Top Reasons Behind Turnover Intentionacetutors.com.sg/blog/Final Report - MNO4319 - Justin Lee U081532E.pdf(5.8%), Healthcare & pharmaceuticals (5.8%), Electronics & manufacturing

MNO4319 – Advanced Independent Study Module

MNO4319

With Guidance from Professor Wu Pei Chuan NUS Business School U081532E Justin Lee

[TOP REASONS BEHIND TURNOVER INTENTION] Abstract: It is found in this study that the key to retaining young Singaporean employees

is in ensuring good job function fit, company fit, industry fit, and employees’ enjoyment

of work. These primary factors need to be well taken care of at the recruitment stage,

following which effort needs to be invested in secondary factors to reduce short-term

turnover intention. These secondary factors include management recognition,

opportunities for the use of skills and abilities, and career development opportunities.

Other unexpected and interesting findings were uncovered, such as the lack of

correlation between work stress levels and turnover intention, and the shorter foreseen

tenure that female employees have over male employees.

MNO4319 – Advanced Independent Study Module U081532E Justin Lee

1 | P a g e Top Reasons Behind Turnover Invention

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2

Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 3

Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 5

Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Discussion ................................................................................................................................19

Limitations .................................................................................................................................27

Concluding Remarks .................................................................................................................27

References ...............................................................................................................................28

Appendix A ...............................................................................................................................30

Appendix B ...............................................................................................................................42



Introduction

Staff turnover has been a major problem for employers since the early 1990s in

Singapore. Monthly resignation rates hit 3.4% in Singapore back in 1995, compared to

South Korea and Taiwan’s rates of 2.9% and 2.7% respectively (Barnard & Rodgers,

1998). This is led some thought leaders to describe Singapore as having a turnover

culture in as early as the 1990s (Debrah, 1993:1994). The monthly resignation rates in

Singapore have since stabilized at between 1.8% to 2.1% between 2007 and 2010

(Ministry of Manpower, 2012), with average tenure of between 4.2 years to 4.6 years.

Elsewhere in the world, data from the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) show

a relatively flat median tenure trend of between 4.7 years to 5.2 years between 1983

and 2010, for all US employees aged between 25-64. The median tenure trend of

employees aged between 25-34 however has been consistently low around 2.7 to 3.5

years from the 1950s to 2010.

The lack of more details regarding the turnover trends in Singapore, in terms of turnover

by age groups and gender, provides many areas for exploration and prompts many

interesting questions, some of which include; whether the younger employees (age 25-

34) are contributing towards the turnover culture in Singapore, just as the young

Americans are; are female and male employees equally responsible; are the gen X and

gen Y employees to blame, or are there many more dynamics involved?

This study takes its focus on the young employees of Singapore, and it aims to

undercover the whole host of factors ranging from job function, company and industry

perceptions(including attraction factors), in relation to employees’ turnover intention. In

addition, items which may be viewed as irrelevant (gender) or highly relevant (work



stress) to turnover intention are similarly examined such that a fresh and full perspective

may be garnered.

Literature Review

The trend of high turnover in Singapore has been described by some to have become a

turnover culture. A multitude of reasons have been identified as top causes for

employee turnover, including the lack of training and development opportunities (Staff

Journalist, 2012), unsatisfactory compensation, lack of flexi-hours etc. The Singapore

Human Resources Institute conducted a study regarding the employee turnover

landscape in Singapore in 2008, and its findings highlight the top 5 reasons for

employees changing their jobs. They include: unsure of career progress; lack of career

opportunity; achievement not recognized; lack of learning opportunity, challenge in the

job and expertise; and dissatisfied with the boss. It will be interesting to examine other

aspects which may be related to turnover intention, and a whole spectrum of factors will

be tested in this study to find how close are their relationships with turnover intention.

Furthermore, this study explores factors related to not only employees’ companies and

job function, it examines the employees’ perceptions with regard to their current

industry. Michael Page International Singapore published its Employee Intentions

Report (2011/12) which includes the turnover intention of employees by industry. The

top 3 industries identified with the highest turnover intention are: oil & gas; property &

construction; and marketing. However, the study does not examine employees’

perception of the industries per se, in relation to turnover intention. A comprehensive list



of factors could be matched against turnover intention in a single study in order to

understand the full picture behind employees’ turnover intention.

Not all turnovers are the same and organizations may experience voluntary, involuntary,

or reduction-in-force types of turnover. The effects of turnovers are generally negative

(McElroy, Morrow, and Rude, 2001) regardless of the type of turnover, and

organizations are not able to fully control the likelihood of turnover. Some research

conclude that there are benefits tied to turnover, especially functional turnover; one in

which poorly performing employees are expelled from the organization (Price, 1989).

This study focuses on voluntary turnover and the negative effects which are generally

brought about.

Staff turnover represents a significant drain of resources for companies (Abbasi &

Hollman, 2000) in terms of recruitment costs, lost investments in training as well as

business disruptions. Intangible costs are involved as well, including declining morale,

the disruption of communication and social patterns, and knowledge loss. In order to

address the problem of high staff turnover, employers need to understand the reasons

and dynamics behind employee turnover.

As in other studies, turnover intention and such equivalent variables are used to predict

turnover (Campion, 1991). This may be due to the constraints of using actual turnover,

which is normally employed in longitudinal studies. This study uses turnover intention as

the basis for predicting actual turnover due to the short-term nature of the study.



Methodology

An online survey was administered, with a total of 54 questions. 11 questions were

directed at gathering the personal and company details of respondents, while the

remaining 43 questions gathered data related to company perception, job perception

and turnover intention (refer to Appendix A). Responses were made voluntarily by the

author’s contacts and by their extended network of contacts. A total of 104 valid

responses were collected out of a total of 118 responses. The website link to the online

survey form was provided to respondents over email and over social networking website

Facebook. The first and last responses were registered between 18 Mar 2012 and 20

Apr 2012 respectively.

Among the 104 valid responses, 87.5% of respondents have university degrees or

higher and 97.1% of respondents are employed on full-time basis. Over 56.7% of

respondents work in local (Singaporean) firms, while another 20.2% work in the

American firms operating in Singapore, with the remaining 23.1% working in firms

originating from the rest of the world such as the UK, Germany, Indonesia etc.

A fair mix of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs, with less than 500 employees)

and large enterprises are represented, with 52.9% of respondents coming from the

SMEs. The majority of respondents are below the age of 30, with the average age being

26.95. 45.2% of the total respondents are males.

