1. Pre Test dan Main Testkc.umn.ac.id/11108/4/LAMPIRAN.pdfkaryawan, ngurus surat kontrak, ngurus...

Team project ©2017 Dony Pratidana S. Hum | Bima Agus Setyawan S. IIP

Hak cipta dan penggunaan kembali:

Lisensi ini mengizinkan setiap orang untuk menggubah, memperbaiki, dan membuat ciptaan turunan bukan untuk kepentingan komersial, selama anda mencantumkan nama penulis dan melisensikan ciptaan turunan dengan syarat yang serupa dengan ciptaan asli.

Copyright and reuse:

This license lets you remix, tweak, and build upon work non-commercially, as long as you credit the origin creator and license it on your new creations under the identical terms.

LAMPIRAN

Analisis pengaruh job..., Didit Ardiansah, FB UMN, 2019

1. Kuesioner Penelitian Pre – Test dan Main – Test.


2. Transkip In Depth Interview

Tranksip in depth interview

Tanggal: 29 Agustus 2018

Narasumber 1 – Human Resource Personel

D: Selamat sore mba, maaf menggangu waktu mba sebentar untuk di interview

R: Iya tidak apa apa dit

D: Pertama saya mau nanya, sudah berapa lama mba bekerja di Memory Group?

R: Mba sudah bekerja di sini kira – kria sudah hampir 4 tahun lebih

D: Selama mba bekerja hampir 6 tahun, mba pernah di rotasi kerja ?

R: Pernah sekali, sebelum mba kerja di bagian job database mba dulunya kerja di

bagian job assessment tapi masih 1 divisi human resource personel

D: Pendapat mba setelah di rotasi kerja gimana ?

R: Mba sebenrnya sudah nyaman sama pekerjaan yang lama dari pada yang sekarang,

soalnya di bagian job database ini kan mba juga belom terlalu pengalaman juga.

Apalagi kerjaan yang sekarang lebih banyak, seperti mengupdate data – data

karyawan, ngurus surat kontrak, ngurus karyawan baru dan yang paling repot kalo

lagi bulan – bulan karyawan produksi perpanjang kontrak kerja itu repot banget.

D: Tekanan kerja yang tinggi, berpengaruh tidak mba kepada kepuasan kerja dan

kinerja mba di kantor?

R: Sebenernya berpengaruh juga karna setidaknya kerjaan banyak jadi tidak fokus,

kalau tugas mba belum kelar mba harus selesain tugas kerjaan mba yang belom

selesai di rumah setelah pulang kerja. Jadi sedikit terganggu, karena kan kita di

rumah harusnya istirahat dan kumpul sama keluarga.

D: Dengan apa yang mba dapat itu sebanding tidak mba dengan gaji dan benefit yang

mba dapat?


R: Iya untuk gaji perbulan masih kurang tidak sebanding dengan kerjaan saya dan

belum puas dengan benefit yang saya terima seperti tunjangan hari raya masih belum

puas.

D: Oke mba terima kasih banyak sudah mau di interview



Narasumber 2 – Human Resource Personel

D: Hallo mba terima kasih sudah menyempatkan waktu mba untuk di interview

E: Iya sama sama, ngga apa apa dit

D: Mba sudah berapa lama bekerja di Memory Group ?

E: Mba sudah bekerja sekitar 5 tahun disini

D: Mba pernah mengalami rotasi kerja atau tidak selama bekerja?

E: Ohh mba pernah dit, mba dulu bekerja di bagian produksi terus mba di pindahin ke

bagian human resource personel

D: Pendapat mba tentang rotasi kerja tersebut gimana ?

E: Menurut dari mba pribadi awalnya kurang sesuai, karena mba takut kurang mampu

dengan tanggung jawab yang telah di berikan kepada maba & juga membuat team

kecewa, hal ini di karenakan belom ada pengalaman di divisi yang baru ini. Selain itu

pekerjaan mba yang sekarang berbanding terbalik dengan latar belakang mba.

D: Setelah di rotasi kendala yang mba hadapi apa saja, serta bagaimana lingkungan

dan hubungan dengan rekan – rekan kerja yang baru ?

E: Dari segi pekerjaan yang berbeda dari sebelumnya membuat saya bingung perlu

adaptasi, lingkungan kerja teamwork yang masih kurang terjalin di divisi yang baru

seperti dalam membantu atau memberi informasi masih kurang peduli dalam


perhatian karyawan yang kesulitan dalam bekerja, tetapi yang terpenting jangan

pernah menyerah & terus berusaha.

D: Dari kendala tersebut, apakah berpengaruh terhadap performa mba ?

E: Iya cukup berpengaruh pernah waktu itu sempat mengeluh sama kerjaan karena

belum mengerti banget peran kerjaannya.

D: Apakah saat ini mba sedang dalam pencapaian kinerja terbaik ?

E: Saat ini mba belum sampai pada kinerja terbaik mba di pekerjaan

D: Terima kasih mba sudah melungkan waktu untuk saya interview mba



Narasumber 3 – Sales

D: Siang mas , maaf mengganggu waktu sebentar untuk di interview

J: Oiya tidak apa – apa silahkan

D: Mau nanya sudah berapa lama mas bekerja di Memory Group?

J: saya disini sudah hampir mau 3 tahun bekerja disini

D: Pernah di rotasi kerja tidak selama bekerja disini?

J: saya pernah di rotasi dulu dari bagian ka jemmy yang dulu purchasing ke bagian

sales sekarang ini.

D: Apakah setuju dengan rotasi kerja ke bagian sales ?

J: Saya sih sebenarnya ga setuju, awal pindah ke bagian sales agak ga percaya diri

dikarenakan tidak sesuai dengan latar belakang saya dan kurang pengalaman di

bagian ini, ditambah saya sudah nyaman dengan kerjaan yang lama, jadi mulai

adaptasi lagi sama kerjaan yang baru.


D: Berpengaruh tidak dengan kinerja mas di bagian yang sekarang waktu pertama di

rotasi ?

J: Iya pasti karena perbedaan job desc, masih tidak tahu soal peran kerja, jadi masih

harus di tingkatin lagi.

D: Bagaimana dengan lingkungan kerja di bagian yang sekarang ini ?

J: Lingkungan kerja di divisi yang baru tidak ada masalah

D: Bagaimana dengan rekan – rekan kerja di dalam satu divisi?

J: Rekan kerja baik, namun kerja sama dalam satu divisi yang harus di bangun dalam

hal pekerjaan dikarenakan partner saya yang kerjanya lambat pekerjaan saya jadi

tertunda seperti membutuhkan dokumen untuk di input, sedangkan saya masih ada

pekerjaan yang harus di selesaikan dan membuat nantinya pekerjaan saya jadi

menumpuk.

D: Kalau untuk masalah gaji yang kaka terima di perusahaan ?

J: Kalau masalah gaji itu agak sensitif sih ya sebenernya tapi bagi saya untuk gaji

yang didapat saat ini menurut saya masih cukup.

D: Apakah puas dengan perlakuan adil dari atasan ?

J: Masih belum puas dengan perlakuan atasan saya, ya mungkin saya belum

merasakan karena saya masih baru di bagian ini.

D: Terima kasih ka jemmy sudah melungkan waktunya untuk interview


Transkip in depth interview


Narasumber 4 – Mutasi

D: Makasih mas sudah melungkan waktunya untuk di interview

I: Iya dit

D: Sudah berapa lama mas imam bekerja disini?

I: Saya sudah kurang lebih 5 tahun di Memory Group, lumayan lama saya kerja disini

D: Selama mas bekerja 5 tahun disini, pernah tidak mengalami rotasi kerja ?

I: Rotasi kerja saya belum pernah, tapi saya pernah di mutasi dari cabang Memory

Group yang ada di sepatan saya di mutasi ke kantor pusat Memory Group yang disini

daerah pasar kemis.

D: Bagaimana pendapat mas imam dengan mutasi yang mas dapatkan ?

I: Dengan mutasi yang mas terima ya saya ikutin dari atasan saja karena di kantor

pusat sedang membutuhkan tambahan tenaga kerja jadi sayalah yang dipilih

D: Apa ada kendala mas setelah pindah ke kantor pusat Memory Group?

I: Kendala pasti ada seperti jarak yang jauh untuk menempuh ke lokasi kerja, karena

jalan menuju ke sini memang sering macet, apalagi kan kalau telat itu merugikan

saya. Kerja sama yang harus di tingkatkan, karena disini kerja sama antar rekan kerja

agak sedikit kurang, ya mungkin karena masih belum percaya dengan satu sama lain.

D: Bagaimana dengan lingkungan kerja mas yang baru ?

I: Lingkungan kerja yang baru menurut saya tidak ada masalah

D: Bagimana dengan hubungan reka – rekan kerja di tempat kerja ?

I: Rekan kerja di sini menyenangkan dan baik

D: Apakah mas sedang salam pencapaian kinerja terbaik ?


I: Untuk saat ini saya belum mencapai kinerja terbaik saya.

D: Oke mas imam terima kasih banyak sudah mau di interview.



Narasumber 5 – Demosi

D: Selamat sore pak, maaf menggangu waktu istirahat bapak sebentar untuk di

interview

S: Oiya silahkan dek didit

D: Pertama – tama saya mau menanyakan berapa lama bapak bekerja di perusahaan

memory ini pak ?

S: Saya sudah bekerja di memory group sanga lama sekitar 20 tahun disini dari

memory belum mempunyai cabang hingga sekarang mempunyai enam cabang

perusahaan.

D: Selama bapak bekerja disini, apakah bapak sudah merasakan rotasi pekerjaan ?

S: Saya pernah di rotasi dari bagian general affair ke bagian insfrastuktur yang tidak

sesuai dengan latar belakang, saya juga mengalami demosi atau penurunan jabatan di

karenakan masalah pedidikan saya yang hanya sampai SMA, awalnya saya asisten

manager human resource sekarang saya di demosi ke bagian supervisor ifst

D: Bagaimana pendapat bapak tentang demosi yang bapak terima?

S: Saya sebenarnya sangat kecewa dengan demosi yang saya terima karena keadilan

karyawan yang agak sedikit mengecewakan bagi saya, tetapi karena masalah

pendidikan mau gimana lagi, ya walaupun saya sudah berbicara pada atasan agar di

toleransi karena saya karyawan lama disini, walaupun pendidikan SMA tetapi sudah

banyak pengalaman bekerja. Kalau mau pindah kerja untuk pendidikan SMA

sekarang sudah susah, berhubung saya sudah nayaman bekerja di perusahaan ini

yasudah saya terima demosi tersebut.


D: apakah bapak puas dengan perlakuan adil yang di berikan atasan?

S: saya belom puas dengan perlakuan atasan saya

D: Bagaimana dengan gaji dan benefit yang bapak terima selama ini?

S: Kalau untuk gaji okelah dan untuk benefit yang saya terima di perusahaan

sebenarnya masih kurang bagi saya.

