Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chapter 5
Resu l t s II
There are two possible outcomes: If the result confirms the hypothesis, then
you've made a measurement. If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then
you've made a discovery- Enrico Fermi (1901 -1954)
The objective of this chapter is to answer the broad research question of
identifying the significance of individual and organizational factors in impacting
the value of recognition for employees. This chapter presents the descriptive
results of the study, outlines each of the independent variables and their
relationship with the dependent variables, presents the regression analysis for
the variables, analyses data across the sectors and the organizations and reports
employee choices as regards the delivery of recognition. To maintain specificity,
the chapter is divided into three sections: Part I presents the descriptive and
correlational results and Part II reports the findings from the regression analysis
and Part III presents the cross sector and cross organization analysis along with
the results on delivery of recognition.
1.0. Part I
1.1. Individual Demographic Variables
l . i . i . Age
The first demographic variable under study was the employee's age. It was
hypothesized that younger employees may differ in their perception of
recognition as compared to older employees. The minimum age was 21 while the
maximum was 58 with the mean being 35-90 years. The sample was as such
-170-
Results II
dominated by younger employees (less than 40 years of age) who constituted
73.8%, while the older employees were 26.2% of the sample. Age was not found
to have an impact on employee's value for recognition (p>.01). The obvious
inter-linkages found were with years of experience (r=.959) and career stage
(r=.383, p<.01). Age also correlated significantly with an individual's past
experiences of non-monetary recognition (r=.099, p<.05). It is understandable
that with increasing age, the opportunities to experience nonmonetary
recognition would increase. Another significant correlation was found with
organization recognition score (r= -.145, p<.01). This implied that as an
individual matures she or he perceives organization practices as negative.
Age Figure 5.1 Distribution of cases across Age
- 171 -
Results II
1.1.2. Sex
The sample was predominantly male (312) with just 88 women managers. This was
owed to the gende r ratio in the population; more men are part of the Indian
workforce.
The hypothesis that men and women will value recognition differently was rejected
as the correlation was found to be insignificant (p>.01). No other significant
relationship was found between sex and other psycho-social and organizational
factors. Employees' perception of recognition was independent of their gender. This
result corresponds with the finding of researcher's earlier study.
Bar Chart
Male Female
Sex
Figure 5.2 Distribution of Cases across Sex and Age
- 172-
Results II
1.2. Individual Functional Variables 1.2.1.
Years of work experience
The minimum value for years of experience was one year (since one year of
experience was the inclusion criteria), and the maximum was 36 and the mean being
12.29 years.
20.00 Years of work expe rience
40.00
Mean =12.29 Std. Dev. =8.464 N =400
Figure 5.3 Distribution of cases across years of work experience
This variable was studied to ascertain differences in the perception of employees, but
was found to be insignificant in impacting employee's recognition value score
(p>.01). A positive significant correlation was however established with individual's
self belief about non-monetary recognition (r=.104, p<.01). This
173
30.00
Results II
could be attributed to the fact that with more experience the opportunities of
witnessing recognition would have been more and as such an individual's belief
would be influenced.
Years of experience also correlated significantly with top management's belief
about non-monetary recognition (r= -.121, p<.05) and organization recognition
score (r= -.166, p<.01). This is to say that as work experience increases employees
perceive top management as not believing in non-monetary recognition and also
become skeptical about the organization recognition practices. Age also
correlated negatively with organization recognition score (r= -.145, p<.01); that is
to say that as one matures, one becomes more vocal about feelings.
1.2.2. Career Stage
The sample constituted of managers from three levels; junior (34%), middle
(52%) and senior (14%). It was hypothesized that managers at senior levels will
value recognition more than the mangers at junior or middle levels. This
hypothesis was however rejected as the difference in manager's perception of
recognition across the three stages was found to be insignificant (p>.01). Career
stage however correlated significantly with self-belief about non-monetary
recognition (r=.105, p<.05) and negatively with senior's belief about non
monetary recognition (r= .104, p<.01).
-174-
Results II
Bar Chart
Male Female
Sex
Figure 5.4 Distribution of cases across career stages
1.2.3. Function
Function referred to the area of expertise for managers or the function in which
they were working at the time of data collection. This was documented under five
specializations of Human resource, Information technology, Sales, Marketing,
-175-
Results II
Finance, and Any other. Figure 5.5 depicts the distribution of cases across functions.
No difference was reported across the various functions as regards employee
recognition value score.
Figure 5.5 Distribution of cases across
functions
-176-
Results II
Dependent variables
Age Young
" " Old S e x Male
Female Years o f
exper ience Career Stage Junior Middle Senior
Funct ion HR IT
Sales Finance
Marketing Any Other
N
4 0 0
295 105 4 0 0 312 8 8
4 0 0
4 0 0
136 208 56
4 0 0
54 100 66
35 25
120
M e a n
30.47 30.14
30.44 30.19
30.81 29.98 30.88
31.07 30.03 31.21 29.06 29.92
30.41
S D
3.853 4.402
3.927 4.269
3.862
3.977 4.324
4.184 4.118 3-502
5-035 4.010 3.650
r
-.023
-.026
-.024
-.028
-.034
t
.729
.515
F(2,397)= 2.259
F(5,394)= 1.903
Sig .
