Employeee Motivation and Organizational Commitment

8/12/2019 Employeee Motivation and Organizational Commitment

1/62

Institute of

Business Administration

1 |P a g

EmployeeMotivation&

Organizational

Commitment

A Multi Organization survey of

Private Security Companies.

INSTITUT O!

"USINSS

A#MINST$ATION


2/62

Institute of


Table of Contents

BASICINFORMAT

ON

1.

2 |P a g


3/62

Institute of


Aim The objectives of this study are to:1. Determine the level of employee motivation in under survey two Private Security Companies.2. Verify eistence of any variance in motivational level of employees due to difference

professional bac!"round.

3. #plore whether employee motivation differ dependin" upon Scio demo"raphic variables li!a"e$ %ualification and years passed in present profession.

4. Correlate the predictive ability of employ motivation with the or"ani&ational commitment factor

'ethod Descriptive cross sectional study done amon" two private securcompanies. Companies were labeled as Company A$ Company )nterviewin" * +,- respondents /0 each from one company1

3 |P a g


4/62

Institute of


Period of the September 2 December 3-4survey conductionDelivered data 5inal report$ table report$ database and - of 6uestionnaires.

Project 'ana"er 5ai% Ali 7han

Purpose% The primary drive for this study is to provide under survey two private securi

companies$ in particular$ and other operators in "eneral an insi"ht over the employee

motivational level$ that is to say$ in terms of various motivational theories$ where the

employees stand as far as motivation and needs are concerned. (y "ettin" the priorities of jo

motivatin" factors from employees the mana"ers of these two companies may closely !no

what their employees desire from their job in order to "ive their best. Another purpose of th

study was to !now is there any si"nificance between the two cate"ories of employees who a

armed forces and civilian professional$ and their job needs priorities. )t was also intended

hi"hli"ht the difference in motivation level as far as common demo"raphic factors li!e a"

%ualification and number of years served in the present company.

Meto'ology%A survey %uestionnaire was administered amon" the employees of the tw

companies under study to identify their need satisfaction level. A 'ulti*point 9atin" Scale /-*

was used for the -- items.

4 |P a g

(. A)stract


5/62

Institute of


!in'ings%The results eplore at what level of motivation employees of two private secur

companies stands and eactly "ives out what they need from their job or for that matter$ o

what fields mana"er wor!s to !eep their under commands motivated. The trend points alon

"ood wor!in" condition$ job security and "ood wa"es.

Practical Implication%n a broader platform$ we can "enerali&e the employee motivatio

factors of two private security companies to the whole industry thus "ivin" them a lead as

how they should mana"e their companies and what steps will lead to "reater employee

motivation and or"ani&ational commitment.

*alue%)n many local and national "rowin" or"ani&ations$ effort and finance is not invested

determine employee motivation )nde on an annual basis. This study will serve the purpose

the preliminary survey in this re"ard for these two companies in addition to providin" insi"

into employee;s needs to "et their best.

INTRODUCTION

2.

5 |P a g


6/62

Institute of


and =our> sets the "rounds for the private security. The history of private person

security stretches in one form and the other$ from the ancient #"yptians to post ?@-- worl

hether it is the hired personals of +bians$ Bibyans$ Syrians and Sherdens of #"yptia

Pharaoh 9amses the ));s army or the private security "uards of ancient 9ome;s wealth

merchants. Durin" the (y&antine #mpire$ the emperors contracted forei"ners for their ow

personal security$ formin" the Varan"ion


7/62

Institute of


Abraham Bincoln for espiona"e durin" the Civil ar. =ells 5ar"o> and =(rin!s> were the ne

to follow shortly.

The first bur"lar alarm system was sold by #dwin Eolmes in -0 after he purchase

the system desi"ned by Au"ustus Pope. There is conflictin" opinion as to when the fir

proprietary security force formed. A considerable number of scholars attributes Eennery 5o

responsible to refine the concept of in house security to factory wor!ers. The era of


8/62


9/62

Institute of


+.(.(. Measurement of mployee Motivation: All thou"h employee;s motivation

an intan"ible term which can only be measured in non*mathematical e%uations$ the means f

determinin" the level of employee motivation can be both direct and indirect. Direct means a

the eyes and ears of the mana"ement which should be constantly on the loo!out for indicato

leadin" to jud"ment of employee motivation levels. As part of indirect means for measurin

levels of employee motivation$ or"ani&ations carry out surveys. (oth direct and indirect mean

have their merits and pitfalls. hile usin" direct means by the mana"ement$ prejudices li!e

and disli!es$ bossin" attitude and caterin" to the needs of a selected class can lead to wron

results. n the other hand$ indirect means can also be misleadin" unless the users of indire

means understand the re%uirements and the process very clearly and carry out the survey

and samplin" =bjectively.G The survey studies should be anonymous$ thus allowin" freedo

to employees to be honest without fear of any dama"e to their jobs. hile usin" direct mean

)nterviews with employees can "ive a feelin" of bein" intimidated$ but if done correctly will l

the employees !now that their concerns are properly addressed by the mana"ement. Survey

and meetin"s can prove to be "reat tools for identifyin" specific problems or areas$ which hav

been contributin" to lower morale of dissatisfied employees.

ne of the indiscreetly adopted methods used by companies to "au"e the employe

motivation level is throu"h immediate head;s reports. Almost all the security companies

Pa!istan are followin" the colonial hierarchy particularly associated with the armed forces

their business model as far as operations are concerned. The system implemented in suc

institutions for this purpose is confined to receive an ABB 7 concernin" routine matters

operations /employment$ shortfall$ incident H1 and administration /Beave$ overstayed person

9 |P a g


10/62


11/62

Institute of


upon its overall environment$ a salary raise may be %uic!ly for"otten due to the mountin" da

stress of unpleasant job.

#mployees will feel satisfied and cared about whether their wor! environment is saf

honorable and provided with amenities. The employer must ensure for a comfortable$ clea

brea! room with basic necessities. Such primary considerations about the place of assemb

can drastically improve employee motivation levels$ and employees feel pampered and we

cared by their employers.

