UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES – DILIMAN

School of Labor and Industrial Relations

Diploma in Industrial Relations

"Impact of the On-Site Supervisors’ Leadership Styles to the

Performance and Organizational Commitment of Wealthlink, Inc.'s Service
Crews"

by:

Bucio, Regine J.

Submitted to: Dr. Emily R. Cabegin

IR 229
Research
I. Background of the Paper/ Statement of Research Objectives and
Research hypotheses

Background:

High attrition rate has been a problem of Wealthlink, Inc., especially to its
service crews deployed in Jollibee stores. These branches are not company-owned
but rather franchise stores of ALN GOC Corp., and Seadweller Corp. As per
Wealthlink’s July Attrition report, turnover rate of service crews for the said stores
was as high as 11% compared to other employees such as Site Technicians
deployed in FBM Technology Solutions was only at 4%. During exit interviews,
some of the separated employees claimed that they were not treated properly by
their On-site Supervisors. According to them, On-site Supervisors shout at them in
front of customers when they were being reprimanded. The Account Supervisor and
the Recruitment & Operations Manager of Wealthlink, Inc. would want to conduct a
General Assembly Meeting to all On-site Supervisors to reinforce their duties and
responsibilities and point out the above-mentioned issues. Wealthlink, Inc. would
also want to come up with leadership programs and seminars for the Team leaders.
To formulate properly such programs, the researcher would want to check the
leadership styles of the On-Site Supervisors and shed light if the style of service
crews’ leaders directly affects their work performance and organizational
commitment leading to retention and or attrition.

As mentioned in the review of related literature in the study of Madan Pal

Sharma (1997), entitled “Organizational Commitment and Its Determinants”, there
are three correlates of organizational commitment – personal characteristics, role
or job characteristics and organizational characteristics. Several literatures in the
above-mentioned study says that organizational commitment has been found to be
positively related to age (Fukami & Larson, 1984; Balaji, 1986; Alvi & Ahmed,
1987), job tenure (Fukami & Larson, 1984; Reichers, 1985), and negatively related
to education (Fukami & Larson, 1984; Curry et al., 1986; Glisson & Durick, 1988).

2| P a g e
Several other studies have found organizational commitment to be positively
related to job variety (Martin and O’Laughlin, 1984; Wallace, 1995), feedback and
task identity (Steers and Spencer, 1977), work technology and job prestige
(Sharma and Singh, 1991), and autonomy (Steers and Spencer, 1977; Wallace,
1995). Organizational commitment has also been found to be positively and
significantly related to many organizational characteristics like, communication
(Martin and O’Laughlin, 1984; Curry et al., 1986), promotional and advancement
opportunities (Curry et al., 1986; Sharma, 1989; Sharma and Singh, 1991), group
cohesion (Martin and O’ Laughpin, 1984; Singh, 1990), jo9b security (Wanous,
1980; Sharma, 1989), training (Martin and O’Laughlin, 1984; Mathieu, 1988;
Sharma, 1989), monetary benefits (Wanous, 1980; Sharma, 1989; Sharma and
Singh, 1991), recognition & appreciation (Sharma, 1989; Sharma and Signh,
1991), objectivity and rationality (Sharma, 1989), grievance handling (Sharma,
1989), relations with supervisor and interpersonal trust (Cook and Wall, 1980;
Fukami and Larson, 1984), supportive or participative leadership (Welsch and
Lavan, 1981; Sharma, 1989; Singh, 1990)), standardization (Singh, 1990),
decentralization, functional dependence and formalization (Morris and Steers,
1980), welfare facilities (Sharna, 1989) and welfare-corporatism (Lincoln and
Kalleberg, 1996).

Following Welsch and Lavan (1981) study stating that organizational

commitment has been positively and significantly linked to organizational
characteristics such as the type of leadership, this study is intended to the same
notion in many organizations but veering away from the usual corporate set-up and
focusing on the food and beverage particularly at the quick service restaurants.

Hypotheses:

1. Transformational leadership style is associated with highest worker

performance and organizational commitment than transactional and
laissez faire style of leadership.

3| P a g e
 2. Laissez faire leadership style is associated with lowest worker
performance and organizational commitment than transformational and
transactional style of leadership.

II. Data and Descriptive Profile of the Study Sample

The survey was conducted thru creating Google forms and sending the link to
selected service crews per target Jollibee store outlet. The researcher added them
on Facebook thru the help of their Team Leaders and sent the link one by one to
them. The target sample size was forty (40) but only thirty three (33) were able to
answer the survey. There were thirteen (13) respondents from Jollibee Eton Centris
which was perceived to be with the transactional leader; thirteen (13) respondents
from Jollibee Robinsons Magnolia which was perceived to be with the
transformational leader; and seven (7) respondents from Jollibee Robinsons Las
Piñas which was perceived to be with laissez faire leader.

For this research, the independent variable is the leadership style while the
dependent variable is the organizational commitment. Identified leadership styles
are transactional, transformational and laissez faire. The Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) of Bass and Avolio was adopted in the survey. This is the
standard instrument for assessing transformational and transactional leadership
behavior (Bass & Avolio, 2000; Avolio & Bass, 2004). These types of leadership
have subscales. The first of the transformational scales is Inspiratioanl Motivation.
Central to this subscale of transformational leadership is the articulation and
representationof a vision by the leader. Consequently, by viewing the future with a
positive attitude, followers are motivated. “idealized unfluence” (attributed) refers
to the attribution of charisma to the leader. Because of the leader’s positive
attributes (e.g. perceived power, focusing on higher-order ideals and values),

4| P a g e
followers built close emotional ties to the leader. Trust and confidence is likely to be
built in followers. Idealized influence (behavior) emphasizes a collective sense of
mission and values, as well as acting upon these values. Next, Intellectual
Stimulation includes challenging the assumptions of followers’ beliefs, their analysis
of problems they face and solutions they generate. Individualized Consideration is
defind by considering individual needs of followers and developing their individual
strengths. On the side of the transactional leadership scales, Contingent Reward is
a leadership behavior by which the leader focuses on clear defined tasks, while
providing followers with rewards (material or psychological) on the fulfillment of
these tasks. In Active Management-by-Exception, the leader watches and searches
actively for deviations from rules and standards in order to avoid these deviations;
if necessary, corrective actions are taken. In contrast, in Management-by-Exception
passive intervening only occurs after errors have been detected or if standards
have not been met. An even more passive approach is laissez-faire, which is
basically defined as the absence of leadership. As such, laissez-faire is used as a
nonleadership contrast to the more active forms of transformational and
transactional leadership approaches (Rowold, 2005).

On the other hand, organizational commitment was broken down into three
classes – affective organizational commitment, normative organizational
commitment and continuance organizational commitment. Such was measured thru
the instrument designed by Meyer & Allen, 1993, which was adopted in the
administered survey. Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of organizational
commitment has become the dominant model for study of workplace commitment
(Jaros, 2007). This model proposes that organizational commitment is experienced
by the employee as three simultaneous mindsets encompassing affective,
normative, and continuance organizational commitment. Affective commitment
reflects commitment based on emotional ties the employee develops with the
organization primarily via positive work experiences. Normative commitment
reflects commitment based on perceived obligation towards the organization, for
example rooted in the norms of reciprocity. Continuance commitment reflects

5| P a g e
commitment based on the perceived costs, both economic and social, of leaving the
organization (Jaros, 2007).

The following are the profiles of the respondents of the survey conducted.

Table 1 - Profiles

Percent
Characteristic (Mean)
N=33
Male 66.7%
Sex Female 33.3%
Total 100%
18 to 24 (Gen Z) 81.8%
25 to 34 (Gen Y) 18.2%
Age Group
Total 100%
Mean Age (22)
Single 72.7%
Marital Status Married 27.3%
Total 100%
1 to 5 months (Probationary) 51.5%
6months and up (Regular) 48.5%
Length of Service Group
Total 100%
Mean Length of Service (7)
High school graduate 63.6%
Educational Attainment College undergrad/ graduate 36.4%
Total 100%
Kitchen Crew 39.4%
Dining Crew 42.4%
Position
Counter Crew 18.2%
Total 100%
Jollibee Eton Centris 39.4%
Jollibee Robinsons Magnolia 39.4%
Store Assignment
Jollibee Robinsons Las Piñas 21.2%
Total 100%

6| P a g e
 Based on the survey, there were sixty seven percent (67%) male respondents
while thirty three point three percent (33.3%) for female respondents. For the age
bracket, the researcher grouped them into two categories only. The first was
categorized as the Generation Z or the “Centennials” with ages eighteen to twenty
four years old (18 – 24). The second one was categorized as Generation Y or the
“Millennials” with ages twenty five to thirty four (25 – 34). Mean age was at twenty
two (22) years old. For the length of service, the researcher also categorized them
into two – probationary (1 to 5 months) and regular (6 months and up). There were
fifty one point five percent (51.5%) probationary respondents while forty eight
point five percent (48.5%) regular service crews. Mean length of service was seven
(7) months. For the educational attainment, there were sixty three point six percent
(63.6%) high school graduates; thirty six point four percent (36.4%) college
undergraduates and graduates. The survey administered covered three positions in
the quick service restaurant, namely, kitchen crew, dining crew and counter crew.
There were thirty nine point four (39.4%) kitchen crew who responded to the
survey, forty two point four percent (42.4%) dining crew and eighteen point two
percent (18.2%) counter crew respectively. For the store outlets, there were thirty
nine point four percent (39.4%) coming from Jollibee Eton Centris; thirty nine point
four percent (39.4%) from Jollibee Robinsons Magnolia and twenty one point two
percent (21.2%) from Robinsons Las Piñas.

