See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339401568

Impact of Job Satisfaction on Organizational Commitment

Book · February 2020

CITATIONS READS
4 27,565

1 author:

Ali Tatar
Akdeniz University
12 PUBLICATIONS   19 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Servis hizmetleri kalitesi View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Tatar on 21 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Impact of Job Satisfaction on Organizational Commitment

ABSTRACT
This thesis aims at identifying the impact of work satisfaction on the level of organizational
commitment in the Libyan Telecom Company. The subject of organizational commitment
is one of the most important issues to be addressed when it comes to the employees of
NGOs. The problem of this study lies in the lack of clarity and awareness in the front of
employees about the important of job satisfaction and its relation on their productivity,
performance and their loyalty. Despite the importance of job satisfaction on organizational
commitment, however, many organizations do not pay sufficient attention to this issue due
to the lack of awareness of the senior management in these organizations of its importance
and its impact on the behavior and performance of workers.

The exploratory research type is used in this research. This approach focused on finding
new solutions or insights to specific problem depending on the study results, the descriptive
study uses to explore accurate information of people, cases, or situations, and the
explanatory study explains the relationship between the variables of study.

The results of study have shown that inadequate applications are among the main reasons
of lack organizational commitment of employees. Satisfaction with work, satisfaction with
pay and incentives, satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career
advancement, satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision, satisfaction with the
work group and social relations between employees, and satisfaction with work conditions
such as safety, healthy and stability, all these factors have shown very significant impact
on the level of organizational commitment. Therefore the management of any organizations
should consider these factors and giver serious attention to improve their application, due
to their positive impact on the organizational commitment.

Keywords: Libyan Telecom Company, Organizational Commitment, Work Satisfaction,

Employees Performance, Promoting System.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... vii
CHATER I ...................................................................................................................................... 8
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................................ 15
2. LITRETURE RIVIEW ........................................................................................................... 15
2.1 Job Satisfaction Definition ............................................................................................... 15
2.2 Employee Satisfaction and Job Performance ................................................................. 15
2.3 Factors that Affect Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 17
2.4 Importance of Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................ 18
2.5 Organizational Commitment ........................................................................................... 20
2.6 Employee Commitment to Strategy Implementation .................................................... 22
2.7 Organizational Commitment and Job Performance ..................................................... 23
2.8 Satisfaction with the Work............................................................................................... 24
2.9 Satisfaction with Payments and Incentives..................................................................... 25
2.10 Satisfaction with Opportunities for Growth, Progress and Professional Growth .... 27
2.11 Satisfaction with Leadership Style and Supervision.................................................... 29
2.11.1 Transformational Leadership ..................................................................................... 30
2.12 Satisfaction with the Working Group and Social Relations of the Employees ......... 32
2.13 Satisfaction with work Conditions such as Safety, Healthy and Stability ................. 32
2.14 Working Environment ................................................................................................... 33
2.14.1 Factors Determining a Good Working Environment. .............................................. 34
2.14.2 Physical Working Conditions ..................................................................................... 37
2.15 Creating a Positive Work Environment ....................................................................... 39
2.16 Relationship between Work Environment and Activity ............................................. 41
2.17 Employee Performance .................................................................................................. 42
2.18 Physical Working Environment and Employee Productivity ..................................... 44
2.18.1 Working Environment and Performance at the Ministry of Higher Education .... 45

iii
 2.19 Genders, Age, Educational level, Years of experience, Social Status Role in
Performance Evaluation......................................................................................................... 47
2.20 Interior Design of Work Place ....................................................................................... 49
2.20.1 Interior Design of Work Place and Employee Performance.................................... 52
2.21 Summary.......................................................................................................................... 54
CHAPTER III .............................................................................................................................. 54
3. METHODOLOGY AND DATA ANALYSIS ....................................................................... 54
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 54
3.2 Research Approach and Design....................................................................................... 55
3.3 Data Collection .................................................................................................................. 56
3.4 Questionnaire of Study ..................................................................................................... 57
3.5 Reliability Test .................................................................................................................. 58
3.6 Characteristics of surveyed Samples ............................................................................... 58
3.7 Normality Test for all Questionnaire Areas ................................................................... 64
CHAPTER IV............................................................................................................................... 75
4. CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND FUTURE STUDIES .............................. 75
4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 75
4.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 75
4.3 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 76
4.4 Future Studies ................................................................................................................... 77
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 78

iv
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 3.1: Reliability of Questionnaire ......................................................................................... 58
Table 3.2: Gender of samples ....................................................................................................... 59
Table 3.3: Age of respondents ...................................................................................................... 60
Table 3.4: Social Status of sample of study .................................................................................. 60
Table 3.5: Number of Sons and daughters .................................................................................... 61
Table 3.6: Years of Experience of samples of study ..................................................................... 62
Table 3.7: Educational Level of respondents ................................................................................ 63
Table 3.8: Normality (satisfaction with work) .............................................................................. 64
Table 3.9: Normality (satisfaction with pay and incentives) ........................................................ 65
Table 3.10: Normality (satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career
advancement) ................................................................................................................................. 65
Table 3.11: Normality (satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision) ....................... 67
Table 3.12: Normality (Satisfaction with the work group and social relations between employees)
....................................................................................................................................................... 67
Table 3.13: Normality (Satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability) 68
Table 3.14: Normality (factors affecting the organizational commitment)................................... 68
Table 3.15: First research hypothesis ............................................................................................ 70
Table 3.16: Second research hypothesis ....................................................................................... 70
Table 3.17: Third research hypothesis .......................................................................................... 71
Table 3.18: Fourth research hypothesis......................................................................................... 71
Table 3.19: Fifth research hypothesis ........................................................................................... 72
Table 3.20: Sixth research hypothesis ........................................................................................... 72
Table 3.21: Results of Hypotheses ................................................................................................ 73

v
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page

Figure 1: Model of study (updated by the researcher) ........................................................14

Figure 2.1: Factors that affect employee satisfaction (Koshy V., 2018) ............................16
Figure 32.2: Drivers of Overall Organization Commitment (NIT Calicut, 2013) ..............22
Figure 42.3: Office Design and Productivity ......................................................................37
Figure 52.4: Evidence of physical workplace effects on employee outcomes by Rianne
Appel- Meulenbroek, 2018 ..................................................................................................46
Figure 2.5: Dimensions of work and employee satisfaction ...............................................52
Figure 3.1: Gender of samples of study ………....………………………………………. 60
Figure 3.2: Age of sample of study ……………………………………………………… 61
Figure 3.3: Social status of samples of study ……………………………………………. 62
Figure 3.4: Number of kids of samples of study ……………………………………...…. 63
Figure 3.5: Respondents years of experience …………………….……………………… 64
Figure 3.6: educational level of respondents ...………………..….…...……………...….. 65

vi
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
NGOs: Non-Governmental Organizations

HRM: Human Resources Management

JS: Job Satisfaction

vii
CHATER I

1. INTRODUCTION

Job satisfaction is crucial problem for all organization no matter whether in public or private
organizations or working in advanced or underdeveloped countries. One of the purposes for this
degree of interest is that satisfied personnel is reported as committed workers and commitment is
indication for organizational output and effectual operations (Robbins & Coulter, 2005:370). There
is no doubt that the valuable asset of a country is its teachers. They build fortune of the nation.
Teachers are said to be the builders of the nation. There is accord about reality that every other
factor are trivial without the presence of powerful instructors. There must be instructed and
experienced educators in colleges who be given adequate convenience offices with the goal that
they give due reflection and regard for instructing just as research (Rehman et al., 2009). Better
business open doors are made for scholastics and their compensation scales be amended and they
are given genuinely attractive pay bundle, so as to beat the issue of cerebrum deplete of instructors
(Manzoor et al., 2011).

Organizational commitment is the degree to which an employee feels loyalty to a particular

organization (Currivan, 1999). Thus, organizational commitment acts as a psychological link to an
organization which influences individuals act in ways that are consistent with the organization‟s
interests (Yang & Chang, 2008). Meyer and Allen, who concentrated on hierarchical responsibility
as a mental express that mirrors the connection between an individual and an association, contended
that this state is determinative on the relations between the specialist and the association, and the
choice of the previous to stay in the last mentioned (Larson & Luthans, 2006; Shahnawaz & Jafri,
2009).The commitment of employees means that sticking all the more firmly to authoritative
articles, distinguishing proof, incorporation with the association, acknowledgment of hierarchical
objectives and values, and phenomenal exertion for hierarchical advantage (Allen & Meyer, 1990).

Employees are a vital resource for all organizations, especially since they represent a significant
investment in terms of locating, recruiting, and training let alone salaries, healthcare plans, bonuses,
etc. The administration of numerous associations builds up their preparation programs, advantage
bundles, execution examination and work framework dependent on their organization approach.
Normally these strategies are gone for creating steadfast representatives since this prompts an
increasingly extensive residency. The more drawn out a representative works for an organization
the more profitable they progress toward becoming. Therefore this research aims at evaluating the

8
impact of job satisfaction on organizational commitment among employees of Libyan Telecom
Company.

Background of Study

Numerous past investigations utilized an immediate impacts model to look at the connection
between occupation fulfillment and hierarchical responsibility utilizing distinctive examples, for
example, 621 representatives from different segments in Belgium (Caroline et al., 2015), 327
representatives from a social work association (Jonathan et al., 2010), 214 individual from 22 non-
profit organizations in a Midwestern State of the USA (Hyenjin et al., 2012) and 730 employees
from retail sectors (Miguel et al., 2014). These investigations found that the capacity of supervisors
to suitably give what representatives need in the workplace had been a vital determinant of
hierarchical responsibility (Caroline et al., 2015; Jonathan et al., 2010; Hyenjin et al., 2012; Miguel
et al., 2014).

Commitment is an organizational concept which has important outcomes for organizations.

Employees’ commitment to the organization has an undeniable, strong effect on the outcomes of a
business. These powerful effects in organizational commitment result not from professionals’
working for personal expectations but from their working for organizational expectations (Cohen,
2000).

Investigation of the focal points of commitment that, also traditional and equally relevant,
encompass objects outside the organization, such as unions, careers, and customers, and inside the
organization, such as occupation, work, staff, and change, among others (Bastos, 1994; Fink, 1992).
One of the prime virtues of this line is to maintain the discussion about the existence of diffuse
bonds and different work relationships within the context of organizations; Morrow (2011) likewise
features the accentuation on the administration of full of feeling responsibility, since this base
introduces the most huge associations with alluring practices. The meta-examinations considered
likewise affirm the anticipated connection among duty and fulfillment (general, with pay, with
partners, with work, and with supervision). In addition, ponders by Green, Wu, Whitten and Medlin
(2006) point out the effect key HR the executives has upon individual execution, hierarchical duty,
and fulfillment levels for crafted by 269 HR experts, who were vertically lined up with authoritative
mission and objectives, and on a level plane lined up with other hierarchical capacities.

Many researches have discussed the positive relationship between organizational commitment and
job satisfaction (Dubinsky et al,1981; Clark et al, 1991; McNeilly et al, 1992; Wong et al, 1995;
9
Fletcher et. al, 1996)]. Instead, (Curry, J P, et al. 1986) concluded that there is no relationship
between the two variables. Vandenberg and Lance (Vandenberg et al., 1992) secured that position
fulfillment is made through hierarchical duty. A few past examinations have inspected the
connection between authoritative responsibility and employment execution. For instance, a few
examinations affirmed that authoritative responsibility and occupation execution are exceptionally
connected (Mowday et al., 1974) dissected the relationship between hierarchical duty and
execution with financial dependence on work as a mediator. As per them, those with low financial
necessities have more grounded connections between authoritative responsibility and execution
than those with high prerequisites. As indicated by Putti et al. there exists a bond between these
two factors.

Research Problem

Porter and Steers (1973) argued that job satisfaction reflects the aggregate level of net worker
prospects and they remain loyal to their jobs. Employees want some other benefits along with their
jobs like promotion, pay, autonomy etc. These benefits and range of their preferences may be
different for every job but if these benefits remains unmet then their satisfaction level will decline
and lead to the withdrawal behavior.

There are numerous investigations that have studied the relationship between organizational
commitment and job satisfaction (Currivan, 1999). Predominant view is that job satisfaction is an
antecedent to organizational commitmen (Lincoln & Kalleberg, 1990; Mowday; Porter, & Steers,
1982; Mueller, Boyer, Price, & Iverson, 1994; Williams & Hazer, 1986). There is also some support
for the reverse causal ordering, organizational commitment as an antecedent to job satisfaction
(Vandenberg & Lance, 1992).

The subject of organizational commitment is one of the most important issues to be addressed when
it comes to the employees of NGOs. The problem of this study lies in the lack of clarity and
awareness in the front of employees about the important of job satisfaction and its relation on their
productivity, performance and their loyalty. Despite the importance of job satisfaction on
organizational commitment, however, many organizations do not pay sufficient attention to this
issue due to the lack of awareness of the senior management in these organizations of its importance
and its impact on the behavior and performance of workers. Therefore the main research problem
is desgined in the following main question:

10
What is the impact of job satisfaction on organizational commitment among employees of Libyan
Telcom Company?

Importance of Study

The importance of this research stems from:

1. This research aims to identify the impacts of job satisfaction on organizational commitment
within the Libyan Telecom Company, and explore its relation on employee’s performance and
productivity.
2. This research topic first of its kind at the level of Libya, which discussed the impact of job
satisfaction on organizational commitment at the level of Libyan NGOs (Libyan Telecom
Company).
3. The study shed the light on the optimal exploitation of human resources and increase their
organizational commitment by reduce the factors which lead to work turnover, and increase
their work satisfaction levels.
4. The study shed the light on the importance of organizational commitment on the efficient and
effectiveness of work within the NGOs, and thus improve the economic situation at the level
of all society.

Research Objectives

This research aims to achive the following objectives:

1. Identify the relationship impact between the job satisfaction and organizational commitment,
and then provide some recommendations that work to develop and improve the level of
organizational commitment among employees of Libyan Telecom Company.
2. Analyze and evaluate the level of organizational commitment among employees of Libyan
Telecom Company.
3. Identify the factors and obstacles that affect the level of organizational commitment among
employees of Libyan Telecom Company.
4. Provide some suggestions and recommendations in order to improve the level of organizational
commitment among employees of NGOs ( Libyan Telecom Comany).

Reserch Questions

This research aims to answer the following questions:

11
1. What is the relationship impact between the job satisfaction and organizational commitment at
the level of Libyan Telecom Company?

2. What is the level of organizational commitment among employees of Libyan Telecom

Company?

3. What is the factors and obstacles that affect the level of organizational commitment inLibyan
Telecom Company?

4. Is their any differences in the respondents views about the impact of the relationship between
the job satisfaction and organizational commitment regarding to some demographical variables
(Gender, Age, Marital Status, Level of Education, Years of Expereience, Job Title, Salary)?

Research Hypotheses and Research Variables

1. The Independent variable: is the variable that changes in response to the independent
variable. The independent variables in this study include:
• Satisfaction with work.
• Satisfaction with pay and incentives.
• Satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement.
• Satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision.
• Satisfaction with the work group and social relations between employees.
• Satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability.

2. The dependent variable: is the one the experimenter controls. The dependent variable in this
study include:
• Organizational Commitment which include Approve on the policy of the organization,
Attention to the fate of the Organization, Long Term membership ın the organization.

Based on the above variables, the research hypotheses are formulated as following:

H1: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfactions with work and
organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfactions with work and organizational
commitment.

12
H2: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with pay and incentives
and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with pay and incentives and
organizational commitment.

H3: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with opportunities for
growth, progress and career advancement and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with opportunities for growth,
progress and career advancement and organizational commitment.

H4: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with the style of leadership
and supervision and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with the style of leadership and
supervision and organizational commitment.

H5: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with the work group and
social relations between employees and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with the work group and social
relations between employees and organizational commitment.

H6: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with work conditions such
as safety, healthy and stability and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with work conditions such as
safety, healthy and stability and organizational commitment.

13
Research Model

Satisfaction with work

Satisfaction with pay and

incentives

Satisfaction with opportunities

Organizational
for growth, progress and career
Commitment
advancement

Satisfaction with the style of

leadership and supervision

Satisfaction with the work

group and social relations
between employees

Satisfaction with work

conditions such as safety,
healthy and stability
Figure 1: Model of study (updated by the researcher)

Thesis Layout

Chapter one of this thesis provides a general introduction about the research topic which includes
background to the study, statement of the problem, research objectives, and research questions that
the study look forward to answering, the purpose of the study, and significance of the study,
delimitations and scope of the study. Chapter two outlines the previous studies anout the impact of
job satisfaction on organizational commitment. Chapter three provides the research methodology,
the general characteristics of the sample study, and results of the study hypotheses followed by the
answers of the research questions. Chapter four presents summary of the study, conclusions and
recommendations, future studies.

14
CHAPTER II

2. LITRETURE RIVIEW

2.1 Job Satisfaction Definition

Job satisfaction is just how people relate to their work and various aspects of their work. This is
the degree to which people like (satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) aspects of their work or
work, such as "work for themselves", "pay", "promotion of opportunities", "control", and
"cooperation" (Spector 1997). Job Satisfaction is a common indicator measured by JDI factors (ie,
work itself, career opportunities, and salary, supported by a manager and relationship with
colleagues).