.650 .276
.607
.426
.632
•573
.106
•093
Table 5.1
Individual demographic and Functional Factors and ERVS
1.3. Individual Psycho-Social Factors
1.3.1. Work Locus of Control (WLOC)
WLOC measures the extent to which the individual is internal or external as
regards the work life. Lower score on the scale implied internality of locus while a
higher score suggested an external locus. The minimum value for an individual
was found to be 17; the maximum was 70 with the mean being 42.29. For
analytical convenience, the variable was classified into four categories of highly
internal, somewhat internal, somewhat external and highly external. The
maximum number of cases were found to be somewhat internal (n=250, 62.5%)
and no case was recorded in the highly external category.
-177-
Results II
The relationship between WLOC and employee recognition value score found
through Pearson correlation was found to be significant and negative (r= -.383,
p<.01). This implied that if an individual's locus of control was external, then
he/she would value recognition less as compared to those with an internal locus
of control. The linear relationship is also validated through the scatter plot.
Figure 5.6 Scatter Plot- Work Locus of Control
Null hypothesis of no difference between the mean value of employee recognition
value score across different categories of WLOC is tested through one-way
ANOVA, and t-tests are done across combinations of two categories for WLOC
(see table 5.1). In each of the cases, null hypothesis is rejected (p<.oi). Thus
-178-
Results II
WLOC emerged as a significant factor in determining the value of recognition for
employees.
No significant difference was found between men and women managers as
regards their WLOC. Also age did not indicate any relationship with an
employee's locus of control. Thus no relationship was established between WLOC
and individual demographic factors. Also the individual functional variables of
career stage, years of experience and function did not indicate any relationship
with an employee's locus of control.
However significant correlations were noted with other psycho-social and
organizational factors. Significant negative correlation were established with an
individual's self-belief about non-monetary recognition (r= -.334, p<.01); top
management belief (r= -.298, p<.01); senior's belief about non-monetary
recognition (r= -.245, p<.01); relations with senior (r= -.260, p<.01) and
organization recognition score (r= -.240, p<.01). That is as the value on WLOC
for an individual increases, his/her belief about non-monetary recognition will be
affected. Externals would thus not believe in the power of recognition and they
would also perceive others (top management and superior) to have negative
views on recognition. Consequently externals are skeptical about recognition and
find organization recognition practices as insignificant to their work. The
negative correlation with employee recognition value score is thus explained.
Since externals do not believe in recognition, they as a result do not value it as
much. Likewise as externals find organizational members (top management and
superior) as not believing in recognition, they also find organizational practices
as inconsequential. Furthermore, WLOC correlates negatively with relations with
-179-
Results II
superior, that is to say that externals tend to share not as good relations with
superior as internals do.
1.3.2. Past experience with non-monetary recognition
Higher value on the items measuring an individual's past experience indicated a
positive past experience with non-monetary recognition. The minimum value
obtained for this variable was 3, the maximum was 10 and the mean was 7.07.
This implied that most of the employees had an above average positive past
experience with non-monetary recognition. A significant positive correlation was
established between past experience and employee recognition value score (r=
.283, p<.01). This implies that with an increase in the value for past experience,
that is better the exposure/experience with non-monetary recognition, more is
the value associated with it by an employee.
Further analysis involved testing the null hypothesis through one sample t test.
The null hypothesis was rejected since p<.01. Thus with a change in the value of
past experience of non-monetary recognition, the corresponding value of
employee recognition value score also changes. That is the past experience with
non-monetary recognition is an important factor in determining how employees
will value recognition. No significant difference in the past experience of men and
women was established. Linkages with age (r=.099, p<.05) and years of
experience (r=.103, p<.05) were obvious. Career stage and function were not
found to be related to an individual's past experience. The important
relationships were however established between past experience and other
psycho-social and organizational variables. Significant negative correlation (r= -
-180-
Results II
.262, p<.01) is noted between past experience and WLOC which implies that as an
individual's experience with non-monetary recognition is improved or when an
individual has more positive experiences with non-monetary recognition, there is a
shift in his/her locus of control. That is internals tend to have a more positive
experience with non-monetary recognition than externals.
Histogram
Past experience of NMR
Figure 5.7 Descriptive Results- Past Experience of NMR
Also following from social learning theory, it is observed that as an individual's
positive experiences with non-monetary recognition are increased, the individual's
self-belief about non-monetary recognition (r= .331, p<.01) is also enhanced.
Furthermore the individual then perceives the significant others in the environment
(top management (r=.252, p<.01) and superior (r=.383, p<.01) to
- 181 -
Results II
also have a positive belief towards non-monetary recognition. This leads to a positive
perception of organization recognition practices (r=.350, p<.01) and eventually the
individual starts valuing the recognition received (r=.283, p<.01). Positive past
experiences also help improve relations with the superior (r=.291, p<.01).