Table 2 - The Dependent variable: Organizational Commitment

% average and % above

Dependent variable Mean
below average
Affective commitment index 54.5% 45.5% 4.3
Normative commitment index 42.4% 57.6% 3.6
Continuance commitment index 45.5% 54.5% 4.4
Intention to leave index 78.8% 21.2% 3.2

7| P a g e
 Dependent variable used was organizational commitment. For the affective
commitment index, there were fifty four point five percent (54.5%) who responded
under average and below, forty five point five percent (45.5%) under above
average while the mean was at four point three (4.30). For the normative
commitment index, there were forty two point four percent (42.4%) under average
and below, fifty seven point six percent (57.6%) above average while the mean
was at three point six (3.6). For the continuance commitment index, there were
forty five point five percent (45.5%) under average and below, fifty four point five
percent (54.5%) under above average while the mean was at four point four (4.4).
Finally, for the intention to leave index, there were fifty one point five percent
(78.8%) under average and below, twenty one point two percent (21.2%) under
above average while the mean was at three point two (3.2).

As mentioned in the study of Zehire, et al (2012), affective commitment is an

attitudinal phenomenon about personal characteristics and job-related factors.
Supporting organizational goals is based on employees’ willingness (Mir et al.,
2002). Influence on attitudes that the formation of affective commitment are
colleagues, the job itself, and organization characteristics might be affected of
individual perception significantly (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Affection for the job
occurs when the employee has a strong emotional attachment to the organization,
and to the work that is being done. If the work is being enjoyed, there is greater
likelihood to feel good and be satisfied on the job (MindTools, 2019).

It was also discussed in the same study that continuance commitment might be
known as “employees who perceived lack of job alternatives and the necessity of
the circumstances, they maintain to be a member of the organization and perform
required minimum level of performance in terms of those organization that reveal
an undesirable type of commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997;
Meyer et al, 2002). This type of commitment occurs when the employee weigh up
the pros and cons of leaving the organization. The employee may feel that there is

8| P a g e
a need to stay at the company, because the loss that would be experienced by
leaving it is greater than the benefit that the employee might gain in a new role.
These perceived losses, or “side bets”, can be monetary (losing salary and
benefits); professional (losing seniority or role-related skills that have spent years
acquiring); or social (losing friendships or allies). The severity of these “losses”
often increases with age and experience. The employee is more likely to experience
continuance commitment if the employee is in established, successful role, or if
have had several promotions within one organization (MindTools, 2019).

Normative commitment, or sense of obligation to stay, is a type of commitment

that occurs when an employee feels a sense of obligation to the organization, even
if he or she is unhappy in the role, or even if he/she wants to pursue better
opportunities. The employee feels there is the need to stay with the organization
because it’s the right thing to do (MindTools, 2019).

Table 3 - The Independent variable: Leadership

% average and % above Mean

Key Independent variable
below average
Transactional leadership 45.5% 54.5% 3.2
Transformational leadership 45.5% 54.5% 3.2
Laissez faire leadership 66.7% 33.3% 3.0

The key independent variable used was leadership styles, namely,

transactional, transformational and laissez faire leadership style. For the
transactional leadership style, there were forty five point five percent (45.5%)
under average and below, fifty four point five percent (54.5%) under above
average while the mean was at three point two (3.2). For the transformational
leadership style, there were forty five point five percent (45.5%) under average
and below, fifty four point five percent (54.5%) under above average while the
mean was at three point two (3.2). Finally, for the laissez faire leadership style,

9| P a g e
there were sixty six point seven percent (66.7%) under average and below, thirty
three point three percent (33.3%) under above average while the mean was at
three point zero (3.0).

Table 4 - Mean commitment index by socioeconomic and demographic

characteristics

Affective Normative Continuance Intention

Control variable
Commitment Commitment Commitment to leave
Male 4.4 3.5 4.4 3.3
Sex Female 4.2 3.7 4.5 3.2
Difference 0.2 -0.2 -0.1 0.1
Single 4.3 3.7 4.5 3.3
Marital
Married 4.4 3.3 4.2 3
status
Difference -0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2
18 – 24
4.2 3.6 4.5 3.4
(Centennials)
25 – 34
4.7 3.1 4.3 2.4
Age (Millenials)
group Difference
bet. youngest
-0.5 0.5 0.2 1
and oldest
age group
1 – 5 months
4.3 3.4 4.5 3.3
(Probationary)

Length 6 months and

4.3 3.7 4.4 3.2
of work up (Regular)
duration Difference
bet. newly
0 -0.3 0.1 0.1
hired and
most tenured

For the mean commitment index by socioeconomic and demographic factors,

under male service crews, affective commitment index was at four point four (4.4),
normative commitment index was at three point five (3.5), continuance
commitment index was at four point four (4.4) and intention to leave index was at
three point three (3.3). For female service crews, affective commitment index was
at four point two (4.2), normative commitment index was at three point seven

10| P a g e
(3.7), continuance commitment index was at four point five (4.5) and the intention
to leave index was at three point two (3.2). Mean difference between male and
female service crews under affective commitment index was at zero point two
(0.2), normative commitment index was at negative zero point two (-0.2),
continuance commitment index was at negative zero point one (-0.1) and intention
to leave index was also at zero point one (0.1).

For the mean commitment index by marital status, for single service crews,
affective commitment index was at four point three (4.3), normative commitment
index was at three point seven (3.7), continuance commitment index was at four
point five (4.5) and intention to leave index was at three point three (3.3). For
married service crews, affective commitment index was at four point four (4.4),
normative commitment index was at three point three (3.3), continuance
commitment index was at four point two (4.2) and intention to leave index was at
three (3.0). Mean difference between single and married service crews under
affective index was at negative zero point one (-0.1), normative commitment index
at zero point four (0.4), continuance commitment index was at zero point three
(0.3) and intention to leave index was at zero point two (0.2).

For the mean commitment index by age group, affective commitment index
under age bracket eighteen to twenty four (18-24) years old or “centennials” was
at four point two (4.2), normative commitment index was at three point six (3.6),
continuance commitment index was at four point five (4.5) and intention to leave
index was at three point four (3.4). For the age bracket twenty five to thirty four
(25-34) years old or “millennials”, affective commitment index was at four point
seven (4.7), normative commitment index was at three point one (3.1),
continuance commitment index was at four point three (4.3) and intention to leave
index was at two point four (2.4). Mean difference between youngest and eldest
service crew under affective commitment index was at negative zero point five (-
0.5), normative commitment index was at zero point five (0.5), continuance

11| P a g e
commitment index was at zero point two (0.2) and intention to leave index was at
one (1.0).

For the mean commitment index by length of work, there was four point
three (4.3) affective commitment index under probationary service crews whose
tenure was at one to five (1-5) months, three point four (3.4) for normative
commitment index, four point five (4.5) under continuance commitment index and
three point three (3.3) for the intention to leave index. Under regular employees
whose tenure was at six (6) months and up, affective commitment index was at
four point three (4.3), normative commitment index at three point seven (3.7),
continuance commitment index at four point fouur (4.4) and intention to leave
index was at three point two (3.2). Mean difference between newly hired and most
tenured service crews under affective commitment index was at zero (0), negative
zero point three (-0.3) for normative commitment index, zero point one (0.1) for
continuance commitment index and zero point one (0.1) for the intention to leave
index.

12| P a g e
III. Results of the Analysis

Table 5 - Mean commitment index by leadership style

Dependent variable
Independent Variable Affective Normative Continuance Intention
Commitment Commitment Commitment to leave
Above
1.50 1.67 1.67 1.67
average
Average
Transactional and 1.40 1.47 1.40 1.27
leadership below
Difference
0.10 0.20 0.27 0.40
of means
p-value 0.58 0.26 0.14 0.51
Above
1.53 1.53 1.53 1.20
average
Average
Transformational and 1.39 1.61 1.56 1.22
leadership below
Difference
0.14 0.08 -0.03 -0.02
of means
p-value 0.42 0.67 0.90 0.88
Above
1.36 1.73 1.55 1.27
average
Average
Laissez faire and 1.50 1.50 1.55 1.18
leadership below
Difference
-0.14 0.23 0.00 0.09
of means
p-value 0.48 0.22 1.00 0.59

Analyzing means between independent and dependent variables, the

following have been generated:

13| P a g e
Transactional Leadership Style

Under affective commitment index, transactional leadership style scored one

point five (1.5) for the above average while one point forty (1.40) for the average
and below, with mean difference of zero point ten (0.10) and significance of zero
point fifty eight (0.58). For the normative commitment index, above average was
with a score one point sixty seven (1.67), average and below at one point forty
seven (1.47), mean difference was at zero point twenty (0.20) and significance of
zero point twenty six (0.26). For the continuance commitment index, above
average scored at one point sixty seven (1.67), average and below at one point
forty (1.40), mean difference at zero point twenty seven (0.27) and significance of
zero point fourteen (0.14). For the intention to leave index, above average scored
at one point sixty seven (1.67), average and below at one point twenty seven
(1.27), mean difference at zero point forty (0.40) and significance of zero point fifty
one (0.51).

