exploring the relationship between participative organizational
TRANSCRIPT
Exploring the relationship between
participative organizational change
and employee satisfaction
Understanding the employee opinion about the influence of participation
in organizational change on employee satisfaction.
By Tom Aendenroomer Tilburg, August 2011
2
3
Master Thesis Organization Studies
Exploring the relationship between
participative organizational change
Understanding the employee opinion about the influence of participation
in organizational change on employee satisfaction.
Details of student
Name: T.C.W. Aendenroomer
ANR: S 193090
Names of the supervisors
Name supervisor: A. van der Zouwen PhD MCM
Name second reader: Drs. R. Pranger
Name of MTO evaluator: Drs. F.B. Tekle
Organization supervisor: Drs. P. van der Meulen
Title of the Master Thesis Circle
Interactive interventions for organizational change and learning.
Tilburg University
Department: Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Study: Organization Studies
Place and date: Tilburg, August 2011
4
5
‘Abstract’
Employee satisfaction has been linked to productivity, motivation, absenteeism and tardiness,
accidents, mental and physical health, and general life satisfaction (Landy, 1978). The number
of linkages may explain why employee satisfaction is one of the most extensively researched
subjects in Organizational Psychology (Judge & Church, 2000). Employee satisfaction refers
to employees' overall feelings about their jobs and is determined by feelings of specific job
aspects (Mueller & Kim, 2008). Measurements of employee satisfaction can be helpful in
identifying which specific aspects of a job require improvements (Kerber & Campbell, 1987).
Traditional research tools to measure the level of employee satisfaction do not take the
possible role of participation in organizational changes processes into account (BASAM,
1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011).
This research is an attempt to understand whether participation in organizational changes
should be taken into account anno 2011. This, since modern organizations often move in
turbulent environments and therefore organisational change is complex (Boonstra & Caluwé,
2007). Complex change processes and traditional top down change steering by management
have often not the expected and desired results (Boonstra, 2004b). Participation of
stakeholders in organizational change processes can be the solution (Zouwen, 2010), since
employees are important stakeholders in organizational change processes (Werkman et al,
2005) and change processes influence the employees of the organization on their turn
(Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010).
Since both job satisfaction and organizational change influence employees, a relation between
them is a logical possibility.
In order to explore this relationship, the following research question was posed:
Does participation of employees in organizational change influence the level of employee
satisfaction and if so, in what way are they related?
This research explored the relation of participation in change processes on employee
satisfaction, with use of multiple methods of data collection. Although employee satisfaction
is a temporary and personal state of mind of individual employees, this research found in a
modern organization evidence that participation in change processes influences the level of
employee satisfaction.
Key words: Employee satisfaction, Job satisfaction, Organizational change, participation in change processes
6
Table of Content (1)
I. Background Information…………………………………….………...….………..3
Abstract……………………………………………………...………….5
Table of Content……….……………………………...………………..6
II. Introduction………………..…..…………………………………………….……..8
I. Research problem……………………………………...….……………8
II. Aim and research question……………………………………………...9
III. Working Hypothesis……………………………………………..……10
III. Relevance……………………………………………..…………….....12
III. Theoretical Background………..................................................................………13
I. Employee satisfaction…………………………………………………13
II. Measuring employee satisfaction……………………………………..16
III. Employee satisfaction and organizational change…………...………..17
IV. Participative change………………………………………………..…18
V. Linking the concepts…………………………………………………..19
VI. Gaining access to, and researching at a public organization……….…20
IV. Research approach……………………………………………….……………….21
I. Research Design………………………………………………………21
Initial research design………………………….....…………..21
Actual research design………………………..……………….22
II. Data collection………………………………….…………..................23
III. Data Analysis……………………………………….……………...….27
IV. Sample strategy………………………………………..…………....…27
V. Research quality indicators………………………………….……...…29
7
Table of Content (2)
V. Findings………………………….....................................................................…..31
I. The Surveys……………………………………..………………….....31
II. The Card game……………………………………………………..….40
III. The Interviews………………………………………………………...41
VI. Conclusion………………………………...………………………….…………..47
I. Confirmation/Rejection of working hypothesis ……….……………..47
II. Answering the Research Question…………………...…….…………50
Participation as an instrument……..……………………..…..51
VII. Discussion…………………………….……………………………………….….54
VIII. Recommendations……………………………………….….…………………….58
Propositions……………………………...…………...…………...………......59
IX. Limitations………………………………….……….……………………………60
X. Personal reflection…………………………………………………………...……61
XI. References………………….……………………………………..……...……….62
XII. Appendices……………….……………………………………………….………67
I The survey………………………………...................................................…67
II Developing the survey……………………………………………..……….80
III Preliminary analysis of the surveys……………………………….……...104
IV The Cronbach dilemma……………..……………………………..…......104
V The card game……………………………………………………….....…116
VI The topic list for the interviews…………..............................................…117
VII The results of the interviews…………………………………...……..…118
VIII A summary of the research journal………………………...…………...122
8
II Introduction
The following chapter provides an introduction to this research. Subsequently, the research
problem, aim and research question, and the relevance will be introduced.
I. Research problem
A growing number of intervention methods used by change agents put an emphasise on the
importance of involving key stakeholders in the change process (Schruijer, 2006; Schruijer &
Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). Interactive and participative change
approaches developed since the 1980s and are commonly called ‘fourth generation
evaluation’ (Guba & Lincoln; Zouwen, 2010).
Research has shown that many traditional top-down processes did not deliver the desired
results because decision makers failed in attending to the interest of and information held by
key stakeholders (Bryson, 2003; Nutt, 2002; Zouwen, 2010). One of the key stakeholders in
change processes are the employees of the organization (Werkman et al, 2005). Although
many factors determine the productivity of employees for an organization, employee
satisfaction is especially important (Lock & Crawford, 1999). One of the positive things of a
high level of employee satisfaction for an organization is that employees are less absent and
intended to leave (Koys & Daniel, 2001). On top of this, there is a positive relationship
between employee satisfaction and job performance (Jones, 2006).
In the literature, participative change approaches are mostly treated as an instrument to
establish organizational change and may improve the outcomes of the process (Schruijer &
Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). So, if the participation of employees, as an
instrument in organizational change, should not be ignored nowadays one could argue that
employee participation could have an effect on the employee satisfaction of those employees
as well. This research will not treat participation in organizational change as an instrumental
to change something, but focusses on what participation in change means to employees of
organizations.
Assuming there was a lot of literature available about the relation between the two variables,
the quest to find an unexplored niche to make a relevant contribution had started. Therefore, it
was remarkable to ascertain that the ISI Web of Science and Tilburg University database did
not hold any previously done study about the relation between participative change and
employee or job satisfaction. Insights in this check can be found on page nineteen of this
thesis.
9
That no scientific publications were found is remarkable, especially because Patterson et al
(2010) found out that employee autonomy and control does have a positive influence on job
satisfaction. Since collective employee autonomy and control in change process have
cohesion with participative change it may be that some research is lacking on this topic.
This combined with a literature exploration for non-reviewed or non-scientific articles with
use of Google, which delivered two papers that say there is a significant influence of
participation in change and job satisfaction (Gomes, 2009; McMillan, 2009) a gap in the
scientific literature is revealed.
Therefore this thesis is an attempt to understand if participation of employees in
organizational change processes does influence the level of employee satisfaction?
If the answer to this question would be: Yes it does, current employee satisfaction
measurement kits (BASAM, 1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011) would be incomplete and may
be even invalid to measure the level of employee satisfaction in organizations which deal with
complex change processes nowadays. If the answer to this question would be: No it doesn’t,
the field of Organizational Change has the knowledge that higher employee satisfaction isn’t
a positive side effect of a participative change intervention.
Irrespectively towards the answer on the research question, there is an interest in
understanding the relation between participation in change processes and employee
satisfaction.
II. Aim and research question
The aim of this research is to understand one possible side effect of a participative change
intervention better and to check whether traditional employee satisfaction measurement tools
need revision. In some situations, participative change approaches have known benefits
(Zouwen, 2010). It may be that there are also has some currently unknown benefits, or maybe
even disadvantages. Since there is reason to assume that participation in change processes
may be a determinant of employee satisfaction (Gomes, 2009; McMillan, 2009), this should
be revealed.
In order to understand what determines employee satisfaction, existing literature is used to
understand the traditional factors that influence this dependent variable. As described in the
theoretical background section on nineteen of this thesis, existing scientific research does not
take participation of employees in organizational change into account as an independent
variable. Since no traces can be found that participation in organizational change is ever
considered as a possible determinant for employee satisfaction in questionnaires,
10
understanding if this is actually a lack or absence, is the goal of this research. If a relation
exists, the how, when and why questions will be addressed.
Another initial scope of this research is to make a first step in unravelling an “optimal”
strategy of change for employee satisfaction by questioning employees, since there is a
positive relationship between employee satisfaction and job performance (Jones, 2006).
This research explored the relation of participation in change processes on employee
satisfaction using multiple methods of data collection at a public service organization. This
will be explained in depth in the research approach section of this research.
The aim of the research as presented above lead to the following central research question:
Does participation of employees in organizational change influence the level of employee
satisfaction and if so, in what way are they related?
The conceptual model is developed to clarify the research question, as shown in figure one
below.
Figure one “conceptual model”
III. Working hypothesis
To guide the research process the next working hypothesis were developed:
I. Participation of employees in organizational change increases the level of employee
satisfaction.
Participation of employees in organizational change processes leads to decisions
based on common ground. Lack of common ground leads to resistance to change and
furthermore it stimulates employees to cooperate. Top down change approaches may
create a feeling of subordination, while more participative approaches may create
better cohesion about the goals of the organizational change. Therefore, more
participation in of employees in organizational changes processes is likely to have a
positive influence on the level of employee satisfaction.
Participation of employees
in organizational change
Employee satisfaction
11
II. Employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes
have a lower level of employee satisfaction.
Employees that faced a lot of top down changes in the past are fed up with the
execution of tasks they don’t support. This in combination with the lack of autonomy
in decision making makes employees less satisfied with their work.
III. Employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes
need a more participative strategy of change (Werkman, 2006 as elaborated on
page 11) to be satisfied, as employees who already had the opportunity to
participate in past changes.
Employees who could deliver non or a narrow contribution to previous organizational
changes are not satisfied with a minor role in the change process. In order to be
satisfied, they need the feeling they are in “self” control.
IV. The task of the employee has no influence on the strength of the relation elaborated in
the first three working hypothesis.
It doesn’t matter if an employee for example has IT- or law related tasks, for the
influence of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction. It may be that
IT employees for example have higher employee satisfaction in general, but
discovering that is not the intention of this research. Expectation is that IT employees
do not rate participation in organizational change as more important for their level of
employee satisfaction, simply since they develop information and communication
technology instead of organizational policy.
V. There is a hierarchy within the factors that determine employee satisfaction.
No specific factor hypothesis will be given, but some factors are expected to be more
important than others. Not only that, but if for example the salary is at the minimum
level the employee doesn’t think that more autonomy is important for his level of
employee satisfaction. First, the wage should be increased. This is comparable with
the ideas of Maslow (1943) which will be discussed in the Theoretical Framework of
this thesis. Purpose of this working hypothesis is to explore what the place of
participation in organizational change has in this hierarchy.
12
IV. Relevance
The scientific relevance of this study lies in the lack of knowledge about the relationship
between participative change and employee satisfaction that was found after a literature
exploration as conducted on page nineteen. This knowledge is interesting for the field of
Organizational Change, Organizational Psychology and Human Resource Management. The
research gives more insights in the way of thinking of employees and what level of
participation in change they prefer. For the field of Organizational Change the results give
new insight in a possible side effects of Participative Change approaches.
Furthermore, this research opens possibilities for future research. Combining the different
ways of looking to participative change in a paradigm or investigating the hierarchy of job
demands are two options where this research could be helpful. In the final section of this
paper, propositions for future research will be given.
The practical relevance of this study for organisations, and government or public
organizations in particular, is a better understanding of the importance of employee
participation in change processes. Why respondents of this study are selected at a public
organization will be explained on page twenty.
Furthermore, the results of this research could bring new reasons for management to make use
of the Participative Change methods. The organization of study liked to have a clear picture of
the determinants.
At last, organizations are interested in keeping their employees satisfied (Koys & Daniel,
2001), since studies suggest that employee satisfaction plays a primary role in helping
companies achieve financial goals (Koys, 2003).
13
III Theoretical background
The following chapter gives a literature exploration of the concepts relevant for this study.
I. Employee satisfaction as a complex concept and it’s different mind-sets over time.
From Taylor towards Herzberg and further.
Today, for most employees in the Western world the times of hard-core Scientific
Management as introduced by Taylor (1911), are behind them. Rational efficiency, without
efficient working employees, may not be that efficient after all (Pruijt, 1997). In times were
Social Capital theories are rising (Hooghe & Stolle, 2003), social support and participation
are essential elements for organizations to gain legitimacy and use worker resources in an
efficient way (Fine, 2001). Hasle and Møller (2007) suggest that in spite of a highly
Taylorized work system, a better psychosocial work environment can be attained by a
goal-oriented effort to create better working relations and by preventing conflicts. Groups
with more social capital found out to have higher job satisfaction at both the individual and
the workplace level (Søndergaard et al, 2007). Several definitions of employee satisfaction
can be found in the literature. Even seemingly different concepts like; work/job satisfaction
and work/job attitudes are used sometimes as synonyms for employee satisfaction.
In this research employee satisfaction will be broadly defined as: “a pleasurable or positive
emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences” (Locke,
1976, p.1300).
Locke (1976) argues that appraisal of employee satisfaction should fulfil a central role.
Appraisal, sometimes referred to as: evaluation, prediction or rating makes knowing more
about employee satisfaction more meaningful (Berings & Steen, 2004). In research, many
different types of measuring employee satisfaction are used.
The field is born with Hawthorne
One of the early studies on employee behaviour are the Hawthorne Studies (Mayo, 1933).
This research elaborates the reactivity of employees in response to the fact that they are being
studied, despite the fact that there is no other experimental stimulus. Although some scientist
are critical about the way in which the experiment is done (Levitt & List, 2011), it is a first
attempt to understand the effects of employee feelings and behaviour.
14
Maslow and his need fulfilment
According to Maslow (1943), there are five needs who determine behaviour and lead to
satisfaction. With this theory Maslow tries to explain why humans act the way they do. The
result is a hierarchy of needs. Every human has needs, which he or she will try to fulfil. At the
base of the pyramid are physiological needs like health, food and sleep. When this need is
fulfilled safety, like shelter, becomes an important issue. On top of that belongings become a
need. Belongings are not necessarily materialistic, love and being part of a group are even
more important belongings. Then self-esteem and recognition are needs which a human will
try to fulfil. If all other needs are fulfilled the individual will try to achieve individual
potential, called self-actualisation. Maslow’s theory is not only important for the development
of the behavioural sciences, but has also been an important inspiratory for this research. The
existence of a hierarchy in employee satisfaction determinants will be explored, with special
attention to the possible place of participation in organizational change in this pyramid.
Herzberg’s factors
Forthcoming out of this, is the two factor theory of Herzberg (1959), inspired by the pyramid
of Maslow (1954). Herzberg (1959) adapts this hierarchy to employee satisfaction by making
a distinction between satisfiers/motivators and dissatisfiers (Mullins, 1995). Achievement,
recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement and growth are labelled as satisfiers
where company policy, supervision, relation with boss, work conditions, salary and
relationship with pears are possible dissatisfiers (Herzberg, 1959). If, for example, salary
scales are approved as fine by employees, this in itself will not lead to satisfied employees but
only creates a neutral state of mind (Mullins, 1995). The satisfier achievement for example,
does make employees more satisfied. Although the research by Herzberg (1959) may look
aged today, another study by Kovach (1987) showed that employers think they know what
motivates their employees, but practice has shown that this is often not the case.
Vroom’s expectations
Another leading theory in the field of employee satisfaction studies is the Expectancy Theory
(Vroom, 1964). The core idea of this theory is about that humans will decide to behave or act
in a certain way because they are motivated to select a specific behavior over other behavior
due to the expected results of that selected behavior. This means that the motivation of the
behavior selection will be determined by the desirability of the outcome. Vroom (1964) states
that the theory is about the cognitive process in the human brain about ranking different
15
motivational elements, and therefore not the desirability of the outcome solely, in decision
making.
The characteristic job of Hackman and Oldham
The Job Characteristics model is a widely spread model about five core factors that determine
employee satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy, and feedback are expected to impact the state of mind of an
employee. According to Hackman & Oldham (1976), not every employee rewards the
individual core factors as equally important and a combination of fulfilled factors lead to
higher employee satisfaction. This framework is especially important for this research, for
more reasons. Firstly, because working hypothesis five on page eleven is about understanding
about a more common hierarchy of factors, like Maslow (1943) which is not supported by the
Job Characteristic model. Secondly, because the five core factors do not at all exclude
“Participation in change processes” from being a determinant of employee satisfaction, since
the x-variable of this research may find its origin in core variable autonomy and task identity.
Salancik & Pfeffer’s social processes
Opinion, information and behavior of others influences people’s perception (Salancik &
Pfeffer (1978). The Social Information Processing theory states that social information is used
to make value judgments. Satisfaction is a continuous comparison of the individual with
others. This interesting theory undermines all working hypothesis, or not? This will be
discussed in depth, in the discussion section of this thesis.
Solomon’s opponent
According to Solomon (1980), for high satisfaction levels are continuously new stimuli
necessary. Employees and humans in general, become “spoiled” over time. Solomon states
that emotions are opposite pairs. Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction is such a pair, but this theory
has not much in common with Herzberg (1959). When the incentive satisfaction is triggered
by, for example, the possibility to modestly participate in the organizational change of the
employee’s organization. The next time a modestly participation style will not be good
enough for the employee to be satisfied. This theory is in contrast with working hypothesis
three on page eleven and will be addressed in the discussion section on page fifty-five of the
paper.
16
The employee satisfaction theories combined
When studying employee satisfaction became clear that a lot of cumulative, but also
contradictive theories exist. Employee satisfaction as a concept, is hard to distinguish from
motivation. Motivation is seen as a positive attitude of people towards their work (Veen,
Alblas & Geersing, 1991). Motivation is another concept which struggles with different views
and perspectives developed in the literature over the years. Only salary as motivation for
employees may be appropriate in the rational economic days (Taylor, 1911), today’s
employees need a bit more to stay motivated (Pruijt, 1997). Over the years, social capital
theories have emphasized the importance of social support and participation (Hasle & Møller
(2007). It is important to understand what drives employee satisfaction, since satisfied
employees work better, are less absent and will not leave the organization that much as
dissatisfied employees (Koys & Daniel, 2001).
