bba thesis report
TRANSCRIPT
1
“The Impact of Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment on Job
Satisfaction of Private School Teachers in Islamabad”
A STUDY ON THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF ISLAMABAD
SUBMITTED BY
AQSA KHALID (080602)
SUPERVISOR
IMRAN HAMEED
A Research Report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of
BBA
Department of Business Administration
Air University
2013
2
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL SHEET
Topic of Research:
“The Impact of Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment on Job
Satisfaction of Private School Teachers in Islamabad”
Name of students: AQSA KHALID (080602)
Program: BBA-F-08
Approved by:
_____________________
Imran Hameed
(Project Supervisor)
_____________________
Internal Examiner
(Umar Ghauri)
_____________________
Internal Examiner
(Farooq Rashid)
_____________________
Dr. Mueen Zafar Aziz
(Dean, Faculty of Administrative Sciences)
3
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF RESEARCH
Miss Aqsa Khalid, Roll no. / Reg. No. 080602. SemesterBBA-08 has completed their research
on under my supervision.
Their topic is “The Impact of Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment on Job
Satisfaction of Private School Teachers in Islamabad”
This thesis has been examined by me. It has been found complete in all aspects and now fit for
presentation. The student is therefore allowed in the presentation / viva voce for defending it
before the panel of examiners.
Imran Hameed
(Supervisor)
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I am grateful to Almighty Allah for awarding me the courage to confront every
challenge in life with greater success and complete the whole thesis.
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Mr. Imran Hameed, Assistant Professor of
Administrative Sciences whose guidance provided strong foundation for this research and
supported me throughout the project. His understanding, untiring advice, and encouragement
have enabled to me to complete our thesis.
I would also like to thank the all the teachers from various institutions who co-operated with me
in getting the survey done.
In the end, I am grateful to my Parents who always encouraged me in my every field and walk of
life and made this project possible.
5
ABSTRACT
This research project was to find the impact of Organizational Commitment and Supportive
Leadership on Job satisfaction of private school teachers in Islamabad. This research was carried
with a non-probability, convenient sampling. A questionnaire was devised as a survey tool to
collect the primary data. A sample size of 90 respondents was chosen out of total 120
questionnaires, and statistical tests were applied for inference-building. Three hypotheses were
developed out of which two hypotheses were accepted. According to the results, Supportive
Leadership and Organizational Commitment had an independent and positive impact on Job
Satisfaction. Interestingly, the research confirmed a partial-moderating impact of Supportive
Leadership in the link between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction. This research
bears managerial implication that both Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment
need to be taken up as independent, distinct factors as well as interacted together by management
to boost the overall Job Satisfaction.
6
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 ................................................................................................................................... 8
INTRODUCION ......................................................................................................................... 8
1.1: Background of the study ................................................................................................. 11
1.2: Purpose of the Research ................................................................................................. 12
1.3: Beneficiaries ................................................................................................................... 12
1:4 Literature Gap .................................................................................................................. 12
1.5: Research Objective ......................................................................................................... 13
1.6: Problem Statement.......................................................................................................... 14
1.7: Research Questions ........................................................................................................ 14
CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................................. 15
LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 15
2.1: Organizational Commitment .......................................................................................... 15
2.2: Job Satisfaction ............................................................................................................... 18
2.3: The impact of Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction ................................... 21
2.4: Supportive Leadership .................................................................................................... 22
2.5: Relationship between Supportive Leadership and Job Satisfaction ............................... 23
2.6: The relationship between Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment ..... 25
CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................. 27
THEORATICAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 27
3.1: Model .............................................................................................................................. 27
3.2: Variables ......................................................................................................................... 28
3.3: Hypothesis Development................................................................................................ 27
3.4: Variable definition .......................................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................. 30
RESEARCH METHOD ............................................................................................................ 30
4.1: Acquisition of data ......................................................................................................... 30
4.2: Population and Sampling ................................................................................................ 30
4.3: Sample size ..................................................................................................................... 30
4.4: Measures ......................................................................................................................... 31
4.5: Data Analysis................................................................................................................. 31
7
4.6: Correlation ...................................................................................................................... 32
4.7: Regression ...................................................................................................................... 32
CHAPTER 5 .............................................................................................................................. 33
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS .................................................................................................. 33
5.1: Normality check ............................................................................................................. 33
5.2: Reliability – Internal Consistency .................................................................................. 33
5.3: Factor Analysis ............................................................................................................... 35
5.4: Multicollinearity Check .................................................................................................. 36
5.5: Partial Correlation .......................................................................................................... 37
5.6: Regression Results.......................................................................................................... 38
5.7: Analysis and Findings .................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER 6 .............................................................................................................................. 42
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................... 42
6.1: Discussion....................................................................................................................... 42
6.2: Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 42
6.3: Management Implication and Recommendation ............................................................ 43
6.4: Limitation ....................................................................................................................... 43
APPENDIX (Questionairre ) ........................................................................................................ 44
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 48
8
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCION
This chapter discusses an outline of the study background and organizational
environment of companies that are working in Pakistan. The problem statement concentrates on
the critical elements that are allied with job satisfaction and the issues that have a strong impact
on this. Furthermore, this chapter highlights literature gap, research objectives, research
questions, problem statement and significance of this research.
Pakistan’s economy is known as one of the developing economies of the world. The
working atmosphere has become competitive with the increasing levels of development. Currall
et al. 2005) stated in a general context, that skilled, proficient and competent employees are
required by organizations because the productivity and organizational production is highly
reliant on employee’s performance.
Numerous difficulties faced by private, multinational and local firms while operating in
such formless market setup in Pakistan that leads employees to dissatisfaction and raises
frustration among the employees. Therefore my effort is towards maintaining overall job
satisfaction among the employees to accomplish the higher levels of organizational commitment
through my research so that employees’ efficiency is enlarged.
Rad and Yaramohammadian in 2006 demonstrated that firms cannot succeed without
appropriate commitment and hence job satisfaction is the most serious elements for the
9
maintenance of employee’s commitment. Lot of consideration has been given to organizational
commitment in preceding researches due to its imperative impact on work attitudes like effective
performances and job satisfaction of the workers.
In Pakistan, many writers have discussed the concept of different job related factors, one
of them is Job Satisfaction and it has been always very broadly researched area all over the
globe. Multiple factors have been recognized by various researchers, affecting Job Satisfaction;
however, my study emphases its link with organizational commitment and Supportive
Leadership.
Organizational commitment has been widely researched and different researchers have
identified its backgrounds and consequences. Allen & Meyer (1990) defined organizational
commitment as “psychological state that binds the individual to the organization”. Cohen (1991)
mentioned that outcomes affected by organizational commitment fluctuate across career stages
and this particularly defines the relationship between organizational commitment and income.
Similarly, employees will always be committed towards their organization if they are
satisfied with their job, leaders, pay etc. than those who are not satisfied with their job. Opkara
(in 2004) illustrated that the emphasis on Job Satisfaction and Commitment cannot be ignored
because they are the main factors of employee performance, productivity and turnover. Samad
(in 2007) stated Organizational efficiency rises when the employees are commitment and
satisfied with their organization because commitment and satisfaction leads to the higher
performance.
