APPENDICESon Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover
Intention
BY
Human Resources Management Option
An Honors Degree Project Submitted to the School of Business in
Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirement for the Degree of
Bachelor of
Business Administration (Honors)
Hong Kong
April 2007
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
i
CONTENT
CHAPTER II – LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS
....................................................5 2.1 Family
Friendly Policies
............................................................................
5 a) Compressed Workweeks (Five day work week)
......................................... 6 b) Flextime
.......................................................................................................
7 c) Family Leave
................................................................................................
9 d) Employee Assistance Programs
................................................................ 10
2.2 Turnover intention
...................................................................................
12 2.3 Job
satisfaction.........................................................................................
12 2.4 Job satisfaction and Turnover
intention.................................................. 12 2.5
Meditating effect of job satisfaction
........................................................ 13 2.6
Conceptual Model of Hypotheses
............................................................ 14 3.1
Sample
......................................................................................................
15 3.2 Measurement
Instruments.......................................................................
16 3.3 Data
Analysis............................................................................................
17
CHAPTER IV- RESULT
................................................................................................................19
4.1 Sample and Descriptive
Statistics............................................................
19 4.2 Cronbach Alpha Reliability Test
............................................................. 20
4.3 Independent Group
t-test.........................................................................
21 4.4 Mean, Standard Deviations and Zero-order Correlation
....................... 21 4.5 Regression
Analysis..................................................................................
23
CHAPTER V- DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
.........................................................25 5.1
Discussion
.................................................................................................
25 5.2 Practical Implications
..............................................................................
29 5.3 Study
Limitations.....................................................................................
30 5.4 Recommendations for future research
.................................................... 32 5.5
Conclusion
................................................................................................
33
APPENDIX A………………………………………………………………………..40 APPENDIX
B……………………………………………………………………..…47
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First, I would like to express my truthful gratitude to my Honors
Project Supervisor –
Dr. Vivienne Luk for her generous and priceless guidance. I am
grateful for her
patience and support throughout this project.
In addition, a thousand thank to my mentor Mr. MF Cheng for his
generosity and
tremendous assistance in helping distributing questionnaires in the
research process.
Also, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to all my dear
classmates, friends
and family members for their whole-hearted support during the
research process.
Finally, I would like to thank to all of the respondents for
spending their valuable time
to complete the questionnaire.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
iii
ABSTRACT
This study aims to investigate the relationship between a full set
of family friendly
policies which includes five day work week, flextime, family leave
and employee
assistance programs and turnover intention. It also demonstrated
that the mediating
effect role of job satisfaction of this relation.
Data were collected from 112 full time employees. They were asked
to indicate the
availability of a list of 12 family friendly policies in their
organizations, job
satisfaction and their intention to leave the current job.
Significant negative relations
were found in regressing turnover intention on the whole of family
friendly policies,
five day work week policy, flextime policy, family leave policy and
employee
assistance programs. Moreover, job satisfaction was found only to
have significant
positive effects on five day work week policy an employee
assistance program.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
1
CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION
Work- life balance seems to be an important part of corporate
social
responsibility nowadays. Good employers need to recognize their
obligations so that
they can ensure employees are not working so hard to damage their
lives outside of
work or lead to health problems. A work-life balance survey
conducted in 2004 by
Community Business reported that Over 75% of 1,000 respondents are
suffering from
stress and said they don’t have a healthy balance between their
personal and work
lives (Community Business, 2004).Increasing levels of stress can
rapidly lead to low
employee morale, poor productivity and decreasing job satisfactory.
More and more
employees are expressing significant to severe stress over workload
and work-time
pressures( Brooks 1999, Families and Work Institute 1998). Prior
research showed
that the benefits of implementing family friendly policies in
organization can
significantly address employee retention, job satisfaction,
employee morale and
productivity. (Lockwood, 2003).
In response to the current situation, the Hong Kong Administrative
Region
Government also remarked the importance of having family friendly
environment in
the year 2005 to 2006 Policy Address. The government encouraged
private
organizations and social services to deliberately introduce the
family friendly policies
in the workplace of Hong Kong to help employee to balance their
work and life. The
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
2
arrangement of five day work week in Hong Kong Government has been
smoothly
implemented to some departments from 1 July 2006 in phase one. Most
of the staff
welcome the new arrangement since they can spend more time with
their family;
pursue further studies, sports and recreational activities during
the longer weekend.
In fact, there are many western countries like Australia and USA,
an increasing
number of family friendly policies have been adopted in
organization to achieve
work-life balance (Saltzstein & Ting, 2001; Strachan &
Burgess, 1998). Organizations
which adopted the policies most benefit from reducing absenteeism
and improving
productivity (Clifton & Shepard, 2004). Some researches also
showed that employees
with assess to the policies express less intention to leave the
organization and a higher
commitment. (Grover & Crooker, 1995).
1.1 Statement of problem
In recent years, there has been an increasing trend for
organizations to implement
more family friendly policies such as five day work week, flextime,
family leave, and
employee assistant programs to improve employee morale and
productivity by
reducing absenteeism and turnover. However prior literatures
primarily investigated
the impact of separate components of the family friendly policies,
but not consider the
multiple policies. In order to effectively cultivate a family
friendly workplace in Hong
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
3
Kong, it is essential to promote comprehensive policies to all the
organizations. For
example, five-day work week is believed as initiative that would
most assist
employees in achieving work-life balance. Hong Kong’s biggest
employers, the SAR
Government has already implemented this policy for the civil
services. However, the
research findings from Community Business (2006) reported that
there is only 28.1%
of the employers provides five-day work week in the workplace
nowadays. Therefore,
a comprehensive study on the impact of entire family friendly
policies is needed in
gaining a better understanding of the policies in order to make the
implementation in
the future.
1.2 Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to look at the impact of family
friendly policy on
employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intention. Results of this
study will be useful
for organization to better decide the policy to use, consequently
helping organization
increase the productivity and effectiveness and retain the talents.
Besides, this study
can also aim to cultivate a family friendly workplace in Hong Kong
as a result to help
employee achieve work life balance.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
4
1.3 Research Questions
1) There is positive relationship between family friendly policies
and employees’ job
satisfaction.