1.3.3 . Self-belief about non-monetary recognition
The minimum value was 15 and maximum 35 with a mean value of 25.07. A
significant positive correlation (r=.255, p<.01) was established between self-belief
and employee recognition value score which implies that with a stronger belief in
non-monetary recognition the value attached to it will also be higher.
Histogram
Self Belief about NMR
Figure 5.8 Descriptive Results- Self-belief about NMR
-182-
Results II
Null hypothesis of no difference in the mean value of employee recognition value
score for different values of self-belief is tested through one sample t test. Ho is
rejected since t value is significant at p<.01.It is thus concluded that individual's
self-belief about non-monetary recognition is an important factor in determining
the value of recognition for managers.
Dependent variables
WLOC Highly
Internal Somewhat Internal
Somewhat Internal
Somewhat External
Somewhat External Highly
Internal Past
Experience Self-Belief
N
4 0 0 116
250
250
34
34
116
4 0 0
4 0 0
Mean
42.29 32.25
29.92
29.92
27.50
27.50
32.25
7.07
25.07
SD
10.186
3 4 4 1
3.867
3.867
4.121
4.121
3.441
1.340
3.478
r
-.383
.283
•255
t
5-559
3.391
6.758
105.552
144.169
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000 Table 5.2
Individual Psycho-social Factors and Employee recognition value score
Individual demographic variables (age and sex) were found to be insignificant in
influencing an individual's self-belief about non-monetary recognition. Of the
three functional variables, years of experience (r= .104, p<.05) and career stage
(r=.105, P<-05) were found to establish a significant positive impact on an
individual's self-belief about non-monetary recognition. That is as an individual's
years of experience increased, his/her exposure to non-monetary recognition
would have also increased and consequently his/her belief about non-monetary
- 183-
Results II
recognition would also improve. A higher score on self belief also indicated better
relations with superior (r=.101, p<.05)
1.4. Organizational Factors
1.4.1. Top management's belief about non-monetary recognition
The minimum value obtained was 2 and the maximum was 10 with a mean value of
6.53.
Top Management belief about non-monetary recognition
Figure 5.9 Descriptive Results- Top Management Belief about NMR
Significant positive correlation was found between top management's belief and
employee recognition value score (r= .524, p<.01) which implies that employees
value recognition more if the top management of the organization believes in
- 184-
Results II
non-monetary recognition. One sample t test was found significant and the null
hypothesis was rejected. Thus top management's belief emerged as a significant
factor in determining the dependent variable employee recognition value score.
Furthermore top management belief was found to be significantly correlated with
other organizational variables. Significant correlation was found between top
management's belief and senior's belief (r=.644, p<.01). That is if the top
management believed in recognition, other managers also nurtured the same
belief. This is primarily because the philosophy and beliefs of top management is
cascaded down to all levels of the organization becoming the organization
culture. It was also noted that as top management's belief in recognition
improved employees tend to share better relations with their superior (r=.376,
p<.01). This is perhaps owed to the correlation between top management's belief
and senior's belief in non-monetary recognition.
Finally top management's belief in non-monetary recognition was found to be
significantly correlated with organization recognition score (r=.702, p<.01). This
implies that as the top management's belief in the power of non-monetary
recognition improves, organization recognition practices are also advanced. This
is obvious because a focus from top management is a prerequisite to the
establishment of any practice in the organization. Top management's belief is
reflected through their active participation which gets translated into setting up
of systems and practices in the organization.
-185-
Results II ¦
1.4.2. Senior's belief about non-monetary recognition
The minimum value obtained was 3 and the maximum was 15 with a mean value
of 10.42 which implied that most of the employees found their superior to have a
positive belief about non-monetary recognition practices.
Senior's belief about Non-monetary recognition
Figure 5.10 Descriptive Results- Senior's belief about NMR
A significant positive correlation (r=.472, p<.01) was found between superior's belief
and employee recognition value score. Null hypothesis was also rejected
-186-
Results II
through the one sample t test. Thus superior's belief emerged as a significant
variable in determining the employee recognition value score.
Another important relationship was established between senior's belief and the
relations that an employee shares with the senior (r=.612, p<.01). That is to say
that an individual tends to share good relations with her/his senior if the senior
also believes in non-monetary recognition. When an individual perceives her/his
senior to believe in recognition, they tend to share better relations. Furthermore,
senior's belief was found to have a significant positive correlation with
organization recognition score (r=.678, p<.01) implying that positive belief is a
key factor in ensuring better recognition practices in an organization.
1.4.3. Relations with Superior
Majority of the respondents claimed to share good relations with their seniors
(84% reporting above average relations with average value being 9 on the scale).
The minimum value reported was 3, while the maximum was 15 and 11.36 was
the mean value. Pearson correlation was found significant (r=.393, p<.05) for
employee recognition value score and relations with superior. Null hypothesis
was rejected as t was found to be significant. Relations with superior were thus
critical in determining employee recognition value score to the extent that,
managers sharing good relations with superior valued recognition more than
others.