10
Graen & Cashmen (1975) found that employee’s commitment towards firm can be
strengthen and link between supervisors and employees can be enriched by the Supportive
Leadership. In this aspect, in order to inspire employees by giving them a responsive and
pleasant environment, supportive leader plays a vital role which leads to decrease their job stress
and other job related problems and helps them to work in an improved way. Organizations in
Pakistan have improved immensely during the past few years, thereby intensive competition
amongst organizations lead employees to put their best determination to achieve a position over
their competitors.
Geijsel et al., (2003) inferred that teacher’s sense of aptitude, enthusiasm and self-
efficacy is developed by the help of Supportive Leadership Behavior which comprises the
leader’s support of subordinates’ professional and personal development. House and Mitchell (in
1974) said that Supportive Leadership displays the concern for employees’ comfort and raises a
pleasant and responsive setting as it’s a behavior that reports the requirements and favorites of
the employees. Wallace et al. (2009) suggested that study should be done on the influence and
impact of the Leadership style on important work elements. Hence, this study and research is
considered to inspect the impact of supportive leadership on job satisfaction.
Job satisfaction can merely be defined as the feelings people have about their professions. It has
been specially defined as a pleasurable emotional state ensuing from the appraisal, an affective
reaction, and an attitude towards one’s job. These descriptions clearly show that job satisfaction
takes into account feelings, beliefs and behaviors.
There are varying definitions of job satisfaction. Alongside, they have been describing
with many measurements which are equally diverse. Job satisfaction can be defined in terms of
11
external working conditions, supervisors support, pay etc. and internal individual motivation, life
satisfaction etc. where the external factors are relatively easy to recognize and gauge the aspect
of the internal factors are more problematic. In regions where emotional intelligence is not
stressed upon nor is goal setting, the internal factors are not deliberately focused.
In Pakistan, the attention towards job satisfaction is only beginning to develop. Obviously, the
first instinctive step is to focus on the environmental or external, more controllable factors of job
satisfaction. As such the focus of this research will be to measure the job satisfaction level on the
bases of environmental factors.
1.1: Background of the study
Nanda and Brown (1977) have tried to classify the important factors of the performance
of the employee at the time of hiring and the productivity depends on number of factors like
motivation and job satisfaction
.
Balfour and Wechsler (1996) describe that the organizational commitment is a good
aspect of organizational productivity and performance. Employees’ performances can be
managed by another technique which is to plan inducement programs more strategically in a way
where organizational commitment is also addressed.
Hackman & Oldham, (1980); Herzberg, (1966) defined that Job satisfaction is the
satisfaction a worker gets from responsibilities and characteristics allied with the job and
Taormina (1999) organizational commitment. Glisson and Durick (1988); Hackman & Oldham
(1980) recognized that Satisfaction with supervision is an imperative part of job satisfaction and
12
is linked to turnover and organizational commitment. Locke (1976) contended that employee’s
job practice assists the job satisfaction to mark it in a positive mental state. Glisson and Durick
(1988) agreed with Locke (1976) that organizational commitment and job satisfaction are linked;
however, they remain separate thoughts.
Glisson & Durick (1988) recommend that as possible sponsors to job satisfaction,
including personal, organizational and job features, many basics have been studied. They also
said that Herzberg (1966) did early work on link between job characteristics and worker attitudes
based on meeting the worker‘s needs with the implication being that a positive attitude from
meeting needs via job characteristics produces job satisfaction which is known as needs-
satisfaction models. In addition, both job satisfaction and organizational commitment is linked
with the satisfaction along with the supervision (Brass, 1981; Fernandez, 2008; Hackman &
Oldham, 1976; Wu, 2009).
1.2: Purpose of the Research
The moderating impact of Supportive Leadership has been studied in past researches. The
present study aims to investigate the moderating impact of Supportive Leadership between Job
Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in developing countries like Pakistan.
1:3 Literature Gap
Most of the modern studies were determining the mutual impact of Organizational
Commitment and leadership on employee’s turnover ratios and were measuring the impact of
leadership as a moderator. According to current literature the impact of Supportive Leadership as
13
an independent variable and its relation to Job Satisfaction was not clear. After going all previous
studies its seems interesting to determine the impact of Supportive Leadership as a moderating
variable on the relationship between the Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction.
1.4: Beneficiaries
Academic institutions play a vital role in a nation’s success. If the employees or the
professors working at different educational institutions are facing supportive leader conflicts they
can never teach well to the pupils. Obviously because if they are not getting appropriate training
or guidance from their deans or leaders, how can they be good teachers? However, an institute’s
presentation raises its status. According to this survey, if institutes in Pakistan want to compete
with institutes at international ranks they should emphasis on increasing their leadership and
mentoring as well as organizational commitment which ultimately leads towards job satisfaction
and better performance. By providing the leadership support, the teachers can perform
effectively and efficiently at the institution and will show commitment towards their
organization.
1.5: Research Objective
1. The purpose of this research is to gauge the impact of Organizational Commitment on
Job Satisfaction.
2. To identify the impact of Supportive Leadership on Job Satisfaction.
14
3. The research will inspect the impact on strength and direction of relationship that exists
between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction through the interaction effect
of Supportive Leadership.
1.6: Problem Statement
To determine the nature and intensity of relationship between Organizational Commitment and
Job Satisfaction with Supportive Leadership playing as moderating role.
1.7: Research Questions
The research questions for this study are:
1. Does Supportive Leadership have a direct association with Job Satisfaction?
2. Does Organizational Commitment have a direct association with Job Satisfaction?
3. Does Supportive Leadership play a moderating role in the relationship between
Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction?
15
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The notion that has been proposed by some researchers is that attachment of the
employees with their work is their commitment towards organization. Salanova et al (2005)
mentioned that these concepts include inspiration, whereas, Harter et al (in2005) and Salanova et
al (in 2005) stated, it also includes job participation and job satisfaction, likewise, Macey and
Schneider (in 2008) listed additional concept of organizational commitment. Stumpt& Hartman
in 1984 illustrated that feelings about work performance such as; commitment and satisfaction
and staying in organization are positive when employees and organization goals are similar.
2.1: Organizational Commitment
Allen &Meyer in 1990 defined organizational commitment as a psychological state that
fixes an employee to an organization. Mowday, Porter & Steers in 1982 outlined the difference
between behavioral commitment, the procedure by which persons’ past behavior in a firm binds
them to the organization, and attitudinal commitment, an approach in which persons consider the
congruency of their values and goals with those of their retaining organizations. In 1991, Meyer
and Allen’s conceptualization of a multi-dimensional model of firms’ commitment, the
complementarity of attitudinal and behavioral commitment was essential subject.
The three-component model of commitment established by Meyer and Allen (1997)
recommends that employees experiences organizational commitment as three simultaneous
16
approach encircling normative, continuances and affective organizational commitment, that has
been described in Allen & Meyer (1990) study in order to make an imperative contribution
towards the study. Allen & Meyer (1990) stated Organizational Commitment as “psychological
state that binds the individual to the organization.”
