONATHAN, S. 2007. True magic of technology. HR Future, October 2007.
p. 22.
MSOMI, D. 2005. So what is HR? People Dynamics, March 2005. Vol. 23, No.
5. p. 26.
MULLINS, L.J. 2005. Management and organizational behaviour. Prentice Hall.
NAIDOO, A. 2007. Integrated management career development model. HR
Future, May 2007. p. 46.
NCONGWANE, S. 2007. Talent management prism of the workplace. HR
Future, April, 2007. p. 34-37.
NELSON, D.L. & QUICK, J.C. 2005. Understanding organizational behaviour.
2nd edition. Thomson South-Western.
151
PAULSON, R. 2007. Reduce absenteeism, increase productivity. HR Future,
June 2007. p. 47.
PAUTZ, M. 2006. Global people commitment survey: Frequently asked
questions. Synovate Loyalty, September 2006.
PERSONNEL TODAY. 2006. The impact of ethical employment policies remains
limited. Personnel Today. Business Source Corporate. Reed Business
Information UK, Ltd.
PFEIFFER, J.B. The 1999 annual: Volume 2, Consulting, (The thirty-third
annual). Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer, San Francisco.
PIENAAR, C. 2007. What makes an organisation “sick”? People Dynamics, June
2007. Vol. 25, No. 6. p. 12.
POTGIETER, L. 2006. Finding the 100% package. HR Future, November 2006.
p. 36-37.
RABSON, M. 2007. Shared values. People Dynamics, June 2007. Vol. 25, No.
6. p. 12.
RAYTON, B.A. 2006. Examining the interconnection of job satisfaction and
organizational commitment: an application of the bivariate probit model.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, January 2006. Vol. 17,
Issue 1. p.139.
RICE, C. 2007. Four priorities. Leadership Excellence, March 2007. Vol. 24,
Issue 3. p. 15-15, 1p.
152
ROBBINS, S.P. 1986. Organisational behavior concepts, controversies and
applications. 3rd edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc. New Jersey.
ROBBINS, S.P. 2001. Organisational behavior. Prentice-Hall, Inc. New Jersey.
ROBBINS, S.P. 2005. Organisational behaviour. 11th edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
New Jersey.
ROBBINS, S.P. & COULTER, M. 1999. Management. Prentice Hall International
(UK).
ROBERTSON, P.J., WING-HUNG LO, C. & TANG, S. 2003. Antecedents of
commitment among public employees in China. Public Management Research
Conference, Georgetown University.
ROSE-INNES, J.C. 2004. An organisation behaviour model to determine the
relationship between ethical climate, hope and self-efficiency. Unpublished
Doctoral Thesis. University of Pretoria: Pretoria.
SAIYADAIN, M.S. 2003. Organisation behaviour. Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi.
SHAMRAO, A.D. 2005. Shaping a safety culture. People Dynamics, April 2005.
Vol. 23, No. 4. p. 6.
SHAVELSON, R.J. 1981. Statistical reasoning for the behavioural sciences.
Toronto: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
SIMS, B. 2007. Recipe for employee safety behaviour change. HR Future,
October 2007. p. 12-14.
153
SMANJAK, P. 2007. When people don’t pitch up. HR Future, April 2007. p. 19.
SULCAS, P. 2007. Are your practices producing results? People Dynamics,
June 2007. Vol. 25, No. 6. p. 12.
SWANEPOEL, B., ERASMUS, B., VAN WYK, M. & SCHENK, H. 2003. South
African human resource management. Juta.
SYMMETRICS MARKETING CORPORATION. 1999. A Deloitte & Touche
consultant’s guide to employee commitment plus. July 1999. Symmetrics
Marketing Corporation.
SYNOVATE LOYALTY. 2006. A model of employee commitment. Synovate
Loyalty, 2006.
TAYLOR, G. 2005. To act or not to act. People Dynamics, April 2005. Vol. 23,
No. 4. p. 28-29.
TEKE, M. 2005. Employee value proposition. HR Future, May 2005. p. 36.
TRUTER, L. 2007. Disability competent organisations. HR Future, June 2007. p.
18-19.
VAN DER MERWE, A. 2006. Spirit @ work. HR Future, August 2006. p. 32.
