Job attitudes and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean
14
UNCORRECTED PROOF + Models WORBUS 276 1–14 Job attitudes and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean Betty Jane Punnett a, * , Dion Greenidge a,1 , Jase Ramsey b,2 a Department of Management Studies, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados b Moore College of Business, University of South Carolina, United States Abstract This paper examines the relationships of job attitudes (facets of job satisfaction and organizational commitment) and personality characteristics to absenteeism, in five manufacturing companies in Barbados, an English-speaking Caribbean country. The relationships examined are based on well-established theories from the developed world, especially the USA. In addition, individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance were measured. The results show that an employee’s levels of satisfaction with co-workers, activity, responsibility, and job security, as well as loyalty tothe organization, are related to absenteeism. These results are similar to those found in past research in the developed world. The most important single predictor of absence was satisfaction with co-workers. Respondents were moderate on individualism, high on uncertainty avoidance, and low on power distance. The cultural scores are used to help interpret the results. The implications of the results are discussed in terms of expanding the reach of an established theory, and relative to decreasing absenteeism in Barbados. # 2007 Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Job satisfaction; Organizational commitment; Personality characteristics; Cultural values; Absenteeism The focus of this research is on absenteeism in an English speaking Caribbean developing country, Bar- bados. The relationships examined in the research were based on well-established theories regarding absentee- ism, from studies done in the USA, as well as other developed countries. Very little work on absenteeism has been done in developing countries, and the authors found no published research on the English speaking Caribbean. The study was undertaken for practical as well as theoretical reasons. From a practical perspective, absences are a particular concern in today’s competitive, global environment. It is no longer other local organizations, facing similar levels of absenteeism that constitutes the competition. Local organizations now compete with firms from other countries, where absenteeism levels may be different. In the Barbados and Caribbean context, concern with absenteeism from work has been growing in recent years. Interviews with businesspeople in St. Vincent and Barbados during 2001 (Reference omitted for anonymity) suggested that it was a key concern for many businesses. Reports of absenteeism, in the press and from public speeches, from Barbados indicated that days lost due to absences was increasing substantially in 2001, and the consensus in the press in 2004 was that absenteeism had reached crisis propor- tions (References omitted for anonymity). Many recent www.socscinet.com/bam/jwb Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 * Corresponding author. Tel.: +246 417 4309; fax: +246 438 9167. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (B.J. Punnett), [email protected] (D. Greenidge), [email protected] (J. Ramsey). 1 Tel.: +246 417 4309; fax: +246 438 9167. 2 Tel.: +1 803 269 4923; fax: +1 803 777 6782. 1090-9516/$ – see front matter # 2007 Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006 Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean, Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
-
Upload
cavehill-uwi -
Category
Documents
-
view
6 -
download
0
Transcript of Job attitudes and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
1
2
3
4
5
67
89
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2021
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
Job attitudes and absenteeism: A study in the
English speaking Caribbean
Betty Jane Punnett a,*, Dion Greenidge a,1, Jase Ramsey b,2
a Department of Management Studies, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbadosb Moore College of Business, University of South Carolina, United States
Abstract
This paper examines the relationships of job attitudes (facets of job satisfaction and organizational commitment) and personality
characteristics to absenteeism, in five manufacturing companies in Barbados, an English-speaking Caribbean country. The
relationships examined are based on well-established theories from the developed world, especially the USA. In addition,
individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance were measured. The results show that an employee’s levels of satisfaction
with co-workers, activity, responsibility, and job security, as well as loyalty to the organization, are related to absenteeism. These
results are similar to those found in past research in the developed world. The most important single predictor of absence was
satisfaction with co-workers. Respondents were moderate on individualism, high on uncertainty avoidance, and low on power
distance. The cultural scores are used to help interpret the results. The implications of the results are discussed in terms of expanding
the reach of an established theory, and relative to decreasing absenteeism in Barbados.
# 2007 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Keywords: Job satisfaction; Organizational commitment; Personality characteristics; Cultural values; Absenteeism
www.socscinet.com/bam/jwb
Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx
R 34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
CO
R
The focus of this research is on absenteeism in an
English speaking Caribbean developing country, Bar-
bados. The relationships examined in the research were
based on well-established theories regarding absentee-
ism, from studies done in the USA, as well as other
developed countries. Very little work on absenteeism
has been done in developing countries, and the authors
found no published research on the English speaking
Caribbean. The study was undertaken for practical as
well as theoretical reasons.
UN 45
46
47
48
49
50
51
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +246 417 4309; fax: +246 438 9167.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (B.J. Punnett),
[email protected] (D. Greenidge),
[email protected] (J. Ramsey).1 Tel.: +246 417 4309; fax: +246 438 9167.2 Tel.: +1 803 269 4923; fax: +1 803 777 6782.
1090-9516/$ – see front matter # 2007 Published by Elsevier Inc.
doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
From a practical perspective, absences are a
particular concern in today’s competitive, global
environment. It is no longer other local organizations,
facing similar levels of absenteeism that constitutes the
competition. Local organizations now compete with
firms from other countries, where absenteeism levels
may be different. In the Barbados and Caribbean
context, concern with absenteeism from work has been
growing in recent years. Interviews with businesspeople
in St. Vincent and Barbados during 2001 (Reference
omitted for anonymity) suggested that it was a key
concern for many businesses. Reports of absenteeism,
in the press and from public speeches, from Barbados
indicated that days lost due to absences was increasing
substantially in 2001, and the consensus in the press in
2004 was that absenteeism had reached crisis propor-
tions (References omitted for anonymity). Many recent
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx2
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
UN
CO
R
news articles have stressed the need to deal with
absenteeism in Barbados, and the wider Caribbean.
There are currently no reliable statistics on
absenteeism in Barbados, but the information from a
variety of sources (personal communication) indicates
an absenteeism level of about 7%, calculated as the
number of days lost to absenteeism divided by the
number of days available (not including vacation days)
to give a percentage figure; this is substantially higher
than reported rates in the USA of about 2% (CCH
Survey reported on http://www.radford.edu/). The 7%
absenteeism figure translates to about fifteen days of
absence compared to about four days for the 2% figure
(these are estimates only, but give a sense of the order of
magnitude represented by these absenteeism figures).
This comparison suggests that lowering absenteeism
rates could potentially have a substantial impact in
Barbados.
While the research had an immediate and practical
purpose, it also had a broader objective of examining
well established relationships in a new context, and thus
broadening the global reach of an accepted theoretical
framework. The purpose of the present study was to
investigate whether the absenteeism relationships
identified in the North American literature were
applicable to Barbados.
Barbados is classified as a developing country, thus,
to some extent this project extends research and theories
from the developed world to a developing country
context. According to the World Bank (2005) World
development report, Barbados is classified as an upper
middle income country (economies are divided accord-
ing to Gross National Income (GNI) per capita,
calculated using the World Bank Atlas method; upper
middle income countries have a GNI per capita ranging
from $3036–9385.
The following brief literature review explains the
relationships that have been established in the devel-
oped world research, and the theoretical underpinnings
for this project.
