Lisensi ini mengizinkan setiap orang untuk menggubah ...kc.umn.ac.id/6462/6/LAMPIRAN.pdf121 analisis...

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.

119

LAMPIRAN

Analisis Pengaruh Job..., Salsabella Kanzu, FB UMN, 2018

120

Kusioner Fisik


121

ANALISIS PENGARUH JOB REDESIGN DAN JOB SATISFACTION TERHADAP EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE: TELAAH PADA

KARYAWAN PT PERUSAHAAN GAS NEGARA TBK.

Kepada Yth Bapak/Ibu, Perkenalkan saya Salsabella Kanzu Watani, mahasiswi Universitas Multimedia Nusantara. Saat ini saya sedang melakukan penelitian mengenai pengaruh job redesign dan job satisfaction terhadap employee performance PT Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk. Dengan ini saya mengharapkan bapak/ibu untuk bersedia mengisi kuesioner penelitian ini sesuai dengan yang dirasakan. Tidak ada jawaban yang benar atau salah, pilihlah jawaban yang mewakili kondisi bapak/ibu. Seluruh data yang terkumpul akan digunakan untuk kepentingan penelitian dan informasi dari responden akan dijaga kerahasiaannya. Hormat saya, Salsabella Kanzu Watani

BAGIAN 1 Petunjuk pengisian: mohon berilah tanda (X) pada pernyataan yang sesuai dengan diri Anda. 1. Apakah anda pernah mengalami job redesign? (contoh: rotasi / mutasi / promosi / penambahan jumlah job desc) O Ya O Tidak. (Kalau anda menjawab tidak, maka Anda tidak perlu meneruskan pengisian kuesioner ini, terima kasih atas bantuan Anda.)

2. Jenis Kelamin:

O Pria O Wanita


122

3. Usia pada tahun 2018:

O < 25 tahun

O 25 – 30 tahun

O 31 – 35 tahun

O 36 – 40 tahun

O > 40 tahun 4. Status kepegawaian:

O Tetap

O Kontrak

O Lainnya. (Sebutkan: ………………………………….) 5. Lama bekerja

O < 2 tahun

O 2 – 5 tahun

O 6 – 10 tahun

O 11 – 15 tahun

O > 15 tahun 6. Pendidikan terakhir atau yang sedang ditempuh saat ini:

O SMA

O D3

O S1

O S2

O S3 7. Divisi Anda bekerja saat ini: ……………………………………...... BAGIAN 2 Pentunjuk pengisian:

� Responden diwajibkan untuk memilih jawaban untuk semua pernyataan.


123

� Berilah tanda ( X ) pada kolom yang disediakan, penilaian angka 1 (Sangat Tidak Setuju) apabila merasa pernyataan tidak cocok dengan responden dan penilaian angka 6 (Sangat Setuju) untuk pernyataan yang dianggap cocok dengan responden.

Job Redesign

No Pernyataan Skala 1. Pekerjaan saya saat ini memerlukan tanggung jawab

yang besar 1 2 3 4 5 6

2. Pekerjaan saya saat ini mengharuskan saya untuk mengetahui banyak hal di dalam perusahaan 1 2 3 4 5 6

3. Pekerjaan saya saat ini menjadi sebuah kebanggan bagi saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

4. Pekerjaan saya saat ini memberikan dampak yang signifikan terhadap PT Perusahaan Gas Negara 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Pekerjaan saya saat ini adalah pekerjaan yang layak untuk dikerjakan 1 2 3 4 5 6

6. Pekerjaan saya saat ini mengharuskan saya untuk bekerja menggunakan skills yang tinggi 1 2 3 4 5 6

Job Satisfaction No Pernyataan Skala 1. Saya puas dengan pekerjaan yang saya lakukan