2) There is negative relationship between family friendly policies
and employees’
turnover intention.
3) There is positive relationship between employee’s job
satisfaction and turnover
intention.
4) Job satisfaction as a mediator between family friendly policies
and turnover
intention.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
5
2.1 Family Friendly Policies
Family Friendly Policies is defined as any benefits and working
conditions that
an organization has in place to assist an employee balance their
work and life
(Bardoel, Moss, Smyrnios & Tharenou, 1999). Literatures
revealed family friendly
policies that are in place to help employee achieve a balanced work
life. It can be
effective tools in promoting job satisfaction, productivity and
company loyalty among
employees. Also, it seemed to generate continued support within the
business
community. (Saltzstein & Ting, 2001). Some researches showed
the impact of family
friendly policies on employee’s turnover intention. Employees who
had access to
family-friendly policies showed significantly greater
organizational commitment and
expressed significantly lower intention to quit their jobs (Grover
& Crooker, 1995).
Moreover, social justices predict that employees will have more
positive attitudes
toward organizations that are perceived as treating employees
fairly (Greenberg,
1990). For instance, employees will be more committed to the
organizations when
they were treated with an equitable management system. As a result,
the following
hypothesis is tested.
Hypothesis 1: Family friendly policies will be positively related
to employees’ job
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
6
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2: Family friendly policies will be negatively related
to employee’s
turnover intention.
In order to get a better understanding of which component of family
friendly
policies has shown the greatest impact on job satisfaction and
turnover intention. The
four main components below are tested individually. They are a)
five day work week,
b) flextime, c) family leave policies and d) employee assistance
programs.
a) Compressed Workweeks (Five day work week)
A compressed work week is an arrangement where an employee works
the
standard number of hours in a one or two week period, but
compresses those hours
into fewer work days thereby working longer hours at work
(Enterprise One Insights,
2006). This article suggested that compressed workweeks are
suitable for employees
who do not need to deal with incoming work on a daily basis or
there are several
employees doing the same job. It revealed that organization can
reduce stress;
employee absenteeism and turnover thereby increase employee morale
and loyalty.
Since there is only a few literature review about five day work
week which as a new
practice start implementing in Hong Kong‘s workplace. According to
the report of
Hong Kong Institute of Human Resource Management, 80% of 524
Human
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
7
Resources professionals in Hong Kong support the implementation of
five day work
week policy in the workplace. The reason was that they believed it
would help
employees achieve a better work-life balance. Also, a shorter
working week is
believed to enhance employees’ performance and productivity
(HKIHRM, 2006).
Besides, Hong Kong Government began phasing this policy from July 1
2006. About
300 respondents were interviewed, over 70% of respondents expected
that civil
servant’s morale would increase (Hung, 2006). The survey by the
Clerical and
Professional Workers' Association found that 65.5% of workers
believed a five-day
work week would help them better manage their private matters,
while half of
respondents said it would allow them more time with family and
improve their quality
of life (Moy, 2006). Thus, the following hypothesis is
proposed.
Hypothesis 1a: Five day work week will be positively related to
employees’ job
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2a: Five day work week will be negatively related to
employees’ turnover
intention.
b) Flextime
Flexible working arrangements take a number of forms. These include
the
flexibility in working time arrangement, the number of hours worked
and with regard
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
8
to place of work (Papalexandris & Kramar,1997). Nowadays
organizations adopt
various kinds of flextime policies such as flexible scheduling
program, job sharing,
part- time work, teleworking etc in workplace. Prior researches on
flextime examined
that absenteeism and turnover could be reduced and employees’ job
satisfaction was
improved when implementing such flexible programs (Narayanan and
Nath, 1982;
Pierce and Newstrom, 1983). For employees, flexible working
arrangement can
facilitate the reconciliation of work and family needs and allow
individuals to balance
both responsibilities and thereby achieve quality of life. The
benefits of flexible work
policies were demonstrated in a bank of Australia with improved
customer services
and reduced turnover and absenteeism. (Papalexandris &
Kramar,1997). Besides,
Grover and Crooker(1995) also reported a negative relationship
between this policy
and turnover intention. Therefore, it is believed that employees
are more likely to stay
in the organization when they were adopted flexibility work
schedule.
Hypothesis 1b) Flexible working schedule will be positively related
to employees’ job
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2b) Flexible working schedule will be negatively related
to employee’s
turnover intention.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
9
c) Family Leave
Family leave policies allow employees to be away from the workplace
for
varying period of time in order to deal with family
responsibilities (Bond & Wise,
2003).
However, some specific policies for time away from work for
maternity,
paternity, or adoption are at the discretion of the employer in
different organizations.
In Hong Kong only maternity leave is compelled by law, other forms
of families leave
are different between employers and employers. Female employees are
entitled to
have a minimum of 10 weeks maternity leave in case of pregnancy.
Similar to
flextime policies mentioned above, family leave policies help
employees achieving a
balance of work life by increasing job satisfaction and reducing
the intention to leave
the organization. Therefore, the following hypothesis is
proposed.
Hypothesis 1c) Family leave policy will be positively related to
employees’ job
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2c) Family leave policy will be negatively related
employee’s turnover
intention
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
10
Employee assistance programs are designed to recognize the
interaction between
people’s domestic and working lives and to offer confidential
counseling to staff to
address personal or other problems, including work-related stress
that may be
affecting their performance (Clemmet, 1998). The nature of today
EAPs is different
from organizations to organizations. The typically examples of EAPs
included
providing assistance in the areas of personal issues, relationship
issues, eldercare,
childcare, parenting issues, harassment, substance abuse, job
stress, balancing work
and family, financial or legal and family violence. Some EAPs
providers are also able
to offer other services including retirement or lay-off assistance,
and wellness and
health promotion and fitness while others may offer advice on long
term illnesses,
disability issues, counseling for crisis situation. Therefore, EAPs
does not just limit on
counseling services and may include life skills programs and
fitness programs. It can
assist employees in managing stress and resolving personal problems
as well. Carolyn
& Cooper (1994) reported that EAPs are an important to improve
employee mental
and physical well-being so that they have better performance at
work and enhanced
job satisfaction and reduced turnover intention. Therefore, the
following hypothesis is
proposed.
