43

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This study focused on determining the work performance and work

commitment among 99 government internship program (GIP)

beneficiaries as key indicators for employment opportunities in Malita,

Davao Occidental. Statistically, the problems of the study were addressed

with the results of the data collected by the researchers.

Level of Work Performance among GIP

Duties and Functions

In terms of duties and functions, the item no.1, got the highest mean

score of 3.96 which means the GIP beneficiary’s work performance is

outstanding. Thus, among of the four items under duties and functions,

item no. 3 has the lowest mean score of 3.65 which has the same

description of very satisfacory. Furthermore, the total general mean is

3.78 which means that the work performance of GIP beneficiary is

 44

outstanding. The result was also supported that in terms of duties and

functions, it emphasize that work performance is a multidimensional

concept which distinguishes between task and contextual performance

(Martha, 2015).

Dependability

In terms of dependability, item no. 7, got the highest mean score of

3.81 which means that the work performance of GIP beneficiary is

outstanding. It also has lowest mean score of 3.61 which has the same

description with item no. 7. Thus, it has a total grand mean score of 3.69

which indicates that the GIP has an outstanding work performance. Based

on the study conducted by (Delmar, 2013), dependency is something care

professionals wanted to avoid or at least limit, in favour of self-

determination.

Skills Enhancement

With regards to the skills enhancement, the result showed that, the

work performance of GIP is moderate with the total mean score of 3.57.

Specifically, the Q10 has the mean score of 3.78 which means the GIP

beneficiaries possesses an outstanding performance. The Q12 got the

mean score of 3.57 which has also the same description with Q10. The

company fully supports its work performance. Skill define as “the capacity
 45

to perform a given type of task or activity with a given degree of

effectiveness, efficiency, speed or other measure of quantity or quality.

Personal skills (that involve emotions), and interpersonal skills (that

involve interacting with others (Romiszowski, 2009). However, researchers

observed that there were less of required skills to the applicants but then

DOLE-DOcFO successfully implemented the GIP since 2017 up to present.

Communication

On the other hand, Q14 got the highest mean score of 3.79

which means the work performance of GIP beneficiary is outstanding. It

also has the lowest mean score of 3.57 which has the same description to

Q14. Thus, the total grand mean score is 3.70 which means the

performance of GIP is outstanding. Effective communication relies on

selecting an appropriate communication channel. Selecting the wrong

communication channel can cause communication obstacles including

information overload and inadequate feedback (Fenell, 2017).

Generally, work performance in organizations need highly performing

individuals in order to meet their goals, to deliver the products and

services they specialized in, and finally to achieve competitive advantage

individuals (Kanfer, 2017). Fourness (2000), stated that coaching the

 46

employee using specific interventions will generate improved

performance.

Many managers believe wrongly that inadequate workers choose

to perform badly. They surmise that employees could do better if they

wished. Hence, the two greatest reasons for nonperformance are that

employees do not know what they are supposed to do or do not know

how to do it. He also suggested that a following a step in coaching

employees is the best way to coach employees. Learn, practice and build

this skill. Before you coach, analyze the problem. Determine what is

influencing nonperformance. Drop any judgments, opinions and

assumptions, so you can dig for the reasons that are causing the

problems. This is shown in table 5.

 47

Table 5. Level of Work Performance among Government Internship

Program (GIP)

INDICATORS Mean Standard DESCRIPTION

Deviation

Duties and Functions 3.78 0.30 Very Satisfactory

Q1. I was able to carry 3.96 0.28 Very Satisfactory

out my work
efficiently.
Q2. I kept in mind the 3.76 0.55 Very Satisfactory
work result I needed
to achieve. 0.59
Q3. I started new task 3.65 Very Satisfactory
when my old tasks
were completed. 0.64
Q4. I managed to work 3.73 Very Satisfactory
that I finished it on
time.
3.69 0.30 Very Satisfactory
Dependability
3.71 0.58 Very Satisfactory
Q5. I arrive in the office
based on the time
required.
3.61 0.48 Very Satisfactory
Q6. I was able to meet my
deadlines up to date. 0.55
3.81 Very Satisfactory
Q7. On my own initiative,
I can work on extra
responsibilities. 0.66
3.69 Very Satisfactory
Q8. I kept on my mind the
good work ethics. 0.63
3.63 Very Satisfactory
Q9. I do handle work with
less supervision.

