Download to read offline
More Related Content
Similar to presentation of Research Proposal M.Phil.pptx
More from UsmanKhalid481044
presentation of Research Proposal M.Phil.pptx
- 2. ANTECEDENTS AND OUTCOMES OFJOB EMBEDDEDNESS The critical role of job characteristics and career growth opportunities PRESENTED BY: USMAN KHALID
- 3. INTRODUCTION Mitchel, Holtom & Lee(2001) • This study provided job embeddedness theory (Why employees stay in an organization?) Crossley, Bennett, Jex, & Burnfield (2007) • This study considered the job embeddedness theory as an employee retention strategy to reduce employees turnover Nguyen, Taylor, & Bergiel (2017) • The study found some organziational factors; HRM practices, supervisor and organizational support as predictors of JE Ng & Feldman (2012), Halbesleben & Wheeler (2008) • Found performance and work-family conflict as outcomes of JE
- 4. RESEARCH AIM Toevaluate the extent of transformational leadership in creating job embeddedness with the moderating effect of job scope. To empirically test at what extent JE can reduce WFC and can enhance in-role performance when the employees are provided with career growth opportunities. To investigate the mediating impact of JE between TFL and in- role performance and WFC
- 5. PROBLEM STATEMENTS • Toidentify the strategy that might help the firms in retaining their skilled and talented employees to overcome the problem of rising firm’s costs (concrete and abstract costs) associated with the leaving of employees. • To suggest in regard the issue of low firms’ productivity in Pakistan as reported by labor market profile 2018. • To discourse the issue of work family conflict that occurs due to excess work demands from the organizations to meet their targets.
- 6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Doestransformational leadership assist in creating job embeddedness in employees? Do job characteristics take part in moderating the relationship between transformational leadership and job embeddedness? Does transformational leadership help in enhancing the in-role performance of the employees directly and through the mediation of JE? Does transformational leadership prove effective in minimizing WFC in employees directly and through the mediating influence of JE? Does job embeddedness participate in enhancing employees performance? Do career growth opportunities moderate between the relationship of JE and in-role performance? Does job embeddedness take a part in reducing work family conflict? Do career growth opportunities act as a moderator between JE and WFC?
- 7. SCOPE OF THESTUDY The past studies more focused on work attitudes as predictors of job embeddedness that motivates the employees to stay with their jobs and organizations. The current study for the first time considers the transformational leadership in predicting job embeddedness as well as its impact on enhancing the in-role performance of the employees directly and also considers its mediating effect in measuring performance of workers in the Pakistani organizations. The prior researches identified work family conflict as a negative factor in determining employees performance. The present study for the first time considers the model of reducing such conflicts of employees towards their job.
- 8. LITERTATURE REVIEW Transformationalleadership is defined as “leaders and followers make each other advance to a higher level of motivation and morality” Burns (1978). Later on, Bass in 1985 explained that transformational leadership stimulates and renovates his followers through idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration. Job embeddedness is defined as “The combined forces that keep a person to stay in his/her job” Mitchel, Holtom and Lee (2001). The job characteristics theory proposed a model of five “core” job characteristics (i.e. skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) that affect five work-related outcomes (i.e. motivation, satisfaction, performance, and absenteeism and turnover) through three psychological states (i.e. experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility, and knowledge of results) Hackman and Oldham (1974).
- 9. LITERATURE REVIEW Accordingto Q. Wang, Weng, McElroy, Ashkanasy, and Lievens (2014), career growth opportunities referred as “the degree to which employees experience career growth within their current organization (rather than the assessment of career outcomes across their total work career)”. Work family conflict is defined as “a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect” Greenhaus and Beutell (1985). The in-role performance is mainly concerned with employees efforts which are subjected to achieve the organizational goals while the extra-role performance of the employees are subjective in nature in which the workers behave beyond the required performance to improve the overall work environment and most commonly termed as citizenship behavior (Williams & Anderson, 1991).
- 10.
- 11.
- 12. SAMPLING DESIGN Non-probability Sampling •Conveniencesampling •Survey method used Target Population •Public and private organizations of diverse industry such as banks, educational institutions, manufacturing, pharmaceutical companies Sample Size •530 sample questionnaires distributed •Responsive rate 65% (342/530)
- 13. Demographic Variables FrequencyPercentage Industry Type Banking 32 9% Education 202 59% Others 108 32% Gender Male 193 56% Female 149 44% Age of Respondent 20 - 30 years 256 78% 30 - 40 years 57 17% More than 40 years 19 5% Qualification Graduation 105 31% Masters 111 32% M.Phil 100 29% Ph.D. 13 4% Others 13 4% Total working experience
- 14. SCALES MEASUREMENT Variable Name Reference Cronbach’s Alpha Current Study Cronbach’salpha Transformational leadership Welty Peachey, J. Burton, & E. Wells (2014) 0.92 0.97 Job characteristics Özbağ & Ceyhun (2014) 0.90 0.96 Job embeddedness Felps et al. (2009) 0.89 0.92 Career growth opportunities Nouri & Parker (2013) 0.93 0.90 Work family conflict Divna Haslam, Filus, Morawska, Sanders, & Fletcher (2015) 0.80 0.89 In-role Williams & Anderson (1991) 0.91 0.88
- 15. HYPOTHESES TESTING Structural equation modeling(SEM): (To test direct and mediating effect of the constructs) Process Macro by Andrew and Hayes (To test moderation effect)
- 16. MEAUREMENT MODEL Model fitnessindices Goodness of fit CFI NFI GFI RMSEA Chi-Square d.f. CMIN/ d.f. P 0.91 0.83 0.80 0.04 3413.47 1921 1.77 .000 Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008)
- 17.