1 2 3 4 5 6

2. Saya puas dengan gaji yang saya terima 1 2 3 4 5 6

3. Saya puas dengan benefit yang saya terima 1 2 3 4 5 6

4. Saya mengerti dengan baik mengenai jenjang karir saya di perusahaan ini 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Saya puas dengan keamanan kerja yang perusahaan berikan untuk masa depan saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

6. Saya puas dengan perlakuan adil yang saya terima dari atasan saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

7. Saya puas dengan lingkungan kerja saya 1 2 3 5 5 6

8. Saya puas dengan hubungan kerja saya dengan rekan kerja saya 1 2 3 4 5 6


124

Employee Performance No Pernyataan Skala 1. Saat ini saya bekerja pada tingkat kinerja terbaik

saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

2. Saya bangga akan kinerja kerja saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

3. Saya mencoba untuk bekerja di tempat kerja selama yang saya bisa 1 2 3 4 5 6

4. Saya adalah salah satu karyawan terbaik yang dapat menyelesaikan pekerjaan tersebut 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Saya menetapkan standar yang sangat tinggi untuk pekerjaan saya 1 2 3 4 5 6

6. Pekerjaan yang saya lakukan selalu berkualitas tinggi 1 2 3 4 5 6


125

Kusioner Online


126


127


128


129


130


131

Transkrip In Depth Interview

Waktu: 22 Februari 2018

Tempat: Kantor PT Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk

SK: Salsabella Kanzu

A: Narasumber 1 – Hubungan Industrial

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Siang mas.. terima kasih sudah meluangkan waktu untuk interview

A: Iya sama sama

SK: Mas sudah berapa lama ya kerja di PGN?

A: Saya kerja di PGN sudah dari tahun 2012, mau jalan 6 tahun

SK: Mas pernah di rotasi atau di mutasi sebelumnya?

A: Saya dulu di PGN Surabaya, sekitar satu tahun lebih lalu dipindahkan di Jakarta,

lalu saya awalnya di departemen synergy alignment, lalu kemarin pindah lagi ke HCBP,

HCBP itu human capital business partner lalu sekarang saya di industrial relation

SK: Bagaimana pendapat mas tentang hal tersebut?

A: Saya saja dalam 6 bulan terakhir ini sudah dua kali pindah departemen, menurut

saya perpindahan ini cukup cepat terjadi dan bikin saya susah fokus

SK: Hal apa yang membuat fokus mas berkurang?


132

A: Saat saya pindah ke departemen lain saya masih memiliki tugas-tugas dari

departemen sebelumnya sedangkan dalam waktu yang sama saya harus mempelajari

pekerjaan di departemen baru saya, jadi hal ini sedikit merepotkan untuk saya

SK: Apakah program workload analysis berpengaruh terhadap perpindahan mas?

A: Sepertinya tidak juga, karena sebelum program itu berjalan saya sudah dirotasi

SK: Lalu bagaimana pendapat mas tentang posisi mas yang baru? Dengan rekan kerja

atau atasan mas?

A: Sekarang atasan saya baru saja diganti, yang sebelumnya saya sudah merasa klop

SK: Jadi mas belum puas ya dengan sikap atasan mas yang baru ini?

A: Bisa dikatakan kurang sa

SK: Bagaimana dengan faktor lain seperti gaji dan benefit mas? Apakah sudah

memuaskan?

A: Untuk gaji saya awalnya puas ya tetapi dengan adanya pencabutan hak rumah dinas

saya jadi saya harus mencari sewa baru lagi

SK: Bagaimana pendapat mas tentang hal tersebut?

A: Saya jadi repot ya jadi tambah banyak pengeluarannya

SK: Apakah mas menggunakan seluruh hak izin sakit mas dan cuti mas?

A: Kalau sakit selagi masih bisa ke kantor saya ke kantor, kalau cuti pasti saya pakai

semua ya, lumayan kalau ada banyak buat pulang kampung


133

SK: Apakah mas selalu mengutamakan kerja dimanapun kapanpun?