Above all bac!bone of employee motivation is respect and di"nity of each wor!er an

the respect for the job he performs. Due courtesy and respect must be paid to all employee

by their mana"ement in any !ind of interactions between both. #mployees must be "ive

ample opportunities for discussin" their problems with upper mana"ement and should b

carefully monitored. A"reein" to employees$ demands at all times mi"ht not be possible to th

mana"ement but every time they must be ensured that they are bein" heard and hone

dedications are bein" put in to help them.

+.(..Manager/s role in mployee Motivation% )n today;s dynamic era$ it is rath

important to identify all those factors which affect employee motivation. Companies spend a

hu"e amount of money and effort on pro"rams$ processes$ and factors that have positive

effects on employee motivation and above all trains them durin" their job hours$ thus

comprisin" upon the company8s present productivity but investin" into a future wor! force with

more reliability and s!ills. Certain such factors which will have a deep impact on employees;

productivity must be ta!en into account by the employer$ are as follows.

ob security.

9elationship between mana"ement and employee.

11 |P a g


12/62

Institute of


ob benefits.

Communication channels between employees and mana"ement.

pportunities for use of s!ills and abilities.

9eco"nition of employee job performance.

ob related trainin".

Safety and security in the wor!place.

Compensation.

r"ani&ation;s culture.

Pay and related benefits.

5uture "rowth for the employee within the company.

+.+.Organizational Commitment% r"ani&ational commitment is the wor!er

psycholo"ical bond to the or"ani&ation. The reason behind conductin" these studies is

eplore means to ma!e feel a wor!er "ood about his wor!place thus "eneratin" mo

commitment and productivity for the or"ani&ation. r"ani&ational commitment anticipates jo

related variables li!e turnover$ or"ani&ational behavior$ and job performance.

+.+.(.#efinitions% There are many definitions available for the term or"ani&ation

behavior in literature. ;9eilly /-??1$ defines or"ani&ational commitment as a wor!er

emotional affiliation with the or"ani&ation$ alon" with the feelin" of participation$ contributio

devotion and trust in the or"ani&ation. This perception implies or"ani&ational commitment wi

re"ard to reco"nition of or"ani&ation;s objective by the wor!er and his readiness to achieve th

"oals /'iller I Bee$ 3-1. This "eneral eplanation of commitment relates to the definition

or"ani&ational commitment by Arnold /301 who termed it as a comparative stren"th

12 |P a g


13/62

Institute of


involvement and identification of a wor!er by an or"ani&ation. Another scholar 'iller /3

also eplains or"ani&ational commitment as a condition in which an employee reco"ni&es a

or"ani&ation and its "oals and is willin" to continue the relations. That;s the reaso

or"ani&ational commitment is$ the level where a wor!er is enthusiastic over continuin" h

association for the or"ani&ation and its "oals due to personal interest and values.

Accordin" to 'orrow /-??41$ the phenomenon of or"ani&ational commitment is all abo

attitudes and behaviors. 'iller /341 eplains the term attitude as epression of favor o

disfavor of an event. Eowever /'orrow$ -??41 found that affiliation devotion and reco"nitio

are the few job attributes which represent employee commitment to an or"ani&ation. 'eye

Allen and


14/62

Institute of


or"ani&ation due to anticipated rewards /(ec! I ilson$ 31. This su""est that the reaso

for an employee to wor! for an or"ani&ation durin" this sta"e is merely what he is "ettin"

worth to him /'eyer I Allen$ -??J1.

+.+.+.+. I'entification Stage% After compliance$ the second sta"e is identification sta"

)n this sta"e$ the wor!ers start acceptin" the influence of wor!place and cowor!ers$ so th

they may have their own identity within the or"ani&ation$ ;9eilly$ /-??1. hile from th

sta"e$ employees start ta!in" pride and honor for bein" associated with the or"ani&ationK the

termed the roles they performed within the or"ani&ation as their identity /(est$ -??L1. Durin

this sta"e$ a wor!er stays in the or"ani&ation due to a sheer feelin" of responsibility$ duty an

faithfulness as to the or"ani&ation /'eyer I Allen$ -??J1.

+.+.+.,.Internalization stage: The third and last sta"e of or"ani&ational commitment

internali&ation sta"e. )n this sta"e$ the wor!er reali&ed that the or"ani&ation8s values are sam

as to his values and are satisfyin" his intrinsic or hi"her*order needs. )n this sta"e$ th

or"ani&ational commitment reflects the affective aspect of commitment /'eyer I Allen$ -??J

A level where an employee not only builds a sense of association with enthusiasm to remain

relation. The or"ani&ation and employee enjoy "reat similarities in their values durin" th

sta"e /Suliman I )les$ 31.

+.+.,.Organizational Commitment 0 1evels% 9eichers$ /-?01 defines various leve

of or"ani&ational commitment asK

+.+.,.( 2iger Commitment% This level of or"ani&ational commitment defines a hi"h

de"ree of employee commitment with complete coherence between personal and or"ani&atio

values and readiness to eercise efforts to remain associated with the or"ani&ation$ 9eicher

/-?01. Accordin" to 'iller /341$ a hi"h or"ani&ational commitment means an employe

14 |P a g


15/62

Institute of


starts identifyin" himself with his or"ani&ation. The element of personnel will have to rema

associated with the or"ani&ation relates with an affective aspect of commitment in which a

employee stays in an or"ani&ation because he wants to do so.

+.+.,.+Mo'erate Commitment% )n simple words$ the moderate level of or"ani&ation

commitment is cate"ori&ed with a level at which there is judicious reco"nition of or"ani&atio

values with the correspondin" willin"ness to continue the association with the or"ani&atio

/9eichers$ -?01.

+.+.,.,. 1o3er Commitment% once an employee did not find any similarity between h

and or"ani&ation8s values and is not motivated to completely eert his ener"ies toward th

attainment of or"ani&ation8s "oal and also not enthusiastic to continue his association with th

or"ani&ation$ the employee happens to be at the lower level of or"ani&ational commitmen

henever an employee at this level of commitment "ot an opportunity may leave th

or"ani&ation. The mere reason for their stay within the or"ani&ation is$ they need to stay bein

associated with a continuance dimension of the commitment /'eyer I Allen$ -??J1.