- 18. STRUCTURAL MODEL (Model1) Transformational Leadership Work-family conflict In-role performance Job embeddedness
- 19. DIRECT EFFECTS Direct effectof IV and DV without mediator Transformational leadership In-role performance Work family conflict R2 = 0.14 p < .001 β=0.38 TFL IRP H3 H3 R2 = 0.18 p < .001 β= - 0.42 H6 TFL WFC
- 20.
- 21. DIRECT EFFECTS (Directeffect of IV and mediator) Transformational leadership Job embeddedness R2 = 0.41 p < .001 β=0.64 TFL JE H1
- 22. DIRECT EFFECTS (Mediatorand DV) Job embeddedness In-role performance Work family conflict R2 = 0.33 p < .001 β=0.56 JE IRP H2 R2 = 0.43 p < .001 β= - 0.65 JE WFC H5
- 23. MEDIATION EFFECTS Transformational leadership Job embeddedness In-role performance R2 = 0.33 p< .001 β=0.36 TFL JE IRP H4
- 24. MEDIATION EFFECTS Transformational leadership Job embeddedness Work –family conflict R2 =0.43 p < .001 β= - 0.41 TFL JE WFC H7
- 25.
- 26. MODEL 2 (MODERATIONEFFECT OF JOB SCOPE) Transformational Leadership Job scope Job embeddedness R2 increase= 0.012 p < .005 β = -0.107 Int TFLxJS JE WFC H9 R2 = 0.49 p < .001 β = 0.219 JS JE WFC H8
- 27. MODERATING EFFECT OFJOB SCOPE Hypotheses Relationships Estimates S.E t- value P-Value Decision Hypothesis 8 JC JE → 0.219 0.038 5.763 0.000 Supported Hypothesis 9 Int_TFLxJC JE → -0.107 0.053 - 2.019 0.045 Supported R2 increase 0.012 F 4.048 0.045
- 28. CONDITIONAL EFFECT OFMODERATOR JC Effect S.E T P -0.697 0.561 0.056 10.015 0.000 0.000 0.486 0.040 12.310 0.000 0.697 0.412 0.052 7.873 0.000
- 29. MODERATING EFFECT OFJOB SCOPE Low TFL High TFL 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Low JC High JC Job Embeddedness
- 30. MODEL 3 (MODERATINGEFFECT OF CGO) Job embeddedness Career growth opportunities In-role performance R2 increase= 0.001 p = .491 β = - 0.046 Int JExCGO IRP WFC H11 R2 = 0.41 p < .001 β = 0.26 CGO IRP WFC H10
- 31. MODERATING EFFECT OFCAREER GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES Hypotheses Relationships Estimate s S.E t-value P-Value Decision Hypothesis 10 CGO IRP → 0.262 0.05 0 5.240 0.000 Supported Hypothesis 11 Int_JExCGO IRP → -0.046 0.06 7 0.686 0.491 Not Supported R2 increase 0.00 1
- 32. MODEL 4 (MODERATINGEFFECT OF CGO) Job embeddedness Career growth opportunities Work-family conflict R2 increase= 0.054 p < .001 β = - 0.103 Int JExCGO WFC WFC H13 R2 = 0.59 p < .001 β = - 0.284 CGO WFC H12
- 33. MODERATING EFFECT OFCAREER GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES Hypotheses Hypothesis Estimates S.E t- value P-Value Decision Hypothesis 12 CGO WFC → -0.284 0.063 -4.508 0.000 Supporte d Hypothesis 13 Int_JExCGO WFC → -0.103 0.052 -1.980 0.000 Supporte d R2 increase 0.054 F 10.11 2 0.000
- 34. CONDITIONAL EFFECT OFMODERATOR CGO Effect S.E t P -0.732 -0.205 0.056 3.660 0.000 0.000 -0.172 0.040 4.300 0.000 0.732 -0.312 0.052 6.000 0.000
- 35. MODERATING EFFECT OFCGO Low JE High JE 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Low CGO High CGO WFC
- 36.
- 37. LIMITATIONS AND FUTUREDIRECTIONS
- 38.
- 39.
Editor's Notes
- #2 NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholder to insert your own image.