VAN ROOYEN, J. 2006. Facing barriers beyond conscious awareness. People
Dynamics, January 2006. Vol. 24, No. 1. p. 4-5.
WANDRAG, C. 2007. Drivers of perceptions. HR Future, June 2007. p. 34.
154
WEGGE, J., SCHMIDT, K.H., PARKES, C. & VAN DICK, R. 2007. Job
satisfaction and job involvement as interactive predictors of absenteeism in a
public organisation. Journal of Occupational & Organisational Psychology, March
2007. Vol. 80, Issue 1. p. 77-89.
WEGNER, T. 2000. Applied business statistics. Juta & Co. Ltd.
WESTERMAN, J. & SIMMONS, B. 2007. The effects of work environment on the
personality-performance relationship: an exploratory study. Journal of Managerial
Issues, Summer 2007. Vol. 19, Issue 2. p. 288-305, 18p.
WILLEMSE, A. 2007. Managing your “golden egg” talent. HR Future, May 2007.
p. 17.
WOOD, J., CHAPMAN, J., FROMHOLTZ, M., MORRISON, V., WALLACE, J.,
ZEFFANE, SCHERMERHORN, HUNT & OSBORN. 2004. Organisational
behaviour a global perspective. 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
155
ANNEXURE A
Global People Commitment Survey
Survey Introduction
Thank you for participating in the Company X Global People Commitment Survey.
To ensure confidentiality, Symmetrics, an independent research organisation, will manage
the survey and tabulate the results. Although the results will be reported to Company X,
no one at the organisation will ever be able to view or receive your individual responses.
In fact, responses will not be reported in the results in groups of fewer than ten people.
For your convenience, this survey should take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete.
Please read or print the following instructions before proceeding with the survey.
Please respond to all statements by marking the box next to the response that matches
your opinion. If you do not have enough information, or feel a statement doesn’t apply to
you, please check “Don’t Know / Doesn’t Apply”.
After you have responded to each statement, please click the “>>” button located at the
bottom of each page to advance. If you are unable to move to the next page, you may not
have responded to each statement. Check for any error messages at the top of the page
to see which statements you may have missed.
If you would like to go back and review or change any of your responses, please use the
“<<” button located at the bottom of each page.
156
If you need help at any time during the survey, please click on the “Questions” link located
at the bottom of each page. This will open a new window and will not interrupt the
progress of your survey. You could also contact Symmetrics or email your question to
Please use the “<<” and “>>” buttons at the bottom of the screen to move between pages.
DO NOT use the buttons on your browser. If you accidentally use your browser buttons,
click the refresh button at the top of your browser to continue where you left off.
In completing the survey, please keep in mind that we are interested in feedback based
on your personal experiences and feelings as they apply to your relationship with the
organisation. What’s most important is to share your opinion on each topic.
Press the “>>” button below to begin the survey.
Please rate the organisation in the following areas. For each area, you will first evaluate the
organisation’s performance overall and then be asked more detailed questions about the
area. For all of these questions, indicate whether performance is excellent, very good, good,
fair, or poor. If you do not have enough information, or feel a question doesn’t apply to you,
please select “Don’t Know/Doesn’t Apply”.
NOTE on Company X Global Standard: individual organisations can refer to
themselves as “the organisation”, “your organisation”, “our organisation”, etc.
The point is that the questions should reflect that the respondent works in a
particular organisation, not for some fictitious single entity named “Company X”.
The exception is sections A and B, where reference is made to “Company X”.
157
SECTION A: General Feelings about Company
X
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with
each of the following statements.
Stro
ngly
Agr
ee
Agr
ee
Nei
ther
Agr
ee N
or D
isag
ree
Dis
agre
e
Stro
ngly
Dis
agre
e
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
A1) I feel a strong sense of belonging to Company X 5 4 3 2 1 9
A2) I am willing to change how I do my job if this will help Company X 5 4 3 2 1 9
A3) Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to
leave Company X now 5 4 3 2 1 9
A4) The reason I prefer Company X to others is because of what it
stands for, that is, its values and beliefs 5 4 3 2 1 9
A5) When confronted with a problem or obstacle at work, my
response is “there’s got to be a way” 5 4 3 2 1 9
A6) I would recommend Company X to my friends as a place to work 5 4 3 2 1 9
A7) There are many positions I could consider in the local job market 5 4 3 2 1 9
A8) For me, this is the best of all possible organisations for which to
work 5 4 3 2 1 9
A9) I would go above and beyond what is normally expected to solve
a problem 5 4 3 2 1 9
A10) I would recommend Company X to potential clients 5 4 3 2 1 9
A11) I plan to work for Company X for many more years 5 4 3 2 1 9
A12) I am proud to tell others that I am part of Company X 5 4 3 2 1 9
A13) I’m always focused on what needs to be done and not just what
I’ve been assigned 5 4 3 2 1 9
158
SECTION B: Images of Company X Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each
of the following statements.
