CHAPTER - 4

4.1 RELIABILITY

Before measuring reliability it is important to know that the concept of reliability refers to
consistent outcomes when repeated measurements are taken. In order to establish the
reliability of the measuring instrument several measures of reliability can be taken. The
most important measure of reliability is to measure internal consistency. It is measured
using reliability coefficient Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach, 1951). For the purpose of
measuring reliability of all factors Cronbach’s α reliability was calculated using SPSS.
Reliability values of all the six variables are summed up in the following table

TABLE 1: SHOWING RELIABILITY VALUES

Variables Cronbach’s Number of Items

S. No Reliability
1 Organizational Justice .823 12
2 Employee Engagement .882 16
3 Psychological Climate .902 21
4 Job Involvement .813 15
5 Employee Job Satisfaction .895 12
6 Organization Commitment .766 10

Higher alpha shows high reliability although there is no standard agreed cut off figure but a
Cronbach’s alpha of 0.7 and above is acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). As we can
see from the above table all variables have Cronbach’s alpha more than 0.70 even the least
Cronbach alpha among six variables is 0.766 thus can be seen from the table that all six
variables showing higher reliabilities.

4.2 VALIDITY
Validity is the property by which it is ensured that the scale is measuring as desired.
Validity is of different types and different methods needs to be adapted to measure different
type of validity. One of such validity is face validity face validity as per Kalpan and
Sucuzzo` (1993) face validity is determines by just appearance it is very subjective validity
but cannot be said as not useful as most of the time researcher relies on subjective judgment
in this research all the instruments is found high and hence found all valid.
Construct validity is also an important type of validity (Trochim, 2006). It finds how well is
the test to measure the degree of construct for which it is meant. Construct is the attribute,
skill or ability, based on established theories. Now construct validity is based on two
components that are convergent validity and discriminatory validity. Convergent validity
check measures whether the test we using is consistent with the other established tests
which are used to measure the construct. Whereas discriminatory validity checks whether
the test we are using is not consistent with the test which are meant to measure a construct
which is exactly opposite to the construct we are required to measure.
Another kind of validity is content validity (Bollen, 1989) in which content is validated by
checking its meaning in line with the content already available. Thus content validity is a
coverage test that the test we using covers all or maximum aspects of the construct. Content
validity is again subjective and logical rather than statistical (Kalpan and Sucuzzo, 1993).
As the questionnaires were based on standardized set of questionnaires aimed on the
variables they pass the content validity test. Next type of validity is criterion validity in
criterion validity it is seen that weather the test is consistent of measuring a particular
criterion of the construct which similar tests can measure
Here for the purpose of our research we have made use of discriminate validity to measure
the effectiveness of the tests employed. The calculation has been explained in the ‘Results
& Discussion’ chapter.
4.2.1 Item Total Correlation of Organizational Justice
First of all Item to Total Correlation was measured for organizational justice and the results
are shown in table. In table out of 12 statements 7 items were used in first factor which are
12, 11, 10, 8, 7, 9 & 4. Second factor included 3, 1, 5. And third factor included only 6. The
statement number 2 was inconsistence so it was dropped.

TABLE 2: SHOWING ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF

ORGANZIATIONAL JUSTICE
Questions Computed Consistent/ Accepted
Items
correlation Inconsistent /Dropped
Value
1 In organization my work schedule is fair. .255 Consistent Accepted
2 I think my level of pay is fair. .373 Inconsistent Dropped
3 I consider my work load to be quite fair. .579 Consistent Accepted
4 Generally, The rewards I received here are quite .573 Inconsistent Dropped
fair.
5 I think my job has several responsibilities. .470 Consistent Accepted
6 Job decisions are made by the manager in a biased .038 Inconsistent Dropped
manner.
7 My managers make sure that all employee concerns .532 Consistent Accepted
are heard before job decisions are made.
8 To make job decisions, my manager collects .692 Consistent Accepted
accurate and complete information.
9 When decisions are made about my job, the .574 Consistent Accepted
manager treats me with respect and dignity.
10 When decisions are made about my job, the .562 Consistent Accepted
manager is sensitive to my personal needs.
11 When decisions are made about my job, the .626 Consistent Accepted
manager treats with me in a truthful manner.
12 When decisions are made about my job, the .659 Inconsistent Dropped
manager shows concern for my right as employee.
In this case 2, 4, 6, 12 items were found inconsistent. As the correlation value was negative,
hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, this item was dropped and was not
considered for further analysis.