A: Engga juga dong kalo libur ya libur, kerja ya di kantor saja

SK: Apakah mas sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat mas bekerja?

A: Belum merasa terbaik tapi selalu usaha semaksimal mungkin

SK: Apakah mas membuat standar kerja yang tinggi dalam bekerja?

A: Standar yang mungkin saya capai aja, set tinggi-tinggi nanti memaksakan juga kan

jadinya tidak tercapai juga

SK: Apakah mas sudah bangga dengan performance mas saat ini?

A: Kurang lebih cukup ya sa

SK: Ooh begitu mas, baik terima kasih atas waktunya


134


Waktu: 22 Februari 2018



C: Narasumber 2 - Legal

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Siang kak, terima kasih sudah luangin waktu nya. Kalau boleh tau kaka udah kerja

berapa lama ya ka di PGN?

C: Aku kurang lebih baru 2 tahun, masuk di tahun 2016 awal. Soalnya kan baru kelar

kuliah juga jadi baru mulai kerja

SK: Kaka sekarang posisi nya dibagian apa ya kak?

C: Aku legal officer sa

SK: Ooh gitu.. selama kaka kerja kaka pernah ga di rotasi?

C: Di rotasi sih aku belum pernah tapi pekerjaan aku ditambahin iya, karena kan gak

mungkin kita kerjaan itu-itu terus pasti tanggung jawab kita bertambah

SK: Kalau mengalami modifikasi pekerjaan seperti itu atau job redesign seperti itu apa

pendapat kaka?

C: Untuk sekarang aku kurang seneng sih, karena kadang aku diberikan pekerjaan yang

lebih lagi, sedangkan pekerjaan aku yang ada pun aku belum selesain


135

SK: Bagaimana dengan faktor lain seperti gaji dan benefit kak? Apakah sudah

memuaskan?

C: Masih kurang menurut aku..

SK: Adanya tindakan efisiensi perusahaan apakah hal tersebut berpengaruh terhadap

kaka?

C: Iya aku harus keluar dari rumah dinas, jadi sebenernya ada kerugiannya juga bagi

karyawan kalau ada efisiensi

SK: Ooh begitu ka, kalau dengan lingkungan pekerjaan bagaimana kak?

C: Nyaman sih kalau lingkungannya, tapi kalau untuk bersosialisasi sama temen-temen

pas diawal aku agak susah

SK: Hal apa ka yang buat kaka susah dalam bersosialisasi?

C: Mungkin karena kan aku bukan orang Jakarta asli ya jadi pembahasan kita dengan

karyawan lain itu agak beda. Jadi buat aku adaptasi pas diawal itu sulit, harus pinter

pinter kita gimana nyesuain diri di lingkungan

SK: Untuk lingkungan partner kerja agak sulit dong kak selama kaka kerja?

C: Di awal iya karena kan pekerjaan aku ini bisa selesai kalau kerjaan orang lain itu

juga udah selesai, jadi aku harus menunggu data dan dokumen-dokumen pendukung

yang lain buat di lampirin supaya aku bisa dapetin persetujuan atasan, jadi kadang

kerjaan aku sering ketunda karena itu, mau negur karyawan lain supaya cepat


136

diselesaikan juga kan gaenak ya karna semua umur nya diatas aku, jadinya takut gak

sopan atau bagaimana..

SK: Kalau kaka sendiri sudah puas belum dengan pekerjaan kaka?

C: Dengan pekerjaan yang sekarang sih ada faktor puas dan tidak puasnya, kaya tentang

gaji sih aku belum

SK: Kalau boleh tau faktor apa aja ya kak yang bikin kaka gapuas sama kerjaan kaka?

C: Pertama sih disini ketergantungan birokrasinya tinggi, jadi legal itu harus minta

paraf sampai dengan tanda tangan direktur utama secara berurutan, tapi namanya

direktur utama jadi gak mungkin selalu ada di kantor jadi itu menghambat proses tanda

tangan kontrak sehingga kadang bisa makan waktu yang lama, berminggu-minggu gitu

tugas numpuk

SK: Lalu apalagi kak faktor lainnya?