As mentioned in the study of Zehir et. al (2012) in the literatures,

transactional leaders lead employees by rewarding (Bass, 1985). The desired
performance is based on when a leader explains what are aims, goals, results, and
rewards to employees who achieved in their work. Transactional leadership is
consisted o contingent reward, active management by exception, and passive
management by exception. Leaders, who adopt this approach, especially reward
employees with money status and promotion while they pay less attention to
creative and innovative acts (Eren, 2010).

Transformational Leadership Style

Under affective commitment index, above average scored at one point fifty
three (1.53), average and below at one point thirty nine (1.39), mean difference at
zero point fourteen (0.14) and significance of zero point forty two (0.42). Under
normative commitment index, above average scored at one point fifty three (1.53),

14| P a g e
average and below at one point sixty one (1.61), mean difference of zero point zero
eight (0.08) and significance of zero point sixty seven (0.67). Under continuance
commitment index, above average scored at one point fifty three (1.53), average
and below at one point fifty six (1.56), mean difference at negative zero point zero
three (-0.03) and significance of zero point ninety (0.90). Under intention to leave
index, above average scored at one point twenty (1.20), average and below at one
point twenty two (1.22), mean difference at negative zero point zero two (-0.02)
and significance of zero point eighty eight (0.88).

In the same study of Zehir et. al (2012) it was mentioned on the literatures
that transformational leadership is comprised of idealized influence, individual
consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation (Bass, 1990).
Transformational leaders try to persuade followers that they are powerful enough to
coping with challenging conditions (Glad & Blanton, 1997). Leaders encourage
employees to see beyond what they already have (Bass, 1990).

Laissez Faire Leadership Style

Under affective commitment index, above average scored at one point thirty
six (1.36), average and below at one point fifty (1.50), mean difference of negative
zero point fourteen (-0.14) and significance of zero point forty eight (0.48). Under
normative index, above average scored at one point seventy three (1.73), average
and below at one point fifty (1.50), mean difference of zero point twenty three
(0.23) and significance of zero point twenty two (0.22). Under continuance
commitment style, above average scored at one point fifty five (1.55), average and
below at one point fifty five (1.55), mean difference of zero (0) and significance of
one (1). Under intention to leave index, above average scored at one point twenty
seven (1.27), average and below at one point eighteen (1.18), mean difference at
zero point zero nine (0.09) significance of zero point fifty nine (0.59).

15| P a g e
 Literatures in the study of Zehir et. al (2012) mentioned that laissez-faire
leaders give group members the freedom to make their own decision in any process
as leaders play no leadership role to subordinates (Griffin, 1993). Laissez-faire
leaders need the less of management authority, leave responsibility to subordinates
to decide goals, plans and programs by their own within the source of possibility. In
other words, laissez faire leaders do not take the responsibility and give
subordinates the authority to use (Eren, 2010). Laissez-faire leaders do not form
any control mechanism on group members, and they are completely free to take
any decision (Vugt et. Al, 2004).

Based on the above results, it can be inferred that service crews generally
have a higher organizational commitment in the three dimensions of organizational
commitment if they are being led by a transactional leader.

When the On-site Supervisor was asked what leadership style works best in
the fast food industry, interviewee said that it is transactional mainly because they
really have to closely monitor if the service crews were able to meet the Jollibee
standards.

“Yung una po. Transactional dapat Ma’am. Dapat kasi detalyado. Pano mo
masasabing matetrain na’ng maayos yung trainee kung hindi ka detalyado.
Dapat naiikot mo silang lahat, namomonitor mo yung progress nito. Kapag
trainee, normal na magkamali. Pag nagkamali yan, kausapin mo na hindi
ganyan. Okay lang naman kasi magkamali, pero kung paulit ulit yung
pagkakamali, parang iba na yun, may katigasan ang ulo na non.
[OSSID01]

The Restaurant Manager was asked with the same question and he stressed
out that it is also the transactional style of leadership that would be effective in the
quick service restaurants. They have to ensure the quality of their service crews
meet their standards in terms of product knowledge, food safety and quality

16| P a g e
customer service. Hence, the need to closely monitor them and use contingent
rewards.

“Siguro Ma’am yung una. Yung transactional. Siguro Ma’am ano yung for Jollibee
it suits yung number one kasi maam bakit. Halimbawa, yung trainee. Hindi mo
yan pwede hayaang magkamali. Lalo na pagsa service, kasi Ma’am, halimbawa
yung trainee tapos may customer, bakit ganon bakit ganyan, kaya sabi ko sayo
Ma’am dapat bago natin bitawan yung trainee, marunong na.”
[RM1]

On the other hand, there was lowest affective commitment from service
crews if they have a laissez faire leader or On-site Supervisor, with a mean of one
point thirty six (1.36) and mean difference of negative zero point fourteen (-0.14).
As there was little to zero supervision, service crews do not feel very attached to
their jobs because there is no vision and they lack purpose as to what they are
doing. According to the Restaurant Manager, service crews must be taught properly
during the training phase. They have to invest on that.

“Dapat bago mo bitawan yung trainee, bago mo pagsolohin, dapat turuan mo

na’ng maayos. Dapat marunong na talaga sya. Hindi yung gusto mo lang
makatipid sa dailies, sa manhours. Kasi Ma’am FSC yung foundation ni Jollibee.
Food, Service, Cleanliness.”
[RM1]

Surprisingly, there was highest normative commitment from service crews if

they have a laissez faire leader, with a mean of one point seventy three (1.73) and
mean difference of zero point twenty three (0.23). They feel highest obligation to
their jobs probably because they were left alone and they have no other option but
to take charge on their jobs since there is minimal supervision. For the continuance
commitment, transactional leaders scored the highest, with a mean of one point
sixty seven (1.67) and mean difference of zero point twenty seven (0.27). For the
intention to leave index, transactional leadership scored the highest with a mean of
one point sixty seven (1.67) and mean difference of zero point four (0.4).

17| P a g e
 The first hypothesis was that transformational leadership style is associated
with highest worker performance and organizational commitment than transactional
and laissez faire style of leadership. Given the above results, it can be inferred that
first hypothesis was wrong because normative and continuance organizational
commitment of service crews with transactional leaders scored higher than
transformational leaders. Only affective index of transformational scored higher
than transactional but the difference between the two means is only zero point zero
three (0.03). However, transactional leadership style scored the highest intention
to leave index.

According to the On-site Supervisor, the impact of the transactional

leadership style to the service crews could be somehow demotivating in the sense
that they might feel the management doesn’t have trust on them and on their
capabilities as they are being micromanaged. Some service crews might accept the
challenge but there would also be a lot who would lose interest and passion into
what they are doing, hence, the highest intention to leave.

“Siguro madedemotivate ng onti. Siguro ayun, panghihinaan ka. Kasi yung bata,
iisipin nun, bakit ba ako nalang lagi yung binabantayan nito. Wala bang tiwala to
sakin. Malaki epekto nun, baka isipin nya hindi para sakin tong task na to. Bakit
ako lang yung binabantayan. Naniniwala kasi ako na magiimprove yang batang
yan. May mga bata kasi na kapag ganyan, tinatanggap ang challenge. Meron
naman, dinadamdam, nawawalan ng gana.”
[OSS1]

The second hypothesis was that laissez faire leadership style is associated
with lowest worker performance and organizational commitment than
transformational and transactional style of leadership. With the above results, it can
be inferred that the second hypothesis was also wrong. Above average of laissez
faire leadership style for normative and continuance commitment scored much
higher compared to transformational leadership style. Only the affective index of
laissez faire scored lower with a mean of one point thirty six (1.36).

18| P a g e
IV. Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation

It was found out that the first hypothesis was incorrect. Based on the
quantitative and qualitative research, service crews have highest organizational
commitment if they are being led by a transactional leader. With this type of
leadership, majority of the service crews tend to feel that leaving their current jobs
is too costly, or there are no other available opportunities for them outside.
Surprisingly, service crews would become more obligated to do their job well
because they believe such is the right thing to do if their leader is using a laissez
faire leadership style. Lastly, service crews feel an emotional attachment if they are
being lead by a transformational leader.

Transactional leadership works best in the fastfood industry. According to

Cherry (2019), one of the basic assumptions of transactional leadership is that
subordinates need to be carefully monitored to ensure that expectations are met.
According to her, transactional leaders tend to be good at setting expectations and
standards that maximize the efficiency and productivity of an organization. They
tend to give constructive feedback regarding follower performance that allows
group members to improve their output to obtain better feedback and
reinforcement.