Table 5 Continuation
 48

Skills Enhancement 3.67 0.33 Very Satisfactory

Q10. I use work efficiently and 3.78 0.53 Very Satisfactory

shows improving skills
overtime.
Q11. I show work interest in 3.65 0.65 Very Satisfactory
improving his/her skills.
Q12. I take advantages of 3.57 0.59 Very Satisfactory
trainings/seminars/
symposium to help me at
work.
Q13. I have a potential to 3.69 0.48 Very Satisfactory
developmy capability in
work.

Communication 3.70 0.27 Very Satisfactory

Q14. I can easily communicate 3.79 0.57 Very Satisfactory

effectively with my peers
and supervisors.
Q15. I can directly talk to my 3.72 0.61 Very Satisfactory
supervisor regarding
issues or problem in the
organization.
Q16. I show willingness to 3.57 0.55 Very Satisfactory
assists others when
necessary.

OVERALL-MEAN 3.72 0.24 Very Satisfactory

 49

Level of Work Commitment among GIP

Affective Commitment

In terms of affective commitment, result showed that the two (2)

questions has the same total mean score of 4.09 which means that the

GIP beneficiary is committed with his/her work. Meanwhile, the Q3, has

the lowest mean score of 3.54 which has also the same description to Q1

and Q2. Furthermore, job involvement has been shown to have a positive

effect on work effort (Brown, 2010), and a high level of union

commitment has been linked to participation in union activities (Kelloway,

2010). The development of these competences may not lead to career

development but will lead to self-satisfaction with one's own development,

the sense that one has a high level of self-efficacy (Weng et al., 2010).

Continuance Commitment

With regards to continuance commitment, Q12 got the highest

mean score of 3.87 which clearly showed that the GIP beneficiary is

committed with his/her work which has the same description with Q11 for

it has the lowest mean score of 3.40. Continuance commitment is related

to costs that an individual has to bear when leaving an organization.

 50

According to the research suggestions, continuance commitment tends to

have a positive relationship with all negative factors such as stress

(Ackerman, 2013).

Normative Commitment

Normative commitment would be experienced as externally

driven, hence detrimental to well-being and performance, when few

alternatives commitment, a sub-component of continuance commitment,

is high (Addae & Parboteeah, 2006). However, based on the result, the

GIP beneficiary have high work commitment. The Q13 which has the

lowest mean score of 3.43 and the Q16 which has the highest mean score

of 3.87, indicates that the beneficiaries are committed with their work.

According to the study of (Feldman, 2020), work commitment can

be interpreted, as employee loyalty to the extent of employee self-

recognition at work and his wishes to continue the inclusion of his

activities in the organization where he is. Work commitment is one's

tendency to involve oneself in what is done with the belief that the

activities undertaken are important and meaningful. Both opinions above

basically have the same view of commitment, which is the phase or level

of employee attachment to their duties. This is shown in table 6.

 51

Table 6. Level of Work Commitment among Government Internship

Program (GIP)

INDICATORS Mean Standard DESCRIPTION

Deviation

Affective Commitment 3.80 0.35 Agree

Q1. I would be very happy to 4.09 0.68 Agree

spend the rest of my career
with this organization/
company.
Q2. I really feel as if this 4.09 0.57 Agree
organization's/company
problems are my own.
Q3. I do not feel a strong sense 3.53 0.61 Agree
of "belonging" to my
organization/
company.
Q4. I do not feel "emotionally 3.84 0.27
0.77 Agree
3.66
attached" to this Agree
organization/company. 0.68
3.82
Q5. I do not feel like "part of the 3.61 0.61 Agree
Agree
family" at my organization/
company.
company 0.62
0.55 Agree
Q6. This organization/company 3.65
3.66
has a great deal of personal Agree
meaning for me.

Continuance Commitment

Q7. Staying with my

organization/company is a
matter of necessity as much
as desire.
Q8. It would be very hard for
me to leave my
organization/company right
now, even if I wanted to.
 52

Table 6 Continuation.
Q9.To Too much of my life would be 3.66 0.51 Agree
disrupted if I decided I
wanted to leave my
organization/company now.
Q10. I feel that I have too few 3.54 0.61 Agree
options to consider leaving
this organization.
Q11. If I had not already put so 3.40 0.53 Agree
much of myself into this
organization/ company, I
might consider working
elsewhere.
Q12. One of the few negative 3.87 0.53 Agree
consequences of leaving this
organization/company would
be the scarcity of available
alternatives.