The average tenure of respondents is 2.16 years. The bulk of respondents are

executives and professionals (40.4% and 33.7%), with the remaining being rank-and-file

employees (12.5%) and senior managers (13.46%).



A fairly even mix of service and manufacturing industries is represented in the results.

The largest groups of respondents are from the Banking & finance and Education

industries (12.5% and 9.6% respectively); followed by Accounting & audit (6.7%),

Information technology (6.7%), Media & entertainment (6.7%), Research & development

(5.8%), Healthcare & pharmaceuticals (5.8%), Electronics & manufacturing (5.8%),

other civil services (5.8%). A mix of other industries such as aviation, consulting,

construction, retail, technical services and non-profit take up the remaining 29.8%.

Three questions related to turnover intention were asked in the survey. The questions

examine the short-term intention to stay (within the next 12 months), the long-term

intention to stay, and the main reasons underlying the likeliness or unlikeliness to stay:

- Q4.1 How many more years do you foresee yourself working at this company?

(Long-term intention to stay)

- Q4.2 What is your likelihood of switching out of this company in the next 12

months? (Short-term intention to stay)

- Q4.3 Why are you likely/unlikely to switch out of this company in the next 12

months? (Top reasons for likeliness to stay/quit)

Given the relatively short tenure of the respondents, the item “short-term intention to

stay” (Q4.2) will provide a more reliable measure of turnover intention compared to the

item “long-term intention to stay” (Q4.1). This is because many respondents are unlikely

to foresee or to have experienced the circumstances under which job switching are

likely to occur. The section on findings will therefore show greater emphasis on the

correlation factors with Q4.2 rather than Q4.1.



There were a total of 54 items in the survey. Items which can be converted into

numerical input were converted and a total of 47 items, including the items related to

turnover intention and personal particulars, had their correlation coefficient figures

calculated in the form of a correlation coefficient matrix. Only correlation coefficient

figures related to the turnover intention items were studied in detail, and there was a

total of 94 figures (see appendix B). This provides us with a wealth of information in

which interesting correlation items may be discovered.



Findings

a) Intention to Stay (Long-Term)

To test respondents’ long-term intention to stay, they were asked the question “How

many more years do you foresee yourself working at this company?” While discrete

numerical responses were expected from this question, there were respondents who

gave a range of years or even text-based answers such as “as long as my body

permits” or “as long as it exists”. In order to make better use of the data, responses

were categorized into four numerical groups in increasing order, with their frequencies

as follows:

Group Range of years Frequency

1 0-2 years 57 54.81%

2 3-4 years 25 24.04%

3 5-6 years 11 10.58%

4 7 years and above 11 10.58%

Total 104 100.00%

The median number of years that respondents foresee themselves to stay is 0-2 years.

Taking into account the existing tenure of employees of about 1.3 years, this result is

rather consistent with results from the US, whereby employees between the age of 25-

34 have a low median tenure of about 3.1 years.

b) Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

To test the intention to stay in the short-term, respondents were asked “What is your

likelihood of switching out of this company in the next 12 months?” The question used,

Q4.2, is adapted from the work of Catherine Taylor and Karl Pillemer (2009), in which



turnover intention is tested using the statement “Likelihood of quitting in the next twelve

months”. Likewise in this study, respondents are asked to answer on a 1-4 scale

representing “very likely” to “very unlikely”. The original results garnered from the

question are listed accordingly:

Scale Representation Frequency

1 Very likely 11.54%

2 Likely 26.92%

3 Unlikely 28.85%

4 Very unlikely 32.69%

Total 100.00%

c) Reasons for Staying or Leaving

The open-end question “Why are you likely/unlikely to switch out of this company in the

next 12 months?“ was used to gather qualitative data with regard to the short-term

intention to stay. Responses were generally grouped under “likeliness to leave” or

“unlikeliness to leave”. Inconsistent answers (or reasons) to this question against the

previous question of “short-term intention to stay” are not taken into account. The

general reasons were identified and the frequency of occurrences was counted. The top

5 reasons for the likeliness of a respondent to leave his/her job are as follows:

Tops Reasons for Likeliness to Leave Frequency

Seek career advancement / growth 13 35.14%

Better pay/benefits 8 21.62%

If better opportunities arise 7 18.92%

Gain more exposure 5 13.51%

Seek more work-life balance 4 10.81%

Total 37 100.00%

The top 5 reasons for the unlikeliness of a respondent to leave his/her job are:



Top Reasons for Unlikeliness to Leave Frequency

Gain more experience / learn more 24 48.00%

Enjoyment of work 8 16.00%

Meaningfulness of work 6 12.00%

Bonded (contract) 6 12.00%

Good relationship with colleagues 6 12.00%

Total 50 100.00%

d) Top Correlation Results Against Intention to Stay

A list of 47 factors supplied by respondents (from the sections of “personal particulars”,

“perception towards company”, and “industry and job function perception”) had their

correlation coefficients against “Intention to Stay” for the short-term and long-term

calculated. This produced a set of very interesting results. The overall top ten correlated

factors with “Intention to stay” and “Turnover intention” are provided in the following

table, along with the correlation coefficient figures (full table in Appendix B):

Position Intention to Stay (Long-Term) Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

1 I fit well in my job function (0.372) I fit well in my job function (0.499)

2 I enjoy working in my job function (0.339) I enjoy working in my job function (0.498)

3 Level of Position (0.335) I enjoy working at my company (0.492)

4 I fit well in my company (0.311) I have adequate opportunities to use my skills and abilities (0.391)

5 I fit well in my industry (0.301) I fit well in my company (0.388)

6 Management recognises my job performance (feedback, incentives, rewards) (0.290)

Management recognises my job performance (feedback, incentives, rewards) (0.377)

7 I find my job function attractive (0.289) I enjoy working in my industry (0.377)

8 I have autonomy and independence to make decisions (0.287)

I find my job function attractive (0.367)

9 I find my industry attractive to work in (0.280)

Career development opportunities are good (0.352)

10 I enjoy working at my company (0.278) I find my industry attractive to work in (0.349)



The factor of “fit” can be found in 5 items among the 20 listed above. We can therefore

test if it is statistically true that employees who fit well in their job function are less likely

to quit in the short-term.

