Factors Affecting Job Motivation, Satisfaction and Performance - Research Paper Example

Factors Affecting Job Motivation, Satisfaction and Performance This chapter explains the data analysis techniques and results through written text, figures, tables, and/or other means. 5.1 Description of the Research Samples A survey was conducted to assess the relationship amongst factors affecting job motivation, satisfaction and performance. Particularly for this study, interest was in an application in customer service in general. The sample was obtained through an online self-administered questionnaire as described in details in chapter 3. The respondents were asked a set of 27 questions which were logically grouped around the three topics of interest; Motivation, satisfaction and performance. The final sample comprised of 72 respondents who completed the survey . Table 1 provides a summary of the distribution of respondents by gender and age from which its evident that the respondents are balanced in gender, although they are mostly clustered between age 19-35. Table 1: crosstab of respondents by age group and gender My gender is Total Female Male My age is between 19-25 15 7 22 26-35 19 19 38 36-45 2 6 8 46-55 2 0 2 56+ 1 1 2 Total 39 33 72 5.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) Factor analysis is a variable reduction strategy whose motivation is coming up with a subset of the data explaining much of the variability. In this case, EFA was achieved using Principal Components Analysis (PCA). To assess the adequacy of the sampling, Keiser-Meier-Okin (KMO) statistic was applied with a value of for the test being 0.60. Since KMO is above the 0.5 cut-off, we conclude that EFA is valid. On the same note, Barlett’s test of sphericity was signifivant (Chi square value=584.589 and p-value of 0.00), hence we conclude that there are significant correlations in the variables[Joh07]. A cut-off for including variables was based on an Eigen value of one or more. Results for the total variance explained indicated that eight variables had an Eigen value greater than one, with a cumulative total variance explained of 70% (Table 2). As a rule of the thumb, In PCA a cut-off value of the total variance explained of 70% is deemed good enough. Table 2: Exploratory Factor Analysis output: variance explained Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization was applied to the factors in a bid to simplify the covariance structure. In principle, rotation aims at ensuring that a particular variable has a high loading on one factor while it has an almost zero loading on all other factors. The results of the rotation are presented in table 3 below, from which it is evident that the eight components with Eigen values above one are selected[Joh07]. A look at the components reveals that there are some reported high correlations between the components and the variables as may be expected. Looking at the first component for instance, it contributes 19.345% of the total variability (Table 2). Moreover, the first component comprises mainly of job satisfaction variables, the second and the third are majorly job performance variables while the rest majorly comprise of job motivation variables. Table 3: Rotated Component Matrix: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. Component   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 Being comfortable is more important than getting ahead. 0.16 0.012 -0.237 -0.078 0.686 0.299 -0.014 -0.105 2 I would rather not have responsibility for other people. -0.179 -0.231 0.002 0.1 0.685 -0.172 -0.101 0.066 3 Inefficiency makes me angry. -0.143 -0.002 0.141 0.769 0.067 0.047 -0.176 -0.057 4 I get restless and annoyed when I feel I am wasting time. 0.168 0.076 -0.14 0.854 -0.051 -0.076 0.143 0.002 5 I have always worked hard in order to be among the best in my own line (school, organization, profession etc.)? -0.082 0.062 0.159 -0.079 -0.076 0.801 0.013 0.191 6 I think that success in life is largely a matter of luck. -0.243 0.144 -0.002 -0.036 0.531 -0.307 0.511 0.04 7 “Getting on in life” is important for me. 0.121 0.107 0.211 0.069 -0.212 0.329 0.227 0.675 8 I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do. 0.67 -0.079 0.083 0.107 0.143 -0.107 -0.207 0.09 9 I like doing the things I do at work. 0.659 0.102 0.361 -0.005 0.093 0.11 0.15 -0.191 10 There is really too little chance for promotion on my job. -0.303 0.165 -0.101 -0.138 0.262 -0.052 -0.075 0.47 11 I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive. -0.749 0.109 -0.099 0.229 0.164 0.054 0.133 -0.101 12 Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult. -0.394 0.081 -0.048 0.187 0.212 0.587 0.332 -0.265 13 My supervisor is fair to me. 0.832 0.112 -0.059 0.121 -0.117 -0.016 0.024 -0.179 14 I feel that the work I do is appreciated. 0.716 0.407 -0.047 0.014 -0.218 -0.102 -0.038 0.042 15 I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of people I work with. -0.095 -0.058 0.161 -0.018 -0.103 0.15 0.82 0.061 16 Communication is good within my organization. 0.58 -0.058 -0.018 -0.065 0.041 -0.064 -0.043 0.495 17 I am polite to customers. 0.112 0.806 0.226 0.143 0.067 0.059 -0.178 0.178 18 I am willing to assist customers when necessary. 0.107 0.847 0.279 -0.02 0.008 -0.134 -0.014 0.071 19 I provide prompt service. -0.08 0.75 0.016 -0.107 -0.161 0.096 0.127 -0.078 20 I am able to make a mistake right. -0.022 0.662 -0.253 0.374 -0.084 0.032 0.123 0.018 21 I provide quality advice to customers. 0.066 0.693 0.557 -0.113 0.031 0.217 -0.094 0.033 22 I keep customers informed about matters that may concern them. 0.005 0.207 0.717 0.045 -0.018 0.1 0.07 0.197 23 I am knowledgeable about my organization’s products and services. 