1. A brief review of the absenteeism literature
The focus of this research is on absenteeism and the
factors that influence an employee’s decision to be
absent from work. The strongest evidence from research
in North America and the developed world is a
consistent relationship between levels of job satisfac-
tion and absence from work (Farrell & Stamm, 1988;
Harrison & Martocchio, 1998). The more satisfied
employees are with the workplace, the less likely they
are to be absent, conversely, the more dissatisfied
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
employees are with the workplace, the more likely they
are to be absent. Three Meta-analyses of the relation-
ship between employee absenteeism and job satisfac-
tion (McShane, 1984; Scott & Taylor, 1985; Hackett &
Guion, 1985) showed that job satisfaction was found
consistently to be negatively associated with absence
(Scott & Taylor, 1985; Hackett, 1989a,b). Job satisfac-
tion was also shown to be negatively associated with
absence, and found to be the most significant predictor
of absenteeism by Brooke (1989).
Historically, withdrawal theory has been used to
account for the job satisfaction–absenteeism relation-
ship (Steers & Rhodes, 1978, 1984). This theory
suggests that when individuals become dissatisfied with
their jobs, this reduces their motivation to attend work,
culminating in absence behavior. Further, Steers and
Rhodes (1978) predicted that the effects of all other job-
related and organizational variables on absence would
work their way through job satisfaction. Although the
withdrawal theory has seen substantial support in the
literature, a more recent meta-analysis has shown that
absence behavior is much more complex than a simple
direct relationship between job satisfaction and absence
behavior (Harrison & Martocchio, 1998). This meta-
analysis concluded that a number of direct relationships
exist in addition to the job satisfaction, absence
relationship. These authors challenged the credibility
of the Steers and Rhodes (1978) model by referring to it
as a framework rather than a theory because it ‘‘specifies
broad collections of variables [satisfaction] rather than
relations between well-defined constructs’’ (p. 312).
Ultimately, these meta-analyses provided evidence that
work attitudes do not explain the whole phenomenon of
absenteeism in the work place.
We can conclude, therefore, that job satisfaction, one
of the most-studied variables in organizational behavior
research (Spector, 1997), results from a complex
evaluative and emotional process (Weiss, 2002) that
goes beyond a reflection of ‘‘objective’’ working
conditions. Job satisfaction has, in fact, been linked
with a wide range of antecedents, including culture
(Judge, Parker, Colbert, Heller, & Ilies, 2002; Spector
et al., 2002), gender (Muhonen & Torkelson, 2004),
core self-evaluations (Rode, 2004), work locus of
control (Muhonen & Torkelson, 2004), and personality
(Judge et al., 2002; Ones et al., 2003). It has also been
linked with other outcomes such as career success
(Burke, 2001) and life satisfaction (Rode, 2004).
In addition, the question of the meaning of job
satisfaction is relevant here. A global satisfaction
variable has been shown to predict absenteeism;
however, this is not very helpful in making changes
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 3
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234235
236
237238
239240
241
242
243
244
245246
247
248249
250
251252
253
254255
256
257
UN
CO
R
in the workplace to improve satisfaction levels.
Consequently, a variety of facets of job satisfaction
have been identified, and survey instruments have been
designed to measure these. Broadly, intrinsic job
satisfaction has been differentiated from extrinsic job
satisfaction – intrinsic is defined as satisfaction with the
job itself, and extrinsic as the satisfaction with factors
external to the job (Weiss, Davis, England, & Lofquist,
1967). Research has looked at many facets of job
satisfaction extensively in North America, and found
them, to varying degrees, to be related to absenteeism.
The literature on absenteeism also suggests that
dedication to the company, or organizational loyalty and
commitment, relate both to job satisfaction and to
absenteeism. Loyal and committed employees are
believed to feel a sense of responsibility to their
employer and organization. Consequently they do not
want to be absent because of the potential negative
impact on the employer and organization. Organiza-
tional commitment, like job satisfaction, is a general
attitude, and thus also subject to the predictions of
withdrawal theory – ‘‘employees with high levels of
organizational commitment identify with a particular
firm; they are less likely to miss work because it
jeopardizes their membership in it’’ (Harrison &
Martocchio, 1998, p. 320). Results of studies in North
America have found that the more loyal and committed
employees are, the more satisfied they are, and the less
likely they are to be absent – i.e., loyalty and
commitment are positively correlated with satisfaction
(Rizzo, House, & Litzman, 1970; Porter & Steers, 1973;
Oliver & Brief, 1977; Bedeian & Armenakis, 1981;
Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Bateman & Strasser,
1984; Clark & Larkin, 1992; Igbaria & Guimaraes,
1993; Deconinck & Bachmann, 1994; Fletcher &
Williams, 1996), thus suggesting that as organizational
commitment increases, job satisfaction increases
(Yousef, 2000; Bennett, 2002), and consequently,
absenteeism decreases (Hammer, Landau, & Stern,
1981; Terborg, Lee, Smith, Davis, & Turbin, 1982;
Farrell & Stamm, 1988; Dunham, Grube, & Castaneda,
1994; Somers, 1995), or, as organizational commitment
decreases, absences from work increase (Blau & Boal,
1987; Savery, Travaglione, & Firns, 1998; Lok &
Crawford, 2001; Bennett, 2002). Meta-analysis (Hack-
ett, 1989a,b) shows similar outcomes on job satisfac-
tion–absenteeism relationship ( p = �.14) as the
organizational commitment–absenteeism relationship
( p = �.11).
Personal characteristics have also been linked to
absenteeism (Furnham & Miller, 1997; Hackett, 1987;
Harrison & Martocchio, 1998; Hogan & Holland,
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
2003). Three personal characteristics that have received
considerable attention are need for achievement, locus
of control, and self-efficacy. A high need for achieve-
ment means that individuals work hard to achieve the
goals that they set for themselves, including work goals
– high need for achievement is expected to be related
negatively to absenteeism. Locus of control ranges from
internal to external – internal locus of control means
that individuals attribute causality to their own activities
while external locus of control means the individuals
attribute causality to factors outside of their control. The
more internal a person’s locus of control the more likely
they are to attend work in the face of difficulties, while
the more external a person’s locus of control the more
likely the are to be absent because they feel they have
little control over external factors. Self-efficacy refers to
the degree to which people feel that they are capable of
achieving what they set out to achieve – a high sense of
self-efficacy is expected to be negatively related to
absenteeism, as employees want to demonstrate their
capability at work and are reluctant to be absent.
Based on the literature, a series of hypotheses were
developed, relating personality characteristics, facets of
job satisfaction, and facets of organizational commit-
ment, to absenteeism.
1.1. Hypotheses
Hypotheses utilizing personality variables:
H1a. Need for achievement is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H1b. Internal locus of control is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H1c. Self-efficacy is negatively related to absenteeism.
Hypotheses utilizing satisfaction variables. Hypoth-
eses H2a–H2k are intrinsic satisfaction variables, and
H2l–H2t are extrinsic satisfaction variables.
H2a. Ability utilization satisfaction is negatively
related to absenteeism.
H2b. Achievement satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2c. Activity satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2d. Authority satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2e. Creativity satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx4
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
257258
259
260261
262
263264
265
266267
268
269270
271
272273
274
275276
277
278279
280
281282
283
284285
286
287288
289
290291
292
293294
295
296297
298
299300
301
302303
304
305
306307
308
309310
311312313
314
315
316
317
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
UN
CO
R
H2f. Independence satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2g. Moral values satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2h. Responsibility satisfaction is negatively related
to absenteeism.
H2i. Social service satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2j. Social status satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2k. Variety satisfaction is negatively related to absen-
teeism.
H2l. Advancement satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2m. Company policy satisfaction is negatively
related to absenteeism.
H2n. Compensation satisfaction is negatively related
to absenteeism.
H2o. Co-worker satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2p. Recognition satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2q. Security satisfaction is negatively related to
absenteeism.