Hypothesis 1d) Employee assistance program will be positively
related to employees’
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
11
Hypothesis 2d) Employee assistance program will be negatively
related to employee’s
turnover intention
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
12
2.2 Turnover intention
Turnover intention as the thought of quitting, the intention to
search for another
job elsewhere, and the intention to quit as assessed in the
turnover model of Mobley et
al. (1978). It is assumed that employees with high degree of
turnover intention from
an organization will subjectively assess that they will be leaving
the organization in
the near future (Mowday et al., 1982). Grover& Crooker (1995)
had investigated the
relationship between different family friendly policies and
turnover intention.
2.3 Job satisfaction
According to Weiss, Dawis, England and Lofquist(1967), job
satisfaction is the
overall summary evaluation a person make regarding his/her work
environment.
Spector (1997) defined job satisfaction as an individual’s
cognitive, affective and
evaluation reactions towards his or her job. Cranny et al. (1992)
also defined job
satisfaction is a combination of cognitive and affective reactions
to the differential
perceptions of what an employee wants to receive compared to what
he or she
actually receives.
Some literatures demonstrated that employees’ job satisfaction and
employees’
commitment are predictors of turnover ( Mowday, Porter, and Steers,
1982; Cotton
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
13
and Tuttle, 1986; Carsten and Spector, 1987). Besides, Ostroff
(1992) also showed the
close association among job satisfaction, organizational commitment
and reduced
turnover, and demonstrated the clear influence that job
satisfaction had on the
turnover intention of engineering staff. Spector (1997) has also
investigated the
relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intentions.
Therefore, the following
hypothesis is tested.
Hypothesis 3: Employees’ job satisfaction will be negatively
related to employee’s
turnover intention.
2.5 Meditating effect of job satisfaction
Base on the above literatures reviews closely supported the
relationship among
family friendly policies, job satisfaction and turnover intention.
It should be
interesting to examine that the mediating effect of job
satisfaction between family
friendly policies and turnover intention. Therefore, the following
hypothesis is
proposed.
Hypothesis 4: The mediating effect of job satisfaction between
family friendly policies
and turnover intention.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
14
IV MV
2) Flextime
Programs
DV
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
15
3.1 Sample
Data will be collected using a questionnaire and measures of the
impact of
family friendly policies on employee job satisfaction and turnover
intention.
Questionnaires will be distributed to full time employees in
different organizations
such as Hong Kong Housing Authority, educational institution and
other business
organizations through mentor, friends and relatives. Cover letter
will be attached to
inform participants the purpose of this research study is to assess
employees work
related attitude on family friendly policies implementation among
Hong Kong
companies. Participants are fully voluntarily and respondents are
assured of the strict
confidential of their information and responses. The questionnaires
were sent and
collected personally. A total of 112 out of 150 questionnaires
distributed were returned,
yielding a response rate of 74.6%.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
16
3.2 Measurement Instruments
For demographic factors, respondents were asked to indicate their
gender, age,
education level, marital status, presence of dependent children,
industry and company
size.
a) Family friendly policies
A list of 12 individual family friendly policies was derived from
prior researches
based on its commonness in researches and the suitableness of
workplace in Hong
Kong case. According to the reference of Grover and Crooker(1995),
the 12 family
friendly policies items were selected and divided into four main
categories which
were compressed work week (Five day work week), Flextime policies
(four items),
Family Leave policies (five items) and Employee assistance program(
three items.)
respondents were asked to answered whether those policies are
provided in their
organization with the option of (1= Provided, 0= Not provided). The
alpha reliability
is .73 for the whole family friendly policies (12 items) and .41
for flextime, .40 for
family leaves and .70 for employee assistance programs.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
17
b) Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction was measured by Wright and Cropanzano(1998) 4 item
scale.
Responses to these items were on a five-point scale ranging from (1
= strongly
disagree to 5= strongly agree). The sample items are “All in all, I
am satisfied with
my working hour.” and “All in all, I am satisfied with my pay” The
alpha reliability of
this scale was .74.
c) Turnover intention
The scales were based on Mobley et al (1978). Their scale was used
to assess
withdrawal intention from the organization. The items were: 1) I
think a lot about
leaving the organization 2) I am actively searching for an
alternative to the
organization. 3) As soon as it is possible, I will leave the
organization. Responses to
these items were on a five-point scale ranging from 1=strongly
disagree to 5= strongly
agree. The alpha reliability of this scale was .90.
3.3 Data Analysis
There are several steps for analyzing the data through SPSS. First,
using factor
analysis to have data reduction and explain the pattern of
correlations within a set of
observed variables. Second, independent t-test was be conducted to
compare mean
difference of job satisfaction and turnover intention for whether
the policies provided
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
18
such as with or without five day work week. Third, zero-order
correlation was also
performed to indicate the general relationship among all the
variables included control
variable. Fourth, regression analysis was conducted to examine the
relationship
between family friendly policies and job satisfaction; the
relationship between family
friendly policies and turnover intention, and finally the mediating
effects of job
satisfaction on the relationship between family friendly policies
and turnover intention.
The SPSS for Window Statistical Package was used to run above
regression models.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
19
4.1 Sample and Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 (Refer to Appendix A) shows the demographics of the
respondents of the
observed sample. Male with 42.9% and female with 56.3% in the
sample. A large
proportion of the respondents were single (75.9%) and the married
respondents
accounted for merely one-fifth of the respondents (21.4%). The
majority respondents
aged between 20 to 30 years old (59.8%). Over 80%of respondents did
not have
dependent children and only 0.9% of respondents had 3 or more
children. Moreover,
about half of the respondents were the bachelor degree holder
(40.2%). One fourth of
them had education level at matriculation or below and diploma and
associate degree.
Besides, in term of business sector, the majority of respondents
worked in Banking/
Finance/ Insurance(30%) while 15.2% worked in Garment and
Government.
Approximately 40% of the respondents have worked with their present
job less than 2
year while one fifth of them have worked with their job for between
2 to 4 years.
