Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE AND
SELF-EFFICACY IN ENGLISH AMONG EMPLOYEES
IN A BANKING INSTITUTION IN BANGKOK
BY
MR.WEERAYUTH PIANRAPEEKUL
AN INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS IN CAREER ENGLISH FOR
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
LANGUAGE INSTITUTE, THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2016
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE AND
SELF-EFFICACY IN ENGLISH AMONG EMPLOYEES
IN A BANKING INSTITUTION IN BANGKOK
BY
MR. WEERAYUTH PIANRAPEEKUL
AN INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
OF MASTER OF ARTS IN CAREER ENGLISH FOR
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION
LANGUAGE INSTITUTE, THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2016
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
THAMMASA T UNIVERSITY
LANGUAGE INSTITUTE
INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER
BY
MR.WEERA YUTH PIANRAPEEKUL
ENTITLED
WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE AND SELF-EFFICACY IN ENGLISH
AMONG EMPLOYEES IN A BANKING INSTITUTION IN BANGKOK
was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Master of Arts in Career English for International Communication
on June 24, 2017
Chairman
(Associate Professor Noppom Sarobol)
Member and Advisor Af.,Mc,,,.,...- S7� (Nantikam Simasangyapom, Ph.D.)
Dean
(Associate Professor Pomsiri Singhapreecha, Ph.D.)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(1)
Independent Study Paper Title WILLINGNESS TO COMMUNICATE AND
SELF-EFFICACY IN ENGLISH AMONG
EMPLOYEES IN A BANKING INSTITUTION
IN BANGKOK
Author Mr. Weerayuth Pianrapeekul
Degree Master of Arts
Major Field/Faculty/University Career English for International Communication
Language Institute
Thammasat University
Independent Study Paper Advisor Nantikarn Simasangyaporn, Ph.D.
Academic Years 2016
ABSTRACT
With the expansion of international banking business, people from
different regions use English as a medium to communicate when dealing with
financial transactions. However, business possibly suffers if the employees in banking
institutions lack the willingness to communicate in English. This study aimed to
investigate the level willingness to communicate and self-efficacy together with the
relationship between these variables; moreover, the participants’ views on methods to
improve their confidence in English communication were gathered. Data were derived
from 151 employees in a banking institution in Bangkok using a self-administrated
questionnaire. The findings revealed that bank employees possessed the willingness to
communicate and self-efficacy in English at a slightly higher than moderate level and
that the willingness to communicate and self-efficacy were correlated. Employees in a
banking institution valued a training course with native English speaking teachers as
well as self-practice outside the workplace. Bank employees need to enhance their
willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English because a higher level of
willingness to communicate and self-efficacy would make communication in the
banking industry more effective. As this study focused only on an American bank
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(2)
context, it is recommended that the willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in
English in a local bank context should be studied extensively.
Keywords: willingness to communicate, self-efficacy, banking institution
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(3)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The success of my study has been occurred through the encouragement,
guidance and support from several people. The first person who I would like to
express my endless appreciation to is Dr. Nantikarn Simasangyaporn, my advisor.
I was able to overcome academic difficulties because of her intelligence and great
contribution. She always encouraged me with a positive attitude and emphasis on the
possibility of my academic accomplishment.
I would like to thank Ms. Sunanta Vejchalermjit, an experienced banker,
for her constructive advice regarding my research instrument. She was very kind and
supportive when I had an obstacle regarding information about the banking context.
I would also like to thank my friends at the Language Institute,
Thammasat University and the colleagues at my workplace for their encouragement
and support.
The most important people whom I would like to express my appreciation
to again are the 151 participants in this study. Their opinions were a key factor for the
success of this study. Lastly, I would like to thank my family for long-lasting love,
understanding and support.
Mr.Weerayuth Pianrapeekul
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(4)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT (1)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (3)
LIST OF TABLES (7)
LIST OF FIGURES (8)
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Statement of the problem 2
1.3 Objective of the study 3
1.4 Research questions 4
1.5 Scope and limitation of the study 4
1.6 Significance of the study 4
1.7 Definition of the terms 5
1.8 Organization of the study 5
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 7
2.1 Language proficiency 7
2.2 Definition of willingness to communicate 7
2.3 Definition of self-efficacy 10
2.4 Relevant studies in an international context 12
2.5 Relevant studies in Thai context 14
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(5)
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 17
3.1 Design of the study 17
3.2 Context of the study 17
3.3 Participants 18
3.4 Procedure and research design 18
3.5 Research instrument 19
3.5.1 Data collection 20
3.5.2 Data analysis 20
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS 22
4.1 Personal attributes of the participants 22
4.2 Level of willingness to communicate in English 25
4.3 Level of self-efficacy in English 32
4.4 Relationship between willingness to communication and self-efficacy 35
4.5 Open-ended questions 37
4.5.1 When are you most comfortable to talk to someone in English? 37
4.5.2 In terms of listening and speaking, what kind of activity do you
think you can do well? 38
4.5.3 What can help bank employees to be more confident when
communicating in English? 38
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 40
5.1 Summary of the study 40
5.1.1 Objective of the study 40
5.1.2 Participants, instrument and procedure of the study 40
5.2 Summary of findings 41
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(6)
5.2.1 Personal attributes information 41
5.2.2 Report of level of willingness to communicate in English 42
5.2.3 Report of level of self-efficacy in English 42
5.2.4 Report of relationship between willingness to communicate and
self-efficacy 42
5.2.5 Report of open-ended question regarding the method to help
employees in a banking institution in Bangkok to be more confident
when communicating in English. 43
5.3 DISCUSSION 43
5.3.1 Level of willingness to communicate in English 44
5.3.2 Level of self-efficacy in English 44
5.3.3 Relationship between willingness to communication and
self-efficacy in English 45 5.3.4. The method to make bank employees more confident when
communicating in English 46
5.4 CONCLUSION 46
5.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY 47
REFERENCES 48
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A 52
BIOGRAPHY 60
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(7)
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
3.1 Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of variables in the questionnaire 20
4.1 Gender of the participants 22
4.2 Age of the participants 23
4.3 Educational level of the participants 23
4.4 Corporate title of the participants 24
4.5 Years of Employment of the participants 24
4.6 Attending to English listening and speaking course of the participants 25
4.7 Self-evaluation towards oral English proficiency of the participants 25
4.8 Level of willingness to communicate in English with English native
speaking customers 26
4.9 Level of willingness to communicate in English with Non-English native
speaking customers 28
4.10 Level of willingness to communicate in English with foreign colleagues 30
4.11 Level of self-efficacy in English 32
4.12 Spearman Correlation between willingness to communicate and
self-efficacy in English of employees in a banking institution in Bangkok 36
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
(8)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
2.1 Heuristic model of variables influencing WTC 8
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In the age of globalization, the world has become a smaller place for people to
travel and interact. In this sense, English language takes a role of lingua franca in
several regions of the world. Recently, the countries of South-East Asia have made an
agreement to establish an association for regional cooperation and it known as the
ASEAN Economic Community (AEC). This agreement offers opportunities in the
form of a huge market of US$ 2.6 trillion and over 622 million people (ASEAN
Economic Community, 2016). The determination from AEC’s principle results in
unlimited allocation of people and business executives; thus, it goes without saying
that English language is used as a medium in communication to support the business
growth in ASEAN countries.
In a borderless market like the AEC, there is no exception for banking
business. The banking sector plays a crucial role to facilitate cross-countries financial
transactions. People from several regions need to transact both incoming and outgoing
funds to support their businesses or personal expenses. Banks are where foreigners
visit first when they want to do money transactions. People from overseas need to
open bank accounts or they might apply for credit cards. Moreover, discussion is
needed when foreigners wonder about product features or benefits. Upon completing
all of these activities, English is utilized as a medium of communication between bank
employees and customers. Despite the rising importance of English, some bank
employees avoid to communicate with foreign customers.