4.2.1.2 Item to Total Correlation for Employee Engagement

Secondly, item to total correlation was applied for employee engagement and correlations
of all the 16 items were measured.

TABLE 3: SHOWING ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF EMPLOYEE

ENGAGEMENT
Questions Computed Consistency Accepted/
Items
correlation Dropped
Value
1 I have a clear understanding of what is expected of me .521 Consistent Accepted
at work.
2 I understand how I can contribute to meet the needs of .347 Inconsistent Dropped
our customers.
3 I have been fairly rewarded. .489 Inconsistent Dropped
4 Here, senior leaders value employee. .632 Consistent Accepted
5 Everyone is treated with respect at work, regardless of .615 Inconsistent Dropped
who they are.
6 I can concentrate on my job when I am at my work .448 Consistent Accepted
area.
7 My personal work objectives are linked to my work .239 Consistent Accepted
area’s business plan.
8 I clearly understand my organization’s mission. .468 Consistent Accepted
9 Senior leaders have the capability to make my .671 Consistent Accepted
organization successful.
10 I am encouraged to take ownership of my work. .557 Consistent Accepted
11 My organization is involved in supporting the .627 Inconsistent Dropped
community.
12 There are career opportunities for me at my .609 Consistent Accepted
organization.
13 You can balance work and personal interests at my .555 Consistent Accepted
organization and still progress.
14 My organization allows me to maintain a reasonable .584 Consistent Accepted
balance between my family and work life.
15 My immediate manager gives me the support I need to .603 Inconsistent Dropped
do my job well.
16 I have the authority that I need to do my job well. .500 Inconsistent Dropped

In this case2, 3, 5,11,15,16 items were found to be inconsistent. As the correlation value
was negative, hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, this item was dropped and
was not considered for further analysis.

4.2.1.3 Item to Total Correlation for Psychological Climate

Total correlation of all the 21 items was calculated for Independent variable Psychological
Climate.

TABLE 4: SHOWING ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL

CLIMATE
Items Questions Computed Consistency Accepted/
correlation Dropped
Value
1 I feel that my job is important to the functioning of .531 Consistent Accepted
my work team.
2 I feel that my work makes a meaningful contribution. .483 Consistent Accepted
3 I have a great deal of freedom to decide how to do my .593 Inconsistent Dropped
job.
4 Control is assigned so that I have authority to make .621 Consistent Accepted
decisions within my own work area.
5 My job challenges my abilities. .596 Consistent Accepted
6 I am able to make full use of my knowledge and skills .590 Consistent Accepted
in my job.
7 My job responsibilities are clearly defined. .558 Inconsistent Dropped
8 The goals and objectives of my work team are clearly .612 Inconsistent Dropped
defined.
9 There are too many people telling me what to do. .440 Consistent Accepted
10 I have more work to do than I could ever get done. .491 Consistent Accepted
11 The amount of work I am assigned keeps me from .189 Consistent Accepted
doing a good job.
12 My supervisor treats his/her people with respect. .552 Inconsistent Dropped
13 My supervisor stresses the importance of work goals. .591 Consistent Accepted
14 My supervisor shows me how to improve my .568 Consistent Accepted
performance.
15 My supervisor helps me solve job-related problems. .647 Consistent Accepted
16 People in this work team are concerned about each .581 Inconsistent Dropped
other.
17 There is a feeling of pride in my work team. .554 Inconsistent Dropped
18 I am encouraged to try new ways of doing my job. .530 Consistent Accepted

19 Before decisions about my job are made, all of my .602 Consistent Accepted
concerns are heard.
20 The organization shows very little concern for me. .240 Inconsistent Dropped
21 This organization cares about my general satisfaction .579 Inconsistent Dropped
at work.