+.+.. Organizational Commitment Management%r"ani&ations are continuous

faced by the challen"es of the chan"in" mar!et. )n order for the or"ani&ation to adapt to th

intense competition in the mar!et place and the rapid chan"es in technolo"y$ it re%uire

or"ani&ational members have to be internally committed /'iller$ 341. The or"ani&ation

then faced by a challen"e of mana"in" its employees; commitment throu"hout$ to ensu

sustainability. 8 9eilly /-??1 states that =to understand what commitment is and how it

developed$ is by understandin" the underlyin" psycholo"y of commitment so that we can thin

about how to desi"n systems to develop such an attachment amon" employees.G )t

therefore$ crucial for the or"ani&ation to first understand commitment in order to mana"e

15 |P a g


16/62


17/62

Institute of


17 |P a g

3.

Research

Methodology


18/62

Institute of


,.(. $esearc O)4ective%'ajor /retired1 '. E Eussain and Captain /retired1 Amm

)sha% started F%ab Security company and Savior Security services in -?4 and 3

respectively. 'ajor Eussain started his venture initially at 7arachi$ which by now has epende

to all the provincial capitals across the country. hereas Savior Securities services are st

confined its operations to 7arachi. They both operate in selective fields of the services$ that

to say$ personal and property security with physical "uardin" only. Captain Ammir contribute

the hu"e success of early be"inners li!e F%ab Security Company to lac! of competition an

ecess of demand. There were very few operators wor!in" within the field at the be"innin" an

18 |P a g


19/62

Institute of


dimensions of duty were alto"ether different$ which are now prevailin". They both !now th

positive relation between employee motivation and customer satisfaction. A motivate

employee whose "oals and objective are same as the or"ani&ation always brin"s hi"h

satisfied customers with hi"her profit mar"ins.

The increasin" competition within the field merits more deliberate mana"ement style

!eep employee motivated. They both were concerned to have a fair idea of what is the level

employee motivation at present in their companies. They were interested in !nowin" is the

any difference in motivation level and positionin" of or"ani&ational commitment as far a

employee8s professional bac!"round of armed forces or civil is concerned. They also want

!now how common demo"raphic factors li!e a"e$ %ualification and year of service in the

present companies have any si"nificance with motivation of employees are concerned.

,.+. $esearc 5uestions%

hat is the level of employee motivation in two surveyed companiesM

Does employee motivation differ dependin" upon the professional bac!"roundM

hat is the effect of followin" socio*demo"raphic variables on employee

motivationM

A"e


20/62

Institute of


security companies were conducted via a 6uestionnaire. The employee samples we

representative byK

A"e$

6ualification$

#perience in number of years and

Professional bac!"round /Armed 5orces r Civilian1

,.. Proce'ure

Collection of data throu"h %uestionnaires.

Analysis of collected data.

Preparation of results.

,.7. Population: Population for this survey will be as followsK

0 employees each of two different security companies.

,.8. Sampling meto'%

A sample si&e of - employees for the two different security companies will b

collected.

Data will be collected from employees throu"h %uestionnaires.

Total sample si&e will be -.

Avera"ely a medium si&e security company holds about 3 to 30 employees

sample si&e employees will be sufficient for our study.

20 |P a g


21/62

Institute of


,.9. Measurement : Instrument selection% Bi!ert scale will be used in all the par

of the %uestionnaires$ where the format of a typical five*level item for the first part of th

%uestionnaire is:

+ot Satisfied at all

+ot Satisfied

somewhat satisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

As this study has to establish whether there is a lin! between employee and custom

satisfaction$ thus the same will be jud"ed by the answers of the respondents$ as they will b

showin" their satisfaction levels.

,.;. *aria)les%

Beadership.

'otivation.

9ewards and Compensation.

#pectations.

ob r"ani&ation.

Work Environment.

,.


22/62

Institute of


A+VA

Pearson product*moment correlation coefficient procedure

Descriptive analysis of factors

ur results are dependent on %uantitative analysis. All fi"ures were assi"ned numeric

values and hence data was hi"hly dependable and the research biases were eliminated. Th

followin" fi"ures represent the structure of the sample this study was conducted on accordin

to the most important demo"raphic variables.

5ualification

T

e respondents ere given the options to se!e"t appropriate age groups to hi"h the# $e!ong. T

respondents from "ompan# A are 2%&3' #ears o!d. 1(.% )* hi"h "ount seven respondents are 31&3

22 |P a g


23/62

Institute of


#ears o!d. 31 of the respondents ho are ((.%) are 3%&%4 #ears o!d* there as none in the "ategor# of

and a$ove #ear age. Bi!ewise$ employees of company ( were made to choose from similar a"

"roups as of company A. Their responses areK four respondents are in the "roup of - to 3

years a"e$ 4O surveyed employees of company ( that is -3 are in the a"e "roup of 30 to 4

years. #i"ht employees a"ed in the set of 4- to 40. 'ost of the surveyed employee who is -

which constitute 4J.0O of the total belon"s to the "roup of 40 to 0L years a"e. There was on

employee epressed his a"e as 00 years.

JO employees of company A$ that is 40 personals are matric as compare to 00O or 3

employees of company (. A"ainst the none of the company A$ company ( does hold -

"uards who are under matric. Company ( does have an ed"e of one employee a"ainst the

of company A$ those are hi"her secondary or e%uivalent.

-O$ that is to say$ all L surveyed employees of company A are havin" the arme

force8s bac!"round. They all are e*service men and "ot retired from forces at different ran!

Comparatively$ 3J employees of company ( are e*service men$ and -4 are civilians.

As far as eperience in wor!in" as a private security "uard is concerned there are fo

"uards of company ( havin" eperience up to ) year a"ainst none from company A. - and 3

employees falls in the cate"ory of - to 4 years wor! eperience in the field from company

and ( respectively.