Organizational research, job satisfaction occupies a dominant role in many theories and models of
individual attitudes and behaviors. The concept of job satisfaction was defined in various ways.
But the most widely used job satisfaction and organizational research definition is the Locke
definition (1976), which described job satisfaction as "a pleasant or optimistic emotional state due
to job evaluation or work experience." Syeyen and Van Wk (1999) reported that job satisfaction is
a sense of hope that comes from understanding a person's work. Mwamwenda (1995) identifies the
relationship between job satisfaction and productivity, loyalty, activity and working hours. Job
satisfaction is the sum of pleasure or job satisfaction (Dubrin, 1997). Job satisfaction is the result
of the employee's perception of how well their work is what is considered important (Luthans,
2002). In his study, smither (1998) stated that most people seem to have a higher need, such as self-
realization. This means that people who have a great need for work are just satisfied with having a
job that can meet those needs (Hackman and Lawler, 1971).

2.2 Employee Satisfaction and Job Performance

With more than thirty years of internal marketing plan, it seems that there is no comprehensive
definition of domestic marketing. Therefore, the lack of a comprehensive definition leads to
problems in measuring domestic trade. In summary, a review of previous studies shows that several
researchers have identified and researched domestic trade through various approaches. The key
point of these methods is that the internal market must be informed about training as required and
have the necessary motivation to achieve organizational goals (Doukakis, 2003).

In general, internal marketing can be described as an activity that contributes to improving

employee internal communication and customer orientation (Hogg, Carter and Dunne, 1998). In
addition, aligning internal clients with business strategies, numerous educational programs, and
15
better organizational relationships (Lings, 1999). Everyone is a client of an organization and, above
all, national customers need to receive services before providing services to foreign customers.
Therefore, the satisfaction and value provided to domestic customers should increase. It should
also be borne in mind that the provision of services within an organization leads to the provision
of high quality services or products to end users (Simbberova, 2007). There are therefore two main
objectives in the area of internal marketing, including: 1 - increasing employee satisfaction by
creating value in their internal organizational relationships; 2. Quality of services for them
(Simbarova, 2007). Job satisfaction is usually explained by the positive attitude of employees
towards their work (Pan, 2015). Job satisfaction depends on feelings or subjective work situation.
Job satisfaction depends on various factors, including organizational policy, supervision,
administration, salary, wages and quality of work life. Employee satisfaction is seen as a series of
exceptional dimensions that enhance job satisfaction (Farooqui and Nagendra, 2014). Research by
insurance companies in Taiwan has shown that internal marketing has a positive impact on job
satisfaction and organizational performance. In addition, organizational culture has a positive
impact on internal marketing (Shiu & Yu, 2010). Another study showed that employees who play
an important role in providing services to customers are required to achieve high quality services
so that the creation of an area based on internal marketing within the organization is a factor of
great job satisfaction (Tortosa, A. Moliner & Sanchez, 2010)

Figure 2.1: Factors that affect employee satisfaction (Koshy V., 2018)

Kalkavan and Katrinli (2014) believe that proper administration of affairs affects employee
satisfaction, greater employee commitment and decent work at work. In addition, the results
showed a positive link between job satisfaction and the organizational commitment of individuals
(Kalkavan and Katrinli, 2014). Pasaoglu and Tonus (2014) analyzed the impact of strategic human
resources on job satisfaction in their research. The results showed that there is a positive
16
relationship between employee performance and job satisfaction. In addition, they realized that the
variables of employee learning, commitment, and work identity affect employee satisfaction, where
job satisfaction ultimately leads to higher human resource productivity and greater competitive
advantage for the organization. (Hosts and Tonus, 2014)

2.3 Factors that Affect Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction in the modern world can be described as one of the most important but controversial
problems in the business world. This means the general attitude of the employee towards his work.
It is a pleasant or positive emotional state that comes from evaluating your work or work
experience. He also shows how satisfied the person is with his work. The happier they work, the
more satisfied they are. "It cannot be defined as motivation, but it is clearly related to it." “Although
there are several factors that affect job satisfaction, there is no clear standard to show which aspects
of work should be considered as a factor in job satisfaction. Ina Alina (2010) presented eight
different elements:

a) Payment: when there is salary, you can influence an employee to devote his time and work to
pay. One of the Hygiene Factors of Hyper bargain Theory (1964)

b) Working hours: - Pores (2003) analyzed that "working time affects quality of life and
relationships with family and friends and hence employee satisfaction".

c) Working conditions: There are several factors in the work environment, including lighting,
building design, air quality, temperature and external noise.

d) Supervision. The relationship between an employee and his / her manager is important to
increase job satisfaction.

e) Stress: Liquidity or overcrowding in the banking sector can be the cause of stress in the banking
sector. The more stress workers experience, the less likely they will be satisfied with their job.

f) Human Resources: "The role of the HR manager is directly related to employee satisfaction".

g) Work Design: "Diversity, Motivation, Remuneration, Promotion, Employee Recognition and

Independence - These are job satisfaction features".

17
h) Demographic characteristics: action Factors such as age, gender, educational qualifications and
experience are demographic characteristics. Studies have shown that these properties have positive
and negative correlations.

I) Promotion: Employee encouragement and job satisfaction have a strong connection. It also
shows a significant link between employee development, the size of the organization and the use
of employee talent.

2.4 Importance of Job Satisfaction

The term "job satisfaction" is the attitude of employees towards their work. It is based on many
factors; some of them are internal factors and others are non-employee. Employee satisfaction is
crucial to maintaining and maintaining the right and effective people within the organization. In
this sense, it is the right position of the right person in the right culture and its maintenance. In
addition, job satisfaction is an important variable that is taken into account when evaluating an
organisation's success. To be effective and efficient, an organization must meet the expectations
and concerns of its employees. In other words, in order for an organization to be successful, it must
constantly ensure the satisfaction of its employees. In addition, job satisfaction has been extensively
studied in many areas of knowledge such as organizational theory, psychology, administration
science, economics and sociology (Samaiya, 2015). As Landy observed (1978), this usually stems
from the fact that many of the experts feel that changing job satisfaction affects many
organizational outcomes, such as labor productivity, productivity, delays or omissions, employee
intentions to give up your job. , Accidents and occupational safety at work, mental / physical health
and overall satisfaction with life. Therefore, as Serrano and Vieira (2005) say, job satisfaction is
an important factor in determining the overall well-being and satisfaction of an employee's life,
and dissatisfaction is a good reason for an employee's intentions or decisions workers leave work
and leave work. (Gazioglu and Tansel, 2006). Organizations have a strong influence on their
employees, and some of these effects are reflected in the behavior of their employees and their
organization as a whole (Spector, 1997). This shows that job satisfaction is important for both
organizations and employees. Because a number of studies have shown that organizations use the
behavior of satisfied employees because they are more likely to have better employee turnover and
productivity when their employees are experiencing great job satisfaction.

Employees must also be satisfied with their work, depending on how long they need to spend
(Nguyen, Taylor and Bradley, 2003). These statements summarize the importance of job
satisfaction for employers and their employees:
18
“"Job satisfaction is self-sufficient because it is part of the social well-being of employees" -
deciding whether or not to do or maintain a job, and the extent of their effort will depend heavily
on a partially positive employee attitude that reflects his personal his work, in other words, the
pleasure of working ”(Clark, 1998).

Employee satisfaction can be seen as one of the key factors contributing to the efficiency and
effectiveness of business organizations. In fact, the new management approach, which states that
employees should be valued and treated first and foremost as people with their desires, needs,
personal desires, is a good indicator of job satisfaction in modern organizations. When considering
job satisfaction, a satisfied employee is a healthy worker, and a happy employee is a successful
employee. The value of job satisfaction is largely achieved by taking into account many of the
negative consequences of job dissatisfaction, such as lack of loyalty, an increase in the number of
incapacity for work, an increase in accidents, and so on. D. Spector (1997) lists three important
characteristics of job satisfaction: organizations that operate in the context of Universal Values will
be people oriented towards respect for and interaction with employees. The result of job satisfaction
on these issues can be a key indicator of employee performance. A high level of job satisfaction
can be a symbol of good mental and emotional staff. Second, employee behavior based on their
level of job satisfaction will have a major impact on the performance and processes of the entire
organization's subsystem. In this sense, we can conclude that job satisfaction will be positive
behavior and job satisfaction, which will lead to negative employee behavior. Third, employee
satisfaction with work is considered a good indicator of organizational performance. Different
employee evaluation systems may have different levels of job satisfaction in different
organizational units, but it is a good indicator of what organizational actions or unit changes need
to be done to increase their effectiveness. Speaking about job satisfaction, Karen Bowes said:

"We spend most of our lives in the workplace, so it is hopeful that many people like to work and
spend time with their colleagues. Good employers recognize that their employees are the best assets
and invest in creating a positive work environment, teaches employees through reliable leadership
and provides other benefits that help employees work, feel good and interested. Creating the
conditions for success will increase morality, innovation and productivity” (Hannah and Uttley,
2013).

According to Rao and Kamleshvara (1996), job satisfaction is the focus of many researchers for a
long time.

19
One of the most important indicators in organizational research is employee satisfaction. Spector
(1997) suggested a simple description of "how much people like or dislike their work". Andrisan
(1978) proposed a broader description of "work done by a worker or specific work-related
components". Locke (1976) had a more comprehensive definition because he used emotional states
in his description; "A pleasant or positive emotional state caused by an assessment of work or work
experience". The grandson (2017) described this as an emotional response to the environment.
Several indicators were used to measure employee satisfaction, such as Wages and Professional
Progress, and this was considered to be a stable way to work. Müller and McCloskey (1990) have
shown that job satisfaction has a positive impact when managers consider employment.
Researchers identifying the link between efficiency and job satisfaction (Petty et al. 1984, Fisher,
2003) accelerated the pace of research in organizational research, and the efficiency and
satisfaction ratio was described as "Holy Grail" (Weiss and Copranzone). 1996).

Several studies have also found a positive link between job satisfaction and reduced staff turnover
(Judge et al., 2017). The hypothesis that "a happy employee is a productive worker" still believes
in industry (Fisher 2003). Employee productivity directly affects the value added of an
organization, and this is one of the most important factors in the organization's science and business
(Spagnoli et al 2012). Many scientists have tried to find a link between efficiency and job
satisfaction. Quantitative assessment of working conditions is still relevant in academia and
industry, as it has a significant impact on employee productivity (Spagnoli et al. 2012). Working
conditions have consequences that go beyond the working environment and are related to a
common level of satisfaction with life (Judge and Watanabe, 1993). Job satisfaction can improve
the quality of service (Schneider and Bo-wen 1985) and job satisfaction is closely linked to life
satisfaction (Illies et al. 2009).

2.5 Organizational Commitment

Each organization must make a full commitment to its employees to achieve excellent results over
time (Mowday, Porter & & Steers, 1982). Employees working in a team are currently acting as
entrepreneurs, and each team member strives to be the best among all others (Mowday et al. 1982).
Increasing employee commitment within an organization will ultimately improve the productivity
of your employees. In the past, organizations provided security to their employees to increase their
commitment to the organization and increase their productivity (Abelson, 1976). Higher employee
commitment within an organization for individual projects or business is seen as the main reason
for increasing employee productivity, which leads to organizational success. Employee

20
productivity can also be improved when employees are more satisfied with their work and
responsibilities. Their satisfaction may depend on the pay system, organizational culture, and
knowledge of employee exchange (Mowday et al. 1982). For four decades, ongoing employee
participation surveys and their impact on employee performance and efficiency have been ongoing.
(Becker, 1960). In Pakistan, the constant desire to organize is traditional because many people do
not choose to work as a profession, but as a profession for life. Meyer and Allen (1991) assign the
obligations of employees to three groups: a) emotional commitment; (b) standing commitments;
and (c) a regulatory obligation. Employees with a strong emotional commitment continue to work
with the organization as they want. Employees with a permanent commitment remain in the
organization because they have to do so. Employees with a high level of regulatory responsibility
remain in the organization because they think they should stay in it. Many studies have shown that
emotional commitment is positively related to employee responsibilities. (Whitener & Walz, 1993;
Somers, 1995; Jaros1997). With a high level of employee commitment, low turnover, and this
employee will work better with fewer work placements (Price & Mueller, 1981). There are certain
things that really affect employee responsibilities, such as workload, less recognition, and less
reward. Dorgan (1994) defines performance and performance characteristics, including quality as
a guiding principle. Epitropaki and Martin (2005) have shown a positive relationship between work
status and emotional commitment. Addae and Wang (2006) identify a negative relationship
between employee commitment and stress. Irving and Colemen (2003) have shown a positive
relationship between stress and commitment to continue. Somers (2009) showed a slight link
between work stress and work duration. Witting-Berman & Lang (1990) shows a negative
relationship between physical stress and commitment.

21
Figure 2.2: Drivers of Overall Organization Commitment (NIT Calicut, 2013)

2.6 Employee Commitment to Strategy Implementation

Successful strategy requires human commitment at the implementation stage. In addition,

administrative support during the implementation phase of the strategy is crucial for success. Jaw,
Liu (2004), states that commitment is not only a concept of human relationships, but also the
generation of human energy and the activation of human mind. Ramus, Steger (2000) argues that
it is difficult to implement new ideas and initiatives without commitment. This requires the
employee's commitment to coordinate strategy implementation and strategic decisions. Juliana et
al. (2003), cited by Irawanto (2015), Recent Indonesian studies show that many companies do not
prioritize the use of their employees' responsibilities as part of a strategy to improve their efficiency
and competitiveness. The ability to implement strategies is important to achieve good business
results, and the commitment to strategy plays an important role in the successful implementation
of this project (Woold-ridge, Floyd, 1990). Employee involvement and commitment are essential
for successful implementation of strategic change in organizations (Fiegener, 2005, Elbanna,
2008). It can be said that companies can demand that employees make strategic changes involving

22
as many managers and employees as possible. Tonnessen, Jefsen (1999) argue that when
employees understand the strategy of their company, they think they are members of the group and
therefore increase their willingness to work towards common business goals. Experienced Dooley
et al. (2000) noted that employee commitment to strategy has a positive impact on the success and
speed of strategy implementation. Commitment increases employee motivation, reduces the time
needed to implement the strategy, and enables you to respond quickly to changes in the business
environment (Dooley et al. 2000). Similarly, Armstrong (1982) found that promoting the
commitment of employees to the strategy improves the performance of the company. Ramaseshan
et al. (2013) examined the role of marketing managers in engaging in marketing strategies. They
concluded that the commitment of marketing managers to the strategy has a significant positive
impact on the efficiency of the organization. They add that supporting managers, innovative
culture, and working autonomy are important managerial responsibilities. In the same direction,
Kohtamäki et al. (2012) established a statistically significant link between the commitment of the
employees to implement the strategy and the performance of the company. Using the example of
670 Nigerian manufacturing companies, Kuye, Sulaimon (2011) studied the relationship between
employee participation in decision-making and business performance. Efficiency indicators,
revenue growth, sales revenue, financial sustainability, operational efficiency, job stability, public
image, employee morale, adaptation to the environment, new ideas and social impact in society are
used.

Data collected during the study were analyzed using descriptive statistics, product moment
correlation, regression analysis, and Z test (estimated from an independent t-sample). It has been
observed that there is a statistically significant relationship between employee participation in
decision-making and the efficiency of companies, as well as the significant difference between the
efficiency of companies with employee participation. Solutions are profound and the effectiveness
of companies with low participation in decision making.

2.7 Organizational Commitment and Job Performance

Specialists make a significant contribution to the work of organizations as they work and behave
towards the goals of the organization. In addition, employees who are committed to your
organization are happy to have members, believe in the organization and feel good about the
organization and its intentions and intend to do what is beneficial to the organization (George and
Jones, 2015, p. 85). Therefore, we can say that there is a certain relationship between organizational
responsibilities and activities. However, it is not surprising that previous studies have shown that

23
organizational commitments are not closely related to performance (Mathieu and Zajac, 2012). In
addition, Mowday et al. (2011) also concluded that the link between commitment and activity is
usually absent (1982). Organizational commitments relate to the psychological attachment of
employees to their jobs (Allen & Meyer, 2011; O'Reiily & Chatman, 2014). Commitment to
organizations is positively related to desired outcomes, such as Job Satisfaction (Bateman &
Stasser, 2001, Mowday, Porter & & Steers, 2011), Motivation (Mowday, Steers & & Porter, 2011)
& Support (Mathieu & Zajac, 2012) Steers & Rhodes, 2018) and has a negative impact on results
such as Unemployment and Workers' Turnover (Clegg, 2017, Cotton & Tuttle, 2012). In addition,
Horton argued that a stronger commitment could lead to a lower turnover and absence of
employees, which would increase organizational efficiency (Schuler & Jackson, 2010, p.302).
However, the link between organizational responsibilities and activities is weaker (Becker,
Billings, Eveleth and Gilbert, 2016). For example, Mathieu and Zajac meta-analysis (2015) showed
that confidence intervals around the average correlation between commitment and organizational
efficiency include zero. Therefore, they concluded that "in many cases, commitments have a
relatively small direct impact on performance" (2012). Given that organizational commitment is
an important factor in work experience and is essential to understanding and managing
organizational behavior (George and Jones, 2010, p. 67), I wonder if it is right that they are not
very interconnected. In addition, experts are also interested in other studies. As Benckhoff says,
the main reason why commitment was one of the most popular topics in industrial psychology and
organizational behavior over the last 30 years is its impact on performance (2016, p. 701).

2.8 Satisfaction with the Work

Workers' satisfaction with their work has long been an important issue for researchers (Fields,
2002). Scientists have investigated previous aspects of Job Satisfaction (JS) and the relationship
between JS and work-related outcomes, such as commitment and employee turnover (Fields,
2002). The most mentioned definition of job satisfaction was proposed by Locke (1976), which JS
identified as a pleasant or positive emotional state, assessed by evaluating a person's work (Haque
and Taher, 2008). JS is also defined as the general attitude of a person to his work (Robbins, 1999).
Several factors, such as employee needs and desires, social relationships, management style and
quality, job planning, wages, working conditions, expected long-distance opportunities, and
opportunities in other countries are important for JS (Byars and Rue, 1997, p.316; Moorhead &
Griffin, 1999, p. 99). A person can be quite satisfied with one aspect of their work and cannot be
satisfied with one or more other aspects. The general JS depends on what a person expects and

24
what they get. The employee will be satisfied with fewer recipients if they expect less. The high
level of acceptance requires that the employee is satisfied with high expectations.

