Results

Descriptive Analysis

Frequency M S.D
Gender 252 1.71 .455
Marital Status 252 .505
1.33
Age 252 .786
Education 252 1.49 .765
Experience 252 .871
1.83
Level of designation 252 3.833
252 1.54
Valid N (listwise)
5.52
Note: M is the mean and S.D is the standard deviation. There are total 252 responses and in table
demographic information are shown.

Frequencies

Gender
Fr. %
Female 73 29.0
Valid Male 179 71.0
Total 252 100.0
Note: Fr is frequency and % is percentage. There are 73 females and 179 males, percentage is
29% and 71% respectively, and as total responses were 252

Marital Status
Fr %
Valid Single 172 68.3
Married 76 30.2
 Widowed 4 1.6
Total 252 100.0
Note: Fr is the frequency and % is the percentage. In marital status, there are 172 Singles, 76
married, and 4 widowed, percentage is 68.3%, 30.2%, and 4% respectively.

Age
Fr %
18 - 25 years old 168 66.7
26 - 35 years old 52 20.6
Valid 36 - 45 years old 25 9.9
45 or old 7 2.8
Total 252 100.0
Note: Fr is the frequency and % is the percentage. In Age table, there are 168 responses having
18 – 25 years, 52 responses having 26 – 35 years, 25 responses having 36 – 45 year, and 7
responses are 45+ years, Percentage is 66.7%, 20.6%, 9.9%, and 2.8% respectively.

Education
Fr %
Intermediate 91 36.1
Graduation 119 47.2
Valid Masters 35 13.9
MPhil/PhD 7 2.8
Total 252 100.0
Note: In education table, 91 responses from Intermediate background, 119 responses from
Graduation background, 35 responses from Masters Background, and 7 responses from
M.Phil./PhD background, Percentage is 36.1%, 47.2%, 13.9%, and 2.8%

Experience
Fr %
Less than 5 years 167 66.3
5 - 10 years 47 18.7
Valid 10 - 15 years 25 9.9
More than 15 years 13 5.2
Total 252 100.0
Note: Fr is the frequency and % is the percentage. In Experience Table: There are 167 responses
having less than 5 years of experience, 47 from 5 – 10 years of experience, 25 from 10-15 years
of experience, and 13 from more than 15 years from experience, percentage is 66.3%, 18.7%,
9.9%, and 5.2%

Level of Designation
Fr %
Valid In 47 18.7
E.L 28 11.1
As 25 9.9
M 32 12.7
S.M 18 7.1
D 13 5.2
V.P 4 1.6
S V.P 2 .8
P/CEO 7 2.8
Owner 25 9.9
Other 51 20.2
 Total 252 100.0
Note: Fr is the frequency and % is the percentage. In Level of Designation table, there are 47
Interns, 28, Entry levels, 25 are associate, 32 are Managers, 18 are senior managers, 13 are
Directors, 4 are vice presidents, 2 are Senior Vice presidents, 7 are Presidents/CEOs, 25 are
Owners, and 51 are others. Percentage is 18.7%, 11.1%, 9.9%, 12.7%, 7.1%, 5.2%, 5.2%, 1.6%,
0.8%, 2.8%, 9.9%, and 20.2%.

Reliability Analysis

Reliability
α α Based on St Items Item numbers
.873 .887 8
Note: In reliability table Cronbach’s alpha is α which value is 0.873 and total numbers of items
are 8.
Correlational Analysis

Correlations
Sr. No. Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 EJP -
2 JEmb .575** -
**
3 JEng .530 .609** -
4 KS .568** .477** .630** -
** ** **
5 Di .457 .429 .446 .568** -
6 Rel .411** .424** .501** .553** .592** -
7 Ent .320** .356** .357** .425** .400** .530** -
** ** ** ** ** **
8 KSe .537 .419 .495 .612 .550 .573 .537** -
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
In correlational table there is correlation between the variables JEmb and EJP is r = .575, p < .
001, the inter-correlation between the variables JEng and EJP is r = .530, p < .001, between KS
and EJP is r = .568, p<.001, between Di and EJP is r = .457, p<.001, between Rel and EJP is r = .
411, p<.001, between Ent and EJP is r = .320, p<.001, between KSe and EJP is r = .537, p<.001,
between EJP and JEmb is r = .575, p<.001, between JEng and JEmb is r = .609, p < .001,
between KS and JEmb is r = .477, p<.001, between Di and JEmb is r = .429, p<.001, between
Rel and JEmb is r = .424, p<.001, between Ent and JEmb is r = .356, p<.001, between KSe and
JEmb is r = .419, p<.001, between KS and JEng is r = .630, p<.001, between Di and JEng is r = .
446, p<.001, between Rel and JEng is r = .501, p<.001, between Ent and JEng is r = .357,
p<.001, between KSe and JEng is r = .495, p<.001, between Di and KS is r = .568, p<.001,
between Rel and KS is r = .553, p<.001, between Ent and KS is r = .425, p<.001, between KSe
and KS is r = .612, p<.001, between Rel and Di is r = .592, p<.001, between Ent and Di is r = .
400, p<.001, between KSe and Di is r = .550, p<.001, between Ent and Rel is r = .530, p<.001,
between KSe and Rel is r = .573, p<.001, between KSe and Ent is r = .537, p< .001 and suggest a
highly significant positive relation between all pair of two variables.