In this case 3, 7, 8, 12, 16, 17, 20, and 21 items were found to be inconsistent. As the
correlation value was negative, hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, these
items were dropped and were not considered for further analysis.

4.2.1.4 ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION FOR JOB INVOLVEMENT

Five, total correlation of all the15 items was calculated for dependent variable

TABLE 5: SHOWING ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF JOB

INVOLVEMENT
Items Questions Computed Consistency Accepted/
correlation Dropped
Value
1 I feel miserable when I have less work to do. .527 Consistent Accepted
2 Less of workload irritates me. .405 Inconsistent Dropped
3 I get depressed when I am not working. .524 Consistent Accepted
4 I love everything about my job. .556 Inconsistent Dropped
5 I give myself 100% to the job. .447 Consistent Accepted
6 For me, the best form of relaxation is doing my .582 Consistent Accepted
work.
7 I enjoy my job activities more than my leisure .569 Consistent Accepted
activities.
8 If a job-connected problem is not solved by the time .505 Consistent Accepted
I go home, I keep thinking about it.
9 I come early or stay late when I have more work to .439 Consistent Accepted
do.
10 I am not willing to devote my free time to my job. .268 Inconsistent Dropped
11 I feel relieved when it is time to go home. .266 Inconsistent Dropped
12 I wait impatiently for holidays. .085 Inconsistent Dropped
13 I am so much interested in my job that I have little .475 Consistent Accepted
time for my friends.
14 While away on leave, I keep on worrying that my .470 Consistent Accepted
work may be suffering.
15 Not able to complete my job worries me a lot. .514 Consistent Accepted

In this case 2, 4, 10, 11, 12 items were found inconsistent. As the correlation value was
negative, hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, these items were dropped and
were not considered for further analysis.
4.2.1.5 Total Correlation for Employee Job Satisfaction
Thirdly, item to total correlation was applied for of employee job satisfaction all the12
items were measured.

TABLE-6 SHOWING ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF EMPLOYEE JOB

SATISFACTION
Items Questions Computed Consistency Accepted/
correlation Dropped
Value
1 I am satisfied with the working environment of the .656 Consistent Accepted
company.
2 I am satisfied with job location. .721 Consistent Accepted
3 I am satisfied with the present working hour. .690 Inconsistent Dropped
4 I am happy with my work responsibilities. .643 Consistent Accepted
5 I feel comfortable in carrying out my responsibilities. .595 Inconsistent Dropped
6 I enjoy work relationships with the people around me. .487 Inconsistent Dropped
7 I like various activities in the firm & love .439 Inconsistent Dropped
participating in them.
8 I am happy with overall job security. .674 Consistent Accepted
9 I am satisfied with the given right to put forward my .643 Consistent Accepted
opinions.
10 I am happy with the recognition and rewards for my .560 Consistent Accepted
outstanding.
11 I am satisfied with the leave policy of the company. .619 Consistent Accepted
12 I am satisfied with long term benefit & insurance .580 Inconsistent Dropped
policies of the company.

In this case Third, Five, Six, Seven and twelve item was found inconsistent. As the
correlation value was negative, hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, this item
was dropped and was not considered for further analysis.

4.2.1.6 Item to Total Correlation for Organizational Commitment

Lastly, the total correlation of all the ten items was calculated for dependent variable
Organizational Commitment

TABLE: 7 SHOWING TO ITEM TO TOTAL CORRELATION OF

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT
Questions Computed correlation Consistency Accepted/
Items
Value Dropped
1 I would be very happy to spend the rest of .358 Inconsistent Dropped
my career in this organization.
2 I really feel as if this organization’s .261 Consistent Accepted
problems are my own.
3 This organization has a great deal of .509 Inconsistent Dropped
personal meaning for me.
4 It would be very hard for me to leave my .575 Consistent Accepted
job at this organization right now even if I
wanted to.
5 Too much of my life would be disrupted .487 Consistent Accepted
if I leave my organization.
6 I believe I have too few options to .457 Consistent Accepted
consider leaving this organization.
7 Even if it were to my advantage, I do not .376 Consistent Accepted
feel it would be right to leave.
8 I would feel guilty if I left this .302 Consistent Accepted
organization now.
9 This organization deserves my loyalty. .585 Consistent Accepted
10 I owe a great deal to this organization. .476 Consistent Accepted

In this case first and third items were found inconsistent. As the correlation value was
negative, hence lowering the overall individual’s score. So, these items were dropped and
were not considered for further analysis.