24/62

Institute of


)n reply to how lon" have you been at your eistin" job$ 3 employees replied in les

than a year$ 3 for the period of - to 4 years$ 0 for 4 to years$ 4 for to ? years and the

were - employees in company A who were puttin" on more than ? years of service at the

current job. Company ( are havin" somewhat different fre%uencies most of their employee

who is - falls in the cate"ory of - to 4 years followed by ? each in the "roups of less than

year and 4 to years$ only L of company ( employees falls in the the cate"ory of to ? yea

and there was no employee in the cate"ory of above ? years of service at their current jobs.

4.

24 |P a g

Literatre Re!ie"


25/62


26/62

Institute of


different levels. These levels are physiolo"ical$ safety$ love@belon"in"$ esteem and se

actuali&ation. The cru of this theory is$ by the time the ur"e of one level needs is satisfied o

diminishes the stren"th of net level needs increases /Batham$ 3J1. Eowever$ this poi

must always be !ept under consideration that it is not necessary that needs of a specific sta"

must be completely satisfied before a man move to net level needs but a person may yet n

be fully contented with one*level need and still pursue for the satisfaction of net level nee

'aslow believes that self*actuali&ation and e"o needs are the hi"her*level needs which cou

never be completely satisfied$ Tesone$ /301. 7eepin" in view the 'aslow;s need hierarch

Champa"ne and 'cAfee in their boo!$ 'otivatin" Strate"ies for Performance and Productivit

A


27/62

Institute of


The need for achievement can be eplained as the human need to accomplish or bein

accepted socially throu"h his abilities. Similarly$ the affiliation need can be termed as th

human desire to ma!e and maintain the associations. The need for power is the will or wis

concernin" the control and influence of the subordinates. 'cClelland observed that it would b

the need which will drive the style for mana"ement. Persons with hi"h affiliation need usua

not to perform well as mana"ers primarily because of their desire to !eep public association

At the same time$ persons that are in desire to maintain a controllable position and are low

affiliation need usually proved to be successful leaders. hereas persons possessin" th

hi"her de"ree of achievement needs$ proved successful as the entrepreneur. /9oss$ -??J1.

.(.,. A'am/s Teory% ohn Stacey Adams in -?4 proposed the e%uity theory. Th

theory is stron"ly influenced by the wor! of an American social psycholo"ist Beon 5estin"

best !nown as co"nitive dissonance. Adams /-?4$ -?01 elaborates co"nitive dissonanc

under two molds. 5irst statin" that the eistence of ine%uity will create strain and the amount

strain is directly proportional to the amount of ine%uity$ that is to say$ more will be the ine%ui

more will be the strain. The second assumption is whenever the ine%uity eists the holder w

try to reduce it. The belief is$ employee will see! a balance between their inputs or th

contributions they made and the outcomes throu"h the or"ani&ation in the forms of "oo

wa"es$ compensations$ benefits and job positions. )t is also believed that people valu

fairness$ this epectation of honest and fair treatment motivates them to !eep affairs

e%uilibrium in relation to their allies and or"ani&ation. henever an employee feels that h

input or efforts are not bein" returned in a fair and e%uitable manner the individual will try t

see! the balance by co"nitive dissonance or by chan"in" the inputs and outputs or even b

partin" with the or"ani&ation$ Carrell I Dittrich$ /-?J1.

27 |P a g


28/62

Institute of


.(.. *room/s =pectancy Teory% Vector E Vroom /-?L1 presented epectan

theory of wor! motivation. The theory eplains the phenomenon of selection of certain cours

of action in an or"ani&ation special while ma!in" decision and leadership. #pectancy theo

proposes that a person will choose to behave in a certain way due to the reason that they a

motivated to pic! a specific behavior out of many available$ as the result of that option is wh

the individual is epectin" more close to their needs. Varoom eplains the motivation as th

phenomenon of selection of a certain option out of many alternatives based upon th

epectations that the selected option will result into fulfillment or at least partial satisfaction

desired need. The theory formulates the behavioral procedure as to how a person choose

one behavior over other. )t also describes how a person ma!es a decision to achieve a resu

which he values.

)n varoom epectancy model$ an individual will be at hi"h level of motivation once thre

conditions are met. 5oremost is the epectation that the person;s effort will be resulted in

"ood standard of performance /#pectancy1. Secondly$ the same very performance will en

with an outcome /)nstrumentality1$ and thirdly that outcome has an importance in individual li

/Valence1. The first condition eplains the association between effort /#1 and the performanc

/P1. The second conditions eplain the relation between performance and outcome or rewar

and the third condition valence measures the value of the outcome or reward for the individua

)n this way$ motivation can be e%uated as.

' , # ) V

here ' stands for motivation$ # is for epectancy and ) and V are for )nstrumentality an

valence respectively. Accordin" to )ssac$ Qerb and Pitt any flaw in epectancy an

28 |P a g


29/62


30/62

Institute of


based on earlier findin"s that supervisor and wor!er relationship has more influence upon th

output then of any other eternal factor and productivity level may vary with inform

associations of wor!ers. #arlier in -?L two researchers Coach and 5rench also establishe

that employees who are bein" "iven the autonomy of settin" their "oals and ta!e a decisio

accepts chan"es more wilfully then those who have been denied such opportunities. Eer&be

evaluates job attitude under three conditions. 5irstly$ demo"raphic variables li!e a"e$ "ende

%ualification$ etc. were used to find the difference. Secondly$ throu"h scaled inventories

wor!er;s morale and job attitudes and lastly throu"h physical observation of the wor!er

Eer&ber" wanted to !now what actuallyK wor!ers desire from their jobs. To "et the answer f

this %uestion either method of as!in" wor!ers to "rade a list of factors in order of their priori

or to strai"ht away as! about their li!es and disli!es and then create a list of factors. Durin" h

research about the factors which affects job attitudes$ Eer&ber" found that not all factors a

same and few of them cause satisfaction and few dissatisfactions. hereas job satisfactio

and dissatisfaction wor!s independently$ thus satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not on th

continuum$ that is to say$ increase in satisfaction will not lessen the dissatisfaction. Eer&be

classification of these factors became the basis of his theory and commonly !nown a