Despite that transactional leadership scored the highest in overall

organizational commitment, this leadership style showed also the highest intention
to leave among the service crews, with a mean of one point sixty seven (1.67) and
with a mean difference of one point forty (1.40).

Majority of the service crews who joined the mini-focus group discussions are
students. They said that they might leave the company but they would be still

19| P a g e
continuing their education three to five years from now. This could also account
why there is the highest intention to leave index for the transactional leadership
style.

“Wala studyante parin. Nag aaraal pa ko,. Independent ako e.”

[PI1]

“Balak ko ulit mag aral e. Baka po by next sem.”

[PI2]

“Sakin kasi Ma’am ano e, ano po kasi ako Ma’am, working student po ako. Tapos
sembreak po namin ngayon. Kumbaga nakikita ko ang sarili ko na isa na pong,
kinakaya na pong tumayo sa sarili nyang paa. Isa na pong businessman. Isa po
kasi yun Ma’am sa mga pangarap ko e. ano po kasi Ma’am e, second year palang
po ako. Inabot po kasi ako ng K+12. Kung sakali sana Ma’am ano, graduating
narin sana.”
[RI1]

“Studyante parin siguro Ma’am. Kasi po Ma’am, graduating po ako ng K+12.

Senior High School po ako ngayon. Dapat po kasi mag aaral na ako ng first year
college kaso parang tinamad ako. So ayun, sabi ko next year nalang. So
mageenroll ka next year? Opo Ma’am.”
[RI2]

Since the respondents and interviewees were students, they were committed
to their jobs mainly because their jobs give them money to sustain their needs.

“About sa pera. Financial”

[PI1]

“Pangangailangan. Yun din.”

[PI2]

Research has found that transactional leadership tends to be most effective

in situations where problems are simple and clearly defined. It can also work well in

20| P a g e
crisis situations where the focus needs to be on accomplishing certain tasks. By
assigning clearly defined duties to particular individuals, leaders can ensure that
those things get done. (Cherry, 2019). This is also supported by the statement of
the Restaurant Manager, saying that there is no perfect operation in their
restaurant. All they have to do is that the service crews must be very
knowledgeable of their jobs and that if there will be problems these crews will
encounter such as a very irate customer with a sensitive complaint, then the
Managers can take over as they were trained with Feedback Management System,
in addressing customer complaints.

“Normal, walang perpektong operasyon. Meron talaga na araw na maeencounter

mo na may unwanted challenges. Hindi naman sa lahat ng araw okay. Sari
saring customer. Which is ayun yung pinapaliwang natin sa mga crew natin na
pag sa service, dapat yung patience, customer oriented tayo, kapag merong di
ma-handle pwede natin iforward sa Manager. Kasi ang manager ay equipped and
trained with FMS - Feedback Management System. Nagkaron tayo ng training
pa.”

[RM1]

Nowadays, the generation of Millenials and Centennials are very different.

Centennials comprise the majority of the workforce of fast food industry. These
generations were tagged as job hoppers if they do not see that they are valued,
trusted, and have the fulfillment in their jobs. Despite of the rigidness of
transactional leadership style, On-site Supervisors must be advised to be more
careful in giving constructive feedback.

Several factors are affecting the reasons or the motivation why service crews
work. Based on the interviews, it can be inferred that older service crews tend to
stay longer in the organization.

“Mas committed ang 25 pataas Ma’am. Mga millenials. Yung mga mas bata kasi
Ma’am naghahanap ng trabaho para magkaera para may pangbili, pangluho,
pang gimmick. Malaya pa yan kung anong gustong gawin. Mas gusto ko nga mas
matanda na. Meron ako dyan 42 tsaka 32. Hindi nga sya mabagal Ma’am e.

21| P a g e
 Maliksi siya. Mas responsable na sila. May pinaglalaan kasi sila, may
pinaghuhugutan kung bakit kailangan kumayod.”

[OSS1]

“Siguro ano Ma’am, kung sa experience, mas committed yung mga nakakatanda
kaysa nakakabata.”

[RM1]

“Ah katulad nyan Ma’am meron dito 30+ tsaka 40+. Siguro Ma’am ano, kaya
nagstay sila ng matagal kasi ang kwento, yung isa mas mataas ang sahod nya
dito. Mas mataas sahod at mas maiksi ang working hours kasi dun sa dati nyang
trabaho, below minimum wage sa NCR. Yung isa, first time nya magwork kasi
hindi raw sya hinayaan ng asawa nya noon na magtrabaho. Ngayong medyo
separated sila, nagtrabaho sya, tapos eto yung pinasok nya. Yung mga tao kasi,
icocompare mo yung trabaho mo before. At tsaka ang mga tao kasi may
pakiramdam. Uy tumatanda na ko. Pag umalis pa ko san na ko pupunta? Nasa
tao yun Ma’am kung ganon ang mindset mo. Siguro kasi Ma’am dahil may family
narin sila. Kasi yung isa Ma’am, yung 30+, 5 na anak non. Yung isa naman, na
40+, may anak din. Tsaka kasi nga mas malaki sinasahod nya sa mas maliit na
oras. Saka siguro Ma’am yung security. As long as maayos ako magtrabaho,
gawin ko ang tama, mananatili ako.”

[RM1]

It was also found out that the second hypothesis was correct. Generally,
there is lowest organizational commitment for laissez-faire leadership style. Since
there is little to zero supervision, service crews do not feel attached to their jobs
and also cannot see their purpose.

Thus, the researcher recommends the following for Wealthlink, Inc.:

1. Since transactional leadership works best in the fastfood industry and this
type of leadership uses rewards and punishment as motivating factor, it is

22| P a g e
 advised to strengthen its rewards system that would be focused on
appreciating the performance and contribution of service crews. Since it was
mentioned that due to its rigidness, some crews might feel that they are not
being trusted, giving frequent awards such as “Most improved employee” or
“Crew of the month” would boost their self-esteem.

2. In creating leadership programs, focus on rewards system, performance

management, and feedback management as these things greatly affect
transactional leadership. On-site Supervisors must be very well-trained and
effective communicators. According to the service crews interviewed, they
wanted to be corrected and given feedback in a nice and professional
approach.

“Pag alam nyang mali yung ginagawa mo, sasabihan ka nya icocorect ka
nya in a nice way.”
[PI1]

“Sakin po may professionalism tsaka approachable”

[PI2]

3. Improve organizational culture in terms of teamwork. The On-site Supervisor

mentioned that teamwork could increase the probability for the service crews
to stay longer on their jobs.

“Siguro yung ano Ma’am, team work. Naka encounter na ko ng ibang mga
Jollibee stores. Iba kasi dito Ma’am e. Mababait yung mga Managers dito.
Dito kasi pwede mo makausap Managers at RM, even ng hindi related sa
trabaho. Parang pamilya na kasi dito Ma’am. Open kami. Emotionally
attached mga tao.”
[OSS1]

23| P a g e
 4. Improve organizational culture in terms of openness in communication. One
of the service crews was asked if what would make them stay in the
company.

“Misunderstanding. Di kasi maiiwasan yun e. Kailangan may maayos na

communication”.
[RI1]

“Kung willing ka tsaka gusto mo yung ginagawa mo, ituloy mo lang. Tsaka
ano po, pakikisama rin po. Magandang pakikisama lang sa trabaho tapos
maayos na pagkakaunawaan. Kung may mali po dun sa isa, pagusapan,
wag nagpaplastikan. Dapat pagusapan po nila.”

[RI1]

5. Leaders should be humble enough and fair when making operational

decisions.

“Pag teamleader or On-site Supervisor. Ano ba dapat magiging galawan

mo. Stay ka dun para di mabigla mga kasama mo para di manibago para
di ka masabihan na lumaki na ulo mo, stay humble. Para respetuhin nila.
Tsaka bago ka kumilos, wag ka act ng act isipin mo muna. Tignan mo
muna. Hindi porket tropa mo or kabiruan mo to, sa kanya ka. Trabaho to
e, labas dapat kung anong meron kayo. Fair dapat.”
[OSS1]

“Siguro yung nakikita ka nila na marunong makisama, may limitasyon,

kasi, sa totoong buhay ah, yung ibang mga crew, minsan mas matapang
pa sa Manager. Lahat naman may level ng pagiging pasaway e. Pero
siguro kung nag-establish ka na’ng maayos na sistema. Kung ano yung
sistema, yun lang dapat, ayun yung pinapatupad namin. For example,
nagkamali yung crew, wag mong murahin. Kausapin natin. Dapat bago
mo bitawan yung trainee, bago mo pagsolohin, dapat turuan mo na’ng
maayos…. Dapat kung ano yung policy, dun ka pa rin. Kung meron kang
babaliin na policy, dapat mas matimbang yung reason kung bakit mo
babaliin. Pero kung hindi naman kinakailangang baliin, wag mong baliin.
Bakit? Kasi Ma’am yang mga crew sa tototo di naman yan magsasalita
dahil takot yan. Tsaka ayaw namin sila matakot. Tsaka halimbawa nito,
RD request, nagrequest ng linggo, ayan ang pinakapeak natin.