Finally, near half of the respondents (47.7%) worked in the
organizations which were
more than 500 people and one fourth of them worked in the
organization which are
less than 100 people.
Table 2 (Refer Appendix A) shows the availability of family
friendly policies
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
20
among 112 respondent’s organization. Of all the 12 family friendly
policies, the most
common item are the five day work week policy and compassionate
leave ( 57.1%),
followed by life skill program (49.1%) and professional counseling
(42.9%). The
most common category is employee assistance program which had
44.37% in average.
Moreover, Table 2a (Refer to Appendix A) shows the follow up
question about
five day work week policy. It indicated that 91% of respondents
supported the
implementation of five day work week policy in workplace. The
majority respondents
(75%) think this policy will help employees to achieve a better
work-life balance
since they can enjoy more their personal life. Besides, half of
respondents believed a
shorter working week can easily arrange schedules to deal with
family issues and
household work.
4.2 Cronbach Alpha Reliability Test
In this research, two scales were adopted from other studies. In
order to test the
reliability of the scale, Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient was
examined. According to
Pallant (2001), a scale with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of 0.70
or above is
acceptable. Two of the scales used in this research were over 0.70,
therefore they are
fully accepted. Table 4 (Refer to Appendix A) shows the alpha of
job satisfaction was
0.72 and the alpha of turnover intention was 0.80. However, the
reliability of the scale
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
21
for measuring job satisfaction and turnover intention had slightly
lower than the
original one.
4.3 Independent Group t-test
Table 3 (Refer to Appendix A) shows an independent samples t test
for the Five
day work week policies. To compare the mean differences to job
satisfaction and
turnover intention of the five day work week policy. Sub-sample
with five day work
week had a higher mean (M= 3.66, SD= .654) on job satisfaction than
without such
policy. Moreover, sub-sample with five day work week had lower mean
(M= 2.48, SD
= .91) on turnover intention then without such policy. Five day
work week policy
showed a positive significant effect to job satisfaction (t = 3.98,
p< .001) while
showed a negative significant effect to turnover intention (t =
-.4.59, p<.001).
Therefore, hypothesis 1a & 2a was supported.
4.4 Mean, Standard Deviations and Zero-order Correlation
The mean, standard deviations and zero-order correlations of all
variables
involved in the research are presented in Table 5 (Refer to
Appendix A). As shown in
the table, only two of the family friendly policies which were five
day work week
policy (r = .35, p< .01) and employee assistance programs (r =
.25, p< .01) were
significantly positive related to job satisfaction. The remaining
two, flextime and
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
22
family leave policy were not significant in this relation. Overall
Family Friendly
Policies (r = .29, p < .01) was also significantly positive
related to job satisfaction.
Furthermore, all of the component of family friendly policies which
were five
day week work policies (r = -.40, p< .01), flextime (r = -.24,
p< .05), family leave (r =
-.23, p< .05) and employee assistances program (r = -.34, p<
.01) and finally the
whole family friendly policies (r = -.46, p< .01) were
significantly negative related to
turnover intention.
Besides, job satisfaction (r = -.51, p< .01) was also shown to
be significantly
negative related to turnover intention. Base on the result of
zero-order Correlations,
the above proposed hypotheses of this study are preliminary
supported while only
hypotheses 1b and 1c were not supported.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
23
4.5 Regression Analysis
Mediating effect of Job Satisfaction on Family Friendly Policies
and Turnover
Intention.
Four separate regression analysis were conducted in order to test
the mediation
effect of job satisfaction on turnover intention (Refer to Appendix
A, Table 6) or
below Figure 1.
Equation 1 examines the influence of the independent variables on
the mediator.
Job satisfaction was regressed on the control variables as well as
the independent
variables (Family Friendly Policies). As shown in Table 7, family
friendly policies
(beta = .409, p< .01) was positively related to Job
satisfaction. Therefore, the result
supported hypothesis 1.
Equation 2 examines the influence of the independent variable on
the dependent
variable. Family Friendly Policies (beta = -.467, p<.001) was
significantly and
negatively related to turnover intention. Therefore, the hypothesis
2 was also
supported.
Equation 3 examines the influence of the mediator on dependent
variable. Job
satisfaction (beta = -.543, p<.001) was significantly and
negatively related to turnover
intention. Hence, hypothesis 3 was supported.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
24
Policies
Equation 4 examines the mediating effect of job satisfaction on the
relationship
between family friendly policies and turnover intention. Turnover
intention was
regressed on the control variables, family friendly policies and
the job satisfaction.
The previously significant relationship between family friendly
policies and turnover
intention shown in equation 2 became less significant when job
satisfaction was added
into the regression equation (beta = -.273, p<.01). This pattern
of result indicated that
the relationship between family friendly policies and turnover
intention were partially
mediated by job satisfaction. As a result, job satisfaction was
examined as a partial
mediating effect between family friendly policies and turnover
intention. Thus, the
hypothesis 4 was supported.
β=.40** β= -.54***
Figure 1: Finding of Regression analysis (Partial mediating
effect)
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
25
5.1 Discussion
The results of this study demonstrate similar finding with other
previous
researches. The entire family friendly policies were found to be
positively related to
job satisfaction and to be negatively related to turnover
intention. The concept of
“psychological contracts” by Rousseau (1995) may offer an
explanation of this
finding. Since psychological contracts refer to beliefs that
individual hold regarding
promises made, accepted and relied upon between themselves and
another.
Perceptions of family friendly workplace may result in increase
attachment to the
organization and overall satisfaction of employees. First, the
individual may perceive
the organization’s offering such family friendly policies as
representing the
organization’s concern for both work and family. Employee may see
this as
“psychological contract” since they can be able to balance multiple
responsibilities
about work and family. Second, having those policies available in
the organization
can improve employee perception about their employer and thereby
increase
employees’ overall positive feeling toward employer which probably
impact job
satisfaction.
Another explanation of this finding is “social comparison process”
proposed by
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
26
Adam (1965). Since employees may compare their situations to peers
in other jobs or
organizations that not offer those family friendly programs. This
kind of comparison
should increase the value of the employees’ psychological contract
to their
organization.