=motivators> bein" those factors which represent satisfaction aspects and =hy"iene> bein

those factors which denote job dissatisfaction. hen we tal! in terms of profession or wo

them motivators are intrinsic in nature. These motivators may include identification$ successe

job pro"ression$ and the wor! itself /9amlall$ 3L1.)n )n the same way hy"iene factors bein

tended to be etrinsic in relation to job and may include wa"es$ personal relation$ an

mana"ement style. )n terms of Eer&ber"$ satisfaction and dissatisfaction are two differe

thin"s. 9emovin" factors causin" dissatisfaction may not increase satisfaction. )t is only jo

30 |P a g


31/62

Institute of


enrichment$ which brin"s motivation at a wor!place$ by removin" factors causin

dissatisfaction will reduce dissatisfaction only /9amlall$ 3L1. )t is necessary for the mana"e

to not only remove or reduce the hy"iene factors in the job but also to loo! upon the motivato

as enhancin" motivation is the prime tas! of mana"ers. Eer&ber" study that jobs which offe

increased responsibilities$ in terms of mana"ement status could be more productive a

compare to jobs$ which offer increased in the number of similar jobs. hile an employe

performin" a job with enhanced responsibility may feel an increased sense of attainmen

pro"ression$ and identification. Eer&ber" believed that enrichment of job$ which ma!es believ

an employee to be more reco"ni&ed$ "row and achieve will increase motivation.

31 |P a g


32/62

Institute of


32 |P a g


33/62

Institute of


33 |P a g

R#SULTS

OF T$#

SUR%#&


34/62

Institute of


34 |P a g

5.


35/62

Institute of


mployee Motivation: The survey %uestionnaire was started with personal informatio

and then employee were as!ed to rate ten employee motivation factors. These motivatio

factors were su""ested by 7ovach and believe to be composed of both intrinsic and etrins

factors /7ovach$ -??0K on"$ Siu$ I Tsan"$ -???1. The purpose of usin" this scale was

!now at what level of motivation towards their job employees of two different private securi

stands. (esides ori"inal ten factors bein" su""ested by 7ovach$ one more %uestion: Rmoneta

incentives for a job well done; were added. The reason for addin" this %uestion was th

associated studies which e%ually hi"hli"hted the importance of compensation /eaver$ -?

9ynes$ ratitu'e for a 4o) 3ell 'one .88 .7(9

Interesting 3or? ,.8( .


36/62

Institute of


Table -: #mployee 'otivation verall 9an!in"s

The surveyed employees positioned the factor Rmana"ement loyalty to employees$;

the top. The factor is$ in fact$ an intrinsic factor$ whereas$ the followin" three factors we

etrinsic consistin" of R"ood wor!in" conditions$; Rjob security$; and R"ood wa"es$; this show

that the private security companies are not loo!in" after the basic or lower order needs

employees; properly. The factors which occupy last two positions were Rsupervisor;s help wi

personal problems; and Rpublic celebration for a job well done$; the results show th

employees want to tac!le their personal problems themselves$ and they do not li!e help. The

are also not very interested in public reco"nition for some achievement.

The private security companies primarily prefer to hire the services of retire

professional soldiersK however$ there is a hu"e number of employees who have the civilia

bac!"round. The one*way analysis of variance /A+VA1 was carried out to find the impact o

motivational variables by the two prominent "roups.

Table 3 demonstrates the results. To display si"nificance in the variable$ the variab

was measured at .0 level.

Motivation !actorsProfessional

"ac?groun'Mean

St'.

#ev.Sig.

'ana"ement loyalty to employeesArmed 5orces L.0 .0?

.03LCivilian L.?L .34


37/62

Institute of



38/62

Institute of


showed si"nificant difference is =a feelin" of bein" involved /p,.41>. +one of the employee

from either professional bac!"round "roup consider it very important factor for their job. --

e*service men employees reflect it as unimportant at all$ whereas all surveyed employee

from the civilian bac!"round reco"ni&ed it as an important factor. The third factor whic

showed si"nificant difference is =supervisor help with personal problem /p,.1>. 0O arme

forces bac!"round employees remained neutral and L-O termed it important while replyin" o

other side 0O civilian employees consider it unimportant.

The findin"s from this study show that there is si"nificant difference between the tw

employee "roups. This table is demonstratin" that armed force8s bac!"round employees ca

more about the variables R"ratitude for a job well done$; and Rpromotion or career developmen

and intrinsic factors are more important to civilian bac!"round employees.

The A+VA was carried out to compare the difference between employee motivation

factors and a"e. Table 4 shows the ratin"s of motivation factors while carryin" out the

analysis of variance for each employee motivation variable and the a"e. This study shows

that different a"e "roups had differences in their opinion about motivational factors. The

si"nificance values that were less than .0 were ="ood wor!in" conditions /p,.1$> ="ood

wa"es /p,.-1$> = =)nterestin" or! /p,.J1$> =a

feelin" of bein" involved /p,.1$> =supervisor helps with personal problem /p,.01$> and

=promotion and career development /p,.-1.> 5actors li!e mana"ement loyalty to

employees$ job security$ tactful discipline and monetary incentives for a job well done showed

no si"nificance difference.

Motivation !actors Age Mean St'. #ev. n Sig.

'ana"ement Boyalty to #mployees -*3L 0. . .J

30*4 L.3 .J3 -J

38 |P a g


39/62

Institute of


4-*40 L.?L .34 -

4*0L L.L0 .- 00

0L 0. . 3


40/62

Institute of


Personal Problems

30*4 4. .JJ -J

4-*40 4.-- .04 -

4*0L 4.-4 .J3- 00

0L L. -.-- 3

Promotion or Career Development

-*3L L.30 .L4

.-30*4 3.J .J03 -J4-*40 4.J .L3 -

4*0L 4.3 -.L0 00

0L L. -.3? 3

Table 4: A+VA * #mployee 'otivation and A"e

Table L displays the employee motivation scale ratin"s with one*way analysis

variance /A+VA1 for each employee motivation factor and the variable %ualification. Th

demo"raphic variable %ualification and employee motivation factors did not differ si"nificantin this study ecept in two factors. The si"nificance values that were less than .0 were =

feelin" of bein" involved /p,.1> and =supervisor help with personal problem /p,.01$>

40 |P a g


41/62

Institute of


Motivation !actors 5ual MeanSt'.#ev.

n Sig

'ana"ement Boyalty to #mployeesFnder 'atric L.3 .4?4

.LLJ'atric L. . -J

ES or Above 0. . 00


42/62

Institute of


in employee motivation variable and duration of stay at present company is bein" displayed

Table 0.