C: Selain itu sih paling ke penilaian.. masih ada politik kekeluargaan di PGN sekarang

ini, penilaian itu masih subjektif untuk orang-orang dengan background yang punya

keluarga di PGN. Jadi sebagai orang luar aku merasa kurang adil aja dalam penilaian

yah..

SK: Jadi kaka mengharapkan atasan kaka untuk lebih adil ya kak?

C: Iya dong, semua orang juga pasti pengen punya atasan dan perusahaan yang adil

sama mereka

SK: Apakah kaka menggunakan seluruh hak izin sakit kaka dan cuti?


137

C: Iya dong itu hak kita jadi ga bosen kerja terus aja

SK: Apakah kaka selalu mengutamakan kerja dimanapun kapanpun?

C: Kalau pekerjaan belum selesai sih aku selalu utamain kerjaan aku dulu dimanapun

itu, biar cepet selesai aja

SK: Apakah kaka sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat kaka bekerja?

C: Aku udah kasih the best nya aku sih selama aku kerja, jadi mungkin iya bisa dibilang

SK: Apakah kaka membuat standar kerja yang tinggi dalam bekerja?

C: Ya target sih pasti ada, tapi engga tinggi-tinggi banget juga

SK: Apakah kaka sudah bangga dengan performance kaka saat ini?

C: Iya lumayan lah

SK: Ok deh kak.. makasih ya atas waktunya


138


Waktu: 12 Maret 2018



D: Narasumber 3 – Human Capital Management

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Siang ka.. terima kasih ya sudah meluangkan waktu untuk saya interview, kalau

boleh tau kaka udah kerja berapa lama ya ka di PGN?

D: Aku udah sekitar 2,5 tahun

SK: Selama kaka kerja kaka pernah ga di rotasi atau job desc nya ditambahin atau

dikurangin oleh atasan?

D: Pernah.. Awalnya aku sekertaris di marketing pas waktu itu sekertaris marketing

yang dulu cuti melahirkan, terus pas udah balik lagi aku dipindahin ke human capital

SK: Kalau ada rotasi seperti itu apakah rotasi tersebut terjadi dengan izin persetujuan

kaka dahulu atau hanya dengan keputusan atasan kaka?

D: Ya kita sih tinggal ikutin keputusan atasan aja

SK: Kalau mengalami modifikasi pekerjaan seperti itu atau job redesign seperti itu apa

pendapat kaka?

D: Menurut aku sih kurang nyaman, terus aku pindah juga dengan posisi yang sama,

cuma tugasnya agak berbeda


139

SK: Salah satu masalah yang kaka hadapi dalam perpindahan itu apa ka?

D: Harus adaptasi ulang dengan atasan dan rekan kerja baru jadi butuh penyesuaian

lagi

SK: Apakah kaka sudah puas dengan gaji dan benefit yang perusahaan kasih ke kaka?

D: Untuk gaji aku merasa belum puas sih, karena pekerjaan aku jujur setelah masuk

human capital makin banyak dan kebutuhan aku bertambah setelah menikah

SK: Ooh begitu ya kak.. apa kaka tau mengenai jenjang karir kaka di PGN?

D: Aku sih belum tau, mungkin butuh waktu yang lama buat naik ya

SK: Kalau menurut kaka bagaimana kebijakan dan peraturan di PGN ka?

D: Peraturan dan kebijakan sih oke, ya sesuai lah dan ga begitu ngekang karyawan

SK: Kalau dengan lingkungan kerja bagaimana ka? Kaka udah puas atau tidak?

D: Untuk lingkungan cukup nyaman, deket rumah juga terus fasilitas kantor juga

mendukung kerjaan aku, jadi ga menyusahkan

SK: Kalau dengan atasan apakah kaka sudah merasa nyaman dan puas?