2.1.1: Affective commitment
According to Allen & Meyer (1990), “the employee’s emotional attachment to,
identification with, and involvement in the organization.” Affective commitment denotes to the
degree to which a person recognizes with, is involved in, and relish the membership in a firm.
Workers with affective commitment want to stay with an organization. Positive work-related
behaviors, such as; attendance, organizational citizenship behavior has always been intensely
connected to affective commitment, stated by Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, in
2002, and as an outcome much of the studies has focused on affective commitment. The recent
study that has been done by Meyer et al. (2002) emphasized the fundamentals that are related to
organizational commitment; in Allen & Meyer investigation affective commitment associate
with organizational support, interactional justice and transformational leadership. Though, a
current study done by Bowler & Brass, in 2006 has found no bond between affective
commitment and interpersonal citizenship behavior, which happens when colleagues help one
another outside of agreed job roles to the advantage of the organization.
17
2.1.2: Continuance commitment
In the view of Allen & Meyer (1990), “an awareness of the costs associated with leaving
the organization” Continuance commitment means the loyalty of the employee towards his
organization. Becker (1960) stated that the employee stays loyal to his organization without any
reward. Whereas, Continuance commitment is when the employee stays loyal to his organization
to avoid the cost of leaving or there are no alternatives or there will be a lot of retirement
benefits. Meyer et al (2002) illustrated that one of the reason behind staying loyal towards an
organization could be lack of skills, due to which employees do not prefer to shift to another
organization or then they have to pay high cost of leaving. It is obvious that when the employees
don’t have other options then they will stay loyal to their organizations. Van Breugel, Van
Olffen, & Ollie (2005) mention that the commitments of the temporary workers are higher than
the permanent workers.
2.1.3: Normative commitment
According to Allen & Meyer (1990), “a feeling of responsibility to continue
employment” The final component of the Organizational Commitment is normative
commitment, which includes a person continuing relationship in an organization out of a sense of
responsibility. Normative commitment mean that its ethical responsibility of employee to
continue work with a specific organization. Meyer & Allen (1991) study that employee feels that
his ethical obligation to work for a particular organization and the committed employee stay with
the same organization. Marsh and Mannari (1977) thirty years ago, explored that a person who
stay with the organization for a long period of time will remain committed to that organization
because they think that its ethically correct. Such type of responsibility will cause normative
18
burdens and the committed person will not focus on his own benefit but he will prefer the benefit
of organization (Wiener, 1982). Normative commitment occur just because to offer rewards in
advance to the employees.
Jaros in 1997 recommended that the normative commitment means the degree to which
the employees show the loyalty towards the organization and it helps the employees to achieve
the organizational goals.
Organizational commitment has been well-defined in a many ways all over the literature
(e.g., Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974). Porter et al
(1974) did research on organizational commitment and concluded that the organizational
commitment means the identification and the participation of employees in the organization to
achieve the organizational goals. Heimann & Pittenger (1996) stated that the feeling of the
employees towards the organization includes the positive and friendly behavior of coworkers and
the leaders of organization, and the positive feedback of the employees. The recent researches
show that these above mentioned factors have strong effect on the organizational commitment.
2.2: Job Satisfaction
Organization is the social system, one of the main factors to take into account the human
resources, capacity and efficiency. They need managers and employees to work hard to achieve
their goals. Without staff Commitment and hard work organization cannot succeed. It reflects
the position of the people, work, and organize their work. Generally job satisfaction can be
defined for workers on the basis of the actual results of an emotional reaction (Sean McCurry,
2004; Mosadeghrad 2003). Job satisfaction can be compared with the structure of a multi-
19
dimensional, including internal and external components of the feelings of a group of employees,
including some aspects of reward satisfactory, promotion, and working conditions, supervision,
and organizational practices and relationships with colleagues ( Misener , Etc., 1996) There are
many factors that affect job satisfaction, including salaries, benefits, achievement, recognition,
and communication autonomous, and working conditions, the importance of work, colleagues
and organizational climate, personal contacts and mutual investments. An organization is a place
where team work is done under the supervision, in order to decrease the uncertainty and the
decline in job satisfaction (Waliser 2004 Koustelios Navaie , Etc.,2003,Watch giant JG 2003 ;
Zhou et al, 2003, 1999, Nice - Mike Smith Thyer , 2003 ).
Locke (1976) defined that job satisfaction or dissatisfaction is “an emotional response to
a value judgment”. If a person sees that the job meets one’s key values, that person will
experience a “pleasurable emotion of satisfaction” (Henne and Locke, 1985: 221-240; Nebeker
et al., 2001, 29-45). Robbins (2000) mentioned that Job Satisfaction denotes to an employee’s
general attitude toward his or her job and a person who is satisfied will hold positive attitude
toward the organization.
Among the social scientist there is a high level of agreement that Job Satisfaction is a
positive emotional reaction to a particular job mentioned by Oshagbemi (2003) and Scarpello
(1992). JS is not a unitary concept. Chirchill (1974) and his co-workers defined that job
satisfaction consist of seven components; the job itself, fellow workers, supervision, company
policy and support, pay, promotion and advancement and customers.
20
Job itself: Most employees’ preferred an interesting and significant job which allows them a
achievement, development and growth. Furthermore, they want accountability, independence,
role clarity, feedback from supervisor’s statement by Henne and Locke in 1985.
Fellow workers: It is always fascinating to work with co-workers having mutual and similar
values (Henne and Locke (1985). Robbins in 2000 stated that friendly and supportive co-workers
lead to increase in job satisfaction.
Supervision: Supervisor plays an important role in making employee feel good about their
environment. Workers relish kind, honest and competent supervisors. Appreciation and rewards
on good performance and involving employees in decision making always make them feel part
of the organization (Henne and Locke, 1985: 221-240).
Company policy: Organization must show respect to employees and their values (Henne and
Locke, 1985: 221-240).
Pay: Salary influence over all employees’ job satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Oshagbemi and
Hickson, 2003: 357-367). Salary should be fair enough to meet employee’s needs (Henne and
Locke, 1985: 221-240).
Promotion: A promotion denotes the progress in designation or a position that means to have
higher rank, increased duty and/or higher salary (Jackson and Schuler, 2000: 265; Dessler, 2008:
387). Fair and unambiguous promotion system should be follow for the employees. When
21
promotion decisions are take fairly then employees are more satisfied with their job (Robbins,
2000: 20).
Ethical climate and job satisfaction: Organizations can develop an ethical climate by executing
and applying code of ethics and policies, rewarding ethical behaviors (Schwepker, 2001: 39-52).
2.3: The impact of Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction.
There is no hesitation saying that organizational commitment leads to job satisfaction.
One of the factors of Organizational Commitment is known as Job satisfaction (Kovach, 1977).