Stro
ngly
Agr
eeA
gree
Nei
ther
Agr
ee N
or
Dis
agre
eD
isag
ree
Stro
ngly
Dis
agre
e
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
B1) Company X appreciates and values its people 5 4 3 2 1 9
B2) Company X responds quickly to competitive opportunities 5 4 3 2 1 9
B3) Company X strives to maintain an outstanding reputation of
community involvement 5 4 3 2 1 9
B4) Company X is financially success-driven 5 4 3 2 1 9
B5) Company X is client-focused 5 4 3 2 1 9
B6) Company X believes that its success depends on always acting
with integrity 5 4 3 2 1 9
B7) Company X responds quickly to challenges impacting the
professional services industry 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1. Firm Leadership
(By organisational leadership, we mean the partners, directors, the organisation’s
policy board, board of directors, etc.). We will ask you questions about your
supervisor/manager later on in the survey.
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C1) Overall rating of firm leadership: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1a) Clearly explaining the thinking behind the organisation’s
strategy 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1b) Providing the resources you need to get the job done right 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1c) Empowering other people in the organisation to make and
carry out decisions 5 4 3 2 1 9
159
C1d) Promoting teamwork and integration 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1e) Keeping commitments to our people 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1f) Acting as a team 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1g) Managing crises effectively 5 4 3 2 1 9
C1h) Setting an appropriate tone at the top regarding
expectations for behaviour concerning ethics and integrity 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2. Management of Change
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C2) Overall rating of the organisation’s management of change: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2a) Planning before making important changes 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2f) Acting swiftly to implement change 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2b) Being flexible and able to change 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2c) Giving you reasonable notice of changes that may affect you 5 4 3 2 1 9
C2d) Giving you an opportunity to influence how significant
changes are implemented when they occur in your practice 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3. Firm Communications
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C3) Overall rating of the organisation’s communication with its
people: 5 4 3 2 1 9
160
C3a) Openly sharing information about the organisation with you 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3b) Explaining how the organisation’s vision, goals, and
strategies apply to your work 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3c) Informing you about developments affecting the organisation
in a timely manner 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3d) Encouraging people at your level/position to raise ideas and
issues 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3e) Listening to people at your level/position 5 4 3 2 1 9
C3f) Communicating to its people about new services the
organisation is offering 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4. Your Immediate Supervisor/Manager(s)
(the person or persons you report to directly)
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/
Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C4) Overall rating of your immediate supervisor/manager(s): 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4a) Involving you in decisions that affect you 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4b) Making good decisions in a timely manner 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4c) Coaching you on how to increase your contribution 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4e) Expressing appreciation for the work you do 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4f) Fostering a positive work environment 5 4 3 2 1 9
C4g) Acting to support the organisation’s culture and customs
(e.g., policy, programmes, and standards) 5 4 3 2 1 9
161
C5. Developing Our People
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C5) Overall rating of the organisation in developing our people: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5a) Having an understanding of your needs, expectations, and
career objectives 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5b) Establishing a development plan to address your skills gaps 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5c) Helping you understand the competencies required for
success 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5d) Providing development opportunities that enhance your
professional and career growth 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5e) Providing time for development and training within your daily
activities 5 4 3 2 1 9
C5f) Effectively integrating new hires into the organisation 5 4 3 2 1 9
C6. Learning and Education
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C6) Overall rating of the learning and education the organisation
provides: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C6a) Providing education and training related to your role 5 4 3 2 1 9
162
C6b) Offering e-learning programmes (or distance learning or
alternative learning tools/programmes) to support your individual
learning objectives
5 4 3 2 1 9
C6c) Sharing knowledge and learning across the organisation 5 4 3 2 1 9
C6d) Providing education and training programmes that improve
your performance 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7. Performance Management