D: Kalau pak baskara baik banget, dia bukan tipe atasan yang ngekang aku banget,

kalau aku izin ada acara penting juga dia kasih izin tanpa ambil jatah cuti aku ya, kalau

aku sakit pun dia ngerti kalau aku harus pulang cepet atau setengah hari

SK: Kalau dengan rekan kerja apakah kaka sudah nyaman?

D: Aku lebih nyaman ketika aku di marketing ya, karena lebih bisa kerja sama aja


140

SK: Apakah kaka menggunakan seluruh hak izin sakit kaka dan cuti?

D: Iyalah butuh refreshing kita sa haha

SK: Apakah kaka selalu mengutamakan kerja dimanapun kapanpun?

D: Engga juga sih, kebetulan kan kalau sekre pake pc jadi gabisa dibawa kemana-mana

kan kerjaan gak kaya karyawan yang lain

SK: Apakah kaka sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat kaka bekerja?

D: Gak terbaik juga sih, kesannya over pede aja.. Tapi udah kasih yang terbaik yang

aku bisa lah

SK: Apakah kaka membuat standar kerja yang tinggi dalam bekerja?

D: Engga juga ko

SK: Apakah kaka sudah bangga dengan performance kaka saat ini?

D: Sudah ya lumayan

SK: Ooh begitu kak.. oke deh kak terima kasih ya atas waktunya


141





C: Narasumber 4 – Marketing

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Selamat siang mba.. terima kasih sudah meluangkan waktu untuk interview

C: Iya silahkan..

SK: Sebelumnya mba sudah berapa lama bekerja di PGN?

C: Saya 3 tahun di PGN

SK: Apakah mba pernah mengalami rotasi, mutasi atau pun penambahan job desc?

C: Rotasi saya pernah

SK: Bagaimana pendapat mba tentang hal tersebut mba?

C: Menurut saya hal tersebut bagus untuk menambah ilmu, menambah pengalaman

saya dalam bekerja juga, jadi lebih memperluas jangkauan saya

SK: Apakah mba sudah puas dengan gaji dan benefit yang perusahaan berikan kepada

mba?

C: Saya masih merasa belum puas, karena saya merasa bekerja lebih tetapi tidak

sepadan dengan apa yang saya dapatkan


142

SK: Ooh begitu mba.. Bagaimana dengan peraturan dan kebijakan dari perusahaan

apakah sudah membuat mba puas?

C: Peraturan dan kebijakan perusahaan sudah baik, karena perusahaan sudah

menyesuaikan segala peraturan dengan undang-undang jadi saya rasa sudah baik

SK: Bagaimana dengan keadilan yang diberika oleh atasan? Apakah mba merasa sudah

adil atau belum?

C: Atasan bersikap baik pada saya, tetapi kembali lagi dengan seberapa lama kita

bekerja di perusahaan, banyak karyawan yang lebih senior dibandingkan dengan saya,

dan mereka lebih lama bekerja dengan atasan saya, jadi mereka lebih nyambung

dengan atasan saya dan terkadang penilaian mereka lebih baik dibandingkan dengan

saya

SK: Jadi mba merasa kurang adil dengan adanya hal tersebut ya mba?

C: Kurang lebih begitu

SK: Lalu bagaimana pendapat mba tentang rekan kerja mba sendiri, apakah mba sudah

puas?

C: Untuk rekan kerja saya cukup puas karena semua saling support

SK: Apakah mba menggunakan seluruh hak izin sakit mba dan cuti?

C: Kalau masih sisa sisa ya lebaran aku abisin

SK: Apakah mba selalu mengutamakan kerja dimanapun kapanpun?


143

C: Engga juga ko, di kantor aja lah

SK: Apakah mba sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat kaka bekerja?