D: oke terima kasih banyak pak sudah meluangkan waktunya untuk saya interview



Narasumber 6 – Production

D: Selamat siang pak, boleh saya meminta waktu sebentar untuk melakukan

interview dengan bapak ?

E: Iya boleh silahkan

D: Berapa lama bapak bekerja di perusahaan Memory Group?

E: Sekitar 7 tahun saya sudah bekerja disini

D: Selama bapak bekerja di perusahaan ini, apakah bapa pernah mengalami rotasi

kerja ?, bagaimana rotasi kerja yang di lakukan oleh perusahaan apakah sesuai ?

E: Rotasi kerja yang saya alami hanya sekali, saya di rotasi ke bagian produksi di

sana saya sebagai manager, dari bagian divisi Information Technology (IT), dari segi

latar belakang saya justru tidak sesuai karna saya belum pernah dan belum

berpengalaman untuk menjabat sebagai manajer di bagian produksi.

D: Dikarenakan tidak sesuai dengan latar belakang bapak, adakah kendala dalam

menjalankan pekerjaan di posisi yang baru ?


E: Ada pernah waktu itu saya miss communication dengan bawahan saya, karena

saya waktu itu masih belum tau peranan dari pekerjaan yang saya kerjakan, tetapi

sejalannya waktu saya bisa beradaptasi.

D: Bagaimana cara mengatasi masalah tersebut tidak terjadi lagi kepada bapak ?

E: Saya belajar dari kesalahan, selain itu dukungan dari rekan – rekan kerja juga,

serta diberikan petunjuk tentang informasi terkait peran perkerjaan saya

D: apakah bapak sedang dalam kinerja terbaik ?

E: saya belum dalam bekerja dengan kinerja terbaik yang saya punya

D: Kalau untuk masalah mengenai pendapatan gaji yang bapak dapatkan ?

E: Untuk pendapatan yang saya terima dari perusahaan tidak ada masalah karena gaji

yang saya terima sebanding dengan pekerjaan yang saya lakukan.

D: Dalam segi benefit apakah puas ?

E: Untuk benefit saya belum merasakan puas karena masih belum mencukupi dengan

pekerjaan yang telah saya kerjakan dalam perusahaan.

D: Oke baik terimakasih pak sudah mau meluangkan waktunya untuk interview.




Narasumber 7 – People Development

D: Siang mba

S: Iya dit

D: Boleh saya minta waktu sebentar untuk interview mba ?

S: Boleh dit, mau interview tentang apa dit?

D: Mau nanya tentang seputar pekerjaan mba

S: Boleh silahkan

D: Pertama saya mau nanya ke mba, berapa lama mba sudah bekerja di Memory

Group?

S: Mba sudah bekerja disini selama 5 tahun kurang lebih

D: Dalam waktu kerja 5 tahun itu, mba pernah mengalami rotasi kerja ?

S: Pernah, mba di rotasi kerja dari bagian talent aqusitions ke bagian people

development , masih 1 divisi sama human resource management

D: Bagaimana pendapat mba setelah mba di pindahkan ke bagian people

development?

S: Walaupun sudah nayaman dengan pekerjaan sebelumnya, ya mba setuju dengan

rotasi kerja yang mba terima itu tantangan buat mba sendiri, yang dulunya mba

bekerja untuk merekrut dan seleksi karaywan, sekarang mba merambah pengalaman

baru di bagian people development dengan membuat metode metode training untuk

setiap karyawan, walaupun tekanan kerja yang tinggi tapi masih bisa di handle sama

mba.

D: Apakah mba sudah mencapai kinerja terbaik ?

S: saat ini mba belum mencapai kinerja terbaik di pekerjaan


D: Apakah mba puas dengan pencapaian kerja yang dilakukan di pekerjaan ?

S: Jelas mba puas dengan pencapaian kerja mba yah, karena mba selalu termotivasi

untuk selalu konsisten dalam bekerja agar kinerja mba terus meningkat.

D: Dalam segi gaji dan benefit merasa puas ?

S: saya masih belum puas dengan gaji dan benefit yang saya terima karena apa yang

saya berikan ke perusahaan masih belum setimpal kepada saya.

D: Baik terima kasih mungkin cukup segitu saja mba pertanyaan, terima kasih mba


Tanggal: 1 September 2018

Narasumber 8 – Finance

D: Sore mas , maaf mengganggu, boleh minta waktunya sebentar tidak mas untuk di

interview?

R: Sore dit, boleh silahkan

D: Mas saya mau nanya, sudah berapa lama mas bekerj di perusahaan Memory

Group?

R: Saya sudah bekerja disini 4 tahun dit

D: Selama mas bekerja di bagian finance, pernah marasakan rotasi kerja tidak ?

R: Pernah, mas di rotasi kerja ke bagian controller finance dari sebelumnya di bagian

admin operasional account payable

D: Bagaimana menurut mas seteju atau tidak, rotasi kerja yang mas alami?

R: Ya, sangat setuju. Malah dengan rotasi ini pekerjaan saya jadi tidak monoton.

Walaupun dipekerjaan yang sekarang tekanan kerja yang tinggi tapi masih bisa di

atasi sama saya

D: Apakah mas puas dengan kinerja saat ini ?


R: Saya puas dengan kinerja saya di perusahaan

D: Bagaimana dengan gaji dan benefit yang perusahaan berikan ?

R: untuk gaji menurut saya lumayan dan benefit saya masih belum puas, seperti uang

lemburan menurut saya masih belum mencukupi.

D: Oke baik mas, terima kasih banyak telah meluangkan waktunya untuk saya

interview.



Narasumber 9 – Finance

D: Selamat sore mas maaf mengganggu, boleh saya minta waktu sebentar untuk saya

interview

P: Boleh silahkan dit

D:Saya ingin menanyakan beberapa pertnyaan mas, pertama sudah berapa lama mas

bekerja di perusahaan Memory Group?

P: Saya bekerja disini sekitar 3 tahun dit

D: Selama bekerja disini, apakah mas sebelumnya pernah merasakan perpindahan

bagian kerja?

P: Mersakan sih belum yah tapi, saya saat ini memegang dua bagian pekerjaan,

pekerjaan saya saat ini bagian admin AP di tambah saya sekarng pegang bagian AR

juga karena di ercaya sama atasan untuk pegang dua jabatan.

D: Berarti tekanan kerjanaya tinggi ya mas?

P: Iya tekanan kerja tinggi, kadang agak kewalahan juga kalau tugas kerjaan lagi

banyak, jadi ga fokus.

D: Apakah mas salah satu karyawan terbaik yang bisa mengerjakan tuasg tersebut?


P: Kalau untuk karyawan terbaik mungkin belum kali yah, tapi bisa menyelesaikan

tugas kerjaan tersebut mungkin iya

D: Apakah mas sedang dalam kinerja terbaik ?

P: Kalau untuk itu mugkin belum

D: Apakah mas puas dengan perlakuan adil yang di berikan atasan?

P: Lumayan puas yah dengan perlakuan atasan

D: Oke terima kasih banyak mas untuk interviewnya yah



Narasumber 10 – Talent Acquisition

D: Selamat siang mba, boleh saya minta waktu sebentar untuk saya interview

D: Iya dit boleh santai aja

D: Oke mba, pertama saya mau nanya, kira – kira mba bekerja di Memory Group

sudah berapa lama ?

D: Mba kerja disini sudah hampir 3 tahun

D: Sudah pernah merasakan perpindahan kerja ?

D: Sudah waktu itu mba di pindahkan dari bagian people development ke bagian

talent acquisitions

D: Bagaimana dengan perpindahan kerja tersebut ?

D: Menurut mba bagus yah karna untuk menambah pengetahuan dan wawasan juga

mengenai apa saja pekerjaan di bagian human resource management.

D: Apakah mba puas dengan kinerja mba ?

D: Untuk saat ini mba lumayan cukup puas dengan kinerja mba


D: Apakah mba sudah mencapai kinerja terbaik ?

D: Jujur mba belom mencapai itu

D: Bagaimana dengan gaji dan benefit yang diberikan perusahaan ?

D: Kalau untuk gaji lumayan , dari segi benefit mba kurang puas

D: Oke terima kasih mba atas waktunya untuk interview


3. Data Main – Test Validitas dan Reliabilitas

a. Validitas dan Reliabilitas Employee Performance


Reliabilitas Employee Perfromance

b. Validitas dan Reliabilitas Job Redesign


Reliabilitas Job Redesign

c. Validitas dan Reliabilitas Job Satisfaction


Reliabilitas Job Satisfaction

Hasil Uji Multikolonieritas pada Variabel Employee Performance, Job Redesign

dan Job Satisfaction


Hasil Uji Heteroskedastisitas pada Variabel Employee Performance, Job

Redesign dan Job Satisfaction

Hasil Uji Glejser untuk Variabel Job Redesign dan Job Satisfaction terhadap

Employee Performance


Hasil Uji Glejser untuk Variabel Job Redesign dan Job Satisfaction terhadap


Hasil Uji Normalitas Variabel Job Redesign dan Job Satisfaction terhadap



Koefisien Determinasi (R2)

Hasil Uji Model Variabel Job Redesign dan Job Satisfaction terhadap Employee

Performance


Hasil Uji Hipotesis

Uji Signifikan Parameter Individual (Uji Statistik t)

Uji Signifikan Simultan (Uji Satistik f)