II. Measuring employee satisfaction
During the literature search it became clear that there are many tools to measure employee
satisfaction. Therefore it was disappointing that it is really difficult to gain access to one.
Almost all employee satisfaction measurements, mostly surveys are protected.
Nevertheless, three existing surveys could be secured. Firstly, a basic, traditional
questionnaire about employee satisfaction named BASAM; Basis Vragenlijst Amsterdam
(Biessen, 1993), was used. The basic questionnaire was supplemented with scales of a more
integral EDMK survey; Extended Delft Measurement Kit (Roe et all, 2000). Because
BASAM and EDMK are more traditional surveys, some new scales were borrowed from
IVA; Tilburg Institute for Social Policy Research and Consultancy (Smeenk, 2007), a
colleague of Tilburg University. Property right prohibited the use of the whole IVA survey.
The actual survey and the way it’s structure is build is displayed in appendix I on page sixty-
seven and appendix II on page eighty.
The multi-question concepts used in the survey will be briefly described below:
All concepts below are about the respondent’s perception or need fulfilment and not
about the actual meaning and content of the concept.
Job content is about the tasks an employee has to execute. Although three different
departments were researched en compared, it is not focus what the differences in content are
but only if they result in a difference in the level employee satisfaction.
Salary & reward are about the material compensation an individual employee receives for its
efforts for the company. No actual values are given, only focus on perception of respondent.
17
Atmosphere and co-workers concerns a social preferable working environment.
Career and training opportunities are about the perception of the possibilities for an
employee to develop him- or herself for the future. Again, it is not about the actual
opportunities, the perception and therefore satisfaction is focus of study.
Work conditions addresses issues concerning safety, health and welfare during work.
Information & communication are about the satisfaction with all kinds of communication
within the organization. It is more about the actual stream of information then the technology
behind it. In other words, how satisfied is the respondent in general with the processing of the
classic Sender-Receiver theory during work, as displayed in figure two.
Figure two:
Visualization of the sender-receiver theory
http://condor.depaul.edu/dsimpson/pers/~wp0001.JPG
Acknowledgment is about the state or quality the employee feels being recognized by co-
workers and management.
Commitment refers to the degree an employee feels connected to the organization. Devotion
and dedication towards the organization’s “wellbeing”, without direct, accountable
declaration.
III. Employee satisfaction and organizational change
Employee satisfaction is also important in organizational change processes. Researchers
discovered that a misfit between humans, besides a structural, cultural and systemically
misfit, is one of the origins of organizational change failure (Boonstra, 2004b). Scientists who
approach organisations as open systems, add to this that the organisation is also continuously
influenced by its environment (Woodword, 1959; Boroş, 2009). The topic of change failure is
of significant importance since over seventy percent of the change processes in the
Netherlands do not have the desired outcome(s) (Boonstra, 2004a).
So, due to both internal and external influences, organisations face problems of multiple
dimensions and ambiguity, inherent dynamics and unpredictability (Delden, 2009). Change
agents often ignore these multidimensional problems and fail to come up with an integrated
solution (Boonstra & Caluwé, 2007). Employees are important stakeholders in the
organization (Schruijer & Vansina, 2004) not involving stakeholders may lead, among others,
in resistance to change. Resistance to change is one of the most common causes of change
failure (Boonstra, 2004b).
18
IV. Participative change
As discussed in the problem section of this thesis, a growing number of intervention methods
is aware of the need for an integrated solution were key stakeholders are involved (Schruijer,
2006; Schruijer & Vansina, 2004; Bryson, 2003; Zouwen, 2010). These methods have a place
within social capital thinking (Hooghe & Stolle, 2003; Zouwen, 2010) and have elements of
participation by stakeholders. In this research, participative change is broadly defined as: a
whole range of approaches and methods with a certain degree of interactivity and
diversity of stakeholders (Zouwen, 2010).
Within change approaches the level of participation by stakeholders varies. Werkman (2006)
states that the change capacity depends on the change strategy that is used by the change
agent. In figure three below, different change strategies are connected with participation
levels and the development of change capacity.
Figure three: Change strategies and development of change capacity;
a table from van der Zouwen (2010; pp. 54,)based on Werkman (2006)
With every next level of participation, certain obligations for employees arise as well. The
Power strategy, which is a top-down approach has opposite characteristics as the Interactive
strategy, which is a bottom-up approach. This range of participation is used to understand the
influence of different participative change levels on employee satisfaction.
In this way, more information about a possible ‘optimal’ level of participation in change for
satisfied employees is found.
This research only measures what level of participation leads to what level of employee
satisfaction. There is no focus on the development of change capacity itself, the third line in
figure three.
19
Although the power of participative change approaches is in combining multiple stakeholders,
for this research the employees, as key stakeholders, are subject of study.
The employees are questioned about what they understand as participation and what level of
participation in change satisfies them most. Results were schematized and the working
hypothesis are answered by comparing the different opinions. This, to prevent a bias like the
one that is visualized in figure four below.
Figure four:
a cartoon by
Mark de Koning;
a figure from
van der Zouwen (2010; pp. 16)
V. Linking the concepts
Deliberately if the answer to the research question will be yes,… or no, ….. participation of
employees in organizational change and employee satisfaction are not such a strange couple
to research after all. Like discussed in the problem section of this research, it was remarkable
that no scientific literature about the influence of participative change was found after
conducting the steps that are described on figure five below.
Literature collection Literature selection
Databases “Search term” AND “search term”
ABI/Inform
Catalogue UvT
JSTOR,
ISI Web of Science,
Online Contents Book articles UvT
Online Contents Journal articles
UvT
Google Scholar (journals only)
participation
participation
participative
Employee satisfaction
Employee satisfaction
Employee satisfaction
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction
Work satisfaction
Work satisfaction
Work satisfaction
change
change
change
participation
change
participation
change
participation
Figure five “literature study”
The literature part of the research linked the two concepts hypothetically and theoretically
together. The last part of the theoretical framework will study the organization where the
actual research took place. Consecutively, the methodological framework will explain witch
steps were made to find out if employee participation in change processes has an influence on
employee satisfaction practise, and therefore deserves a place in upcoming literature.
20
VI. Gaining access to, and researching at a public organization
The actual name of the organization will not be mentioned, this was a constraint in order to
research that particular organization. Preferably the name of the organization was published,
but doing research is also a matter negotiating to gain access to an organization. Sometimes a
concession needs to be done.
From September onwards, the privately held organization Organise2Learn was contacted.
This organization was enthusiastic about the research proposal and was willing to cooperate.
They would arrange access to their clients, schools, to conduct the research. Unfortunately,
due to un-clarified, internal reasons they suddenly stopped the cooperation in February. This
was problematic for the continuation of the research.
Luckily, the researcher’s father’s network had a connection who was possibly willing to
cooperate in a scientific research. This public organization operating in a turbulent
environment with many organizational changes would be very suitable to conduct the
research. Since the connection was a member of the management team and the appearance of
favoritism should be avoided, many presentations followed to convince all stakeholders of the
importance of this research for the organization. For this reason, a whole employee
satisfaction research is done and not only the relevant items to answer the research question.
The next paragraph will briefly explains briefly the history, structure, tasks and goals of the
organization.
Although the organization is only founded in January 2002, it is a merger of several
organizations who existed since the 1960’s. In 2004 the organization had 22.900 employees,
since 2004 this drastically reduced due to budget cuttings (nu.nl, 2004). Even the supervisor
of the organization couldn’t give the exact number of employees.
Employees at the studied organization are familiar with organizational changes. The
organization is deliberately, obligatory and actively engaged to fit in the turbulent
environment, this to meet the demands of stakeholders.
This public organization is responsible for the execution of several insurances. The
headquarters in Amsterdam develops the policy for all departments true the Netherlands. Due
to its former bureaucratic structure, reorganization and continuous changes from upper hand
this organization seems an interesting starting point for investigating the influence of
participation in change on employee satisfaction. The departments that are focus of this study
are localized at the headquarters. All three departments together have approximately 200
employees, including management. Why the three departments are selected will be discussed
in the data collection section on page twenty-three of this thesis.
21
IV. Research approach
The following chapter gives a description of the way in which the research is done. Within the
methodological framework choices are mentioned and explained. Subsequently, the quality
indicators of this research are given.
I. Research Design
Initial design
The design of the study was in the first place a multiple case study design. Three departments
of one organization were studied. Multiple cases allow the researcher to capture possible
moderating or mediating variables on the relation which were not considered on forehand.
The choice to study one organization is mainly because of time constraints. Gaining access to
an organization is a time consuming activity and a substitute to compare different cases is
found. The three departments are so different that they are almost an organization on it selves
and in this way variations can still be compared. Results about the extent participation in
change (X) has an influence on employee satisfaction (Y) was compared for the three
departments.
A case study design is appropriate for in depth investigating of how a variable is related to
another (Yin, 2003; Baker, 1999) and ideal to develop new theory (Eisenhardt, 1989). The
three cases were selected to investigate if there are differences, and not because differences
are expected on forehand.
Furthermore, the research question will be answered by asking employee opinions about the
importance of participation in change and not investigating directly it’s influence on
employee satisfaction. Therefore the research is not based on cases who did a participative
change project and who didn’t. Measurement would be complex since success levels and time
after the intervention probably have a major moderating or even mediating role. The research
design is developed to measure the employee opinion about the satisfaction with the level of
participation in organizational changes. Furthermore, the general employee satisfaction will
be measured. In a later stage, participation satisfaction and employee satisfaction will be
compared and searched for deviations.
Broadly and in other words, it is tested if employees who are satisfied with the level of
participation in organizational change processes are more satisfied with their work in general.
22
Some elements of an cyclical action research project (Riel, 2007) are present. Results are
cumulated and follow up on each other. Several cycles are followed to answer the research
question.
In the first cycle, questionnaires are spread to the respondents of the three departments, then
results were analysed and possible differences between departments were distinguished.
These results are the base for the second cycle, during the interviews the questionnaires
results are discussed and respondents were asked to give any enlightening comments of how
and why they think the results are the way they are. The results found in cycle one will be
researched in depth and may be confirmed or rejected.
Actual research design
An adaptation to the initial research design was necessary. This because scales of the
questionnaires were not reliable enough to extract rich data as correlation and regression
analysis (Vocht, 2004). This will be elaborated in the results section of this paper. Only
individual items could be compared for the departments. This was a problem since nothing
could be said about the strength of the effect. A conclusion whether participation in
organizational changes has an effect on the level of employee satisfaction, but no results
about the strength and way of the relation would be a bit poor for a master thesis. To make
sure data can be obtained about the strength and way of the effect an adaptation to the
research design was made after the first cycle of surveys. This adaptation meant the
introduction of an experimental card game, which is more broadly elaborated in the data
collection section of this chapter.
The survey used in this research is based on existing questionnaires (BASAM, 1993; EDMK,
2000; IVA, 2011). A new developed scale to measure participation in change processes is
added and some extra items on request of the studied organization were introduced. The
origin of all questions is elaborated in Appendix II of this thesis on page eighty.
The respondents for the interviews are selected by a process called hermeneutic circling
(Guba & Lincoln, 1989). The process is explained in depth at the paragraph data collection.
This process begins with an open-ended interview with one employee of each department.
This respondent is asked to nominate a second respondent who he thinks may have a totally
other opinion about the spoken subjects. The goal of the whole process is to derive an
evaluative construction of the program’s impact which is both agreed upon by the various
stakeholders, and it is “informed” and “sophisticated,” (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).
23
Besides this, the research design is inspired by the naturalistic inquiry method (Erlandson,
1993). In Naturalistic Inquiry, just as in Action research projects, it is essential to involve
members of the practice under study in the research process from the very beginning
(Zouwen, 2010; Erlandson, et al., 1993; Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Patton, 2001).
The elements of an action research have a certain cohesion with the ideas of Adema (2010) in
(Van der Zouwen, 2010). Adema (2010) suggests that sending a standardized quantitative
questionnaire to a larger group of respondents and complete the research with qualitative open
interviews as validation of the results as an appropriate research design.
II. Data collection
The unit of analysis is on the department level and the organizational level. The unit of
observation will be employees of the departments within the organization. The data will be
collected at one organization, due to time- and accessibility constraints in public
organizations. Multiple departments are chosen to still be able to analyse possible variations.
The three departments
The three departments are selected since they differ in tasks and management of the
departments allowed cooperation of the research. Although no variations are expected on
forehand, the differences in tasks could have an effect on the influence of participation of
organizational change on the level of employee satisfaction.
Nr. 1 Advice & Design
The first department develops and makes ICT structures for both internal as external clients.
Most employees in this department have an ICT background.
Nr. 2 Policy & Law
The second department is responsible for all the legal and law enforcing procedures. Most
employees in this department have a law background.
Nr. 3 Realisation and administration
The third department is smaller in the number of employees than the first two and has the
more to monitor the processes after implementation at the client. Employees in this
department have a mixed background.
Although these three departments have other tasks, no different outcomes are expected on
forehand. The departments have never done a participative change intervention as such, so
24
they are expected to be more neutral towards their participation then employees who already
did an participative change trajectory. Furthermore, this is more interesting for the field of
LSI and change agents, as future agent for the organization. The reason to choose three
departments within the same organization is because of accessibility and validation of the
outcomes.
Surveys
The first method of data collection was spreading existing questionnaires to all members of
the different departments. This because developing a proper questionnaire is a profession on
itself. 161 questionnaires were printed on hard copy and put in envelops, each envelop
received an individual label with the name of the “possible” respondent on it. 61 copies for
the employees of department one “Advice & Design”, 31 copies for the employees of
department two “Policy & Law” and 69 copies for department three “Realisation &
Administration”. The secretary of each department made sure every employee received a
copy. The questionnaire used for this research is in Dutch and can be found in the appendix
one. The questionnaire is composed out of several existing questionnaires, only a few scales
were modified to fit the research question or to satisfy the organization where the research
took place. This modification process of the questionnaires is shown in appendix two. The
modification process was especially important since it delivered useful contributions for
future research as discussed in the recommendation section of this thesis. The results of this
questionnaires were analysed and compared for the three investigated departments. All
departments are from one organization, but vary in tasks, background and field. The name of
the organization will not be named, due to the possibility of confidential and sensitive
information coming from the research they like to stay anonymous.
Interviews
The second method of data collection was conducting open interviews with individuals. The
strategy for selecting respondents for the interviews is called hermeneutic circling (Guba &
Lincoln, 1989), and will be discussed in the data collection section of this research.
Although the conversations are called open interviews, a rough topic list based on the results
of the surveys was used. Results who needed in-depth explanations were selected, together
with questions that support the initial research question.
The interviews were not only about individual feelings. Respondents were asked whether they
could understand the survey results and could give reasons why the situation was like that.
25
Furthermore, interviewee two was confronted, after he gave his uncoloured opinion, with the
answers on behalf of participation in organizational changes of interviewee one. Interviewee
three was confronted with the answers of number one and two and so on. In this way, a broad
understanding with multiple perspective was created.
After conducting the interviews, a summary of the conversation was send back to the
respondents. This, in order to verify whether the researchers interpretation was the same as
the message of the respondent. This is called a member check (Zouwen, 2010a). This member
check is a commodity in qualitative research, and a technique who helps researchers to
improve accuracy, credibility, validity and transferability. In this research the quantitative
and qualitative quality indicators are used separately since the two methods are used in one
research. All respondent replied the member check and some had minor revisions.
Experimental card game
The third method of data collection was an experimental, intuitive game. The game was
played at the same moment as the second method of data collection, the interviews took place.
Although gaming is an appropriate tool for strategy and change (Geurts, Duke & Vermeulen,
2007), gathering data for a scientific research is not common. Furthermore, gaming is mostly
used for interactive purposes (Geurts, Altena & Geluk, 2006) and this is a solitaire game.
The game is played with all eight respondents, the same as the ones of the second method data
collection, the interviews. There are no right or wrong answers. Goal of the game is to
understand more about the hierarchy of job demands and their influence on employee
satisfaction. The items on the card game find their origin in the variables of the survey. They
are assumed to influence employee satisfaction (BASAM, 1993; EDMK, 2000; IVA, 2011).
Job content, Salary & reward, Carreer & training opportunities, Work conditions, Information
& Communication, Good leadership are existing variables. Balance work / private life is
added on the request of the studied organization. Those cards, together with a card about
Participation in organizational changes configure the base of the game.
Participants were asked to put the cards in an order. This order is defined by the degree in
which the participant rates each item on the level of employee satisfaction. The hierarchy
should be built on intuition, this means that there is a limited amount of time, 5 minutes, to
place the cards in an order. The place in the hierarchy for participation in change processes is
important to solve the survey problem. With this method of data collection a difference of
importance in variables who could influence employee satisfaction is displayed. The method
26
is developed to rank the influence of participation in organizational changes on employee
satisfaction. Since placing factors in a range is based on an intuitive feeling of an employee,
general categories of importance are established. 1-3 is very important, 4-6 is medium
importance and 7-9 is less important for employee satisfaction.
Figure six below illustrates two different results of the card game.
Figure six
“The game” in action
The three sources, surveys, card game and interviews, all methods of data collection made
data-triangulation possible (Hertog and Sluijs, 2000) and this contributes to the quality of the
research. One may argue that a new conceptual model is needed, since many other variables
are introduced. However, the variables Job content, Salary & reward, Carreer & training
opportunities, Work conditions, Information & Communication, Good leadership and Balance
work / private life are not focus of study, they only act to determine the strength of the effect
of participation in organizational change processes on employee satisfaction.
27
III. Data analysis
Questionnaires are marked, a different number for each department. In this way the individual
results of employees of the organization can be added to the department of the employee and
still stay anonymous.
First, an analysis of the outcomes for all departments together is done. This resulted in a
general idea of employee satisfaction at the organization and the common opinion of what
level of participation in change is preferred. Next, the outcomes of the three departments were
compared to find possible differences in results. These results were used to develop an initial
topic list for the interviews.
The analysis of the interviews is done by cumulating opinions of respondents in search for a
general opinion. The opinion of individual employees have no special role in this research,
unless this opinion makes a nuance in the general opinion about the topic. By doing this the
results are a better reflection of the population. This increases the generalizability of the
research as discussed in research quality indicator section of this thesis.
For the data reduction, open interviews with department members of the organization will be
recorded on tape and after that will be typed out in summative transcripts. Since transcription
involves a degree of transformation and interpretation of the data (Gibbs, 2007), the
transcripts were send back to the respondents with the question whether they like to verify
them.