C: Belum yang terbaik sih kayanya

SK: Apakah mba membuat standar kerja yang tinggi dalam bekerja?

C: Engga juga ko ya

SK: Apakah mba sudah bangga dengan performance mba saat ini?

C: Sudah ko sudah

SK: Oke mba terima kasih atas waktunya..


144





I: Narasumber 5 - Center of Technical Exellence

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Selamat siang mba.. terima kasih sudah bersedia untuk saya interview, sebelumnya

mba sudah berapa lama bekerja di PGN?

I: Saya sudah 5 tahun ya


I: Pernah, saya dulu di anak perusahaan ya di pgasol

SK: Bagaimana pendapat mba tentang hal tersebut mba?

I: Baik ya karena menambah pengalaman kerja saya, sekarang juga lebih nyaman

karena dekat dengan rumah


mba?

I: Saya merasa cukup puas sih dengan apa yang perusahaan berikan

SK: Bagaimana mengenai jenjang karir mba di PGN, apakah sudah merasa puas?


145

I: Untuk karir naik di PGN itu butuh pengalaman yang sangat memadai dan juga harus

memiliki level grade kompetensi yang sesuai dengan posisi yang kita inginkan, jadi

butuh waktu lama tuh buat sampai kesitu

SK: Bagaimana dengan peraturan dan kebijakan dari perusahaan apakah sudah

membuat mba puas?

I: Sudah baik, semua dilandasi dengan uud

SK: Bagaimana dengan keadilan yang diberika oleh atasan? Apakah mba merasa sudah

adil atau belum?

I: Untuk atasan saya beliau baik, tegas juga dalam memberikan tugas, lalu dapat

bersikap adil dengan yang lainnya

SK: Jadi atasan mba yang sekarang sudah membuat mba puas dengan pekerjaan mba

yang sekarang?

I: Iya kurang lebih begitu


puas?

I: Rekan kerja semua aktif ya dalam setiap project jadi saya merasa dibantu sekali dan

pekerjaan-pekerjaan jadi lebih mudah


I: Iya tahun lalu sih kepake buat lebaran atau tahun baru


146


I: Iya biar pekerjaan baru bisa cepet dikerjain lagi

SK: Apakah mba sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat mba bekerja?

I: Gak juga ya


I: Ya kalau saya sih bekerja sesuai target perusahaan aja ya


I: Cukup bangga ya

SK: Oke mba kalau begitu terima kasih atas waktunya..


147





D: Narasumber 6 – Human Capital Management

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Selamat siang mba.. terima kasih sudah bersedia untuk saya interview

D: Sama sama

SK: Sebelumnya mba sudah berapa lama bekerja di PGN?

D: Saya sudah 5 tahunan salsa


D: Setiap tahun pgn selalu memperbarui job desc bagi masing-masing jabatan, jadi

sudah pasti saya juga pernah diberikan penambahan job desc. Untuk rotasi dulu saya

di departemen leadership and culture, sekarang di workforce

SK: Bagaimana pendapat mba mengenai hal tersebut?

D: Kalau saya sih oke aja selama itu perputarannya gak terlalu cepat, kalau dalam

jangka waktu yang cepat itu cukup bikin ribet karena banyak penyesuaian ulang

SK: Kalau boleh tau sudah berapa banyak ya mba yang sudah mengalami job rotation

di PGN selama satu tahun ini?


148

D: Sepertinya data perpindahan karyawan dari seluruh anak perusahaan belum

semuanya terkumpul, jadi saya belum bisa memastikan

SK: Kalau untuk divisi human capital management aja mba?

D: Untuk enam bulan terakhir sih sudah sekitar 10 – 12 orang ya yang di rotasi, pindah

ke anak perusahaan, ada juga hanya pindah departemen

SK: Ooh begitu ya mba, lalu apakah mba sudah puas dengan gaji dan benefit yang

perusahaan berikan kepada mba?