It was also observed that individual's self belief about non-monetary recognition
influenced the relations with one's superior (r=.101, p<.05). The positive
correlation indicates that as an individual's belief about non-monetary
-187-
Results II
recognition improves, so do her/his relations with super ior. Other significant
correlations were found with top management's belief (r=.376, p<.01), superior's
belief (r=.612, p<.01) and with organization recognition score (r=.445, p<.01). These
relationships indicate that when the general climate in the organization (comprising
beliefs and practices) is favorable for non-monetary recognition, employees tend to
share good relations with their superior. 1.4.4. Organization recognition score
Above average score (organization recognition score >36) was reported by 58% of
respondents; the minimum value being 12, the maximum was 58 and the mean value
at 37.58. Employees thus perceived the organization as performing well in terms of
recognizing the employees.
Organisation Recognition Score
Figure 5.11 Descriptive Results- Organization Recognition Score
-188-
Results II
Organisation Recognition Score
Figure 5.12 Scatter Plot- ERVS and ORS
A significant positive correlation (r=.516, p<.01) was established between
organization recognition score and employee recognition value score. That is
higher the organization score, better was the value attached to recognition by
employees. The positive linear correlation is also validated through the scatter
plotinfigure5.12.
The rejection of null hypothesis for all the organizational variables indicates the
significant role played by the variables in influencing the dependent variable
-189-
Results II
employee recognition value score. The results of the t tests and F test are reported
in the table 5.3. All values were significant at p<.01 level.
Independent variables
Top management's belief
Superior's belief
Relations with superior
Organization recognition score
N
400
400
400
400
Mean
6.53
10.42
11.36
37.58
SD
1.869
2.408
2.071
8.713
r
.524
.472
•393
.516
t
69.880
86.530
109.664
F=7i9-576 (5, 394)
Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
Table 5.3
Organizational Factors and Employee recognition value score
1.5. Controlling for confounding variables: Individual Variables
The above correlation analysis suggested some relationships between the
variables. It is however unclear if the relationships are on account of the
properties of the two variables or is derivative of the effect of another
confounding variable. It is through partial correlation that the true effect of
independent variables on dependent variable may be ascertained. A partial
correlation is what remains of the correlation between two variables when the
correlation with a third variable has been taken into consideration.
As obtained from the first step of analysis, the individual factors that were
significant in determining the dependent variable employee recognition value
score, were the individual psycho-social factors: WLOC (r= -.383, effect
size=14.5%), past experience with non-monetary recognition (r=.283, effect
size=7.8%), and individual's self-belief about non-monetary recognition( r=.255,
effect size=6.3%). The impact made by each of these factors on the dependent
190-
Results II
variable was analyzed with respect to other factors that may possibly influence
them. The impact made by individual psycho-social factors was thus analyzed in
the light of individual demographic factors (age and sex) which were found as
insignificant in impacting the psycho-social variables. Thereafter the functional
variables were also 'partialled out' and were found as insignificant in impacting
the correlation between the psycho-social factors and the dependent variable.
However when the effect of each of the psycho-social variables was controlled for
another variable from the same category, results were found to be significant. It
was found that WLOC did not correlate substantially with the dependent variable
employee recognition value score when controlled for the variable past
experience with non-monetary recognition. The partial correlation between
WLOC and employee recognition value score with past experience partialled out
was significant: R partial (400) = -.33 with p<.01. Likewise the partial correlation for
WLOC and ERVS when controlled for self-belief was also significant: r partial
(400) = -.327, p<.01. When self-belief and past experience were controlled
together, the correlation between ERVS and'WLOC was reduced significantly
implying the role of the two variables. From r= -.383 at p<.01, the correlation was
reduced to r= -.302 at p<.01.
Control variables
Past experience and Self-belief about NMR
ERVS Correlation Significance df WLOC correlation Significance df
ERVS 1.000 .000 0 -.302 .000 396
WLOC -.383 .000 398 1.000 .000 0
Table 54 Controlling for Past experience and Self-belief
-191 -
Results II
The effect of self-belief on WLOC was further validated through the regression
analysis which indicated a large (10.9%) effect. Past experience with non
monetary recognition contributed to a moderate influence on WLOC (6.6%).
Further analysis of individual variables indicated that an individual's past
experiences with non-monetary recognition impact significantly her or his self-
belief about non-monetary recognition with the effect size being 10.8%.
Model
Predictor: Past experience Dependent variable: WLOC Predictor: Self-belief Dependent variable: WLOC Predictor: Past Experience Dependent variable: Self Belief
R
.262
•334
•331
R Square
.069
.112
.110
Adjusted R Square
.066
.109
.108
Standard Error of Estimate 9.842
9.612
3285
Table 5.5 Model Summary- Psycho-Social Variables
1.6. Controlling for confounding variables: Organizational Variables
The influence of the four organizational variables on the dependent variable
employee recognition value score has been validated through the correlation
analysis. It however remains to be seen as to which of the organizational variables
is the most significant and which if partialled out will impact the correlation
between other variables. It was found through partial correlation analysis that the
correlation between organization recognition score and employee recognition
value score was notably reduced when controlled for top management's belief.