Hasil Analisis Regresi Berganda


Data Kuesioner Excel Main – Test


EP1 EP2 EP3 EP4 EP5 EP6 TEP

5 6 5 6 5 6 33

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

5 6 5 6 5 6 33

3 2 3 3 2 3 16

5 6 4 5 5 6 31

5 5 5 6 5 6 32

6 6 5 4 6 5 32

5 6 4 4 6 6 31

3 3 2 3 3 2 16

5 4 7 5 5 5 31

5 6 6 5 5 5 32

6 5 7 6 6 5 35

6 5 7 7 6 6 37

6 4 5 5 6 5 31

6 6 5 6 5 6 34

5 6 5 6 6 6 34

5 6 5 5 6 6 33

6 6 5 6 6 6 35

6 5 6 5 6 5 33


6 6 5 6 6 6 35

6 7 5 5 7 6 36

5 6 6 5 6 7 35

5 7 7 7 7 5 38

5 5 6 6 5 5 32

6 7 6 5 6 5 35

2 3 3 3 3 3 17

5 6 4 4 5 5 29

5 6 4 5 6 6 32

6 6 5 6 6 6 35

5 5 6 5 6 6 33

5 6 5 6 5 6 33

5 5 5 5 6 5 31

6 5 5 5 5 7 33

6 6 6 6 7 7 38

6 7 6 6 6 6 37

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

4 5 5 5 5 4 28

5 5 4 5 5 5 29

4 5 5 4 6 5 29

6 7 6 7 6 7 39

5 6 4 4 5 6 30

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

4 6 5 4 6 5 30


6 6 6 6 6 6 36

6 6 4 4 5 7 32

6 6 4 4 7 5 32

3 2 3 2 3 2 15

5 6 5 6 5 6 33

4 5 5 4 5 5 28

6 7 4 5 6 4 32

5 6 5 4 5 5 30

5 7 6 5 4 5 32

3 3 2 1 2 3 14

6 6 6 5 6 5 34

6 6 5 5 6 6 34

5 5 5 5 6 7 33

6 5 5 6 5 5 32

5 7 4 4 7 6 33

6 6 5 5 5 5 32

6 5 6 5 5 5 32

5 5 4 4 5 7 30

6 6 6 5 6 5 34

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 6 5 5 5 5 31

5 5 5 5 6 5 31

5 7 5 5 7 7 36

6 6 6 5 6 5 34

4 5 4 4 5 5 27


7 6 6 4 5 7 35

4 4 6 4 5 6 29

4 5 5 5 4 4 27

6 6 7 6 6 7 38

7 7 7 7 7 6 41

4 5 4 4 6 6 29

6 6 6 6 5 5 34

4 4 5 4 5 5 27

5 5 7 7 6 6 36

6 5 6 4 6 5 32

5 5 6 4 4 5 29

4 2 3 2 2 2 15

5 5 7 5 6 6 34

6 6 4 5 5 6 32

4 6 5 4 5 7 31

4 4 6 4 4 6 28

4 4 5 6 4 5 28

4 5 4 4 4 5 26

7 6 7 4 5 5 34

4 3 5 4 5 4 25

5 5 4 5 5 4 28

4 4 4 5 5 6 28

5 5 5 4 6 6 31

6 6 3 5 6 5 31

5 6 5 4 5 6 31


5 5 4 5 5 4 28

5 6 4 4 6 4 29

3 4 6 5 4 4 26

6 5 6 4 6 5 32

5 5 7 5 6 6 34

4 4 6 4 4 6 28

4 4 6 4 5 6 29

5 6 4 5 5 5 30

6 6 5 5 6 5 33

6 5 4 4 4 5 28

5 5 5 5 4 4 28

5 5 4 4 5 5 28

5 6 5 5 6 6 33

6 7 4 5 5 7 34

2 2 1 2 3 2 12

6 5 4 5 4 6 30

4 4 4 5 6 5 28

5 5 7 5 6 6 34

6 6 4 5 5 4 30

4 5 4 5 5 4 27

4 4 6 4 4 6 28

3 2 2 2 3 3 15

4 5 4 4 4 5 26

6 6 6 4 5 5 32

4 5 5 4 5 4 27


5 5 4 5 5 4 28

5 7 5 6 6 6 35

3 3 2 3 2 3 16

6 7 5 6 5 6 35

5 6 6 5 6 5 33

6 6 4 6 6 5 33

5 6 5 6 6 6 34

3 3 2 3 3 3 17

5 6 4 4 5 5 29

5 6 4 5 6 6 32

6 6 5 6 6 6 35

5 5 5 5 6 6 32

5 5 4 5 6 5 30

2 3 1 3 3 3 15

6 6 4 4 6 6 32

5 6 4 5 5 5 30


Job Redesign

JR1 JR2 JR3 JR4 JR5 JR6 TJR

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

5 6 5 6 7 6 35

3 2 3 2 3 2 15

6 5 5 4 5 5 30

6 5 6 7 5 6 35

6 5 7 6 5 5 34

5 4 5 4 6 4 28

3 3 3 2 3 2 16

5 5 6 5 5 6 32

7 5 7 6 7 6 38

7 5 5 7 5 7 36

5 6 6 7 6 5 35

7 6 6 7 6 6 38

6 5 7 5 6 5 34

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 5 6 6 6 5 34

6 5 7 6 6 5 35

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 6 6 6 7 5 36

5 6 6 6 6 6 35

5 5 6 6 7 5 34


5 6 5 6 7 7 36

6 7 5 5 7 6 36

5 6 6 5 6 7 35

2 3 2 2 2 3 14

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 5 5 5 5 5 31

7 6 7 6 6 5 37

6 6 7 6 6 5 36

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

5 4 4 5 5 5 28

5 4 5 5 5 4 28

5 5 4 7 4 5 30

6 7 6 7 6 7 39

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

7 4 6 4 6 4 31

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

5 4 5 4 5 4 27

6 5 6 5 6 5 33


3 2 3 3 2 3 16

5 6 5 6 5 6 33

7 4 6 4 6 4 31

6 5 6 5 7 5 34

6 4 6 5 7 4 32

4 5 6 4 6 5 30

3 2 3 2 3 2 15

5 4 6 5 7 4 31

6 4 6 4 6 5 31

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 5 5 6 6 5 32

6 4 6 5 6 4 31

6 4 7 5 6 5 33

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 5 5 4 5 4 28

6 5 6 4 5 6 32

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 5 5 4 5 4 28

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

6 6 6 5 6 5 34

6 7 6 5 7 6 37

6 6 6 4 5 6 33

7 7 6 6 6 7 39

6 6 4 5 5 6 32

4 5 4 5 5 5 28


7 7 7 7 7 7 42

7 6 6 7 7 6 39

7 5 4 5 7 5 33

6 6 6 6 6 6 36

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

6 6 6 6 6 5 35

6 7 6 7 6 6 38

5 5 6 4 5 5 30

2 2 2 2 2 2 12

6 6 5 6 7 7 37

3 7 6 3 5 5 29

5 2 5 3 5 4 24

6 6 7 5 5 6 35

4 4 5 3 5 5 26

6 7 6 7 6 6 38

7 6 7 7 7 7 41

7 5 5 4 5 5 31

6 4 6 5 3 6 30

3 3 6 4 5 5 26

5 7 7 5 6 5 35

5 7 6 6 6 6 36

5 6 5 5 6 5 32

4 5 6 5 6 5 31

4 5 4 5 4 4 26

5 6 5 5 5 5 31


6 7 6 6 7 6 38

6 6 5 6 7 7 37

6 6 7 5 5 6 35

6 6 4 5 5 6 32

5 5 4 4 5 5 28

6 5 6 5 5 5 32

5 4 4 5 5 4 27

5 5 4 4 5 5 28

5 5 5 5 5 5 30

5 5 6 5 6 5 32

6 5 6 6 6 5 34

2 3 3 2 3 2 15

6 5 4 4 5 6 30

6 5 6 5 5 5 32

6 6 5 6 7 7 37

5 7 6 6 5 5 34

5 4 5 4 5 4 27

6 6 7 5 5 6 35

2 3 3 2 2 2 14

6 7 6 7 6 6 38

6 6 7 7 5 5 36

7 5 5 4 5 5 31

6 4 6 5 6 6 33

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

3 2 3 2 3 3 16


6 5 7 5 5 5 33

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 5 6 6 7 5 35

6 6 7 6 6 5 36

2 3 2 3 2 3 15

6 5 6 5 6 5 33

6 5 5 5 5 5 31

7 6 7 6 6 5 37

6 6 7 6 6 5 36

5 7 6 6 6 6 36

2 3 2 3 2 3 15

4 5 6 4 4 4 27

5 5 6 4 6 4 30


Job Satisfaction

JS1 JS2 JS3 JS4 JS5 JS6 JS7 JS8 TJS

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 44

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 44

5 6 5 6 5 6 5 4 42

3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 22

6 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 39

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 4 43

6 5 5 6 5 6 5 5 43

6 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 39

3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 23

7 5 5 5 6 5 6 5 44

7 5 6 6 7 7 5 6 49

5 5 6 5 5 5 4 5 40

6 6 5 6 6 5 5 5 44

7 5 6 6 5 5 6 6 46

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 44

6 6 5 6 4 5 4 4 40

6 6 6 5 5 6 5 6 45

7 6 6 6 5 5 4 5 44

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 44

6 5 5 6 6 6 5 5 44

6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 53

5 6 5 6 5 5 7 6 45


6 5 6 6 7 6 5 5 46

6 7 6 6 7 6 6 6 50

5 7 6 6 5 5 7 7 48

3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 21

5 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 37

6 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 39

6 6 6 5 6 5 6 5 45

6 5 5 6 5 5 6 5 43

6 6 5 5 6 5 5 5 43

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

6 4 4 6 6 6 4 6 42

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 48

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

6 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 38

5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 39

4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 39

6 7 6 7 6 7 6 7 52

5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 36

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 5 5 6 6 4 4 6 41

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 48

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 44


3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 20

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 5 5 6 6 4 4 6 41

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

6 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 40

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 20

5 4 4 5 6 5 5 5 39

6 6 6 6 6 6 4 5 45

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 41

6 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 39

7 5 5 6 6 6 4 6 45

5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 38

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 41

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 38

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

5 5 5 6 7 5 5 5 43

6 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 46

5 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 35

6 6 6 7 6 7 5 5 48

5 5 5 5 6 5 6 6 43

5 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 36


6 6 6 7 6 7 6 7 51

7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 55

4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 34

6 5 5 6 5 6 5 5 43

5 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 37

5 5 5 7 6 6 6 6 46

5 6 6 6 6 6 2 5 42

4 5 5 7 7 4 4 6 42

2 4 4 2 2 3 3 3 23

6 3 4 7 5 5 5 6 41

3 5 5 6 6 7 5 7 44

2 3 3 5 5 4 3 3 28

5 5 4 6 4 5 3 3 35

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40

6 2 3 7 6 5 5 6 40

7 4 3 7 6 7 5 5 44

4 3 3 7 7 4 4 4 36

6 4 4 6 6 4 4 4 38

6 4 5 6 6 6 5 6 44

4 3 3 7 7 7 7 7 45

6 5 5 6 6 7 4 7 46

5 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 37

6 5 6 5 6 5 4 4 41

6 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 41

5 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 33


7 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 41

6 4 4 7 5 5 5 6 42

5 5 4 6 4 5 4 5 38

5 5 5 5 6 5 6 5 42

5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 37

5 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 41

6 6 5 4 5 5 4 5 40

4 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 35

5 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 40

6 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 42

5 5 5 5 5 6 5 5 41

3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 20

5 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 38

5 4 4 5 6 6 5 5 40

6 4 5 7 5 5 5 6 43

4 5 5 6 6 7 5 7 45

5 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 35

5 5 4 6 4 5 4 4 37

3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 23

6 5 5 7 6 5 5 6 45

6 4 4 7 6 7 5 5 44

4 5 4 7 7 6 4 4 41

6 4 5 6 6 5 4 4 40

6 6 4 4 4 5 4 5 38

2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 19


7 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 42

6 5 4 4 6 5 5 6 41

6 5 5 5 5 6 5 5 42

7 5 6 6 5 6 6 4 45

3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 21

5 4 5 5 5 5 4 5 38

6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 40

6 6 5 5 6 5 5 5 43

6 5 5 6 5 5 5 6 43

6 5 5 6 6 6 4 5 43

3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 21

4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 37

5 4 4 6 6 5 4 5 39


Evidence-based HRM: a Global Forum for Empirical ScholarshipThe interaction effect of job redesign and job satisfaction on employeeperformanceSununta Siengthai, Patarakhuan Pila-Ngarm,