The breakdown of responses to the item “I fit well in my job function” is provided:

Responses to “I fit well in my job function”

Frequency of Responses Point Scale

Strongly Disagree 1 0.96% 1

Disagree 3 2.88% 2

Neutral 20 19.23% 3

Agree 58 55.77% 4

Strongly Agree 22 21.15% 5

Total 104 100.00% -

Responses will be split into two groups; the first group being respondents who

answered “strongly disagree” or “disagree” or “neutral” to the item “I fit well in my job

function”, and the second group being respondents who answered “agree” or “strongly

agree” to the item “I fit well in my job function”. The average scores to the question

“Short-term intention to stay” of the two groups were 2.083 against 3.050. Using the

Welch’s t-test, the two-tailed test p-value is approximately 0.000187. With a chosen

alpha of 0.05, it is statistically true that employees who fit well in their job function are

less likely to quit in the short-term.

An interesting finding identified is the much higher correlation of the item “Level of

Position” with long-term intention to stay, rather than short-term intention to stay. This

factor in fact comes in as the top 3 factor for respondents’ long-term intention to stay.

The levels of position are broken into six tiers:



Representative Number Positions

1 Rank-and-file

2 Executive/Senior executive

3 Professional

4 First line manager

5 Middle manager

6 Senior manager

Intention to Stay (Long-Term) Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

Level of Position (0.335) Level of Position (0.128)

This appears consistent with prior findings from the Employee Benefit Research

Institute regarding employees in this US, where older individuals tend to have longer

tenure. Employees in Singapore may likely exhibit the same pattern of tenure according

to their age and thus their level of position.

e) Most Weakly Correlated Factors Against Intention to Stay

The 5 most weakly correlated factors with “intention to stay” provide us with some very

interesting and somewhat unexpected information. The correlation coefficient figures

are stated in brackets:

Position Factors Against Q4.1 – Longer-Term Turnover Intention

Factors Against Q4.2 – Short-Term Turnover Intention (12 mths)

1 How large is the organization you currently work for? (-0.008)

How long have you been working with your current company? (Tenure) (0.012)

2 My company's financial position is healthy (0.009)

How large is the organization you currently work for? (0.016)

3 What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place? The business/industry of the organization (-0.019)

What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place? Compensation/pay (0.029)

4 What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place? Company's reputation as a great place to work (0.023) Educational Level (0.033)



5

This industry is stable (0.027)

What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place? The business/industry of the organization (0.037)

For many fresh graduates, the attraction of high compensation in a company is often

one of the main factors for taking up a job. It is therefore interesting to note that the

attraction to compensation bears no correlation with short-term turnover intention. We

examine this phenomenon in greater detail and test whether is it statistically true that

employees who are attracted to join companies for their compensation have higher

likelihood of quitting in the short-term.

Responses to the item “What factors about your current company attracted you to join it

in the first place? Compensation/pay” are collated and split into two groups:

Responses to “What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place?

Compensation/pay”

Frequency of Responses

Point Scale


Disagree 11 10.58% 2

Neutral 34 32.69% 3

Agree 42 40.38% 4


Total 104 100.00% -

The first group consists of respondents who answered “strongly disagree” or “disagree”

to the statement, whereas the second group consists of respondents who answered

“agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement. The mean of the two groups are 3.000 and

2.824 respectively. Using the Welch’s t-test, the two-tailed test p-value is approximately

0.515. It is thus not statistically true that employees who are attracted to join companies

for their compensation are more likely to quit in the short-term.



f) Top 5 Most Correlated Company Factors with Short-Term Intention to Stay

Of the 43 questions (which are not related to personal details) put forth to respondents

in the survey, they can generally be categorized into three groups; namely factors

related to their company, factors related to their job function (HR, Sales, Marketing,

etc.), and factors related to their industry. The company-related factors are relatively

more important, as employers have greater power to manipulate the factors in order to

bring about positive change towards turnover. The five most crucial factors related to

“intention to stay” (short-term) are listed in table form below.

Position Correlation Coefficient

Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

1 0.492 I enjoy working at my company

2 0.391 I have adequate opportunities to use my skills and abilities

3 0.388 I fit well in my company

4 0.377 Management recognises my job performance (feedback, incentives, rewards)

5 0.352 Career development opportunities are good

The enjoyment of work at the company is the top correlated factor with respondents’

short-term intention to stay. This is followed by respondents’ opportunities to use their

skills and abilities. Respondents’ fit with their companies is slightly less important than

respondents’ fit with their job function, as found in the earlier finding. Management’s

recognition of respondents’ job performance and the provision of good career

development opportunities make up the remaining top 5 company-related factors.

g) Top 3 Most Correlated Job Function Factors with Intention to Stay (Short-

Term)



The three most crucial factors regarding employees’ job functions in relation to

employees’ short-term intention to stay are as listed below:



1 0.499 I fit well in my job function

2 0.498 I enjoy working in my job function

3 0.367 I find my job function attractive

The two factors of good fit and enjoyment of work in respondents’ job functions are the

overall most correlated factors with employees’ short-term intention to stay at their jobs

as well, as reported in the findings earlier. These factors will naturally contribute

significantly towards an employee’s perception of the job function as attractive or not.

h) Top 3 Most Correlated Industry Factors with Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

The three most crucial factors regarding the industry of the company in relation to

employees’ short-term intention to stay are as listed below:



1 0.377 I enjoy working in my industry

2 0.349 I find my industry attractive to work in

3 0.337 I fit well in my industry

The three factors of enjoyment of work, good fit, and attraction towards industry are

quite equally important contributing towards respondents’ short-term intention to stay.

The factors here mirror the top 3 elements of job function which correlate to short-term

intention to stay.



i) Males Foresee Themselves Staying Longer Than Females

Another interesting result is that a rather significant correlation exists between the

gender difference of employees and the long-term intention to stay. It appears that male

employees may foresee themselves staying longer with their employer than female

employees. The difference in current tenure does not distort the finding. Male

respondents in this study in fact have longer tenure than the female respondents in

terms of both median tenure (1.583 years vs. 1 year) and average tenure (2.87 years

vs. 1.58 years). We therefore test if it is statistically true that male employees foresee

themselves staying longer with their employers than female employees.