H2r. Supervision-technical satisfaction is negatively
related to absenteeism.
H2s. Supervision-human relations satisfaction is nega-
tively related to absenteeism.
H2t. Working conditions satisfaction is negatively
related to absenteeism.
Hypotheses utilizing organizational commitment
variables:
H3a. Loyalty is negatively related to absenteeism.
H3b. Job involvement is negatively related to absen-
teeism.
H3c. Job identification is negatively related to absen-
teeism.
2. Methodology
In the following discussion we identify the sample
details and procedures, and describe the measures used in
the study.
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
2.1. Sample and procedures
The survey was filled out individually by employees
at each organization. The employees gathered in small
groups, at convenient times, and the lead researcher, or
an assistant, explained the purpose of the project and the
procedure for completing the survey. The lead
researcher or an assistant remained to assist if anyone
needed help. A small number of persons needed help
because of literacy difficulties, and the survey items
were read to these persons. The researchers were careful
to simply read the questions, and not to influence
responses. A notation was made on these surveys, so
that they could be considered separately in the analysis.
The number of persons requiring assistance was too
small to influence the overall results. The survey was
relatively lengthy, and took between twenty minutes
and ninety minutes to complete. Surveys were
completed between mid-April and the end of May,
2004.
The companies provided the lead researcher with a
list of employees, and each employee was randomly
assigned a number. Respondents were asked to provide
this number on the completed surveys voluntarily. This
allowed the researchers to link the survey data with
absenteeism data. Respondents were assured of con-
fidentiality and that the surveys would be available only
to the research team and not to the companies. Each
company where the survey was completed provided
absenteeism data for individual employees. Absences of
less than a day were not considered in this research;
absence includes both medically certified and non-
certified absences.
A total of three hundred and fifty two (352) surveys
were completed; of these, eighty eight (88) declined to
provide their assigned numbers. Only those who
provided their assigned number were included in the
analysis relating to absenteeism – a total of two hundred
and sixty four (264). All three hundred and fifty two
respondents were included in the results not relating to
absenteeism. Of the sample population 50.4% were
male and 49.6% were female. The mean age for the
sample population was 36.5 years with a minimum age
of 17 and a maximum age of 63.
2.2. Measures
The Dependent variable, absence frequency, was
calculated by summing explained and unexplained
absences, over the previous year, into an overall measure.
The distinction between explained and unexplained is
whether the employee had an approved excuse for being
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
RC
TED
PR
OO
F
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 5
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
Table 1
Measures of intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction
Intrinsic job satisfaction facets
Ability utilization – The chance to do something that makes use
of my abilities
Achievement – The feeling of accomplishment that I get from
the job
Activity – Being able to keep busy
Authority – The chance to tell other people what to do
Creativity – The chance to try my own methods of doing the job
Independence – The chance to work alone on the job
Moral values – Being able to do things that don’t go against
my conscience
Responsibility – The freedom to use my own judgment
Social service – The chance to do things for other people
Social status – The chance to be ‘‘somebody’’ in the community
Variety – The chance to do different things from time to time
Extrinsic job satisfaction facets
Advancement – The chances to advance on this job
Company policies and procedures – The way company policies
are put into practice
Compensation – My pay and the amount of work I do
Co-workers – The way my co-workers get along with each other
Recognition – The praise I get for doing a good job
Security – The way my job provides steady employment
Supervision (technical) – The competence of my supervisor in
making decisions
Supervision (human relations) – The way my boss handles his
people
Working conditions – The physical environment where I work
UN
CO
R
absent. After discussing the distinction with managers
and employees, we concluded that the distinction was
largely subjective, and decided to include all absences in
the overall measure. We examined each component for
normality assumptions, and based on the results, we
aggregated the two measures. The mean number of
explained absences was 6.2 days per year (s.d. = 8.1) and
the mean number of unexplained absences was 4.7
(s.d. = 4.0), for a total absence of 11 days per year. A
Pearson correlation coefficient between the two absen-
teeism items was 0.48, in line with Clark and Watson’s
recommendations (1995). Absence data was based on the
year prior to collecting data on the independent variables
based on earlier findings that absence behavior is stable
over time, and that previous absence is the best predictor
of future absence (Rentsch & Steel, 1998).
A survey instrument was compiled to measure the
independent variables – personality characteristics, job
satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Job
satisfaction was measured by the long-form Minnesota
Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). The long-form
MSQ consists of 100 items measuring twenty (20)
subscales. Each subscale or facet was measured by 5
items. The twenty facets of job satisfaction measured by
the long form MSQ are summarized in Table 1. Each
item was answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Intrinsic
and extrinsic job satisfaction was computed separately
by a mean score for all items of subscales theorized to
measure that particular factor of job satisfaction
(Table 1).
Organizational commitment was measured by a 23
item revised version of Buchanan’s (1974) organiza-
tional commitment questionnaire. The questionnaire
measured three facets of organizational commitment –
job involvement (6 items), job identification (6 items),
and loyalty (11 items). Each item was answered on a 5-
point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
5 (strongly agree). Buchanan’s (1974) organizational
commitment questionnaire was revised because the
original version used a 7 point Likert scale from
strongly disagree to strongly agree, and it was felt that
assigning the same 5 point Likert scale to all measures
in the study would aid participants in completing the
questionnaire in a timely and accurate manner. Some
items were worded negatively and were reversed scored
at the data entry stage. The mean for all (23-items) was
computed to determine participants’ level of organiza-
tional commitment on a scale from 1 = low to 5 = high
organizational commitment.
Personality characteristics were measured using the
following scales:
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
ESelf-efficacy was measured by a 17-item scale
(Sherer et al., 1982). Each item was answered on a 5-
point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
5 (strongly agree). Some items were worded negatively
and were reversed scored at the data entry stage. The
mean for all 17 items was computed to determine
participants’ perceived self-efficacy ranging on a scale
from 1 = low to 5 = high self-efficacy.
Need for achievement was measured by a 22-item
revised version of Jackson’s (1985) personality research
form. Each item was answered on a 5-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Jackson (1989) personality research form was revised
because the original version used a response of either
agree or disagree. It was felt that a 5-point Likert scale
would allow for the measurement of relative intensity of
responses to items and that consistency across scales
would make the questionnaire simpler for respondents.
Some items were worded negatively and were reversed
scored at the data entry stage. The mean for all 22 items
was computed to determine participants’ need for
achievement ranging on a scale from 1 = low to
5 = high.
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx6
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
UN
CO
R
Locus of control was measured by a 24 item revised
version of Spector’s (1988) locus of control scale. Each
item was answered on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Spector’s locus of control scale was revised because
the original version used a 6 point Likert scale from
disagree very much to agree very much, and it was felt
that assigning the same 5-point Likert scale to all
measures in the study would aid participants in
completing the questionnaire in a timely and accurate
manner. Some items were worded negatively and were
reversed scored at the data entry stage. The mean for all
24 items was computed to determine participants’
internal locus of control on a scale from 1 = low to
5 = high. A low score indicates that the participant
exhibits an external locus of control and a high score
indicates that the participant exhibits a greater internal
locus of control.
A cultural profile, consisting of the dimensions (based
on Hofstede, 1980) of individualism, uncertainty
avoidance, and power distance, was also examined.