4.2.2 FACTOR ANALYSIS

Exploratory factor analysis is used to calculate the underlying factor structure of a set of
data or a construct when one has obtained calculation on a number of variables and want to
identify the number and nature of underlying factors. It helps to observe the
interrelationships among the items of a scale that are used to reveal the clusters of items that
have enough common variation to justify their grouping together as a factor. This process
condenses a group of items in to a smaller set of composite factors with a minimum loss of
information. The varimax rotation with (KMO) Keiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett’s Test was
applied to sampling adequacy for the all six questionnaires. The scree test plots were used
to determine the levels of values and a rotated component matrix is measured to identify the
loading.

4.2.2.1 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICS

All 12 items of the Abbas Ali Rastgar, Nina Pourebrahimi (2013) were subjected to factor
analysis developed three size namely; Interactional Justice, Distributive Justice and
Procedural Justice .According to Abbas Ali seven items to Interactional Justice and
Procedural Justice, three item to Distributive Justice and last only one item to Procedural
Justice.
The KMO index and Bartlett’s test were calculated value of .850 and Chi-square value of
1238.983 at p value .000. It is indicated that high value of factor analysis shown as in table
8 of KMO test. It is proof those exploratory factor analysis (EFA) good responses of
organizational justice (as shown in table 4.9).

Table-8 Showing KMO and Bartlett's Test for Organizational Justice

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .850

Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 1238.983
Sphericity Df 66
Sig. .000

Figure 2
TABLE: 9- SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE

Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

Procedural , Distributive Procedural
Interactional Justice Justice
Justice
OJ12. When decisions are made about my job, the manager .801
shows concern for my right as employee.
OJ11. When decisions are made about my job, the manager .786
treats with me in a truthful manner.
OJ10. When decisions are made about my job, the manager .755
is sensitive to my personal needs.
OJ8. To make job decisions, my manager collects accurate .721
and complete information.
OJ7. My managers make sure that all employee concerns are .660
heard before Job decisions are made.
OJ9. When decisions are made about my job, the manager .628
treats me with respect and dignity.
OJ4. Generally, the rewards I receive here are quite fair .538
OJ3. I consider my work load to be quite fair. .763
OJ1. In organization my work schedule is fair. .736
OJ5. I think my job has several responsibilities. .674
OJ6. Job decisions are made by the manager in a biased .926
manner.

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

4.2.2.2 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

The scale was based on sixteen items developed by Aligned (2008). KMO Bartlett Test
showed value sampling adequacy .889 and chi square value 1709.442 at p- value is.000 it is
indicated in table 10 and the value of KMO is good.
TABLE 10: SHOWING KMO AND BARTLETT’S TEST FOR EMPLOYEE
ENGAGEMENT

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .889
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 1709.442
Sphericity Df 120
Sig. .000

Figure 3 Showing Scree Plot

In table three factors were emerged out of sixteen questions. The first factor
includes 4, 15,5,14,3,9,10,16 statements. Second factor included 2, 1, 8, 6. In third
7, 13, 12 were included. Only 11th statement was found to be inconsistent so it was
dropped.
TABLE 11: SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF EMPLOYEEENGAGEMENT

Items Factor1 Factor2 Factor 3

Employee Performance, Profitability
Attraction Profitability
EE4. Here, senior leaders value employees. .803
EE15. My immediate manager gives me the support I need to .730
do my job well.
EE5. Everyone is treated with respect at work, regardless of .710
who they are.
EE14. My organization allows me to maintain a reasonable .640
balance between my family and work life.
EE3. I have been fairly rewarded. .609
EE9. Senior leaders have the capability to make my .607
organization successful.
EE10. I am encouraged to take ownership of my work. .590
EE16. I have the authority that I need to do my job well. .569
EE2. I understand how I can contribute to meet the needs of .795
our customers.
EE1. I have a clear understanding of what is expected of me at .715
work.
EE8. I clearly understand my organization’s mission. .640
EE6. I can concentrate on my job when I am at my work area. .632
EE7, My personal work objectives are linked to my work .749
area’s business plan.
EE13. You can balance work and personal interests at my .662
organization and still progress.
EE12. There are career opportunities for me at my .580
organization.

