研方Final ppt

The Importance of Organizational Identification on Job Satisfaction:

Comparison with Team-Member Exchange,

and the role of Organizational Identification as a moderator

1. The Research Focus

2. Main Framework

3. ANOVA Analysis

4. Questionnaires

5. Results, Practical Implications and Suggestions

This research focused on how TMX(Team-Member Exchange) and OI(Organizational Identification) influences Job satisfaction. We grouped TMX and OI in four categories of high and low to implement an ANOVA analysis to see which provides a greater effect. Additional to testing this model, we tested the main framework of OI as the moderator between the effect of TMX to job satisfaction. We gave out questionnaires and collected 120 samples from different industries. The results prove the importance of increasing both TMX and OI, with OI as a priority, to enhance job satisfaction. These are our practical implications and suggestions for the working environment.

01/ Introduction

Background Information

1. The importance of Job Satisfaction

2. Factors that influence Job SatisfactionMotivation Theories

3. TMX(Team-Member Exchange)

4. OI (Organizational Identification)

01/ Introduction

Research Gap & Niches1. TMX->JS :

(1) Gap/Niche: Only high quality exchange

(2) What we did: Compare both high and low quality exchange

2. OI&TMX->JS:

(1) Gap/Niche : OI->JS research missing.

(2) What we did : ANOVA Comparison

3. OI as Moderator between TMX->JS :

(1) Gap/Niche : Lack integrated structure.

(2) What we did : Propose a structure to combine them.

01/ Introduction

Research Purpose and ValueIf we could explain the correlations in the structure, we could suggest companies to:

(1) Increase or decrease OI to enhance the effect of TMX on job satisfaction.

(2) See which factor should be prioritized.

to increase job satisfaction and improve the working environment.

02/ Literature ReviewLiterature of Variables

Team-Member Exchange (TMX)

An individual member’s perceptions of his or her exchange relationship within one group or team (Seers, 1989)

When the employee who has low conscientiousness or agreeableness exists in the organization, the development of LMX is very critical.

The reciprocal exchange relationships between members with a team in terms of ideas, assistance, communication, and support

02/ Literature ReviewLiterature of Variables

Job Satisfaction Definition

Overall feelings and emotions an individual employee has to the role he or she plays in the organization. (Mark A. Tietjen and Robert M. Myers (1988))

Weiss, 1967:Three dimensions: 1. Intrinsic job satisfaction Personal job characteristics: Work, achievement2. Extrinsic job satisfactionEnvironmental job characteristics: Coworkers, Supervision…etc3. General Job satisfaction

02/ Literature Review

Literature of Variables

Organizational Identification (OI)

A perceived oneness with an organization and the experience of the organization's successes and failures as one's own.

OI is correlated with a wide range of work-related attitudes, behaviors, and context variables.

OI greatly affects organization’s dedication or job content(wide range of work-related attitudes, behaviors, and context variables.).

Ashforth and Mael (1992)

02/ Literature Review

Literature of Variables1. Team-Member Exchange and Job SatisfactionPeople with high quality in TMX among group members are more likely to facilitate job satisfaction.

2. Organization Identification and Job SatisfactionOrganizational identifications and job-related variables like job satisfaction mutually affect each other.

3. Team-Member Exchange and Organization IdentificationIn high-quality TMX situations, an organization-identified employee would receive mutual care, support, and feedback from his or her colleagues.

(S.P FONG & K.Y HO April 2010)

(Knippenberg, D., & Schie, E. C. M. 2000)

(Liden, Wayne and Sparrowe 2000)

02/ Literature Review

Hypothesis

Hypothesis1 Four clusters which contain different degrees in Team-Memberexchange and Organization Identification have significant differences in Job Satisfaction.

Hypothesis2 Team-Member Exchange has a positive relationship with Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis3 Organization Identification can moderate the relationship between Team-Member Exchange and Job Satisfaction. That is, when organization identification is higher, the positive relationship between Team-member Exchange and Job Satisfaction will be strengthened.

02/ Literature Review

Framework

OI

TMXHIGH LOW

HIGH 1 3LOW 2 4

Team-Member

Exchange

Job

Satisfaction

Organization

Identification

H1

H2

H3

03/ Method

Variables Measures

Team-member Exchange(TMX)(Seers, 1989)An individual member’s perceptions of his or her exchange relations within the group or team

Job Satisfaction

(Mark A. Tietjen and Robert M. Myers ,1988)Overall feelings and emotions an individual employee has to the role he or she plays in the organization.