Article information:To cite this document:Sununta Siengthai, Patarakhuan Pila-Ngarm, (2016) "The interaction effect of job redesign andjob satisfaction on employee performance", Evidence-based HRM: a Global Forum for EmpiricalScholarship, Vol. 4 Issue: 2, pp.162-180, https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-01-2015-0001Permanent link to this document:https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-01-2015-0001

Downloaded on: 02 May 2018, At: 01:12 (PT)References: this document contains references to 70 other documents.To copy this document: [email protected] fulltext of this document has been downloaded 4456 times since 2016*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:(2014),"Personality traits and simultaneous reciprocal influences between job performance and jobsatisfaction", Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 8 Iss 1 pp. 6-26 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-09-2011-0079">https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-09-2011-0079</a>(2003),"Job satisfaction and employee performance of Lebanese banking staff",Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 18 Iss 4 pp. 368-376 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940310473118">https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940310473118</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:226864 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emeraldfor Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submissionguidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, aswell as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources andservices.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of theCommittee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative fordigital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-01-2015-0001

https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-01-2015-0001

The interaction effect of jobredesign and job satisfaction on

employee performanceSununta Siengthai and Patarakhuan Pila-Ngarm

School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, Thailand

AbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of job redesign as well as that of theinteraction effect of job redesign and job satisfaction on employee performance.Design/methodology/approach – The qualitative research method is used, i.e., in-depth interviews,to validate the questionnaire which is modified based on the well-established Job Diagnostic Surveyinstrument. A large-scale questionnaire survey was conducted in 2012 taking the hotel and resortindustry and the banking industry in Thailand as its research sites. Multiple regression analysis wasused to analyse the survey data obtained from 295 sample respondent managers.Findings – It is found that job redesign is significantly and inversely related to employeeperformance. Meanwhile job satisfaction is found to be positively and significantly related toemployee performance. Moreover, the interaction effect between job redesign and job satisfaction isfound to be positively and significantly related to employee performance. Furthermore, whencontrolled for demographic characteristics of sample respondents, it is found that being in the agegroup of 37-47 years old is significantly and inversely related to employee performance. These findingssuggest that when firms implement job redesign, it is likely that it will negatively influence employeeperformance in the first stage of change. Hence, firms should try to enhance employee job satisfactionwhile implementing job redesign so that the job redesign will result in improved employee performance.The findings suggest that implementing job redesign without concerned employees experiencing jobsatisfaction or merely implementing job redesign can result in a possible decreased employeeperformance. These findings also suggest that any proposed job redesign will be an effectiveHR strategy to significantly mobilize employee performance only when firms ensure that theimplementation of job redesign involves the concerned employees and enhances their job satisfaction.Originality/value – Job redesign by itself is found to have a significant negative effect on employeeperformance while job satisfaction is found to always positively and significantly influence employeeperformance. This study ascertains the positive interaction effect of job redesign and job satisfactionfor employee performance improvement. These findings suggest that job satisfaction positivelymoderates the effect of job redesign on employee performance.Keywords Job satisfaction, Banking, Thailand, Employee performance, Hotels and resort,Job redesign, Middle-level managerPaper type Research paper

1. IntroductionJob redesign has been used as one of the HR strategies to develop a new dynamic andproductive life in a rapidly changing business environment. It has beenwell-established that well-designed job characteristics ( JC) will enhance employeemotivation and hence their performance improvement (Hackman and Oldham, 1976).

Evidence-based HRM: a GlobalForum for Empirical ScholarshipVol. 4 No. 2, 2016pp. 162-180©EmeraldGroup Publishing Limited2049-3983DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-01-2015-0001

Received 19 January 2015Revised 3 June 201514 September 20155 November 2015Accepted 14 November 2015

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm

This manuscript is based on a paper presented at the 2013 Conference of MAGScholar in Dubai(11-14 November 2013). The authors are grateful for all constructive comments received,especially those from Dr Kim Fam, and from two anonymous referees of the paper. The authorsare also indebted to Dr Fabian Homberg, the Associate Editor of EBHRM whose guidancesignificantly improved the quality of the manuscript.

162

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


As employees are organizational assets that are renewable, they become a key driverfor change, especially in a rapidly changing environment. Firms need to continuouslyredesign jobs to align with their business strategy and enhance organizationalperformance. To date, several studies have examined the direct link between jobredesign and performance and job satisfaction and performance. Many empiricalstudies support the Hackman-Oldham theory of job design with respect to thesignificant relationship with product quality improvement (Michalos et al., 2013).The empirical studies on the relationship of these aspects of job design with employeeperformance, work outcomes, and/or productivity have been reported previously( Johlke and Iyer, 2013; Yeo and Li, 2011; Kahya, 2007; Rhoads et al., 2002). However,there have been few studies that examine whether there is any link among job redesign,job satisfaction, and employee performance. This relationship is important for HRmanagers due to benefits which are expected to increase effective employeeperformance. As job redesign includes activities or work-related changes that improvework quality of employees or employee productivity (Wood et al., 2012; Maxwell, 2008;Morgeson et al., 2006), it is expected that job redesign has a significant influence onemployee performance improvement. We aim to investigate the effect of job redesignon employee performance. In addition, we also assert that there is an interaction effectof job redesign and job satisfaction, which positively influences employee performance.

During the past decade, the volume of Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) in bankshas increased (IMAA, 2013). It is thus conceivable that M&A can be utilized as trendsmetrics in support of a popular firm strategy to strengthen businesses in a turbulentenvironment. In the Southeast Asian region in particular, the regional economicintegration, i.e., the ASEAN economic community, is expected to materialize by the endof 2015. In Thailand, since the advent of information technology a few decades ago,many organizations have experienced and implemented forms of business processre-engineering to better serve their customers. In this process, job redesign has beenused to ensure the efficiency and productivity of employees. This development hasbecome particularly visible in business organizations, particularly those in servicesectors, such as banking and finance, insurance, hotels, telecommunications, etc.

Few studies in Thailand have investigated job redesign. Akaraborworn and McLean(2002) study the role and impact of human resource development during the country’s1997 economic crisis. The results confirm that human resource development couldsupport employees in job design processes. In the private sector, it is reported thatjob rotation is intended for organizational restructuring. Moreover, the average ofinterval rotation is about one-and-a-half years in a private service company and abouttwo years in a private manufacturing company. “Knowledge, skills, and abilities” arefound to be significant decision criteria. In addition, Jaturanonda et al. (2006) assert thatjob rotation is a common management practice in Thai organizations. They study 500Thai organizations from both private and public sectors. The results show that therespondents positively perceive the purpose of job rotation to improve efficiency orproductivity of the organization. Similar to the findings of Akaraborworn and McLean(2002), they find that in order to rotate employee to new jobs, knowledge, skills, andabilities are found to be the decision criteria. Khahan (2013) examines the effect amongJC, job satisfaction, and work adjustment of new graduates working in 305 variousorganization sizes of Thailand. The study asserts that JC are positively related to workadjustment and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction also has a positive influence on workadjustment. Internally, job redesign and job satisfaction also become significantapproaches to improve employee performance and hence business performance.

163

Effect of jobredesign and

job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


Job redesign is utilized to encourage employees to perform activities in an efficient andeffective manner. Holman et al. (2010) find that job redesign plays an intervention roleas a mediator to improve employee well-being. Consequently, job redesign tends to bean effective HR strategy for solving performance problems and reducing costs that aresignificant to organizations.

This current study investigates whether job redesign and job satisfaction impact onemployee performance. The analysis also explores whether job redesign and jobsatisfaction jointly display an interaction effect on employee performance. The contextof the study is the service sector in Thailand, which has been set as the target sector inthe country’s 11th National Economic and Social Development Plan for sustainablegrowth and is expected to continue to grow significantly in the future. Hotel, resort andbanking industries are taken as our specific research sites. These industry sectors havecontinuously played a significant role in the economic growth of Thailand.

2. Literature review and hypotheses2.1 Job redesign and employee performanceJob performance can be described as a behaviour or action by employees at theindividual level (Campbell, 1990). Judge et al. (2001) argue that job performance is animportant outcome of core self-evaluation (CSE). Individuals with high-CSE scores aremore motivated to perform in their jobs. They will perform the job better by increasingin confidence and abilities. Their model asserts that CSE is positively related to bothjob satisfaction and individual performance. Several studies espouse the individualperformance concept and have confirmed employee performance relationship withvarious variables. Lentz and Allen (2009) find that a career plateau is significantlyrelated to a reduction in job performance. Morrow et al. (2012) assert that jobredesign influences employee attitude, behaviour, and organizational commitment.Past research also investigated employee performance in relation to organizationaloutcomes such as productivity, firm growth, and firm performance (e.g. Ubeda et al., 2013;Sadikoglu and Zehir, 2010).

In organizations, job design is one of the effective ways to increase the performanceof employees. Job design can solve problems such as those related to skills, workoverload, repetitiveness, and increase in working hours (Allwood and Lee, 2004).Internally, when organizations experience changes due to market competition orexpansion of the firm’s business operations, job redesign has a focus on administrativechanges that improve working conditions with work design. For example, job redesignis needed when business process re-engineering is implemented (e.g. the introduction ofinformation technology) to enhance the effectiveness of customer service.Well-designed jobs also lead to increased employee well-being (Strümpfer, 2006).Job redesign is thus an alternative approach to reduce job dissatisfaction and enhancethe motivational potential of a job. Maxwell (2008) asserts that job design motivationand teamwork are positively related to productivity. Job design is also found to be astrategy to enhance employees’ work environment. Mohr and Zoghi (2008) suggest arelationship between job satisfaction and high-involvement work practices.Their findings show that employee satisfaction can increase participation in high-involvement practices. In addition, job satisfaction is positively associated with workdesign involvement that requires high-problem solving skill levels for job rotationplans. Job enrichment is one such job design technique that contributes to a moreinteresting, challenging and satisfying job. De Menezes (2012) studies the relationshipbetween job enrichment and job satisfaction and ascertains the positive relationship

164

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


between the two variables. Rhoads et al. (2002) explore the correlation between JC andjob satisfaction. Control, variety, feedback, and autonomy are JC that are found to bepositively related to job satisfaction.

Thus, work design has an influence on productivity and is essential in providing achallenging and satisfying opportunity in organizations.

In the Asian context, Ali and Zia-ur-Rehman (2014) find that job design can improveemployee performance. The job characteristics model ( JCM) has been applied toinvestigate the impact of job design and employee performance in the fast-movingconsumer goods sector in Pakistan. Findings assert a significant and positiverelationship between job design and employee performance. Al-Homayan et al. (2013)study the impact of job performance level on a sample of 632 nurses in public sectorhospitals in Saudi Arabia. The study examines the direct relationship between jobperformance and job resources (i.e. skill variety, task significance, task identity,feedback, and job security). The results suggest direct significant relationshipsbetween a nurse’s job performance and job resources. Job resources also increase thelevel of nurses’ job performance. In addition, Al-Ahmadi (2009) finds that job designsignificantly and positively contributes to employee performance.