24| P a g e
 Halimbawa, naiintindihan ko ang sitwasyon mo. Pero pano na kung di
naman ganon kaimportante halimbawa manonood ng sine. Halimba yung
isang crew pinayagan natin tapos ikaw hindi ano mararamdaman mo?
Ganon ko sila kinakausap Ma’am.”

[RM1]

“Dapat tinututukan mo, maayos yung training mo, kinakamusta mo. Hindi
ba nakakainspire kapag yung superior kinakamusta ka, malaking bagay
na yun. Nakakapagmotivate yun. Let’s attract good vibes. It’s more on
people attachment. Not totally attached. Saktong attachment lang. Tsaka
malasakit. Alamin mo kwento ng buhay nya, baka may problema. Be a
blessing sa tao Ma’am. Marerealize nila na yung management team,
kailangan ako dito kasi may malaking bahagi ako para maachieve ang
goals ng store na ito.”

[RM1]

6. The study did not support the researcher’s hypotheses and the possible
reason was because only a small number of respondents were able to answer
the survey. Thus, it is being recommended to undertake this study again with
a higher number of respondents, preferably around two hundred or the whole
population of Wealthlink’s service crews which are around two hundred forty
(240).

25| P a g e
Sources:

Cherry, Kendra (2019). How a Transactional Leadership Style Works. Verywellmind.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-transactional-leadership-2795317.

Jaros, Stephen (2007). Meyer and Allen Model of Organizational Commitment:

Measurement Issues. ICFAI Journal of Organizational Behavior

Mind Tools (2019). The Three Component Model of Commitment. Improving

Commitment and Engagement. Extracted from
https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/three-component-model
-commitment.htm

Rowold, Jens (2005). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Psychometric properties

of the German translation by Jens Rowold. University of Muenster, Germany.

Sharma, Madan Pal (1997). Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 33, No. 2.
Extracted from https://www.jstor.org/stable/27767525

Zehir, Cemal; Sehitoglu, Yasin; Erdogan, Ebru (2012). The Effect of Leadership and
Supervisory Commitment to Organizational Performance. 8 th International
Strategic Management Conference. Turkey.

26| P a g e
Appendix: Questionnaire

Good day! I am Regine J. Bucio, Recruitment & Operations Manager of Wealthlink, Inc. and
at the same time, a graduate student of the University of the Philippines – Diliman Campus
taking up Diploma in Industrial Relations at the School of Labor and Industrial Relations
(SOLAIR). As a requirement of our IR 299 subject which is Research, we are required to
present a research study covering various topics relative to industrial relations. My research
is entitled "Impact of the On-Site Supervisors' Leadership Styles to the Performance and
Organizational Commitment of Wealthlink, Inc.'s Service Crews assigned in Metro Manila
selected stores of Jollibee.". In line with this, may I request for your voluntary participation
and complete this survey. Rest assured that all information will be dealt with confidentiality.
Should you have clarifications regarding the questions, you may reach me at 09154890695.
Thank you and happy working!

Part 1: Personal Information

Name : (Optional) _____________________

Gender: ___Male ___Female
Age: ______ years old
Status: ____Single (with kids) ____Single (without kids)
____Married ____Separated/Widowed
Educational attainment: ____High school graduate ____College Undergraduate
Position: ___Kitchen Crew ___Dining Crew ___Cashier/ Counter Crew
Outlet: ____ Robinsons Las Pinas ____ Robinsons Magnolia ____ Eton Centris
Length of stay: ___ months ___ years

Part 2:

This questionnaire provides description of how you perceive your leader. Please answer all
the items on this answer sheet. Forty-five descriptive statements are listed below. Judge
how frequently each statement fits your leader.

Frequently,
Once in a
Item Statement Not at all Sometimes Fairly if not
while
always

Talks about his/her most important

1 0 1 2 3 4
values and beliefs.

Specifies the importance of having

2 0 1 2 3 4
a strong sense of purpose at work.

Considers the moral and ethical

3 0 1 2 3 4
consequences of decision.
Emphasizes the importance of
4 having a collective sense of 0 1 2 3 4
mission.
Instills pride in others for being
5 0 1 2 3 4
associated with him/her
Goes beyond self-interest for the
6 0 1 2 3 4
good of the team.
Acts in ways that builds my
7 0 1 2 3 4
respect.
Displays a sense of power and
8 0 1 2 3 4
confidences of decisions.
Talks optimistically about the
9 0 1 2 3 4
future.
Talks enthusiastically about what
10 0 1 2 3 4
needs to be accounted.
27| P a g e
 Frequently,
Once in a
Item Statement Not at all Sometimes Fairly if not
while
always
Articulates a compelling vision of
11 0 1 2 3 4
the future.
Expresses confidence that goals will
12 0 1 2 3 4
be achieved.
Re-examines critical assumptions to
question whether they are
13 0 1 2 3 4
appropriate for the current
situation/ problem.
Seeks differing perspectives when
14 0 1 2 3 4
solving problems.
Gets me to look at problems from
15 0 1 2 3 4
many different perspectives.

Suggests new ways of looking at

16 0 1 2 3 4
how to complete tasks or job roles.

Spends time teaching and coaching

17 0 1 2 3 4
me at my station.

Treats me as an individual rather

18 0 1 2 3 4
than just as a member of the team.

Considers me as having different

19 needs, abilities, and aspirations 0 1 2 3 4
from other service crews.

20 Helps me to develop my strengths. 0 1 2 3 4

Provides me with assistance in

21 0 1 2 3 4
exchange for my efforts.
Discusses in specific terms who is
22 responsible for achieving 0 1 2 3 4
performance targets.
Makes clear what one can expect
23 to receive when performance goals 0 1 2 3 4
are achieved.

Expresses satisfaction when I meet

24 0 1 2 3 4
expectations.

Focuses attention on irregularities,

mistakes, exceptions and deviations
25 0 1 2 3 4
from standard operating procedures
(SOPs) in my station.

Concentrates his/her full attention

on dealing with order mistakes,
26 0 1 2 3 4
customer complaints, and duty
failures.

27 Keeps track of all mistakes. 0 1 2 3 4

Directs my attention to failures to
28 meet standard operating 0 1 2 3 4
procedures.
Fails to interfere until problems at
29 0 1 2 3 4
the station become serious.

Waits for things to go wrong before

30 0 1 2 3 4
taking action.
Shows that he/she is a firm believer
31 0 1 2 3 4
in “If it isn’t broke don’t fix it.”
Demonstrates that problems must
32 become chronic before I take 0 1 2 3 4
action.

28| P a g e
 Frequently,
Once in a
Item Statement Not at all Sometimes Fairly if not
while
always

Avoids getting involved when

33 0 1 2 3 4
important issues arise.
34 Is absent when needed. 0 1 2 3 4
35 Avoids making decisions. 0 1 2 3 4
Delays responding to urgent
36 0 1 2 3 4
questions.
Gets me to do more than they
37 0 1 2 3 4
expected me to do.
Heightens my desire to succeed
38 and perform my tasks very 0 1 2 3 4
accurately.
Increases my willingness to try
39 harder and meet the standard 0 1 2 3 4
operating procedures.
Uses methods of leadership that are
40 0 1 2 3 4
satisfying.
Works with me in a satisfactory
41 0 1 2 3 4
way.
Is effective in meeting my job-
42 0 1 2 3 4
related needs.
Is effective in representing me to
43 my Account Supervisor and client 0 1 2 3 4
representatives.
Is effective in meeting store/
44 0 1 2 3 4
restaurant requirements.

45 Leads a team that is effective. 0 1 2 3 4

Part 3:

Read each item carefully. Encircle the number that corresponds to your best answer
according to the following scale: 6- Strongly agree; 5- Moderately agree; 4- Slightly agree;
3 Slightly disagree; 2- Moderately disagree; 1- Strongly disagree

To what extent do you agree with the following? Strongly agree Strongly disagree

1. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career

6 5 4 3 2 1
with Wealthlink.
2. I really feel as if Wealthlink's problems are my own. 6 5 4 3 2 1
3. I do not feel a strong sense of "belonging" to
6 5 4 3 2 1
Wealthlink.
4. I do not feel "emotionally attached" to Wealthlink. 6 5 4 3 2 1
5. I do not feel like "part of the family" at Wealthlink. 6 5 4 3 2 1
6. Wealthlink has a great deal of personal meaning for me. 6 5 4 3 2 1
7. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career
6 5 4 3 2 1
with Wealthlink
8. It would be very hard for me to leave Wealthlink right
6 5 4 3 2 1
now, even if I wanted to.
9. Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided to
6 5 4 3 2 1
leave Wealthlink now.
10. I feel that I have too few options to consider leaving
6 5 4 3 2 1
Wealthlink.
11. If I had not already put so much of myself to
6 5 4 3 2 1
Wealthlink, I might consider working elsewhere.