The card game was analysed after the respondent finished it. Results were discussed with the
respondents to understand the meaning behind the placement. The interviews were held in
approximately 45 minutes, were as the card game took place in fifteen minutes. There was a
little variation since some discussion topics were discussed during the card game, where as
they were meant to be treated during the open interviews, and the other way around.
IV. Sample strategy
The three departments, as discussed in the data collection section of this research, are selected
on base of diversity in tasks and accessibility. A well thought sample strategy to increase the
response rate of the questionnaires was not particularly necessary, since management teams of
the organization had a positive attitude towards this research and they promised to stimulate
their employees to respond. Nevertheless, separate meetings with members from all three
departments were organised to increase the response rate. Presentations were given to inform
the employees about the importance of the research. Besides this, a reminder email was sent
two days before the hand in deadline for the surveys.
28
The sample strategy for the interviews was hermeneutic circling (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).
Figure seven below describes the path of finding the optimal respondents for the interviews.
Figure seven
Steps to the answers
The first interviewee was selected by voluntary subscription. To increase the diversity in
opinions and therefore the quality of the interview results all respondents were asked if they
know someone who was likely to think totally different about the issues. This determined
every time the next interview and step in figure seven. Unfortunately, this person was not
willing to cooperate with the research. The dead end was solved by selecting a respondent by
voluntary subscription again, but this time an employee of another department was selected.
This process continued until no new information was heard and a saturation point was reached
(Glesne & Pechkin, 1992).
29
V. Research quality indicators
Since this research uses both quantitative en qualitative methods, the research indicators are
used separately. The survey data are gathered with respect to the quantitative research
indicators, whereas the card game is qualitative. The interviews are conducted with respect to
both research quality indicators.
Quantitative research indicators for multiple case studies
The proper research indicators for multiple case studies are construct validity, external
validity and reliability (Yin, 1994).
With construct validity is meant the level of which the research measures the underlying
theoretical concepts in a proper way (Yin, 1994). This is an issue with both the dependent as
the independent variable. When researching employee satisfaction it is important that this
concept is actually measured and not, for example, is disturbed by the respondents mood on
that particular day. Therefore, already existing surveys are used and the adaptation needed to
measure participation in organizational change are separated from the other survey scales.
Furthermore, the reliability of scales measures if the scales measure the same concept (Vocht,
2004). The scale that measured participation in change processes seemed not reliable enough
(Pallant, 2007). Therefore, no conclusion could be derived from the correlation and regression
analysis of this research. This to prevent a possible construct related bias.
The external validity of this research was not the highest priority. Since this research intended
to be a step up for further studies, future research should show the generalizability of the
results. However, the choice for the three departments increases the external validity within
governmental organizations.
The last quality indicator that will be discussed is the reliability of the research. Reliability is
about the demonstration that the performed operations of a study can be repeated with the
same results (Yin, 1994). To ensure this all steps taken in this research are described in detail.
The appendices deliver all background information and reasoning. This increases
transparency of the research.
30
Qualitative research indicators
Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are important quality indicators
for qualitative research (Erlandson et al., 1993).
The credibility of the research was enhanced by making use of triangulation. This means the
use of multiple sources of evidence for the data collection makes the findings of this research
more convincing and accurate (Yin, 1994). Surveys, interviews and a card game is used to
gather data. Member checks are done to verify the data and interpretations to increase the
credibility of the research (Zouwen, 2010a)..
Transferability describes the process of applying the results of research in one situation to
other similar situations. This is enhanced by the method of hermeneutic circling (Guba &
Lincoln, 1989). This makes the sample a better reflection of the population. Although the
results are statistically tested, generalization of the results should be done carefully.
The use of a research journal contributes to the dependability, because it allows the possibility
to conduct an external check on the consistency of the research process (Erlandson et al.,
1993). By clearly describing the methodological part, replicating the study should become
more easy (Baker, 1998).
31
V. Findings
This chapter represents the results. Subsequently, the results of the surveys, card game and
interviews will be elaborated.
I. The surveys
Preparation of the data file
With the deadline for handing in the questionnaires in sight, some steps needed to be taken in
order to start the actual analysis of the data in SPSS. The first step was to transform the
codebook given in appendix II into an SPSS data file. This, to be able to enter the data
obtained by the questionnaires. The next step was to check and correct the errors in the data
file to make sure that our data does not show a distorted view of the reality (Pallant, 2007).
Entering and checking the data
Now the data file was ready to enter the actual data. After this, a check for possible errors was
done to see if there were some strange data visible. Errors must be removed from the data file
before the start of the analysis, otherwise they can distort the results (Pallant, 2007). Most
items in the survey had a 5-point scale. Value one means totally disagree, were value five
means totally agree. Value 0 is no opinion. So, most items had a possible range of values from
0-5. If for example, value 6 is filled in in the data file, this is a value outside of the range of
possible values and therefore an error to remove . With the frequency option in the descriptive
statistics menu an output was created, this is an easy way to see whether all the minimum and
maximum values of the variables are correct and no data were missing. Furthermore, an
interesting note is that some respondents marked two values within one item. When two
values were circled, the valuable was treaded as missing, no opinion.
Also the open questions were checked for errors. One respondent filled in an age of 300, this
is very unlikely and therefore the item should be removed. After a check with all the items of
that particular respondent the decision was made to remove all the items of the respondent’s
survey. This, because the respondent marked both male and female as sex. This is the only
survey who was removed from participation in the analysis.
32
The first insights after manipulating the data
With a response rate of sixty-eight percent, the number of respondents who filled in the
questionnaires was far above the average of fifty-six percent (Barurch & Holton, 2008). The
three studied departments scored respectively eighty-five, ninety-two and forty-two percent.
This nice response rate was as expected, since higher management of the organization asked
the employees to fill in the questionnaire and on top of that some presentations were held to
increase the support for the research. The below average response rate of one department was
also expected since many employees had external duties during the hand-in period of the
questionnaires. The total number of questionnaires which were retoured was hundred ten.
With ninety-five people who filled in the survey who gave a grade for their level of employee
satisfaction the mean was a 7.41. This grade is according to the ten-point scale ample or
above average (Ifrah, 1994). The deviation of the grade is visualised in figure eight at the
bottom of the page. Three people were not satisfied at all with their jobs and gave the grade
5.0, the lowest grade of all respondents in this research. Eleven people gave the grade 6.0 and
thirty-two people gave an 7.0. These people were quite satisfied with their jobs. The other
forty-two people were very satisfied with a grade of 8.0 and even seven people gave a 9.0 for
their level of job satisfaction. The pending ten people did not fill in a grade. The grades were
not normally distributed. In general, people in this organization are satisfied with their jobs.
This is double checked by the satisfaction item number one displayed on page 104. Forty-four
per cent of the respondents is satisfied with the work in general, and thirty-seven per cent
agrees a bit with the statement. This is in line with the grade for employee satisfaction.
Figure eight: Grades for employee satisfaction
33
Figure nine: Grade for the organization
Ninety-three respondents gave a grade for the studied organization as a whole, as displayed in
figure nine above. The mean was 6,53, this is much lower than the grade for the first question.
Since the questionnaire doesn’t give any insight in the underlying reason(s) for this, the link
between the two items will be studied more in depth during the interview sessions. Some of
the respondents gave low grades (Ifrah, 1994) for the organization as a whole, so this fact
should not be ignored.
34
Preliminary results of the questionnaires
The upcoming figures visualize the preliminary findings (Pallant, 2007) in the SPSS output
and correspond with the description of the item results above them. Only items relevant to
the research question will be discussed. All items are checked for each department and all
together. When an item varies significantly this is mentioned in that particular section.
Q2. Over 39,4 % of the respondents was neutral about the possibilities for involvement in
organizational changes in the studied organization. This is combined with 33 % who is only a
bit satisfied with the participation possibilities. The score on the item satisfaction with
participation in change processes within the organization is therefore neutral unto slightly
positive, as displayed in figure ten below.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant/ don't know 5 4.6
Totally disagree 6 5.5
Disagree a bit 15 13.8
Neutral 43 39.4
Agree a bit 36 33.0
Totally agree 4 3.7
Total 109 100.0
Q3. The last item was about participation on the individual level. Therefore, the next item
that will be discussed is about the general attitude towards co-workers and there level of
participation in organizational change processes. 63, 3 % of the respondents agrees more or
less with the statement that employees should be more involved in organizational changes.
Figure eleven below illustrates these findings.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 4 3.7
Disagree a bit 8 7.3
Neutral 28 25.7
Agree a bit 45 41.3
Totally agree 24 22.0
Total 109 100.0
Figure ten:
Answer percentage question two
“I'm satisfied with the possibilities for
involvement in organizational changes”
Figure eleven:
Answer percentage question three
“Employees should be more involved in
organizational changes”
35
Q4. Over 80 % is accepting some extra responsibilities that a participative change approach
may bring along. 13,8 % is neutral and only 2,8 is not willing to accept all the responsibilities
that participation in organizational changes can bring for employees.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 3 2.8
Disagree a bit 2 1.8
Neutral 15 13.8
Agree a bit 53 48.6
Totally agree 36 33.0
Total 109 100.0
Q5. When asking the respondents of the current situation in the organization about the
openness of management towards new ideas and opinions by employees 72,3% thinks this
could be better.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 1 .9
Disagree a bit 6 5.5
Neutral 21 19.3
Agree a bit 57 52.3
Totally agree 24 22.0
Total 109 100.0
Q6. However 25,7 % of the respondents thinks most former change processes were not
typically bottom up nor top down, 64,2 % has the opinion that most change are set in a top
down manner.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 3 2.8
Totally disagree 3 2.8
Disagree a bit 5 4.6
Neutral 28 25.7
Agree a bit 45 41.3
Totally agree 25 22.9
Total 109 100.0
Q7. The next item is scattered so further analysis is needed to come up with results. On the
question of employees are satisfied in general about the organizational changes of the last two
years 34, 9 % is not so satisfied, 24,8 % neutral and 32,2 % is satisfied.
Figure twelve:
Answer percentage question four
“I think it is important to participate in
organizational changes, even if this
brings responsibilities”
Figure thirteen:
Answer percentage question five
“The management should listen more to
the ideas and opinions of me and my co-
workers”
Figure fourteen:
Answer percentage question six
“Organizational changes processes are
mostly top-down in this organization”
36
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 9 8.3
Totally disagree 10 9.2
Disagree a bit 28 25.7
Neutral 27 24.8
Agree a bit 32 29.4
Totally agree 3 2.8
Total 109 100.0
Q8. 56 % agrees with the statement that if employees were able to participate more, the
results of the organizational change were even better. 22 % was neutral and 13,8 % thought it
was not relevant. Figure sixteen below illustrates these findings.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 15 13.8
Totally disagree 1 .9
Disagree a bit 8 7.3
Neutral 24 22.0
Agree a bit 38 34.9
Totally agree 23 21.1
Total 109 100.0
Q9. One of the most important questionnaire items for the research is the direct question if
participation in change processes will lead to higher work satisfaction of the respondent.
Although 41,3 % thinks this is the case, 36,7 % is neutral about this statement.16,5 % does
not see a direct relation. Figure seventeen visualizes the findings.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 6 5.5
Totally disagree 1 .9
Disagree a bit 17 15.6
Neutral 40 36.7
Agree a bit 35 32.1
Totally agree 10 9.2
Total 109 100.0
Q10. When asking if the organization would be graded higher if the respondent could
participate more in organizational changes 43,1 % of the respondents agrees, 33 % is neutral
and 38,5 disagrees. More research is needed to clarify the underlying reasons.
Figure fifteen:
Answer percentage question seven
“ In general I'm satisfied with the
organizational changes of the last two
years”
Figure sixteen:
Answer percentage question eight
“If employees were able to participate
more, the results of the organization
changes were even better”
Figure seventeen:
Answer percentage question nine
“If I could participate more in
organizational changes I was more
satisfied”
37
Q11. The next question is the reversed version of Q8. Results are not as expected. 38,5 %
thinks that if employees were able to participate more, the results of the organizational change
were better. 33 % was neutral and 20,2 % does not think this would make a difference. More
research is needed to check validity of the answers and the explanation.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 9 8.3
Totally disagree 5 4.6
Disagree a bit 37 33.9
Neutral 36 33.0
Agree a bit 17 15.6
Totally agree 5 4.6
Total 109 100.0
Q12. Over 72 % disagrees with the statement that participation in change processes will lead
to commotion. Only 7,3 % agrees more or less with this statement.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 5 4.6
Totally disagree 37 33.9
Disagree a bit 42 38.5
Neutral 17 15.6
Agree a bit 6 5.5
Totally agree 2 1.8
Total 109 100.0
The results of the questionnaires are used to establish a topic list for the interviews. The topic
list for the interviews is in appendix four. Furthermore, the results will be used for
triangulation purposes in the conclusion section of this thesis.
Frequency Percent
Not relevant / don't know 6 5.5
Totally disagree 1 .9
Disagree a bit 16 14.7
Neutral 39 35.8
Agree a bit 36 33.0
Totally agree 11 10.1
Total 109 100.0
Figure eighteen:
Answer percentage question ten
“ If I could participate more in
organizational changes I graded the
organization higher”
Figure nineteen:
Answer percentage question eleven
“More participation in organizational
changes will not lead to better
organizational changes”
Figure twenty:
Answer percentage question eleven
“More participation in changes
processes will lead to commotion”
38
Differences between departments
The results of the surveys that are discussed on the previous pages do not differ significantly
for the three departments. Although the type of work differs for each department the
satisfaction levels and thoughts about participation in organizational changes appear to be
almost the same, according to the results of the surveys. In the discussion section of this thesis
the absence of quantitative differences between departments will be elaborated further. So far,
the task of employees has no influence on the relation between participation in organizational
change and employee satisfaction. However, at this moment it was too early to make a
general quantitative data conclusion, since regression analysis could show yet undiscovered
results.
The reliability of scales and recoding
In the previous section the scores of individual items was discussed. Questionnaires have
often more information to give then independent items and their scores. Results about the
relation between the items is measured in terms of correlation and regression (Vocht, 2004).
Before it is possible to start these analysis it is needed to check the reliability of a scale. In
order to check the reliability of a scale some items needed to be reversed. This process is
displayed in appendix IV from page 105 onwards and items are called REV. The next step
was to measure the scale’s internal consistency. This is needed because the individual items
need to measure the same construct. This research uses the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of a
scale. Ideally, the Cronbach’s alpha should be above 0,7 (Pallant, 2007). Only variable three
“Salary & reward” and variable five “Carreer and training” had a Cronbach’s alpha of
respectively 0,883 and 0,863 and no items needed to be removed.
Variable two Job content had an initial alpha of 0,887 but since item PREV had a negative
contribution to the corrected item-total correlation this item was deleted. Therefore the
Cronbach’s alpha is even higher with 0,889. Variable six “atmosphere and co-workers” had
an initial alpha of 0,730. Since the original items H and I needed to be reversed those are
deleted from the scale. IREV is unfortunately still a strange item so it is deleted. The alpha is
set on 0,815. Variable seven work conditions had an initial alpha of 0,596 which is poor. Item
E7 was deleted and the alpha was 0,687. Still not above 0,7, but the number of items is lower
than 10 so it is acceptable (Pallant, 2007). Variable eight information and communication had
a Cronbach’s alpha of 0,839. Item G8REV was deleted because it had a negative contribution
to the corrected item-total correlation and the new alpha is set on 0,862. This is quite the same
for variable ten commitment were as item F10 is deleted. The new Cronbach’s alpha is 0,838.
39
In variable fourteen satisfaction of minor work aspects, item B14REV was deleted so the
Cronbach’s alpha is 0,871.
Above the variables with acceptable Cronbach’s alpha’s after modification were discussed.
The upcoming variables are deleted from the study since acceptable levels could not be
created. Although variable nine acknowledgement consists out of less 10 items the
Cronbach’s alpha is really low with 0,593. When item a13 is removed the alpha would
improve to 0,629 but this is still not enough. This, in combination with a minor importance of
the variable for this research has led to complete re-movement of the variable that measure’s
acknowledgement. The same problem was with variable thirteen, who should measure the
balance between work and private life. With a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0,573, the whole variable
is deleted from this research. So, no further findings besides individual items, about the
balance will be discussed in this thesis.
Modification of scales
One of the worst variables in terms of consistency is the most important one for this research.
Variable twelve, who should measure participation in organizational changes has a
Cronbach’s alpha of 0,505. Even with item D12REV removed it is still not high enough with
0,558. Since this is a real problem for the further analysis the variable was split into two
variables. The level of participation in past changes and the importance of participation in
changes. This is done by reasoning. Unfortunately, the two new variables still not measure the
same concepts. With a Cronbach’s alpha of 0,262 and 0,622 the reliability of the scale is still
not adequate.
No Sumscores, now what?
The initial idea of the research was to calculate the sum scores to see differences in the
importance of variables in relation with employee satisfaction. Since this was not an option
anymore, a creative solution was found.
To ensure some results about the strength of the effect and a range of importance became
visible a card game was developed.
The card game is explained in the methodological framework one page twenty-five , the
results will be explained in the upcoming paragraph and the findings are visualised in
appendix V on page 119.
40
II. The Card game
The card game is developed to understand a range in factors that are important for an
employee’s individual work satisfaction. When understanding this, more can be said about the
strength and direction of the effect from participation in change processes on employee
satisfaction. This experimental game is developed since the failure of creating reliable survey
scales like discussed in the previous paragraph.
The nine factors printed on card were the same as the variables of the questionnaire, like
discussed in the theoretical framework on page sixteen of this thesis.
Blanc cards were given to the respondents with the message that they could write additional
important factors on it. More detailed information about the development and rules of the card
game can be found in the methodological section on page twenty-five of the research.
Results
The first eye opener was that none of the respondents wrote additional factors that are
important for employee satisfaction on the blank cards.
Since placing factors in a range is based on an intuitive feeling of an employee, general
categories of importance are established. 1-3 is very important, 4-6 is medium importance and
7-9 is less important for employee satisfaction.
2 respondents rated participation in organizational change of high importance for their
employee satisfaction. 3 respondents rated participation in change processes of medium
importance and 3 employees thought it was less important.
Cards alone leave too much room for interpretation of the research, therefore respondents
were asked to give an explanation why they ordered the cards the way they did.
It became clear that every respondent in essence thought it is important to participate in
organizational change processes. All explained that employee satisfaction is a combination of
factors. If one of those is absent it is really hard to be satisfied.