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.
4.2.2.3 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL CLIMATE

The 21-items Psychological scale developed by Serge Gagnon, Maxime Paquet, François
Courcy, and Christopher P. Parker (2009) was put to factor analysis. The KMO and Bartlett
test showed sampling Adequacy value .898 and Chi-Square 2579.667 and p value .000, the
value of KMO higher than 0.7 is considered as good (Table 12).

TABLE 12:SHOWING KMO AND BARTLETT’S TEST FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL

CLIMATE
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .898
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2579.667
Df 210
Sig. .000

Figure 4 Showing Scree Plots

The results show that out of 21 statements 5 items were extracted in first factor which
include item number 12,14,15,13 and 16. Second factor included items 7, 6,8,5,3, and 4. In
third factor items 19, 18 and 21 were converged. In fourth factor included items 2, 1, and 10
and last five factor included 11, 20, 9.

Only 17th statement was not included as the statement was inconsistent so the statement was
dropped.

TABLE.13: SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL CLIMATE

Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5
Good Autonomy, Innovation, Job Role
Emphasis, Challenge Justice (Importance), (Conflict),
Work Role Role
Facilitation (Workload) (Workload)
PC12. My supervisor treats .758
his/her people with respect.
PC14. My supervisor shows me .755
how to improve my
performance.
PC15. My supervisor helps me .667
solve job-related problems.
PC13. My supervisor stresses .666
the importance of work goals.
PC1. People in this work team .612
are concerned about each other.
PC7. My job responsibilities are .789
clearly defined.
PC6, I am able to make full use .720
of my knowledge and skills in
my job.
PC8. The goals and objectives of .684
my work team are clearly
defined.
PC5 My job challenges my .580
abilities.
PC3. I have a great deal of .579
freedom to decide how to do my
job.
PC4. Control is assigned so that .550
I have authority to make
decisions within my own work
area.
PC19. Before decisions about .770
my job are made, all of my
concerns are heard.
PC18. I am encouraged to try .701
new ways of doing my job.
PC21. This organization cares .659
about my general satisfaction at
work.
PC2. I feel that my work makes a .783
meaningful contribution.
PC1. I feel that my job is .752
important to the functioning of
my work team.
PC10. I have more work to do .569
than I could ever get done.
PC11. The amount of work I am .795
assigned keeps me from doing a
good job.
PC20. The organization shows .751
very little concern for me.
PC9. There are too many people .536
telling me what to do.
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
a. Rotation converged in 7 iterations.

4.2.2.4 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF JOB INVOLVEMENT

For measuring job involvement a scale developed by Daneshwar Doobree (2009) was
used with 15-items. Apply KMO and Bartlett’s tests Sampling Adequacy value .843
higher than 0.7 value to be good and Chi-square value 1348.742 and p-value is .000 it is
also considered to be good. (Table .14)
TABLE 14: SHOWING KMO AND BARTLETT’S TEST FOR JOB
INVOLVEMENT
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .843
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1348.742
Df 105
Sig. .000

Figure 5:Showing Scree Plot Job Involvement

All four factors were extracted. Item number 5, 4,6,15, and 7 were extracted in first factor.
Item number 2, 3, and 1 were extracted in second factor. Item number 14, 9, 8, and 13 were
extracted in third factor. Item number 11, 12 and 10 were extracted in fourth factor.
TABLE 15: SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF JOB INVOLVMENT