Apart from that, Crooker and Grover (1993) also demonstrated that
providing
family benefits to employees positively influences their attachment
to work through
the symbolic action. Since employer provided policies which were
responsive to
employees’ need. Employees may contribute with greater loyalty to
the organization
and better morale in response to the offering of such family
friendly policies. Based
upon the idea that family friendly policies represent an aspect of
the contract between
employee and employer in the previous literature, it is expected
the perception of
family friendly policies to be related to job satisfaction.
Therefore, the above
significant relations are explained.
Contrary to the predication, in examining the relationship between
the four
categories of family friendly policies and job satisfaction, only
two of them which are
five day work week and employee assistance programs were found to
have
significantly positive effect with employee’s job satisfaction. The
possible explanation
of these findings is the commonness of these two policies in Hong
Kong’s workplace.
In the sample (N=112), about half of the respondents enjoy the five
day work week
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
27
policy and employee assistance programs in their organizations.
Base on the result of
table 3, the mean difference indicates the higher level of job
satisfaction and lower
level of turnover intention of the people who had five day work
week policy. Most of
them think five day work week is beneficial for them to have better
work-life balance
as they can have longer periods of time off work. It can be more
flexibility with
personal time and accommodate family needs as well.
In addition, employee assistance programs nowadays play an
important role in
helping employees resolve personal problems and achieve healthy
body. It may
positively impact their work performance, conduct, health and
well-being. The
increasing health awareness of Hong Kong people strengthens the
significant
relationship of employee assistance programs to job satisfaction
and turnover
intention. In order to achieve both psychological and physical
well-being for
employees, organizations nowadays not only provide medical benefit
or insurance
package, but also offer different activities such as professional
counseling in stress or
emotional problem and fitness centre. Thus, employees who gain the
benefits from
these policies are more likely to have less personal problem and
thereby lead to better
performance and consequently to lower level of turnover intention (
Carolyn &
Cooper, 1994).
As for the other two policies, flextime and family leave policy
were found
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
28
unrelated to job satisfaction. The failure to support this
relationship may be due to
some contradictions between what policies organization claim to
exist and what
policies employees actually perceive to exist. It could be a
problem of communication.
For example, those family friendly policies do exist in the
organization, but not
clearly communicate to employees. It could also be the problem of
organizational
culture; that means the policies do exist but are not supported by
management.
(Chinchilla, N. & Cardona, P., 2003) Aryee et.al. (1998). Prior
researches also
revealed that if there is no supportive organization culture,
implementing family
friendly policies may not achieve the desired effects (Bown, 1988;
Galinsky & Stein,
1990). As the result, the lack of organizational supportive culture
may hinder the
positive outcomes of adopting those family friendly policies.
Even flextime policy is provided in some of Hong Kong’s
organizations. The
purpose of this policy is still not achieved in helping people
balance their work and
life due to the long working hours. Base on the research by
Community Business
(2006), over 80% of respondents who work overtime because they have
too much
work to do. Even flextime is available in the organization;
employees generally fail to
enjoy the benefits of this policy. Therefore, flextime policy has
no effects on
impacting employees’ job satisfaction.
Family leave policy seems quite common in Hong Kong, most of the
companies
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
29
provide at least one or two leave policy to employees dealing with
family issues.
Compassionate leave is the most common one, but employees somehow
not regard it
as benefits. They do not have much idea how this policy contribute
to their life.
Besides, another reason was due to the sample size, since the
majority of respondents
was single and do not have family responsibility, therefore they
have relatively less
use of family leave. As a result, there is no relation between this
policy and job
satisfaction.
Finally, company size was found significantly relationship with
family friendly
policies, particularly for the five day work week policy. Goodstein
(1994) and
Osterman (1995) also revealed that the role of organization size as
a factor of
implementing family friendly policies. Generally speaking, big
companies can offer
more family friendly policies than the same one because of plenty
of resources.
5.2 Practical Implications
The results of this study have practical implications for
organization which
interested in implementing family friendly policies in the near
future. Given the
literature demonstrated the desirable outcomes associated with job
satisfaction and
turnover intention towards to employees. Family friendly policies
such as five day
work week and employee assistance programs have a significant
impact of
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
30
employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intention. The benefits of
adopting more
family friendly policies to the business are clear, a health and
productive workforce is
crucial for them to compete for the best talents and become a
differentiator as an
employer of choice.
Meanwhile, the finding of this study supports the Hong Kong
Special
Administrative Region Government keep going to cultivate a family
friendly
workplace to Hong Kong employees. It also persuades organizations
to take a
proactive role for developing more supportive cultures on the
policies implementation.
It is hoped that these results encourage further investigation and
applications of family
friendly policies in organizations.
5.3 Study Limitations
As with most survey researches, this study is subjected to several
limitations.
First, 12 items family friendly policies were selected from work of
Bardoel et. al
(1999) which are mainly used for western countries. It might not
exactly reflect the
practical policies implemented in Hong Kong workplace. Second,
since family
friendly policies are quite new in Hong Kong, employees might not
actually know or
recognize the benefits of these policies in their workplace. Also,
definition for each
policy defined was lack in questionnaire might cause different
perceptions towards
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
31
the option provided to respondents. Therefore, it might affect the
actual percentage of
the policies availability in organization. Third, convenience
sampling and relatively
small sample sized was used in this study. Moreover, due to the
cross-sectional nature
of the data collection in this study, drawing causal inferences
among constructs
examined may not be appropriate. The collected data were also too
limited to
determine the impact of the family friendly policies to the job
satisfaction and
turnover intention towards employees. .
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
32
5.4 Recommendations for future research
This study only gives a general idea of how family friendly
policies affect the job
satisfaction and turnover intention in the workplace of Hong Kong.
Even different
categories of the whole policies was used for regression analysis,
the explanation and
insight are quite limited for support the finding. Therefore, the
regression approach is
suggested for further research to determine which category
contributes the greatest
extent on the impact on job satisfaction and turnover
intention.