On the other hand, none of the employees thought it was possible to fulfill all factors in an
optimal way. So, a realistic balance is enough to be a satisfied employee.
Participation in change processes was never the most important factor that determines
employee satisfaction. It was also never the factor with the lowest importance.
Interesting result was that six employees stated that the variable communication and
information correlated in a negative way with participation in change processes. This means
that if management informs them well about upcoming organizational changes the actual
41
participation is less important. Those employees prefer a clear path of the processes above the
cooperation on the creation of the path. This remarkable results will be elaborated in depth in
the conclusion section of this thesis.
All respondents said the way of placing the cards is really dependent on path of life and past
change experiences. When older respondents were young they agreed that other variables had
a greater influence on their employee satisfaction then the current and with the years some
other variables become more important than they were in the past.
In general, employees who had much top-down change experience are discouraged to
participate in organizational change and therefore think it has positive influence on their
employee satisfaction. This will be explained in the upcoming interview result section.
III. The Interviews
Although the initial primary source of data collection were the surveys, the interviews and
card game delivered in-depth, qualitative information to answer the working hypothesis and
research question. A schematic of answers to the interview questions is given on page 119.
Eight interviews were held, this was enough to reach a saturation point. Saturation refers to a
point when no new information was collected during the interviews (Glesne & Pechkin,
1992).
Past organizational changes
All respondents have a history with organizational changes. Even the respondents who say
they work for a relatively short period within the organization, between two and four years,
had quite a few changes. In contrast with the survey results, were half of the respondents was
satisfied, all respondents think a lot of organizational changes could have gone better. Two
basic reasons are given and those are quite linear. Too much changes and too much failed
changes. Too much means that the follow up already starts when the primary change is not
finished are evaluated yet. This is frustrating 75 % of the respondents, they say that this has a
direct negative influence on their level of work satisfaction. The number of failed changes is
caused by internal and external variables. Failed changes due to external causes are not so
negative for the level of employee satisfaction as internal causes.
The way of changing is top-down, only one participant answered it as a combination. He said
that although the structure is top-down, everyone could make suggestions for the change
process and post them by management. Some agreed with this opinion, others say that the
management never listens to ideas of individual employees. One respondent stated that
42
management sees you as a nosey parker, which is not good for your career. Others didn’t
think the situation was that worse.
The absence of chemistry and the overdose of control and politics
Another remarkable result coming out of the interviews is the relation employees of the
organization have with the management team. Although this is not focus of the research,
respondents do link it on both participation and employee satisfaction.
Team leaders, middle and higher management together, form the management team for all the
employees who were subject of study. Respondents think the management team is an
incoherent whole. The absence of clear organizational goals, vision and scope, together with
lack of management and communication skills are the most important determinants for this
incoherent whole, according to the employees. Employees feel themselves as victims of the
situation.
“Het management is vooral heel druk met zichzelf in stand houden”. “Management is very
busy keeping their own positions alive”. This means that there are continuous conflicts about
how, when and what to change.
In this kind of organizational climate employees have no trust that management will be open
for participative changes approaches. This created employees who are passive towards
everything. Their main focus is on the core tasks, but organizational wellbeing is not relevant
anymore. “Ze doen maar”,”linksom of rechtsom, ik blijf toch wel ongeveer het zelfde doen”.
“I don’t care what they do, left or right, my work stays kind of the same anyway”. In this
organization, organizational change is clearly a topic only for the management team. Normal
employees are fed up with the management team and their organizational changes.
Employee satisfaction as a whole
When researching the role of participation in organizational changes on the level of employee
satisfaction many other variables were named by respondents. A selection of those, namely,
the ones that are mentioned by more or all respondents and the variables marked as extremely
important by a respondent will be discussed on the next page.
Since these relations was not focus of this research, the relations are not researched in an
exhaustive and proper way, so more research is needed to verify the relations. Some will be
taken into account as recommendations for future research.
First of all, employees find interesting work unanimously very important, for work
satisfaction. In the studied organization interesting work is fully fulfilled and therefore people
43
can live with the management problems like discussed above. One respondent thinks even
repetitive work can still be interesting and another employee said it’s the only determinant for
his satisfaction.
Having clear responsibilities is for some employees important more important than others.
The studied organization has clear responsibilities for employees according to half of the
respondents, and half of the employees does not think this influences employee satisfaction.
No results came unfortunately out of this question. One interesting note is, that some
employees see freedom in task as the opposite of having clear guidelines.
Reward is not a problem in this organization. In general, employees do not think that more
salary leads to more satisfaction for them. Some say that the reward is fine, but some
employees receive more than others, without a clear and deviating task specification. This
leads to an ambition drop of that particular employee whose salary is lower than the salary of
the colleague.
There are enough education possibilities, although most employees think that they could be
promoted in a better way. It is difficult for employees to find a proper education and when
this is found, a lot of exhaustive rules make the step for employees more difficult.
Mobility within the organization is for some more important than others. The respondents
who think it is important for their satisfaction think that there are enough possibilities for
mobility, when the individual employee differentiates itself from the mass and communicates
it’s need. Others, who think mobility perspective is less important for their satisfaction, think
there are not that much possibilities. So, what is this relation? When there are not so much
possibilities for mobility in an organization, employees automatically rate this as less
important for their work satisfaction or when an employee thinks mobility is important they
create their own chances. More research is needed to understand this relation.
The perspective of the possibility of easily changing jobs is also undetermined. It may be that
there is a relation with the education possibilities but more research is needed to understand
the extend of this relation.
Most employees think that information and communication is important for work satisfaction.
There is no direct relation with participation in organizational change processes. This means it
is unsure if good communication by, among others, management makes the need for
participation in organizational change lower. Although the information and communication in
the studied organization is on its own rated as okay, there is too much information and
therefore it is a bit unclear.
44
High levels of bureaucracy have, according to the interviewees, a negative relation with
employee satisfaction.
Stress levels do not influence the level of employee satisfaction at all. Respondents think it is
the responsibility of the individual employee. What is said, that team leaders should be more
involved when an employee sets himself under pressure.
The cooperation between the three departments is not optimal. The relation with employee
satisfaction could not be determined. Some suggestions were made to improve the
cooperation, but those are not in the scope of this research.
Balance between work and private life is for every respondent important, but this balance is
so personal that it cannot be defined easily. More research is needed to understand the relation
with employee satisfaction.
Preferences for change
In some organizations and environments particular change approaches are more successful
than others (Pool & Ven, 2004). A change method who searches for common ground is the
participative change approach family. Is the introduction of these methods dependent on the
common ground there is within the organization for these types of approaches? More about
this in the discussion section of this thesis.
The point of this paragraph is to clarify that employees of the studied organization are so
passive in their need for participation in organizational changes processes that some do not
recognize the need for participative approaches.
Why this happened in the studied organization was one of the main questions during the
interviews.
On the interview questions the reason became clear why that much employees were neutral
about possibilities to participate in organizational change. The reasons can be found inside
and outside the organization.
The inside causes, which are already discussed in the previous section of this paper can be
found in a management attitude, and therefore reference to unsuccessful changes. The outside
causes became visible with the card game. The importance of participation in organizational
is determined by the stage of career of an individual employee.
45
Determinants for the importance of participation in organizational changes
The introduction of stage of career or age as a mediator by respondents differs from the
expectations by the working hypothesis. So, the mid-research hypothesis became that
experience with organizational changes in the past and career stage of the employee together
influence the need for participation in organizational change. The way this need is satisfied
has an influence on the employee satisfaction level.
If this is true, what kind of categories can be made was one of the problems. Employees target
two types of employees within the studied organization. Employees who work relatively short
at the organization, have ambition and care for the organization. Employees who work there
for a long period of time for the organization and only care about their main tasks and nothing
more.
Like almost always, the truth isn’t black or white but somewhere in the middle. After some
questions interviewees recognized some people who didn’t fit in the first, nor in the second
category. Therefore, a transition category is taken into account.
For the change experience, developing categories was more difficult. Although there was a
common understanding of the strength of the effect, the boundaries became not very clear
during the interviews. The only difference that can be made about experience with
organizational change is that the individual employee has many experience with top down
changes or less experience.
Strength of the influence
The next step was to unravel the differences in strength of effects. Six out of eight
interviewees were convinced that older employees per definition have less need for
participation in organizational changes then younger. As cause they call freedom of choices in
adolescence. The older generation, fifty years and above, is not that familiar with giving
opinion and is more used to authority then the younger generation. Furthermore, when the age
of an employee is higher, the less years this employee need to work before it’s retirement.
Participation in change costs energy and the older an employee becomes, the less energy he or
she wants to stick in something which is decreasing in relevance. The younger generation has
the opposite motives. From their childhood on they learn to have an opinion about everything
and with a lot of working time in perspective, top-down change only is hard to accept. This is
said, or confirmed, by six out of eight interviewees and is in conflict with the working
hypothesis on page eleven.
46
The strength of the top-down experience effect is exactly the opposite of my own
expectations. When employees had much unsuccessful top down changes in their career I
personally thought they would scream for more participation. The opposite appears to be true
in the studied organization. The more top-down changes people experienced, the more passive
they became on behalf of organizational change. For people who worked relatively short for
the organization or who had not so much working experience in general was participation
more essential for work satisfaction.
Differences for departments
In line with the results of the questionnaires, no differences in both employee satisfaction and
need for participation is perceived for the three different departments. The interviews made
clear that the task and duties of the departments vary. This has an influence on the variable
challenging work and on task clearness, but not the relevant variables for this research.
The next chapter searches for cohesion in the results and formulates an answer to the working
hypothesis, mid-research hypothesis and finally the research question.
47
VI. Conclusion
In the chapter below the answers to the working hypothesis and research question are
formulated, furthermore the results are interpreted onto a higher level of abstraction. The
different angles of incidence are elaborated subsequently to answer the research question.
I. Working hypothesis
Confirmed working hypothesis
Working hypothesis I. Participation of employees in organizational change has
a positive influence on the level of employee satisfaction.
When interpreting the quantitative results of this research only, hypothesis one was
undetermined. With use of the relevant survey questions not enough evidence, or contra
evidence, was found to confirm or to reject the statement.
However, the card game pointed out there was a positive influence, since all respondents
connected participation in change processes with a higher level of employee satisfaction on
the individual level. This was confirmed during the interviews. Unfortunately, the mechanism
behind the direct effect of participation in organizational change on employee satisfaction is
not exactly clear yet. This is, amongst others, because the mechanism theory is disturbed by
working hypothesis two, which is not confirmed. Working hypothesis II suggests that
employees who have non or less experience with participation in change processes have a
lower level of employee satisfaction. This will discussed extensively in the propositions for
future research section of this paper on page fifty-nine.
Working hypothesis IV. The task of the employee has no influence on the
strength of the relation elaborated in hypothesis one (II + III excluded since they
were not confirmed).
The quantitative data were not suitable to answer this working hypothesis by reliability issues
as discussed in the methodological framework of this thesis. No differences between
departments were found in the qualitative results. What became clear is that the actual task
does not matter at all. The current tasks of an employee are only a piece of the much greater
pie, total job experiences of an employee. All job experiences together created a reference for
the employee. This reference does have an effect on the strength of participation in
organizational change on employee satisfaction. This will be discussed in the research
48
question paragraph of the conclusion. Some propositions for future research were derived
with use of this working hypothesis, like discussed in the eponymous section of this research.
V. There is a hierarchy of factors that determine employee satisfaction.
As discussed already in the results section of this thesis, the quantitative results could not be
transformed as planned, this means that no relevant results for this working hypothesis could
be derived out of the data. Nevertheless, this working hypothesis is confirmed. The card game
demonstrated the existence of a factor hierarchy that determines employee satisfaction. In the
discussion section of this thesis the hierarchy of factors will be discussed.
Rejected working hypothesis
II. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change
processes have a lower level of employee satisfaction.
None of the methods used for data collection gave a result that confirmed this working
hypothesis. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change processes
do not have significantly lower levels of employee satisfaction.
The qualitative results explained the mechanism behind it. At first sight, this seems
contradictive with the confirmed working hypothesis one, but the a positive effect when
present does not always mean a negative effect when absent. It seems that not being able to
participate in organizational changes has negative impact on the variable commitment, but not
on the level of employee satisfaction. Other factors can compensate the absence of
participation in organizational changes.
Unconfirmed working hypothesis
III. Employees who have no or less experience with participation in change
processes need a more participative strategy of change (Werkman, 2006 as
elaborated on page 11) to be satisfied, then employees who already had the
opportunity to participate in past changes.
The suitable quantitative data could not support this working hypothesis, nor as the card game
did. During the interviews became clear that there may be a weak effect, but no hard evidence
could be collected. This hypothesis will be discussed in the recommendations for future
research section on page fifty-eight of this thesis.
49
Mid-research hypothesis
I. Experience with organizational changes in the past and age of the employee
together influence the need for participation in organizational change
Although the variables age and career stage initially were not considered as determinants, the
qualitative part of the research discovered their role as mediator. For this reason, there is no
quantitative data available to support this hypothesis. The first two respondents of the card
game and interviews suggested this relation and all other respondents confirmed. Therefore,
the mid-research hypothesis is confirmed.
This will be discussed in the following section that answers the research question.
50
II. Research question
Does participation of employees in organizational change influence the level of employee
satisfaction and if so, in what way are they related?
The answer to this question is simple and complex at the same time. Working hypothesis one,
confirmed there is a positive relation between the level of participation in organizational
change processes and employee satisfaction. This is the simple answer to the first part of the
research question.
Like most things in life, the truth is more complex. Although employees of an organization do
appreciate a management that is open for suggestions and even better, ask them how, what
and when they like to change, the strength of this relation depends on the person. The mid-
research hypothesis confirmed that beside some individual personal characteristics, stage of
career together with reference of former change processes determine the strength of the
relationship.
Figure twenty-one below illustrates the link between experience with top down-changes and
career stage. Furthermore, an expected choice of ideal change strategy is given. This is based
on the type of change strategies given by van der Zouwen (2010), as discussed on page
eighteen of this thesis.
Strength of participation in organizational change processes on employee satisfaction
Top-down
change
experience
LESS
MANY
Effect
strength
Expected initial choice
for change strategy
Effect
strength
Expected initial choice
for change strategy
Junior (-35) STRONGER Interactive STRONGER Interactive /
programmatic
Mid-career
(35-50)
STRONGER Programmatic /
negotiation
WEAKER Systematic / Power
Senior (50+) MID-LOW Negotiation / Systemic WEAKER Systematic / Power
Figure twenty-one Conclusion figure
51
The central mechanism behind the figure above is that people who didn’t follow a career path
with the chance to participate much, it doesn’t have much meaning for them after a while
anymore. They develop a passive attitude towards organizational changes, however they
ideally think that more participation would be a nice thing. For their employee satisfaction
other things like: challenging work, low stress levels and good leadership is more important
than participation in organizational changes. Mid-career or senior employees who didn’t have
much top-down change experience admit that they would like to have an employer who
listens to the employee, but a participative way of changing is not necessary for employee
satisfaction.
Employees whose career is in its infancy are ambitious and need higher levels of participation
in organizational changes to be satisfied employees. For Junior employees it doesn’t matter if
they had quite a lot of top down organizational changes in the past, they see participation as a
must for employee satisfaction.
The conclusion that need for participation in change processes is, among others, career stage
and experience dependent may look like a critical note towards preachers of participative
change approaches. Weisman (2006) states that Interactive or Programmatic change
approaches have a higher development of change capacity then Systematic or Power
strategies. When reading the figure on page fifty the idea could pop up that if an organization
has with many senior employees who had already experience with many top down
organizational changes, the best way for an upcoming change process is the Systematic or
Power strategy. This would be in contrast with the ideas of Weisman (2006). This assumption
is not valid as such. This research is about employee satisfaction and is not an about
successful organizational change or development of change capacity. What can be read in the
table is that senior employees who had many top-down experience are not familiar with
participative change approaches and therefore do not understand the need for it in the
beginning. Therefore, it may be a great challenge to involve those employee in the change
process. This process will be related to the literature in the discussion section on page fifty-
four of this thesis.
Participation as an instrument for more successful change
There is a direct positive effect of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction.
For all kind of employees successful change has a strong influence on the level of employee
satisfaction. Successful change is not exactly defined, since it only has to be a successful
52
change according to the respondent no matter what factors make the change successful. This
relation is visualized in twenty-two below.
Figure twenty-two Indirect Effect
This relation was not focus of study, but cannot be ignored. Employees have a strong believe
that more participation in change processes or better, participative change approaches
influence the outcome of a change process in a positive way. This relation will be linked to
the literature in the discussion section fifty-seven of this thesis.
Participation in organizational changes as a part of many variables that determine employee
satisfaction
In order to measure the level employee satisfaction many other variables were taken into
account. These frequently tested variables originally in psychology and HRM-studies. Job
content, salary & reward, career and training opportunities, atmosphere and co-workers, work
conditions, information & communication, acknowledgment, commitment, participation in
organizational changes and the balance between work and private life were tested.
Although they have no central part in this research it became clear some variables can
compensate one other.
Since participation is a new variable in this kind of research, it was the focus to clarify its
compensation variables. Unfortunately, no conclusion can be made about this. What can be
said is, that employee satisfaction can be high, even though there is none or less participation
in organizational changes.
There is no overall, optimal level of participation
One of the research goals was to unravel an “optimal” level of participation for employee
satisfaction. As discussed above, there is none in general. Organizations differ, employees
differ, environments differ and changes differ. On top of that, this research is about opinions
Participation of employees
in organizational change
Employee satisfaction
Better, more successful
change
53
of employees, without having them actually participate in all types of change strategies
(Werkman, 2006).
There is no optimal level of participation in organizational changes for the studied
organization
The results of the interviews showed that most previous organizational changes in this
organization could be called Power or Systematic strategies of change ( Werkman, 2006).
Solely based on the results of this research, the optimal level of participation in organizational
changes for the studied organization in the future will be, Negotiation (Werkman, 2006). The
political climate, strong hierarchy and top-down culture causes the level of participation by
employees in changes processes is with the Negotiation style the maximum which is
acceptable by all management layers.
Negotiation style is also the optimal way to change according to the employees. They are
simply not used to more participative styles and do not recognise the benefits of it. Although
younger employees have a need for participation, the overrepresented older employees have
no need for participation in change processes. With the Negotiation style some employees can
participate, were others don’t have to. But, this is not a good and complete representation of
reality.
The conclusion that Negotiation is the optimal strategy to change this organization would be
wrong. It is not possible to determine an optimal level of participation in organizational
change for this organization, based on the findings of this research. The research method
appeared not appropriate to determine an optimal level.