The theories that can best explain this situation are the willingness to
communicate (WTC) and self-efficacy principle. Willingness to communicate
accounts for avoidance or initiation of communication in English language. An
individual’s willingness to communicate is usually changeable, depending on many
components, namely, the level of acquaintance among the interlocutors, number of
participants in the discussion, the topic of the discussion, and the language used for
discourse in the communication. For example, bank employees have to change
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
2
language from Thai to English when they need to explain terms and conditions of
banking product to foreign customers, so it affects their WTC (Macintyre, Dornyei,
Clement, & Noels, 1998). Therefore, the level of willingness to communicate could
be a factor influencing the avoidance and approaching communication in English.
Aside from WTC, self-efficacy also explains people’s behavior in using English as a
medium to communicate. The local bank employees regularly face the difficulty in
using English to interact with non-Thai customers. In this sense, self-efficacy
accounts for one’s behavior in dealing with difficult and aversive experiences. The
self-efficacy of each individual affects how people deal with obstacles in
communication (Bandura, 1977). If communicating in English is defined as an event
that affects bank employees’ life, the self-efficacy principle seems to explain why
some bank employees avoid whereas some initiate communication with foreigners.
Willingness to communicate and self-efficacy are used as variables in the
conceptual framework of several studies and these variables have been widely tested
with undergraduate participants. Researchers have carried out studies with college
students who are outside their home countries and the learners who are studying
English as a second or foreign language. (e.g. Peng, 2007; Robson, 2015; Mirsane,
2016). Nevertheless, little research has been done on the willingness to communicate
and self-efficacy in English language among working adults. The environment in
business contexts also impacts WTC and self-efficacy in different ways. An
investigation of WTC and self-efficacy in English of the graduate is thus beneficial.
1.2 Statement of the problem
In Thailand, bank employees might encounter obstacles to communicating
with foreign customers and international colleagues because they use English as a
foreign language. According to the report of Education First, the workforce in
Thailand is in the lowest English proficiency band. People in the low English
proficiency band are characterized by their inability to understand and interact in
complex discourse. The English language proficiency of the workforce in the banking
sector is at a moderate level and it might cause difficult interactions in English
language of bank employees (EF English Proficiency Index for Companies, 2016).
With the low English proficiency of employees in this context, foreign customers or
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
3
non-Thai coworkers are neglected and it leads to failure across the business. From
observing real-life situations, the problem in a banking context is the avoidance to
communicate in English of employees. The majority of bank employees avoid
communicating with foreign customers and non-Thai colleagues while few bankers
initiate communication. For example, the queries in the business discussion are not
promptly responded to, which makes some task unnecessarily time-consuming and
annoys foreign co-workers during meetings. Moreover, the avoidance of speaking
English with the customer brings about job procrastination. The job backlog increases
over the time and finally it must be allocated to other colleagues who have a better
English proficiency. From my personal experience, other staff with better English
proficiency consider this solution as unfair, which results in negative feedback to their
manager at year-end appraisals.
1.3 Objectives of the study
1.3.1 To investigate the level of willingness to communicate in English among
employees in a banking institution in Bangkok.
1.3.2 To investigate the level of self-efficacy in English among employees in a
banking institution in Bangkok.
1.3.3 To investigate the relationship between willingness to communication
and self-efficacy in English among employees in a banking institution in Bangkok.
1.3.4 To find out the method for improvement which helps employees in
banking institutions in Bangkok to be more confident when communicating in
English.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
4
1.4 Research questions
1.4.1 What is the level of willingness to communicate in English among
employees in a banking institution in Bangkok?
1.4.2 What is the level of English self-efficacy among employees in a banking
institution in Bangkok?
1.4.3 What is the relationship between willingness to communication and self-
efficacy in English among employees in a banking institution in Bangkok?
1.4.4 What method improvement can help employees in banking institutions in
Bangkok to be more confident when communicating in English?
1.5 Scope and limitations of the study
Bank employees are usually assigned to work at the branches in order to serve
customers closely. Some bankers work in downtown areas, where the population of
foreigners is larger, while some are in suburban areas, resulting in dissimilar
opportunities to speak to foreigners. Considering the limitation about the area,
launching a research instrument to cover the whole population would be difficult.
Therefore, the scope of this study was narrowed down to Thai employees in American
Bank. The researcher selected employees in an American bank who usually work in
English context to be the subjects in this study because employees in American banks
have more opportunities to interact with foreigners compared to local bank
employees. This study also focuses on oral English communication because the
problem in the context entirely relates to oral communication.
1.6 Significance of the study
The purpose of this study was to explore the level of willingness to
communicate and self-efficacy level in English communication together with the
relationship between WTC and self-efficacy of employees in a banking institution in
Bangkok. The results of this study may fill a gap in the field of willingness to
communicate and self-efficacy, particularly in the context of Thai working adults.
Equally important, the findings may benefit other relevant parties, such as senior
management members in the bank or trainers in the bank, enabling them to better
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
5
strategize training curriculums in order to minimize employees’ obstacles to speaking
English in the banking sector.
1.7 Definition of the terms
Willingness to communicate refers to the psychological readiness of
employees in a banking institution to initiate or avoid English communication when
the opportunity arises together with no condition.
Self-efficacy refers to bank employees’ beliefs regarding their perceived
competency to be involved in oral English communication and whether it influences
bankers’ behavior to initiate or avoid oral English communication.
Employee in banking institution refers to a person who is employed by an
American banking institution in Bangkok and works in the consumer banking section.
Consumer banking refers to banking business that provides services such as
savings and checking accounts, investment, mortgages, debit cards, ATM cards and
credit cards to individual consumers only.
English native speaking customer refers to a person of non-Thai nationality
who uses a service of an American bank and speaks English as the mother tongue.
Non-English native speaking customer refers to a person of non-Thai
nationality who uses a service of an American bank and speaks English as a second or
foreign language.
Foreign colleague refers to a non-Thai citizen who regularly uses English as a
medium in the communication and works together with the participants in an
American bank.
1.8 Organization of the study
The study of willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English among
bank workers in Bangkok comprises five chapters.
Chapter 1 introduces the background and gives an overview of the statement
of the problem that led to this study. Moreover, this chapter states the major
components of this research including research questions, objectives of the study,
scope and limitations of the study, significance of the study, definition of the terms
and lastly, the organization of the study.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
6
Chapter 2 considers the principle of willingness to communicate and self-
efficacy in English, and likewise the previous works in the area of willingness to
communicate and self-efficacy are discussed.
Chapter 3 explains the context of the study and discusses the design of the
study together with research instrument. Furthermore, this chapter explains the
characteristics of the participants in this research study, the procedures, data
collection as well as the statistical analyses deployed in this study.
Chapter 4 reports the statistical results obtained from the survey. The data is
illustrated in the form of percentage, mean, standard deviation and correlation
statistics to describe the participants’ demographic data, as well as measure the levels
and relationships of the variables.
Chapter 5 concludes the results from the study and also discusses the results
by explaining, comparing them with previous work and theory. In addition, this
chapter contributes suggestions for future research.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
7
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The principles of willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English are
reviewed in this chapter. The theoretical perspectives are also evaluated and
discussed.
2.1 Language proficiency
Language proficiency is considered to be more important since it benefits the
individual in terms of economics. It is related to culture adaptation and social class
migration, which may enhance economic status. Language proficiency has a positive
influence on the income rate of the individual (Tainer, 1988). Furthermore, people
who are proficient in multiple languages can gain more opportunities in several
aspects such as career, education, social status (Tubergen & Kalmijn, 2009).