The researchers believed that understanding the cultural
profile of a developing country like Barbados would
contribute to interpreting the findings of the study. The
cultural dimension – masculinity/femininity – was
excluded from the study, as there has been concern that
this dimension does not corroborate with most people’s
understanding of masculinity and femininity (Adler,
2000), as well as because the masculinity/femininity
dimension is best examined at the cultural, not the
individual, level (Hwang, 2004). Note that the exclusion
of one or more of the cultural dimensions of Hofstede’s
(1980) cultural model is relatively commonplace in
cultural research, for example, studies conducted by
Earley (1989), Gomez et al., (2000), Morris et al. (1994)
only measured individualism/collectivism while studies
conducted by Bochner and Hesketh (1994), Kanungo and
Wright (1983) only measured power distance, and a study
conducted by Birnbaum and Wong (1985) measured
power distance and uncertainty avoidance only (Boya-
cigilller, Kleinberg, Phillips, & Sackman, 2004).
The complete survey instrument was pre-tested first
with a small group of administrative employees at one
company. Based on their responses, questions, and
comments, the instrument was modified. These respon-
dents strongly recommended that the responses for all
items should be a consistent one to five Likert scale, and
based on this recommendation we revised some of the
original scales. This was felt to be especially important
because some respondent’s literacy could be relatively
low, and different response arrays could be confusing.
Following the modifications, the instrument was further
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
pre-tested with a group of employees at one of the
manufacturing companies. Based on the results of the
second pre-test, the decision was made to continue with
the instrument as it was, and arrangements were made to
administer the survey throughout the five manufactur-
ing companies.
3. Results
A factor analysis to establish the convergent and
discriminant validity of the measures confirmed that the
original constructs could be used, except in the case of
Need for Achievement and Power Distance, where a
more reliable estimate of the underlying latent variable
was provided by a subset of questions. The Cronbach’s
alpha reliabilities of the various scales ranged from .62
(need for achievement) to .92 (recognition). Most of the
reliabilities were above .70, the commonly accepted
rule of thumb (Cortina, 1993). Although all reliabilities
may be considered acceptable for cross-cultural
research (Strauss, in press), the lower reliabilities for
need for Achievement (.62), and Power Distance (.65),
were improved following the results of the factor
analysis for these variables. The principal components
analysis for Need for Achievement showed more than
one factor, so we kept only the 7 variables which loaded
on the primary factor, resulting in a reliability estimate
of .70. The analysis of Power Distance resulted in a 5
item solution, with a reliability estimate of .66.
Although this is lower than the .70 cutoff, we decided
to report the results; however the somewhat low
reliability for PD must be recognized as a limitation,
and these scores should be interpreted with caution.
Table 2.1 shows reliabilities for each of the scales.
Results were compared across the companies – we
tested the heterogeneity between companies and did not
find enough variance to justify examining the compa-
nies separately (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). Results
were therefore combined and are reported for the five
companies together, as one dataset. Significance levels
of .05 are used as a cutoff; however where results are
significant at the .01 level this is reported in the results.
Due to the fact that there are not any negative values
in absence measures and because there is a high
frequency of low values, the distribution is truncated,
and an Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimator may be
both biased and inefficient (Hammer & Holland, 1981).
The Tobit estimator (Tobin, 1958) was ‘‘designed to
handle criterion variables that assume some value with a
high probability (zero in the case of absence) and are
continuously distributed beyond this point with the
remaining probabilities’’ (Baba, 1990, p. 428). The
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
PR
OO
F
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 7
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
Table 2.1
Descriptive statistics and correlations
Variable Mean s.d. ABSEN SE LC NA OC AU ACH ACT AD LOY
ABSEN 12.89 15.05
SE 4.23 .646 .05 (.80)
LC 3.58 .463 �.08 .21** (.74)
NA 3.48 .538 �.14* .22** .35** (.70)
OC 3.16 .481 �.12* �.02 .25** .19** (.84)
AU 3.61 .745 �.18** .02 .21** .21** .46** (.86)
ACH 3.73 .646 �.19** .13* .30** .29** .46** .68** (.79)
ACT 3.78 .847 �.18** .07 .22** .18** .25** .35** .39** (.79)
AD 2.97 .849 �.13* �.13* .20** .13* .55** .56** .51** .26** (.89)
LOY 3.05 .397 �.14* �.08 .24** .20** .88** .40** .42** .22** .48** (.79)
CPP 2.97 .820 �.07 �.06 .19** .03 .50** .40** .38** .26** .62** .45**
Note: N = 264, *p < .05, **p < .01, Cronbach Alpha reported in parenthesis. ABSEN, absenteeism; SE, self-efficacy; LC, locus of Control; NA, need
for achievement; OC, organizational commitment; AU, ability utilization ACH, achievement; ACT, activity; AD, advancement; LOY, loyalty; CPP,
company policies and practices; COM, compensation; COW, co-workers; CRE, creativity; IND, independence; MV, moral values; RES,
responsibility; REC, recognition; Sec, security; SOS, social serve; SST, social status; S-HR, supervision (human relations); S-TEC, supervision
(technical); VAR, variety; WC, working conditions; INTRS, intrinsic job satisfaction; EXTRS, extrinsic job satisfaction; JIN, job involvement; JID,
job identification; AUT, authority.
Tobit analysis may be considered more consistent,
reliable, and less biased because it does not encounter
heteroskedasticity (Leigh, 1985). At the same time,
Rasmussen and Dunlop (1991) showed that parametric
analysis of transformed data had superior statistical
power to nonparametric analysis or parametric analysis
of the raw skewed data (Hardy, Woods, & Wall, 2003).
UN
CO
RR
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
Table 2.2
Descriptive statistics and correlations
Variable Mean s.d. a ABSEN SE LC NA
COM 3.10 .854 .86 �.06 �.05 .16** .02
COW 3.31 .822 .85 �.29** �.02 .08 .02
CRE 3.49 .676 .81 �.18** .03 .22** .18**
IND 3.60 .624 .81 �.15* .20** .17** .27**
MV 3.76 .532 .72 �.14* .22** .30** .31**
RES 3.06 .962 .76 �.20** �.11 .14* .06
REC 3.51 .602 .92 �.21** .04 .22** .23**
SEC 3.55 .661 .79 �.14* .06 .28** .21**
SOS 3.80 .596 .77 �.13* .10 .29** .29**
SST 3.30 .575 .77 �.19** �.04 .17** .09
S-HR 3.08 .842 .83 �.10 �.14* .11 .04
S-TEC 3.24 .749 .87 �.12* �.01 .18** .16**
VAR 3.54 .660 .79 �.18** .08 .27** .26**
WC 2.98 .885 .90 �.18** �.10 .12* .07
INTRS 3.59 .488 .87 �.17** .11 .31** .31**
EXTRS 3.09 .661 .81 �.19** �.10 .19** .9
JIN 3.41 .717 .79 �.09 .02 .25** .19**
JID 3.12 .658 .83 �.08 �.06 .15** .17**
AUT 3.41 .560 .86 �.15* .05 .19** .29**
Note: N = 264, *p < .05, **p < .01, a, Cronbach Alpha. ABSEN, absenteeis
OC, organizational commitment; AU, ability utilization; ACH, achievement;
and practices; COM, compensation; COW, co-workers; CRE, creativity;
recognition; Sec, security; SOS, social serve; SST, social status; S-HR, superv
WC, working conditions; INTRS, intrinsic job satisfaction; EXTRS, extrins
authority.
TEDWe decided to use the Tobit analysis in addition to the
analysis reported below, to confirm the findings. The
results were essentially the same, therefore we report
only the OLS for simplicity.
Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations for
variables measured in this study are presented in
Tables 2.1–2.3. There were:
EC
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
557558558
559559
560
561
562
563
564564
565565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
558558
558
559
559
560
561
562
563
564
OC AU ACH ACT AD LOY CPP
.44** .29** .36** .13* .60** .33** .47**
.25** .71** .32** .11 .32** .19** .38**
.529** .51** .66** .30** .62** .47** .54**
.248** .55** .48** .31** .29** .19** .29**
.351** .50** .60** .34** .29** .30** .26**
.46** .66** .57** .24** .703** .40** .61**
.49** .55** .72** .36** .54** .44** .53**
.57** .71** .55** .35** .57** .50** .57**
.49** .62** .69** .47** .50** .41** .40**
.53** .46** .55** .21** .60** .41** .48**
.50** .58** .50** .31** .59** .43** .69**
.52** .58** .59** .35** .71** .47** .70**
.50** .70** .64** .31** .58** .41** .52**
.49** .41** .38** .16** .62** .45** .62**
.58** .84** .82** .54** .63** .50** .55**
.60** .58** .52** .29** .834** 51** .81**
.91** .41** .40** .18** .50** .74** .46**
.82** .39** .39** .25** .46** .56** .41**
.42** .62** .50** .33** .45** .34** .28**
m; SE, Self-efficacy; LC, locus of control; NA, need for achievement;
ACT, activity; AD, advancement; LOY, loyalty; CPP, company policies
IND, independence; MV, moral values; RES, responsibility; REC,
ision (human relations); S-TEC, supervision (technical); VAR, variety;
ic job satisfaction; JIN, job involvement; JID, job identification; AUT,
RE
D P
RO
OF
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx8
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
557558558
559559
560
561
562
563
564564
565565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
558558559
560
561
562
563
564
565565566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
Table 2.3
Descriptive statistics and correlations
Variable COM COW CRE IND MV RES REC SEC SOS SST S-HR S-TEC VAR WC INTRS EXTRS JIN JID
COM
COW .32**
CRE .35** .31**
IND .19** .25** .52**
MV .17** .24** .58** .59**
RES .52** .43** .57** .33** .32**
REC .35** .46** .77** .56** .54** .56**
SEC .54** .38** .52** .33** .43** .55** .55**
SOS .36** .35** .61** .49** .58** .49** .61** .58**
SST .47** .40** .59** .42** .45** .54** .59** .53** .55**
S-HR .43** .46** .56** .30** .31** .69** .57** .54** .44** .49**
S-TEC .46** .45** .65** .42** .43** .68** .65** .61** .55** .55** .81**
VAR .40** .34** .76** .57** .59** .51** .69** .51** .62** .57** .51** .63**
WC .48** .36** .50** .29** .26** .54** .49** .51** .38** .43** .56** .53** .51**
INTRS .44** .41** .83** .68** .73** .61** .84** .70** .82** .72** .59** .71** .83** .51**
EXTRS .69** .59** .66** .38** .36** .84** .66** .69** .56** .64** .84** .85** .64** .76** .71**
JIN .45** .25** .47** .26** .35** .40** .43** .51** .46** .52** .44** .47** .46** .44** .53** .55**
JID .37** .23** .44** .19** .26** .42** .42** .49** .42** .46** .44** .42** .44** .41** .49** .51** .64**
AUT .28** .34** .58** .47** .45** .40** .62** .49** .59** .55** .40** .48** .58** .33** .74** .48** .38** .36**
Note: N = 264, * p < .05, ** p < .01. ABSEN, absenteeism; SE, self-efficacy; LC, locus of control; NA, need for achievement; OC, organizational
commitment; AU, ability utilization; ACH, achievement; ACT, activity; AD, advancement; LOY, loyalty; CPP, company policies and practices;
COM, compensation; COW, co-workers; CRE, creativity; IND, independence; MV, moral values; RES, responsibility; REC, recognition; Sec,
security; SOS, social serve; SST, social status; S-HR, supervision (human relations); S-TEC, supervision (technical); VAR, variety; WC, working
conditions; INTRS, intrinsic job satisfaction; EXTRS, extrinsic job satisfaction; JIN, job involvement; JID, job identification; AUT, authority.
UN
CO
R
� significant negative relationships between absenteeism
and need for achievement (r = �.124, p < .05), overall
organizational commitment (r = �.123, p < .05),
overall extrinsic job satisfaction (r = �.191,
p < .01), and overall intrinsic job satisfaction (r =
�.175, p < .01).
� The following facets of extrinsic satisfaction were
significantly negatively associated with absenteeism
(reported in order of size of r) – co-workers (r = �.294,
p < .01), recognition (r = �.202, p < .01), working
conditions (r = �.180, p < .01), security (r = �143,
p < .05), advancement (r = �.139, p < .05), and
technical supervision (r = �.126, p < .05). The fol-
lowing facets of intrinsic job satisfaction were
significant (reported in order of size of r) –
responsibility (r = �.211, p < .01), achievement (r =
�.196, p < .01), social status (r = �.190, p < .01),
activity (r = �.189, p < . 01), creativity (r = �.188,
p < .01), variety (r = �.183, p < .01) ability utiliza-
tion (r = �.181, p < .01), authority (r = �.157,
p < .05), independence (r = �.157, p < .05), moral
values (r = �.147, p < .05), and social service
(r = �.134, p < .05).
Multiple regression analyses were computed to test
the effect of variables on absenteeism. The collinearity
diagnostics were examined by bivariate correlations
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
T(reported in Tables 2.1–2.3), and variance inflation
factors – VIFs (reported in Table 3). Results of the
collinearity diagnostics indicated that there were no
multicollinearities between variables in the regression
models, as bivariate correlations between variables in
the regression models were not above .8 and VIFs were
below 10 (see Howell, 1999).
The results of the multiple regression analysis testing
for the effect of locus of control, self-efficacy, need for
achievement, facets of organizational commitment, and
facets of job satisfaction are reported in Table 3. The
overall regression equation for the model is statistically
significant (F = 3.689, p < .01), and explains 22.2% of
the variance in absenteeism. Additionally, the adjusted
R2 = .131, which is substantially smaller than the 22%
previously mentioned due to the large number of IVs in
relation to the number of subjects (Cohen, Cohen, West,
& Aiken, 2003). The following factors were shown to
have contributed significantly and negatively to the
prediction of absenteeism – organizational commitment
facet loyalty (b = �.167, p < .05); intrinsic job satis-
faction facets – activity (b = �.193, p < .01) and
responsibility (b = �.141, p < .05), and extrinsic job
satisfaction facets – co-workers (b = �.290, p < .01) and
security (b = �.215, p < .05); i.e., as organizational
loyalty, satisfaction with co-workers, activity, responsi-
bility, and security decreases, absenteeism increases.