In the data analysis, males were assigned the number “1” whereas females were

assigned the number “2”, and the correlation coefficient against the long-term intention

to stay is as follows:

Intention to Stay (Long-Term)

Your gender (-0.207)

To test the statistical significance of this hypothesis, the responses were split into two

groups; responses made by male respondents and responses made by female

respondents. The average scores to the item “likely number of years of stay” of the two

groups were 2.000 against 1.579. Using the Welch’s t-test, the two-tailed test p-value is

approximately 0.042. With a chosen alpha of 0.05 it is thus statistically true that male

employees foresee themselves staying longer with their employers than female

employees.



j) More Acceptable Work-Stress Level Does Not Gain Loyalty

Work stress was surprisingly found to have little correlation with turnover intention in the

overall, according to correlation coefficients of the item “Q2.1 Work stress level is

acceptable” with “Intention to stay (short-term)”:

Intention to Stay (Long-Term) Intention to Stay (Short-Term)

Work stress level is acceptable (-0.049) Work stress level is acceptable (0.073)

This result is rather counter-intuitive, as it is normally assumed that employees who are

too stressed over work will quit in short order. In order to examine this finding in greater

detail, the data has to be processed further. The breakdown of responses to the

question “Q2.1 Work stress level is acceptable” is provided:

Responses to “Work stress level is acceptable”

Frequency of Responses Point Scale


Disagree 8 7.69% 2

Neutral 28 26.92% 3

Agree 52 50.00% 4


Total 104 100.00% -

Responses are broken into two groups; the first being respondents who “strongly

disagree” or “disagree” that work stress level is acceptable, and the second group being

respondents who “strongly agree” or “agree” that work stress level is acceptable. This is

to test whether only respondents who do not find work stress levels acceptable are

likely to quit over the next 12 months.



The average scores to the item “short-term intention to stay” of the two groups were

2.700 against 2.792. Using the Welch’s t-test, the two-tailed test p-value is

approximately 0.783. With a chosen alpha of 0.05, it is not statistically true that

employees who do not find work stress levels acceptable are more likely to quit over the

next 12 months.

This irregular result may be explained by the small sample size in the first group (N=10)

of respondents who disagree that work stress levels are acceptable. A look at the

qualitative responses to the item “reasons for intention to stay/quit” indicates that 2 of

these 10 respondents are bonded to their jobs by contract, and severance of these

contracts may lead to hefty financial penalties.



Discussion

a) Top Reasons for Employees’ Intention to Stay in the Short-Run

The top reason for employees’ intention to stay is due to career advancement and

growth which the existing companies are not able to offer. This highlights the need for

adequate internal promotion opportunities within the company in order to retain key

talents. In addition, employees are likely to look up to career development opportunities

as a means of achieving growth.

The want of better pay or benefits is the next strongest factor leading to turnover

intention. While good job openings are scarcer than usual at the time of study (Mar-Apr

2012), employees will take their chances if opportunities arise. Employers may therefore

be wary of any cases of dissatisfaction with pay of a stronger nature than usual. This is

even the case for new employees, for which individual employee benchmarks can be

set by having employees take basic satisfaction surveys at the start of employment,

such that their data can be tracked for irregularities in subsequent surveys. This should

allow the earlier detection of problems, for which rectification may be administered

sooner rather than later.

The Enjoyment of work is expected to be the top reason for employees’ unlikeliness to

leave, as the factor of enjoyment as reported in Findings part d) constantly recurs in the

top 10 correlation ranking with short-term turnover intention. However, gaining more

experience and learning more from the job or company apparently takes greater priority

according to the findings (of reasons) regarding the employees’ intention to stay or quit

over the short-term. Companies which offer employees greater learning opportunities



may have much better chances of retaining employees. This could possibly be done

through appropriate job rotation or highly relevant job training. Perhaps, while

enjoyment of work is important, employees tend to view it as a short-term benefit, and

will rather focus on the longer-term goal of attaining career growth and progression.

This is especially likely as the majority of respondents are below the age of 30.

b) Top 10 Correlations with Intention to Stay

It has been established in Findings part d) that employees who fit well in their job

function are less likely to quit in the short-term. With many alternative choices of

employment for the same job function around, these employees who are clear about the

job function in which they fit should be able to find alternative employment easily with

other companies. By this logic, the item “I fit well in my company” should correlate

higher with short-term turnover intention, rather than the item “I fit well in my job

function”. The correlation coefficients with the item “Intention to stay (short-term) for

these items are 0.301 and 0.372 respectively (for company fit and job function fit).

Furthermore, it has been statistically tested in this study that respondents who fit well in

their job function are indeed less likely to quit in the short-term. Reasons underlying this

phenomenon cannot be readily supplied, and further studies in this area will be apt.

Nonetheless, the results point to the importance of finding employees who fit well in

their job function and enjoy working in their job function at the very recruitment stage.

The employees’ likeliness to enjoy and excel in their job functions are likely to be innate

or require long-term training to come about. It is thus risky to recruit employees who



have little passion or fit for the job function, hoping that the employee will grow into the

job role.

The third highest item correlated with short-term turnover intention is the enjoyment of

work in the company. There can be infinitely many factors tied to an employee’s

enjoyment of work in a company. As far as possible, companies should do whatever are

reasonable and within their means to increase the positive affect of employees and

reduce the negative affect of employees towards the company (Catherine Taylor and

Karl Pillemer, 2009). By doing so, it has been shown to lower the turnover in

organizations.

Another factor which employers should be wary of includes the giving of employees

adequate opportunities to use their skills and abilities. Although this may be highly

reliant on the identification of job function fit at the recruitment stage, employers can

nevertheless enhance this factor by providing employees with greater autonomy in their

work. By this, it means that employers should focus more on the end results and give as

much room as possible for employees to use the appropriate tools and means to

achieve the desired end results.

Management should recognize employees’ individual job performance through an

appropriate system of feedback provision, incentives and rewards. It is widely

recognized in HR literature that verbal praise of an employee from upper management

is often more effective in motivating employees than tangible rewards. Management

recognition of employees’ job performance has significant lasting value in terms of

employee retention.



Finally, growth is often uppermost in the minds of employees. Employers need to

provide good career development opportunities for employees as part of their retention

strategy rather than simply as necessary expenses. It is understood that with the

prevalence of generally high turnover rates, employers may be reluctant to invest in

training and development lest employees leave their jobs, thus leading the company to

waste resources. However, it will be wise for employers to measure the cost savings

associated with higher retention rates as a result of providing employees with the

training. This will more likely bring about an optimal investment in employees’ career

development opportunities through lower turnover rates.

c) Bottom 5 Correlations with Turnover Intention (Findings part e)

Among the top 5 most weakly correlated factors with short-term turnover intention in

Findings part e), the item of “tenure” stands out. Despite the results in Q4.3 stating that

employees would want to learn more, gain more experience in a company, and stay a

minimum number of years (about 2) before moving out, Findings part e) shows us that

the tenure of an employee is independent of his short-term intention to stay. This is

despite the fact that it has been empirically established that tenure is negatively

correlated with turnover intention (e.g. Arnold & Feldman, 1982; Byrd, et al., 2000). This

could primarily be due to the constricted age range of the respondents and the

correspondingly short average tenure of these respondents. Conversely, a study on the

turnover intention of employees in the Food and Beverage (F&B) and Marine and

Shipping industries in Singapore indicate positive correlation between tenure and

turnover intention (Naresh Khatri, et al.).