Obviously, language proficiency has an influence in business contexts. It can be an
indicator of people’s success or failure in their occupation, so with this notion,
language proficiency should be considered as influencer in this study.
Language proficiency refers to an individual’s capability to utilize language in
the appropriate way depending on the particular situation; meanwhile, language
proficiency also has connection with linguistic knowledge, comprehension and usage
towards language skills, listening, speaking, reading and writing (Gottlieb, 2006). The
components of language proficiency comprise knowledge in language and the ability
to exercise both organizational competence and pragmatic competence (Bachman &
Clark, 1987).
2.2 Definition of willingness to communicate
English language is widely used as an international language currently.
Learning the English language has become a way to succeed or achieve great results
in communication at the international level, which leads learners to a higher status in
terms of social class. Dornyei & Shehan (2003), as cited in Alqahtani, state that
English is a globally perfect language and very useful in the current business setting
(Alqahtani, 2015). Because of this sense, many individuals also try to learn English
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
8
language but not every English language learner can reach higher levels of English
language proficiency. Some people can speak English fluently while others face
difficulty in communicating in English though their start point is likely similar. This
circumstance can be explained by the Willingness to Communicate model (WTC).
One of the considerable notions of second language acquisition (SLA) and
communication is WTC (Peng, 2007). McCroskey and associates introduced the
principle of willingness to communicate in order to illustrate the picture of an
individual’s performance when communicating in the first language. Later on,
MacIntyre and associates also utilize the WTC concept to explain the communication
phenomena in a second language environment.
Figure 2.1 Heuristic model of variables influencing WTC
McIntyre and associates present the WTC model in form of a pyramid, which
indicates the vital precursors to L2 communication. The individual’s attributes,
namely, communication apprehension, perceived communication competence,
introversion-extraversion and self-esteem also have relationships to each other
according to the WTC concept. The communication apprehension and perceived
communication competence according to MacIntyre affect WTC. These elements are
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
9
the result of traits such as shyness, self-belief and anomie. However, the individual’s
WTC is also changeable because there are variables that affect the degree of WTC.
In this sense, the variables refer to the conversation setting that have an effect
on the WTC of the individual, the topic and formality in the conversation, the number
of interlocutors or even their attitudes towards each other (MacIntyre, Dornyei,
Clement, & Noels, 1998). Apparently, the language learner needs to engage in
communication in order to obtain better language acquisition. The frequency of the
opportunity to interact in particular L2 settings and the improvement in language
proficiency are derived from the willingness to communicate (Robson, 2015).
Moreover, fear of speaking, low self-esteem and the degree of un-shyness or shyness
of the individual seem likely to be an influencing factor towards WTC (Baker &
MacIntyre, 2000 cited in Alqahtani, 2015). Nevertheless, shifting the language of
communication apparently can change the atmosphere when one reaches out to others,
so a deviation of WTC occurs. The WTC hierarchy in a second language categorizes
the variables into six layers including communication behavior, behavioral intention,
situational propensities, affective-cognitive context and, lastly, social and individual
contexts. The communication behavior is the outcome of the integration of other
variables and its outcome also results in the use of second language. The individual
who moves up through the components and gets to level I will take action in the L2
environment using L2 as usual (MacIntyre, 1998).
WTC explains the possibility of the individual’s involvement in the
communication when the opportunity to share information in L2 occurs (Richard
Clement, 2003). Anxiety in L2 communication alongside the perceived ability in L2
communication of each individual predicts the degree of WTC in L2 whereas the
degree of WTC also relates to the frequency of using L2 in communication. In
addition, trait-like personality, setting, motivation and attitude towards the other
speaker, and the communication capability of the individual impact WTC in L2
utilization (Tomoko Yashima, 2003). The nature of WTC is also flexible and the
degree of WTC is influenced by multiple variables including stable (trait-like) and
situational (state-like) component, which are derived from particular situations (Cao
and Philp, 2006 cited in Inigo Yanguas & Alayne Flores, 2014). Willingness or
unwillingness to communicate in L1 doesn’t apparently represent phenomena in L2.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
10
Furthermore, the variables in L2 WTC are more difficult to understand, compared to
the components of L1 WTC (MacIntyre, 1994 as cited in Mansoureh & Mona, 2016).
From the opinion of various scholars mentioned above, WTC is a vital element in L2
teaching that can apply to several English language users who recognize English
language as their L2. The WTC model explains the variables affecting the ability to
use English language in the communication of each individual show why some
individuals tend to be enthusiastic to use English language. Hence, it is suitable to
follow WTC theory to study the actual phenomena and level of WTC of individuals
outside the classroom in intercultural business contexts surrounded by English
language speakers.
2.3 Definition of self-efficacy
Self-efficacy is the belief in one’s ability to cope with issues that come into
one’s life. The self-efficacy of each individual is different. It depends on assumptions
towards some particular circumstance or element along the way to accomplishment.
People with high self-efficacy have a tendency to take on challenges because they
maintain a can-do attitude whereas lower self-efficacy usually leads people to
negative consequences. For example, when high efficacious students confront very
difficult questions during a mathematics examination, they will put more effort and be
more persistent to overcome the obstacle while the low efficacious students avoid it.
In general, self-efficacy is built up based on many components. Scholars in the
field of psychology have examined how different variables affect self-efficacy.
S elf-efficacy is derived from main four sources. Mastery experience also relates to
the success of an individual, which creates a strong belief in the individual’s personal
efficacy; on the other hand, failure decreases the degree of self-efficacy. Not only can
personal experience build up self-efficacy but it can also undermine the individual
depending on the success or failure and the expected result. The second source of self-
efficacy is vicarious experience. This is different from mastery experience. Vicarious
experience is indirect experience of the individual since it comes from seeing people
who share the same characteristics and consider their success or failure. Success or
failure of the model also impacts one’s self-efficacy based on how similar it is to the
individual. Social persuasion also strengthens one’s beliefs about their capability to
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
11
achieve a task. If people are persuaded verbally that they have enough ability to
accomplish a task, they firmly utilize their capability in order to achieve the goal. A
sense of self-efficacy also is developed by encouragement from the other people as
well. Emotional and physical reaction is the last component that influences one’s
self efficacy. It is a state in which people exist in a particular moment. For example, if
people are stressed or sick, the confidence in their own capability becomes lesser
compared to when they have positive emotions or strong health (Bandura, 1994)
Self-efficacy has been defined as the perceived competence of an individual to control
the process in order to attain achievement (Bandura, 1997 as cited in Yerdelen,
McCaffrey, & Klassen, 2016). The quality of self-efficacy indicates how individuals
cope with a particular challenge or difficulty, This can refer to both the effort level
and persistence of an when dealing with difficulties along the way to achievement of a
targeted mission (Bandura, 1977). According to Bandura (Bandura, 1997 as cited in
Erozkan, Dogan, & Adiguzel, 2016), the ability to realize, foresee and deal with
situations, other people or even oneself is a noticeable quality of self-efficacy. People
maintain these abilities at somewhat different levels, so self-efficacy differs in one
individual from other.