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
RR
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 9
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
Table 3
The effect of locus of control, need for achievement, self-efficacy, ogranzational commitment facets, intrinsic sactisfaction facets, and extrinsic
sastisfaction facets on absenteeism
Variables Coefficients
b Beta t p VIF
Personality characteristics
Locus of control �1.772 �.055 �.814 .418 1.563
Need for achievement �2.490 �.089 �1.131 .259 1.928
Self-efficacy �.300 �.010 �.124 .902 1.317
Organizational commitment facets
Loyalty �6.622 �.167 �2.419 .019* 2.675
Job identification �.475 �.021 �.254 �.800 2.143
Job involvement �2.402 �.114 �1.104 �.271 3.238
Intrinsic job satisfaction facets
Ability utilization �2.118 �.105 �.987 .325 3.385
Achievement �1.987 �.085 �.774 .440 3.513
Activity �3.421 .�193 �2.739 .007** 1.478
Authority �.297 �.011 �.128 .898 2.238
Creativity �.320 �.014 �.121 .904 4.196
Independence �.989 �.041 �.500 .618 1.987
Moral values �.402 �.014 �.158 .870 2.474
Responsibility �3.252 �.141 �1.995 .045* 4.368
Social service 1.203 .048 .471 .638 3.169
Social status �1.652 �.063 �.681 .496 2.547
Variety .126 .006 .051 .950 3.231
Extrinsic job satisfaction facets
Advancement .223 .013 .112 .910 3.675
Company policies and procedures 1.324 .072 .723 .470 2.781
Compensation 1.070 .061 .729 .467 2.614
Co-workers �5.307 �.290 �3.948 .000** 1.715
Recognition �2.590 �.166 �1.643 .102 3.118
Security �4.904 �.215 �2.338 .020* 2.521
Supervision – human relations 1.760 .098 .849 .397 4.116
Supervision – technical .621 .031 .241 .810 4.219
Working conditions �2.110 �.124 �1.446 .149 2.332
R Squared = .222
Adjusted R Squared = .131
F = 3.689, p < .001
* p < .05.** p < .01.
UN
CO
These results provided partial support for Hypothesis 1
(need for achievement was significantly related to levels
of absenteeism), moderate support for Hypotheses 2
(several facets of intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction were
significantly related to levels of absenteeism) and partial
support for Hypothesis 3 (organizational loyalty was
significantly related to levels of absenteeism).
4. Discussion
In the Barbados context, it was surprising to
managers that satisfaction with supervision was not
one of the especially important variables in relationship
to absenteeism. Managers believe that an employee’s
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
attitude towards their supervisor should be central to
attendance or absence – if an employee is dissatisfied
with supervision, he or she should stay away from work.
There are a number of possible explanations for not
finding such a relationship. Most simply, it may be that
supervision is not a big aspect of employees’ level of
satisfaction. Alternatively, it may be that employees are
reluctant to express dissatisfaction with their super-
visors, even where their responses are confidential, it
may be seen as too risky. Satisfaction with supervision
may also show up in other facets of the model. For
example, satisfaction with co-workers may well be
influenced by supervisory style. It may be that those
who are more satisfied with co-worker relationships are
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx10
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
UN
CO
R
those who also get on well with their supervisors, and
are in the ‘‘in group’’ that is favored by the supervisor,
while those who are less satisfied may be part of the
‘‘out group’’. Satisfaction with ability utilization,
achievement, and so on, are an intrinsic part of a given
job, but these can also be a function of supervisory style,
and satisfaction with these facets of the job can
indirectly reflect satisfaction with supervision.
4.1. Scores on personal and cultural characteristics
Average scores on all the personal and cultural
characteristics are of interest in providing a profile of
the Barbados workforce, at least in these manufacturing
companies. Scores on the personal and cultural
characteristics can range from 1 = low to 5 = high. A
score of two or less is considered low, a score from two
to three is moderate, and a score above three is high.
Mean scores were as follows:
The scores on the personal characteristics were: self
efficacy – 4 (relatively high), need for achievement – 3.5
(moderate), locus of control – 3.6 (moderate – not
predominantly internal or external). These scores
indicate that, on average, employees are confident of
their ability (self efficacy), and that they attribute causes
for performance both to their own ability and outside
forces (locus of control), and that their need for
achievement is neither high nor low. This profile
suggests that employees will respond well to delegation
(self efficacy and locus of control) but that, on average,
they will not seek high levels of achievement. There
will, of course, be individuals who differ from these
scores, and individual employees may be high or low on
any of these personal variables.
The scores on the cultural characteristics were:
individualism – 3.2 (moderate), uncertainty avoidance –
4.2 (relatively high), power distance – 2.6 (relatively
low). The scores indicate, on average, neither strong
individualism nor collectivism, a relatively strong
preference for certainty, and a preference for equality
and power sharing rather than hierarchy (remember the
somewhat low reliability for power distance). The
scores on the cultural dimensions are identical to scores
obtained in other research projects in the Caribbean,
with quite different populations. The similarity of the
scores for different populations and countries provides
support for putting this forward as a good description of
the cultural value profile for the English-speaking
Caribbean. This cultural value profile suggests that
employees will react well to both individual and team
activities, that they will be most comfortable where
there is security and certainty, and that they will be
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
motivated when power is shared and hierarchy
differences are minimized.
The preference for certainty may be part of the
explanation for the importance of job security to these
current respondents. Similarly, the low score on power
distance may be related to the importance of authority
for these respondents. The importance of co-workers
may be explained by the moderate level of individu-
alism as well as the low power distance. This profile
suggests that the group (co-workers) is important and
that shared power is desired – such a cultural profile
could mean that relationships with co-workers are
especially important, and that satisfaction with co-
worker relationships plays a critical role in absenteeism.
From a practical perspective, the results of this study
lead to the question ‘‘what can be done to influence
absenteeism rates?’’ There is substantial evidence from
research in North America that improving job satisfac-
tion levels can have a direct and significant impact on
absenteeism levels. The current research results suggest
that in the Barbados context job satisfaction is also
linked to absenteeism. To the extent that job satisfaction
can be improved, absenteeism should decline.
In addition, previous research has shown that job
satisfaction results in employees who care more about
the quality of their work, are more productive, more
committed to the organization, and more likely to
remain with the company. It seems that increasing job
satisfaction can potentially provide financial benefits
for a company. One guide to performance management
(Singer, 2005) says, ‘‘Management’s role is to provide
the conditions to ensure optimal performance’’. A focus
on improving the workplace to ensure employee
satisfaction is a critical aspect of providing the
conditions for optimal performance.
A focus of much of the discussion of absenteeism in
Barbados has been on developing policies to deal with
the symptom – absenteeism. For example, it has been
suggested that methods must be devised to ensure that
doctors do not issue unjustified sickness certificates, to
ensure that workers do not report that they are sick when
they are not really ill, and to provide deterrents to
absenteeism, such as punishments for employees who
are absent frequently (one employer reported a
monetary reward system for employees with good
attendance record, but, in essence, this also punishes
those with high absenteeism rates). None of these
approaches deals with the question of why employees
choose to be absent rather than to attend work. Unless
the reasons for absenteeism are understood, and steps
taken to change the factors leading to absenteeism, we
are dealing only with the symptom, rather than the
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 11
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
UN
CO
R
problem. Dealing with absenteeism through these
methods can actually worsen the problem and create
others in the long run.
As an example, if employees who have been absent
more than the allowed number of times are punished,
the results may be negative rather than positive.
Employees may come to work because of the policy,
but they may feel that they have been treated unfairly,
and this makes them unhappy about their job and the
company. In turn, their productivity and quality may
suffer, they may experience substantial stress because of
this, and may actually become sick, and have to be
absent, as well as affecting the work of co-workers. The
end result thus can be negative.
Finally, our results suggest that managers should
focus on specific facets of both intrinsic and extrinsic
satisfaction in order to reduce absenteeism. For
instance, satisfaction with both activity and responsi-
bility (intrinsic variables) were significantly related to
absenteeism. Therefore, a manager should allow more
flexibility on how the employee allocates his or her time
on the job. The increased flexibility will increase the
perceived responsibility while at the same time permit
the employee to allocate his or her time in an optimal
manner to could keep busy. Furthermore, our results
show a significant relationship between absenteeism
and co-worker and security satisfaction (extrinsic
variables). When employees are concerned about their
job security, a competitive environment emerges among
the co-workers, resulting in a negative satisfaction with
co-workers. A manager could moderate the relation-
ships between co-worker and security satisfaction with
absenteeism by providing greater job security.