Motivation !actors Bears atpresent Coy Mean St'.#ev. n S

'ana"ement@Supervisor Boyalty

to #mployees

Fp to - year L.4 .JJ

.0-*4 year L. .0- -J4* year L.?4 .30 -*? year L.L0 .?3L 00? year 0. . 3


43/62

Institute of


Table 0: A+VA * #mployee 'otivation and +umber of years passed in present company

mployee Commitment% The net half of the survey %uestionnaire was built on th

scale of or"ani&ational commitment /C61 developed by 'owday$ Steers$ I Porter /-?J?

The or"ani&ational commitment of private security companies; employees was measured usin

nine %uestions from the reduced C6 from 'owday$ Steers$ and Porter /-?J?1.

To display the respondent inclinations in employee motivation factors$ descriptiv

statistics were utili&ed to calculate the mean and standard deviation for each variable. Th

variables are listed in ascendin" order by their means. Table shows the responses for th

study.

Commitment 5actors 'ean Std De

) !now what is epected of me at my job 4.+3 .4,%

) really care about the fate of this or"ani&ation. L. .L?3

) am etremely "lad that ) chose this or"ani&ation to wor! for over others ) was considerin" atthe time ) joined.

L.0J .L?

) am able to do what ) do best every day. L.L? .--

) am proud to tell others that ) am part of this or"ani&ation. L.L? .03

5or me$ this is the best of all possible or"ani&ations for which to wor!. L.L0 .?

) find that my values and or"ani&ation;s values are very similar. L.L- .L?L

) would accept almost any job to !eep wor!in" for this or"ani&ation L.4- .L0

This or"ani&ation really inspires the very best in me in the way of job performance. 4.? .3

Table : r"ani&ational Commitment 9an!in"s

#mployees of under surveyed two private security companies ran!ed =) !now what

epected of me at my job$G that is to say$ these participants co"ni&e what they have to do whe

they "o to wor! every day$ or we can say the wor!ers understand what their duty is. The ne

ran!ed or"ani&ational commitment value is wor!ers really cares about the fate of the

43 |P a g


44/62

Institute of


or"ani&ation. The earlier studied factor of job security may have some influence on prioriti&in

this element so hi"h. The participants in this study also feel that they made a "ood decision b

"ivin" their present companies priority over other available choices. The employee

participated in the study also believe that they are puttin" their best to perform their da

dutiesK and they are also proud to tell others about their or"ani&ation. Still$ the last two ran!e

variable specifies that the or"ani&ation was not successful in inspirin" the employees to "iv

their very best$ and a lar"e majority is unwillin" for any other job within the same or"ani&ation

Commitment !actorsProfessional"ac?groun' Mean

St'.#ev.

Sig.

) !now what is epected of me at my jobArmed 5orces L.4 .L0

.0Civilian L.- .03

) really care about the fate of this or"ani&ation.Armed 5orces L.3 .L

.4LLCivilian L.0 .0-L

) am etremely "lad that ) chose this or"ani&ationto wor! for over others ) was considerin" at thetime ) joined

Armed 5orces L.- .L?-.

Civilian L.4? .03

) am able to do what ) do best every dayArmed 5orces L.L .43

.40Civilian L.- .03

) am proud to tell others that ) am part of thisor"ani&ation

Armed 5orces L.L4 .L?.J

Civilian L.J .L3

5or me$ this is the best of all possible

or"ani&ations for which to wor!.

Armed 5orces L.L0 .43.?

Civilian L.LL .0--

) find that my values and or"ani&ation;s values

are very similar

Armed 5orces L.L .L?4.JL

Civilian L.LL .0--

) would accept almost any job to !eep wor!in" for

this or"ani&ation

Armed 5orces L.3 .4??.

Civilian L.4 .44

This or"ani&ation really inspires the very best in

me in the way of job performance

Armed 5orces 4.J .00J.

Civilian L.0 .0--

Table J: A+VA * r"ani&ational Commitment and Professional (ac!"round

The top four prioriti&e factors displayed in earlier table remains unaffected here also an

showed complete a"reement between two distinct professional bac!"round employees.

44 |P a g


45/62

Institute of


!nown what is epected of me at my job$ ) really care for the fate of this or"ani&ation. ) a

etremely "lad that ) chose this or"ani&ation to wor! for over others when ) was considerin"

the time ) joined$ and ) am able to do what ) do best every day remained important for bo

armed force8s professional bac!"round employees and civilian bac!"round employees. h

carryin" out the analysis of variance /A+VA1 substantial differences can be observed in thre

out of nine or"ani&ational commitment values.

The first si"nificant differences were revealed in the variable$ of =) am proud to te

others that ) am part of this or"ani&ation /p,.J1>. 'ean of employees reply belon"ed

armed forces were L.L4 with the standard deviation of .L? a"ainst the mean value of th

civilian employee8s replies of L.J with standard deviation .L3. L3O armed force

bac!"round employees showed stron" a"reement with this factor$ where as JO civilia

employees stron"ly feel proud to tell where they wor!. The net factor which showe

si"nificant difference is =) would accept almost any job to !eep wor!in" for this or"ani&atio

/p,.1>. nly -?O armed force8s bac!"round employees showed stron" a"reement with th

factor$ where as LO civilian employees stron"ly feel proud to tell where they wor!. +one

the employees from either professional bac!"round "roup consider it very important factor f

their job. --O e*service men employees reflect it as unimportant at all$ whereas all surveye

employees from the civilian bac!"round reco"ni&ed it as an important factor. The third fact

which showed si"nificant difference is =supervisor help with personal problems /p,.1>. 0

armed forces bac!"round employees remained neutral and L-O termed it important whi

replyin" on other side 0O civilian employees consider it unimportant.