As several studies have revealed that the implementation of family
friendly
policies does not ensure their actual utilization. Without the
supportive company
culture, especially for managers and colleagues‘s support, the
desired outcome of
implementing the policies will be weakened. The creation of family
friendly work
culture is one of the most important concerns for future research.
It is suggested using
organization support or culture as a mediator on family friendly
policies and turnover
intention or other positive outcome such as organizational
commitment, employee
retention and reduced related stress.
Apart from that, future research should also examine the barriers
to the
utilization of family friendly policies. It can be determined how
and why family
friendly policies are utilized and the impact of job-related
attitudes and career
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
33
outcomes.
5.5 Conclusion
This study examined the significant impact of family friendly
policies on
employee’s job satisfaction and turnover intention. Since the
family friendly policies
are not very common in Hong Kong workplace. Many employees with
little
understanding on the policies and so not recognize it purposes
behind. Therefore, the
impact of adopting the policies is not very remarkable.
The finding of this study shows family friendly policies to have a
significant
positive relation with job satisfaction and negative relation with
turnover intention.
The significant impact of whole family friendly policies to job
satisfaction is mainly
from five day work week policy and employee assistance programs.
There is no
support for flextime and family leave polices even they are two
components of entire
family friendly policies. The finding of this study indicates that
the relationship
between family friendly policies and turnover intention were
partially mediated by job
satisfaction.
The benefits to the organization for adopting more family friendly
policies are
clear, to gain a healthy and productive workforce. The findings of
this study support
and encourage more family friendly workplaces in Hong Kong. It
serves as reference
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
34
for organization to propose more effective policies in the
future.
REFERENCES
Adams, J.S. (1965). “ Inequity in social exchange”. In: Berkowitz,
L. (Ed.) Advances in Experimental Socail Psychology, Academic, New
York.
Aryee, S., Luk, V., and Stone, R. (1998) “ Family –responsive
variables and retention- relevant outcomes among employed parents”.
Human Relations. 51(1). 73-87.
Bardoel, E.A., Moss, S.A., Smyrnios, K. and Tharenous, P. (1999).
“Employee characteristics associated with the provision of
work-family policies and program”. International Journal of
Manpower, 20(8), 563-576.
Bond, S., & Wise, S. (2003). “Family leave policies and
devolution to the line”. Personnel Review, 23(1), 58-72.
Bowen, O.L., (1998). “Corporate supports for the family lives of
employees: A conceptual model for program planning and evaluation”.
Family Relations. 37. 183-188.
Carsten, Jeanne M., and Spector, P.E. (1987). “Unemployee, job
satisfaction, and employee turnover: A meta-analytic test of the
Muchinsky model.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 72. 374-381.
Chinchilla, N. & Cardona, P. (2003). “ The adoption of family
friendly HRM policies: Competing for scarce resources in the labour
market”. International Journal of Manpower, 24(2), 128-147
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
35
Clemmet, A. (1998). “Employee Assistance programmes”. Work Study,
London,46(1), 17-19.
Clifton, T. J., & Shepard, E. (2004). “Work and family programs
and productivity” International Journal of Manpower, 25,
714-728.
Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C. and Stone, E.F. (1992), Job Satisfaction:
How People Feel about their Jobs and How it Affects Their
Performance, Lexington, New York, NY.
Crooker, K. J. and Grover, S. L. (1993). “The impact of family
responsive benefits on selected work attitudes”. Paper presented at
the National Academy of Management meeting, Atlanta, GA.
Community Business. (2006, October). “The State of Work-Life
Balance in Hong Kong 2006”. A Summary of Research Findings. Hong
Kong.
Community Business. (2004, September). “Work-life Balance in Hong
Kong”. Survey Result. Hong Kong.
Cotton, J.T., and Jeffrey M. Tuttle(1986) “Employee turnover: A
meta: analysis and review with implication for research.” Academy
of Management Review, 11: 50- 70.
“Compressed Workweeks”. (2006, November) Enterprise One,
p.5,6
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
36
Galinsky, E., & Stein, P.J. (1990). “ The impact of human
resource policies: Balancing work and family life”. Journal of
Family Issues. 11. 368-383.
Greenberg, J. (1990). “Looking fair versus being fair: Managing
impressions of organization justice”, Resaerch in organization
behaviour, 12, 111-157.
Grover & Crooker (1995). “Who appreciate family-responsive
human resources policies: the impact of family friendly policies on
the organizational attachment of parents and non-parents”. Personal
Psychology, 48(2), 271.
Goodstein, J.D. (1994), "Institutional pressures and strategic
responsiveness: employer involvement in work-family issues",
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No.2, pp.350–82.
Hong Kong Institute of Human Resources Management. (2006, March).
“Five-day Work Week in Hong Kong”. HR statistics.
Hong Kong People Management Association. (2006, October). “HKSAR
Pay Level Survey, 2006”. Wing Lung bank International Institute for
Business Development, Hong Kong Baptist University. pp.16.
Hung, D. (2006, August 7). “5-day week will be economic boon city’s
decision- markers believe new work regime will be good for business
and boost staff morale” South China Morning Post, Hong Kong,
pp.1.
Kinnoin, Carl, M.(2005). “An examination of the relationship
between family- friendly policies and employee job satisfaction,
intention to leave and organization commitment, Nova Southeastern
University. 2290.
37
Locke, E.A. (1984), “Job satisfaction”, in Gruneberg, M. and Wall,
T. (Eds), Social Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Wiley,
Chichester.
Lockwood, N.R. (2003, June), “Work- life balance: Challenges and
solutions” HR Magazine, Alexandria, 48(6), S1.
Mobley, W.H., Horner, S.O. and Hollingsworth, A.T. (1978), “An
evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, 63(4), 408-14.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1982) “Employee-
Organization Linkage: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism,
and Turnover”. New York: Academic Press.
Moy, P. (2006, June 26). “80 pc of worker support five-day week”,
South China Morning Post, Hong Kong. PP.4.
Narayanan, V.K., Nath, R. (1982), "A field test of some attitudinal
and behavioral consequences of flexitime", Journal of Applied
Psychology, 67, 214–8.