Normative Commitment 3.77 0.30 Agree

Q13. I do not feel any obligation to 3.55 0.57 Agree

remain with my employer.
Ev Even if it were to my
Q14. advantage, I do not feel it 3.43 0.67 Agree
would be right to leave
organization/company now.
I would feel guilty if I left my
Q15. organization/company. 4.06 0.58 Agree
This organization/company
Q16. deserves my loyalty. 4.11 0.90 Agree
I would not leave my
Q17. organization/company 3.63 0.56 Agree
because I have a sense of
obligation to the people in it.
Q18. I owe a great deal to my 3.85 0.51 Agree
organization/company.
 53

Table 6 Continuation.

OVERALL-MEAN 3.73 0.27 Agree

Level of Work Opportunity among GIP

Work Opportunity

In terms of work opportunity, the result showed that the Q4 has

the lowest mean which means that the GIP beneficiary’s working duration

will be extended. Hence, it was also the same with Q8 for it has a total

mean score of 4.36. With this, work experience constituted an important

consideration for employers in when recruiting graduates. Part time

employment was also perceived positively because it provided evidence

that graduates were willing to work hard to achieve their goals and were

able to balance employment and study (Broadbridge & Swanson, 2005).

 54

Table 7. Level of Work Opportunity among Government Internship

Program (GIP)

INDICATORS Mean Standard DESCRIPTION

Deviation

Work Opportunity
Q1. There simply aren’t very 4.33 0.63 Strongly Agree
many jobs for people like
me in today’s job market.
Q2. Given my qualifications and 4.28 0.65 Strongly Agree
experience, getting a new
job would not be very hard
at all. Strongly Agree
Q3. I can think of a number of 4.37 0.58 Strongly Agree
organizations that would
probably offer me a job if I
was looking.
Table
Q4. 4IfContinuation.
I looked for a job, I would 4.25 0.67 Strongly Agree
probably wind up with a
better job than I have now.
Q5. By the large, the jobs I 4.33 0.62 Strongly Agree
could get if I left here are
superior to the job I have
now.
Q6. Most of the jobs I could get 4.27 0.68 Strongly Agree
would be an improvement
over my present
circumstances.
Q7. I have a far-reaching 4.31 0.64 Strongly Agree
“network’ of contacts which
could help me find out
about other job
opportunities.
Q8. I have contacts in other 4.36 0.59 Strongly Agree
companies who might help
me line up a new job.
 55

Table 7 Continuation.

Q9. My work and/or social 4.24 0.70 Strongly Agree

activities tend to bring me in
contact with a number of
people who might help me
line up a new job.
Q10. Right now, I have a job 4.29 0.65 Strongly Agree
offer “on the table” from
another employer, if I
choose to take it.

OVERALL-MEAN 4.30 0.17 Strongly

Agree

Relationship between Work Performance and Work Opportunities

among GIP

As shown in table 5, the correlation analysis on work performance

and work opportunities as perceived by the government internship

program (GIP) beneficiaries.

It indicates that under the work performance, duties and function

has a correlation coefficient value of 0.049 with a description of low

possitive correlation and a p-value of 0.627 indicating as not significant

 56

relationship between work performance and work opportunities among

government internship program (GIP) beneficiaries whiich means it has no

relationship between work performance and work opportunities. It is a

good stepping stone for beneficiaries to learn and experience the real

world of government (Bello III, 2019).

Meanwhile, dependability has a correlation coefficient value

of -0107 with a description of low negative correlation and a p-value of

296 indicating as not significant relationship between work performance

and work opportunities. Performance does not necessarily depend on only

one individual’s activities, we should also consider the team environment

when assessing an individual’s performance (Steffens et al., 2014).

Moreover, skills enhancement has a correlation coefficient value

of -0.152 with a description of low negative correlation and a p-value of

0.134 indicating as not significant relationship between work

performance and work opportunities. It is important to note that student

outcomes include not only employment opportunities or wages, but also

non-economic factors such as job satisfaction, academic achievement,

and career crystallization (Margaryan et al., 2020).

Lastly, communication has a correlation coefficient value of -0136

with a description of low negative correlation and a p-value of 0.178

 57

indicating as not significant relationship between work performance and

work opportunities The capability to communicate and interact with

others, either in teams or through networking, good written and verbal

communication skills, information and communication technology skills,

creativity and self-confidence, good self-management and time-

management skills, a willingness to learn and accept responsibility

(Andrews & Higson, 2008).

Overall, among all indicators, it would be gather that work

commitment has a correlation coefficient value of -0.067 with a

description of low negative correlation and a p-value of 0.509 and

interpreted as not significant relationship between work performance and

work opportunities among GIP beneficiaries. GIP experience as a result of

participating in an internship. There exists some contradictory evidence on

this point of employability, especially whether internships improve not only

immediate employability upon graduation but long-term employment

prospects (Nunley et al., 2016). Also the motivation process follows

certain defined steps, which, as a continuum needs to be periodically

reviewed and strategized to ensure its proper renewal. This helps to

maintain the motivation of employees (Green, 2000).