Correlations

accept values proud inspires

chose

this

or"an

care

about

fate

best

possible

or"an

epected

of me

able

do be

45 |P a g


46/62

Institute of


involved

Pearson .434 *.40 *.3-4 .3LL *.3 *.-4 .-4 *.? .3

Si". /3*tailed1 .- . .4L .-L .L-? .?- .-J .L?L .J

+ - - - - - - - - -

ob security

Pearson *.L3 *.-34 *.- *.-3- .3- .0-4 .? .0- .J

Si". /3*tailed1 .J .33L .3L .34 .4 .-3 .44L .-L .L

+ - - - - - - - - -

Supervisor;s

help with

personal

problems

Pearson *.30 *.3 *.-3- *.3-4 *.0 .34 *.?- *.3L *.4

Si". /3*tailed1 .-- .L3 .340 .40 .LL .3L .4J3 .LL .J0

+ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?


47/62

Institute of


composed of the vertical column listin" the eleven employee motivation factors: a feelin"

bein" involved$ job security$ mana"ement@supervisor;s help with personal problems$ "oo

wa"es$ interestin" wor!$ tactful discipline$ promotion or career development$ "ood wor!in

conditions$ mana"ement loyalty to employees$ full appreciation for a job well done an

monetary incentive for a job well done$. The columns lays hori&ontally in the table display th

nine or"ani&ational commitment variables: ) would accept almost any job to !eep wor!in" f

this or"ani&ation$ ) find that my values and or"ani&ation;s values are very similar$ ) am proud

tell others that ) am part of this or"ani&ation$ this or"ani&ation really inspires the very best

me in the way of job performance$ ) am etremely "lad that ) chose this or"ani&ation to wo

for over others ) was considerin" at the time ) joined$ ) really care about the fate of th

or"ani&ation$ for me$ this is the best of all possible or"ani&ations for which to wor!$ ) !now wh

is epected of me at my job$ and ) am able to do what ) do best every day. The values of

Pearson product*moment correlation coefficient /r1 can ran"e from *-. to -..

The values are showin" the stren"th of the relationship between the two variables:

shows that there is no relationship$ while -. displays$ a perfect positive and a perfect ne"ativ

relationship will be display by *-. /Pallant$ 341. The interpretation of these values has bee

based upon a ratin"8s scale composed by Cohen /-?1$ /as cited by Pallant$ 341K th

ratin"8s scale is as follows:

r = .10 to .29 or r = -.10 to -.29 small

r = .30 to .49 or r = -.30 to -.49 medium

r = .50 to 1.0 or r = -.50 to -1.0 large

5or predictive ability$ Pearson;s correlation was done usin" the fied effect model to "

the si"nificance. The variables not predictin" the outcomes or not si"nificantly correlatin" we

ecluded. )n Table $ we can find thou"h limited but demonstrates few but si"nifica

47 |P a g


48/62

Institute of


connections between employee motivation factors and or"ani&ational commitment variable

'ana"ement8s loyalty to employees si"nificantly correlates with or"ani&ational commitme

factor$ of =) !now what is epected of me at my job> Ur ,.?$ n , -L and =job security

denotes a positive relationship$ with =) really care about the fate of this or"ani&ation> Ur , .0-

n , -.

48 |P a g


49/62

Institute of


49 |P a g

SUMMAR&

OF T$# R#SULTS

AND

R#COMM#NDATIONS

6.


50/62


51/62

Institute of


issues but most of them bein" i"norant of correct motivation techni%ues either ta!e them a

their industry routine use unre%uired motivational methods.

Appreciation of the problem of employee motivation is the first thin" a mana"er ma

choose to tac!le the problem. (ein" !nowin" that thou"h private security industry

dominantly occupied by e*services personnel and there is still very small share of civilians b

yet the wor!force is composed of two different !inds of the employee$ the e*service men an

the civilian employees$ mana"ers should reali&ed that bein" havin" different wor! eperienc

and routine the two different "roups have different needs..

The employees of two different companies ran!ed the factors in followin" orde

'ana"ement loyalty to employees$ "ood wor!in" conditions$ job security$ "ood wa"e

"ratitude for job well done$ interestin" wor!$ feelin" of bein" involved$ 'onitory incentives for

job well done$ tactful discipline$ supervisor help with personal problems$ and promotion

carrier development.

nce we analy&e these results under 'aslow8s need*hierarchy theory$ the number on

ran!ed motivator$ 'ana"ement loyalty to employees$ is a social factor. Positionin" this fact

at the top may be eplained as bein" eplained by 'ayo /cited by Eer&ber"$ -?0?1$ accordin

to 'ayo$ relationships between wor!ers and their supervisors had alone a "reater effect o

wor!er output than any !ind of manipulation of environmental conditions. Perhaps a probab

reason for this intrinsic motivator bein" at the top priority is in relation to be presently availab

job opportunities$ under wide*spread unemployment and economics uncertainty prevailin

throu"hout the country$ employees mi"ht be desirin" mana"ement loyalty more desperately

this contet. The number two positioned motivator$ "ood wor!in" conditions$ represen

physiolo"ical factor. The factor "raded third was job security$ is a safety factor and the factor

51 |P a g


52/62

Institute of


fourth position is "ood wa"es$ a"ain a psycholo"ical factor. The "radin" of net three facto

reflect that etrinsic motivators are still si"nificant to employees.


53/62

Institute of


of the employees belon" to armed force8s bac!"round$ and discipline is their second natu

thus may not hold very important position in their needs. The two last ran!in" motivatin

factors were Rsupervisor;s help with personal problems; and Rpromotion or career developmen

this also specifies that employees of these two private security companies as far as this stud

is concerned does not want help in their personal problems from their seniors. The fact

which "rabs least importance from the participants in this study was Rpromotion or care

development$; one obvious reason for this can be as most of the samples were e*service ma

who already enjoyed first le" of their profession and promotion or career development may n

be very important for them at this sta"e of their lives.