Organization Identification (Ashforth and Mael ,1992)A perceived oneness with an organization and the experience of the organization's successes and failures as one's own.

03/ Method

Questionnaire- TMX 7-point Likert Type Scale

Cronbach α=0.897Validity=0.8988

(安鴻瑋, 2012)

03/ MethodQuestionnaire-OI

7-point Likert Type Scale

Cronbach α=0.838

(溫金豐, 2005)

1. 當有人批評組織時，我會覺得好像我自己被侮辱了

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agree

2. 我很在意別人對我所屬的組織的看法

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agree

3. 當我談論組織時，我經常用「我們」而非「他們」來敘述

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agree

4. 組織的成功就是我的成功

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agree

5. 當有人稱讚組織時，我會覺得好像我自己被讚美了

Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agree

03/ Method

Questionnaire MSQ (Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire)

Two versions: (1)The Long-Form MSQ

(2)The Short-Form MSQ:Dimensions:1. Intrinsic job satisfaction 2. Extrinsic job satisfaction3. General Job satisfactionOriginal Questionnaire: 20 Questions.

03/ Method

Questionnaire Original Short-Form MSQ (1)

1. Being able to keep busy all the time …….2. The chance to work alone on the job ……..3. The chance to do different things from time to time ……….4. The chance to be somebody in the community ……..5. The way my boss handles his/her workers……..6. The competence of my supervisor in making decision ………..7. Being ale to do things that don’t go against my conscience………..8. The way my job provides for steady employment ……….9. The chance to do things for other people ……..10. The chance to tell people what to do……..

03/ Method

Questionnaire Original Short-Form MSQ (2)

11. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities ……12. The way company policies are put into practice……….13. My pay and the amount of work I do …….14. The chances for advancement on this job……..15. The freedom to use my own judgment ………16. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job ………17. The working conditions ………..18. The way my co-workers get along with each other…….19. The praise I get for doing a good job ……..20. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job ……..

03/ Method

Questionnaire Adjusted Short-Form MSQ

Guo, Nai-Wen 2012

03/ MethodQuestionnaire

Adjusted Short-Form MSQ:

Dimensions: 1. Employee Job Fulfillment2. Overall Job responsibility

New Questionnaire: 10 Questions.

(Guo, Nai-Wen 2012)

Cronbach α=0.859

Dimension 1 Employee Job Fulfillment

5. .473

6. .708

7. .754

8. .743

9. .662

10. .748

Dimension 2 Overall Job responsibility

1. .616

2. .758

3. .762

4. .639

CFA Validity Test

Note: Validity > 0.5 to be affective

03/ Method

Control VariablesGender (李文娟,1998)

Industry type (徐雅慧,2003)

Tenure (Kiyak, Namazi & Kaahana, 1977;楊妙,1997;李淑真,2000 )

Age (Raghuram et al., 2001)

Job position (Schein,1970)

03/ Method

Participants & Sample

A. Employees from all industries except individual workers.

B. Questionnaire SurveyDistributed 200 samplesReclaimed 164 samples – Time 1Reclaimed 120 samples – Time 2

C. Convenience Sampling - Description (Chapter4)

03/ Method Procedure

CODE

Time 1 Time 2

Same Code

1 week

03/ Method

CMV To Avoid the same people finishing one questionnaire, we

divided the Questionnaire distribution into 2 stages. We avoided the same respondent finishing different variance

questionnaires at the same time. We Divided the questionnaire into 2 stages, the first stage is to

observe TMX and OI, the second stage is to observe JS. We waited a week for individual employee perceptions of TMX

and OI to affect Job Satisfaction.