La Lopa (1997) specified that significant predictor of organizational commitment is a job
satisfaction. Many facts have been studied to predict employee qualities such as performance,
organizational commitment, and service quality (Dienhart and Gregoire, 1993). Tai et al. (1998)
noticed that Job satisfaction and Organizational Commitment are highly correlated. Markovits et
al., (2007); recommended that the most influential affective organizational commitment was
found with respect to levels of intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction. Johnson and Johnson,
(2000) specified that the employees attitudes is developed toward such job levels as work, pay,
promotion, co-workers, company policies, supervisors and customers. According to Brown and
Peterson, (1993) job satisfaction is an antecedent to organizational commitment. They also
proposed a more detailed relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction.
Boles et al. (2007) specify that job satisfaction is more strongly related to organizational
commitment. Babakus et all (1999) Job Satisfaction has received more importance than other
ancestors of organizational commitment. The relationship between Organizational Commitment
and Job Satisfaction cannot be ignored because some behavioral scientist stated that
22
Organizational Commitment is predictor of Job Satisfaction and some stated that Job Satisfaction
is a predictor of Organizational Commitment.
A number of researchers were done on the relationship between Job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment. For instance, Curry, Wakefield, Price and Mueller (1986)
identified no significant relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction.
Yet, other researchers (Busch et al., 1998; Chiu-Yueh, 2000; Feinstein & Vondraek, 2006;
Freund, 2005; Mannheim et al., 1997) identified that job satisfaction was a significant predictor
of organizational commitment. Some researchers claimed that job satisfaction reflects immediate
affective reactions to the job while commitment to the organization develops more slowly after
the individual forms more comprehensive valuations of the employing organization, its values,
and expectations and one’s own future in it. Therefore, job satisfaction is perceived as one of the
factors of organizational commitment (Mannheim et al., 1997). Hence, it is understood that
highly satisfied workers will be more committed to the firm.
2.4: Supportive Leadership
More specifically, Supportive Leadership provides a favorable environment of trust, so
that employees can fully participate in the effort, in their professional roles, to establish a link
between leadership support and commitment towards the firm.
York-Barr and Duke, (2004) did a research of two decades on teacher leadership and they
discussed questions such as: What teacher leaders should do? What are their effects? What
circumstances influence teacher leadership? How they can be prepared? The results emphasized
the importance of teacher leadership.
23
Wasley studied in 1991, teacher leaders in-depth and he identified that despite different
demographics, goals and role they shared some common problems. Every teacher had different
difficulties working in schools, some teachers lacked incentives and many teachers resisted being
involved in reform efforts.
Little in 1995 presented two important viewpoints. She illustrated that when teachers
tried to work for development in the school, it was for teamwork, experimentation and flexible
use of time. McLaughlin & Talbert in 1993 announced the idea of a professional learning
community where teachers agree upon collective discussion and talk openly and discuss
curriculum. Grossman, Wineburg & Wentworth (2001) additionally illustrated the progress of a
professional learning community including the discussion over different disciplines, gender and
race.
2.5: Relationship between Supportive Leadership and Job Satisfaction
Factors in determining job satisfaction are lead, which is considered an important
indicator of job satisfaction that plays a central role. Driving management tasks, especially the
interaction between man and society. This also affects the goals of the organization process
( Skansi , 2000 ) Has shown studies conducted in different countries, most of the relationship
between active management and job satisfaction (Seo et al, 2004;. Vance and Larson,
2002; Chiok Yongfeng Lu Dunham - Taylor 2001, 2000, 2000 people Stordeur , Pearson Winton
in 2005 Mosadeghrad , 2003).
24
Leadership style is superior to another team to stay in their commitment to work and job
satisfaction ( Dahlen , 2002 , 2003 Brerggren Severinsson , Fletcher, 2001; Bass Avolio ,
1990; Northouse 2001 Dvir, 2002; Fall Friedman et al, 2001) . Support management model in
order to reduce the pressure of work, and improve staff morale, thus contributing to job
satisfaction. Suggested diverse and Rochelle (1995) that this kind of leadership that plays an
important role in job satisfaction, especially the type of conversion, the greatest impact on job
satisfaction despite the fact that the leadership of affairs expected results, and the results of
transformational leadership, and the performance is much better than expected, Louis. (1996)
found that people who were seen as people who only transactions Transformational Leadership
more effective leadership and better business results.
Some researchers (Sergiovanni in Corbally 1984 and Smithand Peterson, 1988)
illustrated that it must be the leader of the staff who can lead work place and job more satisfying
to their employees. Disciples should share vision of your organization in order to achieve
effective leadership and his main concern should be to achieve organizational goals, rather than
the interests of their own personal (low Haterand , 1988 Archibald, 2004; Durndum , Et al, 2002
Fuller et al, 1996; love, etc.). Many studies have shown that the performance of the employee to
work with the inevitable result of the leading companies in the transformation of the property.
Additionally, employees have a good relationship of cooperation to achieve played positive
results for the team plays an important role. Satisfaction with the supervision of subordinates and
found that the leadership behavior (Shim et al, 2002, Joseph, 2000, Ugboro Aubin, 2000, Massey
2000; Luthans , F , Avolio 2003 Dvir, 2002. Crump 2002. walumbwa Et al, 2004) if , and can
also reduce the pressure of work, to raise their morale. Other studies have shown that
transformational leadership is more closely related to job satisfaction including transactional
25
leadership ( Ribelin , Weimar in 2003 and Thomas in 2001, and bass Avolio , 1990 Dvir, etc.,
2002).
2.6: The relationship between Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment
Blau (1985) looked at the relationship between leadership style and commitment. It was
found driving style that can have a greater impact on the structure (or pattern-oriented task)
commitment to the issue of leadership style. Additionally, Williams and Smoke (1986), given its
commitment to leadership style background. For example, La Rocca, and Jones (1978) found
support for the leadership and staff with higher levels of satisfaction and lower levels of self-
reported intention to leave the organization. Moreover, Karasek, Schwartz and Theorell (1982)
found that the negative impact of job dissatisfaction and depression resulting buffer demand.
Previous studies have shown that transformational leadership is positively related to his
disciples’ commitment (Lee, 2005).
The focus of the leaders and the followers of the transactions clearly defined leadership
transactions. For example, the tasks set by the leader; the disciples came to accomplish this task,
and earned a bonus above definition. Studies have shown that the leadership of a cohesive
leadership to participate in part of the link between the change and the structure, such as
motivation, job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
And Dairy Metcalfe and Alimo Metcalf (2008) Show a positive relationship between the driving
variables and their links to employment / organizational commitment and job satisfaction.
26
Given the transformational leadership, focus on shared values and promote the values of the
inspection team, leadership behavior is a way to strengthen this commitment and the positive
results of team performance.
Team-based leadership behavior aimed at developing the primacy of staff (ie, support
group) is also consistent with studies that have shown support supervision, to facilitate the
participation of behavior (Bakker et al, 2007; .. Khan, 1990, May al , 2004 and Sachs, 2006).