Alternatively, it could be due to the entrenched turnover culture, in which workers may

deem it acceptable to switch out of a company as long as a better offer is made by

another company. This has the effect of nullifying the correlation between tenure and

short-term intention to stay. Such has become the norm in the financial services sector

for example, in which it is viewed by employers to be fair for their employees to switch

companies if competing employers can offer better terms to the employees.

In Findings part e), the weak correlation of the item “What factors about your current

company attracted you to join it in the first place? Compensation/pay” with the “intention

to stay (short-term)”, shows the distinction between recruitment and retention strategies.

Even if employees were attracted to join a company due to its attractive compensation

in the first place, the company cannot rely on this initial carrot to retain their employees.

The employees’ fit and enjoyment of the job function would have been more important

criteria at the recruitment and selection stage. Thereafter, continuous effort needs to be

put into helping employees enjoy their work at the company, giving them adequate

opportunities to use their skills and abilities, recognising their job performance, and

presenting them with good career development opportunities.

For the employees themselves, this result shows that to base job selection partly on the

initial attraction to pay may not lead them to be more likely to quit over the short-term;

perhaps due to poor job fit or company fit. Company recruiters may have done their part

well in the selection process by filtering out candidates who are keen to join a company

solely for the attractive compensation, but whom may not fit the job well or enjoy the

work.



d) Fit and Enjoyment of Work in Industry

The results in section h) of findings again emphasize the fit and enjoyment of work of

employees in the industry as key to employee retention. Such factors in the employee

should once again be assessed at the very recruitment stage. Should employers not be

able to ascertain this accurately enough, the initial probation period will be a good time-

frame for more intensive assessment. Beyond the stages of recruitment and probation,

employers could ensure that employees are kept up to date with developments in the

company and its industry, and thus reemphasize the reasons for employees’ fit and their

enjoyment of work in the industry.

e) Males Foresee Themselves Staying Longer Than Females

A recent study by John Becker-Blease (2010) found from analysing the data of S&P’s

1500 firms that women are more likely to depart from their executive positions than

men. The voluntary rate of departure was higher at 4.3% for women compared to 2.8%

for men. Our study adds another dimension to this perspective, which is that female

employees foresee themselves holding shorter tenures than their male counterparts to

begin with. A possible reason proposed by John Becker-Blease is that female

employees are more likely to leave their jobs due to social or domestic responsibilities

than male employees. Given the relatively young age of female respondents (average

26.05), the expectation of marriage and child-rearing in the coming years could be the

main reason behind the results. Female employees may expect themselves to take

employment breaks due to child-rearing, or to switch over to companies with more

flexible work policies and thus allowing them to juggle more effectively between child-



rearing and work. Companies with a significant make-up of young female employees

should thus review their flexi-work policies in order to retain key female talents.

In addition, given that this result is consistent with international findings, it may be a

concern should employers interpret the hiring of female employees as less worthwhile

by the reason that turnover rates are expected to be higher. This perception may be

further exacerbated by the fact that employers in Singapore need to grant female

employees 4 months of maternity leave, in which 2 months’ worth of salary is payable to

the employees on the employers’ part. According to figures provided by the Employee

Benefit Research Institute however, the difference in median tenure between the male

and female employees (in the US) across the various age groups is less than 0.3 years

between 2008 and 2010 (Employee Benefit Research Institute, 2010). Furthermore, the

median tenure of female employees across the age groups has generally increased

since 2002 to 2010, from 4.4 years to 5.1 years. Information available from the Ministry

of Manpower Singapore only shows that the general tenure (both genders combined) in

Singapore is about 4.2 years in 2011 (Ministry of Manpower, 2011). This number is

lower than that in the US, which is 5.2 years.

Further studies into the difference in tenure trends between the genders in Singapore,

the reasons behind the difference, and possible intervention strategies will be

appropriate.

f) More Acceptable Work-Stress Level Does Not Gain Loyalty

That the levels of work stress acceptability show no correlation with turnover intention in

the short-run is a very interesting finding. One reason could be that the majority of



respondents are graduates, and are thus conditioned to higher levels of stress through

the academic rigour that they were exposed to earlier in their lives. While some

respondents may have indicated that work stress levels were unacceptable, the stress

levels could have been bearable and were necessary for career advancement.

Professionals in the audit industry for instance have the notion that as junior auditors

are promoted to senior levels, the workload is lessened and work stress levels are

significantly reduced. Such respondents may therefore choose to bear with the

unacceptable work stress levels in the short to medium term in order to attain their long

term career goals.

Nonetheless, unacceptable work stress levels in an industry or job function in general

may discourage students from undertaking a particular course of professional study to

begin with, and employers need to be mindful of the psychological and emotional needs

of employees. Besides, a fair percentage of respondents in this survey who reported

unacceptable levels of work stress are not able to switch out of the company in the

near-term due to their contractual bonds. Such employees, if continuously exposed to

unreasonable stress levels, may switch out of the company as soon as their contractual

obligations end.



Limitations

Although the sample size is big enough to examine macro trends in the data, some of

the micro trends could have been more reliably tested and explained if bigger a sample

size was available. With regard to the lack of correlation between work stress and

“intention to stay” for example, a much bigger sample size may allow us to understand

more definitively the reasons underlying this finding.

Concluding Remarks

The results of this study show that the key to lowering employee turnover is to ensure

good fit and enjoyment of the job by employees. A large part of these factors are

attributable to the innate personality and abilities of individuals, therefore the processes

of recruitment and selection play critical roles in protecting the long-term return on

investment (ROI) of an organization’s human capital. Employers will need to be wary

not only about person-organization fit, but more critically the person-job fit at the

recruitment stage.

Beyond the recruitment stage, continuous effort needs to be put into developing the

potential of employees, ensuring that employees have the autonomy to utilize their skills

and abilities, and providing feedback and rewards for job performance. In sum,

employers who develop comprehensive strategies towards human capital retention will

stand to fare better against others or in fact defy the job-hopping mentality which is said

to plague the employment market.