This will be explained in depth in the upcoming discussion section of this research.
54
VII. Discussion
In the this chapter, the place of the research within the literature fields will be discussed.
Furthermore, it includes a personal opinion of the researcher and contributions of this paper.
Participation in organizational changes and its influence on employee satisfaction is by no
means an easy topic to study. The relation hasn’t been studied before, as elaborated in the
theoretical framework of this paper. Employee satisfaction is hard to grasp and continuously
influenced by many other variable aspects (Mueller & Kim, 2008).
Not all research goals could be reached, but some unexpected results compensated this
disappointment. Personally I think the failures can be very instructive for both science as
organizations. The discussion section will start with elaborating what went wrong during the
research process and place of the research in the literature.
Although the results may look as a practical test of witch strategy of change (Werkman, 2006)
would be best for the studied public organization, the opposite is true. Firstly, the topic will
not be that relevant for science. Secondly, the research method would be inconvenient since
employees of the organization are not familiar with the most participative change approaches.
So, why do I end my conclusion with it?
The answer to this question lies in the next sentence: “People don’t always know what they
think, but think that they know”. Although it is important to understand what people think
about how they would react in certain circumstances, you can’t measure how they did if the
situation didn’t occur. This is exactly what happened in this research. Asking what level of
participation in organizational change processes the employee prefers, to someone who
probably doesn’t know what participation actually means. This is somewhat the same like
asking an eskimo if he thinks he will be a good camel rider in a desert environment.
It may not be very useful to know what an eskimo thinks of camel driving, but it is useful to
know what levels of participation employees prefer before having dealt with different change
approaches. The “optimal” Negotiation approach in the conclusion should be interpreted as
the change approach which has on forehand the most common ground by employees of the
organization. According to the Expectancy Theory explained on page fourteen (Vroom,
1964), this result is a reflection of the cognitive process of an employee to increase the chance
on the most desirable outcome. Other factors determine whether the “chosen” strategy is the
“optimal” strategy of organizational change.
55
Therefore, the determination of an “optimal” strategy of change in terms of employee
satisfaction on forehand of the process is a myth.
This research is therefore not in contradiction with the model of (Werkman, 2006). The
research was about asking employees about their opinion and not if this actually is the best
way to do it. Development of change capacity and environment is not researched.
Furthermore it is possible that if employees get the experience with participative changes,
their state of mind about it might change. This result can be in line with the Opponent Theory
of Solomon explained on page fifteen (1980). Experience influences expectations for the
future. More research is needed if participation in change leads to “spoiled” stakeholders.
Every next time a more participative change strategy is necessary to be satisfied.
This bring us to another delicate question. Is it a good idea for management to start a change
approach that searches for common ground when there is no common ground to start such a
change approach?
Card Game
The card game revealed there is a pyramid of needs in work satisfaction. It is not such need as
meant in the Hierarchy of Needs developed by Maslow (1943) as discussed in the theoretical
framework of this research and displayed in twenty-three below.
Figure twenty-three Maslow’s Pyramid
Retrieved from: http://www.timlebon.com/maslow.htm
56
When starting this research I thought there was a hierarchy in job demands, as stated in
working hypothesis five. First employees need salary and interesting work, when these are
fulfilled participation in organizational changes becomes important. Although there is some
kind of hierarchy, no universal pyramid could be confirmed by the results of this research.
There is a pyramid of needs for employee satisfaction, but this pyramid differs for individuals.
Still, some commodities were found. This is in line with the two factor theory of Herzberg
(1959) as discussed in the theoretical framework of this research and displayed in figure
twenty-four.
Figure twenty-four 2-factor Theory
Retrieved from:
http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/
herzberg/
According to Herzberg, employees are not satisfied with only the lower-order needs at work,
like salary and a good relationship with pears. On the long run employees have higher-level
needs like growth and advancement. This is in line with the pyramid developed by Maslow
(1954), only this variant has less different levels.
Participation in change processes is about achievement, recognition, responsibility and
sometimes advancement. These are all satisfiers according to Herzberg. This research is not
about proving the existence of satisfiers or dissatisfiers, but participation in change has the
characteristics of a satifier.
The widely spread Job Characteristics model about five core factors that determine employee
satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) is still standing, although only five global factors to
determine employee satisfaction is poor anno 2011. All factors used in the survey can be
fitted into skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback, but the use of
the tested nine factor-survey has led to more detailed results in this research.
57
Participation in organizational changes as a tool for successful change
A lot is written about the positive influence of participation for the outcome of change
processes. This study has shown that the outcome of change processes is far more important
for most employees than the participation in the process itself. This is discussed in the
conclusion section of this research.
Employee satisfaction linking to participation is therefore disputable, since the determinant
successful change has a much stronger effect. Successful change is about the perception the
employee has about the result.
Participation in change, employee satisfaction and Organization Studies
A lot has changed for employees since the scientific management is left behind (Taylor,
1911). A lot is changed for employees during that time. Employers understand the importance
of satisfied employees more than ever before.
Salancik & Pfeffer’s (1978) Information Processing Theory explains a continuous comparison
of the individual with others. In this research no evidence is found that there are dominating
collective patterns in the development of employee satisfaction which undermine the factors
of the individual employee.
However, organizational change is changing (Boros, 2009). A wide range of new approaches
and methods are developed the last twenty years. This may rise the question whether
determinants for employee satisfaction are changing too. For most it is, for some it isn’t. Still,
it is important to recognize the trend. Some publications may be outdated by all new
developments. For organizations continuously development is important, for science, and
organization studies in particular, the monitoring of these developments is important to stay
relevant. This research contributes in keeping this circle round.
58
VIII. Recommendations
This section presents recommendations for future studies. Propositions and new insights will
be discussed.
The first and for future research most important recommendation is to: Never add a new
variable to an already existing and tested questionnaire. Even with a pilot the Cronbach’s
alpha was not good enough to start with a regression analysis. Since this variable was core to
the analysis in depth survey results lack in this research. The way the used survey is
established can be seen in Appendix II on page eighty, the reliability of the scales is displayed
in Appendix IV on page 104. I strongly recommend future researchers of employee
satisfaction and participation in organizational changes processes, together or separately, to
understand what happened in this process in order to improve the tools for data collection.
Study the exact strength of the relationship age, stage career with participation need. Future
research should find out what the exact strength of the effect is, because higher or lower is not
that concrete.
The pilot with the card game was a success. Participants understood and liked the game. The
game provided evidence of a variable hierarchy in job demands. The card game should be
played with more respondents to come up with data who are more generalizable.
Future researchers should do this study at a privately owned organization. Public organization
may be organized in a different way and operate in another environment. In this way data can
be compared and relevance of the topic will be increased.
Another recommendation for future research is to conduct this research in an organization
who did a participative change trajectory. This gives the opportunity to compare the actual
influence on employee satisfaction and not only the expected influence by employees.
59
Propositions for future research
1. Participation in organizational change processes needs to be a variable in future
employee satisfaction researches
2. The influence of participation in change processes on employee satisfaction in other
organizations, sectors and privately owned organizations
3. Participation in organizational change processes has an indirect positive influence
employee satisfaction via successful change.
4. Participation in organizational change processes and the influence on employee
satisfaction is mediated by experience and career stage
5. Participation in organizational change processes is a satisfier (Herzberg, 1959)
6. There is no universal hierarchy of job demands and it is career stage dependent.
60
IX. Limitations
When assessing this research, the following limitations should be taken into account.
The first limitation of this thesis is that all results are based on a limited amount of data. A
research with 110 respondents and 8 interviews is a small sample of the almost seven billion
people and millions of organizations in the world. Although, the research is done with care to
maximize the generalizability more research is needed to reflect reality.
The second limitation of this thesis is that the research is done in one organization. Besides
this, the organization has the characteristics of a government organization and its employees
may have a different attitude towards job demands then employees of a profit organization.
The third limitation of this thesis is the amount of time available for the research. Although a
master thesis is an ambitious project for a student, it is no dissertation or long-term funded
research project.
The fourth limitation of this thesis is the failure to yield interdependence of results who
determine employee satisfaction. If this was possible, the research had more valuable results
to the fields of Organization studies, HRM and participative change.
The fifth limitation is about the card game. This tool is experimental and not tested before.
The sixth limitation is about the interviews. Two times the path of hermeneutic circling was
terminated by selected interviewees who could not participate in the research.
The seventh limitation of this research is about the non-response of the questionnaires. With
62 employees who did not fill in the surveys valuable data is missing.
61
X. Personal reflection
This chapter will describe the personal experiences of the researcher during the process.
Last academic year was the greatest challenge in my educational life. The master
Organization Studies is an intellectual journey with the master thesis as highest top. As a real
adventurer I planned the journey well, with the appropriate baggage on my neck. Even the
means of transportation, an organization to do the research, was almost arranged for certain.
Unfortunately, the destination needed to be changed when I received a go major for my IRP
and in the same week the means of transportation left me alone. The prepared adventure trip
was suddenly a survival on bare feet. Three problematic weeks gone by in which I struggled
to find a path that lead to the end of the academic jungle. The studied government
organization was willing to cooperate if I would do an employee satisfaction research for
them. In a desperate survival this means of transportation may be good enough to reach my
goals if this was a possible vehicle to reach the destination. Luckily, the second version of the
destination plan, the IRP was good enough.
The following weeks was no survival anymore. It may not even be an adventure trip. I was
the researcher and with my white jacket and safety glasses I explored the organization. Bad
luck again, when my surveys were not that useful as expected. How to fix this? The game,
together with the interviews was the solution to this problem. The next problem came when
the organization started to push for results, in the same period as the deadline for the master
thesis. The last weeks were exhausting. Finishing the master thesis and the organizational
research, together with working for a taxi organization was a work load of over 85 hours a
week.
This paragraph, the last of my master thesis, is hopefully the beginning of a period with a bit
more time to relax. After that, my career journey will hopefully start. Would it be an even
greater challenge then this educational adventure?
My special gratitude’s go out to Tonnie, Rob, Fetene, Pieter, Nelly, Sanne, Martin, Jaap, Said,
Rik, Elwin, Niels, Jelle, Jo, Hannie, Yvette, Laurie, Anne and all respondents of the research.
Thanks for your contribution to this Master Thesis.
62
XI. References
In this chapter all sources used for this research are given.
Baker, T.L. (1998). Doing social Research. New York: MC Graw-Hill.
Baarda, D.B., Goede, M.P.M., Kalmijn, M. (2007a). Basisboek enquêteren. Groningen:
Wolter-Noordhoff
Baarda, D.B., Goede, M.P.M., Kalmijn, M. (2007b). Basisboek interviewen. Groningen:
Wolter-Noordhoff
Baruch, Y., Holton, B. (2008). Survey rate levels and trends in organizational research.
Human Relations 61 (8) 1138-1160 Tallahassee: Florida state University
Berings, D., Steen, T. (2004). Mens en organisatie. Antwerpen: De Boeck.
Biessen, P. G. A., Gilder, D. (1993). BASAM; Basisvragenlijst Amsterdam.
Amsterdam: Pearson
Boonstra, J. J. (2004a). Introduction. In J. J. Boonstra (Ed.), Dynamics of Organizational
Change and Learning (1-21). Chichester: Wiley.
Boonstra, J. J. (Ed.). (2004b). Dynamics of Organizational Change and Learning. Chichester:
Wiley
Boonstra, J. J., Caluwé, L. d. (Eds.). (2007). Intervening and Changing: Looking for
Meaning in Interactions. Chichester: Wiley
Boroş, S. (2009). Exploring Organizational Dynamics. London: SAGE
Bryson, J. M. (2003). What To Do When Stakeholders Matter: A Guide to Stakeholder
Identification and Analysis Techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53.
Chi, C.G., Gursoy, D. (2008). Employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction and
Financial performance: An empirical examination. International journal of Hospitality
management 245-253. Pullman: Washington
Delden, P. van. (2009). Samenwerking in de publieke dienstverlening: ontwikkelingsverloop
en resultaten. Delft: Eburon
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of
Management Review, vol. 14(4), 532-550.
Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing Naturalistic
Inquiry: A Guide to Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Fine, B. (2001). Social Capital versus Social Theory: Political economy and social science at
the turn of the millennium. London: Routledge
63
Geurts, J.L.A., Altena, J., Geluk, B. (2006). Interventie door interactie: Een vergelijkende
beschouwing. M&O, Tijdschrift voor Management en Organisatie, 60(3/4), 322-351
Geurts, J.L.A., Duke, R.D., Vermeulen, P.A.M. (2007). Policy gaming for strategy and
change. Long Range Planning, 40(6), 535-558
Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data, London: Sage Publications
Glesne, C., Peshkin. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White
Plains, New York: Longman.
Gomes, D. R. (2009). Organizational change and job satisfaction: the mediating role of
organizational commitment. Comunicação e ciências empresariais. Retrieved from:
www.exedrajournal.com/docs/01/177-196.pdf
Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Beverly Hills: SAGE.
Groot, S.A. (2005). Presteren met professionals: prestatieverbetering binnen kennisintensieve
organisaties. Amsterdam: Kluwer
Hackman, J. R., Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work:
Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279
Hasle, P., Møller, N. (2007). From conflict to Shared Development: Social Capital in a
Tayloristic Environment. Denmark
Hertog, F., Sluijs, E. (2000). Onderzoek in organisaties, Een methodologische
Reisgids. Assen: Van Gorcum & Comp
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. & Snyderman, B.B. 1959, The Motivation to Work. New York:
John Wiley
Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business
Review, 52-62
Hooghe, M., Stolle, D. (2003). Generating Social Capital: civil society and institutions in
comparative perspective. New York: Palgrave
Ifrah, G. (1994). Histoire universelle des chiffres. L'Intelligence des hommes racontée
par les nombres et les calculs Paris: Laffont
Jones, M. (2006). Which is a better predictor of job performance: job satisfaction or life
satisfaction? Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 15 (6), 77-97
Judge, T. A., Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice Oxford :
Blackwell.
Kerber, K. W., Campbell, J. P. (1987). Job satisfaction: Identifying the important parts among
computer sales and service personnel. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1(4),
337-352
64
Kovach, K. A. (1987). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different
answers. Business horizons.
Koys, B., Daniel, J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship
behaviour and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal
study Retrieved from:
http://www.keepem.com/doc_files/clc_articl_on_productivity.pdf
Koys, D. (2003). How the achievement of human-resources goals drives restaurant
performance, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 44 (1), 17–24
Landy, F. J. (1978). An opponent process theory of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 63(5), 533-547
Levitt, S. D., List, J. A. (2011). "Was There Really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne
Plant? An Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments". American Economic
Journal: Applied Economics 3 (1): 224–238
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Lok, P., Crawford, J. (1999). The relationship between commitment and organizational
culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and
development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20- 7, 365-74
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 50 (4)
Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of industrial civilization. New York: Macmillan.
McMillan, A. (2010). Participative Management. Retrieved from
http://www.enotes.com/management-encyclopedia/participative-management
Mueller, C. W., & Kim, S. W. (2008). The contented female worker: Still a paradox?
Justice: Advances in group processes, 25 117-150. Bingley, UK: Emerald
Mullins, J. (1995). Management and organisational behaviour. London: Pitman Publishing
Nutt, P. (2002) Why Decisions Fail: Avoiding the Blunders and Traps That Lead to
Debacles, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS Survival manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS.
London: Open University Press
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Southand Oaks: SAGE.
Pool, M. S., Ven, A, H, vd. (2004). Handbook of Organizational Change and Innovation.
New York : Oxford
65
Pruijt, H.(1997) Job Design and Technology. Taylorism vs. Anti-Taylorism, London
Riel, M. (2007) Understanding Action Research, Center For Collaborative Action Research.
Pepperdine Univerity. Retrieved on 19 February 2011 from
http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/ccar/define.html
Roe, R. A., Zinovieva, I., L., Dienes, E., Ten Horn, L., A. (2000). A Comparison of
Work Motivation in Bulgaria, Hungary, and the Netherlands: Test of a Model. Applied
Psychology: an International Review, 49, 658-687.
Salancik, G. R., Pfeffer, J. (1978). A Social Information Processing Approach to Job
Attitudes and Task Design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 2, 224-253 Johnson
: Cornell
Solomon, R.L. (1980). The Opponent-Process Theory of Acquired Motivation: The Costs of
Pleasure and the Benefits of Pain. American Psychologist, 35, 8, 691–712
Schruijer, S. G. L. (2006). Research on Collaboration in Action. International Journal of
Action Research, 2(2), 222-242
Schruijer, S. G. L., Vansina, L. (2004). The Dynamics of Multiparty Collaboration and
Leadership. In T. Camps, P. Diederen, G.-J. Hofstede & B. Vos (Eds.), The Emerging
Worlds of Chains and Networks: Bridging Theory and Practice (pp. 219-234). The
Hague: Reed Business Information
Smeenk, S.G.A. (2007). Professionalism versus managerialisim? A study on HRM practices,
organisational commitment, and quality of job performances among university
employees in Europe. Paper dissertation Nijmegen : Radboud University Press
Søndergaard, T., Hasle, P., Pejtersen, J.H., Olesen, K.G. (2007) Organisational social capital
and the health and quality of work of the employees; two empirical studies from
Denmark. International Congress on Social Capital and Networks of Trust on 18 – 20.
October 2007
Taylor, F.W. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management. New York : Harper & brothers.
Veen, P., Alblas, G., Geersing, J. (1991). Mensen en organisaties; een inleiding in de
organisatiepsycholgie. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum BV.
Vocht, A. de. (2004). Basishandboek SPSS 12 Amsterdam: Bijleveld
Volkskrant (2010). retrieved from:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2664/Nieuws/archief/article/detail/1017290/2010/08/2
4/Niemand-houdt-van-x.dhtml
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation.. New York: Wiley.
66
Werkman, R. A. (2006). Werelden van Verschil: hoe actoren in organisaties vraagstukken in
veranderprocessen hanteren en creëren. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam
Werkman, R. A., Boonstra, J. J., Elving, W. J. L. (2005). Complexiteit en weerbarstigheid
in veranderprocessen. Management & Organisatie, 5, 5-29
Weisbord, M. R., Janoff, S. (1995). Future Search: An Action Guide to Finding Common
Ground in Organizations and Communities. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Woodward, J. (1958). Management and Technology. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary
Office
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research, Design and Methods, Newbury Park, Sage
Zouwen, A. v. d. (2010). Effective use of large scale interventions. Working
paper/dissertation, Tilburg University, Tilburg
Zouwen, A. v.d. (2010a). Practice what you preach: Large group conferences as member
check in intervention research. Profile. International Journal of Change, Learning,
Dialogue, 19, 37-42
67
XII. Appendices
I. “The questionnaire”
X is bijzonder benieuwd naar uw mening omtrent uw tevredenheid met het werk.