Khan (1990, 1992), May et al (2004) showed that the relationship between supervisors has been
associated positively with a lower value. Therefore, supervision and relations support, and
relationships with colleagues and collaborators, helps to create an environment that make
employees feels to fully participate in their work. Sachs (2006) found a positive correlation
between supervisor support and commitment, that is the way to get the job requirements, and
resources (Buck and Demerouti , 2007) Packer et al (2007) found that the potential negative
impact is committed to the protection and support of the supervisors of the job requirements.
Together, these studies suggest that a higher level of involvement of internal staff directly
exposed to profitable relationships more responsible behavior.
27
CHAPTER 3
THEORATICAL FRAMEWORK
In this section the theoretical framework has been explained. This framework has been
established on the variables that we have considered. Moreover, Research model, hypothesis and
the definitions of the variables has been also mention
3.1: Model
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES DEPENDENT VARIABLE
3.2: Hypothesis Development
These are the hypothesis that I have established to observe the ‘Impact of Supportive Leadership
and Organizational Commitment on the Job Satisfaction of private school teachers of Islamabad”
Organizational
Commitment
Supportive
Leadership
Job
Satisfaction
28
H1# Organizational Commitment is directly associated with Job satisfaction.
H2# Supportive Leadership is directly associated Job satisfaction.
H3# Supportive Leadership plays a moderating role in the relationship between Organizational
Commitment and Job satisfaction.
3.3: Variables
Job satisfaction
Supportive leadership
Organizational commitment
3.4: Variable definition
Job satisfaction is the feeling of satisfaction with their work of one person. This feeling is
based on the perception of personal satisfaction and that job satisfaction can affect a person's
ability to perform well.
Supportive leadership is a friendly attitude of the leader towards the employees.The
leader should work for the comfort of employees working in the firm, providing them contented
and responsive atmosphere in order to motivate them to achieve the organizational goals.
Supporting management means that manager should let employees manage every task in their
own way instead of giving those orders. Delegation is an important part of management support,
not just managers assign tasks and then the results obtained, but through the task, they work with
the team to improve the skills and talents, they do not have to worry about the job is done until
the principal is fully eligible for employees in a particular area.
29
Organizational commitment of staff is a psychological attachment to the organization.
The basis behind many studies is to make employees feels that their job is to find ways to
improve, so that employees will be more committed to their organizations. Organizational
commitment is the sense of belongingness of the employee towards his organization.
Organizational commitment shows faithfulness and involvement of employee in the operations
and tasks of the organization in order to accomplish the organization’s goals and aims.
30
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH METHOD
4.1: Acquisition of data
Data has been gathered through the use of questionnaires for collecting primary data
source. Questionnaire data collection, the most widely used because each person's invitation in
response to a same set of techniques that provides an efficient means to collect samples from a
large response to quantitative analysis. Data were collected from 120 respondents. Information
through the development of the system is based on three variables job satisfaction, organizational
commitment and support of the leadership questionnaire. For data collection I have visited
Islamabad educational institutions: i.e; City School and Becon House.
4.2: Population and Sampling
For this research, non-probability convenient sampling was done. The study was
conducted in two main campuses of one of the largest running private school systems in the
country. The above campuses were chosen from the city of Islamabad in the H-8 sector. The
respondents included teachers, men and women, of different age and designations.
4.3: Sample Size
Our target population was the teaching community of private educational institutions. Out of 120
questionnaires, 89 questionnaires were filled by the faculty of our targeted respondents leaving
31
31 questionnaires incomplete. The questionnaire was dully filled by both male and female
faculty members.
4.4: Measures
The degree of Job Satisfaction balance was measured by adapting questionnaires by
Diener and Robert Biswas -Ph.D (1996). The degree of organizational commitment was
measured adapting questionnaires by (Mowday et al. (1982). Supportive leadership was
measured adapting The Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire developed by Hemphill
and Coon (1957) and translated by Rahima Bt. Ahamd (1981) in addition to five items from
multifactor leadership questionnaires (MLQ) designed by Bass and Avolio (1997) were also
added.
A five point Liker-style rating scale was employed ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)
and 5 (strongly agree).
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
4.5: Data Analysis
The results were analyzed by SPSS software. Analysis and conclusions are based on the
data of the data reliability (internal consistency), the mean and standard deviation, and return to
normal.
32
4.6: Correlation
The correlation between two or more variables, the relationship between them is different
in degree and type. There are three types of correlation (-1, 0, +1) between variables. A negative
correlation means the relationship of high values of one variable with the low values of other
variable. The correlation may be within the range from 1 to -1. Value close to 1 directs to a high
degree of positive correlation, whereas, value close to -1 specifies a strong negative correlation.
The near-zero value indicates that other types of weak correlation, however, 0 indicates no
correlation. Although correlation between variables is very beneficial in order to determine
possible connections, it does not prove or disprove any causal effect (causality) between them.
4.7: Regression
Statistically, regression analysis is a statistical method to estimate the relationship
between the variables. When the attention is on the relationship between a dependent variable
and one or more independent variables, it contains many methods for modeling and analyzing
numerous variables. More specifically, regression analysis helps to understand how the typical
value of the variable varies with the change in any one independent variable, whereas the other
independent variables remain constant. This proves that the causal (cause-and-effect)
relationship between the variables.
33
CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
5.1: Normality check
TABLE 5.1.1: Descriptive Statistic
N Rang
e
Minim
um
Maxim
um
Mean Std.
Deviat
ion
Varia
nce
Skewness Kurtosis
Statis
tic
Statis
tic
Statisti
c
Statisti
c
Statis
tic
Statisti
c
Statist
ic
Statis
tic
Std
.
Err
or
Statis
tic
Std
.
Err
or
SL 89 3.00 2.00 5.00 3.71 .70 .50 -.52 .25 .38 .50
OC 89 4.00 1.00 5.00 3.50 .77 .60 -.41 .25 .35 .50
JS 89 4.00 1.00 5.00 3.76 .83 .70 -.58 .25 .56 .50
Valid
N
(listwi
se)
89
Table 5.1.1 illustrates that since skewness of data is between negative and positive 1, and since
kurtosis of data is positive and below 4, the entire data is normal
5.2: Reliability – Internal Consistency
TABLE 5.2.1 Reliability Check
Variables Chronbach Alpha
OC .881
SL .863
JS .911
34
The above given table 5.2.1 shows the reliability (Internal consistency) among the
variables. The Cronbach alpha reliability of the scale of Organizational commitment is 0.881.
Examples of items include: “I feel respect discussing about my organization in my social circle;”
“I am happy with my organizational culture and their working setting”, “This organization has a
great deal of personal meaning to me”.
The Cronbach alpha reliability of Supportive Leadership is 0.863 in this survey.
Examples of items contain: “My supervisor takes continues feedbacks from the staff in order to
keep improving his leadership style and fully motivates and encourages his employees for the
better performance etc.”
The Cronbach alpha reliability of the scale of Job satisfaction is 0.911. Examples of this
object include: “I enjoy while doing my tasks which are specified by my leader or manager”,
“My training and experience on this job has enhanced my abilities”.