The person who maintains high self-efficacy has a positive intention to put
more effort when dealing with a difficult job but the opposite one will be defeated by
the perceived mindset of fear, unhappiness and incompetence (Erozkan, Dogan, &
Adiguzel, 2016). Self-efficacy refers to a self-evaluation of one’s capability toward a
course of action which is required to overcome an obstacle in a particular
circumstance and people usually make predictions based on their assessment of self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1986 as cited in Saka, Bayram, & Kabapinar, 2016). People with
high self-efficacy can physically and mentally deal with difficult situations; on the
other hand, people with low self-efficacy make a lesser effort when encountering
challenging tasks (Gordon et al., 1998; Pajares,2002 as cited in Saka, Bayram, &
Kabapinar, 2016). In this sense, self-efficacy can roughly account for the
achievement level of people in several social contexts. Self-efficacy will lead people
to do or not do something. It not only reflects the decision making process, but also
affects behavior in a particular circumstance.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
12
2.4 Relevant studies in an international context
Tomoko Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, and Kazuaki Shimizu (2004) conducted a
study with Japanese adolescent learners of English to investigate the antecedents of
the willingness to communication (WTC) in L2. The study found that the participants
with better WTC scores maintained communication with a host longer and more
frequently during a sojourn when compared to those with lower scores. Similarly,
participants who regularly initiated communication in classroom also had more WTC
in L2 discourse. For the antecedents of WTC, the perceived competence in
communication of the individual was related to WTC. Self-confidence in L2
communication of the interlocutor also affected WTC in L2.
Peng (2007) studied the willingness to communicate in an L2 and integrative
motivation among college students in an intensive English language program in
China. The study was conducted based on the belief that willingness to communicate
in a second language (L2 WTC) plays a crucial role in second language acquisition
and communication. Questionnaires were distributed to 174 medical college students
in order to measure L2 WTC of the participants. The study revealed that the
motivation played the major role in anticipating L2 WTC while integrativeness
predict L2 WTC to a lesser degree. On the other hand, attitude towards the learning
situation did not affect L2 WTC. Motivation was the key driver for success in L2
learning alongside competency in L2 communication. Therefore, motivation and
integrativeness were identified as predictors of L2 WTC.
Robson (2015) conducted qualitative research together with a quantitative
approach to elicit data from 23 high-proficiency Asian L2 English learners for nine
weeks during an academic preparation course at a university in England. It was
determined that with high level of WTC, a learner’s oral output including fluency,
accuracy and complexity was somewhat better. The study measured the change in the
utterances of subjects over a nine-week period. The data showed that the interlocutor
and familiarity of the topic in communication had a relationship to the performance of
the subjects in the study. This conclusion was supported by the study of Wolf (2013)
as cited in (Robson, 2015). The students exchanged ideas with the fellows in English
in mechanical and argumentative essays and had more interest in their own topics,
compared to topics taken from a textbook. Thereby, an increase in WTC is from self-
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
13
selection of the topic. Moreover, the research looked at the relationship between WTC
and learner’s attributions, which are fluency, accuracy, complexity and learner
engagement. The results indicated a positive correlation for some attributes, namely,
complexity and length of turn.
Nasiri, Suzani, Babamoradi, and Mohammadi (2016) studied the relationship
between willingness to communicate and decultuartion. This study concentrated on
cultural challenges, which are deculturation, together with willingness to
communicate. Two kinds of questionnaires were distributed to 50 female English
students of Radmehr English Language Center in Iran. The first type of material was a
Home Cultural Attachment Scale (HCAS) based on crucial variables including
religious, Iranian, Cultural, Artistic and Western Attachment; meanwhile, the rest was
also designed using the Willingness to Communicate concept. The result showed a
significant relationship between deculturation and WTC. The student who aimed to
communicate outside the class considered learning English as a self-benefit. On the
other hand, the willingness to communicate inside the class indicated a desire to show
superiority among fellow students.
Yerdelen, McCaffrey, and Klassen (2016) conducted a longitudinal study of
students’ anxiety and procrastination together with the relationship to self-efficacy for
self-regulation of these principles. The researchers used the Growth Curve Modeling
four times during the semester to analyze the 182 participants, who were
undergraduate students. The result showed an inverse correlation between
procrastination and academic anxiety. Procrastination increased over the semester but
academic anxiety went in the opposite direction. At the beginning, high level of
anxiety and procrastination had a relationship to low levels of self-efficacy for self-
regulation. Over the semester, the degree of procrastination increased but academic
anxiety also decreased. Students’ procrastination and anxiety were correlated at the
beginning of the semester. Moreover, at the initial measurement period, high levels of
anxiety and procrastination were significantly related to low levels of self-efficacy for
self-regulation, whereas the rate of change in anxiety and procrastination over time
were not predicted by students’ initial levels of self-efficacy for self-regulation.
Saka, Bayram, & Kabapinar (2016) examined the relationship between the
teaching practice of prospective science teachers and their self-efficacy in teaching.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
14
The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI) was used to measure 125
prospective science teachers’ self-efficacy level and determine the study unit. The
purposive sampling method was used in the research. There were three groups of self-
efficacy, i.e., highest, lowest, and average, and the study group comprised two from
each group. The researchers conducted this study with the qualitative approach using
observation, interviews and documents to collect data from the prospective science
teachers who were in the final year. The conclusions made from content analysis
revealed that the level of self-efficacy of the prospective teachers was different but
they also shared the same idea that a student-centric method was the best approach in
the teaching process. The result contrasted the prediction. The teachers with high
levels of self-efficacy didn’t exhibit a high teaching performance; meanwhile, low
self-efficacy teachers might get the content across better.
2.5 Relevant studies in a Thai context
Jongsermtrakoon (2009) sought to determine the level of affective variables,
namely, international posture, English learning motivation, and confidence in English
communication together with WTC in English, and the English communication
behaviours of Thai secondary school students. In addition, the researcher aimed to
investigate the model of English communication in Thai contexts as well as the
relationship between those affective variables, willingness to communicate and
English communication. Questionnaires were distributed to 438 secondary school
students in Bangkok accompanied by classroom observations and interviews. The
results demonstrated that the English learning motivation of the participants was at a
high level while other variables were classified at a moderate level. Regarding the
relationship between the five variables, WTC in English was correlated with English
communication behaviours at a moderate level while WTC in English and English
communication behaviours were correlated with affective variables at a low level.
From the observation, the frequency in English communication of high WTC students
was higher when compared to the low WTC students. Moreover, the data from
interview stated that the similar level of affective variables for both high and low
WTC students.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
15
Anyadubalu (2010) studied 318 students at a secondary school in Bangkok.
The researcher investigated the participants’ perception of self-efficacy and anxiety in
English language. In addition, the study intended to explore the relationship among
those variables and the participants’ English ability. The statistical analysis
demonstrated a moderate negative relationship between anxiety and performance in
English language whereas there was no significant relationship between self-efficacy
and English language performance. The relationship between English language
anxiety and self-efficacy was moderate in a negative way. Interestingly, the results
revealed that self-efficacy and English language anxiety were influential predictors.
Therefore, the findings clearly indicated that the paramount predictors of English
language performance were English language anxiety and self-efficacy.
Sato (2011) conducted a study to find out the level of self-confident and
willingness to communicate focusing on English activities in the classroom and
compared the relationship between self-confidence and willingness to communicate
level. Data were derived from 65 students who studied in a Master of Arts program in
English for Careers at the Language Institute Thammasat University. The quantitative
method was used to demonstrate the level of self-confidence and willingness to
communicate of the participants. The resulted showed that the participants’ self-
confidence and willingness to communicate level in L2 were high when speaking with
a classmate or in a small group discussion with a simple topic. However, the degree of
self-confidence and willingness to communicate in L2 became lower if the situation
was more formal such as an academic discussion or a debate activity. In terms of the
relationship, self-confidence and willingness to communicate in L2 were strongly
correlated.
Boonsongsup (2012) aimed to examine whether demographic differences
affect willingness to communicate and communication apprehension in English.