Therefore, based on the above literature review, the following hypothesisis formulated:

H1. Job redesign is positively related to employee performance.

2.2 Job satisfaction and employee performanceJob satisfaction can be defined as a measurement of one’s job or experiences in terms ofpositive emotion or enjoyment in the job (Locke, 1976) and of people’s feelings (like ordislike) in the job (Spector, 1997). These definitions refer to individual emotions thattend to lead to being more productive, creative, and committed to a job. Employeesatisfaction also refers to job satisfaction that can relate to work itself.

Employee satisfaction is an important source of employee motivation. Herzberg(1968) asserts that hygiene factors and motivator factors influence employeemotivation. Motivator factors are related to job satisfaction and hygiene factors arerelated to job dissatisfaction levels. There are several studies that investigate employeesatisfaction and performance. Falkenburg and Schyns (2007) support the assertion thatjob satisfaction positively affects organizational commitment and hence performance.Judge et al. (2001) confirmed that job satisfaction is related to job performance.Antoncic and Antoncic (2011) explain that employee satisfaction has a positiveinfluence on four dimensions of work (general satisfaction with work; employeerelationships; remuneration, benefits and organizational culture; and employee loyalty).Hence, this impact has a positive influence on firm growth. Perera et al. (2014) usestructural equation modelling to analyse the relationship between job satisfaction andjob performance in the apparel sector of Sri Lanka. The findings assert that jobsatisfaction has a significant positive effect on job performance.

In addition, key JC can be used to describe the motivating potential of a job redesign.The JCM is widely used as a conceptual framework and instrument for employeemotivation enhancement. For instance, Rhoads et al. (2002) found that there is a positivecorrelation between JC (control, variety, feedback, and autonomy) and job satisfaction.A high level of these JC tends to increase job satisfaction and performance.The majority of the managers in their study lacked variety and autonomy on thejob, felt dissatisfaction and lack of commitment to their job. Unsurprisingly, a

165


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


high-turnover intention was also observed. De Menezes (2012) finds that jobenrichment is positively related to job satisfaction. Hadi and Adil (2010) ascertain thework motivation and job satisfaction of bank managers in Pakistan. Using multipleregression analyses, their findings reveal that overall JC display a significant andpositive correlation with intrinsic motivation. Skill variety, task significance, and taskidentity are significantly and positively related to job satisfaction. Task identity andwork feedback have significant and positive correlations with extrinsic motivation.Bhatti et al. (2012) study job satisfaction and motivation in the banking industry inPakistan. Their results reveal that JC have a positive and significant effect on employeejob satisfaction, internal work motivation, and growth satisfaction. Netemeyer andMaxham (2010) investigated the relationship among job satisfaction, job performance,and customer contact. Results reveal a positive relationship between job satisfactionand job performance. Most of the studies reviewed above found a positive relationshipbetween job satisfaction and improved employee performance. We hypothesize that:

H2. Job satisfaction is positively related to employee performance.

2.3 Job redesign and job satisfaction on employee performanceThe above observations notwithstanding, to date there has not been a study thatsimultaneously examines the relationship between the job redesign-job satisfactioninteraction and employee performance, although the relevant literature suggests amoderation effect might be possible in this context. Humphrey et al. (2007) examinework design theory using a meta-analytic review method based on a total of 259studies. Their findings reveal a strong and positive relationship between JC (autonomy,skill variety, task identity, task significance, and feedback) and job satisfaction, growthsatisfaction, internal work motivation, and job performance. Truxillo et al. (2012)discuss the possible joint effects of age and JC on job satisfaction and performance.Based on a relevant literature review, they developed a series of propositions, related toJCM and job satisfaction and performance. The propositions stipulate that “autonomy,task variety, task significance, and feedback from the job will relate more positively tothe satisfaction, engagement, and performance of older workers” (Truxillo et al., 2012,p. 8). Wood et al. (2012) test job enrichment content, but their results suggest thatenrichment does not display a strongly significant effect on productivity. Job design isassociated with quality and job satisfaction. However, high-job satisfaction is stronglyrelated with higher employee productivity and better quality. Parker (2014) reviewsresearch on motivation and argues that job design can improve employee learning,maintenance, and development for outcomes, such as productivity and quality.Furthermore, Holman et al. (2010) study the mediating role of JC in job redesign as anintervention in health insurance and health care in the UK. Their multilevel regressionresults suggest that “job redesign intervention increases job resources ( job control,participation in decision-making, feedback and skill utilization), and job redesignintervention will allow employees an increase in well-being” (Holman et al., 2010, p. 98).We deduce that this is likely to enhance employee performance. They also found asignificant interaction effect between time of measurement and experimental group.Job redesign is a significant mediator between job control and well-being. Since none ofthe existing studies investigated the interaction effect of job redesign and jobsatisfaction on employee performance, the following hypothesis is formulated:

H3. Job redesign and job satisfaction is jointly positively related to employeeperformance.

166

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


3. Research methodology3.1 MeasuresWe formulated our conceptual model, exhibiting the causal relationship among the threemain constructs: job redesign (R), job satisfaction (S), and employee performance (EP). Wedeveloped our research instrument for data collection by using the results fromin-depth interviews to modify, to some extent, the Job Diagnostic Survey ( JDS) instrumentdeveloped by Hackman and Oldham (1974). Hackman and Oldham (1974) developedthe JCM asserting that the perception of task environment influences employee response.Key JC could be used to describe the motivating potential of a job redesign. Many studieshave investigated the effect of JC on employee motivation and performance using theJDS (Boonzaaier et al., 2001; Rhoads et al., 2002; Rathi and Barath, 2013).

We commenced the analysis with a qualitative method to verify and improve draftquestionnaire items. The semi-structured interview protocol with open-ended questionsis developed to collect data as the basic information of the sample organizations fromboth managerial and operational levels. First, we tested the interview protocol byinterviewing nine interviewees from different hierarchies. After adjusting the protocol,we conducted an additional 18 interviews. We used the result of the interviews tofurther improve our draft questionnaire which was developed based on our literaturereview. The content validity of the questionnaire was validated with Item ObjectiveCongruence Index (Rovinelli and Hambleton, 1977).

Then, the pilot study was conducted in order to pre-test the research plan, method;and to pre-test the research instrument in which the key questions may be modified forthe subsequent large-scale survey. Experienced practitioners were selected toparticipate in the pilot study (expert opinion survey) based on the following criteria:first, being a HR-manager (mid-level manager) with five or more years of workexperience; and second, being with the current company at least five years. The pilotstudy results were then used to finalize the instrument for quantitativeoperationalisation. We pre-tested the questionnaire with 36 sample respondents inthe sample banks. According to Nunnally (1978), Cronbach’s α should be greater than0.70. The Cronbach’s α reliability of the three main constructs yielded the following:0.8698 for job redesign (R), 0.8774 for job satisfaction (S), and 0.8257 for employeeperformance (EP). The questions were developed with 101 items in six sections.In addition, we measured the symmetry of data using skewness and kurtosis. The pilotstudy’s results further improved the actual field survey. We retained all items of theresearch instrument used in the pilot test since the items displayed high reliability.

The questionnaire was developed to capture employee performance. Since our dataset is cross-sectional we have taken into account the issue of common method bias(CMB). CMB potentially inflates correlations among constructs of interest since theyare collected with the same method and at the same point in time (Meade et al., 2007).CMB is pervasive and can be a major internal validity issue in social science research(Sharma et al., 2009). There are several prevalent techniques for controlling anddetecting CMB including Harman’s single factor test (Podsakoff et al., 2003) andconfirmatory factor analysis (CFA) marker technique (Lindell and Whitney, 2001).Podsakoff et al. (2003) suggest that CFA tends to be the most rigorous approach. Weapplied Harman’s single factor test and CFA in this study.

A basic assumption of Harman’s single factor test is described as either: “[…] (1) asingle factor will emerge from the factor analysis; or (2) one general factor will accountfor the majority of the covariance among the measures” (Podsakoff et al., 2003, p. 889).Furthermore, “if a single factor is obtained or if one factor accounts for a majority of the

167


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


covariance in the independent and criterion variables, then the threat of commonmethod bias is high” (Devaraj et al., 2002, p. 323). On the entire sample (n¼ 295;82 survey items), we tested the responses by using Harman’s single factor test.One single factor accounted for 28.196 per cent of the variance, suggesting that CMB isnot a problem in this study.

We used a seven-point Likert scale questionnaire. We measured job redesign with25 questions adopted from the JDS; job satisfaction with 14 questions based onHerzberg’s two-factor theory and employee performance with three questions(see, Table AI). For job satisfaction, we used CFA to confirm the construct(see, Table AII). Regression analyses were used to test our hypotheses.

3.2 SampleThere are 231 hotels and resorts that are listed companies in the Thai HotelsAssociation Directory in 2012. We directly sent our questionnaires to all of them. Forthe banking sector, ten commercial banks are listed companies in both the StockExchange in Thailand and the Bank of Thailand. The questionnaire was distributedby the Head Office of each bank, at both head office and branch level following oursurvey instructions.

The rationale for the selection of middle-level managers as survey participantsincluded: first, several organizations in Thailand experienced business processengineering due to the advent of information technology in the last few decades andmiddle-level managers experienced the job redesign process themselves as well asoverseeing the job redesign process among other employees under their supervision;second, a middle-level manager is the intermediate manager accountable to a higherlevel superior while directly managing employees at the operational level. Hence,middle-level managers are employees who are expected to understand those in both,higher and lower level positions; and third, middle-level managers are professionalswho are aware that their self-report will be beneficial for organization improvement andthey are responsible for their unit’s performance. Their self-report reflected in thecompleted questionnaire can thus be reliable to a certain extent.

3.3 Profiles of sample respondentsA total of 1,324 questionnaires were sent to the sample firms: 924 questionnaires forsample hotels and resorts, and 400 questionnaires for sample banks. A total of 295usable questionnaires were returned, representing a 22.28 per cent responserate. When considering the response rate by sector, 136 (or 14.17 per cent) usablequestionnaires were returned from hotels and resorts and 159 (or 39.8 per cent)usable questionnaires were returned from banks. For the combined sampleobservations, the Cronbach’s α coefficient equals 0.962. For the entire sample(n¼ 295), we tested for non-response bias by using: first, χ2 test to compare observeddata with expected data; and second, the independent sample t-test to compare samplerespondents who returned the completed questionnaires in the first round of thesurvey and those who responded in the final round of the survey follow-up, who areassumed to be similar to those who never responded. Based on the χ2 test with keyvariables, the results suggest that the two groups of sample respondents are notsignificantly different (at 0.05 level of significance).

