2 Enter your Paper Title Here. Enter your Name Here. Enter Your Paper Title Here. Enter Your Name Here. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION.

2

Enter your Paper Title Here.

Enter your Name Here.

Enter Your Paper Title Here.

Enter Your Name Here.

ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION AND EFQM BUSINESS SATISFACTION AND EFQM BUSINESS EXCELLENCE MODEL: EXCELLENCE MODEL: AN IMPLEMENTATION ON TURKISH QUALITY AN IMPLEMENTATION ON TURKISH QUALITY AWARD WINNERSAWARD WINNERS

Dr.Ozkan Tutuncu, ozkan.tutuncu@deu.edu.tr Dr.Ozlem Dogan ozlem.dogan@deu.edu.tr

3

INTRODUCTION

• Excellence models affect performance and help organizations achieve organizational excellence.

• Furthermore employee satisfaction is another concern of organizational excellence.

4

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

• The link between employee and customer satisfaction has been verified empirically (Dahlgaard et al., 1998; Eskildsen and Dahlgaard, 2000).

• It has a limitation about data that was obtained by one company.

• The paper focuses on identifying the relationship between BEM and JS that creates satisfied employees in business excellence process.

5

BASIC CONCEPTS

• Excellence as the outstanding practice in managing organization and achieving results.

• Job satisfaction as pleasantness or unpleasantness of employees while working.

6

EXCELLENCE MODEL

Five ‘Enabler’ criteria;Leadership, policy and strategy, people management, researches and partnerships, and process.

Four ‘Results’ criteria;Customer satisfaction, people satisfaction, impact on society and key performance results.

7

BUSINESS EXCELLENCEBUSINESS EXCELLENCE

8

Job Descriptive Index

• Work itself• Promotion• Wages• Supervision• Co-workers

JOB SATISFACTION

9

THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To determine the relationship between excellence model and job satisfaction.

Hypothesis

• H1: There is a correlation between BEM and JS.

• H2: BEM factors are perceived more important then JS factors.

• H3: Personel relationships are perceived more important than material benefits among BEM applied companies in Turkey.

10

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGY

• A survey that contains JDI and EFQM Criteria are applied to Turkish Quality Award Winners employees in 2004.

• A five-point Likert scale was used in this part, ranging from ‘definitely agree’ (1) to ‘definitely disagree’ (5).

• Five companies and institutions have won EFQM Business Excellence Award in 2004.

11

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGY

• Survey is planned for all of them. However, one company is refused to participate in this survey.

• Approximately 9000 employees work in these organizations.

• In total, 400 questionnaires distributed by the researchers and 371 questionnaires were returned (2 of them eliminated).

12

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The questionnare is consisted of four parts.

• The first part involved 26 likert type survey items regarding employees’ satisfaction such as “My colleagues are friendly”.

• The second part of the instrument included 36 items designed to measure the level of the employees’ perception levels on EFQM Excellence model criteria and presented statements such as “Leaders motivate, support and recognize the organization’s people”.

13

RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRESEARCH METHODOLOGY

• The third part was devoted to investigating the relationship between employees’ perception level on Business Excellence Model and Job Satisfaction (2 questions).

• The final part involved 6 questions regarding basic demographic characteristics of the respondents such as “How old are you?”. The survey instrument was pilot tested among 25 employees.

14

RESEARCH FINDINGSRESEARCH FINDINGSNumber % Number %

SEX EDUCATION

Female 108 30,4 High school 68 19,1

Man 247 69,6 University 241 67,7

Total 369 100.0 Post graduate 47 13,2

AGE Total 356 100,0

15-25 17 4,8

26-32 119 33,3 TOTAL WORKING YEARS

33-42 133 37,3 0-2 50 33.6

43-50 62 17,4 3-5 32 21.5

51 and above 26 7,3 6-9 30 20.1

Total 357 100,0 More than 10 years 37 24.8

TENURE (PRESENT JOB)

Total 149 100.0

Less than 1 30 8,5

1-5 75 21,4

6-10 74 21,1

11-20 47 13,4

21 and more 125 35,6

Total 351 100,0

15

RESEARCH FINDINGSRESEARCH FINDINGS

• The reliability tests have been implemented on data.

• As a result of the test, the general Cronbach alpha of data is found to be as 0, 98.