Mirvis and Lawler (1984) suggested that Quality of Work Life (QoWL) be linked to wage
satisfaction, working hours and working conditions. It describes "the key elements of good work
quality", such as Safe Working Conditions, Fair Pay, Equal Employment Opportunities and
Promotion Opportunities. Warr, Cook, and Wall (1979) discussed a number of correlations derived
from their work, such as the relationship between engagement at work and JS, internal motivation,
and JS, as well as perceived internal characteristics and job satisfaction. JS has been associated
with QoWL in recent years (Walton, 1972).

The actual QoWL studies have shown that JS data can change the quality of work (Wooden and
Warren 2003, Bearfield 2003, Bowling, Watson, Beehr and Rodriguez, 2004). For a long time, it
has been found that JS shows a strong positive association in the direction of the many labor
attributes that cover various aspects of work content (ie diversity, importance of the task, and use
of skills). salaries and other benefits, employment security, career opportunities, recognition,
working conditions, relationships with colleagues and managers, effective communication
structures within companies, and participation in management decisions (Hackman & Lowler
1971, Locke 1976, Hackman & Oldham 1980; Brass 1981; Glick, Jenkins & Gupta 1986, cited in
Wooden & Warren 2003). Organizations need to find factors that affect employee satisfaction and
guarantee their QoWL (Gilgeous, 1998).

A review of previous literature shows that, as in other developed and developing countries, QoWL
and JS in Bangladesh have not been adequately addressed. Although theoretical and empirical
studies have been conducted, empirical research has mainly described statistics, such as average
percentages. Until now, knowledge has not been investigated by QWL and JS using sophisticated
statistical tools such as factor analysis, correlation, and multiple regression to analyze QoWL and
JS relationships. Therefore, the authors expressed interest in a certain gap in this large-scale
research. In order to fill this gap, this study was conducted.

2.9 Satisfaction with Payments and Incentives

Satisfaction at wage level means "the satisfaction of a person with his basic salary" (Miceliand
Lane, 1991, p. 245). Satisfaction with wage levels is one of the four aspects of Henemann and
Schwab (1985) Proposed Wage Satisfaction, followed by a research workflow that proposes a
broad definition of reward satisfaction through a multi-faceted conceptualization of wage

25
satisfaction. (judge) and Welbourne, 1994; Carraher and Buckley, 1996). This shows that studies
relating to various aspects of satisfaction should be dealt with separately. This study focuses on
wage satisfaction in order to understand its impact on attitudes and behavior at work due to a lack
of research on the problem (Photo, 2006). Some data on overall payment satisfaction indirectly
proves our expectations (Panaccioet al., 2014). For example, salary levels increase productivity by
increasing organizational authority (Gardneret al., 2004), and basic salary was positively related to
work motivation (Igalen and Roussel, 1999). Meta-Analysis of Wage Level Satisfaction
(Williamset al., 2006) shows that satisfaction at wage level has a negative impact on all aspects of
cognition and behavior related to refusal (i.e. intentions of staff change, absence of work and
voluntary rotation) but positively linked to work efficiency.

Most people want to spend most of their adult life on paid work. The reasons why people work in
this way are different, and many have self-esteem factors (E. E. Work is a source of personality,
Khulin, 2002). When people ask why they work, money is one of the most common reasons
(Jurgensen, 1978). Locke, Feren, McCaleb, Shaw and Danny (1980) also said: "No other incentive
or motivational technique is in line with their instrumental value." Many work options cannot be
considered an excellent choice because money provides life, security and privileges. In most cases,
people live, and the material aspect of work is what sustains life. As for money as a lifestyle,
Americans are pretty good. Of the approximately 192 sovereign countries, the US is the richest (its
gross domestic product [GDP] is the highest in the world). Therefore, for many Americans and
other wealthy countries, the issue of citizens is generally not working and starving (in the United
States, for those who work, "only" 13.2% below the poverty line) [US Census Bureau] and work
for how much money . People are very different from wages; The dispersion of income in the
United States is quite high and has increased over time (Lee, 1999). Therefore, it becomes
interesting to ask whether this external motif is "fruitful" in terms of happiness. How does our pace
of work affect our feelings about our work and life? Indeed, there is much literature about the
relationship between income and subjective well-being. Although the United States Gross
Domestic Product (Gross Domestic Product) has increased three times over the last 50 years, since
the 1940s, the Gross Domestic Product has increased. The level of satisfaction with life remained
constant (Diener & Oishi, 2000), which was repeated in Japan (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002). ).
In addition, after a relatively short time (ie 1 year), the winners of the lottery are not happier than
winning the lottery (Brickman, Coates and Janoff-Bulman, 1978). These results show that in the
case of happiness revenue is not important. On the other hand, the richest American.

26
There are, in theory, reasons to expect a positive or negative relationship between wage levels and
job satisfaction. Most salary models provide a positive link between wages and salaries and reward
is a key element of overall job satisfaction (Smith, Kendall & Hulin, 1969). Smith, Kendall &
Hulin, 1969).

Heneman and Judge (2000) state: "All salary patterns mean that the amount of the benefit itself
should have a direct impact on the payment." For example, Hulina (1991) The Integrated Model
predicts that, in comparison to other things, role play, for example. The results of salaries will
increase job satisfaction. In addition, the Lawler mismatch model, where reward satisfaction is
what a person gets about what they think they should get, shows that the payment level should
match people. On the other hand, the theory of self-determination (Deci and Ryan, 1985) shows
that external rewards eventually demotivate and do not satisfy people. Because external causes
have a negative impact on internal interest in a task or job, it undermines the perception of
independence (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In addition, financial success goals are said to be detrimental
to well-being, as these goals are a controlled orientation that prevents more sustainable needs, such
as self-acceptance or membership (Kasser and Ryan, 1993), whose opinions have not retained any
response (Svriva, Locke, and Bartol, 2001). Therefore, the relevant theories are different whether
wages and other forms of external remuneration should be positively related to job satisfaction.

2.10 Satisfaction with Opportunities for Growth, Progress and Professional Growth

Motivation is a factor that affects our actions and work. In the work environment, the ability to
gain recognition, reward and promotion is a great factor in motivating employees. In modern
conditions, organizations strive to strike the right balance between employee responsibilities and
organizational efficiency. Promotion and recognition programs are the most likely factor to ensure
high self-esteem and passion for employees. Oosthuizen (2001) stated that one of the managerial
roles is to successfully motivate employees and influence their behavior to achieve greater
organizational efficiency. La Motta (1995) believes that performance is a result of ability and
motivation. Skills formulated through education, equipment, training, experience, task simplicity,
and two types of skills, ie mental and physical. Measuring performance and reward are factors that
show that they are mandatory developers of performance appraisal programs.

According to Wilson (1994), the performance management process is one of the key elements of a
full compensation system. Entwistle (1987) thinks that if a worker works successfully, it leads to
organizational salaries, so their work is the motivating factor for their employees. Most
organizations require their employees to work according to rules and regulations as well as job
27
requirements that meet all standards. Studies aimed at clarifying the relationship between wages
and individuals were aimed at increasing the efficiency of employees (Ciscel, 1974).

Employees with great motivation are a competitive advantage for any company, because their
activities allow the organization to achieve its goals successfully. Human, financial, economic and
human resources are more important, which can give the company a competitive edge over others.
According to Andrew (2004), the commitment of all employees is based on awards and recognition.
Lawler (2003) stated that the prosperity and survival of organizations is determined by human
resources and their behavior. Most organizations have made great progress in fully respecting their
business strategy through well-balanced reward programs and employee recognition. Deeprose
(1994) stated that employee motivation and productivity can be improved by ensuring their
effective recognition, which ultimately increases the effectiveness of organizations. The whole
success of an organization is based on how the organization motivates its employees and how they
value employees' work in terms of payments. Employee management is an integral part of any
organizational strategy and how they manage their human capital (Drucker, Meyer & Kirsten,
2005). Today, when every organization has to fulfill its obligations; Employee performance is very
important for the overall achievement of the organization. In a dense environment, employees with
little or bold experience cannot practice their skills, abilities, innovations, and full commitment to
the extent they need an organization. Freedman (1978) believes that when an organization receives
effective rewards and recognition, it creates a favorable working environment that encourages
employees to work successfully. Employees perceive recognition as a sense of value and gratitude,
which increases the morale of employees, which ultimately increases the productivity of
organizations. Chikszentmihayi (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) believes that employees only achieve a
state of satisfaction and happiness when they use their skills in their functions and work. Therefore,
motivated employees are retained in organizations, which reduces additional rental costs.

Baron (1983) said that by recognizing and recognizing employees in terms of their identification,
their productivity and productivity are very high. According to most experts, current recognition is
the greatest need, and remuneration, including all cash and compensation benefits, cannot be the
only motivator for a staff motivation program. Employees are fully motivated when their needs are
met. Employee motivation increases when employees receive unexpected increases in recognition,
praise and payment (La Motta, 1995). In today's dynamic environment, highly motivated
employees serve as synergies to achieve corporate goals, business plans, high efficiency, growth
and productivity. Motivation is also needed when an organization's employees do not have good

28
relationships. Employee relations with employees and managers are key elements of an
organization’s internal strength.

Managers' ability to ensure strong leadership has an impact on employee satisfaction (Morris,
2004). The study focuses on how the impact of incentive, reward, and recognition programs
stimulates employee motivation. The awards play an important role in determining important
performance, and this is positively related to the motivation process. Lawler (2003) stated that there
are two factors that determine how attractive reward is, firstly, the amount of compensation given,
and secondly, the weight a person gives to a particular reward. Deeprose (1994) believes that "good
leaders understand people who do what they recognize as their achievements and reward people
by giving them something tangible". Good promotion opportunities, taking into account the skills
and abilities of the employee, give him more loyalty to his work and become an appropriate source
of health for the employee. Bull (2005) believes that when employees experience success in
psychologically complex occupations that allow them to use their skills and skills, they experience
greater job satisfaction. Most organizations argue that incentives, rewards, and recognition are key
parameters of modern motivation programs because they link success factors to employee
performance.

2.11 Satisfaction with Leadership Style and Supervision

Lo et al. (2009) stated that the leader plays an important role in ensuring responsibility rather than
focusing on power and leadership in dealing with subordinates. In addition, attitudes, behaviors,
qualities and leadership skills can contribute to good leadership in an organization (Mosadeghrad,
2003). In fact, a good leader can encourage your employees to work as efficiently as possible (Rad
& Yarmohammadium, 2006). These leaders must be able to act with integrity, integrity, efficiency
and clarity with their employees (Aronson et al. 2003). An effective leadership style can contribute
to the success of the engagement (Gharehbaghi & McManus, 2003). Limsila and Ogunlana (2007)
pointed out that the right leadership style leads to employee satisfaction, and this is a good indicator
that a better style can encourage an employee to work effectively (Likhitwonnawut, 1996). Here,
leaders must be able to convey the values, vision and mission of their organization to motivate
employees (Borkowski et al. 2011). In addition, the leader is also a person who can direct his / her
staff and lead their behavior (McEachen and Keogh, 2007)

Lo et al., (2009) stated that transaction leadership has shown that it is more effective in terms of
change commitments than those with a transformational leadership style. Employees perform a
transformational leadership style with their organizational mission, leading the transaction, and
29
creating a compatible workforce (Nancy et al. 2011). Reorganization is more about creating
relationships between employees and employers, and the deal is more task-oriented when the task
is more important (Limsila and Ogunalana, 2007).

2.11.1 Transformational Leadership

Krishnan (2005) says that the transformational leadership style helps the organization's employees
reach more than planned. Here, the style of leadership determines the transformation of followers'
emotions, values and goals into a particular work according to their talent (Northouse, 2009). Tales
(2010) classifies transformational leadership into five different styles:

1) Intellectual stimulation. This transformational leadership style encourages creativity and

employee innovation with certain constraints and solves new problems in older situations.

2) Individual Arguments Promotion and support are based on the relationship between the
employee and the employer as a mentor or instructor in learning and sharing ideas or knowledge.

3) Inspirational motivation: the employee's boss gets a clear vision, meaning of the task and a
challenging task.

4) Idealized influence. Leaders are exemplary who take the initiative, understand and are
committed to the task.

5) Assigned charisma. Charismatic leadership behavior and speaking can persuade its followers to
respect and admire them.

Transactional leadership

Burns (1978) defined a style of transaction leadership that includes motivation and direction to
achieve followers' independence through reward and punishment for sharing. This leadership style
is very useful when the organization is stable, and the learning goals are designed to improve
balance and restore (Bucicet, Al., 2010). A transaction leader can improve employee productivity,
especially when calculating employee results, and the rewards or penalties are correct. The style of
transaction leadership is very useful when the organization is stable and the learning goals are
designed to improve balance and restore (Bucic et al. 2010). Tale (2010) states that there are three
aspects of transaction management:

30
1) Contingent rewards: Employers and employees change their pay system. Employees promise to
get something from the task.

2) Active management-by-exception is when leaders investigate and track bugs or errors and send
corrective actions after the problems occur.

3) Passive control except: this type of leader is valid only after an error occurs. It is systemic and
not recommended because leaders not only intervene when they have problems.

Communication between the supervisor and the subordinate is an important factor influencing job
satisfaction in the workplace.

The way in which subordinates perceive the behavior of a manager can positively or negatively
affect job satisfaction. Communicative behaviors such as facial expression, eye contact, voice
expression, and body movement are very important for relationships between subordinate and
subordinate (Teven, 2014).

Non-verbal reports play a key role in interpersonal interactions related to impression formation,
deception, attractiveness, social influence and emotional expression (Burgoon, Buller and Woodall,
1996).

The manager's non-verbal urgency helps increase interpersonal engagement with his subordinates,
affecting job satisfaction. Managing managers to inform their subordinates may be more important
than verbal content (Teven, 2014)

People who do not like and negatively appreciate their leader are less likely to interact or be
motivated to work, and people who love and appreciate their leader have more opportunities to
communicate and are satisfied with their work and your work environment. Subordinate contact
with his supervisor is a very important aspect of the workplace. Hence, a manager who uses non-
verbal spontaneity, sincerity, and open lines of communication is more likely to get positive
feedback and great job satisfaction from a subordinate, and an antisocial, hostile and unwilling to
communicate leader will of course get a negative and very low response. Employee satisfaction at
work. Mood and emotions during work are the raw materials that accumulate and form work
satisfaction. (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996).

Moods are usually longer, but often they are weaker, open-ended, and emotions are often more
intense, short-lived and have a clear purpose or cause. There is evidence in the literature that the

31
state's mood is associated with general satisfaction with work. It has also been found that positive
and negative emotions are largely related to overall job satisfaction. A feeling of purely positive
emotion will be a better overall job satisfaction rate than a positive emotional intensity when
experiencing.

2.12 Satisfaction with the Working Group and Social Relations of the Employees

Homogeneity is a necessary (and possibly sufficient) criterion for identifying structures at group
level, which means that the group can be described as a structure (Klein, Dansereau and Hall,
1994). However, group-level construction can take place in several ways (Chan, 1998), depending
on the nature of the functional relationships that should exist between construction at the individual
level and the construction group level. In the case of job satisfaction, we predict that at group level,
the structure will be functionally independent of individual job satisfaction for three reasons. First,
social identity studies and self-classification processes have shown that group rates can differ
significantly from individual members of the group (Miller and Prentice, 1994). These effects are
partly due to the need to distinguish the group from other groups (Turner, Oakes, Haslam, and
McGarty, 1994) and may lead to a higher or lower level of satisfaction at group level individual
job satisfaction group. We also predict that satisfaction with group tasks may differ from total
satisfaction with individual work on group work environment and group work experience. When it
is difficult for the group to effectively manage their processes, it is likely that their teamwork
experience is negative, and in a group where team members communicate well and coordinate their
work, it is likely that the experience of the team is positive. In fact, we predict that satisfaction with
the group's internal work environment can be a key aspect of the group's tasks. Finally, the focus
on job satisfaction at group level may differ from job satisfaction, individually, as the group can
develop a common approach to those work environment characteristics that are common to all
members of the group. For example, personal work is an important direction of individual job
satisfaction. However, in some groups, each member of the group performs various tasks. When
members of a group have different jobs, it is unlikely that the group will develop a common
approach to the work of any member of the group. The approach to group-level work is more
focused on the overall task of the group and other aspects of the work environment shared by the
team members.

2.13 Satisfaction with work Conditions such as Safety, Healthy and Stability

Tobi et al. (2013) has shown that employee health will have a major impact on job satisfaction.
According to a study carried out by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
32
(NIOSH) (2006), 40% Employees believe that they can work satisfactorily, "very" or "very much",
and 26 percent. They feel "burnt" at work. Other studies, such as Vassie and Lucas (2001), have
shown that increased participation in occupational safety and health can contribute to the positive
assessment of various occupational safety and health initiatives, including ergonomic changes risks
and the overall security environment. Health According to Bottany et al. (2009), if the organization
has implemented good safety and health practices and better understood that the organization is
caring for the employees, and this will partly contribute to employee satisfaction.