As shown in Table I, the results suggest that the majority of the sample respondentsare female (59.7 per cent) and are found to be in the so-called “Generation X” (58.6 per cent

168

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


are in the 33-47 years age group). In terms of the hotels and resorts category, themajority of sample respondents (63 respondents, 21.4 per cent) are from four-starhotels. Most sample respondents attained a bachelor’s degree (64.1 per cent). Finally,the majority of the sample respondents have had less than five years of workexperiences in their current position (178 respondents or 60.3 per cent).

4. Results and discussions4.1 On JC and job satisfactionBased on factor analysis of JC, the mean value of each variable seems to be high: mostof them are greater than 5. The results of the principal axis factoring extraction andvarimax rotation methods suggest five factors, which strongly confirm the JCM(Hackman and Oldham, 1976): autonomy, task significance, job feedback, skill variety,and task identity (see, Table II). The KMO-Bartlett value is 0.917. Factor loadings ofall variables are between 0.499 and 0.752. The Cronbach’s α of all variables range from0.764 to 0.8733. The mean values of variables are between 5.07 and 6.27. The factoranalysis of job satisfaction identifies two factors: motivation factors and hygienefactors, which strongly confirm Herzberg’s two-factor theory (Table III). The

n %

GenderMale 119 40.3Female 176 59.7

AgeBelow 32 years (Gen-Y)a 71 24.133-47 years (Gen-X) 173 58.648-66 years (Baby Boom) 51 17.3

Type of organizationBank 159 53.9Hotel and resorts 136 46.1

Hotel and resorts category5 stars 45 15.34 stars 63 21.43 stars 28 9.5

Educational attainmentoBachelor’s degree 25 8.5Bachelor’s degree 189 64.1Master’s degree 81 27.5

Years of experience in current position⩽5 178 60.36-10 72 24.411-15 20 6.816-20 5 1.721-25 6 2.026-30 3 1.0W35 3 1.0Invalid response 8 2.7Notes: n¼ 295. a12-32 years old¼Gen-Y

Table I.Demographic profile

of samplerespondents

169


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


KMO-Bartlett test value is 0.934. The factor loadings of all variables are greater than 0.6.Cronbach’s α of all variables are greater than 0.8, with mean values of each variableranging from 5.27 to 6.03.

4.2 Regression resultsTable IV provides the means, standard deviation, and correlation matrix of the coreindependent variables. It indicates that all variables are statistically and significantlycorrelated. Based on the regression analyses (Table V) of three regression models,Model 1 serves as our base model incorporating all core independent variables: jobredesign, job satisfaction, and the interaction effect term. We recall that this washypothesized to influence employee performance. Then, Model 2 is tested with onecontrol dummy variable (industry sector, banking). In Model 3, a regression wasperformed with all core independent variables and all control variables, includingindustry, and demographic characteristics of sample respondents. It is unexpectedlyfound that job redesign is significantly and inversely related to employee performance,at the 0.10 level, in all three models. Job satisfaction is, however, found to beconsistently positively and significantly related to employee performance, at the 0.05

Structure Factor loading Mean Items mean α Reliability

Factor I: autonomy (Eigenvalue¼ 9.315) α¼ 0.842 5.415 0.8733Autonomy 0.686 5.40Autonomous authority 0.562 5.39Decision 0.651 5.07Job feedback 0.465 5.75Colleagues feedback 0.527 5.34Reveal ideas 0.601 5.54Job redesign 0.668 5.08

Factor II: task significance (Eigenvalue¼ 2.088) 5.866 0.840Know process 0.482 5.86Job significant 0.555 5.74Affect the policy 0.659 5.80Job value 0.648 6.06

Factor III: job feedback (Eigenvalue¼ 1.548) 5.935 0.756Meeting and appraise 0.505 5.38Work with co-worker 0.526 6.13Teamwork 0.612 6.09Helpful co-workers 0.552 5.87Trustworthiness 0.536 6.21

Factor IV: skill variety (Eigenvalue¼ 1.184) 5.867 0.814Skill variety 0.594 5.77Knowledge variety 0.752 5.79Acquire knowledge 0.629 6.05

Factor V: task identity (Eigenvalue¼ 1.021) 5.991 0.764Technique skill 0.570 5.73Responsibility 0.642 6.27Job pride 0.499 5.97Notes: Extraction method: principal axis factoring; rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization.KMO¼ 0.917; Bartlett’s test Sig.¼ 0.00

Table II.The confirmatoryfactor analysis resultsof job characteristicsand mean valueof each factor

170

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


Construct Variables Factor loading Mean Item means α Reliability

Factor I: MFac (5 items) (Eigenvalue¼ 1.439) 5.846 0.892d51 – Achievement 0.787 5.813d52 – Recognition 0.828 5.891d53 – The work itself 0.722 5.755d54 – Job receives 0.698 5.810d55 – Career path and advancement 0.555 5.967

Factor II: HFac (9 items) (Eigenvalue¼ 7.758) 5.623 0.926d56 – Salary 0.723 5.315d57 – Possibility of growth 0.679 5.423d58 – Subordinate and peer 0.708 5.779d59 – Status (the pride of occupation) 0.628 6.040d60 – Company policy and administration 0.740 5.684d61 – Working conditions 0.623 5.505d62 – Personal life 0.674 5.657d63 – Security 0.723 5.728d64 – Supervision-technical 0.730 5.474Notes: Extraction method: rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization. KMO¼ 0.934; Sig.¼ 0.00

Table III.The factor analysisresult of motivationand mean value of

each variable

Var. Mean SD 1 2 3 4

1. Employee performance (ep2) 5.6599 0.89169 (0.774)2. Job redesign (r1) 5.4446 1.17388 0.200*** (0.922)3. Job satisfaction (s1) 5.7031 0.79832 0.643*** 0.385*** (0.937)4. Job Red.× Job Sat. (r_s) 31.4102 8.89905 0.447*** 0.898*** 0.733*** 1Notes: n¼ 295. Cronbach’s α reliabilities in the parenthesis. ***po0.001 level (two-tailed)

Table IV.Mean, standarddeviation, and

correlations matrixof the core

independentvariables

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3B B B

(Constant) 3.246*** 3.259*** 3.289***Job redesign (r1) −0.36* −0.338* −0.347*Job satisfaction (s1) 0.447** 0.434** 0.459**Job redesign× job satisfaction (r_s) 0.058* 0.059* 0.058***Hotel −0.163** 0.15533-47 years (Gen-X) −0.289*48-66 years (Baby Boom) −0.253Male 0.005Lower than bachelor’s degree −0.025Master’s degree −0.075Less than 6 years −0.1436-10 years 0.061More than 10 years −0.005Adjusted R2 0.421 0.421 0.427F 70.811 54.546 19.283Notes: n¼ 295. Dependent variable¼EP2. *po0.10; **po0.05; ***po0.01

Table V.Regression resultson the interaction

effect of job redesignand job satisfaction

on employeeperformance

171


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


level in all models. Moreover, the interaction effect between job redesign and jobsatisfaction is found to be positively and significantly related to employee performance,at the 0.10 level in Models 1 2 and at the 0.001 level in Model 3. The adjusted R2 rangesfrom 0.421 in Model 1 to 0.427 in Model 3, indicating that the model can significantlyexplain the variation in employee performance.

Since the interaction term of job redesign and job satisfaction (r_s) is found to besignificantly positive (i.e. β¼ 0.058, po0.10), we conducted simple slope test (see, Aikenand West, 1991; Preacher et al., 2006; Dawson, 2014) to examine the relationship betweenthe job redesign and employee performance (EP2). The simple slope test reveals that theeffect of job redesign on employee performance is moderated by the job satisfaction level.We note that the relationship between job redesign and employee performance isinversely related. The plotted interaction is presented in Figure 1.

5. DiscussionOur empirical results suggest relationships among job redesign, job satisfaction, andemployee performance. The findings (Table V), however, seem to generate unexpectedresults. Our regression results reveal that job redesign is significantly but inverselyrelated to employee performance. This runs counter to the assumption (H1) that jobredesign is positively related to employee performance. Thus, H1 is not supported.An arguably plausible explanation of this finding suggests that if job redesign isimplemented without due consideration of concerned managerial employees, theseemployees may not be satisfied and committed to their redesigned job. Amongst suchexperienced managers, whose promoted managerial status presumably derived fromstrong performances prior to the job redesign process, a performance deterioration in achanged environment without consultation may not be altogether surprising. What ismore, the results of Model 3 suggest that age of the sample respondents tends to benegatively related to employee performance. This seems to suggest that it may be moredifficult to use job redesign for the purpose of performance improvement withemployees in an older age group. Conversely, this may also imply that job redesignmay work more effectively with a younger age group of employees.

In response to H2, we find that job satisfaction is positively and significantly relatedto employee performance in all models. Perhaps even more interestingly, the interaction

5

4.5

4

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5

Low-job redesign

Dep

ende

nt v

aria

ble

High-job redesign

High-Job Sat.

Low-Job Sat.

1

Notes: Dependent variable=EP2; independent

variable=JobRe; and moderator variable=JobSat

Figure 1.The plot interactionpattern betweenjob redesign andjob satisfaction

172

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


effect (H3) between job redesign and job satisfaction is found to be positively andsignificantly related to employee performance. However, we note that the betacoefficients of job satisfaction ( JS) are much higher than those of the job redesign ( JR)and the interaction effect variable (r_s). In addition, job satisfaction positivelymoderates the impact of job redesign on employee performance, as suggested by thepositive effect of the interaction variable. Further interpretations of the relationshipbetween job redesign and job satisfaction may be warranted.

Our finding on the interaction effect suggests a positive relationship between thesetwo independent variables and employee performance. To some extent, this supportsfindings by other researchers such as Hadi and Adil (2010) who investigated theinteraction effect of JC and work motivation to predict bank employee performance inPakistan. Morgeson et al. (2006) assert that the positive effect of redesigning work isrelated to the nature of work, driven predominantly by task characteristics (workscheduling autonomy, decision-making autonomy, work methods autonomy, taskvariety, significance, task identity, and feedback related to the job) that are related tojob satisfaction. Furthermore, knowledge characteristics ( job complexity, informationprocessing requirements, problem solving, and skill variety) are found to be related tojob satisfaction. Thus, a knowledge-based job redesign that enhances employee jobsatisfaction can enhance employee performance.

In more generic terms and in the spirit of participative decision-making, we suggestthat involvement and consultation matters. Amongst middle-level managers, thisarguably matters even more, because their enhanced job satisfaction can be utilised tooversee others under their supervision and achieve the efficiency and effectiveness inredesigned job goals.

6. Conclusion, managerial implications, and future work6.1 Conclusion and managerial implicationsIn this study, we aim to contribute to the literature on job design and employeeperformance. We hypothesized an effect of job redesign on employee performance andconsidered a possible joint interaction effect of job redesign and job satisfaction onemployee performance. As the analysis was deemed to be particularly meaningful tothe service sector, which is growing rapidly in ASEAN, we chose the hotel, resort, andbanking sectors of Thailand as our evidence-based study context.