Very little of the earlier correlation (r=.516, p<.01) remains after partial
correlation r partial (400) = .245, p<.01. Likewise the correlation between
senior's belief and employee recognition value score was also reduced when
- 192-
Results II
controlled for top management's belief, r partial (400) =.207 at p<.01. However
the most significant difference in the correlation between senior's belief and
employee recognition value score was obtained for controlling organization
recognition score and top management's belief together; from r= .472, the
correlation reduced to r= .120 at p<.01.
Control variable
Top Manage ment belief and ORS
ERVS Correlation Significance df Senior's belief Correlation Significance df Top Management's belief Correlation Significance df ORS Correlation Significance df ERVS Correlation Significance df Senior's belief correlation Significance df
ERVS
1.000 .
0
.472
.000 398
.524
.000 398
.516
.000 398 1.000 .
0 .120 .017 396
Senior's Belief
.472
.000 398 1.000 .
0
.644
.000 398
.678
.000 398 .120 .017 396 1.000 .
0
Top Management 's Belief .524 .000 398 .644 .000 398
1.000 .
0
.702
.000 398
ORS
.516
.000 398 .678 .000 398
.702
.000 398
1.000 ,
0
Table 5.6 Controlling for Organization Variables-One
Partial correlation also exposed the important role of relations shared with the
superior; it was found that the correlation between senior's belief and employee
recognition value score, and, the correlation between organization recognition
score and employee recognition value score was significantly reduced when
controlled for relations shared with the superior. This implies that for an
-193-
Results II
employee to value recognition it is imperative that she or he shares good relations
with the superior. See table 5.7
Control variables
Relations with Superior
ERVS Correlation Significance df ORS Correlation Significance df Senior's belief Correlation Significance df Relations with superior Correlation Significance df ERVS Correlation Significance df ORS Correlation Significance df Senior's belief Correlation Significance df
ERVS
1.000 .
0
-516 .000 398 .472
.000 398 •393
.000 398 1.000 .
0
.415
.000
397 .318
.000
.397
ORS
.516
.000 398 1.000 .
0
.678
.000 398 •445
.000 398 .415 .000 397 1.000 .
0
•573
.000
397
Senior's Belief .472 .000 398 .678 .000 398 1.000
,
0 .612
.000 398 .318 .000
397 •573 .000
397 1.000
.
0
Relations with superior •393 .000 398 •445 .000 398 .612
.000 398 1.000
.
0
Table 5.7 Controlling for Organization Variables-Two
The vital role played by top management and the senior is further validated
through regression analysis of the variables. It was found that top management's
belief had a 49.1% effect on the organization recognition score while the senior's
belief had 45.9% influence. Regression model with organization recognition score
as the dependent variable and other organization variables as predictors
-194-
Results II
suggested the importance of top management and senior's belief about non
monetary recognition in determining the organization's recognition practices.
Model l
R .763(a)
R Square .583
Adjusted R Square •579
Std. Error of the Estimate
5.651 a Predictors: (Constant), Senior's belief about NMR, Relations with senior, Top Mgmt belief about NMR b Dependent Variable: Organisation Recognition Score
Table 5.8 Model Summary (Method: Enter)-DV-ORS
Model 1 2
R .702(a) .762(b)
R Square •492 .580
Adjusted R Square
.491
.578
Std. Error of the Estimate 6.216 5.659
a Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR b Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR,
Senior's belief about NMR c Dependent Variable: Organisation Recognition Score
Table5.9 Model Summary (Method: Stepwise)- DV-ORS
As evident the value for R has not substantially reduced (from R=-763 to R=.762)
in the second model of regression which excludes the variable 'relations with
superior' implying that the variable is the least significant in determining an
organization's recognition practices.
The impact of 'relations with superior' was however observed with respect to
employee recognition value score. Regression model suggested the relevance of
top management's belief, organization recognition score and relations with
superior in determining how an employee may value the recognition bestowed on
him or her.
-195-
Results II
Model l
R .587(a)
R Square •345
Adjusted R Square .338
Std. Error of the Estimate 3.255
a Predictors: (Constant), Organisation Recognition Score, Relations with senior, Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Senior's belief about NMR b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.10 Model Summary (Method: Enter)-DV-ERVS
Model R .524(a) .565(b) .586(c)
R Square •274 .319 •344
Adjusted R Square •273 .316 •339
Std. Error of the Estimate 3412 3.309 3.253
a Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR b Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Relations with senior c Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Relations with senior, Organisation Recognition Score d Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.11 Model Summary (Method: Stepwise)-DV-ERVS
It is suggested from the regression model that excluding the variable 'senior's
belief leads to better prediction about the dependent variable employee
recognition value score.
Results II
2.0. Part II
The objective of this section will be to assess the quantum of impact made by the
predictors on the constant or the dependent variable. This will be accomplished
through the regression analysis of each of the variables independently and in
combination with other variables.