Moreover, the researcher intended to find out the relationship between willingness to
communicate and communication apprehension in English among Thai employees. A
questionnaire was utilized to gather the data from 420 Thai employees in Bangkok
and then the data were analysed by descriptive, inferential and correlation statistics.
The investigation revealed that the personal attributes, namely, years of experience
and self-perceived English competence, influenced willingness to communicate and
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
16
communication apprehension. Age didn’t affect communication apprehension yet this
variable was correlated with willingness to communicate. According to the result, the
level of willingness to communicate of the subject was identified at a moderate level
if the communication took place among friends in both small and large groups; on the
other hand, participants’ WTC was reported at a low level when the interlocutors was
a stranger. Regarding communication apprehension scores, the average
communication apprehension score was moderate. The score was higher in
communication taking place in public contexts whereas the communication
apprehension score was lowest in a group context. Regarding the relationship between
willingness to communicate and communication apprehension, the study surprisingly
demonstrated that these variables had a negative relationship.
Simasangyaporn (2016) attempted to discover the level of self-efficacy and the
relationship between the participants’ self-efficacy and listening comprehension
performance in English among Thai undergraduate students. The study also examined
whether a program of listening strategy instruction could enhance their level of self-
efficacy and listening comprehension in English. The study was a quasi-experimental
mixed method and the participants were 161 Thai undergraduate EFL students in
Thailand. The findings revealed that the participants’ self-efficacy level was low and
the correlation statistics indicated a moderate but significant relationship between
self-efficacy and listening comprehension. Moreover, the comparison between the
intervention and comparison groups revealed that, after strategy instruction, the
improvement in self-efficacy of the intervention group was higher than that of the
comparison group but not to a significant level. However, the intervention group
improved their listening proficiency at a significantly higher level in comparison. The
study also provided qualitative evidence that the listening strategies of the
intervention group resulted in a better listening comprehension level whereas the
control group did not change much.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
17
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Design of the study
The purpose of this study was to measure the level of willingness to
communicate and self-efficacy and whether WTC and self-efficacy affect the English
oral communication of bank workers. The primary sources related to willingness to
communicate, self-efficacy and language proficiency were used to construct the
research instrument. The present study is quantitative cross-sectional study using a
questionnaire. According to the purpose of the study, the questionnaire was used to
gather the data from the participants while descriptive statistics were used to explain
the level of WTC and self-efficacy of the participants in order to answer the research
questions. Self-administered questionnaires were presented to 15 pilot participants.
The pilot participants’ comments led to adjustments to some questions to make them
more understandable.
3.2 Context of the study
Globalization in the banking business has caused peoples across the world to
interact with several purposes in this industry. For instance, business executives from
the United States may need to open bank accounts to facilitate financial transactions
while setting up new businesses in Thailand. Expatriates who work for multinational
companies usually prefer to hold credit cards to support living expenses while living
in Thailand. Furthermore, discussions in English with foreign colleague regularly
occur in foreign banks. The context of this study was an American bank located in
Bangkok where the employees of the bank certainly have a chance to use English in
communication during working hours in different forms and frequency. It depends on
the individual’s job responsibility. For example, the credit operation staff needs to
discuss with customers via telephone when processing credit card applications;
meanwhile, sales representative need to call back customers to explain product
benefits when the customer leaves a message on the website. Moreover, in this
American bank, all work-related documents are in English language while video
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
18
teleconference regularly uses English language as the medium to interact. The
abovementioned situations portray working context in the American bank. The study
aimed to investigate why some bankers initiate English language communication
while others avoid it.
3.3 Participants
The researcher used the purposive sampling method to select employees in an
American bank because their working context certainly relates to English language.
Therefore, the international setting in an American bank is a possible factor which
reflects English language issue compared to a local bank (Holmes, 2013). The
research instrument was distributed to the 151 participants face to face using the
convenience sampling method.
3.4 Procedure and research design
This study was survey research that intended to collect data regarding the
willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English of the employees in an
American bank. The survey aimed to investigate the level WTC and self-efficacy in
English of the participants together with answering the research questions.
The quantitative method was employed to elicit the degree of WTC and self-efficacy
in English as well the relationship between WTC and self-efficacy in English.
Moreover, the participants’ idea was asked to find out the method improvement which
helps banker to be more confident when communicating in English. The instrument
was developed based on primary and secondary data. After that, the researcher
conducted a trial by randomly distributing the first draft of the questionnaire to 15
employees in the American bank in Bangkok. The data from the pilot study tested the
reliability of the questionnaire with Cronbach’s Alpha program. Any awkward
questions and ambiguous wordings were revised and clarified. After the pilot study,
the questionnaires were distributed to the subjects by the convenience sampling
method.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
19
3.5 Research instrument
The instrument of this study was a self-administrated questionnaire. It was
divided into four sections. The queries in the first section solicited the personal
attributes of the participants. The next section in this instrument measured the
participants’ willingness to communicate in English. It contained statements
customized from the willingness to communication in a Foreign Language Scale
(WTC-FLS) to harmonize with the context of this study. The statements aimed to
determine the participants’ willingness to take part in English language interaction
under various components, namely, setting, context and interlocutor (Baghaei &
Dourakhshan, 2012). In section three, the questions were adapted from a
questionnaire of English self-efficacy (QESE) scale (Wang, Kim, Bong, & Ahn,
2013). A six-point Likert scale was used to determine how the participants assessed
their own WTC and self-efficacy in English. The indicators ere ranked from 1 to 6
where 1 referred to strongly disagree, 2 - Disagree, 3-Slightly disagree, 4- Slightly
agree, 5- Agree and 6-Strongly agree. Some statements from the original
questionnaire were deleted and revised in order to fit with context of this study. In
addition, the researcher added up open-ended questions to the end of section two and
section three to obtain more opinions about WTC and self-efficacy in English. Free
writing was required in this sub-question. The last section of this instrument was a
query about the method of improvement to help bank employees be more confident
when communicating in English. The researcher allowed free writing answers in this
section.
To examine reliability of the research instrument, the researcher conducted a
pilot study with 15 employees in the American bank whose characteristics were
similar to the population of this study. Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient was calculated
to test the reliability of the questionnaire and the results of the reliability test are
displayed in the below table.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
20
Table 3.1 Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of variables in the questionnaire (N=15)
Variable Cronbach’s Alpha
Willingness to communicate with English native
speaking customers
.905
Willingness to communicate with Non-English native
Speaking customers
.935
Willingness to communicate in English with foreign
colleagues
.937
English Self-Efficacy
.990
All items .985
3.5.1 Data collection
The researcher distributed the questionnaires in person in order to ask for their
consent beforehand. A total of 200 questionnaires with running numbers were
distributed to the voluntary subjects and the execution of data collection occurred
after business hours.
3.5.2 Data Analysis
Through SPSS version 23, descriptive statistics were used to determine the
data distribution and tendencies of English self-efficacy and WTC in English
language. The outcome from the SPSS program reflected results in the form of
percentage, mean, median and standard deviation.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
21
In order to facilitate the interpretation of the mean scores of the feelings and
attitudes regarding willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English, the
following criteria was used.