)n order to measure the impact of motivation between two very important "roups

employees that is e*serviceman and civilians$ the one*way analysis of variance was use

'ana"ement loyalty to employee$ "ood wor!in" condition$ job security and "ood wa"e

maintained e%ual importance for both armed forces professional bac!"round employees an

civilian bac!"round employees. hile carryin" out A+VA$ noteworthy variances we

revealed in three employee motivation variables. Si"nificant difference were revealed in th

variable of ="ratification for the job well done /p,.41>. 'ean of employees reply belon"ed

armed forces were L.J4 with the standard deviation of .L? a"ainst the mean value of civilia

employees reply of L.44 with standard deviation .L0. J0O armed forces bac!"roun

employees termed this factor very important whereas only 44.4O civilian employees consid

it very important. The net factor which showed si"nificant difference is =a feelin" of bein

involved /p,.41>. +one of the employee from either professional bac!"round "roup consid

it very important factor for their job. --O e*service men employees reflect it as unimportant

all$ whereas all surveyed employees from civilian bac!"round reco"ni&ed it as an importa

53 |P a g


54/62

Institute of


factor. The third factor which showed si"nificant difference is =supervisor help with person

problems /p,.1>. 0O armed forces bac!"round employees remained neutral and L-

termed it important while replyin" on other side 0O civilian employees consider

unimportant.

The findin"s of this study shows that there is substantial difference between the tw

employee "roups. Armed forces bac!"round employees care more about the variable

R"ratitude for a job well done$; and Rpromotion or career development$; and intrinsic factors a

more important to civilian bac!"round employees.

The samples were also compared for employee motivation factors and the a"es of th

samples. The employees were distributed amon" five different a"e "roups. Study revealed th

different a"e "roups had si"nificant difference in their opinion about motivational factor

Eowever #trinsic factors li!e "ood wa"es$ job security$ "ood wor!in" condition$ and moneta

incentives for job well done were rated hi"h by employees under all a"e "roups. The stud

could not find very si"nificant difference in motivation due to difference in %ualification

employee;s ecept in variables li!e =a feelin" of bein" involved /p,.1> and =supervisor he

with personal problem /p,.01.>

Alon" with the employee motivation levels$ the outcomes of this study concernin

or"ani&ational commitment of private security company;s employees will also be of some valu

to mana"ers. R) !now what is epected of me at my job$; R) really care about the fate of th

or"ani&ation$ and R) am etremely "lad that ) chose this or"ani&ation to wor! for over others

was considerin" at the time ) joined; were the first three placed or"ani&ational commitme

values by the employees. Eowever$ the factors which occupies last two positions reflects th

this place may not be the top priority for an employee to wor! at and perhaps if "ot a

54 |P a g


55/62

Institute of


opportunity they may not li!e to continue their services at present or"ani&ation. +one of the

are willin" to perform any other job in the same or"ani&ation. ith a view to !now the stren"

and course of relationship between the motivation factors and or"ani&ational commitme

variables the Pearson product*moment coefficient was used. A mi of positive and ne"ativ

relationship were found between these motivation and commitment variables. e !now th

or"ani&ational commitment and employee motivation "o side by side$ "enerally a committe

employee is a motivated wor!er. 'otivation factors li!e job security and mana"ement loyalty

employee displays positive relation with R) am proud to tell others that ) am part of th

or"ani&ation.; This is a constructive relation and displays employee;s attachment to the

or"ani&ation. The Pearson product*moment coefficient analysis thou"h at moderate level b

confirms correlation of employee motivation factors with or"ani&ational commitment indicators

$ecommen'ation% The above presented results implies mana"ers to me

physiolo"ical needs by offerin" a fair competitive wa"e$ brea!s with in assi"nments$ an

recreational allowances li!e tea allowance etc. so that the employee feels comfortable that h

basic needs are satisfied. +et$ a company can ensure off course to an etent that the wo

facility is safe and he has been so e%uipped not only to !eep himself safe but also to h

concerns. The company can also have a fair pro"ressive discipline policy ensurin" jo

security. Also$ the mana"ers can encoura"e employees to participate on wor! teams and@

sponsor informal "atherin"s so employees may sociali&e to help meet their social needs.

rewards and reco"nition pro"ram for "ood performance$ perfect attendance$ and simil

pro"rams could help satisfy the employee;s esteem needs. 5inally$ to help satisfy employee

self*actuali&ation needs$ companies can offer in*house development$ or offer reimburseme

for tuition or relevant fees for hi"h achievements of their children. There are many possibilitie

55 |P a g


56/62

Institute of


for applyin" these needs to drive wor!er8s motivation. )t may not always be very clear wh

needs to be done$ but this is why it8s important for mana"ers to understand these need

theories and be able to reco"ni&e the employee needs and apply appropriate tools to enhanc

motivation.

56 |P a g


57/62

Institute of


57 |P a g

Conclsion


58/62


59/62

Institute of


)t really does not matter under which scholar;s perception we "au"e the wor!forc

motivation level$ in one way or other$ security constitute the basic need of human bein"s.

"ood job not only secure etrinsic needs of an employee but also provide opportunities to fulf

intrinsic needs which actually helps an employee to "et motivated and "ive his whole hearte

efforts for the betterment of the or"ani&ation. The mana"ers should not only ta!e care

employees; salaries$ compensations$ safety and security but also create an environment whic

flourish the attainment of synchroni&ation between personal and or"ani&ation;s "oal. Althou"

!eepin" in view the present economic condition of the country pay and bonuses have

definite positive impact on the motivation and commitment of an employee and whenev

occasions permits the same should be "ranted$ but this point should always be !ept in min

that money is not the conclusive solution of every problem$ )t is the overall environment of th

wor!place which re"ulates motivation and commitment level of an employee.

$eferences%

59 |P a g


60/62


61/62

Institute of


9ynes$ S.B.$


62/62

Institute of


How important is eac o! te !ollowing !actors !or "ou#

1 2 3 4 %

A ob where you feel bein" involved

ob securitySupervisor;s help with personal problems

Employeee Motivation and Organizational Commitment

Documents

Transcript of Employeee Motivation and Organizational Commitment