It is logical that people who feel comfortable in their work environment work much more efficiently
and like to work more than those who feel uncomfortable. Therefore, you should carefully consider
some aspects of your workplace. There are several problems that affect the comfort of the work
environment. The first problem is noise. If there is a problem with workplace noise, special
measures should be taken, such as Measuring the Noise Level of a Competent Person. Noise can
cause irreversible damage to your hearing as well as increase stress. This is mostly caused by noisy
cars, and the noise level must be checked when purchasing any new plant or equipment. Such
measures are usually fairly simple, for example, they provide workers with hearing protectors,
rotate workers in noisy mechanisms to reduce their lifetime, and they clearly indicate any area
where "high noise" warns people of the risks. (Hughes 2009).

2.14 Working Environment

The working environment can be everything that exists around the employee and can affect his or
her duties. Alex S. Nitisemito (2006) argues that the working environment is an external and
internal state that can affect the working spirit and cause an instant stop. According to
Sedarmayanti (2003), a decent working environment is a condition where people can do their job
perfectly, safely, healthily and comfortably. Therefore, in many studies, the work environment is
classified under toxic and favourable conditions (Akinyele, 2010, Chaddha, Pandey and Noida,
2011, Yusuf and Metiboba, 2012, Assaf and Alswalha, 2013). McGuire and McLaren (2007)
believe that the physical environment of an organization, especially its structure and design, can
affect employee behaviour in the workplace. As noted by Nitisemite (2001), some factors
affecting the workplace include cleaning, water, lighting, paint, safety and music. Many workplace
studies have shown that employees are satisfied with the specific features of the work
environment. These user-preferred features greatly increase their job satisfaction and
performance. A productive office environment consists of several elements. Al-Anzi (2009)
defines; Furniture, noise, flexibility, comfort, communication, lighting, temperature and air uality

33
as components of office design operation and simple background for movement.

Comfortable people are more productive for a better working environment. However, comfort is
one of those words that are easy to use and difficult to define. People feel comfortable when they
feel comfortable. It is a state of mind that depends on physical feelings and emotional states.
Creating an effective personal environment should take into account these two elements as well
as cost and technology constraints.

In the coming years, companies will successfully or unsuccessfully depend on their ability to hire
and retain highly skilled workers,”said Hoskins and his employees. Companies have realized the
importance of comfort in the workplace by improving ergonomic functional parts to maintain
quality personnel, increase productivity and maintain a competitive edge. The quality of the
employees' working environment has the greatest impact on the level of motivation and
subsequent productivity. The way they relate to the organization, especially in the immediate
environment, has a major impact on their error rate, level of innovation and collaboration with
other employees, and is not involved and, ultimately, how long they work.

2.14.1 Factors Determining a Good Working Environment.

The quality of the work environment of employees influences their level of motivation and hence
their productivity (Heath, 2006). When employees want to work physically and emotionally, their
productivity should increase (Boles et al. 2004). They also stated that a decent working
environment helps to reduce unemployment and can therefore boost productivity in today's
dynamic and competitive business world. The work environment created at this location affects
both positive and negative morals, productivity and employee responsibilities (Chandrasekar,
2011). He adds that factors in the working environment play an important role in employee
productivity. Factors in the work environment have a significant impact on the work of employees
in terms of negative outcomes or positive outcomes.

Five office design indicators, such as furniture, noise, temperature, lighting and spatial
distribution, were considered during the survey. The overall response of each factor was analysed.

Office furniture

The furniture consists of a chair, tables, shelves, drawers and so on. All of these components play
a special role in the proper functioning of any office, as well as in the productivity and efficiency
of employees. And one of the most important aspects. When buying office furniture, consider
34
whether it is ergonomic or not.

Noise:

This is probably the most forgotten environmental pollutant, the consequences of which can be
ambitious. Noise is more damaging to us than we can imagine, and sometimes without warning.
We can't have a world without noise, but we can have a world without noise. There are several
sources of noise pollution. In some places, noise from construction projects prevails, while in
others, traffic or airport noise prevails.

Light intensity:

Until now, the only purpose of interior lighting has been to help visually target tasks where there
is not enough external lighting. But the latest discovery has shown that light not only helps us see.
The invisible retina receptors form the nerve pathways that directly affect our body clock, the part
of our brain that controls and regulates sleep and alertness that directly affect our alertness levels.

Temperature and humidity:

What temperature works best depends on our body. For a thin person, higher temperatures can be
better. However, for those who are not so thin, lower temperatures can work better.

Temperature and humidity effects: High temperature level: lethargy and fatigue of workers due to
increased body temperature can reduce efficiency.

The results of this study showed that nine out of ten believe that the quality of the workplace
affects the attitudes of employees and increases their productivity. The staff of different
organizations have different office designs. Each office has unique furniture and spatial layout,
lighting and heating and different noise levels. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of
office design factors on employee productivity. Research shows that good office design has a
positive impact on employee productivity. The physical working environment is one of the basic
human requirements that allows people to perform certain conditions effectively. The quality of
the employees' work environment has the greatest impact on the level of motivation and further
work of the employee. The study aimed to understand the impact of the physical work
environment on employee productivity. The residents of this study are PT officials. Negara
Indonesia Regional Office in Manado, with up to 29 respondents. Data analysis was a simple
linear regression analysis, and the data collection tool was conducted using structured

35
questionnaires for top managers and lower-level employees. The study concludes that the physical
working environment has a significant impact on employee productivity. In order to ensure the
productivity of employees, management must pay attention to the physical working environment
so that employees feel comfortable and happy to work in the company.

36
 Furniture

Equipment

Air Quality

Office

Lighting Productivity

Temperature

Noise Level

Figure 2.3: Office Design and Productivity

2.14.2 Physical Working Conditions

The physical working environment affects employee productivity. Physical working

environment conditions affect employee functions and determine the well-being of
organizations. The physical work environment includes internal and external office design,
temperature, comfort zone, as well as configuration or organization of office work. Amir (2010)
stated that there are two basic elements of the physical environment, ie the office distribution
plan, as well as the convenience of the office. He also stated that the physical workplace is an
organization's field of activity that allows the company to achieve its goals. A physical working
environment can encourage a person to adapt to the work environment or not. Quality of work
depends on safe and healthy working conditions to determine employee behavior. Organizational
climate is an important indicator of employee behavior as a combination of social and
psychological factors. Working conditions have been found to be associated with employee
participation and job satisfaction, which ultimately leads to an increase in employee productivity

37
(Scott et al. 2000). It is reported that there is a positive correlation between manager's
perceived support and the results of a nurse (Hall, 2007). Kazmi et al. (2008) examines the impact
of a stressful work environment on the work of home health workers. The results show a reverse
relationship between stress and work. High work stress in the home of officials leads to low
productivity. Similarly, the perceived or inadequate adequacy of the physical and psychosocial
work environment has a profound effect on employee satisfaction, productivity and
understanding of organizational efficiency (Srivastava, 2008).

According to Tripathi (2014), the working environment can be defined as the environment in
which people work, including the physical environment, work profile, culture and market
conditions. Each aspect is interrelated and influences the overall productivity and productivity
of employees. The quality of their work environment is most important for their level of
motivation and, consequently, for productivity. You can think of the work environment as just
the environment in which people work (Briner, 2000); this is a very broad category that includes
physical configuration (eg Heat, equipment), performance characteristics (eg Load, task
complexity). He adds that it also covers broader organizational characteristics (such as culture,
history) and even external aspects of the organizational environment (eg Local Conditions in the
Labor Market, Industrial Sector, and Work Life Balance).

Employees will always face when they feel that their direct environmental condition is in line
with their obligations (Farh, 2012). Chandrasekhar (2011) argues that the working environment
in which employees work is determining whether organizations are thriving or not. The working
environment consists of physical factors, including office design and other factors; psychosocial
factors include working conditions, role matching and social support. Other aspects of the
working environment are policies that include working conditions. Improving the physical
environment at the workplace improves employee productivity. Employees in many
organizations face difficulties with physical and environmental factors in the workplace. Pech
and Slade (2006) argue that the distribution of workers is increasing and that it is important to
create jobs that have a positive impact on work. Workers' comfort at work caused by working
conditions and the environment has been recognized as an important factor in measuring their
productivity (Leblebici, 2012). In today's dynamic and competitive business world, a healthy
working environment makes sense for business. Managers should not only focus on the payroll
package, considering that it is proportional to performance (Heath, 2006). Organizations
regarded as positive jobs will have a competitive advantage over others.
38
Office space is one of the physical aspects affecting employee productivity in the workplace.
Research shows that if a company does not provide enough space for the assigned work, this will
lead to poor management of time and energy spent on office premises, which will impede
effective working habits. In the organization, if the furniture is not in good condition, the
furniture is not properly made, the staff can feel uncomfortable working. Materials must be
properly stored for proper disposal. According to Schneider (1987), "people do the room". Costa,
McCrae, and Holland (1999) confirm that people are starting this process by choosing the right
profession for their personality. The similarity of the values of job seekers and employment
agencies and employees improves the approach to work and greater productivity after joining
the organization (Chatman, 2001, Judge and Cable, 1997). A study conducted by Cable and
Judge (2004) shows that candidates are actively choosing an organizational environment based
on their personal attitudes, as they find candidates looking for organizations with reward systems
and culture that match their personalities.

2.15 Creating a Positive Work Environment

Building trust

This means that the employer is reliable, responsible and responsible, and the employees can
trust it. After the destruction, it takes even more time, and in no way can it be completely restored.
It is very important to establish a reliable relationship between the manager and the staff.

Communicate openly:

In order to create a favourable working environment, every employee should feel valuable and
valuable. This is achieved by listening to each other and respecting each other for what it has to
say. In this way, the employer proves that he appreciates and respects every employee. A key
feature of open communication is a meeting with the workforce and discussions about the
organisation's beliefs, standards, mission and goals. There must be a two-way connection.
Employees also share their thoughts and thoughts on how individual and team can help an
organization achieve its goals.

Non-discrimination and harassment:

In order to attract and retain the most skilled professionals, the employer can appoint employees
regardless of race, caste, colour, religion, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation

39
and age. The non-discrimination policy applies to employees and applies to all employment
conditions, including recruitment, hiring, transfer, promotion, dismissal, compensation and
benefits. Harassment at work is unacceptable. Harassment in the workplace involves unpleasant,
intentional or abusive behaviour with a worker or a group of employees.

Heating and lighting issues:

Employers design an office in such a way that light and natural light are available. Companies
need to work in natural light. Companies should regularly check the operation of heating,
ventilation, ventilation and air conditioning systems.

Health & Safety:

Organizations must provide a safe, safe and healthy workplace for their employees. All
employees have the right to work in an environment where their welfare and safety risks are
properly controlled. The main fee for this is employers. Employers must consult their employees
or health and safety advice. The employer consults the workforce or its health and safety
representatives: (Cheryl L 2009).

• Developing any policies that can have a significant impact on their health and safety at work,
such as innovative tools or new work systems.

• Employees should be aware of the risks and dangers of their work;

• New measures must be taken to mitigate this risk and what human resources must be done if
they are at risk; (Dean N. and Judge A. 2004)

Managed workloads:

Exploitation is one of the last threats to act and trust. For this reason, managers need to keep up
the workload. When the workload changes, employers can meet with employees and ask them
to evaluate each job because it is relevant to the level of business and skills.

Work scheduling:

The list of employees and work shifts must comply with the business requirements and
conditions of relevant laws and general negotiation agreements. If employees have the talent to
manage and control their execution time and breaks, they will be healthier to adapt to their job
40
and needs. Generally, the creation of a system where employees retain the ability to communicate
with managers is a popular system. Work is considered to be directly managed if the employees
perform work tasks during the working day without having the opportunity to influence their
work in practice. (Peng K., 2004).

2.16 Relationship between Work Environment and Activity

Research has shown that the environment has a direct impact on the organization (financial /
non-financial). Environmental components can be divided into two categories:

1. Organizational culture.

2. The climate in which people work.

The organizational culture, "how things are done indoors," is made up of formal and informal
factors that go together. (eg) the need to act differently and the need for coordinated processes
and procedures; It is important to take external factors into account when making decisions.
Organizations delivering the above results can better achieve their goals

-Profitability

- Quality

- Innovation

- Sales growth

- Employee satisfaction.

Most of the works are done at the team or team level. Groups are more responsible for innovation,
processes and practices that can turn an organization into a new level. Are personality aspects
directly responsible for employee success in organizations, or do labour preferences in the
workplace play an important role in communication? Employee selection may be inaccurate.
Depending on the extent of control and the reduced relationship between employees and
managers in work situations, the use of employee selection processes to increase productivity and
commitment can be less effective. In addition, managers do not have the flexibility to schedule
their staff in a short time. In such situations, in order to improve the result, job training can be
controlled as a short-term option without training skills.
41
The simple premise of moving to a better working environment is that comfortable people are
more productive. However, comfort is one of those words that are easy to use and difficult to
define. People feel comfortable when they feel comfortable. It is a state of mind that depends on
physical feelings and emotional states. Creating an effective personal environment should take
into account these two elements as well as cost and technology constraints. The purpose of this
study is to investigate the relationship between personality, preferences of work environment and
variables of results, efficiency and commitment. Research Goals:

1) Determine the impact of the work environment on employee productivity.

2) Analyse the impact of office design on employee productivity.

3) Evaluate the impact of employee health on their work efficiency.

"Over the next few years, companies will successfully or unsuccessfully depend on their ability
to hire and retain highly skilled workers," Hoskins said. "Therefore, the office environment takes
great responsibility for the unity of people and a strong business culture that attracts the minds
and hearts of employees." Companies have realized the importance of comfort in the workplace
by improving ergonomic functional parts to maintain quality personnel, increase productivity
and maintain a competitive edge. The quality of the employees' working environment has the
greatest impact on the level of motivation and subsequent productivity. To the extent that they are
committed to organizations, especially their immediate environment, they have a significant
impact on their error rate, level of innovation and collaboration with other employees, non-
participation and ultimately how long they remain at work. The main purpose of this study is to
explain the relationship between office design and activity. The results of this study show that
office design is crucial to increasing employee productivity. Comfortable and ergonomic office
design encourages employees and significantly increases their productivity. Most people spend
fifty percent of their inner life, which has a major impact on their mental condition, actions,
abilities and activities (Sundstrom, 2004). The best results and maximum productivity are
thought to be the result of improved working conditions. Improved physical office environment
will increase employee performance and ultimately increase productivity.

2.17 Employee Performance

Armstrong (2006) defines productivity as the creation of quantitative goals. Productivity depends
not only on what people achieve, but also on how they reach. Sultanos et al. (2012) as the
42
achievement of specific goals compared to 3 predefined or defined accuracy, integrity, cost and
speed standards. High productivity is a step towards the goals and goals of an organization. Frese
and Sonnentag (2001) believed that individual work is very important for the whole organization
and for the people who work for it. Organizations need high-quality employees who want to
achieve their goals and offer the products and services they specialize in, and ultimately achieve
a competitive advantage. Plattas and Sobotka (2010) claim that employee productivity is the
result of a common understanding of efforts, opportunities, and tasks. Factors affecting the level
of individual work rate are motivation, ability and opportunity to participate (Armstrong, 2009).
There are many factors that affect employee productivity, and the workplace environment affects
most of their motivation and productivity levels. Stupas (2003) describes several factors for
employee success. These factors include physical environment, equipment, great work, expected
performance, feedback on performance, poor system, and more. He adds that, in order to achieve
standard metrics, employers must force employees to perform the task to achieve the
organisation's goals.

Employee productivity depends on various factors that contribute to the work environment. An
organization is a combination of employees, policies, and procedures. This can be effectively
managed with green policy and positive motivated workers. The ratio of each variable that affects
employee productivity is discussed in the literature. Social Assistance Social Assistance is the
help that a person receives from colleagues, leaders and colleagues in order to be able to do their
job effectively. Literature reveals social support as a structure of relationships (Greenhaus and
Parasuraman, 1994). It can be divided into two categories, such as job-related social support and
personal social support. Current research is about social support related to work that can be done
at workplaces in organizations, including manager and staff. Employee activity is multifaceted
and essential to the success of an organization (Campbell, 1990, Dina et al., 2002). Abualrub
(2004) found that perceived social support for employees increases productivity and reduces
workload. Similarly, it is assumed that support management methods are very important to
achieve high results (Drach-Zahavy, 2004).

It is documented that socially disadvantaged people are more productive than people without
social support at work (Castilla, 2005). Employees provide a sense of identity, support and
friendship with others (Bowler and Brass, 2006). In addition, employee confidence has been
linked to the willingness of individuals to share resources with other employees (Dirks and
Skarlicki, 2009). Although employee confidence in the organization has a significant impact on
43
employee behavior (Dar, 2010).

Employee Efficiency is the level at which your employee works. So it becomes something
important when someone or organization reaches their goals. Many organizations have stated
that our employees are our most important asset or something that is close to them to recognize
the important role of employees in the success of the organization. Employee productivity also
influences the goals of the organization when they do high and professional work, can help the
organization to succeed and automatically have a positive impact on the achievement of goals.

2.18 Physical Working Environment and Employee Productivity

There are several factors that can affect employee productivity in terms of the physical work
environment. Factors such as Workplace Lighting. There are other interferences that can affect
the work of the employees, other disturbances are the noise that will cause inconvenience
between the employees and thus reduce the productivity of the employees. In addition, employee
satisfaction can lead to employee productivity. Therefore, in order to satisfy employees, the
physical workplace factor should be applied to all workplaces. Temesek (2009) stated that these
functions help to function aesthetically, finish and work environment design, which ultimately
helps to improve employee awareness and productivity. In addition, as workers become stressed
at the workplace, employees have great potential to work very slowly and affect employee
productivity. This may affect the employee depending on the task assigned to him, as well as the
environment in which he works. Employees with a good environment can focus on their work
and energy for their work.