Mean score between 5.20 – 6.00 refers to Extremely high
Mean score between 4.36 – 5.19 refers to High
Mean score between 3.52 – 4.35 refers to Slightly higher than moderate
Mean score between 2.68 – 3.51 refers to Slightly lower than moderate
Mean score between 1.84 – 2.67 refers to Low
Mean score between 1.00 – 1.83 refers to Extremely low
As the data was not normally distributed, Spearman correlation was used to
determine the relationship between self-efficacy and willingness to communicate and
the significant results could answer the research questions. For the opinions and
suggestions from the participants, the researcher reorganized the handwritten answers
from open-ended questions into the groups based on frequency and similarity of the
opinions and explained and synthesized the answers to endorse the statistical report.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
22
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
This chapter presents the statistical report which fulfilled research questions
and portrayed the characteristics of the participants in this study. Descriptive statistics
were used to illustrate participants’ personal attributes and the data is reported in the
form of percentage, mean, median and standard deviation. Correlation statistics also
indicated the relationship between willingness to communicate and self-efficacy of
employees in an American bank while the handwritten answers to open-ended
questions were reorganized and disseminated in this chapter.
4.1 Personal attributes of the participants
The participants in this study were 151 employees in an American bank and
their personal attribute s was reported in form of percentage and frequency. There
were seven components reported in this section namely gender, age, educational level,
corporate title, years of employment, attendance in listening and speaking courses and
self-evaluation of oral English proficiency.
Table 4.1 shows the different portion of employment in the banking business
regarding gender. The majority of participants in this study were female (74.8%)
while 25.2% were male.
Table 4.1 Gender of the participants
Gender Frequency Percentage (%)
Female 113 74.8
Male 38 25.2
Total 151 100.0
The participants in this study were divided into three generations. The
majority, 53.0%, was 31-40 years old. Table 4.2 demonstrates that a minority was
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
23
27.1% and they were in the group of 41 years old and more. Lastly, a tiny minority
equaled 19.9% and they were 21-30 years old.
Table 4.2 Age of the participants
Age Frequency Percentage (%)
21-30 years 30 19.9
31-40 years 80 53.0
41 years and more 41 27.1
Total 151 100
As shown in Table 4.3, a large majority of the participants (84.1%) held
bachelor’s degrees, whereas only 15.9% of them had master’s degrees.
Table 4.3 Educational level of the participants
Educational level Frequency Percentage (%)
Bachelor’s degree 127 84.1
Master’s degree or higher 24 15.9
Total 151 100
Table 4.4 shows the combination of the participants’ employment position;
40.4% held the position of staff while the smaller groups were assistant manager and
manager or a higher position at 39.1% and 20.5%, respectively.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
24
Table 4.4 Corporate title of the participants
Corporate title Frequency Percentage (%)
Staff 61 40.4
Assistant manager 59 39.1
Manager or higher 31 20.5
Total 151 100
Table 4.5 demonstrates the employment length of the participants in this
study. A total of 34.4% of the participants had worked in this bank for 11-15 years
and 31.1% had worked for 1-5 years; meanwhile, 20.5% of the participants had
worked for 6-10 years. Nevertheless, the employees had a length of employment at 16
years or longer were the smallest group (13.9%) in this study.
Table 4.5 Years of Employment of the participants
Years of employment Frequency Percentage (%)
1-5 years 47 31.1
6-10 years 31 20.5
11-15 years 52 34.4
16 years and above 21 13.9
Total 151 100
Table 4.6 shows percentage of attending in English listening and speaking
courses of the participants in this study. Employees in the American bank valued
English listening and speaking course since table 7 shows that 73.5% of participants
used to take English listening and speaking course whereas 26.5% of the participant
had never attended.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
25
Table. 4.6 Attending English listening and speaking course of the participants
Attending Frequency Percentage (%)
Attended 111 73.5
Never attended 40 26.5
Total 151 100
Table 4.7 shows that 58.3% of the participants assessed their oral English
proficiency at a fair level. The participants who evaluated their oral English
proficiency at a good level were 23% while 15.2% stated their oral proficiency was at
a poor level. Only 3.3% possessed an excellent level.
Table 4.7 Self-evaluation towards oral English proficiency of the participants
Proficiency level Frequency Percentage (%)
Poor 23 15.2
Fair 88 58.3
Good 35 23.2
Excellent 5 3.3
Total 151 100
4.2 What is the level of willingness to communicate in English among employees
in a banking institution in Bangkok?
The information in table 4.8 answers the research question of whether
employees in an American bank possessed WTC in English with English native
speaking customers at a slightly higher than moderate level since the total mean score
was 4.20. With regard to the interpretation of mean scores in this study, a mean score
between 3.52 and 4.35 referred to slightly higher than moderate.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
26
Table 4.8 Level of willingness to communicate in English with English native speaking
customers (N = 151)
Statement Mean Median SD Ranking Level of
WTC
5. If I meet English native speakers who are
facing problems at my workplace because
of not knowing Thai language, I take
advantage of this opportunity and I would
talk to them.
4.54
5.00
1.325
1
High
6. I am willing to help customers who are
English native speakers although it is not
within my responsibility.
4.44
5.00
1.263
2
High
7. I am willing to talk with a customer who
is an English native speaker.
4.38
5.00
1.320
3
High
8. If my colleague introduced me to a
customer who is an English native speaker,
I would like to test my abilities in
communicating with him/her in English.
4.30
5.00
1.254
4
Slightly
higher
than
moderate
4. If I meet English native speakers inside
my workplace, I hope there will be an
opportunity in which they would talk to
me.
4.14
5.00
1.410
5
Slightly
higher
than
moderate
(Continue)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
27
Table 4.8 Level of willingness to communicate in English with English native speaking
customers (Continued)
Statement Mean Median SD Ranking Level of
WTC
3. If I meet English native speakers outside
my workplace, I hope there will be an
opportunity in which they would talk to
me.
4.03
4.00
1.376
6
Slightly
higher
than
moderate
2. If I meet English native speakers inside
my workplace, I would ask them the
questions and talk to them.
3.89
4.00
1.401
7 Slightly
higher
than
moderate
1. If I meet English native speakers outside
my workplace, I would ask them the
questions and talk to them.
3.85
4.00
1.355
8 Slightly
higher
than
moderate
Total 4.20 4.38 1.112
Slightly
higher
than
moderate
For WTC in English with English native speaking customers, the employees in
an American bank possessed a high level of WTC in English in three kinds of
activities. They were willing to communicate in English when the customers were
facing problems at their workplace because of not knowing Thai language (item 5, ̅
= 4.54). The other activities were helping customers even if it was not their
responsibility (item 6, ̅ = 4.44) and talking in English with native speaking
customers in general (item 7, ̅ = 4.38).
On the other hand, the level of WTC in English of the participants was
reported as slightly higher than moderate in the five other activities. These activities
were testing the ability to communicate in English with a customer after introductions
occurred (item 8, ̅ = 4.30) and hoping for the opportunity to have interactions with
English native speakers inside the workplace (item 4, ̅ = 4.14). Finally, three lowest
ranked WTC levels were item 3, 2 and 1. The mean of item 3 ( ̅ = 4.03) indicated that
bank employees hope to communicate in English with English native speaking
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
28
customers outside the workplace. The circumstances that bank employees possessed
the lowest WTC level were item 7 and 8. Bank employees were willing to initiate a
conversation with English native speaking customers by asking questions inside the
workplace ( ̅ = 3.89) and outside the workplace ( ̅ = 3.85) at a slightly higher than
moderate level. Similarly, the average level of WTC in English with Non-English
native speaking customers was slightly higher than moderate since the statistical
outcome in table 4.9 shows the total mean score at 4.16.
Table 4.9 Level of willingness to communicate in English with Non-English native
speaking customers (N = 151)
Statement Mean Median SD Ranking Level of
WTC
13. If I meet Non-English native speakers
who are facing problems at my workplace
because of not knowing Thai language, I
take advantage of this opportunity and I
would talk to them.
4.46
5.00
1.295
1 High
14. I am willing to help customers who
are Non-English native speakers although
it is not within my responsibility.