29| P a g e
To what extent do you agree with the following? Strongly agree Strongly disagree

12. One of the few negative consequences of leaving

Wealthlink would be the scarcity of available alternatives. 6 5 4 3 2 1

13. I do not feel any obligation to remain with Wealthlink. 6 5 4 3 2 1

14. Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would
6 5 4 3 2 1
be right to leave Wealthlink now.
15. I would feel guilty if I leave Wealthlink now. 6 5 4 3 2 1
16. Wealthlink deserves my loyalty. 6 5 4 3 2 1
17. I would not leave Wealthlink now because I have a
sense of obligation to the customers and to my co- 6 5 4 3 2 1
workers/ fellow service crews.
18. I owe a great deal to Wealthlink. 6 5 4 3 2 1
19. I I am likely to leave my job or to actively start looking
6 5 4 3 2 1
for a new job in the next six months.
20. I am likely to stay with the company until forced
6 5 4 3 2 1
retirement/or for as long as possible.

Thank you for participating the survey! Your answers will be a big help on the above
mentioned study and that your inputs will be used for Wealthlink’s improvement to give you
better employee experience! 

Regards,

Regine J. Bucio

30| P a g e
Appendix – Profiles of the Interviewees

ID EMPLOYMENT
POSITION GENDER GENERATION METHOD
NO. STATUS
Restaurant Not employee of
RM1 Male - Key Informant
Manager Wealthlink
On-site
OSS1 Male - Regular Key Informant
Supervisor
Mini-Focus
RI1 Service Crew Male Centennial Regular
Group
Mini-Focus
RI2 Service Crew Female Centennial Regular
Group
Mini-Focus
PI1 Service Crew Male Millenial Probationary
Group
Mini-Focus
PI2 Service Crew Female Millenial Probationary
Group

31| P a g e
Appendix – Transcription of the Interviews

Key Informant: On-Site Supervisor

RJB: Kamusta kaba? Gaano kana katagal dito?

OSS: Sorry di ko na matandaan yung exact date. From Generation 1 to Wealthlink

po, 2014. Ay sorry, hindi, 2015 from Gen1. Tapos 2018 po kay Wealthlink.

RJB: Ano yung naging challenges mo bilang On-site Supervisor?

OSS: Naku malaki Ma’am. Syempre noon kasi na first time, wala namang ganto kay
Jollibee e. Bilang matagal na nagwowork na deployed sa Jollibee, hindi madali kasi
merong magtataka, bakit ikaw, bakit ikaw yung napipisil, na kung tutuusin merong
mas magagaling na iba. Kasi noon ang mga crew noon, hindi rin naman
matatawaran yung galling. May mga kanya kanyang diskarte. Yung naging Team
Leader/ On-site Supervisor ako, nahirapan ako, malaking adjustment. Kasi ano e,
nung time na yun, naisip ko lang. Pano ba yung maging trabaho ng TL. Kasi
syempre, sa madaling salita, katuwang ka ng Restaurant Manager. Para
magpasunod ng mga crew, sa paghahandle ng mga crew. E sabi ko, e isa rin akong
pasaway na bata rin. Aminado ako dun. Sinabi ko lang kay Ma’am Raine, nung sya
pa ang RM namin dati, di ko yata kakayanin. Parang di ko kaya magpasunod ng
bata kasi parang mahirap yun e. Di mo naman masusupil kung ano yung gusto
nyang gawin lalo na kung pagka talagang nakasanayan na.

RJB: So ibig sabihin noon meron na yung mga pasaway tapos hindi nadidisiplina.

OSS: Yes Ma’am. Parang ano, dahil tropa tropa, pikit mata nalang. Pero syempre,
nasubo na ko sa ganong sitwasyon, e kasi sabi may iba raw sakin e. Siguro kasi
Ma’am ako noon, pag papasok ako, talagang trabaho. Yung iba kasi, alam mo yun,
yung papasok kalang. Walang achievement, walang goal. Meron yung pumasok ka,
wala kang alam. Bat ganon, pagkalabas mo wala kapa ring alam. Sabi ko nun
parang di ko kaya. Maraming nagbago. Challenge kasi syempre. Yung mga taong
malalapit sayo noon, parang naglie low. Di ka pwedeng sumabay e. Kasi ito, iba
yung gusto nito sa gusto mong mangyari. May mga ganong scenario, kasi syempre
ikaw, bilang part ng team, ng management, kailangan dun ka sa side nila. Dapat
dun ka sa tama. E syempre eto Jollibee. Actually hindi lang naman dito. Maski sa
ibang brands. Kung ano yung na-adopt nito, ganon nadin.

RJB: Which reminds me, kasi nabanggit sakin ni Sir Arianne, yung Account
Supervisor nyo, noon kasi nagwork rin sya sa Jollibee. According to him, madalas
pinapahirapan raw talaga yung mga trainee o mga bagong trainee. Kumbaga,
hazing. How true?

32| P a g e
OSS: Actually naabutan ko yun. 2011 pa ako nag Jollibee. 17 palang ako non.
Nahirapan nga ako magrequirements. Pero dahil malapit na ako mag-18, kinuha na
nila ako. May mga ganong part talaga na mabubully ka.

RJB: Ano yung mga nagimprove sayo, bago ka nagging TL/OSS tapos ngayong
ayan na ang position mo?

OSS: Yung mga nagimprove sakin, nadevelop, madami. Admin. Timekeeping.

Scheduling, disciplinary action. Tsaka syempre po yung paghawak ng tao.

RJB: Ano yung ideal leader mo?

OSS: Gusto natin yung leader na sya yung una. Makikita mo muna sa kanya kung
ano ang tama at dapat gawin. Yun yung susundan ng mga tao.

RJB: Sa study ko kasi, may tatlong leadership styles. (Described Transactional,

transformational and laissez faire leaders) Ano yung magwowork best ditto sa
fastfood industry?

OSS: Yung una po. Transactional dapat Ma’am. Dapat kasi detalyado. Pano mo
masasabing matetrain na’ng maayos yung trainee kung hindi ka detalyado. Dapat
naiikot mo silang lahat, namomonitor mo yung progress nito. Kapag trainee,
normal na magkamali. Pag nagkamali yan, kausapin mo na hindi ganyan. Okay lang
naman kasi magkamali, pero kung paulit ulit yung pagkakamali, parang iba na yun,
may katigasan ang ulo na non.

RJB: Ano sa tingin mo ang magiging epekto ng gantong uri ng leadership sa

commitment ng mga service crew?

OSS: Malaki epekto sa commitment nun nung bata. Siguro madedemotivate ng

onti. Siguro ayun, panghihinaan ka. Kasi yung bata, iisipin nun, bakit ba ako nalang
lagi yung binabantayan nito. Wala bang tiwala to sakin. Malaki epekto nun, baka
isipin nya hindi para sakin tong task na to. Bakit ako lang yung binabantayan.
Naniniwala kasi ako na magiimprove yang batang yan. May mga bata kasi na kapag
ganyan, tinatanggap ang challenge. Meron naman, dinadamdam, nawawalan ng
gana.

RJB: Gano ba kabilis umalis mga crew mo dito?

OSS: Meron dito mabilis umalis. 2 months palang ata yun e. Wala daw mag aalaga
ng anak. Returnee yun e. Nabuntis tapos nagresign kasi di nya raw kakayanin.
After some time, bumalik kaso ang nagging problema naman, napapadalas ang
pag-aabsent nya kasi wala raw mag-aalaga sa anak nya. Ending ayun nagresign
nalang ulit.

RJB: Ano yung nakakapagpastay sa mga crew?

OSS: Siguro yung ano Ma’am, team work. Naka encounter na ko ng ibang mga
Jollibee stores. Iba kasi dito Ma’am e. Mababait yung mga Managers dito. Dito kasi

33| P a g e
pwede mo makausap Managers at RM, even ng hindi related sa trabaho. Parang
pamilya na kasi dito Ma’am. Open kami. Emotionally attached mga tao.

RJB: Sino mas committed? Millenials or Centennials.

OSS: Mas committed ang 25 pataas Ma’am. Mga millenials. Yung mga mas bata
kasi Ma’am naghahanap ng trabaho para magkaera para may pangbili, pangluho,
pang gimmick. Malaya pa yan kung anong gustong gawin. Mas gusto ko nga mas
matanda na. Meron ako dyan 42 tsaka 32. Hindi nga sya mabagal Ma’am e. Maliksi
siya. Mas responsable na sila. May pinaglalaan kasi sila, may pinaghuhuggutan
kung bakit kailangan kumayod.

RJB: Sa tingin mo, sino mas committed sa trabaho, ang regular o ang probationary
employee?

OSS: Mas committed ang under probationary. Kasi nagpapakitang gilas sila. Yung
ibang regular nga Maa’m, dun sa dati ko pang branch, bago dito, mag papunch in
tapos matutulog na. Tiwala na sila di mawawala yung trabaho nila.

RJB: Ano ang mabibigay mong advice to other team supervisors in other outlets
with higher attrition?

OSS: Pag teamleader or on site supervisor. Ano ba dapat magiging galawan mo.
Stay ka dun para di mabigla mga kasama mo para di manibago para di ka
masabihan na lumaki na ulo mo, stay humble. Para respetuhin nila. Tsaka bago ka
kumilos, wag ka act ng act isipin mo muna. Tignan mo muna. Hindi porket tropa
mo or kabiruan mo to, sa kanya ka. Trabaho to e, labas dapat kung anong meron
kayo. Fair dapat.