In order to better understand the results of the work, it is important to know the relationship
between labor relations, people and situation factors. Work efficiency is a very important factor
affecting the profitability of any organization (Bevan, 2012). Efficiency is important for
organizations, because employee efficiency determines business success. In addition,
productivity is important to people because the performance of tasks can be a source of
satisfaction (Muchhal, 2014). Work efficiency can be defined as behaviors or actions taken to
achieve organizational goals (Motowidlo, Borman and Schmit, 1999). Efficiency is the result of
a person's or group's work organization at a given time, reflecting how well a person or group
achieves a qualification to work in a mission to achieve organizational goals. Many factors can
affect employee productivity, including equipment, physical working environment, meaningful
work, standard operating procedures, and benefits for good or bad systems, predictable and
44
reversed productivity, as well as knowledge, skills and attitudes (Stup, 2003). The physical
working environment and its effects have been thoroughly investigated, as this environment can
interfere, obstruct, or set boundaries in a range of operating modes, which in turn can affect
performance.

2.18.1 Working Environment and Performance at the Ministry of Higher Education

All public and private organizations are trying to realize the optimum use of their resources,
whether they are human or financial resources or raw materials to reach their goals and
objectives. Performance evaluation plays a key role in reforming the education system and
increasing the productivity of teachers, as well as improving the overall quality of higher
education (Turk, 2003). There are many problems that hinder the implementation of public
service reforms in Africa (Lienert, 2003). Factors include factors related to human resources,
such as labor shortages and lack of psychological inclination, as well as the lack of financial and
material resources required for efficient service delivery.

Human resources are one of the most important of these resources because the organization can
organize and control the use of other organization's resources through human resource
management. All public and private organizations are trying to realize the optimum use of their
resources, whether they are human or financial resources or raw materials to reach their goals
and objectives. Human resources are the most important of these resources because the
organization can organize and control the use of the rest of the organisation's resources through
human resource management. The basis for progress and development in different areas of life
is the ability of an organization to explore elements of human activity in terms of efficiency and
productivity, which determines the overall effectiveness of the organization.

45
Figure 2.4: Evidence of physical workplace effects on employee outcomes by Rianne Appel-
Meulenbroek, 2018

Figure above shows the workplace effects on office employees Outcome Variables Aspects of
studies % of studies

Satisfaction: satisfaction, feeling of control, preferences 77 57%

Performance: performance, organizational effectiveness, turnover 58 43%
Health: health, SBS, stress, arousal, fatigue, sleep quality 44 33%
Productivity: productivity, absenteeism 37 28%

Comfort: comfort, well-being 34 25% Emotional

state: emotional state, mood 24 18%
Concentration: crowding, distraction 22 16%

Attitude: motivation, commitment, morale, corporate culture, work climate, trust, Image,
environmental awareness, personalisation acts 22 16%

Privacy: privacy feeling, withdrawal during discretionary periods 19 14%

Communication: communication, collaboration, social behaviour, cohesion 18 13% •
46
2.19 Genders, Age, Educational level, Years of experience, Social Status Role in
Performance Evaluation

The physical work space is what we see, touch, taste and smell. It is the art that hangs on the
walls, the office building plan, the demographics of the people we work with (older people,
young people, diversity, etc.) And any physical benefits we can get, such as eating in the dining
room from the beautiful a café and a hotel gym or lounge, which can be used by the staff to relax.

Age

The aging phenomenon has additional work-related problems. What are the problems people
may face in the workplace due to aging, and how are they flexible and popular office space? It's
not as easy as "young" and "old". Differences can be made in chronological, functional and
psychosocial age. The chronological definition of age, which is often used in research, is based
on the Age Discrimination Act on Labor Law (ADEA). Here, workers aged 40 and over are
protected from age discrimination. However, there are studies in which 'older' people are
identified at 55 or 65 years of age. The differences in these numbers indicate that it is very
difficult to determine the age at which people are older. One of the reasons is that the needs,
values, abilities and health of older people can vary widely (Baltes and Baltes, 1990). In addition,
they often differ with regard to aging. Many older workers continue to work in the workplace
(Hursh, Lui & Pransky, 2006). Often the terms "successful and normal aging" are used to
describe the aging process. Successful aging people generally have low chances of illness, high
cognitive and physical functioning and active participation in life (Rowe and Kahn, 1997).

Young people have a natural goal of acquiring knowledge in friendship (O'Reilly, Chatman &
Caldwell 1991), but they also think it is a necessary attribute for job search (Corporaal,
Riemsdijk, Kluijtmans & Vuuren, 2012). The latter also found that young people are looking for
a job that includes these favourable characteristics of work; Organizations have to offer complex
tasks, a variety of activities, independence and flexibility in terms of time and space.

This worsening of long-term attention can cause problems for older workers to focus on a flexible
office concept, as the work space is more open and transparent than the workplace of a mobile
office. At the same time, the flexible office environment seems to meet the needs and
characteristics of young employees.

Gender
47
The difficulties faced by scientists in terms of gender differences and the effectiveness of
working conditions in the workforce are such that it is difficult to compare men and women who
do the same work for gender segregation. (Rydstedt and Evans, 1998). However, Kundson N.P.
Hassan and Ogunkoya (2014) believe that women were as powerful as men if they were given a
similar exposure. Although, according to Kherson and Ogunkoy (2014), Hartmann said men were
considered more powerful than women, and good results are considered to be male. It is possible
that women have chosen a profession. Onwuchekwa (1990) confirmed this when he came to the
conclusion that, in many cases, women do some kind of work that requires social and interpersonal
skills. Ogunleye (2006) argues that technology has increased women's participation in the public
and private sectors. They are now competing with men in almost all jobs in society, even those
who consider themselves to be dominant among men, for example in professions related to
science, technology and mathematics, but in previous Graham (2007) and Ogunley (1998)
showed that women are still under-represented in these professions. According to Elleus (1994),
the disproportionate share of men and women in some professions causes difficulties for several
women to communicate with their male counterparts.

So gender is not an outside of the profession or organization, but is an integral part of the
organization's rules, functions and responsibilities (Davies, 1992). For example, an
organization's commitment may be measured by the number of hours a person physically works
at work or those (men) who are free to spend extra hours in an organization (Bailyn, 1993).

Education

Ng and Feldman (2009) in the widely cited document based on the meta-analysis of the level of
education and the performance of the main task found that education is positively related to the
performance of the task. Another author (Kuneel et al. 2004) also believes that education
contributes to greater productivity in many jobs. Finally, previous research in this area has mainly
focused on the impact of educational achievements on key tasks (Karatepe, Undudag, Menevis,
Hadzimehmeddagich and Baddar, 2006, Maglen, 1990). Therefore, it is important to examine
the impact of the level of education on the various aspects of labor productivity.

Years of Service or working experience

A more specific example is the study of Open Capital Managers in Taiwan by Li, Jen and Chen
(2008). The authors tried to explain the success of investment funds by comparing the

48
explanatory impact of holding and work experience, which was defined as the period during
which a person participated in the investment fund sector. Finally, it was found that the board is
a better fund performance indicator than work experience. In fact, taking into account life
expectancy, the influence of seniority has usually disappeared. Specifically, the board's impact
on the main task was more significant between 3 and 6 years in the organization and gradually
declined to around 14 years (Ng and Feldman, 2010). Ownership and work are not strong,
rotation practices can have a positive impact on employee performance while helping employers
to develop human capital (Ng and Feldman, 2013).

Social status

Social status is a level of respect, honor, perceived competence and respect for society, groups
and organizations. The relationship between job level or job qualification and performance has
hardly been discussed in the performance evaluation literature. Kahya (2007). The study shows
the impact of work characteristics (physical effort and level of work) and working conditions
(environmental conditions and hazards), as well as experience and level of education in terms of
tasks and contextual work. The results have shown that there is a significant link between
employee performance and environmental conditions and working conditions. Davis and
Kolmeyer (2005) found that the presence of an employee in an organization reduces the
relationship between motivation and efficiency. These authors also found that lower-level
employees in the organization worked better when they met the standards of work that their
managers set. The condition of a spouse or marriage is a family situation. Some studies have
shown that women with work and family roles have reported better physical and mental health
and therefore better work than women living at home or single women (Jordan and Ziteck, 2012).
Korenman and Neumarkas (1991) tried to determine whether marriage actually made men more
productive. In the first part of the study, they used data from a long-term survey of young men.
The sample consisted of 1966. Men from 14 to 24 years of age and each person were followed
for 15 years. The sample was restricted to white men who finished school in 1976. The number
of samples was 1541. Examples of statistical data showed that the non-salary characteristics
differed according to the human civil status. Sample men were older and had more work
experience than single men. The results also showed that, on average, those who had completed
their education had less than married people.

2.20 Interior Design of Work Place

49
The study shows a close link between the internal environment and the work of employees.
Improving the physical environment improves employee productivity. Clements-Croome (2000)
argues that employee productivity can be improved by 4-10% by improving environmental
conditions in the office. Recent research has consistently shown that improvement in the physical
environment increases office productivity (Sundstrom, Town, Rice, Osborn & Brill, 2004, Fisk
& Rosenfeld, 1997, Heerwagen, 2000, Leaman & Bordass, 2001, Veitch & Newsham, 1998;
Wyon, 2004).

Internal design and workplace construction can have a significant impact on employee
productivity. Many big and small things make healthy, happy, satisfied and above all productive
workers in their workplace. One of the most important is whether employees work in groups or
have their own jobs, noise levels in their work area, furniture layout, comfort, ventilation and
lighting.

Robertson and Huang (2006) Investigation of 120 workplace impact assessments on workplace
design and training, as well as the link between the perception that office workplace design
factors are satisfied (design and storage) and work productivity tools (individual productivity,
group performance) collaboration and efficiency) using a work environment questionnaire. The
results showed a significant positive impact of interventions on environmental satisfaction in the
design of workplaces. Satisfaction with workplace design is largely related to individual
performance, group collaboration and efficiency. Employees also need to equip themselves with
sufficient equipment to successfully complete the assigned tasks. It also includes personal
protective equipment. According to Haldiya, Sachdev and Mathur (2005), if employees are well
aware of health problems and protective measures, there is a huge gap between the use of
knowledge and personal protective equipment, mainly due to the lack of protective measures.

Ten key design elements can positively affect your work environment and support your work:

1. Thermal comfort and temperature

2. Access to nature, views and natural light.

3. Sensory changes and variability.

4. Color

5. Noise control
50
6. Crowding

7. Human factor and ergonomics.

8. Indoor air quality

9. Choice

10. Employee Engagement

In addition, these important design elements, based on our research and experience, lead to the
same result: an environment that enables people to work better. 1. Give employees control over
their environment.

Physical discomfort limits the ability to concentrate. That's why the ideal modern office
environment gives people more control over temperature and ventilation. Solutions differ from
simple work windows to individual management systems in every workplace.

2. Create images of natural light and nature.

Over the years, there were dark, sad places in the offices. The only light worker was due to the
heavy fluorescent lights that were on them, and the only vegetation was the salad in the
refrigerator.

Research has shown that the natural light and appearance environment can improve orientation,
increase concentration, and improve overall performance. Another architectural element that
helps bring nature to the room is vegetation, on the one hand, the inner "living wall", a vertical
garden full of real plants. Organizations with limited budgets may want to add more plants (or
even images with the environment) to record their willingness to interact with nature.

3. Offer a variety of jobs.

Over the last decade, technology has changed our way of working. The lonely genius working
in the corner ended. Cooperation is a thing. There is movement for clean, open and full light
works that support teamwork and idea generation.

Nevertheless, employees often need a place to retire, be it in a quiet place to concentrate at work,
a place to relax and eat, or a place to have fun and relieve steam.

51
4. Find colour, texture and pattern.

Many deadlines and a constant flow of information can make today's workplace a lot of stress.
This can damage our digestive system and sleep patterns. Depending on your design, the office
environment can worsen this issue or help reduce anxiety in the workplace.

At the same time, office environment design should encourage employees to convey a sense of
vitality. Soothing, but not boring, alive, but without excessive stimulation. This is the line a
designer has to follow.

5. Promote mobility

Unfortunately, most office staff spend more than 75% of their days. By pushing and moving all
day, we are more productive. Tables suitable for sitting and standing alone are very far away and
hiking stations are not always an acceptable option.

Office design can promote the mobility of employees and visitors. For example, stairs filled with
intriguing light-covered light can draw attention up and inspire passengers to climb stairs instead
of elevators.

Figure2.5: Dimensions of work and employee satisfaction

2.20.1 Interior Design of Work Place and Employee Performance

For many years, many companies have experienced new designs and techniques in office

52
buildings that can increase productivity and attract more employees (Hameed & Amjad, 2009).
Many authors point out that job creation combined with effective management processes play an
important role in increasing employee productivity and improving organizational performance
(Uzee, 1999, Leaman and Bordass, 1993). A study by architects Gensler (2005), which involved
200 business executives in the UK, showed that improved jobs would increase workers'
productivity by 19 percent, and their productivity by 17 percent. These improvements are
important for the economy if they are checked. Gensler (2006) continued this study in a survey
of 2,000 workers in the United States, which showed that 90 percent of the respondents said they
were not. Respondents believe that better interior design and design improve overall employee
productivity. The American Society of Interior Designers (ASID, 1999) conducted an
independent study and found that physical workplace design is one of the three key factors
determining productivity and job satisfaction. The survey showed that 31% of people were
satisfied with their job and had a pleasant working environment. 50 percent People were looking
for work and said they wanted to work in a good physical environment. Many managers
mistakenly believe that the level of employee productivity is proportional to the size of the
compensation package. Although the compensation package is one of the means of external
motivation, it has a limited short-term impact on employee productivity (Ryan and Deci, 2000).
Brill (1990) believes that improving the physical design of a workplace can increase by 5-10
percent. Labor productivity. Stallworth and Kleiner (1996) argue that the organization's physical
design is increasingly being developed to meet the needs of employees to maximize productivity
and satisfaction. A satisfactory working environment and support are very important for job
satisfaction. The working environment has many qualities that can affect physical and mental
well-being. A quality workplace is essential to enable employees to perform various tasks and
work efficiently. A good workplace is confirmed by features such as competitive reward,
employee and manager trust, justice and justice for all, as well as a well- grounded workload
with complex but achievable goals. By combining all these conditions, the workplace is the best
working environment for employees to work with a high level of satisfaction. As a profit-making
organization, creating favourable conditions for satisfied employees is an advantage to achieve
the desired results.

International Design and Health Academy report "Creating a Workplace Health and Productivity
Workplace" by Jacqueline C. Vischer, Interior Designer at Los Angeles Home and University of
Montreal. Workplace productivity is assessed at two levels: individual task performance (ITP)
and collaboration and teamwork. Most of the productivity researches carried out by the employees
53
are performed on individual tasks.

2.21 Summary

In today's competitive business environment, corporations can no longer afford to waste the
strength of their employees. Companies participate in a marathon to achieve their goals. It is
therefore necessary to ensure a high level of productivity for its employees. Literature shows that
good workplace design has a positive impact on employee productivity. Employees who are
healthy and satisfied with their work are an important source of successful business. It is very
important for the company to ensure that the environment and working conditions provide the
employees with the right environment to maximize their work. The working environment is an
important element of organizational research. This study examines the working environment and
productivity of workers in Libya. Appreciates the connection between the physical work
environment and the improvement of the work of the highest education staff in the Ministry of
Libya, taking into account architectural design and interior design. In addition, the demographic
factors will determine the impact of the work environment on employee productivity.

CHAPTER III

3. METHODOLOGY AND DATA ANALYSIS

3.1 Introduction

This chapter consists of a review of the research methodology and design. Moreover, an
explanation presented on the methods of collecting data of study, analysis of these data, and the

54
results of research hypotheses. Also this chapter describe the data quality challenges up on the
research approach that was selected.

3.2 Research Approach and Design

Two main types of research approaches can be adopted either deductive research approach, or
inductive research approach. In the deductive research approach a strong theory-based research
hypothesis is developed to illustrate the relationship between the two variables (independent and
dependent) (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).

This approach is relied on scientific basis as the analysis tests are relied on quantitative data and
are well organized. The inductive research method is more popular and common use in social
sciences, where the theory relied on the data is being collected from the samples of study
(Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). The inductive research approach is normally relied on the
qualitative data, also this approach is not organized to the same level of the deductive research
approach.

An important condition that the researcher should take in his account when crossing the research
approach, which is the type of research data either quantitative or qualitative. The quantitative data
is the outcome of any data that been collected from the respondents that uses numerical type of
data. The qualitative data is the data which is characterized d by their non-numerical data.

For the purpose of analyse the research variables the job satisfaction and the level of organizational
commitment, it is suitable to use the numerical data approach "quantitative", which is widely used
for the deductive research approaches. The dataset of the current research is mainly numerical
where the main purpose of this study to measure the impact of job satisfaction on the level of
organizational commitment. There are five main steps of that each research should follow when
using the deductive research approach (Robson, 2002):

1. From the theory of study, deduct the research hypothesis.

2. In operational terms, express on the research hypothesis.

3. Testing the operational research hypothesis.

4. Test the results of the statistical analysis.

5. Updating and modifying the theory of according on the new outcomes.

55
The research design is defined as the general plan on how the researcher will test the research
hypotheses, answer the research questions, and reached the research goals (Saunders, Lewis, &
Thornhill, 2009). Three different types of research design are commonly used among the
researchers which are the explanatory, descriptive, and exploratory studies.

The exploratory research type focused on finding new solutions or insights to specific problem
depending on the study results, the descriptive study uses to explore accurate information of
people, cases, or situations, and the explanatory study explains the relationship between the
variables of study. Therefore according on the previous explanations, and because the current
thesis about to test the relationship between two variables, the explanatory study will be used in
this research.