2.1. Individual demographic variables
A fairly small and insignificant effect (.2%, p>.05) was recorded for age, implying
that individuals valued recognition irrespective of their age. Like wise for sex also
recorded a small insignificant effect on employee recognition value score (.2%,
p>.05). Age and Sex together contributed to a small effect of 0.4%.
2.2. Individual Functional Variables
Years of work experience had a small (0.2%, p>.05) effect on employee
recognition value score. Similar effects were obtained for functional area (0.1%)
and career stage (0.2%). Together the functional variables contributed to a
miniscule effect of .5%.
The combined effect of individual demographic and functional variables was 1%
making these factors insignificant in determining the employee recognition value
score.
Model 1
R .054(a)
R Square .003
Adjusted R Square -.010
Std. Error of the Estimate 4.020
a Predictors: (Constant), Career Stage, Sex, Function, Age, Years of work experience b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.12 Model Summary-Individual demographic and functional Variables
- 197-
Results II
2.3. Individual Psycho-Social Factors
2.3.1. WLOC
An individual's internality or externality of locus did show an influence on the
way an individual may value recognition. WLOC had a large effect of 14.5% on the
dependent variable with the standard error of estimate as 3.700.
2.3.2. Past experience with non-monetary recognition
An average effect of 7.8% was reported by an individual's past experience with
non-monetary recognition.
2.3.3. Self-belief about non-monetary recognition
An individual's self belief about non-monetary recognition had a medium effect
of 6.3% on employee's recognition value score.
Altogether an individual's psycho-social variables contributed a large effect of
18.4% on the dependent variable with the standard error of estimate at 3.613.
Model 1
R •436(a)
R Square .191
Adjusted R Square .184
Std. Error of the Estimate
3.613 a Predictors: (Constant), Self Belief about NMR, Past experience of NMR, Final WLOC b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 543 Model Summary-Individual Psycho-social Variables
Taken together the individual factors (demographic, functional and psycho
social) influence the employee recognition value score to 18.1% (See table 5.14)
which is considered as a large effect on the dependent variable. The normal
-198-
Results II
probability plot indicates the linearity and homogeneity of variance across the
variables. See Figure 5.13
Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual
Independent Variables: Individual Psycho-Social Factors
Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
-199-
Model 1
R 445(a)
R Square .198
Adjusted R Square .181
Std. Error of the Estimate 3.620
a Predictors: (Constant), Self Belief about NMR, Function, Sex, Age, Past expenence of NMR, Final WLOC, Career Stage, Years of work experience b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.14 Impact of Individual Variables
Results II
2.4. Organizational Variables
2.4.1. Top management belief about non-monetary recognition
It was found that the top management of an organization could influence the
employee recognition value score to a large extent with an effect size of 27.3%.
2.4.2. Superior's belief about non-monetary recognition
An effect of 22.1% was reported by the senior's belief in non-monetary
recognition.
2.4.3. Relations with superior
It was found that an employee's recognition value score was affected to a large
extent of 15.3% by the kind of relations that an individual shares with her or his
senior.
2.4.4. Organization recognition score
The organization's recognition practices had a large influence on the way
employees perceive recognition and value it. Organization recognition score
reported an effect size of 26.5% on the employee recognition value score.
The overall effect of organizational variables on the dependent variable employee
recognition value score was considerable with an effect size of 33.8%
Model 1
R .587(a)
R Square
•345
Adjusted R Square .338
Std. Error of the Estimate
3255 a Predictors: (Constant), Organisation Recognition Score, Relations with senior, Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Senior's belief about NMR b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.15 Model Summary- Organization Variables
To further substantiate the results, the above found relationships were controlled
for individual self belief about recognition. The possibility of one's self belief
-200-
Results II
impacting the perception of others was checked with the effect of variable
partialled out for the correlation between top management belief and
organization recognition score. The partial correlation analysis however did not
indicate an influence of one's self belief about non-monetary recognition in
determining other people's perception. The correlation between top management
belief and organization recognition score (r partial (400) =.703 at p<.01) and
between senior belief and organization recognition score (r partial (400) =.679 at
p<.01) was not reduced substantially indicating no effect of one's own self-belief.
Furthermore the correlation between organization recognition score and
employee recognition value score was controlled for self-belief and was found to
have no influence (r partial (400)=-532 at p<.01). These results indicate that the
relationships noted between organization variables were independent of self-
belief of individuals.
2.5. Combined effect of individual and organization variables on
employee recognition value score
The effect of all individual and organizational variables on employee recognition
value score was assessed through regression with both enter and stepwise
methods. It was found that the most important variables that made the
significant impact (effect size= 40.3%) were Top Mgmt belief about non
monetary recognition , Individual's WLOC, Organization Recognition Score, Self
Belief about non-monetary recognition and Relations with senior.