Osterman, P. (1995), "Work/family programmes and the employment
relationship", Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 681–700.
Ostroff, C. (1992), "The relationship between satisfaction,
attitudes, and performance: an organizational level analysis",
Journal of Applied Psychology, 77 (6), 963-74.
38
Papalexandris, N., & Kramar, R. (1997). “Flexible working
patterns: towards reconciliation of family and work”. Employee
Relations, 19, 581-595
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological Contracts in Organizations:
Understanding Written ad Unwritten Agreements, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Saltzstein, A.L., Ting, Y., Saltzstein, G.H. (2001). “Work-family
balance and job satisfaction: The impact of family friendly
policies on attitudes of federal government employees”. Public
Administration Review, 61(4), 452.
Spector, P.E. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment,
Causes and Consequences: Advanced Topics in Organizational
Behavior, Sage, London.
Spinks, N., & Moore, C. (2002). “Integrating work-life
strategies with recognition programs”. Canadian HR Reporter.
Toronto. 15(5), 11-13.
Strachan, G., & Burgess, J. (1998). “The family friendly
workplace: origins, meaning and application at Australian
workplaces. International Journal of Manpower, 19, 250-265.
Sullivan, B., Hollenshead, C., Smith, G. (2004) “Development and
Implementing Work-Family Policies for Faculty. Academe, 90(6),
24-28
Pierce, J.L., Newstrom, J.W. (1983), "The design of flexible work
schedules and employee responses: relations and process", Journal
of Occupational Behavior, 4, 247–62.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
39
Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R. V., England, G. W. and Lofquist, L. H.
(1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire,
Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis,
MN.
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
40
APPENDIX A
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
41
Demographic Variable Frequency Percentage Gender
Male 48 42.9% Female 63 56.3%
Age <20 3 2.7% 20-30 67 59.8% 31-40 25 22.3% 41-50 15 13.4%
>50 2 1.8%
Education Level Matriculation or below 29 25.9% Diploma/ Associate
degree 28 25% Bachelor’s degree 45 40.2% Master degree or above 10
8.9%
Marital status Single 85 75.9% Married 24 21.4% Divorced 2
1.8%
Presence of dependent children 0 90 81.1% 1 11 9.9% 2 9 8.1% 3 or
more 1 0.9%
Job nature Banking / Finance / Insurance 33 29.5% Accounting 13
11.6% Garment 17 15.2% Education 10 8.9% Government 17 15.2% IT /
Engineering 13 11.6% Others 9 8%
Tenure < 2 44 39.3% 2-4 23 20.5% 5-7 17 15.2% 8-10 10 8.9%
>10 18 16.1%
Company size < 100 29 26.1% 100-200 11 9.9% 201-500 18 16.2%
>500 53 47.7%
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
42
Table 2: Items of family friendly policies (N=112)
Items of family friendly policies Percentage Provided Not Provided
Five day work week 57.1% 42.9%
Flextime
Work at home 8% 92% Part time work 32.1% 67.9%
Average: 22.82% 77.18% Family leave
Shorter work days for family issues 18.8% 81.3% Compassionate leave
57.1% 42.9%
Extended paid maternity leave 33% 67% Paid leave to care for sick
family members 19.6% 80.4% Average: 32.13% 67.87%
Employee Assistance Programs(EAPs)
Professional counseling. E.g. family/career 42.9% 57.1% Life skill
programs e.g.: stress management 49.1% 50.9% Subsidized exercise or
fitness centre 41.1% 58% Average: 44.37% 55.63%
Table 2a (N=112)
Five day work week follow up question Percentage YES NO Q2. Do you
support the implementation of five day work week policy in the
workplace?
91% 9%
Q2a. If YES, how will you spend your leisure time during weekend?
(may choose more than one)
Percentage
Take care of children 8.03% Deal with family issues/ household work
55.4% Continuing education 35.7% Enjoy the personal life 75% Others
4.5%
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
43
Five day No Five day Mean SD Mean SD t 1) Gender .53 .50 .62 .88 2)
Age 2.8 .88 2.06 .43 3) Education level 2.4 1.0 2.1 .85 4) Marital
status 1.43 .63 1.06 .24 5) Dependent children 1.4 .75 1.08 .40 6)
Job nature 4.9 2.1 4.14 2.06 7) Company size 3.4 .89 2.1 1.33
5.87*** 8) Job satisfaction 3.66 .654 3.16 .667 3.98*** 9) Turnover
Intention 2.48 .916 3.27 .855 -4.59***
Reliability Coefficients Turnover Intention Alpha .801 0.90
(Original alpha) N of cases 112 N of items 3
Reliability Coefficients Job Satisfaction Alpha 0.720 0.74
(Original alpha) N of cases 112 N of items 4
Table 4 Alpha Reliability
Notes: *p<.05
For the Five day work week policies, t-test for independent samples
was conducted: company size, job satisfaction and turnover
intention were found significant.
Table 3: Mean and Standard Deviations for sample with five day work
week policy (N=64) and sample without five day work week policy.