3.3 Data Collection

The mono method (the single data and the analysis corresponding) or the (multiple methods) is
used in the data collection technique of a quantitative research approach (Saunders, Lewis, &
Thornhill, 2009). The mono method is used in the research paper as the data of study collected
and then analysed numerically.

The case studies, survey based studies, the experiments studies, and the action research are all
studies based on the deductive research approach (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). In the
case of this study, as the research aims at evaluating the impact of job satisfaction on the level of
organizational commitment, a large size of numerically data is needed for this purpose. Therefore,
a questionnaire is the most suitable method to collect the primary data from respondents, analysing
these data, and then perform the needed tests to answer the research questions and test the research
hypotheses. The size of research questionnaire may limit the number of respondents to the
paragraphs of questionnaire. Therefore it’s recommended to have quite small questionnaire to
increase the number of respondents on the questionnaire.

All the administration staff within the Libyan Telecom Company, are consider as the population
of study. Moreover, as there large number of administration staff who work in the company under
study, it is difficult to collect responds from the whole population of study.

Therefore, out of 320 staff who working in the administration fields within the Libyan Telecom
Company, a random sample of 230 is used in the current research survey, and after collected the
questionnaires a total of 217 were retrieved back, after checking the validity of all questionnaires
56
a number of 17 were discarded, because they didn’t meet the required conditions in of valid
questionnaire. The researcher tried to reach all respondents, by deliver the questionnaire of study
directly by himself to the needed samples to ensure the maximum respondents possible.

The probability and non-probability sampling are two different methods used for sampling
techniques (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). Where in the probability sampling technique all
sample of the study population has the same chance to be selected in the survey, while in the non-
probability sampling technique some of samples may will have no chance to be selected in the
study survey. Therefore since the whole population of the administration staff is known in this
study, the probability sampling technique was adopted in this research.

The selected samples is considered a suitable sample as the samples of study who fill the research
questionnaire were the most reachable ones among all the study population, by other words it
could be called a self-selecting sample, as they choose to fill the research questionnaire (Saunders,
Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). The convenience sampling technique is characterized by its easy to be
managed, cheapness to be performed, also its suitable in the case when it’s difficult to consider
the probability sampling technique. In the case of self-selection sampling, it’s predicted that
respondents will provide honest answers to all questionnaire paragraphs, as they choose to
participate in the study by them-self without any pressure from the researcher.

3.4 Questionnaire of Study

The questionnaire of study consists of three main parts, where the first part consists of
demographical data for respondents of study, the second part consists of a set of questions related
to the factors affecting job satisfaction level, and the third part consists of questions related to the
factors affecting the organizational commitment level. The questionnaire consists of only a
quantitative questions.

The paragraphs of questionnaire are "opinion based questions", as many studies indicated that the
level of job satisfaction and the level of organizational commitment are based on the employees
them self and on the strategies and policies of the company. The Five Likert Scale is used in order
to measure the respondents answers on the questionnaire paragraphs (1 to 5) where 5 represents
(S.D), 4 represents (D), 3 represents (neutral), 2 represents (A), and 1 represents (S. A). the
questions of questionnaire were well designed to avoid any ambiguity in the questions.

57
 3.5 Reliability Test

Cronbach Alpha reliability test is used in this research. This test is conducted in order to measure
the internal consistency i.e. reliability of the measuring instrument (Questionnaire). It is most
commonly used when the questionnaire is developed using multiple Likert scale statements and
therefore to determine if the scale is reliable or not. The result of reliability test is shown in the
following table:

Table 3.1: Reliability of Questionnaire

Areas of study Cronbach's N of

Alpha Items
Satisfaction With Work .556 5
Satisfaction with Pay and Incentives .685 7
Satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and
.714 6
career advancement
Satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision .552 7
Satisfaction with the work group and social relations
.751 6
between employees
Satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy
.751 6
and stability
Factors affecting the organizational commitment .904 14
ALL paragraph .881 51

As can be seen in the above table, the overall reliability for all questionnaire paragraphs (N=51
items) equal (.881) which is higher than the recommended value (0.700). The reliability value for
the areas of “satisfaction with work”, “satisfaction with pay and incentives”, and “satisfaction with
the style of leadership and supervision” was less than the recommended value (0.700) but were
acceptable values “ (0.556), (0.685), and (0.552) respectively. It’s recommended to increase the
value of reliability when low values obtained, but due to the time limitation, the researcher
couldn’t redistribute the questionnaires to the same respondents, therefore the researcher accepted
these values since they are acceptable.

3.6 Characteristics of surveyed Samples

1. Gender of respondents

In order to find out the number of males and females who participated in the questionnaire of
study, the respondents were asked to indicate their gender in the first section of the questionnaire
“the demographical variables”. Males and females have different views and attitudes toward
events in the workplace (Singer, 1996). As can be observed in the table 3.2, 105 (52.5%) of the

58
respondents were males, while 95 (47.5%) were females. The number of males and females
respondents were very close to each other, which indicated that females and males have the same
chances to be promoted in their work.

Table 3.2: Gender of samples

Frequency Percent
male 105 52.5
Valid female 95 47.5
Total 200 100.0

Gender

47.5
52.5

male female

Figure 3.1: Gender of samples of study

As can be observed in the above figure 3.1, (47.5%) of the respondents were females, while
(52.5%) were males.

2. Age of Respondents

In order to find out the age differences to the respondents who participated in the questionnaire of
study, the respondents were asked to indicate their age in the first section of the questionnaire “the
demographical variables”. As can be observed in the table 3.3, 40 of respondent’s representing
(20%) fall within the age group (20 – 30 years old), 60 of respondents representing (30%) fall
within the age groups (31 – 40 years old), and (41 – 50 years old) respectively, and 40 of
respondents representing (20%) fall within the age group (More than 50 years old).

59
Table 3.3: Age of respondents

Age of respondents Frequency Percent

20 - 30 40 20.0
31 - 40 60 30.0
Valid 41 -50 60 30.0
more than 50 40 20.0
Total 200 100.0

Age

20 20

30 30

20 - 30 31 - 40 41 -50 more than 50

Figure 3.2: Age of sample of study

As can be observed in the above figure 3.2, (30%) of respondents fall within the age groups (31 –
40 years old), and (41 – 50 years old) respectively, while (20%) of respondents fall within the age
groups (20 – 30 years old), and (more than 50 years old) respectively.

3. Social Status

In order to find out the social status differences to the respondents who participated in the
questionnaire of study, the respondents were asked to indicate their social status in the first section
of the questionnaire “the demographical variables”. As can be observed in the table 3.4, 155
(77.5%) were married, 35 (17.5%) were not married, while 10 (5%) have other social status.

Table 3.4: Social Status of sample of study

Social Status Frequency Percent

Married 155 77.5
Valid
Not married. 35 17.5

60
 Other. 10 5.0
Total 200 100.0

Social status

5
17.5

77.5

Married Not married. Other.

Figure 3.3: Social status of samples of study

As can be observed in the above figure 3.3, 77.5 of respondents were married, 17.5% of
respondents were not married, while only 5% have “other” social status.

4. Number of kids

In order to find out the number of sons and daughters differences to the respondents who
participated in the questionnaire of study, the respondents were asked to indicate their number of
sons and daughters in the first section of the questionnaire “the demographical variables”. As can
be observed in the table 3.5, 41 (20.5%) of respondents have “no kids”, 125 (62.5%) have “less
than 4 kids”, 31 (15.5%) have between “5 to 8 kids”, and 3 (1.5%) have “more than 8 kids”.

Table 3.5: Number of Sons and daughters

Number of Sons Frequency Percent

and daughters
None. 41 20.5
Less than 4. 125 62.5
5 – 8. 31 15.5
Valid
More than
3 1.5
8.
Total 200 100.0

61
 Number of Sons and daughters
1.5

15.5 20.5

62.5

None. Less than 4. 5 – 8. More than 8.

Figure 3.4: Number of kids of samples of study

As can be observed in the above figure 3.4, 62.5% of respondents have “less than 4 kids”, 20.5%
of respondent shave “no kids”, 15.5% of respondents have between “5-8 kids”, and 1.5% of
respondents have “more than 8 kids”.

5. Years of experience

In order to find out the number of years of experience to the respondents who participated in the
questionnaire of study, the respondents were asked to indicate their years of experience in the first
section of the questionnaire “the demographical variables”. As can be observed in the table 3.6,
40 (20%) of respondents have “less than 5 years of experience”, 60 (30%) of respondents have
between “6 to 10” years of experience”, 61 (30.5%) have “11 to 15 years of experience”, and 39
(19.5%) of respondents have “more than 15 years of experience”.

Table 3.6: Years of Experience of samples of study

Years of Experience Frequency Percent

Less than 5 40 20.0
6 – 10 60 30.0
11 – 15 61 30.5
Valid
More than
39 19.5
15
Total 200 100.0

62
 Years of Experience

19.5 20

30.5 30

Less than 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 More than 15

Figure 3.5: Respondents years of experience

As can be observed in the above figure 3.5, 40 (20%) of respondents have “less than 5 years of
experience”, 60 (30%) of respondents have between “6 to 10” years of experience”, 61 (30.5%)
have “11 to 15 years of experience”, and 39 (19.5%) of respondents have “more than 15 years of
experience”.

6. Educational level

In order to find out the educational levels to the respondents who participated in the questionnaire
of study, the respondents were asked to indicate their educational level in the first section of the
questionnaire “the demographical variables”. As can be observed in the table 3.7, 5 (2.5%) of
respondents have “high school educational level”, 11 (5.5%) of respondents have “vocational
degree educational level”, majority of respondents 168 (84%) have “bachelor degree educational
level”, and only 6 respondents (3%) had “PhD” educational level.

Table 3.7: Educational Level of respondents

Educational Level Frequency Percent

High School 5 2.5
Vocational Degree 11 5.5
Bachelor Degree. 168 84.0
Valid
Master Degree. 10 5.0
PhD Degree. 6 3.0
Total 200 100.0

63
 Educational Level
2.5

5 3 5.5

84

High School Vocational Degree Bacholer Degree.

Master Degree. PhD Degree.

Figure 3.6: educational level of respondents

As can be observed in the figure 3.6, 5 (2.5%) of respondents have “high school educational level”,
11 (5.5%) of respondents have “vocational degree educational level”, majority of respondents 168
(84%) have “bachelor degree educational level”, and only 6 respondents (3%) had “PhD”
educational level.

3.7 Normality Test for all Questionnaire Areas

In order to test whether the data of study are normal distributed or non-normal distributed, the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z test to measure the distribution of data is used. This test for normality is
based on the maximum difference between the observed distribution and expected cumulative-
normal distribution. Since it uses the sample mean and standard deviation to calculate the expected
normal distribution, the Lilliefors’ adjustment is used. The smaller the maximum difference the
more likely that the distribution is normal.

1. Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z for the paragraphs of the first study area “satisfaction with work”

Table 3.8: Normality (satisfaction with work)

Paragraphs of the first questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig. (2-

(satisfaction with work) Smirnov Z tailed)a,b
I am satisfied with my job conditions. .797 0.000
I feel happy during my working hours. .797 0.000
I don’t feel bored during my working hours. .797 0.000

64
 I feel that my job is more appropriate to me
.797 0.000
than others.
I feel happy in my work compared to others
.797 0.000
colleges.

The Kolmogorov– Smirnov measurement evaluates a separation between the experimental

dispersion capacity of the sample and the aggregate circulation capacity of the reference
dissemination, or between the observational appropriation elements of two samples. The invalid
appropriation (distribution) of this measurement is determined under the invalid theory that the
sample is drawn from the reference conveyance (in the one-sample case) or that the samples are
drawn from a similar dispersion (in the two-sample case). As can be observed in the above table
3.8, the normality test to the first area of study “satisfaction with work” for all paragraphs of this
area didn’t follow the normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05).
Therefore, up on these findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

Table 3.9: Normality (satisfaction with pay and incentives)

Paragraphs of the second questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig. (2-

(satisfaction with pay and incentives) Smirnov Z tailed)a,b
My salary commensurate with my performance in
.655 0.000
the work.
I receive my salary at the end of each month
.361 0.000
without any delay.
I receive extra payment for any overtime work. .655 0.000
I don’t do any other work outside the institution to
.649 0.000
increase my salary.
There is equity in the distribution of incentives
.644 0.000
within the institution.
My salary is sufficient to accommodate all my 0.000
.634
needs.
I don’t agree to work at another institution with 0.000
.501
higher income.

As can be observed in the above table 3.9, the normality test to the first area of study “satisfaction
with pay and incentives” for all paragraphs of this area didn’t follow the normality, as the Sig.
value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05). Therefore, up on these findings, the non-
parametric tests are recommended to be used.

Table 3.10: Normality (satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career
advancement)

Paragraphs of the third questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig.

satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress Smirnov Z (2-tailed)a,b
and career advancement
65
 The organization develops, trains, and provides staff
with new skills in order to improve their performance .121 0.000
and capabilities.
The organization works continuously to develop staff
.121 0.000
capabilities.
The promotion process depends on the degree of
.631 0.000
performance within the organization.
The management of the organization constantly
.121 0.000
assesses employee performance.
The organization works to develop plans to develop
.121 0.000
and improve employee’s performance.
The manager's assessment of my performance 0.000
objectively, gives me a positive boost to doing my job .121
better.

As can be observed in the above table 3.10, the normality test to the first area of study “satisfaction
with opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement” for all paragraphs of this area
didn’t follow the normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05).
Therefore, up on these findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

66
Table 3.11: Normality (satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision)

Paragraphs of the fourth questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig.

satisfaction with the style of leadership and Smirnov Z (2-tailed)a,b
supervision
The top management helps me to apply the modern
management methods that I need in my work within .121 0.000
the organization.
My managers treat me with respect and interest. .663 0.000
I get support from my managers in guiding my work. .451 0.000
I am not exposed to criticism of my managers at work
.121 0.000
when simple mistakes occur.
Managers treat all employees in the same manner
.585 0.000
without discrimination.
My thoughts and opinions are taken into 0.000
.585
consideration by managers when making decisions.
The manager clearly defines the key performance 0.000
.121
criteria.

As can be observed in the above table 3.11, the normality test to the first area of study “satisfaction
with the style of leadership and supervision” for all paragraphs of this area didn’t follow the
normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05). Therefore, up on these
findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

Table 3.12: Normality (Satisfaction with the work group and social relations between
employees)

Paragraphs of the fifth questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig.

Satisfaction with the work group and social Smirnov Z (2-tailed)a,b
relations between employees
I feel there a mutual respecting and understanding
.121 0.000
between me and my colleagues at work.
I have no problems with my colleagues in the way
.121 0.000
they behave within the organization.
I feel the support and mutual cooperation between me
.121 0.000
and the management of organization.
The work pressures affect my personal life. .550 0.000
The organization supports human and social relations
.550 0.000
between managers and employees.
The concept of teamwork is applied within the 0.000
.121
organization.

As can be observed in the above table 3.12, the normality test to the first area of study “Satisfaction
with the work group and social relations between employees” for all paragraphs of this area didn’t
follow the normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05). Therefore,
up on these findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

67
Table 3.13: Normality (Satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability)

Paragraphs of the sixth questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig.

Satisfaction with the work group and social Smirnov Z (2-tailed)a,b
relations between employees
The organization provides the appropriate facilities
for employees to achieve outstanding performance .550 0.000
and functionality.
The organization provides transportation services to
.121 0.000
transport employees to and from their place of work.
The organization provides all necessary security and
.121 0.000
safety elements.
The organization follows with interest the
.121 0.000
maintenance of equipment and tools for the work.
My workplace is comfortable and safe. .121 0.000
The amount of work required is commensurate with 0.000
the size of equipment and tools available within the .550
organization.

As can be observed in the above table 3.13, the normality test to the first area of study “Satisfaction
with the work group and social relations between employees” for all paragraphs of this area didn’t
follow the normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05). Therefore,
up on these findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

Table 3.14: Normality (factors affecting the organizational commitment)

Paragraphs of the seventh questionnaire areas Kolmogorov- Asymp. Sig.

factors affecting the organizational commitment Smirnov Z (2-tailed)a,b
The policy of working within the organization is
.121 0.000
clear and appropriate.
I accept the organization’s policy with conviction. .612 0.000
The corporate communication policy is open and
.603 0.000
without barriers
The organization has an effective system that
.470 0.000
addresses employee problems and complaints.
The objectives of the institution are clear and
.121 0.000
surprising.
There is a homogeneity between my personal values 0.000
.121
and the organization values.
I consider myself an important element in the 0.000
.121
organization.
I am ready to make the needed effort to achieve the 0.000
.121
organizational goals.
I am very interested in the fate of my organization. .121 0.000
I take the issues and concerns of my organization as 0.000
.121
my responsibilities.
I feel secure in the organization. .646 0.000

68
 I feel a permanent belonging to this organization. .121 0.000
I feel a moral obligation to continue my work in this 0.000
.648
organization.
I express my opinion in the organization freely and 0.000
.121
without fear.

As can be observed in the above table 3.14, the normality test to the first area of study “factors
affecting the organizational commitment” for all paragraphs of this area didn’t follow the
normality, as the Sig. value exactly equal (0.000), which is less than (0.05). Therefore, up on these
findings, the non-parametric tests are recommended to be used.

3.8 Analysis, Discussion, and Results of Research Hypotheses

When conducting a piece of quantitative research, you are inevitably attempting to answer a
research question or hypothesis that you have set. One method of evaluating this research question
is via a process called hypothesis testing, which is sometimes also referred to as significance
testing. This section shows the results of research hypotheses.