Het invullen van deze vragenlijst gaat anoniem en kost u ongeveer vijftien minuten.
Resultaten zullen zowel intern gebruikt worden voor inzicht en waarborging,
als extern voor een afstudeeronderzoek ‘Organization Studies’ aan de Universiteit Van Tilburg.
Tips voor het invullen van de vragenlijst
Op de volgende bladzijden staan per onderwerp enkele uitspraken. Het is de bedoeling dat u over elke
uitspraak uw mening geeft, tenzij een uitspraak niet op u van toepassing is.
Voorbeeld:
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met de onderstaande uitspraak?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik zorg voor meer plezier in het werk bij mijn
collega’s � � � � ���� �
Als u zich volledig kunt vinden deze stelling, kleurt u het vijfde vakje ‘helemaal mee eens’ zwart, zoals in
het bovenstaande voorbeeld gebeurd is. Vakje twee van links staat voor oneens tot en met een beetje
oneens en het vierde vakje staat voor een beetje mee eens tot en met eens. Als u het moeilijk vindt om te
kiezen omdat u het niet eens, maar ook niet oneens bent met de uitspraak, dan kleurt u het vakje
‘Neutraal’ zwart.
Deze vragenlijst bevat ook open vragen. Vult u a.u.b. uw antwoord in op de stippellijnen.
Alle vragen in deze vragenlijst hebben betrekking op uw eigen situatie en gevoel. Uw mening staat
centraal. Denk niet te lang over elke vraag na, er zijn geen goede of foute antwoorden!
Wilt u proberen om alle vragen in te vullen?
Succes met het invullen van de vragenlijst!
Enquête
Medewerkerstevredenheid
68
1) Algemeen
In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende algemene stellingen over uw tevredenheid?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Over het algemeen ben ik tevreden met mijn
werk � � � � � �
b. Als u uw tevredenheid met het werk in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg ontevreden) en de
10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken, welk cijfer geeft u dan?
…………………
c. En welk rapportcijfer geeft u aan X als organisatie?
…………………
2) Houding ten opzichte van taakinhoud
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik heb afwisselend werk � � � � � �
b. Het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk of ik mijn
werk goed uitvoer of niet � � � � � �
c. Ik kan mijn werk van begin tot eind helemaal
zelf uitvoeren � � � � � �
d. Over het algemeen lever ik goede prestaties � � � � � �
e. Het werk wat ik doe is belangrijk voor X � � � � � �
f. Ik mag zo zelfstandig werken als ik wil � � � � � �
g. Ik weet in mijn werk direct of ik het goed doe � � � � � �
h. Ik heb mogelijkheden om mijn werk naar eigen
inzicht te organiseren � � � � � �
i. De werkzaamheden die ik verricht verschillen
per week van elkaar � � � � � �
j. Ik kan uit de vooruitgang van mijn werk
opmaken of ik goed presteer � � � � � �
k. Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor mijn
afdeling � � � � � �
l. Ik vind mijn taken zinvol � � � � � �
m. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheid om iets voor een
ander te betekenen (kennis over te dragen) � � � � � �
69
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
m. Ik weet waartoe ik bevoegd ben (waarover ik
wel/niet mag beslissen) � � � � � �
n. Ik heb weinig vrijheid in het bepalen van HOE
ik mijn werk zal uitvoeren � � � � � �
o. Ik moet voor de kleinste beslissingen
toestemming vragen � � � � � �
p.
1
Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor de
medewerkers in de uitvoering � � � � � �
p.
2
Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor collega’s
van InformatieManagement � � � � � �
p.
3
Het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor de
collega’s van andere divisies/afdelingen � � � � � �
q. Ik weet waarvoor ik verantwoordelijk ben � � � � � �
r. Het is mij doorgaans duidelijk wie binnen IM-U
waarvoor verantwoordelijk en bevoegd is � � � � � �
s. Ik weet vrij snel of ik op het goede spoor zit met
mijn werk � � � � � �
t. In het geheel van de X activiteiten is mijn
bijdrage goed te herkennen � � � � � �
u. Het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk wat mijn
taken zijn � � � � � �
v. De vrijheid van handelen die mijn directe
leidinggevende mij toestaat is goed � � � � � �
w. In mijn werk kan ik de taken (waaraan ik begin)
helemaal afronden � � � � � �
x. De werkzaamheden die ik verricht vallen voor
het grootste deel binnen mijn
functieomschrijving
� � � � � �
y. Het is mij doorgaans duidelijk aan wie ik
verantwoording dien af te leggen � � � � � �
70
3) Beloning
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over beloning?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming met de
inspanningen die ik lever � � � � � �
b. In vergelijking met collega’s binnen IM-U
verdien ik voldoende � � � � � �
c. Ik verdien voldoende in vergelijking met wat
buiten X in vergelijkbare functies/ organisaties
wordt verdiend � � � � � �
d. Mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming met mijn
verantwoordelijkheden � � � � � �
e. Ik verdien voldoende gezien mijn kennis en
vaardigheden � � � � � �
f. Ik ben tevreden met het salarisniveau waarop ik
ben ingeschakeld � � � � � �
4) Leiderschap & Management
a. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseren het hogere X management
(raad van bestuur, directeuren e.d.) het beste?
Maximaal 1 vakje inkleuren
1. ���� Laissez-faire management: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers en geen
aandacht voor de belangen van X
2. ���� Management of people’s needs: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar
geen aandacht voor de belangen van X
3. ���� Management of efficiency: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van X
4. ���� Middle management: weinig aandacht voor de medewerkers en weinig aandacht
voor de belangen van het X
5. ���� Ideal management: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers en volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van het X
b. Als u uw tevredenheid over het hogere X management in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg
ontevreden) en de 10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken, welk cijfer geeft u dan?
…………………
71
c. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseren de managementstijl
van de afdelingsmanagers en hoofd IM-U het beste?
Maximaal 1 vakje inkleuren
1. ���� Laissez-faire management: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers en geen
aandacht voor de belangen van X
2. ���� Management of people’s needs: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar
geen aandacht voor de belangen van X
3. ���� Management of efficiency: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van X
4. ���� Middle management: weinig aandacht voor de medewerkers en weinig aandacht
voor de belangen van X
5. ���� Ideal management: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers en volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van X
d. Als u uw tevredenheid over de afdelingsmanagers en hoofd X in een rapportcijfer tussen de 1 (erg
ontevreden) en de 10 (erg tevreden) uit zou moeten drukken,
welk cijfer geeft u dan?
…………………
e. Welke van de volgende zinnen karakteriseert de managementstijl van mijn teamleider het
beste?
Maximaal 1 vakje inkleuren
1. ���� Laissez-faire management: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers en geen
aandacht voor de belangen van X
2. ���� Management of people’s needs: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar
geen aandacht voor de belangen van X
3. ���� Management of efficiency: geen aandacht voor de medewerkers, maar volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van X
4. ���� Middle management: weinig aandacht voor de medewerkers en weinig aandacht
voor de belangen van X
5. ���� Ideal management: volledige aandacht voor de medewerkers en volledige
aandacht voor de belangen van X
72
5) Loopbaan- en scholingsmogelijkheden
In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Er zijn voldoende doorgroeimogelijkheden
binnen X � � � � � �
b. Binnen IM-U is er aandacht voor mijn
persoonlijke wensen op het gebied van
doorstroming naar andere functies � � � � � �
c. Het is mij duidelijk welke
loopbaanmogelijkheden er voor mij binnen X
openstaan � � � � � �
d. Er zijn voldoende mogelijkheden voor
horizontale mobiliteit (veranderen van functie op
hetzelfde niveau) � � � � � �
e. Er zijn voldoende mogelijkheden om een cursus
of opleiding te volgen � � � � � �
f. Ik ben tevreden met de scholingsmogelijkheden
binnen X � � � � � �
g. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om zelf invloed
uit te oefenen op verbeteringen in mijn werk � � � � � �
h. Ik ben tevreden met de ondersteuning van mijn
leidinggevende wat betreft mijn loopbaan en
scholing � � � � � �
i. De kennis en kunde die ik in mijn functie binnen
X heb opgebouwd is ook elders heel bruikbaar � � � � � �
6) Sfeer en collega’s
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik vind dat wij op onze afdeling goed
samenwerken � � � � � �
b. De sfeer op onze afdeling is goed � � � � � �
c. Er is sprake van eilandvorming door de
verschillende afdelingen � � � � � �
d. Ik kan met problemen terecht bij mijn collega’s � � � � � �
73
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
e. De verschillende afdelingen steunen elkaar bij
het uitvoeren van het werk � � � � � �
f. De procesdomeinen zorgen voor eilandvorming
binnen een afdeling � � � � � �
g. De collega’s op mijn afdeling luisteren naar
ideeën, meningen en suggesties van elkaar � � � � � �
h. Tussen de afdelingen komen regelmatig
conflicten voor � � � � � �
i. Mijn collega’s bij IM-U zijn TE lief voor elkaar � � � � � �
j. Er is veel contact tussen de verschillende
afdelingen � � � � � �
k. De medewerkers op mijn afdeling steunen elkaar
bij het werk � � � � � �
l. De sfeer tussen de verschillende afdelingen is
goed � � � � � �
m. In mijn team komen nauwelijks conflicten voor � � � � � �
n. Mijn collega’s op mijn afdeling durven elkaar de
waarheid te zeggen � � � � � �
o. Afdelingen werken onderling goed samen � � � � � �
7) Arbeidsomstandigheden
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over uw arbeidsomstandigheden?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik heb in mijn werk vaak met tijdsdruk te maken � � � � � �
b. Ik kan de hoeveelheid werk die ik heb goed aan � � � � � �
c. Ik moet vaak in mijn werk te veel taken
gelijktijdig uitvoeren � � � � � �
74
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
d. Ik ervaar een hoge werkdruk � � � � � �
e. Mijn werk is geestelijk inspannend � � � � � �
f. Ik kom wel eens gestrest thuis van mijn werk � � � � � �
g. Ik ben tevreden met mijn werkplekinrichting � � � � � �
h. De werkruimte waar ik mijn taken uitvoer,
beoordeel ik als goed � � � � � �
i. Het management van X doet voldoende aan
stressbeteugeling � � � � � �
j. Het management van X doet voldoende aan
vitalisering � � � � � �
8) Communicatie en informatie
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over de communicatie en
informatievoorziening?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over de toekomst
van X � � � � � �
b. Op mijn afdeling is altijd iedereen goed
geïnformeerd � � � � � �
c. Er is voldoende openheid binnen IM-U � � � � � �
d. Ik vind dat er voldoende overlegmomenten zijn
met andere afdelingen � � � � � �
e. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over
veranderingen bij X � � � � � �
75
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over de communicatie en
informatievoorziening?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
f. Ik ben tevreden met mijn inspraakmogelijkheden
binnen X � � � � � �
g. Ik krijg veel overbodige informatie � � � � � �
h. Er wordt voldoende naar mij geluisterd � � � � � �
i. Ik ben tevreden over de snelheid waarmee ik op
de hoogte word gesteld van de veranderingen � � � � � �
j. Afspraken met medewerkers van andere
afdelingen worden door hen goed nagekomen � � � � � �
k. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over de
veranderingen op mijn afdeling � � � � � �
l. Andere afdelingen zijn goed geïnformeerd als je
naar ze toegaat met vragen � � � � � �
m. Ik krijg voldoende informatie over andere
afdelingen binnen X � � � � � �
9) Erkenning en waardering
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over erkenning en waardering?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd wordt door
mijn leidinggevende � � � � � �
b. Ik voel me gewaardeerd door mijn collega’s � � � � � �
c. Ik hecht grote waarde aan wat collega’s vinden
van mijn werk � � � � � �
d. Ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd wordt door
de medewerkers van X � � � � � �
e. Ik krijg erkenning voor mijn werk � � � � � �
76
10) Betrokkenheid
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over betrokkenheid?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik heb een gevoel van trots dat ik voor X werk � � � � � �
b. Ik ben persoonlijk sterk betrokken bij X � � � � � �
c. Ik wil in mijn werk graag iets bereiken voor X
en niet alleen voor mezelf � � � � � �
d. Ik voel me thuis in deze organisatie � � � � � �
e. Ik wil nog lang bij X blijven werken � � � � � �
f. Ik ben persoonlijk meer betrokken bij IM-U, dan
bij X als geheel � � � � � �
11) Persoonlijke medezeggenschap
In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen over uw individuele medezeggenschap?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. De medezeggenschap op X niveau functioneert
goed (het hogere echelon luistert naar de goede
ideeën van de lagere(n) � � � � � �
b. De medezeggenschap binnen X functioneert
goed � � � � � �
c. Ik hecht veel belang aan medezeggenschap � � � � � �
77
12) Participatie in organisatieveranderingen
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken over participatie in geplande
organisatieveranderingen?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik
betrokken word bij de geplande veranderingen � � � � � �
b. Medewerkers van X zouden meer betrokken
moeten worden bij de geplande veranderingen � � � � � �
c. Ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden
bij veranderingen, ook als dit extra
verantwoordelijkheden met zich meebrengt � � � � � �
d. Het management zou bij veranderingen meer
moeten luisteren naar de ideeën, meningen en
suggesties van mij en mijn collega’s � � � � � �
e. Bewust uitgevoerde veranderingen worden
vooral top-down ingezet (weinig inspraak
personeel) � � � � � �
f. Over het algemeen ben ik tevreden over de
veranderingen waarmee ik de afgelopen twee
jaren te maken heb gehad bij X � � � � � �
g. Als medewerkers meer waren betrokken, waren
de resultaten van de veranderingen nog beter
geweest � � � � � �
i. Als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij
veranderingen, zou ik meer plezier hebben in
mijn werk � � � � � �
j. Als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij
veranderingen, zou ik nog meer tevreden zijn
over werken bij X � � � � � �
k. Meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal
niet zorgen voor betere resultaten � � � � � �
l. Het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan
mij vroeg hoe ik tegen bepaalde zaken aankijk � � � � � �
m. Het zal vooral onrust opleveren om
medewerkers meer te betrekken � � � � � �
78
13) Balans werk/privé
In welke mate bent u het eens met de volgende stellingen over de balans tussen uw werk en privé?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik heb voldoende invloed op mijn werktijden � � � � � �
b. Ik kan mijn werktijd goed afstemmen op mijn
privésituatie � � � � � �
c. Ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om verlof op te
nemen wanneer mij dat uitkomt � � � � � �
d. X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om in deeltijd
te werken als medewerkers dat willen � � � � � �
e. X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden voor
medewerkers om hun takenpakket (tijdelijk) aan
te passen, wanneer privéomstandigheden dat
vragen
� � � � � �
f. Ik combineer mijn werk zonder problemen met
mijn zorgtaken thuis � � � � � �
In het begin hebben we u gevraagd naar uw algemene tevredenheid. Tevens hebt u uw mening gegeven over de
verschillende deelaspecten van uw werk en werksituatie. Nu volgen er nog wat samenvattende vragen over de
deelaspecten van uw werk.
14) Tevredenheid over de deelaspecten van het werk
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
a. Ik ben enthousiast over de pilots van het nieuwe
werken bij X � � � � � �
b. Ik ben bang voor wat er tussen nu en twee jaar
kan gebeuren bij X � � � � � �
c. Ik ben tevreden over mijn beloning � � � � � �
d. Ik ben tevreden met mijn leidinggevende � � � � � �
e. Ik ben tevreden over de loopbaanmogelijkheden
binnen X � � � � � �
f. Ik ben tevreden over de scholingsmogelijkheden
binnen X � � � � � �
g.
1
Ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn
collega’s van X � � � � � �
79
In hoeverre bent u het eens of oneens met onderstaande uitspraken?
Helemaal
oneens
Neutraal Helemaal
eens
Weet
niet/
n.v.t.
g.
2
Ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn
collega’s van InformatieManagement � � � � � �
h. Ik voel me veilig om mijn werkplek � � � � � �
i. Ik heb binnen mijn werkzaamheden voldoende
deelgebieden waarin ik kan excelleren � � � � � �
j. Ik ben tevreden over de communicatie binnen X � � � � � �
k. Ik ben tevreden met de inspraakmogelijkheden
bij X � � � � � �
l. Ik ben tevreden met de informatie die ik krijg
binnen X � � � � � �
m. Ik ben tevreden over de waardering die ik krijg � � � � � �
n. Ik ben tevreden over de mate van betrokkenheid
bij veranderingen � � � � � �
o. Ik ben tevreden over de veranderingen � � � � � �
p. Ik ben tevreden met de mate van plezier in mijn
werk � � � � � �
Bedankt voor het invullen van de vragenlijst!
Als de resultaten van de vragenlijsten bekend zijn, zullen er interviews worden gehouden om meer diepte
informatie te verkrijgen omtrent uw tevredenheid met het werk. De individuele resultaten zullen niet aan uw
leidinggevende gepresenteerd worden, u blijft dus anoniem. De persoonlijke gegevens die u invult bij de
volgende vraag zullen dan ook uitsluitend gebruikt worden als controlevariabelen bij het onderzoek voor de
Universiteit van Tilburg.
15) a Wat is uw geslacht? � Man � Vrouw
b Wat is uw leeftijd?
…………………
Het kan zijn dat er komende weken contact met u wordt opgenomen voor het maken van een interviewafspraak.
Wilt u zelf iets kwijt, of meer informatie omtrent het onderzoek, neem dan contact op met ondergetekende.
mvg
Tom Aendenroomer Bsc.