16

Canonical Correlation Analysis Relating levels of Canonical Correlation Analysis Relating levels of Dependent and Independent SetDependent and Independent Set

Measures of overall Model Fit for Canonical Correlation

Canonical Function Canonical Correlation Canonical R2 F Statistics Probability1 0.7305 0.533 16.54 .00012 0.2609 0.068 2.58 .005

Multivariate tests of significance

Value Approx. F Statistics ProbabilityWilks’ lambda 0.434 16.54 .0001Pillai’s trace 0.601 13.81 .0001Hotelling’s trace 1.217 19.43 .0001Roy’s ger 1.144 36.71 .0001

17

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• The table shows the canonical coefficients of JS and BEM variables.

• Canonical Function 1 has been found significant from the significance tests and redundancy values (p=0.0001, F=16.54, Canonical R2 =0.53).

• Canonical Function 2 has not been taken into consideration since it is significant but poor redundancy percent with lower loadings (p=0.005, F=2.58, Canonical R2 =0.068).

18

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

Canonical Function 1 Canonical Function 2

Loadings Cross-loadings Loadings Cross-loadings

Criterion set

JS-Job Satisfaction

BEM-Business Excellence Models

Explained Vairance

Predictor Set

Work itself

Wages

Promotion

Co-workers

Supervision

Leadership

Policy

People

Partners

Processes

Results

0.8675

0,9080

%78,8

0.7421

0.2129

0.5984

0.4236

0.7451

0.8586

0.8000

0.7839

0.8270

0.8175

0.6912

0.6337

0.6633

0.5421

0.1555

0.4371

0.3094

0.5443

0.6272

0.5844

0.5726

0.6041

0.5972

0.5049

-0.4974

0.4190

%21.2

-0.1293

-0.5726

-0.1661

0.0422

0.2983

0.0727

0.2063

0.0797

0.0709

0.0362

0.4165

-0.129

0.1094

-0.0338

-0.1494

-0.0434

0.0110

0.0779

0.0190

0.0539

0.0208

0.0185

0.0095

0.1087

Explained variance

Canonical Coefficient

%50.1

0.7305

%6.3

0.2609

Redundancy R2 %53.3 %6.8

19

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• In Function 1, both dependent variables (criterion set) have loadings exceeding 0.87.

• JS loadings 0.87

• BEM loadings 0.91

• This indicates a high correlation between JS and BEM This indicates a high correlation between JS and BEM and supports Hypothesis 1.and supports Hypothesis 1.

20

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

All the independent variables loadings has positive values.

• Leadership (0.86, BEM)

• Partners (0.83, BEM)

• Processes (0.82, BEM)

21

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• Policy (0.80, BEM)

• People (0.78, BEM)

• Supervision (0.75, JS)

• Work itself (0.74, JS)

22

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• Results (0.69, BEM)

• Promotion (0.60, JS)

• Co-workers (0.42, JS)

• Wages (0.21, JS)

23

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• The BEM components have mostly had positive and strongest impact on BEM and JS.

• As far as JDI components are concerned, supervision, work itself and promotion has also positive but relatively moderate impact on criterion set.

• It supports Hypothesis 2.

24

CANONICAL RESULTS

• Wages factor has minimum affect on BEM and JS.

• Wages loadings 0.21

• It supports Hypothesis 3.

25

CANONICAL RESULTSCANONICAL RESULTS

• In order to validate the canonical correlation analysis, sensitivity analysis of the independent set also has been made.

• Independent variables like leadership, partnership and supervision have been deleted but there have not been significant changes at the factor loadings.

• This analysis ensures the validity of the data .

26

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

• The relationship between the enablers of the EFQM criteria and the results can also be interpreted.

• The enablers of the study have more canonical loadings compared to the results.

• Process management more important than results.

• One reason is the formulation of the results in the survey as a whole through a questionnaire whose validity was previously proved while the results in the EFQM Model consist of four parts.

27

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

• Wages do not have an important place in this relationship.

• Employees do not evaluate their job satisfaction in relation with their wages in the process towards business excellence.

• Organizational goals are more important than individual goals for Turkish employees.

28

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

• Management that want to implement business excellence model practically should also take supervision, work itself, promotion and co-workers variables into consideration besides BEM’ s factor.

• The strong relationship between JS and BEM shows that organizations that implement business excellence models should be aware of job satisfaction which has a supporting role for the successful implementation.