As noted in the introduction, Barbados is classified
as a developing country, thus to some extent, this
research can be seen as extending the research on
absenteeism to developing countries. The results of this
project suggest that the job satisfaction/absenteeism
relationship holds in a developing country. This may
have wider implications for developing countries more
generally. At the same time, Barbados is a classified as
an upper middle income country, and it can be argued
that it may be quite similar to more developed countries,
because of influence from these countries, as well as a
relatively robust economy. We should be cautious in
interpreting these results in the broad context of the
developing countries.
5. Limitations and future research
This project tried to include the main variables that
we thought might directly influence absenteeism levels
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
in Barbados, and, as such, the survey instrument was
quite long, and took a substantial amount of time to
complete. Nevertheless, there were a variety of other
variables and relationships that could have been
examined. For example, organizational justice and
perceptions of equity may influence absences (Geurts,
Buunx, & Schaufeli, 1994; Geurts, Schaufeli, & Rutte,
1999), individuals’ integrity may influence absences,
and environmental factors – such as the availability of
transportation – may also influence absences. All of
these provide avenues for further investigation. Addi-
tionally, an insightful reviewer posited the mediating
role of job satisfaction on the organizational commit-
ment-absence relationship. We tested this relationship
using Baron and Kenny’s (1986) protocol and found
partial support for general satisfaction, and full support
for both extrinsic and intrinsic satisfaction. Sobel’s
(1987) test for indirect effects also supported these
findings. Further research should be conducted on the
specific satisfaction facets in order to provide more
detail of the mediation.
Surveys, by their nature, are limited in terms of the
variables that are addressed. It is always possible that the
most important variable is not measured in the survey.
Variables unique to the Barbados, or Caribbean, context
could be uncovered using other research techniques, such
as interviews, focus groups, and in-depth case studies. All
of these can provide valuable additional information on
the causes of absenteeism. In turn, these would contribute
to the effective design and implementation of interven-
tions to decrease absenteeism.
A major potential limitation of the study was that it
could not be anonymous. Confidentiality could be
assured, but in order to link the variables measured with
actual absenteeism statistics, it was necessary for the
researchers to have individual information. The
participants did not seem to have undue concern in
this regard, but we cannot be sure that this did not bias
responses.
Past absenteeism has been demonstrated to be the
best predictor of future absenteeism, and this suggests
that the results from this study should hold true if we
looked at job attitudes relative to absenteeism in a
period of time following the survey. Nevertheless, the
approach here of relating attitudes to past absenteeism is
a weakness. An alternative approach would be to
measure attitudes, then measure absenteeism, and look
at the predictive value of a proposed model. Unfortu-
nately, this approach introduces its own problems, as
measuring attitudes may influence future absenteeism,
especially in an environment where attitudinal mea-
surement is rare, as is the case in Barbados. The
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx12
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868869
870
871
872
873874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
UN
CO
R
researchers, nevertheless, intend to continue the
research in this direction, as well as others.
The researchers also intend to rigorously examine the
effectiveness of various interventions. It is interesting to
note that the literature does not clearly identify
interventions that have had a major impact on absentee-
ism. This is a major area for future research in all
contexts.
The current project is seen as the beginning of a
series of projects which can provide both theoretical and
practical knowledge and information for Barbados, and
perhaps the Caribbean region, in its links to a global
business environment. The current project examined
one specific aspect of the workplace, and considered
well established relationships identified in North
America, from a Caribbean perspective. The results
of this project serve to support the local links of a theory
with global roots. There are many other workplace
phenomena that could be examined in a similar way. It
is particularly important to extend management theory
from the developed world to the developing world to
establish a truly global understanding of management.
This project examines a specific theory that has been
well researched in the developed world in a developing
country context.
Uncited references
Dorfman and Howell (1988), Durham, Grube, &
Castaneda (1994), Hofstede (2000), Hulin, Roznowski,
& Hachiya (2002), Kaiser (1998), Lam, Schaubroeck, &
Aryee (2002)) and Markham and McKee (1995).
References
Adler, N. (2000). International dimensions of organizational beha-
viour (fourth ed.). South Western Canada.
Baba, V. V. (1990). Methodological issues in modeling absence: A
comparison of least squares and Tobit analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 75(4): 428.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173–1182.
Bateman, T. S., & Strasser, S. (1984). A longitudinal analysis of the
antecedents of organizational commitment. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 27(1): 95–112.
Bedeian, A. G., & Armenakis, A. A. (1981). A path-analytic study of
consequences of role conflict and ambiguity. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 24: 417–424.
Bennett, H. (2002). Employee commitment: The key to absence
management in local government.. Leadership and Organiza-
tional Development Journal, 23(8): 430–441.
Blau, G. J. (1986). Job involvement and organizational commitment as
interactive predictors of tardiness and absenteeism. Journal of
Management, 12: 577–584.
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
Blau, G., & Boal, K. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement
and organizational commitment affect turnover and absenteeism.
Academy of Management Review, 12(2): 288–300.
Boyacigilller, N., Kleinberg, J., Phillips, M., & Sackman, S. (2004).
Conceptualizing culture: Elucidating the streams of research in
international cross-cultural management. In B. J. Punnett & O.
Shenkar (Eds.), Handbook for International Management
Research, (2nd ed., pp. 99–168). Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press.
Brooke, P. (1989). The determinants of employee absenteeism: an
empirical test of a causal model. Journal of Occupational Psy-
chology, 62: 1–19.
Buchanan. (1974). Organizational commitment questionnaire. In J. D.
Cook, S. Hepworth, T. Wall, & P. Warr (Eds.), The Work Experi-
ence. (pp. 88–89). New York: Academic Press.
Burke, R. J. (2001). Managerial women’s career experiences, satis-
faction and well-being: A five country study. Cross Cultural
Management, 8(3–4): 117–133.
Clark, C. E., & Larkin, J. M. (1992). Internal auditors: Job satisfaction
and professional commitment. Internal Auditing, 8(1): 9–17.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in
objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3): 309.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S., & Aiken, L. (2003). Applied multiple
regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mah-
way, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Deconinck, J., & Bachmann, D. P. (1994). Organizational commit-
ment and turnover intentions of marketing managers. Journal of
Applied Business Research, 10(3): 87–95.
Dunham, R., Grube, J., & Castaneda, M. (1994). Organizational
commitment, the unity of an integrative definition. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 79: 370–380.
Dorfman, R. W., & Howell, J. P. (1988). Dimensions of national
culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited.
Advances in International Comparative Management, 3: 127–150.
Durham, R. B., Grube, J. A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1994). The utility of
an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3):
370–380.
Farrell, D., & Stamm, C. L. (1988). Meta-analysis of the correlates of
employee absence. Human Relations, 41: 211–227.
Fletcher, C., & Williams, R. (1996). Performance management, job
satisfaction and organizational commitment. British Journal of
Management, 7(2): 169–179.
Furnham, A., & Miller, T. (1997). Personality, absenteeism and
productivity. Productivity and Individual Differences, 23(4):
705–707.
Geurts, S. A., Buunx, B. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1994). Social
comparisons and absenteeism: A Structural Modelling Approach.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24: 1871–1890.