Items Factor 1 Factor2 Factor 3 Factor 4

Complete Strong
involvement, involvement, Detachment Personal
work itself Job satisfaction Involvement Involvement
JI5. I give myself 100% to the job. .771
JI4. I love everything about my job. .754
JI6. For me, the best form of relaxation .738
is doing my work.
JI15. Not able to complete my job .633
worries me a lot.
JI7. I enjoy my job activities more than .584
my leisure activities.
JI2. Less of workload irritates me .814
JI3. I get depressed when I am not .798
working.
JI1.I feels miserable when I have less .697
work to do.
JI14. While away on leave, I keep on .686
worrying that my work may be
suffering.
JI9. I come early or stay late when I .664
have more work to do.
JI8. If a job-connected problem is not .637
solved by the time I go home, I keep
thinking about it.
J13. I am so much interested in my job .621
that I have little time for my friends.
JI11. I feel relieved when it is time to .805
go home.
J12. I wait impatiently for holidays. .767
JI10. I am not willing to devote my .562
free time to my job.
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.
4.2.2.5 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION

Employee Job Satisfaction scale of Mosammod Mahamuda Parvin, M M Nurul Kabir

(2011) with 12 items was used. KMO and Bartletts Test value .903, Chi-Square value
1739.709 and p-value is .000 which is good and considered for further analysis shown is
Table 16.

TABLE 16: SHOWING KMO AND BARTLETT’S TEST FOR EMPLOYEE JOB
SATISFACTION
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .903
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1739.709
Df 66
Sig. .000

Figure 6: Showing Scree Plot

In this table two factors were extracted out of twelve questions. Item numbers 4, 6, 2, 5, 3,
7, and 1 were extracted in first factor. Item number 12,11,10,8,9 were extracted in second.
TABLE 17: SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF EMPLOYEE JOB
SATISFACTION

Items Factor 1 Factor 2

Pay Promotions
EJS4. I am happy with my work responsibilities. .771
EJS6. I enjoy work relationships with the people around me. .746
EJS2. I am satisfied with job location. .691
EJS5. I feel comfortable in carrying out my responsibilities. .690
EJS3. I am satisfied with the present working hour. .688
EJS7. I like various activities in the firm & love participating in them. .688
EJS1. I am satisfied with the working environment of the company. .608
EJS12. I am satisfied with long term benefit & insurance policies of the company. .846
EJS11. I am satisfied with the leave policy of the company. .817
EJS10. I am happy with the recognition and rewards for my outstanding. .775
EJS8. I am happy with overall job security. .695
EJS9. I am satisfied with the given right to put forward my opinions. .623
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.

4.2.2.6 FACTOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL

COMMITMENT
For measuring commitment a scale developed by Abdullah and Muhammad Ismail Ramay
(2012) was used with 10-items. These 10 factors were subjected to KMO and Bartlett tests
value .790 value higher than 0.7 is considered to be good and Chi-square value is 675.047
and p-value is .000. It is shown as Table 18.

TABLE 18: SHOWING KMO AND BARTLETT’S TEST FOR ORANIZATIONAL

COMMITMENT
 KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .790
Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 675.047
Sphericity Df 45
Sig. .000

Figure 7: showing Scree Plot

There are 10 questions which were emerged in three factors. The first factor included 6, 5
and 7. Second factor included statement number 3, 2, and 4 and third factor included items
8,9,10.

Only 1st statement was inconsistent and that was dropped.

TABLE 19: SHOWING FACTOR ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATION
COMMITMENT
Items Factor1 Factor 2 Factor3
Continuance, Affective, Normative
Normative Continuance Commitment
Commitment Commitment
OC6 I believe I have too few options to consider leaving .787
this organization.
OC5 Too much of my life would be disrupted if I leave .713
my organization.
OC7 Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it .704
would be right to leave.
OC3 This organization has a great deal of personal .771
meaning for me.
OC2 I really feel as if this organization’s problems are .689
my own.
OC4 It would be very hard for me to leave my job at this .640
organization right now even if I wanted to.
OC8 I would feel guilty if I left this organization now. .774
OC9 This organization deserves my loyalty. .727
OC10 I owe a great deal to this organization. .646
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 4 iterations.