H1: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfactions with work and
organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfactions with work and organizational
commitment.

According on the normality test result, the data distribution of questionnaire areas are “non-
normal” distributed, therefore the non-parametric tests are used. To test all the research hypotheses
the Pearson Correlation test” for this purpose.

69
Table 3.15: First research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction With Work Pearson Correlation .684
Sig. .000
N 200

As can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables:
satisfaction with work and organizational commitment are (.684) at sig level (.000). Therefore; up
on these findings, it’s clear to say there a significant relationship between these the above two
variables, which means that the organizational commitment level affected positively by the level
of employee’s satisfaction with their works.

H2: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with pay and
incentives and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with pay and incentives and
organizational commitment.

Table 3.16: Second research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction with Pay and Pearson Correlation .491
Incentives Sig. .000
N 200

AS can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables,
satisfaction with pay and incentives and organizational commitment are (.491) at sig level (.000).
Therefore; up on these findings, it’s clear to say there a significant relationship between these the
above two variables, which means that the organizational commitment level affected positively
by the level of employee’s satisfaction with pay and incentives.

H3: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with opportunities for
growth, progress and career advancement and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with opportunities for growth,
progress and career advancement and organizational commitment.

70
Table 3.17: Third research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction with opportunities for Pearson Correlation .233
growth, progress and career Sig. .001
advancement N 200

As can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables,
satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement and organizational
commitment are (.233) at sig level (.000). Therefore; up on these findings, it’s clear to say there a
significant relationship between these the above two variables, which means that the
organizational commitment level affected positively by the level of employee’s satisfaction with
opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement.

H4: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with the style of
leadership and supervision and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with the style of leadership and
supervision and organizational commitment.

Table 3.18: Fourth research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction with the style of Pearson Correlation .808
leadership and supervision Sig. .000
N 200

AS can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables,
satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision and organizational commitment are (.808)
at sig level (.000). Therefore; up on these findings, it’s clear to say there a significant relationship
between these the above two variables, which means that the organizational commitment level
affected positively by the level of employee’s satisfaction with the style of leadership and
supervision.

H5: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with the work group
and social relations between employees and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with the work group and social
relations between employees and organizational commitment.

71
Table 3.19: Fifth research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction with the work group Pearson Correlation .140
and social relations between Sig. .048
employees N 200

AS can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables,
satisfaction with the work group and social relations between employees and organizational
commitment are (.140) at sig level (.000). Therefore; up on these findings, it’s clear to say there a
significant relationship between these the above two variables, which means that the
organizational commitment level affected positively by the level of employee’s satisfaction with
the work group and social relations between employees.

H6: There is statistically significant relationship between the satisfaction with work conditions
such as safety, healthy and stability and organizational commitment.

H0: There is no significant relationship between the satisfaction with work conditions such as
safety, healthy and stability and organizational commitment.

Table 3.20: Sixth research hypothesis

Organizational Commitment
Satisfaction with work conditions such Pearson Correlation .778
as safety, healthy and stability Sig. .000
N 200

As can be observed in the above table 3.15, the strength of relationship between the two variables,
satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability and organizational
commitment are (.778) at sig level (.000). Therefore; up on these findings, it’s clear to say there a
significant relationship between these the above two variables, which means that the
organizational commitment level affected positively by the level of employee’s satisfaction with
work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability.

According on the above findings, it’s clear that all the suggested independent variables within this
study, including (satisfaction with work, satisfaction with pay and incentives, satisfaction with
opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement, satisfaction with the style of
leadership and supervision, satisfaction with the work group and social relations between
employees, and satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy and stability), all have
positive impact on the level of organizational commitment, therefore; the management of Libyan
72
University should give serious attention to these factors, due to their positive impacts in improving
the level of commitment, increase employees satisfaction, and then achieve organization goals,
and increase their competiveness ability.

Table 3.21: Results of Hypotheses

Hypotheses of Study Main Hypotheses Null-Hypotheses

H1: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfactions with work and
organizational commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfactions with work and organizational
commitment.
H2: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfaction with pay and incentives
and organizational commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfaction with pay and incentives and
organizational commitment.
H3: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfaction with opportunities for
growth, progress and career advancement and
organizational commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfaction with opportunities for growth,
progress and career advancement and
organizational commitment.
H4: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfaction with the style of
leadership and supervision and organizational
commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfaction with the style of leadership and
supervision and organizational commitment.

73
H5: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfaction with the work group and
social relations between employees and
organizational commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfaction with the work group and social
relations between employees and organizational
commitment.
H6: There is statistically significant relationship Accepted Rejected
between the satisfaction with work conditions
such as safety, healthy and stability and
organizational commitment.
H0: There is no significant relationship between
the satisfaction with work conditions such as
safety, healthy and stability and organizational
commitment.

74
CHAPTER IV

4. CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND FUTURE STUDIES

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the main results in the thesis. The chapter conclude the results of study about
the impact of work satisfaction on the level of organizational commitment in a conclusion form,
also this chapter includes some recommendations to the company under study to improve the level
of organizational commitment by implementing the strategies of work satisfaction, as well as
recommend some studies to the upcoming researchers in order to enrich the knowledge in this
area.

4.2 Conclusion

With the rapid develop of information technology and communication, there is a need for all
institutions to address the satisfaction level of employees, the level of organizational commitment,
organizational loyalty, and the work itself. The success of organizations, and the level to achieve
their objectives, depend mainly on the level of employee’s organizational commitment, the level
of employee’s performance which is controlled by the level of work satisfaction. Many studies
and researches, examining the impacts of job satisfaction level on the level of employee’s
organizational commitment, many of these studies have shown that the level of employee’s
organizational commitment is directly affected by the level of job satisfaction.

The results of the analysis part in this thesis have shown that organizations which give attention
to the needs and desires of their employees, and allow ideas and information exchange between
their employees, will positively affect the level of job satisfaction among their employees, which
is very important factor to achieve the organizational commitment. The high level of job
satisfaction will increase the level of organizational commitment among all employees, and will
increase the organization ability in keeping their upstanding employees.

The results of study have shown that inadequate applications are among the main reasons of lack
organizational commitment of employees. Satisfaction with work, satisfaction with pay and
incentives, satisfaction with opportunities for growth, progress and career advancement,
satisfaction with the style of leadership and supervision, satisfaction with the work group and
social relations between employees, and satisfaction with work conditions such as safety, healthy
and stability, all these factors have shown very significant impact on the level of organizational
commitment. Therefore the management of any organizations should consider these factors and
75
giver serious attention to improve their application, due to their positive impact on the
organizational commitment.

4.3 Recommendations

The following recommendations are suggested by the researcher to improve the level of work
satisfaction and organizational commitment:

• Working to improve the employees satisfaction level in the nongovernmental organizations,

by increasing the powers granted to the employees and improve the aplication of strategy of
distribution the available jobs according to the employees qualificaions. Also work to
assigned rights and duties to each employee, as well as conditions to each job, which increases
the employees saitisfaction, and then increase the level of organizational commitment.
• Working to improve the wages system in the Libyan Telecom Company and within all
nongovernmental organizations, which leads to increase the employees satisfaction level, and
then improve the level of organizational commitment.
• Develop a rewards and promotion systems in all organizations, in a way that ensure the
equality in distribution of these rewards to all employees, which will positievly affect the level
of work satisfaction and then improve organizational commitment.
• Upgrade the current applied promotion and rewards systems within most Libyan
organizations, and ensure the criteria for promotion and rewarding based on efficiency,
seniority and merit in work performance; which will positively increase the employees
satisfaction level, and then improve the level of organizational commitment.
• Devlop a fair system of staff assessment so that the evaluation process depends on actual
performance of employees rather than their loyalty, taking into account the establishment of
appropriate and objective criteria so that the employee participates in the evaluation process
according to his occupaied job.
• Work to develop the abilities and skellies of employees in all organizations, as well as work
to enrich their knowledge and information in their fields, which will directly affect their
satisfaction level, and then improve their organizational commitment.
• Applied the modern management strategies in the organizations, which will give employees
opportunities to participate in the decision making process, and formulate organization plans.
The successful application for these strategies will positively affect the level of work
satisfaction, and then enhance the level of organizational commitment.

76
• Improve the social relationships between employees and managerial staffs within the
organization.
• Improve the work environment, by make sure all the needed tools and facilities to perform
the work are available, which will positively affect the employee’s performance level, and
enhance the employee’s organizational commitment.
• Develop a special system that addresses the problems of employees and their complaints by
implement methods, mechanisms and procedures and thus work on solving these problems,
which increases their satisfaction and loyalty toward their organization.
• Enhancing the culture of not leaving work (turnover), and loyalty to the organization by
paying attention to the development of employees in different ways and modern methods,
which increases the satisfaction of employees and motivate them to stay in their work, which
reflect their work satisfaction and then improve their organizational commitment.
•

4.4 Future Studies

This study focused on identify the impact of work satisfaction on the level of organizational
commitment. The results of study have shown that work satisfaction factors have direct impact on
improving the level of organizational commitment, Therefore; according on the results of this
study, the researcher recommend the following research titles for the upcoming researchers:

• Conduct a comparative study to measure the level of work satisfaction in the NGOs and
government organizations.
• Conduct a study to identify the impact of work satisfaction on improving the employee’s
performance in the Nongovernmental organization (NGOs).
• Conduct a study to identify the impact of work satisfaction and organizational commitment
on the productivity in the Nongovernmental organization (NGOs).
• Conduct a study to identify the impacts of work stress on the organizational commitment in
the Nongovernmental organization (NGOs).
• Conduct a study to identify the relationship between work satisfaction and organizational
commitment and their impacts of the competiveness.

77
REFERENCES
A path analytic study of causes and consequences of retail sales people's role conflict and
ambiguity. Dubinsky, A J and Borys, R H. Chicago, IL : American Marketing
Association, 1981. AMA Educators.

Abelson, R. P. 1976. Script processing in attitude formation and decision-making. In J. S. Carrol

& J. W. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior: 33-45. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Addae, H. M., &Wang, X. 2006. Stress at work: Linear and curvilinear effects of psychological-
, job-, and organization-related factors: An exploratory study of Trinidad and Tobago.
International journal of stress management, 13(4), 476.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (2011). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology,
63: 1-18.

Allen, N. & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance
and Normative Commitment to the Organization, Journal of Occupational Psychology,
Vol. 63: 1-18.

Andrisani PJ 1978. Levels and trends in job satisfaction 1966-1972. In: P Andrisani (Ed.): Work
Atti-tudes and Labor Market Experience. New York: Praeger, pp. 87-111

Armstrong, J. S. (1982). The Value of Formal Planning for Strategic Decisions, Strategic
Management Journal, 3, pp. 197–211.

Bastos, A. V. B. (1993). Comprometimento organizacional: um balanço dos resultados e

desafios que cercam essa tradição de pesquisa. Revista de Administração de Empresas,
33(3), 52-64. doi: 10.1590/S0034-75902003000300006

Bateman, T. S., & Strasser, S. 1984. A longitudinal analysis of the antecedents of the
organizational commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 27: 95-112

Bottani, E, Monica, L &Vignali, and G (2009), Safety management systems: Performance

differences between adopters and non-adopters. Safety Science, Vol. 47, pp. 155-162.
Journal of Applied psychology, 63: 391-407.

Caroline Closon Christophe Leys Catherine Hellemans, (2015),"Perceptions of corporate social

responsibility, organizational commitment and job satisfaction", Management

78
 Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, Vol. 13 Iss 1 pp.
31 – 54.

Casual Relationship Between attitudenal antecedents to turnover. Wong, C, Hui, C and Law, K
S. 1995, Academy of Management Journal, pp. 324-6.

Clegg, C. W. (2017). Psychology of employee’s lateness, absence, and turnover: A

Methodological critique and an empirical study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68:88-
101

Cohen A. (2000): The relationship between commitment forms and work outcomes: A
comparison of three models. “Human Relations”, Vol. 53(3), pp. 387-417.

COMMUNICATION RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION AND ORGANIZATIONAL

COMMITMENT. Putti, J M, Aryee, S and Phua, J. 1, 1990, GROUP &
ORGANIZATION STUDIES, Vol. 15, pp. 44-52.

Currivan, D. B. (1999). The Causal Order of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
in Models of Employee Turnover, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 9, Num.
4, pp. 495-524.

Dooley, R. S., Fryxell, G. E., Judge, W. Q. (2000). Belaboring the not-so-obvious: consensus,
commitment, and strategy implementation speed and success. Journal of Management,
26(6), pp. 1237–57

Dorgan, C.E. (1994). Productivity link to the indoor environment estimated relative to Ashrae
1962-1989, Proceedings of Health Buildings, Budapest, 94, 461-472.

Doukakis, P. (2003). Internal Marketing in the UK Retail Banking Sector: Rhetoric or Reality?
Journal of Marketing Management, 197-224.

ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY ON WORK - A MODERATOR OF THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AND PERFORMANCE. Brett, J
F, Cron, W L and Slocum, J W. 1, 1995, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, pp.
261-71.

Elbanna, S. (2008). Planning and participation as determinants of strategic planning

effectiveness: evidence from the Arabic context. Management Decision, 46(5), pp. 779–
796.

79
Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. 2005. The moderating role of individual differences in the relation
between transformational/transactional leadership perceptions and organizational
identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 569-589.

Examining the casual order of job satisfaction organizational commitment. Vandenberg, R J

and Lance, C E. 1, 1992, Journal of Management, Vol. 18, pp. 153-67.

Farooqui, S., & Nagendra, A. (2014). The Impact of Person organization Fit on Job Satisfaction
and Performance of the Employees. Procedia Economics and Finance, 122-129

Fiegener, M. K. (2005). Determinants of board participation in the strategic decisions of small

corporations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), pp. 627– 650.

Fink, S. L. (1992). High commitment workplaces. New York, NY: Quorum Books.

Fisher CD (2003). Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated?
Possible sources of a commonsense theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6):
753-777.

Gazioglu, S.; Tansel, A., (2006). Job satisfaction in Britain: Individual and job-related factors.
Economic Research Centre Working Papers in Economics. Volume 38. PP. 1163 – 1171

George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2015). Understanding and managing organizational behavior.
California: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

Hogg, G., Carter, S., & Dunne, A. (1998). Investing in People: Intemal Marketing and
Corporate Culture. Journal of Marketing Management, 879-895.

Illies R, Wilson KS, Wagner DT 2009. The spillover of daily job satisfaction onto employees’
family lives: The facilitating role of work-family integration. Academy of Management
Journal, 52(1): 87-102

Internal Auditors: Job Satisfaction and Professional Commitment. Clark , C E and Larkin, J M.
1, 1992, Internal Auditing, Vol. 8, pp. 9-17.

Irawanto, D. W. (2015). Employee participation in decision-making: evidence from a state-

owned enterprise in indonesia. Management, 20(1), pp. 159–172.

Irving, P. G., & Coleman, D. F. 2003. The Moderating Effect of Different Forms of
Commitment on Role Ambiguity‐Job Tension Relations. Canadian Journal of

80
 Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de administration, 20(2), 97-
106.

Jaw, B., Liu, W. (2004). Promoting organizational learning and self-renewal in Taiwanese
Companies: The role of HRM. Human Resource Management, 42(3), pp. 223–241.

Jonathan H. Westover Andrew R. Westover L. Alan Westover, (2010),"Enhancing long-term

worker productivity and performance", International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 59 Iss 4 pp. 372 – 387.

Jonathan H. Westover Andrew R. Westover L. Alan Westover, (2010),"Enhancing long-term

worker productivity and performance", International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 59 Iss 4 pp. 372 – 387.

Judge TA, Kammeyer-Mueller JD, Weiss HM et al. (2017). Job attitudes, job satisfaction, and
job affect:A century of continuity and of change. Journal of Applied Psychology,
102(3): 356-374

Kalkavan, S., & Katrinli, A. (2014). Perception of Job Satisfaction, Organizational

Commitment, and Job Performance: Case Study on Insurance Industry In Turkey.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1137 1147

Kohtamä ki, M., Kraus, S., Mä kela, M., Rö nkko, M. (2012). The role of personnel commitment
to strategy implementation and organizational learning within the relationship between
strategic planning and company performance. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior & Research, 18(2), pp. 159–178

Kuye, O. L., Sulaimon, A. A. (2011). Employee involvement in decision making and firm’s
performance in the manufacturing sector in Nigeria. Serbian Journal of Management,
6(1), pp. 1–15.

Landy, F. J., (1978). An opponent process theory of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
Psychology. Volume 63, Issue 5. PP. 533-547

Larson, M. & Luthans, F. (2006). Potential Added Value of Psychological Capital in Predicting
Work Attitudes, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13: 45-62, DOI:
10.1177/10717919070130010701.

Lings, l. N. (1999). Balancing Internal and External Market Orientations. . Journal of Marketing
Management, 239-263

81
Locke EA 1976. The nature and causes of job satisfac-tion. In: MD Dunnette (Ed.): Handbook
of Indus-trial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, pp. 1297-
1349

Manzoor, M.U., Usman, M., Naseem, M.A., & Shafiq, M.M. (2011). A Study of Job Stress and
Job Satisfaction among Universities Faculty in Lahore, Pakistan Global Journal of
Management and Business Research, 11(9):1 September 2011.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. 1991 A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1: 61-89.

Miguel Ángel Calderón Molina José Manuel Hurtado González Beatriz Palacios Florencio José
Luis Galán González , (2014),"Does the balancedscorecard adoption enhance the levels
of organizational climate, employees’ commitment, job satisfaction and job
dedication?", Management Decision, Vol. 52 Iss 5 pp. 983 – 1010.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. 1982. Employee-organizational linkages: The
psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (2011). Employee-organization linkages: The
psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academy Press

Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M. (1982), Employee-origanization linkages. New
York: Academic Press.