0.249 0.109 0.729 -0.052 -0.318 0.001 0.164 -0.189 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.                 5.3 Internal Reliabilities of the Measures Internal consistency of the data was evaluated using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in a bid to analyze the degree to which measurements were free from random error. This test is used especially in cases where there are multiple Likert questions in a questionnaire that form a scale and wish to assess the reliability of the scale. Cronbach’s test had a 0.511 alpha value which indicates average internal reliability of the Likert scale for this survey. We however should take into account that Cronbach’s test does not distinguish between the groupings in the data. Table 4 presents the reliability analysis results from which the variables that would result to an increase in Cronbach’s alpha if deleted are highlighted[Joh07]. Table 4: Internal reliability analysis results   Corrected Item-Total Correlation Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted 1 Being comfortable is more important than getting ahead. 0.043 0.521 2 I would rather not have responsibility for other people. -0.193 0.562 3 Inefficiency makes me angry. 0.103 0.508 4 I get restless and annoyed when I feel I am wasting time. 0.217 0.488 5 I have always worked hard in order to be among the best in my own line (school, organization, profession etc.)? 0.127 0.503 6 I think that success in life is largely a matter of luck. 0.072 0.513 7 “Getting on in life” is important for me. 0.259 0.485 8 I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do. 0.076 0.514 9 I like doing the things I do at work. 0.277 0.479 10 There is really too little chance for promotion on my job. -0.004 0.525 11 I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive. -0.127 0.544 12 Many of our rules and procedures make doing a good job difficult. 0.112 0.507 13 My supervisor is fair to me. 0.147 0.5 14 I feel that the work I do is appreciated. 0.225 0.486 15 I find I have to work harder at my job because of the incompetence of people I work with. 0.101 0.508 16 Communication is good within my organization. 0.039 0.521 17 I am polite to customers. 0.563 0.454 18 I am willing to assist customers when necessary. 0.515 0.465 19 I provide prompt service. 0.276 0.479 20 I am able to make a mistake right. 0.331 0.47 21 I provide quality advice to customers. 0.534 0.456 22 I keep customers informed about matters that may concern them. 0.29 0.48 23 I am knowledgeable about my organization’s products and services. 0.173 0.497 5.4 Correlation Analysis A look at the correlations between the total motivation, satisfaction and performance variables reveals that the only significant correlation is between total satisfaction and total performance (correlation value=0.273, p-value=0.024). being a positive correlation, this implies that as the overall satisfaction increases, so would the job performance. Table 5: Correlation between variables 5.5 Hypotheses Testing Results The hypothesis of interest were evaluated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, whose output is presented in table 5 above. The hypothesis are listed below with their corresponding results. 1) H1: There is a positive relationship between job motivation and job performance in customer service. The correlation between job motivation and job performance is 0.04 (P-value=0.747) hence no evidence of a significant relationship between the two variables. 2) H2: There is a positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance in customer service. There is evidence for a positive relationship between job performance and job satisfaction since the correlation between the two of 0.273 is significantly different from zero (p-value=0.024) 3) H3: Gender has an effect on job performance in customer service. Considering the p-value of 0.744 for the Pearson’s correlation test , there is no evidence of an effect of gender on job performance in customer service. 4) H4: Age has an effect on job performance in customer service. Similarly for age, there is no evidence of a significant effect of age on job performance. A multiple regression analysis of the total job motivation, total job satisfaction, gender and age on the total job performance was done. The output is presented below from which the overall F-test statistic is not significant (P-value=0.186 in Table 7). The mode R square is 0.308 indicating that job motivation, job satisfaction in conjunction with age and gender are only able to explain about 30% of variability in the job performance in customer service (Table 6). As was highlighted from the earlier discussions, it’s evident that its only total job satisfaction that significantly affects job performance (P-valueo.017 from the regression model results of table 8) Table 6: Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Change Statistics R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change 1 .308a 0.095 0.035 4.20766 0.095 1.597 4 61 0.186 Table 7: ANOVAa Model   Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 113.12 4 28.28 1.597 .186b Residual 1079.971 61 17.704 Total 1193.091 65 a Dependent Variable: totperformance b Predictors: (Constant), My age is between, My gender is, totmotivation, totsatisfaction Table 8: Coefficientsa Model   Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.     B Std. Error Beta     1 (Constant) 24.691 6.043 4.086 0 totmotivation -0.001 0.143 -0.001 -0.01 0.992 totsatisfaction 0.331 0.135 0.305 2.447 0.017 My gender is -0.123 1.046 -0.014 -0.118 0.906 My age is between -0.462 0.582 -0.098 -0.794 0.43 a Dependent Variable: totperformance Read More