-201-
Results II
Model 1
R
.647(a) R Square .419
Adjusted R Square .401
Std. Error of the Estimate 3.097
a Predictors: (Constant), Organisation Recognition Score, Self Belief about NMR, Function, Sex, Career Stage, Final WLOC, Age, Relations with senior, Past experience of NMR, Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Senior's belief about NMR, Years of work experience b Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.16 Model Summary (Method: Enter)- Combined effect
Model 1
2
3
4
5
R
.524(a)
.575(b)
.609(c)
.630(d)
.641(e)
R Square .274
331 370
•397 •411
Adjusted R Square 273 .328 .366
391
.403
Std. Error of the Estimate 3.412 3.280
3.187 3122 3090
a Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR b Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Final WLOC c Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Final WLOC, Organisation Recognition Score d Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Final WLOC, Organisation Recognition Score, Self Belief about NMR e Predictors: (Constant), Top Mgmt belief about NMR, Final WLOC, Organisation Recognition Score, Self Belief about NMR, Relations with senior f Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Table 5.17 Model Summary (Method: Stepwise)- Combined effect
It is observed from the model summary that the value for R with all the individual
and organizational variables included is .647 and is hardly reduced with the
exclusion of less important variables R= .641. That is to say that, individual
demographic and functional variables are insignificant and in case of
organizational variables senior's belief is the least significant determinant of
employee recognition value score.
The normal probability plot confirms that the assumptions of linearity and
homogeneity of variance were tenable as all the points lie along the diagonal.
-202-
Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual
Dependent Variable: Employee Recognition Value Score
Observed Cum Prob
Figure 5.14 Probability Plot-Individual and organization variables
- 2 0 3 -
Results II
Results II
3.0. Part III
3.1. Sector wise analysis
One of the important objectives of the study was to analyze the differences in
employee perception of non-monetary recognition across the two sectors of
economy. Significant differences were noted for organization recognition score
and employee recognition value score for the comparison between the public and
private sectors.
ORS
ERVS
Public
Private
Public
Private
N
112
288
112
288
Minimum
13
12
15
17
Maximum
52
58
39
40
Mean
3399
38.97
29.67
30.67
SD
8.053
8.573
4.145
3915
t
5305
2.249
Sig.
.000
.025
Standard Error
.761
505
392
.231
Table 5.18
Sector-wise differences
It was noted that the mean value for organization recognition score was higher
for the private sector and was significant at p<.01. Likewise the value for
employee recognition value score was also higher in case of organizations under
private sector and was statistically significant at p<.05.
Other significant differences found across the two sectors were in case of
organizational variables. Top management's and senior's belief in non-monetary
recognition was significantly higher in case of private sector organizations
0=3.527, p<.01 and t=2.882, p<.01). Employees were also found to report better
relations with their superior in case of private sector organizations.
-204-
Results II
Top Management Belief Senior's Belief Relations with Senior
Sector
Public Private
Public Private Public Private
N
112
2 8 8
112
2 8 8
112
2 8 8
Minimum
2
2
3 3 3 4
Maximum
10
10
15
15
15
15 Table 5.19
Mean
6.01
6.73
9.87 10.63 10.88
11-54
SD
1.788 1.863
2.499 2.341 2.138 2.019
t
3-527
2.882
2.877
Sig.
.000
.004
.004
Standard Error .169 .110
.236
.138
.202
119
Sector-wise differences in case of organization variables
Individual differences across the two sectors were insignificant (p>.01) with just
self-belief of individuals as higher in case of public sector organization with
p<.05.
WLOC
Past Experience Self-Belief
Sector
Public Private Public Private Public Private
N
112
2 8 8
112
2 8 8
112
2 8 8
Minimum
17
19
4
3 18
15
Maximum
6 6
7 0
10
10
35
3 5
Mean
42.51 42.21
7.14 7.04 2 5 7 4 24.81
SD
8.550 10.767 1.265 1.369 3 3 5 0 3497
t
-.262
-.678
2.431
Sig.
•794
•498
.016
Standard Error . 808
6 3 4 .120 .081
.317
.206 Table 5.20
Sector-wise differences in case of individual variables
3.2. Intra-Organization differences
Comparative analysis of the seven organizations for the mean organization
recognition score and mean employee recognition value score confirmed the
linear positive correlation between the two variables 0=723, p<.01). The line
graph indicates the relationship and also points towards a significant finding. The
graph indicates that with an increase in the value of mean organization
recognition score, (that is as the organization enhances its recognition practices),
-205-
Results II
there is an increase in the score of mean employee recognition value score (that is
the value of recognition for employees is enhanced).
However the value of recognition after reaching an optimum point, starts
reducing with further increase in mean organization recognition score and
achieves a constant state with any further increase in mean organization
recognition score. This constant point is however less than the optimum level
that employee recognition value score had achieved.
mean_orgscore
Figure 5.15 Intra-organization differences
-206-
Results II
One important implication is that organizations must keep a track of its
recognition practices and do not overdo it. It is important to develop a balanced
recognition platform such that employee's value the recognition received. Adding
further recognition forums will not enhance the value of recognition for
employees.