TABLE 20: FACTOR ANALYSIS

Eig Relia Variable Convergence Load N

Factor Name en bility ings o.
Val of
ue it
(To e
tal) m
Procedural Justice OJ7. My managers make sure that all employee
Interactional Justice concerns are heard before Job decisions are made. 0.660
OJ8. To make job decisions, my manager collects
accurate and complete information. 0.721
OJ9. When decisions are made about my job, the
3.7 manager treats me with respect and dignity. 0.628
0.841 9
11 OJ10. When decisions are made about my job, the
manager is sensitive to my personal needs. 0.755
OJ11. When decisions are made about my job, the
manager treats with me in a truthful manner. 0.786
OJ12. When decisions are made about my job, the
manager shows concern for my right as employee. 0.801
 OJ1. In organization my work schedule is fair. 0.736
2.2
Distributive Justice OJ3. I consider my work load to be quite fair. 0.763
32
OJ5. I think my job has several responsibilities. 0.674
EE4. Here, senior leaders value employees. 0.803
EE9. Senior leaders have the capability to make my
4.1 organization successful. 0.607
Employee Attraction
53 EE10. I am encouraged to take ownership of my work. 0.590
EE14. My organization allows me to maintain a
reasonable balance between my family and work life. 0.640
EE1. I have a clear understanding of what is expected
of me at work. 0.715
Performance, 2.6 0.824 EE6. I can concentrate on my job when I am at my 10
Profitability 00 work area. 0.632
EE8. I clearly understand my organization’s mission. 0.640
EE7, My personal work objectives are linked to my
work area’s business plan. 0.749
1.8 EE12. There are career opportunities for me at my
Profitability
43 organization. 0.580
EE13. You can balance work and personal interests at
my organization and still progress. 0.662
EJS1. I am satisfied with the working environment of
3.7 the company. 0.608
Pay
48 EJS2. I am satisfied with job location. 0.691
EJS3. I am satisfied with the present working hour. 0.688
EJS8. I am happy with overall job security. 0.695
0.864 7
EJS9. I am satisfied with the given right to put forward
3.4 my opinions. 0.623
Promotions EJS10. I am happy with the recognition and rewards
80
for my outstanding. 0.775
EJS11. I am satisfied with the leave policy of the
company. 0.817
PC13. My supervisor stresses the importance of work
goals. 0.666
Good Emphasis, 3.2 PC14. My supervisor shows me how to improve my
Work Facilitation 63 performance. 0.755
PC15. My supervisor helps me solve job-related
problems. 0.667
PC4. Control is assigned so that I have authority to
make decisions within my own work area. 0.550
Autonomy, 3.2
Challenge 18 PC5 My job challenges my abilities. 0.580
PC6, I am able to make full use of my knowledge and
0.849 13
skills in my job. 0.72
PC18. I am encouraged to try new ways of doing my
2.7 job. 0.701
Innovation, Justice
23 PC19. Before decisions about my job are made, all of
my concerns are heard. 0.770
PC1. I feel that my job is important to the functioning
of my work team. 0.752
Job(Importance), 2.0 PC2. I feel that my work makes a meaningful
Role (Workload) 95 contribution. 0.783
PC10. I have more work to do than I could ever get 0.569
 done.