 58

Table 8. Relationship between Work Performance and Employment

Opportunities among Government Internship Program (GIP)

Work Performance r-value Description p-value Interpretation

1. Duties and functions 0.049 Low Positive 0.627 Not Significant

Correlation
2. Dependability -0107 Low Negative 296 Not Significant
Correlation 0.13
3. Skills Enhancement -0.152 Low Negative 4 Not Significant
Correlation
4. Communication -0136 Low Negative 0.178 Not Significant
Correlation

OVERALL -0.059 Low 0.560 Not

Negative Significant
Correlation

Relationship Between Work Commitment And Work

Opportunities

As shown in gtable 6, the correlation analysis on work commitment

and work opportunities as perceived by the government internship

program (GIP) beneficiaries.

 59

It indicates that under the work commitment, affective

commitment has a correlation coefficient value of -0.116 with a

description of low negative correlation and a p-value of 0.251 indicating as

not significant relationship between work commitment and work

opportunities among government internship program (GIP) beneficiaries.

Developed a dimensional concept of commitment that defines

commitment in terms of volition, dedication, and responsibility towards

one’s organization, or to aspects of the organization such as work team

and supervisor (Klein et al., 2014).

Furthermore, continuance commitment has a correlation coefficient

value of -0.116 with a description of low negative correlation and a p-

value of 0.251 indicating as not significant relationship between work

commitment and work opportunities. Commitment has a relationship with

loyalty, obedience and job satisfaction in the organization. Highly

committed people are more concerned with work and tasks in meeting

organizational needs than personal needs (Robbins, 2003).

Finally, normative commitment has a correlation coefficient value

of -0.097 with a description of low negative correlation and a p-value of

0.338 indicating as not significant relationship between work commitment

and work opportunities. Normative commitment also tends to out-perform

 60

those who feel no such obligation, but the effect on performance is not as

strong as that observed for desire (Meyer et al., 2004).

Overall, among all indicator, it would be gather that work

commitment has a correlation coefficient value of -0.067 low negative

correlation p-value of 0.509 and interpreted as not significant relationship

between work commitment and work opportunities. Work commitment is

one's tendency to involve oneself in what is done with the belief that the

activities undertaken are important and meaningful (Feldman, 2020).

Since the p-value s greater than 0.05 level of significance, hence

we failed to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is no

significant relationship between work performance, work commitment and

work opportunity.

We observed that during the duration of their contract the GIP

beneficiaries-respondents was sometimes not totally committed to their

respective task/job assignment that was given by the manager or the

supervisor, due to short term duration. But some of the respondents

experiences also the same responsibility, accountability and committed to

the job was designated. Even the short term of work the respondents was

learn a duties and function, dependability, skills enhancement and

 61

communication in the company. It aims to create a competitive and

experienced workforce.

Since 2011, it has helped 25,534 young Filipinos. Moreover, the

National Youth Commission, the programme’s secretariat, aims to use GIP

as a form of poverty alleviation. For this purpose, a monthly non-taxable

stipend, 75 percent of the highest existing minimum wage in the region, is

provided by the government. The programme is very inclusive, including

persons with disabilities. Students are exposed to a real work environment

in a government setting (Bello III, 2019).

As a researchers, the thought of being committed and has a

dedication to work is a sense of purpose to continue working in the

company as direct hired after the duration of the contract. GIP is one

program has a big impact to the young people to pursue their dreams to

finish their study and got the good qualification for their future (Bello III,

2019).

The concept of career growth had a positive impact on affective and

normative organizational commitment (Klein et al., 2014).

The researcher also noted that some of the respondents stated that

the one of the reasons for not continued working in the company was

their names not included the list of renewed GIP. But majority of the GIP
 62

are absorb by the PLGU/LGU offices as job order up to present. It aims to

pursue work in the public service sector, both local and national

government units. GIP serves as a training ground for future government

employees (Hontiveros, 2019).

Table 9. Relationship between Work Commitment and Work

Opportunities among GIP

Work Performance r-value Description p-value Interpretation

1. Affective 0.008 Low Positive 0.934 Not Significant

Commitment Correlation

2. Continuance -0.116 Low Negative 0.251 Not Significant

Commitment Correlation
0.33
3. Normative -0.097 Low Negative 8 Not Significant
Commitment Correlation

OVERALL
5. Communicati -0.067 Low 0.509 Not
Negative Significant
Correlation