Further intra-organization analysis involved testing the null hypothesis of no
difference in the mean value of employee recognition value score with a change in
the mean value of organization recognition score. One way ANOVA was used and
F value was found significant, that is the difference found was not due to
sampling error, and hence the null hypothesis was rejected. That is to say, an
organization's recognition practices make a critical impact on how employees
value the recognition received.
Comparison of organizations involved analysis of the organization variables so as
to ascertain the differences across organizations. It is illustrated from the values
as shown in table 5.21 that the organization (FMCGi) which has the best values
for organization recognition score also scores the best in terms of other
organization variables. Likewise the organization (public sector organizations)
with the least score for organization recognition score has the least values for
other variables. The correlation between the organization variables as noted in
the earlier section is thus further validated through the cross-organization
analysis.
-207-
Results II
Table 5. 21 Intra-Organization Differences
Organization Variable Top Management Belief
Senior's Belief
Relations with Senior
Organization recognition score
Employee recognition value score
Organization
IT FMCGi FMCG2
FMCG3 ENGG P U B i PUB 2 IT FMCGi FMCG2
FMCG3 ENGG P U B i PUB 2 IT FMCGi FMCG2
FMCG3 ENGG P U B i PUB 2 IT FMCGi FMCG2
FMCG3 ENGG P U B i PUB 2 IT FMCGi FMCG2
FMCG3 ENGG P U B i PUB 2
N
i l l 42
41
42 52 64 48 111 42
41 42 52 64 48 111 42
41 42 52 64 4 8 111 42 41 42 52 64 48 111 42
41 42 52 64 4 8
Minimum
2
4 3 2
3 2 2
3 7 6
3 7 3 3 4 6 6 6 6
3 5 12
19 26 12
23 13 13 17 22 20
23 22
19 !5
Maximum
10 10 10 10 10 10
9 15 14 15 14 15 15 15 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 53 55 56 52 58 50 52 39 39 36 4 0 4 0 39 38
Mean
6.23 7.69 7.10 6.98 6.56 6.30
5.63 9.81 11.62 11.10 10.83 11.06 9.88
9.85 11.32 11.79 11.61 11.21 12.02
10.94 10.81
3 5 9 8 4 4 6 4 40.88
38.57 3 9 6 0
3 3 9 5 34.04 30.26 30.90 30.56 31.79 30.52 30.30 28.83
SD
1.957 1.554 1.546 2.042 1.614 1.866 1.619 2.546 1.860
1.947 2.388
1 9 6 5 2-734 2.173 2.111 1.690
1.935 2.269 1.863 2.309 1.909 8.620
8.354 7.277 8.668
6.774 8.768 7.080
4.333 2.962
3-654 3 8 0 3
3 8 9 3 4.297 3.817
F
6.811
5 6 3 0
2.363
11.487
2.268
Sig.
.000
.000
.030
.000
037
3.3. Delivery of recognition
The study involved identifying the factors important to the recognition process
which when incorporated in the system would increase the value of recognition
for employees. This was accomplished through correlation and regression
-208-
Results II
analysis of independent variables with the dependent variable. Further
investigation involved ascertaining the key elements of delivery of recognition. It
was aimed that a model for delivery of recognition may be designed keeping in
view individual employee's characteristics. It was hypothesized that since
individuals are different there choices as regards the delivery of recognition may
also be different. The results of the data related to delivery of recognition
however corroborated with the earlier quantitative analysis and indicated no
relevance of individual demographic and functional factors in determining the
choices.
Chi-square tests for association across nominal variables were conducted. Null
hypothesis of no difference across sex was checked for deliver setting, form,
forum, timing, person and token. All the chi-square values were found
insignificant (p>.05) and consequently the null hypothesis was accepted. That is
no difference was observed across men and women managers as per their choices
regarding delivery of recognition. Career stage functional area and WLOC were
also tested through chi-square tests and were found insignificant in determining
the delivery design. Results for the delivery of recognition were also similar
across the two sectors. That is to say that the respondents of the study did not
differ at all in their choice of delivery of recognition. As evident from the
table5.22 , the majority of respondents show similar pattern in their choice of
delivery. The most coveted recognition program must involve formal setting,
should be given in a public forum with a written document and a monetary token.
Recognition must be bestowed by the senior or top level manager and must be
given after the performance target has been achieved.
-209-
Results II
Setting: Formal Informal
Total Form: Verbal
Written Total
Person: Senior Team Total
Token: Monetary Non-Monetary
Total Forum: Public
Private Total
Timing: After Achievement
During the process of achievement
Total
Frequency 2 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0
89 311 4 0 0
3 3 2 68
4 0 0
2 3 5 165 4 0 0
334 66
4 0 0
3 0 7 93
4 0 0
Percent 5 0 5 0 1 0 0 22.2 77.8 1 0 0
83 17
1 0 0 58.8 41.2 1 0 0
83-5 16.5 1 0 0 76.8 23.2 1 0 0
Table 5. 22 Delivery of recognition
The next chapter analyses and discusses the findings from the quantitative
analysis and relates with past researches with the aim of developing
comprehensive knowledge of the phenomenon of non-monetary recognition.
- 2 1 0 -