35
5.3: Factor Analysis
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3 4 5
X7, Job Satisfaction: My training and experience in this job has enhanced my abilities and skill .722 .102 .233 .159 .303
X6, Job Satisfaction: I am fairly satisfied with my working environment .714 .249 .254 .173
X8, Job Satisfaction: The tasks in my job are interesting and challenging .667 .157 .213 .338
X9, Job Satisfaction: My colleagues in this job are courteous and supportive .621 .264 .158 .112
X5, Job Satisfaction: I consider my work to be very pleasant .568 .396 .132 .179 .287
X3, Job Satisfaction: Work is interesting and absorbs my complete attention .567 .313 .180 .111 .489
X1,Organizational Commitment: I would be happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization .508 .473 .195 .288
X7, Organizational Commitment: I think I would not leave my organization even if I get a better offer
elsewhere .170 .807 .245
X8, Organizational Commitment: I have emotional, social, and economic attachment to this organization .693 .107 .180 .367
X6, Organizational Commitment: I feel sense of moral obligation to stay in this organization .122 .645 .104 .274 .339
X4, Job Satisfaction: I find real enjoyment in my work .434 .627 .138 .442
X3, Organizational Commitment: I really feel as if problems of this organization are my own .435 .613 .353
X2, Organizational Commitment: I enjoy discussing about my work and organization within my social circle .345 .574 .407
X6, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor regularly provides me with feedback on my performance .199 .808 .127 .190
X8, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor expects me face hurdles and challenges in my tasks .333 .645 .198
X5, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor trusts my abilities as well as my character .390 .295 .625
X7, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor expects reason and justification of my decisions and actions .148 .616 .158
X4, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor motivates me for hard work and performance .447 .204 .503 .345
X3, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor guides me to think clearly about my career aspirations .176 .478 .467 .389
X2, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor encourages me to improve vital aspects of my personality .404 .154 .165 .687 .204
X5, Organizational Commitment: This organization has a great deal of personal meaning to me .345 .148 .679 .210
X4, Organizational Commitment: I feel like ‘part of the family’ within this organization .138 .482 .124 .597
X1, Supportive Leadership: My supervisor motivates me to handle challenging situations and goals .474 .163 .127 .590 .235
X1, Job Satisfaction: I feel fairly satisfied with my present job .321 .248 .121 .323 .666
X2, Job Satisfaction: In most days, I am excited about my work .463 .268 .160 .230 .637
X9, Supportive Leadership: My supervisors expects me to take initiatives in difficult and risky situations .137 .194 .457 .199 .595
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 10 iterations.
36
TABLE 5.3.1: KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .879
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square 1443.994
df 325
Sig. .000
Factor Analysis Statistics
KMO .879
Bartlett 325***
Since above table 5.3.1 shows that KMO is > 0.6 with a value bearing 0.879, it is a significant
value. Furthermore, Bartlett Test is significant to indicate validity of results.
5.4: Multicollinearity Check
TABLE 5.4.1: Correlation Coefficient
SL OC JS
SL Pearson Correlation 1
OC Pearson Correlation .601**
1
JS Pearson Correlation .615**
.680**
1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
From Table 5.4.1 it is clear that a healthy correlation exists between Organizational Commitment
and Supportive Leadership at 0.601** level. Similarly, Job Satisfaction and Supportive
37
Leadership indicates a healthy correlation of 0.61** along with Job Satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment indicating stronger correlation of 0.68** respectively.
5.5: Partial Correlation
TABLE 5.5.1 Partial Correlation of JS, OC and SL
Control Variable: SL JS OC SL
JS
OC 0.493***
Control Variable: OC JS OC
SL
JS 0.35***
SL
Control Variable: JS JS OC
SL
OC 0.316***
SL
In above tables 5.5.1, running partial correlations by controlling for each variable, one by
one; we see that all variables have a positive and significant correlation with each other. For
example, the Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment are correlated at 0.49 levels
controlling for Supportive Leadership. Similarly, Job Satisfaction and Supportive Leadership are
correlated at 0.35 level controlled by Organizational Commitment, and similarly, Organizational
Commitment and Supportive Leadership are correlated at 0.31 levels controlling for Job
Satisfaction. All correlations are significant at 5% level. This shows all variables have a natural,
original association with each other.
38
5.6: Regression Results
TABLE 5.6.1.: Multiple Regression
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
Correlations
Collinearity
Statistics
B Std. Error Beta
Zero-
order Partial Part Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) .498 .349 1.427 .157
SL .383 .110 .322 3.482 .001 .615 .351 .258 .639 1.565
OC .526 .100 .486 5.255 .000 .680 .493 .389 .639 1.565
a. Dependent Variable: JS
TABLE 5.6.1 Model Summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted
R
Square
Std.
Error of
the
Estimate
Change Statistics
Durbin-
Watson
R
Square
Change
F
Change df1 df2
Sig. F
Change
1 .727a .529 .518 .58296 .529 48.283 2 86 .000 2.034
a. Predictors: (Constant), OC, SL
b. Dependent Variable: JS
TABLE 5.6.2: Anova
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 32.818 2 16.409 48.283 .000b
Residual 29.227 86 .340
Total 62.045 88
39
TABLE 5.6.3: Running regression assuming moderating impact of SL on relationship
between OC and JS
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients t Sig.
Correlations Collinearity
Statistics
B Std.
Error Beta
Zero-
order Partial Part Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 1.189 0.305 3.9 0
OC 0.736 0.085 0.68 8.653 0 0.68 0.68 0.68 1 1
2
(Constant) 0.498 0.349 1.427 0.157
OC 0.526 0.1 0.486 5.255 0 0.68 0.493 0.389 0.639 1.565
SL 0.383 0.11 0.322 3.482 0.001 0.615 0.351 0.258 0.639 1.565
3
(Constant) -
0.177 1.066 -0.17 0.868
OC 0.749 0.346 0.692 2.161 0.034 0.68 0.228 0.16 0.054 18.603
SL 0.58 0.314 0.489 1.846 0.068 0.615 0.196 0.137 0.079 12.704
OCXSL -
0.063 0.094 -0.337 -0.67 0.504 0.711 -0.073 -0.05 0.022 45.729
5.7: Analysis and Findings
5.7.1: Multiple Regression
Multiple regression results indicate a positive and significant impact of Supportive Leadership
and Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction. For example, Supportive Leadership with
ß=0.32, t=3.4, and p=0.001 has a positive impact on Job Satisfaction. Similarly, Organizational
Commitment with ß=0.48, t=5.2, and p=0.000 has a positive impact on Job Satisfaction. The
entire model had an F value of 48.3 at 0.001 significance level. The value of R2=0.51 proved a
model fit according to our satisfaction with Durbin Watson value of 2.03 and Variance Inflation
Factor (VIF) at 1.56 level and Tolerance level of 0.639 to prove that multi collinearity problem
did not exist in the data.