References

Abbasi, S. M., & Hollman, K. W. (2000). Turnover: The real bottom line, Public

Personnel Management, 29, 333-342.

Barnard, M.E. and Rodgers, R.A. 1998, What's in the package? Policies for the internal

cultivation of human resources and for high performance operations, Asia Academy of

Management (Hong Kong), 1998.

Campion, M. A. (1991). Meaning and measurement of turnover: Comparison of

alternative measures and recommendations for research. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 76, 199 212.

Catherine Taylor and Karl Pillemer, Using Affect to Understand Employee Turnover: A

Context-Specific Application of a Theory of Social Exchange, Sociological Perspectives,

Vol. 52, No. 4 (Winter 2009), pp. 481-504

David A. Harrison et al., How Important Are Job Attitudes? Meta-Analytic Comparisons

of Integrative Behavioral Outcomes and Time Sequences, The Academy of

Management Journal, Vol. 49 No.2 (Apr 2006), pp. 305-325

Debrah, Y. 1994. Management of operative staff in a labour-scarce economy: the

views of human resource managers in the hotel industry in Singapore. Asia Pacific

Journal of Human Resources, 32, 1, 41-60.

Debrah, Y. 1993. Strategies for coping with employee retention problems in small and

medium enterprises (SMEs) in Singapore. Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Change,

2, 2, 143-172.

Employee Benefit Research Institute. Dec 2010. Employee Tenure Trend Lines, 1983-

2010. http://www.ebri.org/pdf/notespdf/EBRI_Notes_12-Dec10.Tenure-CEHCS.pdf,

accessed on 29 Apr 2012

John Becker-Blease,, Elkinawy S, Stater M, The Impact of Gender on Voluntary and

Involuntary Executive Departure, Economic Inquiry [serial online], October

2010;48(4):1102-1118. Available from: Business Source Premier, Ipswich, MA.

Accessed April 27, 2012



Kristen M. Watrous, Ann H. Huffman, Robert D. Pritchard, When Coworkers and

Managers Quit: The Effects of Turnover and Shared Values onPerformance, Journal of

Business and Psychology, Vol.21, No.1 (Fall, 2006), pp. 103-126

Michael Page International 2011/12, Employee Intentions Report,

http://www.michaelpage.com.sg/websitepdf/Employee-Intentions-Report-Singapore.pdf,

accessed on 29 Apr 2012.

Ministry of Manpower, Mar 2012. Labour Market 2011.

http://www.mom.gov.sg/Publications/mrsd_qtlmr114.pdf, accessed on 30 Apr 2012.

Naresh Khatri et al, Employee Turnover: Bad Attitude or Poor Management?,

http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/nbs/sabre/working_papers/12-99.pdf, accessed on 26 Feb 2012

National Productivity Board Task Force on Job-Hopping, Report of the Task Force on

Job-Hopping, National Productivity Board, 1988

Price, J. L. (1989), The impact of turnover on the organization, Work and Occupations,

16, 461-473.

Rick Nauert, High Turnover among Women Executives,

http://psychcentral.com/news/2010/10/05/high-turnover-among-women-

executives/19179.html, accessed on 27 Apr 2012

Singapore Human Resources Institute, 2008, Singapore’s Changing Employment

Landscape: Employee Turnover and Learning and Development Concerns,

http://www.shri.org.sg/_surveyreports_turn_learn.asp, accessed on 29 Apr 2012

Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), Job Satisfaction Survey 2009,

http://www.shrm.org/Research/SurveyFindings/Articles/Documents/09-

0282_Emp_Job_Sat_Survey_FINAL.pdf, accessed on 05 Mar 2012

Staff Journalist, Flexi-Hours A Key To Retaining Singapore Employees,

http://humanresourcesonline.net/news/31685, accessed on 25 Mar 2012

Staff Journalist, Aug 2011, Money Driving Singaporeans To Job Hop,

http://www.humanresourcesonline.net/news/27820, accessed on 27 Feb 2012

Staff Journalist, Singaporeans Plan To Quit Their Job This Year,

http://humanresourcesonline.net/news/31683, accessed on 25 Mar 2012.

Stewart D. Friedman and Sharon Lobel, The Happy Workaholic: A Role Model for

Employees, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 17 No.3 (Aug 2003), pp. 87-

98



Travis Teo, May 2011, 61% of Singaporeans looking to job-hop in next 3 months,

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/1132081/1/.html,

accessed on 27 Feb 2012

Xieli Lee, Mar 2009, Employees Still Itching To Job Hop,

http://humanresourcesonline.net/news/11222, accessed on 27 Feb 2012

Xinhua, Job-hopping widely seen among college graduates,

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-08/01/content_11077347.htm, accessed on 26

Feb 2012

Appendix A

Questions and Summary of Responses

Dear Respondent, Thank you very much for your participation! This is an NUS Business study which explores the interaction between overall job perception and turnover intention. It will take you about 5-10 mins to complete. Your individual submissions will be kept confidential. This is a study by BBA(H) student Justin Lee, guided by Dr Wu PC. Please contact us at [email protected] should you have any queries. Thank you for your support!

Section 1 of 4 - Personal Particulars

1. Q1.1 Your age

Statistic Value

Total Responses 114

2. Q1.2 Your gender

# Answer

Response %

1 Male

52 46%

2 Female

62 54%

Total 114 100%



3. Q1.3 Educational Level

# Answer

Response %

1 "O" or "N" Level

or ITE

4 4%

2 "A" Level

3 3%

3 Polytechnic

Diploma

7 6%

4 University

degree or above

100 88%

Total 114 100%

4. Q1.4 Job Status

# Answer

Response %

1 Full-Time

110 96%

2 Part-Time

4 4%

Total 114 100%

5. Q1.5 Level of Position

# Answer

Response %

1 Rank-and-file

15 13%

2 Executive/Senior

executive

45 39%

3 Professional

39 34%

4 First line manager

11 10%

5 Middle manager

2 2%

6 Senior manager

2 2%

Total 114 100%

6. Q1.6 How long have you been working with your current company? (Tenure)

Statistic Value

Total Responses 114



7. Q1.7 Name of your current company (optional)

Statistic Value

Total Responses 38

8. Q1.8 How large is the organization you currently work for?

# Answer

Response %

1 1 - 50 employees

27 24%

2 51 - 99

employees

6 5%

3 100 - 499

employees

29 25%

4 500 - 999

employees

7 6%

5 1,000 - 4,999 employees

15 13%

6 5,000 - 9,999 employees

4 4%

7 10,000 - 49,999

employees

11 10%

8 50,000+

employees

15 13%

Total 114 100%

9. Q1.9 What is your organization's country of origin?

Statistic Value

Total Responses 114

10. Q1.10 The industry you are currently in (e.g. aviation, education, shipping etc.)

Statistic Value

Total Responses 114

11. Q1.11 Your current job function (e.g. HR, marketing, sales etc.)

Statistic Value

Total Responses 114



Section 2 of 4 - Perception Towards Company



12. Q2.1 The following items are related to your current company. Please consider the

statements carefully regarding your company:

# Question Strongly Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Responses Mean

1 I find my company

attractive as an employer

1 5 27 51 20 104 3.81

2 I fit well in my

company 0 2 20 66 17 105 3.93

3 I enjoy working at

my company 0 2 23 56 23 104 3.96

4

My company has the reputation as a

great place to work

1 13 26 42 22 104 3.68

5 My company's

financial position is healthy

0 3 14 51 36 104 4.15

6

Compensation/pay is good compared

to other companies in the

same industry

3 15 38 37 12 105 3.38

7

Benefits are good compared to other companies in the

same industry

2 16 31 41 14 104 3.47

8 I have flexibility to

balance life and work

2 11 22 47 22 104 3.73

9

Career development

opportunities are good

2 11 31 50 10 104 3.53

10

Career advancement

opportunities are good

2 14 39 39 10 104 3.39

11 My company

offers job security 3 5 24 49 24 105 3.82

12 I have autonomy

and independence to make decisions

3 12 29 47 13 104 3.53

13 I have adequate opportunities to use my skills and

1 8 13 66 16 104 3.85



abilities

14

Management recognises my job

performance (feedback, incentives, rewards)

2 8 28 52 14 104 3.65

15 Relationship with

immediate supervisor is good

1 4 18 58 23 104 3.94

16 Relationships with

co-workers are good

0 0 9 65 30 104 4.20

17 Work stress level

is acceptable 2 8 22 60 12 104 3.69



13. Q2.2 What factors about your current company attracted you to join it in the first place?

Please recall and answer carefully



Responses Mean

1

Company's reputation as a great place to

work

1 7 32 45 19 104 3.71

2 Company's

financial position 2 7 40 42 13 104 3.55

3 The work itself 0 6 26 42 30 104 3.92

4 Compensation/pay 2 11 34 42 15 104 3.55

5 Benefits 2 13 30 46 13 104 3.53

6 Flexibility to

balance life and work

0 9 32 41 22 104 3.73

7 Career

development opportunities

0 5 31 50 18 104 3.78

8 Career

advancement opportunities

0 5 37 43 19 104 3.73

9 Job security 1 8 31 48 16 104 3.67

10 The

business/industry of the organization

0 4 26 51 23 104 3.89

11 The company

culture 3 5 37 44 15 104 3.61

Section 3 of 4 - Industry and Job Function Perception



14. Q3.1 The following items are related to your current industry. Please consider the

following statements in the context of your industry:



Responses Mean

1

I find my industry

attractive to work in

0 4 27 51 22 104 3.88

2 I fit well in

my industry

1 4 22 61 16 104 3.84

3

I enjoy working in

my industry

0 4 22 59 19 104 3.89

4 My

industry is lucrative

2 13 27 46 16 104 3.59

5

The growth

prospects of my

industry is good

1 5 30 53 15 104 3.73

6 This

industry is stable

4 5 19 49 27 104 3.87

7

Working in this

industry is meaningful

to me

0 4 19 54 27 104 4.00



15. Q3.2 The following items are related to your job function:(Please think carefully)



Responses Mean

1

I find my job

function attractive

1 9 21 53 20 104 3.79

2 I fit well in

my job function

1 3 20 58 22 104 3.93

3

I enjoy working in

my job function

2 5 25 49 23 104 3.83

4

The growth

prospects of my job function is

good

2 6 30 54 12 104 3.65

5

Working in this job

function is meaningful

to me

1 5 20 54 24 104 3.91

Section 4 of 4 - Turnover Intention

16. Q4.1 How many more years do you foresee yourself working at this company?

Statistic Value

Total Responses 104

17. Q4.2 What is your likelihood of switching out of this company in the next 12 months?

# Answer

Response %

1 Very Likely

12 12%

2 Likely

28 27%

3 Unlikely

30 29%

4 Very Unlikely

34 33%

Total 104 100%



18. Q4.3 Why are you likely/unlikely to switch out of this company in the next 12 months?

Text Response

I can't. I'm bonded. lol. But even if I weren't, I wouldn't switch out in the next 12 months because: 1. I feel a sense of responsibility towards my students 2. I'm enjoying myself enough so far to want to stay on

Not enough Challenging Work

it's my dad's company

I garner enough experience before I venture out I a higher position.

I prefer to stay in a job for 1.5 years at the very least before changing jobs. To learn more about the current job function and from the company.

The company is growing and i wishes to be a part of the company.

Personally feel that this company gives me the potential to learn more. Will like to learn more from the media specialists and gain more experience before venturing out.

Bad Job Market

I aspire to be working in a company and in a role that has more realtime exposure and provides me with remuneration in accordance to the amount of effort I place in my job tasks

no reason to

Want to venture into a different aspect of HR, compensation and benefits, and try out working in a different industry, seeking to enhance job capabilities.

Career advancement in other firms.

At the moment I still enjoy my work and find it meaningful. It has also good work life balance.

To achieve a better work life balance. (The working hours are ridiculous)

2 yrs in current job.= explore n experience different jobscope and work environment

I enjoy it, very meaningful

Growth

Financial Stability. Comfortable working in a reputable company. Has adapted well with the job scope. Have made myself known to the consumers. Flexible working hours with less stress.

This job is my calling.

Because I started the company with my friends!

pay benefits is low

Like the work culture

Have already secured a position for full-time further studies related to the same industry.

want to accumulate working experience

I want to wait a while longer to gain more experience

Im bonded for 3 years

No career growth

I love my job and I am still learning

When there is better job opportunities

2 year contract and seeing it as an opportunity to learn more things

a bleak economy with limited jobs available.

Corporate culture, heavy workload, high stress level, difficult clients and seniors/managers, long working hours,



pay cut

I have good relations with my colleagues, I find the job meaningful and satisfying.

This is a good company that focuses on work and not politics. Focus on getting things done

..