Role(Conflict), 1.7 PC9. There are too many people telling me what to do. 0.536
Role(Workload) 00 PC11. The amount of work I am assigned keeps me
from doing a good job. 0.795
JI5. I give myself 100% to the job. 0.771
JI6. For me, the best form of relaxation is doing my
Complete
2.9 work. 0.738
involvement,
26 JI7. I enjoy my job activities more than my leisure
work itself
activities. 0.584
JI15. Not able to complete my job worries me a lot. 0.633
Strong involvement, 2.2 JI1.I feels miserable when I have less work to do. 0.697
Job satisfaction 44 0.823 JI3. I get depressed when I am not working. 0.798 10
JI8. If a job-connected problem is not solved by the
time I go home, I keep thinking about it. 0.637
JI9. I come early or stay late when I have more work to
Detachment 2.1 do. 0.664
Involvement 63 JI13. I am so much interested in my job that I have
little time for my friends. 0.621
JI14. While away on leave, I keep on worrying that my
work may be suffering. 0.686
OC5 Too much of my life would be disrupted if I leave
my organization. 0.713
Continuance,
2.0 OC6 I believe I have too few options to consider
Normative
89 leaving this organization. 0.787
Commitment
OC7 Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it
would be right to leave. 0.704
OC2 I really feel as if this organization’s problems are
Affective, 0.721 8
1.9 my own. 0.689
Continuance
22 OC4 It would be very hard for me to leave my job at
Commitment
this organization right now even if I wanted to. 0.640
OC8 I would feel guilty if I left this organization now. 0.774
Normative 1.6
Commitment 89 OC9 This organization deserves my loyalty. 0.727
OC10 I owe a great deal to this organization. 0.646

4.3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

The descriptive statistics contained show in table reported levels of all the six variables. All
the variables were positively skewed.

The mean values for Organizational Justice (M=45.41, SD=8.39345), Employee

Engagement (M=60.9933, SD=11.35148), Employee Job Satisfaction (M=46.4267,
SD=9.55032), Psychological Climate (M=80.0367, SD=14.22333), Job Involvement
(M=58.1167, SD=9.80255), and Organization Commitment (M=41.7067, SD=4.13978).

Table 21: SHOWING DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Minim Maxim Mea Std.

N Range um um n Deviation Variance Skewness Kurtosis
Stati Statist Statisti Statisti Stati Statisti Std. Statist Std.
stic ic c c stic Statistic Statistic c Error ic Error
OJ 300 40 20 60 45.4 8.39345 70.45 -0.679 0.141 0.019 0.281
1
EE 300 63 17 80 60.9 11.35148 128.856 -0.51 0.141 0.007 0.281
933
EJS 300 47 13 60 46.4 9.55032 91.209 -0.439 0.141 -0.452 0.281
267
PC 300 72 33 105 80.0 14.22333 202.303 -0.597 0.141 -0.007 0.281
367
JI 300 57 18 75 58.1 9.80255 96.09 -0.645 0.141 0.419 0.281
167
OC 300 22 28 50 41.7 4.13978 17.138 -0.425 0.141 0.14 0.281
067
Valid 300
N
(List
wise)

Firstly Histogram for Organization Justice was created. The histogram in figure shows that
the data is again positively skewed indicating responses on higher side. The histogram in
figure 8 shows that the data is again positively skewed indicating responses on higher side.

Figure 8: Showing Histogram of Organization justice

Organization Justice
Figure 9: Showing Histogram of Employee Engagement
Figure 10: Showing Histogram Diagram of Psychological Climate
Figure 11: Showing Histogram diagram of Job Involvement
Figure 12: Showing Histogram of Employee Job Satisfaction
Figure 13: Showing Histogram diagram of Organization Commitment

The figure is also showing that the data was positively skewed.
TABLE 22: Coding of Variable’s Name
NO. Name of Factor Coding
1. Organization Justice OJ
2. Employee Engagement EE
3. Psychological Climate PC
4. Job Involvement JI
5. Employee Job Satisfaction EJS
6. Organization Commitment OC

TABLE 23: Coding of Factor’s Name

No. Name of Factor Coding
1 Procedural Justice PC
2 Interactional Justice IJ
3 Distributive Justice DJ
4 Continuance Commitment CC
5 Normative Commitment NC
6 Employee Attraction EA
7 Performances P
8 Profitability P
9 Good Emphasis GE
10 Work Facilitation WF
11 Autonomy Climate AC
12 Challenge Climate CC
13 Innovation Climate IC
14 Job (Importance) Climate JC
15 Role (Work Load) Climate RC
16 Conflict (Role) Climate CC
17 Pay P
18 Promotion P
19 Complete Involvement CI
20 Work It Self WS
21 Strong Involvement SI
22 Job Satisfaction JS
23 Detachment Involvement DI
24 Personal Involvement PI
25 Affective Commitment AC