D: Untuk gaji kayanya kurang terus deh haha


membuat mba puas?

D: Sudah ko..

SK: Bagaimana dengan keadilan yang diberikan oleh atasan? Apakah mba merasa

sudah adil atau belum?

D: Atasan selalu adil, selalu memberikan masukan untuk memperbaiki pekerjaan

SK: Bagaimana mengenai jenjang karir mba di PGN? Biasanya apa saja syarat yang

harus mba penuhi untuk mendapatkan promosi?

D: Untuk dapat promosi kita butuh melampaui beberapa hal seperti training apa saja

yang sudah kita ikuti, jadi semua training itu harus terus kita ikutin jika ingin naik, jadi

step step dalam kenaikan level training saja sudah banyak, jadi kita tidak bisa asal naik


149

posisi, saya pastinya selalu mengharapkan untuk naik tapi setiap ada kesempatan selalu

ada dari kandidiat lain yang mengisi

SK: Ooh begitu ya mba.. jadi mba belum puas ya dengan jenjang karir yang diberikan

perusahaan?

D: Iya bisa dibilang seperti itu


puas?

D: Rekan kerja nyaman sih sudah seperti keluarga sendiri selama bekerja


D: Saya sih pake semua ya kalau bisa nambah juga saya pake


D: Iya dong sekarang kerjaan aja numpuk kalo dibiarin


D: Ya menuju yang terbaik lah, tujuan saya sih selalu jadi yang terbaik


D: Buat dong biar makin semangat kerjanya


D: Cukup bangga lah saya


150






V: Narasumber 7 – Marketing

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Selamat siang mba.. terima kasih sudah bersedia untuk saya interview

V: Iya siang.

SK: Maaf mba, sebelumnya mba sudah berapa lama bekerja di PGN?

V: Saya baru 3 tahun kebetulan

SK: Apakah selama mba bekerja 3 tahun itu mba pernah mengalami rotasi, mutasi atau

pun penambahan job desc?

V: Iya untuk job desc saya tiap tahun selalu diperbarui sih, jadi ya pernah


mba?

V: Itu tergantung dengan kebutuhan masing-masing orang sih, tapi buat saya sih kurang


membuat mba puas?


151

V: Peraturan perusahaan ok ko, tidak menyusahkan saya dalam bekerja

SK: Bagaimana dengan keadilan yang diberikan oleh atasan? Apakah mba merasa


V: Saya merasa beliau sudah adil, cukup berepngalaman juga jadi saya bisa belajar

banyak sama beliau ya walaupun kadang kita ada berantemnya

SK: Bagaimana mengenai jenjang karir mba di PGN? Apakah mba sudah merasa puas?

V: Saya belum dipromosi sih, belum tau juga kedepannya bagaimana

SK: Jadi mba belum puas ya dengan jenjang karir yang diberikan perusahaan?

V: Belum ya kalau gitu


puas?

V: Temen kerja membantu semua, semua bareng-bareng bisa jadi tim yang kompak

buat bisa sama-sama mencapai target


V: Pake dong lumayan buat kumpul keluarga


V: Utamain dong pasti, walau kadang pindah-pindah ke ketapang juga kan kita kalau

ada acara, tapi tetep utamain kerja juga



152

V: Belum sih itu


V: Gak juga sih


V: Belum bangga banget, masih terus tingkatin kualitas diri



153





I: Narasumber 8 – Payroll

____________________________________________________________________

SK: Selamat siang mas.. terima kasih sudah bersedia untuk saya interview

I: Iya sama sama salsa

SK: Sebelumnya mas sudah berapa lama bekerja di PGN?

I: Saya sudah mau 5 tahun

SK: Apakah selama mas bekerja pernah mengalami rotasi, mutasi atau pun

penambahan job desc?

I: Job desc nambah pasti ya tiap tahun, kalo gak ya berubah karena kita pindah

departemen

SK: Apakah mas sudah puas dengan gaji dan benefit yang perusahaan berikan kepada

mba?