40
5.7.2: Regression for the Moderating Effect
In this research, Baron and Kenny (1986) method was used to check for a moderating role of
Supportive Leadership in the relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job
Satisfaction. According to Baron and Kenny (1986), a typical moderating or interaction effect of
regression equation could be depicted as:
Y = bo + b1x1 + b2x2 + b3 (x1 x x2) + µ
This required stepwise regression that first regressed Job Satisfaction with Organizational
Commitment in the first step. Then Job Satisfaction was regressed with Supportive Leadership in
the second step, and in the end, the product of Organizational Commitment and Supportive
Leadership was used as a variable to check for a possible impact on Job Satisfaction.
For moderating effect to take place, two conditions have to be met: First, in the
moderating model (typically, Model 3) the beta values of independent and moderating variables
must increase from the previous model (typically, Model 2), and show significant levels. Second,
the interaction effect must result in a reverse beta sign (compared with previous, Model 2) and
show significant levels. If only one of the above conditions are met, the moderation would be
termed as partial or quasi-moderation.
As we run the moderating regression in Model 3, we observe the beta-value of
Organizational Commitment increases from (earlier Model 2 levels) 0.52 to 0.74 with a p-value
of 0.034. Similarly, the beta-value of Supportive Leadership increases from 0.38 to 0.58 at a p-
value of 0.068 (significant at 10% level). On the other hand, the interaction effect of
41
Organizational Commitment and Supportive Leadership shows a reverse beta sign of -0.337 and
t-value of -0.67 but at an insignificant level (p=0.50). All this indicates a quasi or partial
moderation effect. Thus in this study, Supportive Leadership plays a partial moderating role in
the relationship between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction.
Hypothesis Findings
H1# Organizational Commitment is directly
related to the Job satisfaction.
Supported
H2# Supportive Leadership is directly related
to the Job satisfaction.
Supported
H3# Supportive Leadership plays a moderating
role in the relationship between Organizational
Commitment and Job satisfaction.
Partially Supported: A Partial/Quasi
Moderating Impact was noted
42
CHAPTER 6
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1: Discussion
Hence, the overall results indicate a direct, independent effect of Supportive Leadership
and Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction. This is supported by strong correlation
coefficients that exist between these variables. This is also checked by running regression tests
among these variables that proved a significant impact of Supportive Leadership and
Organizational Commitment on the Job Satisfaction when taken as independent variables.
This research also proved a partial-moderating impact of Supportive Leadership between
Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction. Partial correlation tests provide some clue to
our finding where controlling for either of JS, SL and OC, one does not observe reduce strength
and significance of correlation coefficients between variables in their mutual relationships.
From the above, we found out that Supportive Leadership and Organizational
Commitment are independent variables impacting on Job Satisfaction, and further there is a
partial-moderating impact of Supportive Leadership on the relationship between Organizational
Commitment and Job Satisfaction.
6.2: Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to explore the nature of relationship carried by Supportive
Leadership and Organizational Commitment with Job Satisfaction. The results found a positive
43
independent impact of both variables on Job Satisfaction. Due to the fact that results found
partial- moderating impact of Supportive Leadership in link between Organizational
Commitment and Job Satisfaction, it can be interpreted that all interactions had a natural
correlation as well as impact on each other
.
6.3: Management Implication and Recommendation
It suggests that under the context studied for this research, top management needs to put
importance on both Supportive Leadership and Organizational Commitment as independent and
interactive initiatives to enhance Job Satisfaction.
6.4: Limitation
There are many limitations of this research. First most central limitation is that the
sample size was small and the institutions on which the survey is being conducted were first two
organizations. However, More than two institutions could be selected in future by increasing the
sample size. The research can also be conducted on other sectors except educational institutions
like industrial sector, banking, commercial sector, health sector etc.
44
APPENDIX
QUESTIONNAIRE
I am a student of Air University BBA-8, conducting a survey to analyze the ‘Impact of
Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction under the Moderating Conditions of Supportive
Leadership.’
Your Gender:
1. Male 2. Female
Your Industry Type:
1. Service
2. Manufacturing
3. Retail
Your Work Status
1. Senior Executive/Manager
2. Junior Executive
3. Staff
Organization Size (Number of People):
1. 1-30 2. 31-60 3. More than 60
Your Age (years):
1. 20-30 2. 31-40 3. 41-50
4. Above 50
45
Organizational commitment
Strongly
disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly
agree
5
1. I would be happy to spend the
rest of my career with this
organization
2. I enjoy discussing about my
work and organization within my
social circle
3. I really feel as if problems of this
organization are my own
4. I feel like ‘part of the family’
within this organization
5. This organization has a great deal
of personal meaning to me
6. I feel sense of moral obligation to
stay in this organization
7. I think I would not leave my
organization even if I get a
better offer elsewhere
8. I have emotional, social, and
economic attachment to this
organization
46
Supportive Leadership Scale
Strongly
disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly
agree
5
1. My supervisor motivates me to
handle challenging situations
and goals
2. My supervisor encourages me
to improve vital aspects of my
personality
3. My supervisor guides me to
think clearly about my career
aspirations
4. My supervisor motivates me for
hard work and performance
5. My supervisor trusts my
abilities as well as my character
6. My supervisor regularly
provides me with feedback on
my performance
7. My supervisor expects reason
and justification of my
decisions and actions
8. My supervisor expects me face
hurdles and challenges in my
tasks
9. My supervisors expects me to
take initiatives in difficult and
risky situations
47
Job Satisfaction
Strongly
disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly
agree
5
1. I feel fairly satisfied with my
present job
2. In most days, I am excited about
my work
3. Work is interesting and absorbs
my complete attention
4. I find real enjoyment in my work
5. I consider my work to be very
pleasant
6. I am fairly satisfied with my
working environment
7. My training and experience in
this job has enhanced my abilities
and skill
8. The tasks in my job are
interesting and challenging
9. My colleagues in this job are
courteous and supportive
48
REFERENCES
Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1990).The measurement of antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization.Journal of Occupational Psychology. 63, 1-18.
Baltes, B. B., Briggs, T. E., Huff, J. W., Wright, J. A., &Neuman, G. A. (1999). Flexible and
compressed workweek schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on work-related criteria.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 496-513.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). ‘The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.’ Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 1173–1182.
Bass B. M. &Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full Range of Leadership Development: Manual for the
Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire. California: Mind Garden Inc.
Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (1994).Looking for leadership: Another search party’s report.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(1), 77.
Bryman, A. (1993). Charisma and leadership in organizations. Some neglected issues.
Leadership Quarterly, 4 (3/4), 289-304.
Burke, R. J., &Greenglass, E. R. (1999).Work-life congruence and work-life concerns among
nursing staff. Canadian Journal of Nursing Leadership, 12 (2), 21-29.
49
Chiu, W. C. K., & Ng, C. W. (1999). Women-friendly HRM and organizational commitment: A
study among women and men of organizations in Hong Kong. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72, 485-502.
Covin, J.G., &Slevin D.P. (1988), ‘The influence of organization structure on the utility of an
entrepreneurial top management style’, Journal of Management Studies, 25(3), 217-34.