34| P a g e
Appendix – Transcription of the Interviews

Key Informant: Restaurant Manager

RJB: Hi Sir RJ, Kamusta po kayo? Kelan nga kayo Sir nag-start dito?

RM: Started last May 18, 2015. One month training ako nag-training sa Robinsons
Galleria.

RJB: What are the challenges that Wealthlink’s on-site Supervisor encountered
here?

RM: Actualy, all they need is a formal education so they coud be a Management
Trainee. Minsan mas magaling pa nga yan sila sa Manager e. Mas nauna pa nga yan
sila sakin e. Matagal na sila kaya yung respeto talaga, andyan. Nirerespeto talaga
sila.

RJB: Para sa inyo Sir, ano ang ideal leader?

RM: Siguro yung nakikita ka nila na marunong makisama, may limitasyon, kasi, sa
totoong buhay ah, yung ibang mga crew, minsan mas matapang pa sa Manager.
Lahat naman may level ng pagiging pasaway e. Pero siguro kung nag-establish ka
na’ng maayos na sistema. Kung ano yung sistema, yun lang dapat, ayun yung
pinapatupad namin. For example, nagkamali yung crew, wag mong murahin.
Kausapin natin. Dapat bago mo bitawan yung trainee, bago mo pagsolohin, dapat
turuan mo na’ng maayos. Dapat marunong na talaga sya. Hindi yung gusto mo lang
makatipid sa dailies, sa manhours. Kasi Ma’am FSC yung foundation ni Jollibee.
Food, Service, Cleanliness. Yung leader para sakin Ma’am ay marunong rin
tumingin sa nakakababa sa kanya. Regardless kung anong position mo, kung ano
ka pa man, dapat marunong kang umunawa. Tsaka per tao iba iba ang atake mo
kasi iba iba tayo ng personality pero dapat be careful din. Dapat kung ano yung
policy, dun ka pa rin. Kung meron kang babaliin na policy, dapat mas matimbang
yung reason kung bakit mo babaliin. Pero kung hindi naman kinakailangang baliin,
wag mong baliin. Bakit? Kasi Ma’am yang mga crew sa tototo di naman yan
magsasalita dahil takot yan. Tsaka ayaw namin sila matakot. Tsaka halimbawa nito,
RD request, nagrequest ng linggo, ayan ang pinakapeak natin. Halimbawa,
naiintindihan ko ang sitwasyon mo. Pero pano na kung di naman ganon
kaimportante halimbawa manonood ng sine. Halimba yung isang crew pinayagan
natin tapos ikaw hindi ano mararamdaman mo? Ganon ko sila kinakausap Ma’am.

RJB: May three types ng leadership – transactional, transformational, tsaka laissez

fair (describe the three leadership styles). Sa gantong fastfood, ano yung
magwowork best Sir?

RM: Siguro Ma’am yung una. Yung transactional. Siguro Ma’am ano yung for
Jollibee it suits yung number one Kasi maam bakit. Halimbawa, yung trainee. Hindi
mo yan pwede hayaang magkamali. Lalo na pagsa service, kasi Ma’am, halimbawa
yung trainee tapos may customer, bakit ganon bakit ganyan, kaya sabi ko sayo
Ma’am dapat bago natin bitawan yung trainee, marunong na. Normal, walang
35| P a g e
perpektong operasyon. Meron talaga na araw na maeencounter mo na may
unwanted challenges. Hindi naman sa lahat ng araw okay. Sari saring customer.
Which is ayun yung pinapaliwang natin sa mga crew natin na pag sa service, dapat
yung patience, customer oriented tayo, kapag merong di ma-handle pwede natin
iforward sa Manager. Kasi ang manager ay equipped and trained with FMS -
Feedback Management System. Nagkaron tayo ng training pano i-handle ang
customer na nagwawala at nageeskandalo.

RJB: Paano nakakaaffect yung ganong leadership style sa commitment ng crew?

RM: Diba Ma’am, bago maghire may initial interview. After sa inyo, chinecheck ko
lang din muna yung mga crew, bago ko pinapakausap kina Teamleader. Dun na
lahat ng pwede natin i-share sa crew sinasabi natin. Basta maintindihan lang nila
kung bakit. Bakit nila ginagawa ang isang bagay, it follows naman. Hindi naman
mahirap ihandle. Actually nasa magulang rin kung paano pinalaki ang anak mo.
Kung maluwag, ka, pag sobrang maluwag ka, aabusuhin ka. Pag kasama mo
umiom mga crew, pero lumalagpas na, ay si Sir nakasama ko sa inuman, okay lang
yan na s a work kasi nakainuman ko na. Dapat may boundary. Kung
magkakaibigan oo pero pag nasa work, trabaho tayo walang masama magusap
magkwentuhan pero if hinihingi ng work na wag muna magusap, gawin natin. Kasi
kapag hinigpitan natin yan, hindi yan masaya, lalayasan, ka nyan. Magrerebelde
yan. Pag di masaya ang tao kahit gano kalaki pa ang sweldo mo, para san pa.
Mastress kalang. Sa ibang mga crew siguro, na kailangan ng pera, dahil pamilyado,
sila bumubuhay, tutuloy sila dito. Ewan ko Ma’am ah, sabi nila ah, kapag millenials
daw, tapos di mo pinakitaan na’ng maganda, aalisan ka.

RJB: Ano sa tingin mo yung pinakafactor kung bakit mas nagi-stay ang mga crew?

RM: Iparamdam mo sa kanila na mahalaga sila sayo. Kapag di nila naramdaman

yun, aalisan ka nila.

RJB: Sino ang mas committed? Millenials o Centennials?

RM: May ganon ba? Hindi ko masagot kung meron sa tingin ko wala e. Daan daan
na nainterviw ko, iba ibang manager narin nakasama ko. May mas nakakatanda,
may mas nakakabata, pero yung commitment iba iba e. Di ko yan masasagot sa
ngayon. Nasa tao lang talaga yan e.

RJB: Pero Sir ikaw, anong napansin mo. Ano mas tumagal sayo?

RM: Siguro ano Ma’am, kung sa experience, mas committed yung mga
nakakatanda kaysa nakakabata.

RJB: Okay. Ano kayang factor Sir?

RM: Ah katulad nyan Ma’am meron dito 30+ tsaka 40+. Siguro Ma’am ano, kaya
nagstay sila ng matagal kasi ang kwento, yung isa mas mataas ang sahod nya dito.
Mas mataas sahod at mas maiksi ang working hours kasi dun sa dati nyang
trabaho, below minimum wage sa NCR. Yung isa, first time nya magwork kasi hindi

36| P a g e
raw sya hinayaan ng asawa nya noon na magtrabaho. Ngayong medyo separated
sila, nagtrabaho sya, tapos eto yung pinasok nya. Yung mga tao kasi, icocompare
mo yung trabaho mo before. At tsaka ang mga tao kasi may pakiramdam. Uy
tumatanda na ko. Pag umalis pa ko san na ko pupunta? Nasa tao yun Ma’am kung
ganon ang mindset mo. Siguro kasi Ma’am dahil may family narin sila. Kasi yung
isa Ma’am, yung 30+, 5 na anak non. Yung isa naman, na 40+, may anak din.
Tsaka kasi nga mas malaki sinasahod nya sa mas maliit na oras. Saka siguro
Ma’am yung security. As long as maayos ako magtrabaho, gawin ko ang tama,
mananatili ako. Kasi Ma’am dalawa lang hinihingi ko kapag nagiinterview ako. Una,
marunong kang makisama, hindi maki-sama. So pangalawa naman, gawin mo lang
yung hinihingi ng tindahan. Kung kaya mong higitan, mas maganda. Magsasama
tayo na’ng matagal.

RJB: May effect kaya yung status ng employee sa commitment at performance ng

tao?

RM: Yes of course Ma’am. Kasi sabi mo, kapag regular ka, kung okay ang
compensation mo, mas mamahalin mo ang trabaho mo. Sinungaling tayo kung di
tayo nagtatrabaho para sa pera. Pero dito gusto natin na hindi lang tayo
nagtatrabaho para sa pera kundi pati narin dahil gusto mo yung ginagawa mo. Na
mahal mo yung tindahan. Siguro Ma’am nasa tao na. Kung regular na sya, tapos
petiks na sya. Pero kasi Ma’am, nasa bible yun e. Na mahalin mo yung trabaho
hindi sa tao ka naglilingkod, kundi para sa Diyos. Ayun din yung prinsipyo ko e.
Dun ako kumukuha. Bat ako nandito? Lahat ng gagawin mo kasi, Halimbawa, ayaw
mo ma-late. Ikaw dapat magset as good example. Pano ka magiging magandang
ehemplo, magandang huwaran. Sisigaw sisigaw ka ayaw mo ng late tapos late
Karin.

RJB: Final note nalang Sir. Ano dapat ang gagawin para mas magtagal ang mga
crew sa store?