Afstudeeronderzoek mastersopleiding Organization Studies
80
II. “Analysis codebook and origin of the items”
CODEBOOK QUESTIONAIRE
PARTICIPATION IN CHANGES����EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION
Vari-
able
Variable-label Value-label Measur
e
Source Modified
Name
:
a1 Over het algemeen
ben ik tevreden met
mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
b1 rapportcijfer
tevredenheid in het
werk
Nominal developed Item added
c1 rapportcijfer uwv
geheel
Nominal developed RequestUW
V
a2 ik heb afwisselend
werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
b2 doorgaans duidelijk of
ik werk goed uitvoer
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
c2 ik kan mijn werk van
begin tot eind helemaal
zelf uitvoeren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
d2 over het algemeen
lever ik goede
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
81
prestaties 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
e2 het werk wat ik doe is
belangrijk voor UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
f2 ik mag zo zelfstandig
werken als ik wil
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
g2
ik weet direct of ik het
goed doe
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
h2 ik heb mogelijkheden
om mijn werk naar
eigen inzicht te
organiseren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
i2 de werkzaamheden die
ik verricht verschillen
per week van elkaar
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Day replaced
for week
j2 ik kan uit de voortgang
van mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
82
opmaken of ik goed
presteer
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
k2 het werk wat ik doe is
van belang voor mijn
afdeling
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
l2 ik vind mijn taken
zinvol
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
m2 ik heb voldoende
mogelijkheden om iets
voor een ander te
betekenen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
n2 ik weet waartoe ik
bevoegd ben
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
o2 ik heb weinig vrijheid
in het bepalen van
HOE ik mijn werk zal
uitvoeren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
p2
ik moet voor de
kleinste beslissingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
83
toestemming vragen 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
q2.1 werk belang
medewerkers
uitvoering
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Differentiatio
n made
q2.2 werk van belang
collega's IM
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Item added
q2.3 werk van belang voor
andere divisies
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Item added
r2 ik weet waarvoor ik
verantwoordelijk ben
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
s2 het is mij doorgaans
duidelijk wie
waarvoor
verantwoordelijk is
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
t2 ik weet vrij snel of ik
op het goede spoor zit
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
84
met mijn werk 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
u2 in het geheel van de
UWV activiteiten is
mijn bijdrage goed te
herkennen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
v2 het is voor mij
doorgaans duidelijk
wat mijn taken zijn
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
w2 de vrijheid van
handelen die mijn
directe leidinggevende
mij toestaat is goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
x2 in mijn werk kan ik de
taken helemaal
afronden
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
y2 de werkzaamheden die
ik verricht vallen
binnen
functieomschrijving
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
z2 het is mij doorgaans
duidelijk aan wie ik
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
85
verantwoording dien af
te leggen
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
a3 mijn inkomen is in
overeenstemming met
de inspanningen die ik
lever
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
b3 in vergelijking met
collega's binnen IM-U
verdien ik voldoende
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
c3 ik verdien voldoende
in vergelijking met wat
buiten UWV verdiend
word
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
d3 mijn inkomen is in
overeenstemming met
mijn
verantwoordelijkheden
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
e3 ik verdien voldoende
gezien mijn kennis en
vaardigheden
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
f3 ik ben tevreden met het
salarisniveau waarop
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
86
ik ben ingeschakeld 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
a4 leiderschapsstijl hoger
UWV management
1 = laissez-fair
2 = management
of people’s needs
3 = management
of efficiency
4 = middle
management
5 – ideal
management
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
b4 cijfer hoger UWV
management
Nominal developed Request of
UWV
c4 leiderschapsstijl
afdelingleiders
1 = laissez-fair
2 = management
of people’s needs
3 = management
of efficiency
4 = middle
management
5 – ideal
management
Scale developed Differentatio
n added
d4 cijfer afdelingleiders Nominal developed Reguest
UWV
e4 leiderschapsstijl
teamleiders
1 = laissez-fair
2 = management
of people’s needs
3 = management
of efficiency
4 = middle
management
5 – ideal
management
Scale developed Differentatio
n added
a5 er zijn voldoende
doorgroeimogelijkhede
n binnen UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
b5 binnen IM-U is er
aandacht voor mijn
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
87
persoonlijke wensen
doorstroming
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
for UWV
c5 het is mij duidelijk
welke
loopbaanmogelijkhede
n openstaan
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
Personalized
for UWV
d5 voldoende
mogelijkheden voor
horizontale mobiliteit
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
e5 er zijn voldoende
mogelijkheden om een
cursus of opleiding te
volgen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
f5 ik ben tevreden met de
scholingsmogelijkhede
n binnen uwv
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
g5 voldoende
mogelijkheden zelf
invloed uit te oefenen
op verbeteringen in
werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
h5 ik ben tevreden met de
ondersteuning van
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
88
mijn leidinggevende 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
I5 kennis en kunde ook
elders heel bruikbaar
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request
UWV
a6 ik vind dat wij op onze
afdeling goed
samenwerken
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
b6 de sfeer op onze
afdeling is goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
c6 er is sprake van
eilandvorming door de
verschillende
afdelingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
d6 ik kan met problemen
terecht bij mijn
collega's
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
e6 de verschillende
afdelingen steunen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
89
elkaar bij het uitvoeren
van het werk
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
f6 de procesdomeinen
zorgen voor
eilandvorming binnen
een afdeling
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request
UWV
g6 de collega's op mijn
afdeling luisteren naar
ideeën, meningen van
elkaar
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
h6 tussen de afdelingen
komen regelmatig
conflicten voor
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
i6 mijn collega's bij IM-U
zijn TE lief voor elkaar
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
j6 er is veel contact
tussen de verschillende
afdelingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
k6 de medewerkers op
mijn afdeling steunen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
90
elkaar bij het werk 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
l6 de sfeer tussen de
verschillende
afdelingen is goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
m6 In mijn team komen
nauwelijks conflicten
voor
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
n6 mijn collega's op de
afdeling durven elkaar
de waarheid te zeggen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
o6 afdelingen werken
onderling goed samen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
a7 ik heb in mijn werk
vaak met tijdsdruk te
maken
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
b7 ik kan de hoeveelheid
werk die ik heb goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale EDMK NO
91
aan 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
c7 ik moet in mijn werk
vaan teveel taken
gelijktijdig uitvoeren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
d7 ik ervaar een hoge
werkdruk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
e7 mijn werk is geestelijk
inspannend
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
f7 ik kom wel eens
gestrest thuis van mijn
werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
g7 ik ben tevreden met
mijn
werkplekinrichting
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale EDMK NO
h7 de werkruimte waar ik
mijn taken uitvoer,
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale EDMK NO
92
beoordeel ik als goed 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
i7 het management van
IM-U doet voldoende
aan stressbeteugeling
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request
UWV
j7 het management van
IM-U doet voldoende
aan vitalisering
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Reguest
UWV
a8 ik krijg voldoende
informatie over de
toekomst van UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
b8 op mijn afdeling is
iedereen goed
geïnformeerd
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
c8 er is voldoende
openheid binnen IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
d8 ik vind dat er
voldoende
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale BASAM NO
93
overlegmomenten zijn
met andere afdelingen
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
e8 ik krijg voldoende
informatie over
veranderingen bij
UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Item added
f8 ik ben tevreden met
mijn
inspraakmogelijkheden
binnen IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
g8 ik krijg veel
overbodige informatie
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
h8 er word voldoende
naar mij geluisterd
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
i8 ik ben tevreden over
de snelheid op de
hoogte gesteld
veranderingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
Scale BASAM NO
94
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
j8 afspraken met
medewerkers van
andere afdelingen
worden door hen goed
nagekomen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
k8 ik krijg voldoende
informatie over de
veranderingen op
mijn afdeling
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Differentatio
n
Item added
l8 andere afdelingen zijn
goed geïnformeerd als
je naar ze toegaat met
vragen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
m8 ik krijg voldoende
informatie over andere
afdelingen binnen
UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
a9 ik weet dat mijn werk
gewaardeerd wordt
door mijn
leidinggevende
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
b9 ik voel me
gewaardeerd door mijn
collega's
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
Scale BASAM NO
95
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
c9 ik hecht grote waarde
aan wat collega's
vinden van mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
d9 ik weet dat mijn werk
gewaardeerd wordt
door de medewerkers
van UWV in werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
e9 ik krijg erkenning voor
mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
a10 ik heb een gevoel van
trots dat ik voor UWV
werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
b10 ik ben persoonlijk
sterk betrokken bij
UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
c10 ik wil in mijn werk
graag iets bereiken
voor mezelf
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
96
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
d10 ik voel me thuis in
deze organisatie
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA NO
e10 ik wil nog lang bij
UWV blijven werken
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA NO
f10 ik ben persoonlijk
meer betrokken bij IM-
U, dan bij UWV als
geheel
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
a11 de medezeggenschap
op UWV-niveau
functioneert goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES request
by UWV
b11 de medezeggenschap
binnen IM-U
functioneert goed
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES request
+
personalized
for UWV
c11 ik hecht veel belang
aan
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
Scale IVA NO
97
medezeggenschap 1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
a12 ik ben tevreden over
de mate waarin ik
betrokken word bij
veranderingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
b12 medewerkers van
UWV zouden meer
betrokken moeten
worden bij
veranderingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
c12 ik vind het belangrijk
om betrokken te
worden, ook als dit
extra
verantwoordelijkhede
n
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request by
UWV
d12 het management zou
meer moeten
luisteren naar
suggesties van mij en
collega's
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
e12 bewust uitgevoerde 0 = weet niet / Scale developed No adequate
98
veranderingen
worden vooral top-
down ingezet
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
scale found
f12 over het algemeen
tevreden over
veranderingen
afgelopen jaren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request
UWV
g12 meer betrokkenheid
van medewerkers,
betere resultaten
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
h12 als ik meer zou
worden betrokken bij
veranderingen, zou ik
nog meer tevreden
zijn met mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
i12 als ik meer zou
worden betrokken bij
veranderingen, zou ik
meer tevreden zijn
over IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
99
j12 meer inspraak in
organisatieveranderi
ngen zal niet zorgen
voor betere resultaten
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
k12 het zou vreemd zijn
als mijn
leidinggevende aan
mij vroeg hoe ik
tegen bepaalde zaken
aankijk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Item added
l12 het zou vooral meer
onrust opleveren om
medewerkers meer te
betrekken
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
a13 ik heb voldoende
invloed op mijn
werktijden
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA NO
b13 ik kan mijn werk goed
afstemmen op mijn
privé-situatie
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA NO
c13 ik heb voldoende
mogelijkheden om
verlof op te nemen als
mij dat uitkomt
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
Scale IVA NO
100
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
d13 IM-U biedt voldoende
mogelijkheden om in
deeltijd te werken als
medewerkers dat
willen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
e13 IM-U biedt voldoende
mogelijkheden om
takenpakket aan te
passen wanneer privé-
omstandigheden dat
vragen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA YES
personalized
for UWV
f13 ik combineer mijn
werk zonder
problemen met mijn
zorgtaken thuis
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale IVA NO
a14 ik ben enthousiast over
de pilots van het
nieuwe werken bij
UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request by
UWV
b14 ik ben bang voor wat
er binnen nu en 2 jaar
kan gebeuren bij UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
by UWV
c14 ik ben tevreden over
mijn beloning
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
Scale BASAM NO
101
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
d14 ik ben tevreden met
mijn leidinggevende
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
e14 ik ben tevreden over de
loopbaanmogelijkhede
n binnen UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
by UWV
f14 ik ben tevreden over de
scholingsmogelijkhede
n binnen UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
g14.1 ik ben tevreden over de
samenwerking met
mijn collega's van
UWV
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
differentation
made
g14.2 ik ben tevreden over de
samenwerking met
mijn collega's van IM-
U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Differentatio
n added
h14 ik voel me veilig op
mijn werkplek
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
Scale developed Request
UWV
102
5 = helemaal eens
i14 ik heb binnen mijn
werkzaamheden
voldoende
deelgebieden om te
excelleren
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed Request
UWV
j14 ik ben tevreden over de
communicatie binnen
IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
k14 ik ben tevreden met de
inspraakmogelijkheden
binnen IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
l14 ik ben tevreden met de
informatie die ik krijg
binnen IM-U
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM YES
personalized
for UWV
m14 ik ben tevreden over de
waardering die ik krijg
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
n14 ik tevreden over de
mate van
betrokkenheid bij
veranderingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
Scale developed Item added
103
5 = helemaal eens
o14 ik ben tevreden over
de veranderingen
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale developed No adequate
scale found
p14 ik ben tevreden met
mijn werk
0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk
oneens
3 = neutraal
4 = redelijk
oneens
5 = helemaal eens
Scale BASAM NO
a15 Man/vrouw 0 = Man
1 = Vrouw
Scale developed Control item
b15 leeftijd Nominal developed Control item
c15 Afdeling + team 0 = weet niet /
n.v.t.
1 = helemaal
oneens
2 = redelijk oneens
Scale developed Control item
104
III. “Preliminary analysis of the questionnaire”
1. In general I'm satisfied with my work
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Not relevant/don't knwo 3 2.8 2.8 2.8
Totally disagree 1 .9 .9 3.7
Disagree a bit 2 1.8 1.8 5.5
Neutral 14 12.8 12.8 18.3
Agree a bit 41 37.6 37.6 56.0
Totally agree 48 44.0 44.0 100.0
Total 109 100.0 100.0
IV. The cronbach dillema “Reliability of scales”
Variable two: Job content
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 109 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 109 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the
procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.887 28
105
Item-Total Statistics
2. Job content Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if
Item
Deleted
ik heb afwisselend werk 103.2018 169.292 .480 .883
doorgaans duidelijk of ik werk goed uitvoer 103.7248 164.868 .577 .880
ik kan mijn werk van begin tot eind helemaal zelf uitvoeren 104.0642 164.209 .457 .883
over het algemeen lever ik goede prestaties 103.2844 172.446 .260 .886
het werk wat ik doe is belangrijk voor X 103.5138 169.011 .381 .884
ik mag zo zelfstandig werken als ik wil 103.6514 163.266 .562 .880
ik weet direct of ik het goed doe 104.3028 165.954 .471 .882
ik heb mogelijkheden om mijn werk naar eigen inzicht te organiseren 103.5780 166.265 .467 .883
de werkzaamheden die ik verricht verschillen per week van elkaar 104.0000 167.222 .345 .886
ik kan uit de voortgang van mijn werk opmaken of ik goed presteer 104.3028 158.065 .651 .878
het werk wat ik doe is van belang voor mijn afdeling 103.4404 166.434 .551 .881
ik vind mijn taken zinvol 103.3394 165.708 .643 .880
ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om iets voor een ander te betekenen 103.5596 161.897 .641 .879
ik weet waartoe ik bevoegd ben 103.9083 159.269 .600 .879
werk belang medewerkers uitvoering 103.3119 172.161 .209 .888
werk belang collega's IM 103.7248 164.683 .520 .881
werk belang voor andere divisies 103.9174 170.336 .242 .888
ik weet waarvoor ik verantwoordelijk ben 103.4587 163.269 .606 .880
het is mij doorgaans duidelijk wie waarvoor verantwoordelijk is 104.5229 159.955 .532 .881
ik weet vrij snel of ik op het goede spoor zit met mijn werk 103.8349 164.454 .501 .882
in het geheel van de X activiteiten is mijn bijdrage goed te herkennen 104.3853 163.221 .500 .882
het is voor mij doorgaans duidelijk wat mijn taken zijn 103.6697 162.316 .691 .878
de vrijheid van handelen die mijn directe leidinggevende mij toestaat is goed 103.3853 168.813 .398 .884
in mijn werk kan ik de taken helemaal afronden 104.0092 165.213 .491 .882
de werkzaamheden die ik verricht vallen binnen functieomschrijving 104.0000 166.407 .368 .885
het is mij doorgaans duidelijk aan wie ik verantwoording dien af te leggen 103.7798 161.729 .498 .882
ik heb weinig vrijheid bepalen HOE ik werk zal uitvoeren 103.8257 171.238 .216 .888
PREV kleinste beslissingen toestemming 105.8807 185.939 -.358 .899
106
3. Variable three: Salary and reward
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 109 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 109 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the
procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.883 6
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha
if Item Deleted
mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming
met de inspanningen die ik lever
16.38 29.478 .652 .869
in vergelijking met collega's binnen
IM-U verdien ik voldoende
16.55 26.935 .747 .853
ik verdien voldoende in vergelijking
met wat buiten X verdiend word
16.52 29.474 .516 .895
mijn inkomen is in overeenstemming
met mijn verantwoordelijkheden
16.36 28.343 .803 .847
ik verdien voldoende gezien mijn
kennis en vaardigheden
16.41 28.189 .761 .852
ik ben tevreden met het salarisniveau
waarop ik ben ingeschakeld
16.40 28.299 .728 .857
107
Variable five: carreer and trainingopportunities
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 109 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0
Total 109 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the
procedure.