4.40
5.00
1.302
2
High
15. I am willing to talk with a customer
who is Non-English native speakers.
4.35 5.00 1.333 3
Slightly
higher than
moderate
16. If my colleague introduced me to a
customer who is Non-English native-
speaker, I would like to test my abilities
in communicating with him/her in
English.
4.15 4.00 1.365 4
Slightly
higher than
moderate
9. If I meet Non-English native speakers
inside my workplace, I hope there will be
an opportunity in which they would talk
to me.
4.09 4.00 1.411 5
Slightly
higher than
moderate
10. If I meet Non-English native speakers
inside my workplace, I would ask them
questions and talk to them.
4.04 4.00 1.336 6
Slightly
higher than
moderate
(Continue)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
29
Table 4.9 Level of willingness to communicate in English with Non-English native
speaking customers (Continued)
Statement Mean Median SD Ranking Level of
WTC
11. If I meet Non-English native speakers
outside my workplace, I hope there will
be an opportunity in which they would
talk to me.
3.93 4.00 1.357 7
Slightly
higher than
moderate
12. If I meet Non-English native speakers
outside my workplace, I would ask them
questions and talk to them.
3.87 4.00 1.353 8
Slightly
higher than
moderate
Total 4.16 4.25 1.166
Slightly
higher than
moderate
The first two items exhibited the highest mean when compared to the rest. The
means of these items were 4.46 and 4.40. The interpretation of mean scores implies
that bank employees’ WTC level regarding these events were high. They had high
level of WTC in English with Non-English native speaking customers who were
facing problems at the bank because of not knowing Thai language (item 13, ̅ = 4.46)
and they had WTC at high level in English so as to help customers even if it was not
their responsibility (item 14, ̅ = 4.40).
In addition, table 4.9 displays six items which the interpretation of mean
scores as “Slightly higher than moderate level”. The mean scores of these items
ranked from 4.35 to 3.87. Item 15 stated that the participants had a willingness at
slightly higher than moderate level to talk with a customer who is a Non-English
native speaker in general ( ̅ = 4.35). Item 16 ( ̅ = 4.15) reported that the participants
had WTC at a slightly higher than moderate level to test their ability in
communicating with Non-English native speaking customers as well as hoping for the
opportunity in which the customer would talk to them inside the workplace (item 9, ̅
= 4.09). From item 10 ( ̅ = 4.04), the participants had WTC at a slightly higher than
moderate level in regard to asking Non-English native speaking customers a question
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
30
and talking to them when meetings occurred inside the workplace. Item 11 ( ̅ = 3.93)
reported that if bank workers meet Non-English native speaking customer outside
their workplace, they possessed WTC at a slightly higher than moderate level in
regard to having an opportunity in which the customer would talk to them. Similarly,
item 12 showed mean at 3.87 for asking and talking with Non-Native English
speaking customers outside the workplace.
Likewise, table 4.10 answers the research question on the level of WTC in
English with foreign colleague being at a slightly higher than moderate level. The
total mean score of WTC in English with foreign colleagues was 4.10.
Table 4.10 Level of willingness to communicate in English with foreign colleagues (N = 151)
Statement Mean Median SD ranking Level of
WTC
19. I am willing to ask questions in
English to foreign colleagues at the
bank.
4.40 5.00 1.223 1
High
17. In order to practice my English, I am
willing to talk in English with my
foreign colleagues outside the bank.
4.29 5.00 1.309 2
Slightly
higher than
moderate
20. I am willing to talk and show my
opinions in English in the bank when all
my colleagues are listening to me.
4.24 4.00 1.274 3
Slightly
higher than
moderate
21. I am willing to have pair and group
activities in the bank so that I can talk in
English with my colleagues.
4.10 4.00 1.279 4
Slightly
higher than
moderate
23. In group work activities in the bank
when the group is composed of my
colleagues, I am willing to speak in
English.
4.09 4.00 1.368 5
Slightly
higher than
moderate
22. I am willing to give a presentation in
English in front of my colleagues.
4.01 4.00 1.390 6
Slightly
higher than
moderate
(Continue)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
31
Table 4.10 Level of willingness to communicate in English with foreign colleagues
(Continued)
Statement Mean Median SD ranking Level of
WTC
18. In order to practice my English, I am
willing to talk in English with my
manager outside the bank.
3.91 4.00 1.326 7
Slightly
higher than
moderate
24. In group work activities in the bank
when the group is NOT composed of my
colleagues, I am willing to speak in
English
3.76 4.00 1.355 8
Slightly
higher than
moderate
Total 4.10 4.13 1.107
Slightly
higher than
moderate
As reported in table 4.10, item 19 shows the mean score at 4.40. Based on the
interpretation of mean scores in this study, bank employees possessed WTC at a high
level when asking questions in English to foreign colleagues. However, the
participants in this study had WTC at a slightly higher than moderate level with
foreign colleagues in various circumstance. The remaining items showed mean scores
ranked from 4.29 to 3.76 and the mean score of WTC fell to lowest level when the
group activity was not composed of the participants’ direct colleagues (item 24, ̅ =
3.76).
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
32
4.3 What is the level of self-efficacy in English among employees in a banking
institution in Bangkok?
The researcher utilized descriptive statistics to measure the sense of efficacy in
English of bank employees through 25 statements. Statements described people’s
feelings regarding the capability to do an activity in English.
Table 4.11 Level of self-efficacy in English ( N = 151)
Statement Mean Median SD ranking Level of self-
efficacy
13. I can write e-mails in English.
4.55 5.00 1.204 1 High
20. I can read short English instructions
about my job.
4.54 5.00 1.171 2 High
14. I can understand English dialogues
about my job matters.
4.52 5.00 1.160 3 High
23. I can understand account numbers
spoken in English.
4.51 5.00 1.216 4 High
18. I can introduce myself to foreign
customers in English.
4.48 5.00 1.285 5 High
11. I can leave a note for my colleague
in English.
4.46 5.00 1.284 6 High
2. I can do my job by myself when
reading and writing English texts is
required.
4.45 5.00 1.269 7 High
(Continue)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
33
Table 4.11 Level of self-efficacy in English ( Continued )
Statement Mean Median SD ranking Level of
self-efficacy
6. I can write messages in English on
social media (Facebook, Twitter, or
Instagram).
4.44 5.00 1.203 8 High
7. I can give directions to the bank
from the place where I live in English.
4.40 5.00 1.271 9 High
8. I can write texts, such as approval
memos, business e-mails and job
manuals, in English.
4.40 5.00 1.184 10 High
12. I can guess the meaning of
unknown words when I am reading an
English text.
4.34 5.00 1.149 11
Slightly
higher than
moderate
22. I can read policy in English.
4.34 5.00 1.239 12
Slightly
higher than
moderate
15. I can understand messages or news
in English on the bank website.
4.33 5.00 1.248 13
Slightly
higher than
moderate
21. I can answer customers’ questions
in English.
4.33 5.00 1.300 14
Slightly
higher than
moderate
17. I can introduce my colleague (to
someone else) in English.
4.32 5.00 1.387 15
Slightly
higher than
moderate
3. I can do my job by myself when
listening and speaking English is
required.
4.31 5.00 1.245 16
Slightly
higher than
moderate
(Continue)
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
34
Table 4.11 Level of self-efficacy in English. ( Continued )
Statement Mean Median SD Ranking Level of
self-efficacy
10. I can understand recorded
conversations between bank staff and
customers in English.
4.30 5.00 1.274 17
Slightly
higher than
moderate
1. I can acquire and verify customers’
profiles stated in English.
4.29 5.00 1.309 18
Slightly
higher than
moderate
4. I can understand online training in
English.