04/ RESULT Description AnalysisDemographic of samples (N=120)

Attributes Options Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 42 35 %Female 78 65 %

Age

16~20 years old 3 2.5%21~25 years old 23 19.2 %26~30 years old 61 50.8%31~35 years old 23 19.2%36~40 years old 7 5.8%41~45 years old 1 0.8%46~50 years old 1 0.8%51~60 years old 1 0.8%60 years old above 0 0 %

Industry Type

Financial Service Industry 3 2.5%Information and communication Service Industry 2 1.7%Health Care Service Industry 3 2.5%Service Industry 46 38.3%Traditional Manufacturing Industry 11 9.2%High-Tech Manufacturing Industry 10 8.3%Circulation of Retail Industry 13 10.8%Military, Government, Education Employees 11 9.2%Others 21 17.5%

04/ RESULT Description Analysis

Demographic of samples (N=120)

Attributes Options Frequency Percentage

Position

First-Line Employees 94 78.3%

Salesman 7 5.8 %

Junior Manager 10 8.3 %

Middle Manager 3 2.5 %

Senior Manager 1 8%

Others 5 4.2%

Tenure

Less than 1 year 32 26.7%

Between 1 to 3 years 41 34.2%

Between 3 to 5 years 26 21.7%

Between 5 to 8 years 11 9.2%

Between 8 to 10 years 5 4.2%

10 years above 5 4.2%

04/ RESULTCorrelation Coefficient

H2: SupportedTeam-Member Exchange has a positive relationship with Job Satisfaction

* N=120

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Our questionnaire uses 1-7 Likert scale.

04/ RESULT

Reliability and ValidityItem Factor loading CR AVE

TMX1 0.822162

0.928884 0.724057

TMX2 0.942422

TMX3 0.817630

TMX4 0.881389

TMX5 0.781543

OI1 0.794543

0.924808 0.711817

OI2 0.848110

OI3 0.768365

OI4 0.885697

OI5 0.913047

Standard >0.5 >0.8 >0.5

Fornell & Larcker(1981)

04/ RESULT

Reliability and Validity

Standard >0.5 >0.8 >0.5

Fornell & Larcker(1981)

Item Factor loading CR AVE

JS11 0.663065

0.908890 0.502873

JS12 0.812944

JS13 0.717086

JS14 0.732767

JS21 0.739896

JS22 0.739937

JS23 0.568218

JS24 0.777590

JS25 0.749359

JS26 0.541318

04/ RESULTGoodness of Fit Index

Χ2

362.95The smaller the better

(Joreskog & Sorbom,1996)

χ2／ d.f.

ratio

2.17 ＜ 3 (Carmines & Mclver,1981）

RMSEA 0.099

＜ 0.05 Good fit；0.05 ≦＜ 0.08 Reasonable fit；

0.08 ≦＜ 0.1 Mediocre fit； 0.1 Poor fit≧（Browne &

Cudeck,1993）

NFI 0.91＞ 0.9（Bentler & Bonnett,1980）

CFI 0.95 >0.9 (Bentler,1990)

NNFI 0.94 ＞ 0.9（Tucker & Lewis,1973）

HIGH

LOW

04/ RESULT

Define

OI

TMXHIGH LOW

HIGH 1 3

LOW 2 4

04/ RESULT

Group Dividing

Organization

Identification??

Team-Member

Exchange??

And

Difference

between

OI & TMX

Group/Frequency/Mean F-Value Post Hoc

Test(1) (2) (3) (4)

High OI

&

High TMX

High OI

&

Low TMX

Low OI

&

High TMX

Low OI

&

Low TMX

N=12 N=3 N=5 N=19

Job

Satisfaction5.417 4.533 4.800 3.800

13.499***

(P<0.001)

(1)>(4)

(3)>(4)

Note: p*<.05 ; p**<.01 ; p***<.001

04/ RESULT

ANOVA

H1: SupportedFour clusters which contain different degrees in Team-Member exchange and Organization Identification have significant differences in Job Satisfaction.

04/ RESULTModerating Effect

Equation 1 Equation 2 Equation 3

AGEJOBPOSYEARSEX

0.397 0.757 0.083 0.261

0.047

0.305 0.865 0.120 0.246 0.501

0.294 0.994 0.249 0.199 0.465

TMXOITMX*OI

0.000 0.008

0.000 0.001

0.020*

F Valued.fR2

△R2

1.901 5

0.077 0.036

9.002 7

0.360 0.320

8.887 8

0.390 0.346

note: *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

SPSS Steps

Step 1: Calculate the Z-score of the IV and the moderator

Step 2: Multiply both Z-scores = Interaction Term

Step 3: (1)Put Control Variables in Model 1

(2)Both Z-scores in Model 2

(3)Put the Interaction Term inModel 3

04/ RESULTStrengthened positive relationship

H3: SupportedOrganization Identification can moderate the relationship between Team-Member Exchange and Job Satisfaction.