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
er zijn voldoende
doorgroeimogelijkheden
binnen X
28.18 47.114 .548 .853
binnen X is er aandacht
voor mijn persoonlijke
wensen doorstroming
28.84 44.040 .613 .847
het is mij duidelijk welke
loopbaanmogelijkheden
openstaan
28.57 44.266 .617 .846
voldoende mogelijkheden
voor horizontale mobiliteit
29.03 44.675 .541 .856
er zijn voldoende
mogelijkheden om een
cursus of opleiding te
volgen
27.68 46.646 .727 .840
ik ben tevreden met de
scholingsmogelijkheden
binnen X
27.87 45.094 .786 .833
voldoende mogelijkheden
zelf invloed uit te oefenen
op verbeteringen in werk
27.99 47.880 .606 .849
ik ben tevreden met de
ondersteuning van mijn
leidinggevende
28.33 43.760 .697 .838
kennis en kunde ook elders
heel bruikbaar
28.33 50.371 .315 .874
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.863 9
108
Variable six: atmosphere and co-workers
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total Correlation
Cronbac
h's
Alpha if
Item
Deleted
de sfeer op onze afdeling is goed 48.1667 37.736 .646 .689
ik kan met problemen terecht bij mijn collega's 48.3111 40.127 .343 .716
de verschillende afdelingen steunen elkaar bij het
uitvoeren van het werk
49.1667 36.612 .688 .682
de collega's op mijn afdeling luisteren naar ideen,
meningen van elkaar
48.3778 37.721 .627 .690
H. tussen de afdelingen komen regelmatig
conflicten voor
49.6000 51.479 -.522 .802
I mijn collega's bij IM-U zijn TE lief voor elkaar 49.3222 47.075 -.254 .772
er is veel contact tussen de verschillende
afdelingen
49.0333 39.336 .406 .709
de medewerkers op mijn afdeling steunen elkaar
bij het werk
48.2778 37.956 .615 .692
de sfeer tussen de verschillende afdelingen is goed 48.5889 39.593 .466 .706
In mijn team komen nauwelijks conflicten voor 48.3333 36.652 .617 .686
mijn collega's op de afdeling durven elkaar de
waarheid te zeggen
48.7889 38.595 .367 .713
afdelingen werken onderling goed samen 49.2778 36.315 .647 .683
eilandvorming 49.7556 37.602 .445 .703
procesdomeinen eilandvorming 49.7556 38.322 .422 .707
H.REV regelmatig conflicten 48.7333 40.085 .257 .725
IREV te lief 49.0111 44.079 -.027 .751
Case Processing Summary
N %
Cases Valid 90 82.6
Excludeda 19 17.4
Total 109 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the
procedure.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.730 16
109
Variable seven: work conditions
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
ik kan de hoeveelheid werk die
ik heb goed aan
24.7248 21.979 .313 .562
E7mijn werk is geestelijk
inspannend
24.3853 28.443 -.348 .687
ik ben tevreden met mijn
werkplekinrichting
24.8532 20.941 .333 .554
de werkruimte waar ik mijn
taken uitvoer, beoordeel ik als
goed
24.8991 20.795 .398 .539
het management van X doet
voldoende aan
stressbeteugeling
26.1560 19.800 .397 .535
het management van X doet
voldoende aan vitalisering
26.2661 19.234 .398 .533
A7REV tijdsdruk 26.4679 22.011 .318 .561
C7REVteveel taken tegelijk 26.0642 22.931 .182 .591
D7REVhoge werkdruk 25.9083 21.140 .414 .539
F7REVgestresst thuis van werk 25.9083 21.232 .327 .556
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.596 10
110
Variable eight: information and communication
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if
Item
Deleted
ik krijg voldoende informatie over de toekomst van X 36.6981 57.641 .563 .823
op mijn afdeling is iedereen goed geïnformeerd 37.2736 58.010 .469 .829
er is voldoende openheid binnen X 37.2075 57.042 .533 .825
ik vind dat er voldoende overlegmomenten zijn met andere afdelingen 37.6226 56.028 .507 .827
ik krijg voldoende informatie over veranderingen bij X 36.7642 56.601 .673 .817
ik ben tevreden met mijn inspraakmogelijkheden binnen X 37.1226 55.671 .523 .826
er word voldoende naar mij geluisterd 36.8962 56.894 .597 .821
ik ben tevreden over de snelheid op de hoogte gesteld veranderingen 37.0849 56.955 .670 .818
afspraken met medewerkers van andere afdelingen worden door hen goed
nagekomen
37.5755 57.866 .429 .833
ik krijg voldoende informatie over de veranderingen op mijn afdeling 36.9340 56.977 .593 .821
andere afdelingen zijn goed geinformeerd als je naar ze toegaat met vragen 37.6509 58.248 .396 .835
ik krijg voldoende informatie over andere afdelingen binnen X 37.6604 57.693 .593 .822
G8REVveel overbodige info 37.5849 67.197 -.070 .862
Variable nine: acknowledgement
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
A10ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd
wordt door mijn leidinggevende
15.01 7.750 .241 .601
A11ik voel me gewaardeerd door mijn
collega's
14.77 7.382 .538 .458
A12ik hecht grote waarde aan wat
collega's vinden van mijn werk
15.00 8.315 .242 .590
A13ik weet dat mijn werk gewaardeerd
wordt door de medewerkers van X
15.52 7.196 .230 .629
A14ik krijg erkenning voor mijn werk 15.22 6.747 .647 .394
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.839 13
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.593 5
111
Variable ten: Commitment
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.731 6
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if Item
Deleted
ik heb een gevoel van trots dat ik voor X werk 18.01 12.898 .615 .645
ik ben persoonlijk sterk betrokken bij X 17.67 13.020 .672 .631
ik wil in mijn werk graag iets bereiken voor mezelf 17.39 12.482 .652 .632
ik voel me thuis in deze organisatie 17.37 14.401 .639 .654
ik wil nog lang bij X blijven werken 17.50 15.308 .442 .701
F10ik ben persoonlijk meer betrokken bij X, dan
bij X als geheel
18.26 18.563 -.038 .838
Variable eleven: Personal participation
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
de medezeggenschap op X-
niveau functioneert goed
6.06 4.367 .553 .447
de medezeggenschap
binnen X funtioneert goed
5.90 4.462 .562 .434
C11ik hecht veel belang
aan medezeggenschap
4.71 6.450 .323 .735
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.661 3
112
Variable twelve: Participation in organizational changes
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.505 12
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance
if Item Deleted
Correcte
d Item-
Total
Correlati
on
Cronbach'
s Alpha if
Item
Deleted
ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik betrokken word bij
veranderingen
32.1759 24.558 .177 .487
medewerkersv van X zouden meer betrokken moeten worden bij
veranderingen
31.5370 23.204 .298 .455
ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden, ook als dit extra
verantwoordelijkheden
31.1389 22.906 .444 .427
bewust uitgevoerde veranderingen worden vooral top-down
ingezet
31.5000 26.533 -.003 .532
over het algemeen tevreden over veranderingen afgelopen jaren 32.5370 25.298 .057 .524
meer betrokkheid van medewerkers, betere resultaten 31.9259 19.434 .423 .396
als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer
tevreden zijn met mijn werk
32.0278 21.579 .456 .408
als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer
tevreden zijn over X
31.9907 21.617 .446 .410
meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal niet zorgen voor
betere resultaten
32.6296 26.310 -.004 .536
het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan mij vroeg hoe ik
tegen bepaalde zaken aankijk
33.5278 25.467 .163 .491
het zou vooral meer onrust opleveren om medewerkers meer te
betrekken
33.3148 25.582 .100 .506
D12REVmeer luisteren naar idee 33.1389 28.887 -.218 .558
113
Variable twelve A: Participation in past changes
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha if
Item Deleted
ik ben tevreden over de mate waarin ik betrokken
word bij veranderingen
10.3113 5.435 .372 -.024a
over het algemeen tevreden over veranderingen
afgelopen jaren
10.6887 5.131 .295 .018
meer betrokkenheid van medewerkers, betere
resultaten
10.0377 7.599 -.176 .573
top down 11.1604 6.441 .230 .136
meer luisteren naar idee 11.2736 7.477 .080 .254
a. The value is negative due to a negative average covariance among items. This violates reliability model assumptions. You
may want to check item codings.
Variable twelve B: Importance of participation in changes
Item-Total Statistics
Scale
Mean
if Item
Delete
d
Scale
Variance if
Item
Deleted
Correcte
d Item-
Total
Correlati
on
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
medewerkers van X zouden meer betrokken moeten worden bij veranderingen 16.55 12.602 .392 .533
ik vind het belangrijk om betrokken te worden, ook als dit extra verantwoordelijkheden 16.17 11.923 .594 .468
als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer tevreden zijn over 17.06 11.515 .519 .481
als ik meer zou worden betrokken bij veranderingen, zou ik meer tevreden zijn over IM-U 17.02 11.722 .482 .496
meer inspraak in organisatieveranderingen zal niet zorgen voor betere resultaten 17.65 15.248 .033 .662
het zou vreemd zijn als mijn leidinggevende aan mij vroeg hoe ik tegen bepaalde zaken
aankijk
18.54 14.917 .190 .598
het zou vooral meer onrust opleveren om medewerkers meer te betrekken 18.33 15.279 .080 .634
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.262 5
114
Variable thirteen: Balance work/private life
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean if
Item Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected Item-
Total Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha
if Item Deleted
ik heb voldoende invloed op mijn werktijden 19.12 17.550 .341 .535
ik kan mijn werk goed afstemmen op mijn privesituatie 19.24 16.572 .485 .496
ik heb voldoende mogelijkheden om verlof op te
nemen als mij dat uitkomt
19.20 16.348 .487 .491
X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om in deeltijd te
werken als medewerkers dat willen
19.83 13.250 .341 .518
X biedt voldoende mogelijkheden om takenpakket aan
te passen wanneer priveomstandigheden dat vragen
20.37 13.642 .200 .625
ik combineer mijn werk zonder problemen met mijn
zorgtaken thuis
19.94 14.478 .342 .513
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.573 6
115
Variable fourteen: Satisfaction of minor work aspects
Item-Total Statistics
Scale
Mean if
Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance
if Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's Alpha
if Item Deleted
ik ben enthousiast over de pilots van het nieuwe werken bij X 55.6759 92.632 .222 .873
ik ben tevreden over mijn beloning 54.0926 93.019 .414 .850
ik ben tevreden met mijn leidinggevende 53.7315 93.656 .458 .848
ik ben tevreden over de loopbaanmogelijkheden binnen X 54.0000 86.897 .726 .834
ik ben tevreden over de scholingsmogelijkheden binnen X 53.6111 91.174 .533 .844
ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn collega's van X 53.7130 92.618 .596 .842
ik ben tevreden over de samenwerking met mijn collega's van IM-U 53.8519 95.211 .501 .847
ik voel me veilig op mijn werkplek 53.2037 98.631 .298 .854
ik heb binnen mijn werkzaamheden voldoende deelgebieden om te
excelleren
53.5648 97.033 .380 .851
ik ben tevreden over de communicatie binnen X 54.5093 90.663 .681 .838
ik ben tevreden met de inspraakmogelijkheden binnenX 54.6852 90.236 .605 .841
ik ben tevreden met de informatie die ik krijg binnen X 54.3704 90.048 .716 .837
ik ben tevreden over de waardering die ik krijg 53.9815 91.439 .613 .841
ik tevreden over de mate van betrokkenheid bij veranderingen 54.5185 90.906 .621 .841
ik ben tevreden over de veranderingen 54.9537 90.979 .562 .843
ik ben tevreden met de mate van plezier in mijn werk 53.6759 94.315 .527 .846
B14REV bang voor gebeuren 54.3056 102.962 -.010 .871
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.855 17
116
V. Card Game
Below the collage of game results pictures is given.
117
VI. Initial topic list interviews
The interviews started with a brief description of the research, anonymity and goal of the
interview. The following ten minutes were used to ask questions which were not developed
for this research, but to investigate the degree of employee satisfaction for the organization.
Some of these variables are discussed in the result section of this paper. The game is played,
most of the times in the first half of the interviews, this brought value data for employee
satisfaction. Topic list for Y variable was not necessary.
Topics:
What is your general idea about the organizational changes of the last two years?
What went well, what could have gone better?
Is it possible for employees to participate in organizational changes, what is your opinion?
If employees were more involved, would the changes have been better?
If you could participate more in organizational changes, would you be more satisfied?
118
VII. Interview Results Figure Variable Respondent nr. Agree or disagree
with results Why? Improvement
1. interesting work 1
2
3
4
5
7 8
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree Agree
X
Important for employee satisfaction
Only important
determinant of employee satisfaction
X
X X
But doesn’t matter if it is
repetitive
X
X
X
X
X
X
2.clear responsibilities 1
2
3
5
6 7
8
Agree, but
Agree
Disagree
Disagree, but
Agree, but Disagree
Disagree
Interpretation of
responsibilities variates X
Different interpretation
which leads to frustration It’s a good thing to have
freedom
Same as 1 Same as 3
A bit chaos is fun
More steering of
management
X
Task of management to address issues
X
3. Reward 1 2
3
5 6
7
8
Agree Agree, but
Agree, but
Agree Agree
Disagree
Agree
X Employee does more than
expected
No extra salary for extra task
X
Mory salary is not more satisfaction
Too much tasks for salary
X
X They could give more
salary, but not necessary
Ambition is dead
X
More salary
X
4. Education 1
2
3
4
5
6 7
8
Agree but
Agree, but
Disagree
Agree
Undetermined
Agree, but Agree but
Disagree
Employee itself needs to put a lot of effort in it
More attention from management for talents
Only optional
Employee doesn’t want it
anymore
X See one
See one No budget for education
Team coach should be more involved in individual
employee. Currently to
much window dressing Same as 1, because it is
better for everyone
Task of team coach and HRM
Age
X
Make it easier
5. Mobility within
organization
1
2 3
4
6
Undetermined
Undetermined Agree, but
Agree, but
Agree
Yes, there is attention
from management, but no possibilities
X
Since cuts more difficult Employees choose for
certainty
Individual responsibility Not possible
Create own possibilities
X No solution
Not ideal, but not a bad thing
119
7
8
Disagree
Agree
Inform employees about
jobs Help from team coach
6. Mobility towards other
organizations
1
2
3 4
5
6
8
Disagree
Undetermined
Undetermined Agree
Disagree
Agree, if
Undetermined
Specific knowledge in
sector X
X
But job hopping is not the style of personnel
Knowledge to specific
Employees uses possibilities for education
X
Stimulate additional
education (4) X
X
It should not be improved
X
X
7. Information and communication
1
3
4 5
6
7
8
Disagree
Agree, but
Disagree Agree
Agree, but
Disagree
Undetermined
Very turbulent management decision, but
also very turbulent climate.
It takes to much time to
find the information Really poor
You can find everything
It takes to much time to
read Really poor
It is there, but really hard
to find
Make specific choices and follow these.
No influence on climate Team coach should update
employees
Same as 1 What you can’t find doesn’t
matter for your work
Inform
Summary updates on the intranet
8. High bureaucracy 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Focus is on production
instead of quality To much control
Organizational change causes this
Control culture should be
open culture
Structure is ideal
Create open culture
Search common ground
Don’t play the parent, act
like a coach
Skip management layers
Give more freedom
Don’t change without
common ground Skip management layer
Just do what management
tells you.
Skip management layers
More participation = less management
Listen to spontaneous
advices
9. Stress 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Not a stressed person
Not a stressed person
Not a stressed person, but
Span of control of
management is to big But that’s up to person
Own responsibility
Too less steering
Too much pressure
X
X
Management should say
No sometimes Increase nr team coaches
Dismiss additional tasks
Management should take more time for the
individual
Team coach should have more attention
10. Cooperation of 1 Agree Lack of control More intra department
120
departments
2
3 5
7
8
Agree
Agree Disagree
Agree
Agree
Lack of steering
X Cooperation is totally
unnecessary
Lack of web meetings Lack of steering
meetings
Not more, but more
efficient meetings X
Just do your work people
See two
11.Balance work/private
life
1
2
4
5
7
8
Agree, but
Undetermined
Agree
Undetermined
Agree, but
Agree
ICT structure works
frustrating + bad
performance Own responsibility
No balance is problem
employee satisfaction Own responsibility
See one
X
Possibility to log on at
home
X
Stimulate the new way of
working
X
X
12. top down culture 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
No participation of employees
Preference for bottom up
This is wrong
Too much management
Bottom up would be
messy Even if you want it is not
possible to participate
Stimulate creativity Create common ground
Before starting new projects first ask the
employees how & what
Common ground for new changes
It creates passive
employees Direct report of team coach
towards department chef
(Bottum up) Stick to this way
Listen more to employees
Give freedom
Listen to employees
13. Why are people
neutral about possibilities
for participation?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Agree, because
management created this
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
?
Agree
?
Lack of steering on
organizational change.
2 types of people created
by management
Too much stupid changes
Sick of changes
It is not important at all Do not understand those
people
People feel not taken serious
X
Choose instead of switch.
Before choice as
employees Stimulate passive
employees to create
common ground Passive attitude
Common ground Just listen to the boss
Listen and vote
X
14. satisfaction about past
changes
1
2
? so many changes
Many unsuccessful
changes
Agree
X
Changes would be better with more participation
Change in its core is no
problem
X
Search common ground before start organizational
change, then hold on to it But monitor, evaluate and
steer!
Same as 3
121
3
4
5
6
7
Agree
? so may changes Many unsuccessful
changes
Sick of change
Too much
X
More participation of
employees
More participation
X
Admission to privileged sessions
Sort of a LSI session
15. more participation =
more satisfaction
1
2
3
4
5 6
7
8
Undetermined
Disagree
Agree
Agree
Disagree Agree
Undetermined
Undetermined
Not as such, other factors
important There is some relation,
but other factors are more
important More participation =
better change
Direct effect
Not important Direct effect
Better change lead to
employee satisfaction
Other factors are also important
X
For example successful
changes
Better change = higher
satisfaction
Search common ground.
Maslow’s pyramid
Then management takes
employees serious
16. Informal meetings 3
4
5
6
8
No success at the
moment No success
No success
Succes
Succes
Mistrust about motives
Dislike activities
Team building should go
automatic, not forced Very nice way to be
informal
Fun, but it’s peoples own choice
Everybody should be
honoust Find interesting ones
Do not oblige these
activities
17. cyclical change 5
7
Agree
Agree, but
Does not believe in
change at all, accept ict change
Without change no
survival
122
VIII. A summary of the research journal
Date Activities Notes
Week 49 IRP writing
Sending progress to organization
Week 50 16-12-2010 Circle meeting 5
Week 51 IRP writing
Week 52 IRP writing
Week 1 4-1-2011 Circle meeting 6
Week 2 14-1-2011 IRP hand in 1st time
organization stops to cooperate
Received go major
From grave 2 cradle
Week 3 Evaluating what went wrong
Desperate brainstorming + contacting organizations
Week 4 25-2-2011 organization appointment Eindhoven
27-2-2011 organization appointment Amsterdam
28-2-2011 organization appointment Heerlen
Negative outcome
Positive outcome
Positive outcome
Week 5 Finding a match between research and organizations
Decision made to continue with Amsterdam
IRP literature study
Week 6 IRP literature study + writing
Week 7 IRP writing
16-2-2011 Green light for research plan @ new organization
17-2-2011 Circle meeting 7
Week 8 IRP writing
First draft questionnaire
Using literature
Week 9 28-2-2011 IRP hand-in 2 time Received Go
Week 10 Second draft questionnaire
Start writing codebook
Organization comments + literature
Week 11 15-3-2011 Circle meeting 8
Third draft questionnaire
developing additional scales
Week 12 Fourth draft questionnaire
Fifth draft questionnaire
Finish codebook
24-3-2011 Presentation for almost whole crew A&O
organization comments
higher management comments
to increase number of respondents
Week 13 Spread questionnaires
Thesis writing
31-3-2011 Presentation for almost whole crew B&I + R&B
Collecting questionnaires
Document preparation
to increase number of respondents
Week 14 5-4-2011 Circle meeting 9
5-4-2011 Send reminder to respondents
7-4-2011 Final date to hand in questionnaires
8-4-2011 Collecting questionaires
Refreshing SPSS skills
Week 15 Refreshing SPSS skills
Analyzing data (Preliminary analysis)
Analyzing data (Reliability check)
Analyzing data (Regression)
Developing interview questions & planning the interviews
123
Week 16 Interviews
Week 17 Interviews
Transcription
Week 18 Interviews
Transcription
3-5-2011 Circle meeting
Week 19 Transcription
Writing
Week 20 Writing
Week 21 Debriefing organization
Week 22 Writing
Week 23 Writing
Week 24 14-6-2011 IRP- defence
Week 25 24-6-2011 Deadline
Week 26 X
Week 27 X
Week 28 Feedback changes
Week 29 Rewriting
Week 30 Rewriting
Week 31 Rewriting
Week 32 12-8-2011 Revision Deadline