Our sample was composed of middle-level managers. This design provided a differentfocus compared with previous studies that focused largely on general employees. Thus,our managerial implications provide powerful lessons for top management whensupporting middle-level managers in the change process. Based on the statistical analysesof 295 sample respondents who are middle-level managers in the chosen industry sectors,we uncover that job redesign itself is inversely related to employee performance.We suggest that employee performance can only be improved if the job redesign processis implemented in such a way that affected employees experience a notable degree of jobsatisfaction. We speculate that this, in turn, means that in the process of job redesignimplementation, concerned employees should be involved in the change process. Griffin(1991) concurs when investigating the long-term effects of work redesign on employeeperception, reporting on the crucial role of attitudes (such as job satisfaction andcommitment) and behaviour. It follows that in change management, job redesign can beutilised as a method to improve performance. However, if job redesign is implementedwithout the involvement of concerned employees, it is unlikely that employees willexperience a job satisfaction boost in the process. To this end, the outcome of changes in

173


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


JC will be negatively related to employee performance, as evidenced in this study. It istherefore very important for managers to involve employees (Gyan-Baffour, 1999; Wadeand Parent, 2002) in the process of work or job redesign, and in such a manner thatemployees feel satisfied and committed to the change process. Positive performanceoutcomes can be expected as a consequence.

Job redesign is a conceivable way to mobilize employee performance through theinteraction with job satisfaction. We deduce that job satisfaction could be a key link toemployee performance mobilization. To this end, we suggest that prior to animplemented job redesign, the organizational HR function should provide relevantsupport endeavours that will increase employee job satisfaction (i.e. training, coaching,etc.). In addition, and crucially, any job redesign requires an underpinning ofinvolvement and consultation with concerned employees. Organizationalcommunication can be an important facet in this scenario, enhancing employeepsychological commitment towards an effective job redesign. After all, a committedrelationship between employee and manager influences performance (Buble et al., 2014;Białas and Morska w Gdyni, 2009; Sawyerr et al., 2009).

6.2 Limitation of the study and future workWe recognize a number of limitations in our study. The analysis of cross-sectional datalimits causality claims to mere inferences rather than scientific proof. In the bankingsector, the questionnaires were distributed by the head office, which compromisesassumptions of random sampling of our survey for this sector. We also note thatemployee performance in this study is concerned with in-role performance as taskperformance only. Job performance can, of course, be categorized by two dimensions:in-role (task) performance and extra-role (contextual) performance (Conway, 1999).In-role performance refers to individual behaviour that performs the duties required bythe job (Christian et al., 2011) whereas extra-role performance points at behaviouroutside role expectations, also often termed organizational citizenship behaviour (Zhu,2013). An investigation of extra-role performance enhancement would be a worthwhileendeavour. Finally, due to time and budget constraints, we were unable to coverbroader contexts or extend our analysis to alternate business sectors in the service (andnon-service) industries. Future studies may wish to narrow this gap.

References

Aiken, L.S. and West, S.G. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions,Sage, Newbury Park, CA.

Akaraborworn, C.T. and McLean, G.N. (2002), “The changing roles of HRD in Thailand duringthe current economic crisis”, International Journal of Human Resources Development andManagement, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 64-77.

Al-Ahmadi, H. (2009), “Factors affecting performance of hospital nurses in Riyadh region, SaudiArabia”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 40-54.

Al-Homayan, A.M., Shamsudin, F.M., Subramaniam, C. and Islam, R. (2013), “Impacts of jobperformance level on nurses in public sector hospitals”, American Journal of AppliedSciences, Vol. 10 No. 9, pp. 1115-1123.

Ali, N. and Zia-ur-Rehman, M. (2014), “Impact of job design on employee performance, mediatingrole of job satisfaction: a study of FMCG’s sector in Pakistan”, International Journal ofBusiness and Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 70-79.

174

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.5539%2Fijbm.v9n2p70&citationId=p_5

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.5539%2Fijbm.v9n2p70&citationId=p_5

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1504%2FIJHRDM.2002.001017&citationId=p_2

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1504%2FIJHRDM.2002.001017&citationId=p_2

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&system=10.1108%2F09526860910927943&citationId=p_3

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.3844%2Fajassp.2013.1115.1123&citationId=p_4

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.3844%2Fajassp.2013.1115.1123&citationId=p_4

Antoncic, J.A. and Antoncic, B. (2011), “Employee satisfaction, intrapreneurship and firm growth:a model”, Industrial Management & Data system, Vol. 111 No. 4, pp. 589-607.

Bhatti, N., Syed, A.A.S.G. and Shaikh, F.M. (2012), “Job satisfaction and motivation in bankingindustry in Pakistan”, Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 54-62.

Bialas, S. and Morska w Gdyni, A. (2009), “Power distance as a determinant of relationshipbetween manager and employees in the enterprises with foreign capital”, Journal ofIntercultural Management, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 105-115.

Boonzaaier, B., Ficker, B. and Rust, B. (2001), “A review of research on the job characteristicsmodel and the attendant job diagnostic survey”, South African Journal of BusinessManagement, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 11-34.

Buble, M., Juras, A. and Matic, I. (2014), “The relationship between manager’s leadership stylesand motivation”, Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 161-193.

Campbell, J.P. (1990), “Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial andorganizational psychology”, in Dunnette, M.D. and Hough, L.M. (Eds), Handbook ofIndustrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Consulting Psychologists Press,Palo Alto, CA, pp. 678-732.

Christian, M.S., Garza, A.S. and Slaughter, J.E. (2011), “Work engagement: a quantitative reviewand test of its relations with task and contextual performance”, Personnel Psychology,Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 89-136.

Conway, J.M. (1999), “Distinguishing contextual performance from task performance formanagerial jobs”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 3-13.

Dawson, J.F. (2014), “Moderation in management research: what, why, when and how”, Journal ofBusiness and Psychology, Vol. 29, pp. 1-19.

De Menezes, L.M. (2012), “Job satisfaction and quality management: an empirical analysis”,International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 32 No. 3,pp. 308-328.

Devaraj, S., Fan, M. and Kohli, R. (2002), “Antecedents of B2C channel satisfaction andpreference: validating e-commerce metrics”, Information Systems Research, Vol. 13 No. 3,pp. 316-333.

Falkenburg, K. and Schyns, B. (2007), “Work satisfaction, organizational commitment andwithdrawal behaviors”, Management Research News, Vol. 30 No. 10, pp. 708-723.

Griffin, R. (1991), “Effects of work redesign on employee perceptions, attitudes, andbehaviors: a long-term investigation”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 2,pp. 425-235.

Gyan-Baffour, G. (1999), “The effects of employee participation and work design on firmperformance: a managerial perspective”,Management Research News, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 1-12.

Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1974), “The job diagnostic survey: an instrument for thediagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects”, Technical Report No. 4,US Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service Document,Yale University, New Haven, CT.

Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1976), “Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory”,Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 250-279.

Hadi, R. and Adil, A. (2010), “Job characteristics as predictors of work motivation and jobsatisfaction of bank employees”, Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology,Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 294-299.

Herzberg, F. (1968), “One more time: how do you motivate employees?”,Harvard Business Review,Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 53-62.

175


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&system=10.1108%2F01443571211212592&isi=000303074200004&citationId=p_15


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&isi=A1968ZA23000011&citationId=p_23

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1111%2Fj.1744-6570.2010.01203.x&isi=000287453000004&citationId=p_12

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1287%2Fisre.13.3.316.77&isi=000177971400006&citationId=p_16


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1037%2F0021-9010.84.1.3&isi=000078955000001&citationId=p_13


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2F0030-5073%2876%2990016-7&isi=A1976CA95500003&citationId=p_21

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1007%2Fs10869-013-9308-7&isi=000331382600001&citationId=p_14


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.2307%2F256449&isi=A1991FL87500008&citationId=p_18

Holman, D.J., Axtell, C.M., Sprgg, C.A., Totterdell, P. and Wall, T.D. (2010), “The mediating role ofjob characteristics in job redesign interventions: a serendipitous quasi-experiment”,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 84-105.

Humphrey, S.E., Nahrgang, J.D. and Morgeson, F.P. (2007), “Integrating motivational, social,and contextual work design features: a meta-analytic summary and theoreticalextension of the work design literature”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 5,pp. 1332-1356.

IMAA (2013), “Banking industry trends of M&A between 1985 and 2013”, available at:www.imaa-institute.org/statistics-mergers-acquisitions.html (accessed 21 May 2014).

Jaturanonda, C., Nanthavanij, S. and Chongphaisal, P. (2006), “A survey study on weights ofdecision criteria for job rotation in Thailand: comparison between public and privatesectors”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 17 No. 10,pp. 1834-1851.

Johlke, M.C. and Iyer, R. (2013), “A model of retail job characteristics, employee role ambiguity,external customer mind-set, and sales performance”, Journal of Retailing and ConsumerServices, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 58-67.

Judge, T.A., Bono, J.C., Thoresen, C.J. and Patton, G.K. (2001), “The job satisfaction-jobperformance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review”, Psychological Bulletin,Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 376-407.

Kahya, E. (2007), “The effects of job characteristics and working conditions on job performanceinternational”, Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 37, pp. 515-523.

Khahan, N.N. (2013), “Influence of job characteristics and job satisfaction effect work adjustmentfor entering labor market of new graduates in Thailand”, International Journal of Businessand Social Science, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 95-103.

Lentz, E. and Allen, T.D. (2009), “The role of mentoring others in the career plateauingphenomenon”, Group & Organizational Management, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 358-384.

Lindell, M.K. and Whitney, D.J. (2001), “Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 114-121.

Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.),Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL,pp. 1297-1349.

Maxwell, J.R. (2008), “Work system design to improve the economic performance of the firm”,Business Process Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 432-446.

Meade, A.W., Watson, A.M. and Kroustalis, C.M. (2007), “Assessing common methods bias inorganizational research”, Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Society forIndustrial and Organizational Psychology, New York, NY.

Michalos, G., Makris, S. and Chryssolouris, G. (2013), “The effect of job rotation during assemblyon the quality of final product”, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology,Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 187-197.

Mohr, R. and Zoghi, C. (2008), “High-involvement work design and job satisfaction”,Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 275-296.

Morgeson, F.P., Johnson, M.D., Campion, M.A. and Medsker, G.J. (2006), “Understanding reactionsto job redesign: a quasi-experimental investigation of the moderating effects oforganizational context on perceptions of performance behavior”, Personnel Psychology,Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 333-363.

Morrow, P.C., McElroy, J.C. and Scheibe, K.P. (2012), “Influencing organizational commitmentthrough office redesign”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 81, pp. 99-111.