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C7) Overall rating of the performance management process: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7a) Giving you a clear understanding of what is expected of you 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7b) Providing you with the right balance of constructive criticism
and positive feedback 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7c) Providing you with feedback that is timely 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7d) Differentiating between superior, average, and poor
performance when doing evaluations 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7e) Evaluating and reviewing performance in ways that help you
improve 5 4 3 2 1 9
C7f) Making promotions on the basis of skills/performance 5 4 3 2 1 9
163
C8. Recognising Success
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C8) Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C8a) Recognising performance in ways that are meaningful to
you 5 4 3 2 1 9
C8b) Recognising the contributions of its people regularly and
consistently 5 4 3 2 1 9
C8c) Recognising superior performance with desirable
assignments and opportunities 5 4 3 2 1 9
C8f) Finding creative and flexible non-monetary ways to
recognise performance 5 4 3 2 1 9
C9. Compensation and Benefits
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C9) Overall rating of compensation and benefits: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C9a) Providing compensation that reflects the value of your
performance 5 4 3 2 1 9
C9b) Offering competitive compensation levels within the
marketplace 5 4 3 2 1 9
C9c) Having a compensation plan that differentiates between
levels of performance 5 4 3 2 1 9
164
C9d) Offering you a competitive benefits plan 5 4 3 2 1 9
C9e) Explaining how your compensation is determined 5 4 3 2 1 9
C10. Work-Life Balance
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/
Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C10) Overall rating of the organisation’s respect and support of
work-life balance: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C10a) Working with you to allow adequate time for your personal
and family life 5 4 3 2 1 9
C10b) Considering your need to balance multiple commitments
(work, family, education, community, etc.) when making decisions
that affect you
5 4 3 2 1 9
C10c) Offering formal programmes for flexible work arrangements
(e.g., flex time, job sharing, part-time, working at home, etc.) 5 4 3 2 1 9
C10d) Enabling you to take advantage of flexible work
arrangements 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11. Client Relationship Management and
Client Service Quality
(helping our clients excel)
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C11) Overall rating of the organisation in terms of managing
relationships with clients: 5 4 3 2 1 9
165
C11j) Overall rating of the organisation in terms of quality of
service to clients: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11i) Offering a range of services that fulfil client needs 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11a) Responding quickly to changing client needs 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11b) Creating teams with the right mix of talents to work with
clients 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11c) Giving you client- and job-specific information you need to
meet client needs 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11e) Providing you with a clear definition of what high-quality
service is 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11f) Communicating with clients on changes in the organisation
that are relevant to the client relationship 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11d) Providing a client feedback process that lets you know
whether clients are satisfied 5 4 3 2 1 9
C11d1) Supplying innovative tools and technologies that enable
you to provide high-quality service 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12. Hiring and Staffing
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C12) Overall rating of the organisation in terms of hiring and
staffing: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12a) Being able to attract good people 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12b) Placing the right people in the right jobs 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12c) Hiring new people into the practice that have the capacity
to grow and develop within the organisation 5 4 3 2 1 9
166
C12d) Keeping the best people with the organisation 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12e) Providing appropriate levels of staffing for your
assignments 5 4 3 2 1 9
C12f) Developing and communicating clear job expectations 5 4 3 2 1 9
C13. Multiculturalism and Inclusion
Supporting differences based on, but not limited to, the following:
race, gender, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, mental/physical
ability, national origin, thinking style, and function
Exce
llent
Very
Goo
d
Goo
d
Fair
Poor
Don
’t K
now
/Doe
sn’t
App
ly
C13) Overall rating of the organisation in terms of supporting
diversity as defined above: 5 4 3 2 1 9
C13a) Treating all of our people with respect 4 3 2 1 9 9
C13b) Seeking out and utilising the different backgrounds of all
people 5 4 3 2 1 9
C13c) Understanding diverse perspectives in developing business
solutions 5 4 3 2 1 9
C13d) Creating an environment that demonstrates support for
people of different backgrounds and cultures 5 4 3 2 1 9
C13g.1) Creating an environment that demonstrates support for
women 5 4 3 2 1 9
167
ANNEXURE B
Comparative statistics graphs
13.40%
43.90%
42.70%
30.10%
39.80%
30.10%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: Cape Town
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 1: Overall rating of the performance management process by Cape
Town
The criteria group Cape Town indicated a more positive attitude towards
performance management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ to ‘Neither’ category
decreased between the year 2005 and the year 2006.