(N=48)
***p<.001 ** p<.01
Variables Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1) Gender a
.58 .51 2) Age b 2.52 8.28 -.113 3) Education Level c 2.32 .96
-.086 -.087 4) Marital status d 1.28 .54 -.091 .684** -.104 5)
Presence of dependent
children e 1.29
-.013 .598** -.083 .579**
6) Industry 3.36 2.06 -.008 0.17 .046 -.90 -.193 7) Tenure g 2.42
1.48 -.121 .733** .006 .518** .438** .054 8) Company size h 2.86
1.27 -.071 .286** .312** .191* .107 -.122 .302** 9) Five-day work
week .57 .49 -.094 .479** .197* .345** .276** -.219* .381** .504**
10) Flextime .23 .23 -.008 .142 -.003 .058 .075 .056 .140 .176
.246** 11) Family Leave .38 .29 -.079 .024 .157 -.003 .284**
-.291** .009 .155 .084 -.105 12) EAP .45 .41 -.101 .251** .062 .080
.242* -.336** .273** .528** .385** .141 .357** 13) FFP .37 .20
-.114 .273** .149 .120 .348** -.345** .263** .503** .508** .412**
.706** .794** 14) Job Satisfaction 3.45 .75 .040 .247** -.019 .115
.067 .025 .200* .099 .355** .100 .124 .253** .291** 15) Turnover
Intention 2.82 .97 .004 -.388** .194* -.245** -.271** .124 -.357**
-.212* -.401** -.243* -.238* -.338** -.459** -.511**
44
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
f. Banking/ Finance/ Insurance= 1; Accounting= 2; Garment = 3;
Education = 4; Government= 5; IT/ Engineering =6; Others=7
c. Matriculation or below = 1; Diploma/ Associate degree = 2;
Bachelor’s degree = 3; Master degree or above = 4
Table 5: Means, Standard Deviations and Zero-order Correlations
(N=112)
g. < 2 years = 1; 2-4 years = 2; 5-7 years = 3; 8-10 years = 4;
>10 years = 5
Notes: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
b. <20 = 1; 20-30 = 2; 31-40 = 3; 41-45 = 4; >50 = 5
h. <100=1; 100-200=2; 201-500=3; >500=4
e. 0 = 1; 1 = 2; 2 = 3; 3 or more = 4
d. Single= 1; Married = 2; Divorced= 3
a. Male = 0; Female = 1
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
45
Table 6: Results of Regression Analysis of Family Friendly Policies
and Turnover Intention with the mediating effect of Job
Satisfaction
Notes: *p<.05
Variables
Job Satisfaction (MV)
Turnover Intention (DV)
Turnover Intention (DV)
Turnover Intention (DV)
Variables Beta Beta Beta Beta Controls Gender .121 -.076 .009 -.019
Age .192 -.068 .017 .023 Educational level -.010 .225 .222 .221
Marital status .019 -.049 .035 -.040 Presence of dependent
children
-.148 .051 -.094 -.020
Industry .106 -.039 .093 .011 Tenure .064 -.185 -.170 -.155 Company
size -.137 -.003 -.171 -.068 Main Effects Family Friendly Policies
(IV)
.409** -.467*** -.273**
Job Satisfaction (MV) -.543*** -.474*** R² .170 .344 .491 .531
Adjusted R² .093 .284 .445 .483 R² Change .098** .128*** .274***
.187***
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
APPENDIX B
46
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
47
15P
URe: Survey of the impact of family friendly policies
I am a final year student majoring in Human Resources Management at
Hong Kong Baptist University. This study is a partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Bachelor of Business Administration
(Hons) Degree offered by Hong Kong Baptist University. The
objective of the study is to examine the impact of family friendly
policies on employee job satisfaction and turnover intention.
Please spend a few minutes to complete the attached questionnaire.
Data will be used for academic purpose only. All information
collected will be kept strictly UCONFIDENTIAL Uand UANONYMOUSU.
Please put the completed questionnaire into the collection box.
Thank you for your kind participation. If you have any enquiry,
please feel free to contact me at 96654415 or via email:
[email protected]. Yours sincerely, _______________ Chan Hak
Fun, Peggy Final Year Student BBA – Human Resources Management
Option Hong Kong Baptist University
U
U
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
48
Family Friendly Policies Questionnaire
PART A Family friendly policies Listed below are the items of
family friendly policies. Please indicate your answer by ticking
the appropriate box.
“ ” Five-day work week 1) Has your company implemented the five-day
work week policy in workplace?
?
Yes No
1a) If NO, is there any plan that the policy will be implemented in
your company within the coming two years? ,
?
Yes No Do not know
2) In your opinion, do you support the implementation of five-day
work week policy
in the workplace? , ?
Yes, reason:: ___________________________ _ No, reason: :
_____________________________________
2a) If YES, how will you spend your leisure time during weekend? ,
?
(may tick more than one choice)
Take care of children Deal with family issues/ household work
/
Continuing Education
Enjoy the personal life (e.g. entertaining or gathering with
friends) (: )
Others: _______________
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
49
Provided Not Provide
3) Family leave a) Shorter work days for family issues
b) Compassionate leave
c) Extended paid maternity leave
, d) Paid leave to care for sick family members
(: / )
b) Life skill programs. e.g: stress management (: ) c) Subsidized
exercise or fitness centre
5) Flextime a) Flexible scheduling program b) Job sharing (several
employees doing the same job)
c)Work at home d) Part time work
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
50
PART B Listed below are statements describing employees’ job
satisfaction towards their career. For each statement, please
circle one response to indicate your level of agreement or
disagreement. ,
1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree , 3 = Neutral , 4 = Agree , 5 =
Strongly agree Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1) All in all, I am
satisfied with my working hour. 1 2 3 4 5 , 2) All in all, I am
satisfied with my co-workers. 1 2 3 4 5 , 3) All in all, I am
satisfied with my supervisors. 1 2 3 4 5 , 4) All in all, I am
satisfied with my pay. 1 2 3 4 5 , PART C Listed below are
statements describing employees’ turnover intention towards their
career. For each statement, please circle one response to indicate
your level of agreement or disagreement. ,
1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree , 3 = Neutral , 4 = Agree , 5 =
Strongly agree Strongly disagree Strongly agree
1) I think a lot about leaving the organization. 1 2 3 4 5 2) I am
actively searching for an alternative to the organization. 1 2 3 4
5 3) As soon as it is possible, I will leave the organization , 1 2
3 4 5
Work-Life balance: The impact of Family Friendly Policies on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention
51
PART D Personal Information The information will be used for
research purpose only. Please be assured that your personal
information will be treated as strictly CONFIDENTIAL. 1) Gender
Male Female 2) Age < 20 20-30 31-40 41-50 >50 3) Education
level
Matriculation or below Diploma/ Associate degree /
Bachelor degree Master degree or above
4) Marital status Single Married Divorced
5) Presence of dependent children 0 1 2 3 or more
6) Industry Banking/ Finance/ Insurance// Accounting Garment
Education Government IT/ Engineering / Others:_______________ 7)
Tenure (Year) < 2 2-4 5-7 8-10 >10 8) Company size: number of
employees : < 100 100-200 201-500 > 500
--End of Questionnaire-- ----