176

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


www.imaa-institute.org/statistics-mergers-acquisitions.html

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.ergon.2007.02.006&isi=000248612500005&citationId=p_30

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1177%2F001979390806100301&isi=000255673100001&citationId=p_38



http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1002%2Fjob.631&isi=000273619900006&citationId=p_24


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.jretconser.2012.10.006&citationId=p_28

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.jretconser.2012.10.006&citationId=p_28


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.jvb.2012.05.004&isi=000305873500010&citationId=p_40




http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.cirpj.2013.03.001&citationId=p_37

Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Parker, S.K. (2014), “Beyond motivation: job and work design for development, health,ambidexterity, and more”, The Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 65, January,pp. 661-691.

Perera, G.D.N., Khatibi, A., Navaratna, N. and Chinna, K. (2014), “Job satisfaction and jobperformance among factory employees in apparel sector”, Asian Journal of ManagementSciences & Education, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 96-104.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biasesin behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.

Preacher, K.J., Curran, P.J. and Bauer, D.J. (2006), “Computational tools for probing interactions inmultiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis”, Journal ofEducational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 437-448.

Rathi, N. and Barath, M. (2013), “Work-family conflict and job and family satisfaction:moderating effect of social support among police personnel”, Equality, Diversity andInclusion: An International Journal, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 438-454.

Rhoads, G.R., Swinyard, W.R., Geurts, M.D. and Price, W.D. (2002), “Retailing as a career:a comparative study of marketers”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 78 No. 1, pp. 71-76.

Rovinelli, R.J. and Hambleton, R.K. (1977), “On the use of content specialists in the assessment ofcriterion-referenced test item validity”, Dutch Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 2,pp. 49-60.

Sadikoglu, E. and Zehir, C. (2010), “Investigating the effects of innovation and employeeperformance on the relationship between total quality management practices and firmperformance: an empirical study of Turkish firms”, International Journal ProductionEconomics, Vol. 127, pp. 13-26.

Sawyerr, O.O., Srinivas, S. and Wang, S. (2009), “Call center employee personality factors andservice performance”, Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 301-317.

Spector, P. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes and Consequences, Sage, CA.

Strümpfer, D.J.W. (2006), “The strengths perspective: fortigenesis in adult life”, Social IndicatorsResearch, Vol. 77, pp. 11-36.

Truxillo, D., Cadiz, D., Rineer, J., Zaniboni, S. and Fraccaroli, F. (2012), “A lifespan perspective onjob design: fitting the worker to the job to promote job satisfaction”, OrganizationalPsychology Review, Vol. 1 No. 21, pp. 1-22.

Ubeda, G.M., Marco, L.B., Sabater, S.V. and García, L.F. (2013), “Does training influenceorganisational performance? Analysis of the Spanish hotel sector”, European Journal ofTraining and Development, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 380-413.

Wade, W.R. and Parent, M. (2002), “Relationship between job skill and performance: a study ofwebmasters”, Journal of Management Information System, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 71-96.

Wood, S., Veldhoven, M.V., Croon, M. and Menezes, L.M. (2012), “Enriched job design, highinvolvement management and organizational performance: the mediating roles of jobsatisfaction and well-being”, Human Relations, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 419-446.

Yeo, R.K. and Li, J. (2011), “Working out the quality of work life: a career development perspectivewith insights for human resource management”, Human Resource ManagementInternational Digest, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 39-45.

Zhu, Y. (2013), “Individual behaviour: in-role and extra-role”, International Journal of BusinessAdministration, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 23-27.

177


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)





http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.ijpe.2010.02.013&isi=000281345300002&citationId=p_49

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2Fj.ijpe.2010.02.013&isi=000281345300002&citationId=p_49

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010213-115208&isi=000329821700025&citationId=p_42



http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&system=10.1108%2FEDI-10-2012-0092&citationId=p_46

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&system=10.1108%2FEDI-10-2012-0092&citationId=p_46




http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.5430%2Fijba.v4n1p23&citationId=p_58

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.5430%2Fijba.v4n1p23&citationId=p_58

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1016%2FS0022-4359%2801%2900068-9&isi=000176323100007&citationId=p_47

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.4135%2F9781452231549&citationId=p_51

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1080%2F07421222.2002.11045694&isi=000173053000004&citationId=p_55




Further reading

Allison, P. (2012), “When can you safely ignore multicollinearity?”, 10 September, available at:http://statisticalhorizons.com/multicollinearity (accessed 14 October 2015).

Birnbaum, D. and Somers, M.J. (1995), “Another look at work design in hospitals: redesigning the workroles of nurses”, Journal of Health Human Service Administration, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 303-316.

Byrne, M. (2010), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Routledge Taylor and FrancisGroup, New York, NY and London.

Campion, M.A., Mumford, T.V., Morgeson, F.P. and Nahrgang, J.D. (2005), “Work redesign: eightobstacles and opportunities”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 367-390.

Craig, R.L. (1976), Training and Development Handbook: A Guide to Human ResourceDevelopment, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York, NY.

Edgar, F. and Geare, A. (2005), “HRM practice and employee attitudes: different measures-different results”, Personnel Review, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 534-549.

Johnson, A. (2007), Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 6th ed.,Pearson Education Inc.

Mayfiel, M. and Mayfield, J. (2009), “The role of leader-follower relationships in leadercommunication: a test using the LMX and motivating language models”, The Journal ofBusiness Inquiry, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 65-82.

Sels, L., Winne, S.D., Maes, J., Delmotte, J., Faems, D. and Anneleen, F. (2006), “Unravelling theHRM-performance link: value-creating and cost-increasing effects of small business HRM”,Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 319-342.

Slocum, J.W. Jr (1981), “Job redesign: improving the quality of work life”, Journal of ExperientialLearning and Simulation, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 17-36.

Sonnentag, S. and Ilies, R.M. (2011), “Intra-individual process linking work and employeewell-being: introduction into the special issue”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 32No. 4, pp. 521-525.

Wooldridge, J. (2009), Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, Southwestern CengageLearning, OH, 865pp.

178

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


http://statisticalhorizons.com/multicollinearity


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&isi=A1981MH69000003&citationId=p_68

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&isi=A1981MH69000003&citationId=p_68

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1002%2Fjob.757&isi=000290625500001&citationId=p_69

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?doi=10.1108%2FEBHRM-01-2015-0001&crossref=10.1002%2Fhrm.20080&isi=000233697700001&citationId=p_62


Appendix

Variables Items

JobRec26 Does your job require you using a variety of skill and ability?c27 Your job requires you to know many things in organizationc28 Your job require you often to acquire knowledgec29 Your job requires you to use techniques, skills, and high-level skillsc30 Does your job involve a complete piece of work that has an obvious beginning and end?c31 Your job requires high responsibilityc32 Your job is giving up to be a pride for you (reverse coding)c33 Your job requires you to do an entire piece of work from beginning to endc34 How significant is your job? Does your job significantly effect on work life of other people?c35 Your job has obviously significant impact on policy or organizationc36 Your job is a worthy job in itselfc37 Your job is significant to coordinate with other divisionc38 How much autonomy and decision on your own is there in your job?c39 Your job requires you to listen to other ideasc40 Your job requires high-autonomous authorityc41 You are a top decision-maker in your job or your teamc42 Does your job style or job itself let you know feedback about your work performance?c43 Do your managers or colleagues let you know feedback about your job?c44 Your job requires you to disclose your ideac45 Your job require intermittently meeting, sharing, or evaluatingc46 Your job can redesign by own jobc47 Does your Job require you to work closely with other people?c48 Your job require you to do in teamworkc49 Your job give your opportunity to helps other people while you doing a jobc50 Your job require you to trust your colleagues

JobSatd51 How satisfied are you with your personal job’s achievement?d52 How satisfied are you with the recognition and the feeling of worthwhile accomplishment

you got from doing your job?d53 How satisfied are you with the level of challenging in your job. The work itself gives

opportunity to use creativity or do the job at beginning and end by you?d54 How satisfied are you with your job that receives to assign?d55 Do you understand your career path and your advancement well?d56 How satisfied are you with your salary welfare and benefit?d57 How satisfied are you with your possibility of growth that you gain from your job?d58 How satisfied are you with the relationship level with your subordinate and peers?d59 How satisfied are you with the pride in your occupation and the feeling of your honourable job?d60 How satisfied are you with company policy and administration?d61 How satisfied are you with working environment, work equipment, etc.?d62 Does your job make your happy life or make your family life to be happy?d63 How satisfied are you with the job security for the future?d64 How satisfied are you with fair treatment that you receive from your manager?

EP2b21 Organization success in HCI?b23 Apply knowledge to add value to my job?b25 Improve my job operation?Notes: EP, employee performance; JobRe, job redesign; JobSat, job satisfaction

Table AI.Descriptions of

the variables, items,and coding

179


job satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


Initial Eigenvalues Extraction sums of squared loadingsComponent Total % of variance Cumulative % Total % of variance Cumulative %

1 23.121 28.196 28.196 23.121 28.196 28.1962 8.379 10.219 38.415 8.379 10.219 38.4153 5.157 6.289 44.704 5.157 6.289 44.7044 3.778 4.607 49.311 3.778 4.607 49.3115 3.436 4.190 53.502 3.436 4.190 53.5026 2.710 3.304 56.806 2.710 3.304 56.8067 1.921 2.342 59.148 1.921 2.342 59.1488 1.656 2.020 61.168 1.656 2.020 61.1689 1.505 1.835 63.003 1.505 1.835 63.003

10 1.366 1.666 64.669 1.366 1.666 64.66911 1.314 1.603 66.272 1.314 1.603 66.27212 1.235 1.506 67.778 1.235 1.506 67.77813 1.220 1.488 69.266 1.220 1.488 69.26614 1.164 1.419 70.685 1.164 1.419 70.68515 1.059 1.291 71.976 1.059 1.291 71.97616 1.008 1.229 73.206 1.008 1.229 73.20617 0.978 1.193 74.398⋮82 0.027 0.034 100.000Notes: CFA, Eigenvalues greater than 1. Extraction method: principal component analysis

Table AII.Harman’s singlefactor test

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htmOr contact us for further details: [email protected]

180

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


This article has been cited by:

1. Zheng Chen. 2018. Job satisfaction among frontline police officers in China: the role ofdemographic, work-related, organizational and social factors. Psychology, Crime & Law 3, 1-20.[Crossref]

2. SalminenHanna, Hanna Salminen, VanhalaMika, Mika Vanhala, HeilmannPia, Pia Heilmann.2017. Work-related attitudes as antecedents of perceived individual-, unit- and organisation-levelperformance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 25:4, 577-595. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Coo

k U

nive

rsity

At 0

1:12

02

May

201

8 (P

T)


https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1442835

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-05-2016-1028

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/IJOA-05-2016-1028

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/IJOA-05-2016-1028

1. Pre Test dan Main Testkc.umn.ac.id/11108/4/LAMPIRAN.pdfkaryawan, ngurus surat kontrak, ngurus...

Documents

Transcript of 1. Pre Test dan Main Testkc.umn.ac.id/11108/4/LAMPIRAN.pdfkaryawan, ngurus surat kontrak, ngurus...