RM: Dun palang sa interview kausapin na na’ng maayos tapos training na, alagaan
na nila. Kasi di mo alam Ma’am na ayun yung crew na tutulungan ka. Dapat
tinututukan mo, maayos yung training mo, kinakamusta mo. Hindi ba
nakakainspire kapag yung superior kinakamusta ka, malaking bagay na yun.
Nakakapagmotivate yun. Let’s attract good vibes. It’s more on people attachment.
Not totally attached. Saktong attachment lang. Tsaka malasakit. Alamin mo kwento
ng buhay nya, baka may problema. Be a blessing sa tao Ma’am. Marerealize nila na
yung management team, kailangan ako dito kasi may malaking bahagi ako para
maachieve ang goals ng store na ito.

37| P a g e
Appendix – Transcription of the Interviews

FGD 1 – Probationary Interviewees

RJB: Hi. Kamusta? Gaano kana katagal dito?

PI1: 4 months po

PI2: 4 months rin po.

RJB: Ano ano mga challenges na naenconter nyo nung nagstart kayo?

PI1: Yung pakikisama sa attitude nila, kasi bago ka

PI2: Sakin Ma’am ano first time ko pumasok sa fast food pero yung pakikisama
naman hindi problema kasi okay naman approach nila. Nung una akala ko di ako
magtatagal.

RJB: Ilang taon na kayo?

PI1: 19

PI2: 20

RJB: Ano ang ideal leader nyo?

PI1: Pag alam nyang mali yung giagawa mo, sasabihan ka nya icocorect ka nya in
a nice way.

PI2: Sakin po may professionalism tsaka approachable

RJB: (Discussed the three types of leader). Sa gantong industry na fastfood, ano
ang magwowork best na leadership style?

PI1: Yung una sakin. Kasi, tulad po ng mga TL ko, si TL Angie, binabalik balikan
nila ako, tinatanong nila ako, parang sinusuayan nila ako kung ano gagawin

PI2: May combination ng una at pangalawa. Sakin kasi ano, may mga time na
pinabayaan nila ako, more on motivation kasi gianagaw nila. Sinasabihan nila ako
na ganon na nagkakamali rin kami noon pero nagsasucceed naman sa bandang
kalaunan.

RJB: Saan nyo nakikita sarili nyo 3 years from now?

PI1: Wala studyante parin. Nag aaraal pa ko,. Independent ako e.

38| P a g e
PI2: Balak ko ulit mag aral e. Baka po by next sem

RJB: Magstay ba kayo kung walang ibang factor?

PI1: Oo

PI2: Oo

RJB: Sino mas committed? Millenials or centenials? May effect ba ang age sa
pagiging committed at magandang performance ng isang crew?
PI1. hindi po
PI2. Sakin hindi naman

RJB: Sa tingin nyo ano kaya yung pinakafactor bakit nagiging committed yung
crew sa trabaho?

PI1: About sa pera. Financial

PI2: Pangangailangan. Yun din.

RJB: Sa tingin nyo nagmamatter ba ang status? Kung regular or under

probationary?

PI1: Wala naman

PI2: Wala rin

RJB: Ano ang advice nyo to other crew para magtagal sa trabaho?

PI1: Pakikisama

PI2: Kung nahihirapan sila, isipin nila bakit sila nagtatrabaho

39| P a g e
Appendix – Transcription of the Interviews

FGD 2 – Regular Interviewees

RJB: Gano na kayo katagal dito sa store?

RI1: 7 months

RI2: 7 months din po.

RJB: Ano ano challenges nyo nung nagstart kayo?

RI1: Ma’am ano kasi sa una nahirapan talaga ako. Dining ako. Galig ako sa Chow
King, 2016 kitchen staff, parang matagal ako natennga. Nanibago. Mahirap. Pero
wala naman madaling trabaho. Kinaya naman

RI2: Sa una pala Ma’am gulong gulo ako, ganto pala yung trabaho madami pala
kinakabisado. Sa soda ako na-assign. Naisip ko na parang ayaw ko na, susuko na
ko. Pero syempre, may dahilan ako. Sabi ko, sabi sakin na dapat may dahilan ka
pag nagtrabaho ka. Yun dun ako kumuha ng lakas. Talagang pinagpatuloy ko.

RJB: Ano ba yung dahilan kung bakit kayo nagtatrabaho?

RI1: Sakin po kasi Ma’am, ano e. Experience din po. Tsaka yun nga rin po. Para di
na ko umaasa sa mga magulang ko. Yung marunong na ko tumayo sa mga sarili
kong paa. Na maprove ko po sa kanila na kaya ko.

RI2: Ako naman gusto ko yung may sarili akong kinikita. Yung mismong ako yung
naghihirap para sa pera ko. Yung di ako nanghihingi, tapos para rin sa mga kapatid
ko yung kinikita ko. Pangalawa po kasi ako sa magkakapatid. Kasi po yung ate ko
nag aaral. Ako po nag papaaral sa kanya.

RJB: Ano yung nakita nyong improvement sa mga sarili nyo bago kayo pumasok,
tapos nung andito na kayo sa store working as service crew?

RI1: Sakin Ma’am, nagimprove po sakin yung galaw, yung bilis. Kasi pag oras na
po ng peak hour na po, nung una po kasi Ma’am nahihiya po ako, naninibago, pero
nung mga tumagal tagal na po, nalaman ko na mga diskartehan, mga galawan.
Kaya ayun po. Na-adopt ko na po. Ayun parang mas madali na yung trabaho.

RI2: Sakin po kasi nung una, mabagal talaga ako tapos konti lang yung nalalaman
ko. Pero nung tumagal tagal talaga bumilis na ko tapos marami pa akong
natutunan. Kumbaga nakuha ko yung sarili kong diskarte.

RJB: Passion mo rin ba pagluluto?

40| P a g e
RI2: Opo.

RJB: Ilang taon na pala kayo?

RI1: 22 years old po.

RI2: 19 years old po.

RJB: Para sa inyo, ano ang ideal leader?

RI1: Ma’am pag sinabing leader, when you say you’re a leader, you must be a
good follower.

RI2: Sya yung nasusunod. Ganun din po Ma’am. Good follower din po.

RJB: (Discussed the three types of leader). Sa tingin nyo, dito sa fastfood industry,
ano ang magwowork best?

RI1: Yung una po. Transactional po.

RI2: Sakin yung hahayaan ka’ng magkamali tapos matututo ka sa mga mali mo.
Yung transformational po.

RJB: Ano sa tingin nyo magiging impact sa commitment ng napili nyong leadership
style?

RI1: Malalaman ko po yung standard tas yung talagang mga dapat at

kinakailangang gawin.

RI2: Sakin Ma’am, yung mga ginagawa ko’ng mali, pwede ko’ng itama.

RJB: Saan nyo nakikita sarili nyo 3 years from now?

RI1: Sakin kasi Ma’am ano e, ano po kasi ako Ma’am, working student po ako.
Tapos sembreak po naming ngayon. Kumbaga nakikita ko ang sarili ko na isa na
pong, kinakaya na pong tumayo sa sarili nyang paa. Isa na pong businessman. Isa
po kasi yun Ma’am sa mga pangarap ko e. ano po kasi Ma’am e, second year
palang po ako. Inabot po kasi ako ng K+12. Kung sakali sana Ma’am ano,
graduating narin sana.

RJB: E 5 yrs from now, ganon parin?

RI1: Ano po Ma’am, nagiimprove narin po. Tsaka ibabagay ko nalang din yung
course ko.

RJB: Ano ba course mo?

RI1: BSBA po.

41| P a g e
RJB: Ikaw, 3 years from now?

RI2: Studyante parin siguro Ma’am. Kasi po Ma’am, graduating po ako ng K+12.
Senior High School po ako ngayon. Dapat po kasi mag aaral na ako ng first year
college kaso parang tinamad ako. So ayun, sabi ko next year nalang. So mageenroll
ka next year? Opo Ma’am.

RJB: Magstay ba kayo kung walang ibang factor? Like gaya neto na gusto nyo
mag-aral or nag-aaral kayo?

RI1: Opo Ma’am

RI2: Yes po.

RJB: Sa tingin nyo, sino mas committed? Millenial or Centennial?

RI1: Sakin Ma’am depende po kasi. Depende sa tao

RI2: Di ko alam. Ma’am wala naman ata

RJB: Sa tingin nyo ano kaya yung pinakafactor bakit nagiging committed yung
crew sa trabaho?

RI1: Misunderstanding. Di kasi maiiwasan yun e. Kailangan may maayos na

communication

RI2: Relationship po

RJB: Sa tingin nyo nagmamatter ba ang status? May epekto bas a commitment at
performangce kung regular or under probationary ang isang crew?

RI1: Yung probationary po. Kasi po kinakailangan nating ipakita yung gilas, yung
galing nya para maging regular po.

RI2: Kailangan mo rin ipakita ang galling mo Ma’am para maging regular ka.

RJB: Ano ang advice nyo to other crew para magtagal sila sa trabaho?

RI1: Kung willing ka tsaka gusto mo yung ginagawa mo, ituloy mo lang. Tsaka ano
po, pakikisama rin po. Magandang pakikisama lang sa trabaho tapos maayos na
pagkakaunawaan. Kung may mali po dun sa isa, pagusapan, wag nagpaplastikan.
Dapat pagusapan po nila.

RI2: Nasabi na nya lahat e.

42| P a g e