As we can see the relation of Employee job performance with other variables, it is cleared that
there is an effect of social media usage on Employee Job Performance. So, Hypothesis 01 is
proved.

Relation of Job Engagement with other variables is highly significance, it is cleared that there is
an effect of social media on Job Engagement. So, Hypothesis 02 is proved.

Relation between Employee Job Performance and Job Engagement is highly significance, it is
cleared that there is an effect of Job engagement on Employee Job Performance. So, Hypothesis
03 is proved.

Relation of Job Embedment with other variables is highly significance, it is cleared that there is
an effect of social media on Job Embedment. So, Hypothesis 05 is proved.

Relation between Employee Job Performance and Job Embedment is highly significance, it is
cleared that there is an effect of Job embedment on Employee Job Performance. So, Hypothesis
06 is proved.
Regression Analysis

Model Summary
Mode R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
R Square F df1 df2 Sig. F
l Square R Square of the
Change Change Change
Estimate
a
1 .695 .483 .468 4.01222 .483 32.549 7 244 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), KSe_New, JEmb_New, Ent_New, Di_New, JEng_New, Rel_New,
KS_New
Note: Regression analysis Model summary indicates that value of R is .095, R square = .483,
p<.001

ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 3667.764 7 523.966 32.549 .000b
1 Residual 3927.898 244 16.098
Total 7595.663 251
a. Dependent Variable: EJP_New
b. Predictors: (Constant), KSe_New, JEmb_New, Ent_New, Di_New, JEng_New, Rel_New,
KS_New
Note: Regression analysis ANOVA indicates that df = 7, mean square = 523.966, F = 32.549,
and p<.001
 Coefficients’
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 5.259 1.730 3.040 .003
JEmb_New .533 .098 .326 5.424 .000
JEng_New .081 .066 .083 1.236 .218
KS_New .228 .072 .220 3.173 .002
1
Di_New .124 .115 .068 1.077 .283
Rel_New -.048 .081 -.039 -.589 .556
Ent_New -.119 .128 -.054 -.933 .352
KSe_New .436 .122 .239 3.587 .000
Note: In regression analysis it is clear that Job embedment has the significance value which is
p<.001 and it is playing role of moderate between social media and Employee job Performance.
So, Hypothesis 7 proved.
On the other side Job engagement has the non-significant value which is p>.05 and it is not
playing moderation role between social media and Employee job performance. So, Hypothesis 4
is not proved.
 Discussion

In the discussion, it is explained about the impact of social media on the job performance .As we
know, the use of social media and networking sites, in particular, is a phenomenon that has had
both good and bad consequences for businesses and workers in recent years. Employee work
performance was used to evaluate whether or not a person did a good job. The report claims that
market growth is said to be aided by social networks, which promote societal solidarity. The
widespread usage of social media facilitates activities such as online learning and information
sharing. According to the study model, social media has an impact on creative thinking.
Individual job performance and work behavior.

In the H1 , It investigate that there is positive affect of Social media usage on employee' job
performance, through analysis the result indicate that the relation of Employee job performance
and social media it is cleared that there is an significant relationship of social media usage on
Employee Job Performance. p<.001 So, Hypothesis 01 is proved.

In the H2,It is investigate that There is positive affect of Social media usage on Job engagement
so the result indicate that there is significant relationship between Social media and job
engagement and its significant is . p<.001.

In H3,It showed that there is positive affect of Job engagement on employee job performance,
the result indicate trough analysis that there is positive and significant relation between these two
variables and has impact and its significant is . p<.001 as well and co-relation value mention
above analysis.

In H4, It investigate that Job engagement meditate the relationship between social media usage
and employee job performance’s, according to result in regression analysis it showed that On the
other side Job engagement has the non-significant value which is p>.05 and it is not playing
moderation role between social media and Employee job performance. So, Hypothesis 4 is not
proved.
In H5, It shows that there is positive affect of social media usage on Job embedment hence
according to result there is positive relationship in them.
In H6, There is positive affect of job embedment on employee job performance. Through
analysis, the result indicate that there is significant relation and have positive effect on both
variable.
In the end, the hypothesis is Job embedment meditate the relationship between social media
usage and employee job performance. As the result indicate that In regression analysis it is clear
that Job embedment has the significance value which is p<.001 and it is playing role of moderate
between social media and Employee job Performance. So, Hypothesis 7 proved.