Daft, R. L. (2005). The leadership experience. (3rd Ed). Toronto: Thompson South Western.
Davidson, M.J. and Cooper, C.L. (1992), Shattering the Glass Ceiling: The Woman Manager,
Paul Chapman, London.
De Cieri, H., Holmes, B., Abbott, J. and Pettit, T. (2002), “Work life balance strategies: progress
and problems in Australian organizations”, Working Paper 58/02, Monash University, Victoria,
November.
Deluga, R. J. (1995). Relationship of transformational and transactional leadership with
employee influencing strategies. Leaders and the leadership process: Readings, self-assessments
and applications. IL: Austin Press.
Dumdum, U. R., Lowe, K. B. &Avolio, B. J. (2002).A meta-analysis of transformational and
transactional leadership correlates of effectiveness and satisfaction: An update and extension. In
B. J. Avolio&F.J.Yammarino (eds.), Transformational and Charismatic leadership: The road
ahead, 2, 35-66.Oxford, U.K: Elsevier Sciences.
Falkenberg, L. and Monachello, M. (1990). Dual career and dual income families: Do they have
different needs?” Journal of Business Ethics, 9(4-5), 339-351.
50
Farris, G. C. & Lim, F. G. Jr. (1969). Effects of performance on leadership influence,
satisfaction, and subsequent performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 490-7.
Forster, N. (1999), “Another glass ceiling? The experiences of women professionals
andmanagers on international assignments”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 6, pp. 79-90.
Frone, M.R., Yardley, J.K. and Markel, K.S. (1997), “Developing and testing an integrative
modelof the work-family interface”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 50, pp. 145-67.
Furnham, A., Petrides, K.V., Tsaosis, I., Pappas, K. and Garrod, D. (2005), “A cross-cultural
investigation into the relationships between personality traits and work values”, The Journal of
Psychology, Vol. 139, pp. 5-32.
Greene, C. N. (1975). The reciprocal nature of influence between leader and subordinate.Journal
of Applied Psychology, 60, 187-193.
Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., Donnelly J.H. Jr&Konopaske, R. (2009). Organizations:
Behavior, Structure, Processes, Thirteenth Edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M. & Donnelly, J. H. (2000). Organizations: Behavior, structure,
processes. 10th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Goldberg, W. A., Greenberger, E., Koch-Jones, J., O’Neil, R., & Hamill, S. (1989).
Attractiveness of child care and related employer-supported benefits and policies to married and
single parents.Child and Youth Care Quarterly, 18, 23-37.
Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., Singh, R., &Parasuraman, S. (1997). Work and family
influences on departure from public accounting.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 249-270.
51
Grover, S. L., & Crooker, K. J. (1995). Who appreciates family-responsive human resource
policies: The impact of family-friendly policies on the organizational attachment of parents and
non-parents. Personnel Psychology, 48, 271-288.
Grzywacz, J.G., & Marks, N.F (2000).Conceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological
perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family.Journal
of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 111-126.
Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., &Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work-
family conflict.Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(4), 560-568. doi:510.1037/0021-
9010.1076.1034.1560.
Hemphill, J. K. & Coons, A. E. (1957). Development of the leader behavior description
questionnaire.In R. Stogdill and A. Coons, (Eds.,), Leader Behavior: Its Description and
Measurement. Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research.
House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness.Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16, 321-338.
House, R. J. & Mitchell, T. R. (1974).Path-goal theory of leadership.Journal of Contemporary
Business, 3, 81-97.
Imtiaz, S.& Ahmed, M. S. (2009). The impact of stress on employee productivity,
performance and turn over: An important managerial issue. International Review of
Business Research Paper, 5(4), 468‐477.
Izraeli, D.N., Banai, M. and Zeira, Y. (1980), “Women executives in MNC subsidiaries”,
California Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 53-63
52
Jam, F. A., Akhtar, S., Inam, H., Rehman, M. A. &Hijazi, S. T. (2010). Impact of leader
behavior on employee job stress: Evidence form Pakistan. European Journal of Economics, 21,
172-179.
Janssens, M., Cappellen, T. and Zanoni, P. (2006), “Successful female expatriates as agents:
positioning oneself through gender, hierarchy, and culture”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 41
No. 2, pp. 133-48.
Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D., & Rosenthal, R.A. (1964). Organizational
Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Kossek, E. E., &Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction
relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior-Human Resources research.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 139-149.
LaRocco, J. M. & Jones, A. P. (1978). Co-worker and leader support as moderators of stress-
strain relationships in work situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(5), 629-634.
Lewis, S. and Cooper, C.L. (1999), “The work-family agenda in changing contexts”, Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 382-93..
Linehan, M. and Walsh, J.S. (1999), “senior female international managers: breaking the glass
border”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 14, pp. 264-72.
Linehan, M. and Scullion, H. (2001), “Challenges for female international managers: evidence
from Europe”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 16, pp. 215-28.
53
Lowin, A. & Craig, J. R. (1968). The influence of level of performance on managerial style: An
experimental object-lesson in the ambiguity of correlational data. Organizational behavior and
Human Performance, 3, 440-458.
Mowday, R., Porter, L., & Steers, R. (1982). Organizational linkages: the psychology of
commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mowday, R.T., Porters, L.W. & Steers, R.M. (1979).The Measurement of Organizational
Commitment.Journal of Motivational Behavior, 14.224-247.
Nelson, D. L., Quick, J. C., Hitt, M. A., &Moesel, D. (1990). Politics, lack of career progress,
and work/home conflict: Stress and strain for working women.Sex Roles, 23(3/4), 169-185.
Oluseyi, S. A. & Ayo, H. T. (2009). Influence of work motivation, leadership effectiveness and
time management on employees’ performance in some selected industries in Ibadan, Oyo State,
Nigeria. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, (16).
Orthner, D. K., & Pittman, J. F. (1986). Family contributions to work commitment.Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 48(3), 573-581.
Rafferty, A. E. & Griffin, M. A. (2006). Refining individualized consideration: Distinguishing
developmental leadership and supportive leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 79, 37–61.
Scandura, T. A., &Lankau, M. J. (1997).Relationships of gender, family responsibility and
flexible work hours to organizational commitment and job satisfaction.Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 18, 377-391.
54
Sharma, S.., Durand, R.M. and Gur-Arie, O. (1981). ‘Identification and analysis of moderator
variables,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 291-300
Tzeng, R. (2006), “Gender issues and family concerns for women with international careers”,
Women in Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 376-92.
Wayne, J. H., Musisca, N., &Fleeson, W. (2004).Considering the role of personality in the work-
life experience: Relationships of the big five to work-life conflict and facilitation.Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 108-130.
Wood, S. J., & de Menezes, L. (2008).Family-friendly management, organizational performance
and social legitimacy. Mimeo, Sheffield: Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield.
Work-life balance (2002). In, The Word Spy. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from
http://www.wordspy.com/words/work-lifebalance.asp
Youngblood, S., & Chambers-Cook, K. (1984). Child care assistance can improve employee
attitudes and behavior. Personnel Administrator, 29, 45-47.