05/ Conclusion

Short Conclusion

1. In four clusters

High OI & High TMX has greater influence than Low OI & Low TMX in JS.Low OI & High TMX has greater influence than Low OI & Low TMX in JS.However, High OI & Low TMX and Low OI & High TMX have no significance in JS.

2. Further discussion

Our results showed that OI can strengthen the relationship between TMX and JS.

05/ Conclusion

Discussion1. Research

(a) We have external validity, which can be utilized in different industries(b) Add more moderators to try to find different relationship in the model of IV to DV

2. Practical

(a) Suggest companies to enhance both TMX and OI to increase JS(b) Companies can try to increase employees OI first and then can make it much easy to

increase JS if the company increases TMX

05/ Conclusion

Limitation & Recommendation1. Sample size too small

2. Software: SPSS, LISREL, AMOS, Smart PLS

3. Limitation of Control Variables

(a) Tenure: Most of our samples (half) worked for less than 3 years.(b) Add an additional control variable: Level of Education.

ReferenceAdams, J. S. （1963）。 Towards an understanding of inequity。The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology， 67（5），頁 422。

Ashforth, B. E.、Mael, F. （1989）。 Social identity theory and the organization。Academy of management review， 14（1），頁 20-39。

Dutton, J. E.、Dukerich, J. M.、Harquail, C. V. （1994）。 Organizational images and member identification。Administrative science quarterly， 39（2）。

Knippenberg, D.、Schie, E. （2000）。 Foci and correlates of organizational identification。Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology， 73（2），頁 137-147。

Liu, Y.、Loi, R.、Lam, L. W. （2011）。 Linking organizational identification and employee performance in teams: the moderating role of team-member exchange。The International Journal of Human Resource Management， 22（15），頁3187-3201。

Locke, E. A. （1976）。 The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction1。

Mael, F.、Ashforth, B. E. （1992）。 Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification。Journal of organizational Behavior， 13（2），頁 103-123。

PING, F. S.（2010）。THE MEDIATING EFFECTS OF LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE (LMX) AND。Hong Kong Baptist University Hong Kong。

Pollack, J. M.（2009）。Social ties and team-member exchange as antecedents to performance in networking groups。Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia。

ReferenceRiketta, M. （2005）。 Organizational identification: A meta-analysis。Journal of Vocational Behavior， 66（2），頁 358-384。Seibert, S. E.、Kraimer, M. L.、Liden, R. C. （2001）。 A social capital theory of career success。Academy of Management Journal， 44（2），頁 219-237。

Tietjen, M. A.、Myers, R. M. （1998）。Motivation and job satisfaction。Management decision， 36（4），頁 226-231。

Van Dick, R.、Christ, O.、Stellmacher, J.、Wagner, U.、Ahlswede, O.、Grubba, C.等人（2004）。 Should I stay or should I go? Explaining turnover intentions with organizational identification and job satisfaction*。British Journal of Management， 15（4），頁 351-360。

Van Eerde, W.、Thierry, H. （1996）。 Vroom's expectancy models and work-related criteria: A meta-analysis。Journal of applied psychology， 81（5），頁 575。

White, A. P.（2008）。An Examination of Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District Employee Job Satisfaction。Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University。

安鴻瑋（2012）。人格特質, 領導成員交換關係, 團隊成員交換關係與組織承諾之研究-以團隊私人關係為干擾變數。成功大學企業管理學系學位論文，頁1-85。

陳冠諭（2011）。僕人式領導及組織文化與新進員工組織認同關係研究-以 C 公司員工人格特質為干擾變數。成功大學高階管理碩士在職專班 (EMBA) 學位論文，頁 1-92。

劉宗愷（2012）。領導風格, 領導成員交換關係, 團隊成員交換關係與工作滿意度之研究-以領導與成員之私人關係為干擾變數。

Thank you foryour attention!

Presented By │ 林尚賢、陳彥翰、邱淑敏、黃奕祿、 Tomio