I: Kalau gaji kadang cukup kadang engga ya, kebanyakan ga cukup nya, kalau bisa

naik sih pastinya mau naik terus dong


membuat mas puas?


154

I: Aman ko semuanya terkendali oleh peraturan..

SK: Bagaimana dengan keadilan yang diberikan oleh atasan? Apakah mas merasa


I: Saya baru ganti atasan ya jadi masih dalam penyesuaian, selama ini sih atasan selalu

memberi feedback jadi oke lah

SK: Bagaimana mengenai jenjang karir mas di PGN? Apakah mas sudah puas?

I: Untuk itu sih masih belum, masih belum..

SK: Kalau boleh tau apa yang membuat mas masih belum puas?

I: Saya masih belum mencapai tujuan saya di perusahaan, perusahaan juga belum

memberikan saya penjelasan karir saya kedepannya

SK: Jadi as belum puas ya dengan jenjang karir yang diberikan perusahaan?

I: Belum sih ya..

SK: Lalu bagaimana pendapat mas tentang rekan kerja mas, apakah mas sudah puas?

I: Sebenarnya bisa dikatakan puas tetapi dalam hal komunikasi aja mungkin karena

beda generasi jadi kadang kurang nyambung

SK: Hal tersebut merugikan proses kerja mas tidak?

I: Ya iya sih tapi kita sebisa mungkin kooperatif dalam bekerja

SK: Apakah mas menggunakan seluruh hak izin sakit mas dan cuti?


155

I: Saya pakai ya

SK: Apakah mas selalu mengutamakan kerja dimanapun kapanpun?

I: Tentu, biar kerjaan itu ga numpuk nanti malah belum selesai pas udah deadline

SK: Apakah mas sudah merasa menjadi salah satu yang terbaik saat mas bekerja?

I: Harus jadi terbaik dong, kita jadi karyawan harus punya target dan standar sendiri

dalam bekerja jadi kerja itu punya tujuan yang jelas

SK: Apakah mas membuat standar kerja yang tinggi dalam bekerja?

I: Sesuai dengan target perusahaan, saya tinggal sesuaiin mau bikin standar gimana

SK: Apakah mas sudah bangga dengan performance kaka saat ini?

I: Belum sih kalau bangga, harus selalu merasa tidak puas agar kita bisa terus belajar

dan kerja lebih baik lagi

SK: Oke mas kalau begitu terima kasih atas waktunya..


156

DATA PRE-TEST VALIDITAS DAN RELIABILITAS

1. Job Redesign


157


158

2. Job Satisfaction


159


160

3. Employee Performance


161


162

DATA MAIN-TEST VALIDITAS DAN RELIABILTAS

1. Job Redesign


163

2. Job Satisfaction


164


165


166

3. Employee Performance


167


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: 26 July 2017, At: 15:05 (PT)References: this document contains references to 70 other documents.To copy this document: [email protected] fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2893 times since 2016*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:(2014),"Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance",International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 63 Iss 3 pp. 308-323 <ahref="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008</a>(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>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:330691 []

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.

Dow

nloa

ded

by G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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; independentvariable=JobRe; and moderator variable=JobSat

Figure 1.The plot interactionpattern betweenjob redesign andjob satisfaction

172

EBHRM4,2

Dow

nloa

ded

by G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (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 G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


��

�� !� �""�""��#$%��&�#�'(&

Dow

nloa

ded

by G

riffit

h U

nive

rsity

At 1

5:05

26

July

201

7 (P

T)


Lisensi ini mengizinkan setiap orang untuk menggubah ...kc.umn.ac.id/6462/6/LAMPIRAN.pdf121 analisis...

Documents

Transcript of Lisensi ini mengizinkan setiap orang untuk menggubah ...kc.umn.ac.id/6462/6/LAMPIRAN.pdf121 analisis...