Mueller CW, McCloskey JC (1990). Nurses’ job satisfaction: A proposed measure. Nursing
Research, 39(2):113-117

National Institute for Occupational Health and safety (NIOSH) 2006, Criteria for a
Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Refractory Ceramic Fibers, Issue
123.

O’Reilly, C. A., III, & Chatman, J. (2014). Organizational commitment and psychological
attachment: The effect of compliance, identification, and internalization on prosocial
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 492-499

On the casual order of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Curry, J P, et al. 1986,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 847-58.

82
Pasaoglu, D., & Tonus, Z. (2014). Strategic Importance of Human Resource Practices on Job
Satisfaction in Private Hospitals. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 394403

Performance management Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. Fletcher, C and

Williams, R. 1996, British Journal of management, Vol. 15, pp. 169-79.

Petty MM, McGee GW, Cavender JW (1984). A meta-analysis of the relationships between
individual job satisfaction and individual performance. The Academy of Management
Review, 9(4): 712-721

Price, J. and Mueller, C. 1981. A causal model of turnover for nurses. Academy of Management
Journal, 24(3), 543-565. Mathieu, J. E., &

Ramaseshan, B., Ishak, A., Rabbanee, F. K. (2013). The role of marketing managers’
commitment and involvement in marketing strategy implementation. Journal of
Strategic Marketing, 21(6), pp. 465– 483.

Ramus, C., Steger, U. (2000). The role of supervisory support behaviors and environmental
policy in employee eco initiatives at leading-edge European companies. Academy of
Management Journal, 43(4), pp. 605–626.

Rehman, S., Gujjar, A.A., Khan, S.A. & Iqbal, J. (2009) Quality of Teaching Faculty in Public
Sector Universities of Pakistan as Viewed by Teachers Themselves. International
Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 1 (1), 48-63. Available at: www.iojes.net.
Retrieved February 17, 2012.

Robbins, SP. & Coulter, M. (2005). Management. Pearson Education. Inc; and Dorling
Kindersley Publishing Inc, India.

Samaiya, Samita (2015). Comparison of Employee Satisfaction along Age and Gender: Study
of Public and Private Sector. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. Volume 17,
Issue 8. PP. 44-52.

Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (2010) Human resource Management: Positioning for the21st
century, sixth ed., New York: West Publishing Company.

Shiu, Y.-M., & Yu, T. (2010). Internal marketing, organisational culture, job satisfaction and
organisational performance in non-life insurance. The Service Industries Journa, 793
809

83
Simberova, I. (2007). Internal Marketing as a Part of Marketing Culture Supporting Value for
External Customer. Economics and Management, 470-480

Spagnoli P, Caetano A, Santos SC 2012. Satisfaction with job aspects: Do patterns change over
time? Journal of Business Research, 65(5): 609-616.

Spector, P.E., (1997) Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences.
London: Sage

Steers, R. M., & Rhodes, S. R.(2013). Major influences on employee attendance: A process
model.

The moderating effect of salesforce performance on relationships involving on antecendents of

turnover. McNeilly, K M and Russ, F A. 1, 1992, Journal of Personal Selling &
Management, Vol. 12, pp. 9-20.

Tobi, SNM, Munir, RIS & Mat, KAB 2013, ‘Job Satisfaction and Physiological Health
(HRRQOL) amongst Administrative Employees in Malaysian Government Sector’,
International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 6, pp.
625-629.

Tonnessen, T., Gjefsen, T. (1999).The enterprise development: direct employee participation

in strategic planning. Total Quality Management, 10(4/5), pp. 739– 744

Tortosa, V., A.Moliner, M., & Sanchez, J. (2010). Internal market orientation and its influence
on the satisfaction of contact personnel. The Service Industries Journal, 1279 1297

Understanding employee commitment in public organization: a study of juvenile detention

center. Liou, K T. 8, 1995, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 18, pp.
1269-95.

Unit performance, situational factors and employee attitudes in spatially separated work units.
Mowday, R T, Porter, L W and Dubin, R. 1974, Organizational Behaviour and Human
Performance, Vol. 12, pp. 231-48.

Vandenberg & Lance (1992), “Examining the Causal Order of Job satisfaction and
Organizational Commitment “,Journal of Management ,153-167.

84
Vassie, LH & Lucas, WR 2001, ‘An assessment of health and safety management within
working groups in the UK manufacturing sector’, Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 32,
No. 4, pp. 479-490.

Weiss HM, Cropanzano R 1996. Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the
structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In: BM Staw, LL
Cummings (Eds.): Research in Organization Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical
Essays and Critical Reviews. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 1-74

Whitener, E., & Walz, P. 1993. Exchange theory determinants of affective and continuance
commitment and turnover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42(3), 265–281.

Wittig-Berman, U., & Lang, D. 1990. Organizational commitment and its outcomes: Differing
effects of value commitment and continuance commitment on stress reactions, alienation
and organization-serving behaviors. Work and Stress, 4, 167-177

Wnuk M (2017). Organizational conditioning of job satisfaction: A model of job satisfaction.

Contemporary Economics, 11(1): 31-43

Wooldridge, B., Floyd, S. W. (1990). The strategy process, middle management involvement,
and organizational performance. Strategic management Journal, 11(3), pp. 231–241.

Yang, F.H. & Chang, C.C. (2008). Emotional labour, job satisfaction and organizational
commitment amongst clinical nurses: A questionnaire survey, International Journal of
Nursing Studies, 45: 879–887, doi. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.02.001.

Zajac, D. M. 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences
of organizational commitment. Psychology Bulletin, 108: 171-194.

Abualrub R (2004). Job stress, job performance and social support among hospital nurses. J.
Nurs. Scholarsh. 36(1): 73-78

Akinyele S. T. (2010). The influence of work environment on workers’ productivity: A case

study of selected oil and gas industry in Lagos, Nigeria. African Journal on Business
Management, 4(3)

Al-Anzi, N. M. 2009. Workplace Environment and its Impact on Employee Performance. A

Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements of Open University of
Malaysia for the Degree of Master of Business Administration. Bahrain: Open
University of Malaysia.
85
Amir, F. (2010) Measuring The Impact of Office Environment on Performance Level of
Employees: A Case of Private Sector of Pakistan. Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference of AGBA South Asia Chapter on Nurturing Innovation, Entrepreneurship,
Investments and Public Private Partnership - in Global Environment. Bhurban, Pakistan.

Armstrong, M. (2006). Strategic Human Resource Management: A Handbook of Human

Resource Management Practice, 10thed. London: Kogan Page

Assaf, A. M. & Alswalha, A. (2013). Environmental impacts of working conditions in paint

factories workers in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. European Scientific Journal, 9
(8).

Baltes, P. B., &Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The

model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes& M. M. Baltes
(Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1–34).

Bevan, S. (2012). Good work, High performance and productivity. The paper prepared for the
European HRD Forume, Lisbon, (2012).

Bowler M, Brass D (2006). Relational Correlates of Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior: A

Social Network Perspective, J. Appl. Psychol., 91: 70-82.

Briner, R.B. (2000).Relationships Between Work Environments, Psychological Environments

& Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Occupational Medicine, Vol. 50 No. 5 pp. 299-
303

Cable, D. M. and T. A. Judge. 2004. "Pay Preferences and Job Search Decisions: A Person-
Organization Fit Perspective." Personnel Psychology 47: 317-348.

86
Campbell JP (1990). Modeling the Performance Prediction Problem in Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, In Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
(2nd ed.). Dunnette MD, Hough LM, (eds). Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto,
CA, 1: 687-732

Case Study of A Bank In Turkey. Journal of Business, Economics & Finance,

Castilla EJ (2005). Social Networks and Employee Performance in a Call Center, Am. J.
Sociol., 110(5): 1243-1283.

Chaddha, V., Ravi P. G. & Noida, G. (2011). Analysis of factors influencing employees’
productivity in relation to workplace environment. International Journal of Research in
Commerce and Management, 2(5).

Chandrasekar K. (2011). Workplace Environment and its Impact on Organizational

Performance in Public Sector Organizations, International Journal Of Enterprise
Computing and Business Systems, Vol:1,Issue:1.

Chandrasekar, K. (2011).Workplace environment and its impact on organizational performance

in Public Sector Organizations, Alagappa University, Karaikudi, India.

Cheryl L (2009),” A work values approach to corporate culture: A field test of the value
congruence process and its relationship to individual outcomes”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 74(3), pp. 424-432.

Corporaal, S., Riemsdijk, M. J., Kluijtmans, F., & Vuuren, T. (2012). HRM, 2012, 58-81.

Dar OL (2010). Trust in Co – workers and Employee Behaviors at Work. Int. Rev. Bus. Res.
Papers, 6(1): 194-204.

Deanne N. Den Hartog and Robert M. Verburg (2004),” High performance work systems,
organisational culture and firm effectiveness”, Human Resource Management Journal,
Vol. 14 (1), pp. 55–78

Dirks K, Skarlicki D (2009). The relationship between being perceived as trustworthy by co-
workers and individual performance, J. Manage., 35(1): 136-157

Dorgan, C.E. (1994). The Productivity Link to indoor environment. Proceedings of Health
Buildings.

Drach-Zahavy A (2004). Primary nurses’ performance: role of supportive management.

J. Adv. Nurs., 45(1): 7-16.
87
Dyne LV, Jehn KA, Cummings A (2002). Differential Effects of Strain on Two forms of Work
Performance: Individual Employee Sales and Creativity. J. Organ. Behav. 23: 57-74

Farh, C. C.; Seo, Tesluk (2012). Emotional Intelligence, Teamwork Effectiveness, & Job
Performance: The Moderating Role of Job Context. Journal of Applied Psychology.

Farh, C. C.; Seo, Tesluk (2012). Emotional Intelligence, Teamwork Effectiveness, & Job
Performance: The Moderating Role of Job Context. Journal of Applied Psychology

Fisk, W. J., & Rosenfeld, A. H. (1997). Estimates of improved productivity and health from
better indoor environments. Indoor air, 7(3), 158-172.

Frese, M., & Sonnentag, S. (2000). High performance: An action theory approach. Working
Paper. University of Giessen and University of Konstanz

GHAURI, P. & GRONHAUG, K. 2005. Research Methods in Business Studies, Harlow,

FT/Prentice Hall.

Greenhaus J, Parasuraman S (1994). “Work-family conflict, social support and well-being”, in

Davidson, M. and Burke, R. (Eds), Women in Management: Current Research Issues,
Paul Chapman, London, pp. 213-29.

Hall DS (2007). The relationship between supervisor support and registered nurse outcomes in
nursing care units. Nurs. Adm. Q., 31(1), 68-80

Hameed, Amani (2009), Journal of public affairs, administration and management :Impact of
Office Design on Employees‟ Productivity: A Case study of Banking Organizations of
Abbottabad, Pakistan.

Hammed, A. & Amjad, S. (2009). Impact of office design on employees' productivity: A case
study of banking organizations of Abbottabad, Pakinstan. Journal of Public Affairs,
Administration and Management, 3, 1-13.

Hassan, B. and Ogunkoya O. (2014). Demographic Variables and Job Performance: Any Link?
ActaUniversitatisDanubius10(4) 1-8.

Heath, B. (2006). Effect of perceived work environment on employee‟s job behaviour and
organizational effectiveness, Journal of Applied Psychology Banarashindu, University,
Varanasi.

88
Heath, B. (2006). Effect of perceived work environment on employee‟s job behaviour and
organizational effectiveness, Journal of Applied Psychology Banarashindu, University,
Varanasi.

Humphries, M. (2005). Quantifying occupant comfort: Are combined indices of the indoor
environment practicable? Building Research and Information, 33(4), 317-325.

Hursh, N., Lui, J. &Pransky, G. (2006).Maintaining and enhancing older worker productivity.
Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 25, 45-55

Kahya, E. (2007). The effects of job characteristics and working conditions on job
performance.International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37: 515-523

Karatepe, O.M., Ududag, O., Menevis, I., Hadzimehmeddagic, L. and Baddar, L. (2006).The
effects of individual characteristics on frontline employee performance and job
satisfaction.Tourism Management, 27, 547-560.

Kazmi R, Amjad S, Khan D (2008). Occupational Stress and its Effect on Job Performance:
A Case Study of Medical House Officers of District Abbottabad, J. Ayub Med. Coll.
Abbotabad, 20(3): 135-139.

Kohun, (2002). Workplace Environment and its impact on organizational performance in Public
sector organizations, International Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business
System International Systems, Vol. 1 Issue 1 January 2011.

Kothari, C.K (2004): Research Methodology, Methods & Techniques, New Age International,
New Delhi.

Kuneel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A. and Ones, D.S. (2004).Academic performance, career potential
creativity and Job performance. Can one construct predict them all? Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology.86: 148-161.

Leblebici D., (2012), Impact of Workplace Quality on Employee’s Productivity: Case study of
A bank in Turkey, Journal of Business, Economics and Finance, ISSN 2146- 7943,
Volume 1 issue 1 p.p. (38-49)

Leblebici, D. (2012). Impact of Workplace Quality on Employee’s Productivity:

Lienert, I (2003). Civil service reform in Africa: Mixed results after 10 years, International
Monetary Fund. Finance and Development, 35 (2)

89
McGuire, D., & McLaren, L. (2009). The impact of physical environment on employee
commitment in call centres: The mediating role of employee wellbeing. Team
Performance Management, 15(1–2), 35–48.

Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1999). Performance assessment in unique
jobs. In D.R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance, 56-86,
San Francisco: JosseyBass.

Muchhal, D. S (2014). HR Practices and Job Performance. IOSR Journal of Humanities and
Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 19(4), 55-61.

Naharuddin, N. M., & Sadegi, M. (2013). Factors of Workplace Environment that Affect
Employees Performance: A Case Study of Miyazu Malaysia. International Journal of
Independent Research and Studies - IJIRS, 2(2), 66– 78.

Ng, T.W. & Feldman, D.C. (2009). How Broadly Does Education Contributes to Job
Performance? Personnel Psychology, 62: 89-134.

Nitisemito, A. S. (1992). Personnel management, Ninth mold (4th ed.). Ghalia Indonesia,
Jakarta.

Nitisemito, A. S. (2001). Personnel management, human resources management (3rd ed.).

Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.

Ogunleye, T.O. (2006). Success anxiety, job ability perception and social interaction among
women in male dominated professions ‘Implications for counselling’ An unpublished
PhD. Thesis, University of Lagos. Akoka, Lagos

Oppenheinier, V. (1998).The sex labeling of jobs; Industrial relations 7, 219-234.

Peng Kohc (2004), “An integrated model of knowledge transfer from MNC parent to China
subsidiary”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 39 (2), pp. 168–182.

Platt & Sobotka (2010). Psychological Management of Individual Performance. Wales. John
Wiley & Sons.

Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1973). Organizational Work and Personal Factors in Employee
Turnover and Absenteeism, Psychological Bulletin, 80, 151-176 Paul Jackson, Reima
Suomi, e-Business and Workplace Redesign (2004), p. 37.

Public Health England Report (2015). The impact of physical environment on employee
wellbeing-topicoverview.
90
 http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/451
75/2 015 0318_-physicalenvironment_-v3.0_FINAL.pdf. 1-23. Retrieved August,
2016.

R. Cooper, (1968)“The Psychology of Boredom, Science Journal 4, no. 2 (1968): 38–42.

Rowe, J.W. & Kahn, R. L. (1997).Successful aging. The Gerontologist, 37(4), 433-440.

Samson, G.N., Waiganjo, M. & Koima, J. (2015). Effect of Workplace Environment on the
Performance of Commercial Banks in Nakuru Town. International Journal of
Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR), 3, 76-89.

Scott KD, Jusanne M, Steven ME (2000). Factors influencing employee benefits beliefs that
pay is tied to performance. J. Bus. Psychol., 14: 553-562.

Sedarmayanti. (2003). Working Procedures and Work Productivity an Overview of Aspects

of Ergonomics or the link between Man and Work Environment. Bandung: Mandar
Maju.

Srivastava AK (2008). Effect of Perceived Work Environment on Employees’ Job

Behaviour and Organizational Effectiveness. J. Ind. Acad. Appl. Psychol., 34(1): 47-
55.

Stup, R. (2003). Control the factors that influence employee success. Managing the Hispanic
Workforce Conference. Cornell University and Penneylvania State University.

Stup, R. (2003). Control the Factors that Influence Employee Success. Managing the
Hispanic Workforce Conference. Cornell University and Penneylvania State
University.

Sundstrom, E., Town, J. P., Rice, R. W., Osborn, D. P., & Brill, M. (2004). Office noise,
satisfaction, and performance. Environment and Behavior, 26(2), 195-222

Sundstrom, E., Town, J.P., Rice, R.W., Osborn, D.P. and Brill, M. (2004), Office noise,
Satisfaction, and Performance, Environment and Behavior, 26(2), pp. 195- 222

Suwati, Magdalena, M., Gagah, E. (2016). Influence of motivation work, career

development and cultural organization on the job satisfaction and implications on the
performance of employees. Journal of Management, 2(2).

Temessek. 2009. Expanding the Psychosocial Work Environment: Workplace Norms and
Work– Family Conflict as Correlates of Stress and Health. Vol. 3 No. 1. Pp. 71-88.

91
 Tripathi, A. (2014). Workplace Environment: Consequences on Employees

Turk, K. (2005). Performance appraisal and the compensation of academic staff in the
University of Tartu. Baltic Journal of Management, 3(1), 40-54.

92

View publication stats