4.29 5.00 1.225 19
Slightly
higher than
moderate
25. I can understand new reading
materials (such as news from Time
magazine, how to books, websites and
blogs).
4.28 5.00 1.234 20
Slightly
higher than
moderate
16. I can ask my manager questions in
English about job issues.
4.26 5.00 1.449 21
Slightly
higher than
moderate
24. I can write an essay about my job
achievements in English.
4.26 4.00 1.214 22
Slightly
higher than
moderate
9. I can explain a case study in English.
4.13 4.00 1.368 23
Slightly
higher than
moderate
19. I can discuss general interests with
my colleagues in English.
4.11 5.00 1.448 24
Slightly
higher than
moderate
5. I can describe banking products to
other people in English.
4.06 5.00 1.358 25
Slightly
higher than
moderate
Total 4.35 4.64 1.123
Slightly
higher than
moderate
As shown in Table 4.11, the statistical output demonstrates the results to
answer the research question on bank employees’ level of perceived self-efficacy in
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
35
English with a total mean score 4.35. This showed that the level of self-efficacy in
English was slightly higher than moderate. However, ten out of twenty-five items
were higher compared to the others in the questionnaire. The mean scores of these
activities ranged from 4.55 to 4.40 (Rank 1-10) and these intervals referred to high
levels of self-efficacy in English in the activities. The participants had a sense of self-
efficacy at a high level when writing e-mail in English (item 13, ̅ = 4.55), reading
short English instructions about their job (item 20, ̅ = 4.54) and understanding
English dialogues about their job (item 14, ̅ = 4.52).The other items with mean
scores at a high level of self-efficacy comprised item no. 23,18,11,2,6,7 and 8. Their
mean scores ranged from 4.51 to 4.40.
However, the larger proportion reported a lower level of self-efficacy in
English. A total of 15 activities out of 25 obtained weaker self-efficacy since their
mean score went down from 4.34 to 4.06. This rank of score meant that the
participants had a level of self-efficacy at slightly higher than moderate to exercise
control over the working environment where English language was used as a medium
in the communication. Table 12 displayed five activities with mean scores that
indicated the weakest sense of self-efficacy of the participants. The participants made
insufficient effort to ask a manager questions in English about job issues (item 16)
and write an essay about job achievements in English (item 24). The mean score of
these items equaled 4.26. Furthermore, the participants’ self-efficacy became weaker
when explaining a case study in English (item 9, ̅ = 4.13), discussing general interest
with colleagues in English (item 19, ̅ = 4.11) and describing banking product to
other people in English (item 5, ̅ = 4.06).
4.4 What is the relationship between willingness to communication and
self-efficacy in English among employees in a banking institution in
Bangkok?
Since the data obtained from the questionnaires were not normally distributed,
the Spearman correlation statistic was applied to investigate the association between
willingness to communicate and self-efficacy in English of the participants.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
36
Table 4.12 Spearman Correlation between willingness to communicate and self-
efficacy in English of employees in a banking institution in Bangkok
Variables
Self-Efficacy in English
r Sig.
Willingness to communicate with English
native speaking customers .657** .000
Willingness to communicate with Non-English
native speaking customers .672** .000
Willingness to communicate in English with
foreign colleagues .776** .000
To answer the research question, willingness to communicate was divided into
three aspects. The first one was WTC in English with English native speaking
customers. The next was WTC in English with Non-English native speaking
customers and the last was WTC in English with foreign colleagues. The mean score
of these variables together with self-efficacy assessed whether they had association.
The result is presented in table 4.12. All aspects of WTC and self-efficacy in English
had a relationship at the significant level of .05. When evaluating each aspect, there
was a significant relationship between WTC in English with English native speaking
customers and self-efficacy, r = .657, p < .05. Similarly, WTC in English with Non-
English native speaking customer correlated with self-efficacy in English, r = .672
while WTC in English with foreign colleagues was also correlated with self-efficacy
in English, r = .776 (all ps < .05). The correlation between WTC and self-efficacy in
English leads to the inference that these variables each other at some level.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
37
4.5 Open-ended questions
Beyond the statistical report, an open-ended question was also utilized.
4.5.1 When are you most comfortable to talk to someone in English?
The open-ended question was used to enhance the understanding about the
participants’ opinions regarding willingness to communicate. The open-ended
question in section 2 of the research instrument invited the respondents to reveal the
affairs in which English conversation was comfortably actualized. The total number
of respondents in this study was 151 bank workers and, impressively, 69 people
responded to this question. The answers were classified and there were five categories
as a result of this execution. A total of 25 respondents reported that they were
comfortable to communicate anytime and anywhere with everyone. They loved
English and searched for opportunities to speak English because they wanted to
practice as well. Interestingly, the readiness to communicate in English was evident in
personal life. A total of 21 answers indicated that the respondents were comfortable to
talk to an interlocutor in English when falling in love, travelling, getting drunk at a
party and gossiping with a close friend. Unexpectedly, only nine persons articulated
that they were comfortable to talk to others in English in the workplace, while eight
bank workers preferred to speak English if they were approached and their mistakes
wasn’t a focus.
In summary, descriptive statistics contributed to the understanding towards the
level of willingness to communicate in English among bank workers in Bangkok.
There were three subsections used to identify the level of WTC among bank workers
in Bangkok. The first subsection was WTC with English native speaking customers.
The total mean score of this section was 4.20. The second subsection was WTC with
Non-English native speaking customers; the total mean score of this section was 4.16.
Lastly, WTC with foreign colleagues had a total mean score at 4.10. The
interpretation of these mean scores was “Slightly higher than moderate”. Meanwhile,
the answers to the open-ended question portrayed a circumstance where the
participants were most comfortable to make the utterances in English; 36.2% was
willing to make a conversation in English without conditions and 30.4% had a
willingness to speak English if the interaction was personal-related or informal.
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
38
4.5.2 In terms of listening and speaking, what kind of activity do you
think you can do well?
Self-efficacy refers to the beliefs of people about their perceived competency
to take control or accomplish a difficult task. Using English as foreign language might
not be very easy for many people. The hypothetical value from the statistical report
can paint the overall picture of self-efficacy in this study. The open-ended was applied
to obtain more details of self-efficacy in terms of listening and speaking. When the
subjects were asked about the activity that they perform well in terms of listening and
speaking, the response rate was 46.3%. A total of 70 respondents out of 151 supplied
answers to this section. Unexpectedly, 46 respondents indicated that they perform
well in listening (20 responses), speaking (10 responses) and both (16 responses) but
they didn’t specify the actual activity. Although the answers from this group of people
were short, it signalled that their sense of self-efficacy in listening and speaking
English was strongly established in various activities. The respondents needed more
effort to evaluate the degree of achievement in each activity, so they might have been
reluctant to report the specific activity they can do best. However, 16 answerers
clearly stated their best activity in terms of listening and speaking. The participants
had a strong sense of self-efficacy at some level when they experienced success in a
personal-related activity. Listening to the music, watching a movie or TV series and
chatting with close friends were reported as the activities they do well. Five people
were able to perform well in formal business settings, namely, speaking with
customers and colleagues, business presentations and being a speaker in training
sessions. Lack of capability in listening and speaking English was reported by a few
persons.
4.5.3 What can help bank employees to be more confident when
communicating in English?
Since this study aimed to find out the method which helps bank employees to
be more confident when communicating in English, the various ideas from the
respondents filled up this question.45% of the participants provided the idea about the
method which helps them to be more confident.
Bank employees disclosed four strategies that they approached if they wanted
to improve confidence to communicate in English. 22 persons valued a training
Ref. code: 25595821040515VSBRef. code: 25595821040515VSB
Top Related