Geurts, S. A., Schaufeli, W. B., & Rutte, C. G. (1999). Absenteeism,
turnover intent and inequity in the employment relationship. Work
and Stress, 13(3): 253–267.
Hackett, R. D. (1989a). Work attitudes and employee absenteeism: A
synthesis of the literature. Journal of Occupational Psychology,
62(3): 235.
Hackett, R. D. (1989b). Work attitudes and employee absenteeism: A
synthesis of the literature. Journal of Occupational Psychology,
62: 235–248.
Hammer, T., & Holland, J. (1981). Methodological issues in the use of
absence data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(5): 574.
Hammer, T., Landau, J., & Stern, R. (1981). Absenteeism when
workers have a voice: The case of employee ownership. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 66: 561–573.
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
R
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx 13
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
UN
CO
R
Hardy, G. E., Woods, D., & Wall, T. D. (2003). The impact of
psychological distress on absence from work. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88(2): 306.
Harrison, D. A., & Martocchio, J. J. (1998). Time for absenteeism: A
20-year review of origins, offshoots and outcomes. Journal of
Management, 24(3): 305–350.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differ-
ences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (2000). Cultural consequences: Comparing values,
behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd
ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Hogan, J., & Holland, B. (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality
and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. Jour-
nal of Applied Psychology, 88(1): 100–112.
Howell, D. (1999). Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioural
Sciences (4th ed.). USA: Duxbury Press.
Hulin, C. L., Roznowski, M., & Hachiya, D. (1985). Alternative
opportunities and withdrawal decisions: Empirical and theoretical
discrepancies and an integration. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2):
233.
Hwang, Y. (2004). An empirical examination of individual-level
cultural orientation as an antecedent to ERP systems adoption.
12th Annual Cross-Cultural Meeting in Information Systemshttp://
tigger.uic.edu/�evaristo/program12.htm.
Igbaria, M., & Guimaraes, T. (1993). Antecedents and consequences
of job satisfaction among information center employees. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 9(4): 145–174.
Jackson, D. N. (1989). Personality research form manual, sigma
assessment systems. Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists
Press.
Judge, T. A., Parker, S. K., Colbert, A. E., Heller, D., & Ilies, R.
(2002). Job satisfaction: A cross-cultural review. In Anderson,
N., & Ones, D. Eds. Handbook of industrial, work and organiza-
tional psychology, volume 2: organizational psychology..
(pp.25–52). .
Kaiser, C. P. (1998). What do we know about employee absence
behavior? An interdisciplinary interpretation. Journal of Socio
Economics, 27(1): 80–98.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to
theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and
emergent processes. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.),
Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foun-
dations, extensions, and new directions. (pp. 3–90). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lam, S. K., Schaubroeck, J., & Aryee, S. (2002). Relationship
between organizational justice and employee work outcomes: A
cross-national study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: 1–
18.
Leigh, J. P. (1985). The effects of unemployment and the business
cycle on absenteeism. Journal of Economics & Business, 3(2):
159.
Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2001). Antecedents of organizational com-
mitment and the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 16(8): 594–613.
Markham, S. E., & McKee, G. M. (1995). Group absence behavior and
standards: A multilevel analysis. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 38(4): 1174–1190.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-
organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absentee-
ism and turnover. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Muhonen, T., & Torkelson, E. (2004). Work locus of control and its
relationship to health and job satisfaction from a gender perspec-
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
EC
TED
PR
OO
F
tive. Stress & Health. Journal of the International Society for the
Investigation of Stress, 20(1): 21–28.
Oliver, R. L., & Brief, A. P. (1977). Determinants and consequences of
role conflict and ambiguity among retail sales managers. Journal
of Retailing, 53: 47–58.
Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and
personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 80: 151–176.
Rasmussen, J. L., & Dunlap, W. P. (1991). Dealing with nonnormal
data: Parametric analysis of transformed data vs. nonparametric
analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(4):
809.
Rentsch, J. R., & Steel, R. P. (1998). Testing the durability of job
characteristics as predictors of absenteeism over a six year period.
Personnel Psychology, 51(1): 165.
Rizzo, J., House, R. J., & Litzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and
ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 15: 150–163.
Rode, J. C. (2004). Job satisfaction and life satisfaction revisited: A
longitudinal test of an integrated model. Human Relations, 57(9):
1205–1230.
Savery, L., Travaglione, A., & Firns, I. (1998). The links between
absenteeism and commitment during downsizing. Personnel
Review, 27(4): 312–324.
Scott, K., & Taylor, G. (1985). An examination of conflicting findings
on the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism:
A meta analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 28(3): 599–
612.
Sherer, M., Maddux, J., Merchante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B.,
& Rogers, R. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and
validation. Psychological Reports 51: 663–671.
Singer, S. M. (accessed November, 2005). Managing and Measuring
Employee Performance. http://www.hrvs-rhsbc.ca/hr_practices/.
Somers, M. (1995). Organizational commitment, turnover and absen-
teeism: an examination of direct and indirect effect. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 16: 49–58.
Spector, P. E. (1988). Development of work locus of control scale.
Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61: 335–340.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause,
and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Sanchez, J. I., O’Driscoll, M., Sparks, K.,
Bernin, K., Bussing, A., Dewe, P., Hart, P., Luo, L., Miller, K., de
Morales, L. R., Ostrognay, G. M., Pagon, M., Pitariu, H. D.,
Poelmans, S., Radhakrishnan, P., Russinova, V., Salamatov, V., &
Salgado, J. F. (2002). Locus of control and well-being at work:
How generalizable are western findings? Academy of Management
Journal, 45: 453–466.
Sobel, M. E. (1987). Direct and indirect effects in linear structural
equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1): 155.
Steers, R. (1997). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational com-
mitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 46–56.
Steers, R. M., & Rhodes, S. R. (1978). Major influences on employee
attendance: A process model. Journal of Applied Psychology,
63(4): 391.
Steers, R. M., & Rhodes, S. R. (1984). Knowledge and speculation
about absenteeism. In P. S. Goodman & R. S. Atkin (Eds.),
Absenteeism: New approaches to understanding, measuring,
and managing employee absence. (pp. 229–275). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Strauss, M. A. (in press). Cross cultural reliability and validity of the
multidimensional neglectful behavior scale adult recall short form.
Child Abuse and Neglect.
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
O
B.J. Punnett et al. / Journal of World Business xxx (2007) xxx–xxx14
+ Models
WORBUS 276 1–14
10821083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
11021102
Terborg, J. R., Lee, T. W., Smith, F. J., Davis, G. A., & Turbin, M. S.
(1982). Extension of the Schmidt and Hunter validity general-
ization procedure to the prediction of absenteeism behavior from
knowledge of job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 440–449.
Tobin, J. (1958). Estimation of relationships for limited dependent
variables. Econometrica, 26: 24–36.
Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: separating
evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences. Human Resource
Management Review, 12(2): 173–194.
UN
CO
RR
Please cite this article in press as: Punnett, B.J, et al., Job attitudes
Journal of World Business (2007), doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.02.006
F
Weiss, D., Davis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L. (1967). Manual
for Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Work Adjustment Pro-
ject Industrial Relations Centre Minnesota. University of Minne-
sota.
World Bank. (2005). World development report 2005: A better invest-
ment climate for everyone. New York: Oxford University Press.
Yousef, D. (2000). Organizational commitment: a mediator of the
relationships of leadership behavior with job satisfaction and
performance in a non-western country. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 15(1): 6–28.
EC
TED
PR
O
and absenteeism: A study in the English speaking Caribbean,