23.50%
32.70%
43.90%
32.70%
43.60%
23.70%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: KZN
DisagreeNeitherAgree
168
FIGURE 2: Overall rating of the performance management process by KwaZulu-
Natal
The criteria group KwaZulu-Natal indicated a more positive attitude towards
performance management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
25.00%
34.00%
41.00%
29.30%
44.60%
26.10%
0%10%
20%30%
40%
50%
60%70%80%
90%100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: Trainee
Disagree
NeitherAgree
FIGURE 3: Overall rating of the performance management process by trainees
The criteria group trainees indicated a more positive attitude towards performance
management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased between the
year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’ increased.
169
26.40%
35.20%
38.50%
32.00%
41.00%
27.00%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: Female
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 4: Overall rating of the performance management process by females
The criteria group female indicated a more positive attitude towards performance
management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased between the
year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’ increased.
22.50%
26.20%
51.20%
34.50%
39.80%
25.70%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: African
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5: Overall rating of the performance management process by Africans
170
The criteria group African indicated a more positive attitude towards performance
management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased between the
year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’ increased.
25.20%
26.20%
48.60%
33.80%
38.30%
27.90%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: Coloureds / Indians
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 6: Overall rating of the performance management process by Coloureds/
Indians
The criteria group Coloureds/Indians indicated a more positive attitude towards
performance management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
171
25.10%
34.90%
40.00%
31.50%
43.70%
24.80%
0%10%
20%30%40%
50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Performance Management: Tenure < 3 Years
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 7: Overall rating of the performance management process by tenure < 3
years
The criteria group tenure < 3 years indicated a more positive attitude towards
performance management in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
31.70%
27.80%
40.50%
29.70%
45.10%
25.20%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Recognizing Success: Africans
DisagreeNeitherAgree
172
FIGURE 8: Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success by Africans
The criteria group Africans indicated a more negative attitude towards recognising
success in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased between the year
2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’ increased.
21.00%
36.20%
42.90%
35.10%
33.80%
31.10%
0%10%
20%30%40%
50%60%70%80%
90%100%
2005 2006
Recognizing Success: Coloureds / Indians
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 9: Overall rating of the organisation in recognising success by
Coloureds/Indians
The criteria group Coloureds/Indians indicated a more positive attitude towards
recognising success in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ and ‘Neither’ categories
decreased between the year 2005 and the year 2006.
173
18.80%
26.10%
55.10%
22.90%
34.90%
42.20%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: JHB
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.10: Overall rating of compensation and benefits by Johannesburg
The criteria group Johannesburg indicated a more positive attitude towards
compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
13.10%
26.90%
60.00%
13.00%
41.00%
46.00%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: Trainee
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.11: Overall rating of compensation and benefits by trainees
174
The criteria group trainee remained stable in the category ‘Agree’ towards
compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
18.20%
30.90%
50.90%
16.10%
44.00%
39.90%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: Female
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.12: Overall rating of compensation and benefits by females
The criteria group female indicated a more negative attitude towards
compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
175
17.90%
16.70%
64.40%
11.60%
35.70%
52.70%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: African
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.13: Overall rating of compensation and benefits by Africans
The criteria group African indicated a more negative attitude towards
compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
16.20%
24.80%
59.00%
20.40%
36.80%
42.80%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: Coloureds / Indians
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.14: Overall rating of compensation and benefits by Coloureds/Indians
176
The criteria group Coloureds/Indians indicated a more positive attitude towards
compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category decreased
between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category ‘Neither’
increased.
14.00%
28.00%
58.00%
14.00%
40.40%
45.60%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2005 2006
Compensation and Benefits: Tenure < 3 years
DisagreeNeitherAgree
FIGURE 5.15: Overall rating of compensation and benefits for tenure < 3 years
The criteria group tenure > 3 years remained stable in the category ‘Agree’
towards compensation and benefits in the year 2006. The ‘Disagree’ category
decreased between the year 2005 and the year 2006. However, the category
‘Neither’ increased.
Note must be taken that some of the cells had zero expected counts for some of
the statements and that the chi-square test might not be valid in those cases.