Need higher pay

Back to school

better opportunities

If i have better job opportunities i would prefer to do accounts.

To find work life balance

intend to further studies and hope to get company to sponsor

too quick, rather develop my own skills first

As an advancement in job career.

It's my own company.

Still under probation

More challenges and pay.

Bonded

I think my firm offers me what i'm looking for at this point of time.

Will have to pay compensation for breaking bond

Because I have not gained enough exposure and my market value won't be high.

Would like to stay in the company for at least two years, as it would reflect better on my resume.

to do something different

As a foreigner, it is difficult for me to switch job freely without PR. Secondly, I love this job.

Stability

Have not been in current portfolio for long enough.

If contented will not switch Company.

I would like to ensure that I experience and learn as much as I can from my job and industry before I make a move. Staying less than 12 months here will probably not give me the full experience and skills that I seek at this point of time.

other opportunities available

2 years is the minimum stay for a job.

Job personality mismatch Inadequate compensation

Many learning Opportunities. Bad job market at present.

MY company offers good stability and promising growth opportunities, way more than others in the same industry.

The company may not be able to support my needs.

Wrong job rotation. New Dept unable to fulfil worker's satisfaction in job

A lot to learn.

Job market isn't fantastic, will switch if better opportunities arise though

Seek to learn more and gain more experience



Dissatisfied with career development opportunities

There is still a lot of potential awaiting to be untapped for the company to grow as well as for myself to grow intellectually and wiser in this company and field of work.

would like to gain more experience, job gives me the opportunity to learn new things several times a year, colleagues are great.

better career advancement

Limited career progression due to influx of foreigners. Fixed market rate for number of years of experience accumulated, difficult to earn more than market rate.

Job stability in this function

There's still a lot to be done.

Expansion of job scope - right now in a specialized field Better career growth opportunities

Because I can apply the knowledge gained from my MBA and its what I have always wanted to do.

because my boss and working colleagues are very nice people and it's a small group of people, so basically everyone knows everybody.

Tired.

Poor leadership of the immediate supervisor, better offer

Leaving: Because the company is super underpaying ALL staff in current market. And the management do not listen to the staff unhappiness and blame us for our incapability when people choose to leaves. They are not willing to promote people from internal, but recruit from outside. Not leaving: Because I'm stil studying part-time and my job scope is what i'm currently studying now. And I need the money for my school fee. All in all, my direct boss treats me very well which I doubt I can find such a good and understanding boss in the future.

Unsuitable work environment

I enjoy the job and i see the advancement at a personal level as well as career level

Team culture and environment

Close relationship with colleagues and I feel that there is still a lot to learn on the job.

I have no doubt to work for this company in long term unless i move my house to other country.

Thinking of getting married

Would like to learn more abt the company

To attain better work life balance

I want to gain more experience in this company before I switch out.

- pay - job function - growth

Look for a role that suits my interests

To accumulate working experience in new projects and advance to higher level position.

I have a huge existing clientele base and past 3.5 years of passive income accumulated. I am growing my own team of agents and has goals to form my own agency and be a director before 30 years old. My colleagues and Manager are the best I can find in a working world.

Focus on my studies

options.

i just joined the coy for 1 year. More experience is needed and more things to learn here

Bonded for 3 years

No regoganization & Wage / welfare is poor. i could not meet my normal personnal expectations



Seek new challenges

Need to Learn more and earn more $$$

Better job prospect and opportunity.

Statistic Value

Total Responses 104

MNO4319 – Advanced Independent Study Module

Appendix B Correlation coefficient figures between intention to stay (short-term and long-term) and the job, company, and industry factors.

Correlation Coefficient

Q4.2 What is your likelihood of switching out of this company in the next 12 months?

Correlation Coefficient

Q4.1 How many more years do you foresee yourself working at this company?

0.499 Q3.2 I fit well in my job function 0.372 Q3.2 I fit well in my job function

0.498 Q3.2 I enjoy working in my job function 0.339 Q3.2 I enjoy working in my job function

0.492 Q2.1 I enjoy working at my company 0.335 Q1.5 Level of Position

0.391 Q2.1 I have adequate opportunities to use my skills and

abilities 0.311 Q2.1 I fit well in my company

0.388 Q2.1 I fit well in my company 0.301 Q3.1 I fit well in my industry

0.377 Q2.1 Management recognises my job performance

(feedback, incentives, rewards) 0.290

Q2.1 Management recognises my job performance (feedback, incentives, rewards)

0.377 Q3.1 I enjoy working in my industry 0.289 Q3.2 The following items are related to your job

function: I find my job function attractive

0.367 Q3.2 The following items are related to your job

function: I find my job function attractive 0.287

Q2.1 I have autonomy and independence to make decisions

0.352 Q2.1 Career development opportunities are good 0.280 Q3.1 The following items are related to your current

industry. I find my industry attractive to work in

0.349 Q3.1 The following items are related to your current

industry. I find my industry attractive to work in 0.278 Q2.1 I enjoy working at my company

0.344 Q2.1 My company has the reputation as a great place to

work 0.268

Q1.6 How long have you been working with your current company? (Tenure)



0.337 Q3.1 I fit well in my industry 0.263 Q2.1 I have adequate opportunities to use my skills and

abilities

0.337 Q2.1 Career advancement opportunities are good 0.262 Q1.1 Your age

0.336 Q2.1 The following items are related to your current

company. Please consider the statements careful...-I find my company attractive as an employer

0.252 Q3.1 I enjoy working in my industry

0.335 Q3.2 Working in this job function is meaningful to me 0.246 Q2.1 Career development opportunities are good

0.335 Q2.1 I have autonomy and independence to make

decisions 0.239 Q3.2 Working in this job function is meaningful to me

0.295 Q3.1 Working in this industry is meaningful to me 0.221 Q2.1 The following items are related to your current

company. Please consider the statements careful...-I find my company attractive as an employer

0.283 Q2.1 Compensation/pay is good compared to other

companies in the same industry 0.197 Q3.1 Working in this industry is meaningful to me

0.274 Q2.1 Relationship with immediate supervisor is good 0.194 Q2.1 Career advancement opportunities are good

0.273 Q2.1 Relationships with co-workers are good 0.180 Q2.1 My company has the reputation as a great place to

work

0.260 Q3.2 The growth prospects of my job function is good 0.177 Q2.2 Flexibility to balance life and work

0.249 Q2.1 Benefits are good compared to other companies in

the same industry 0.175 Q2.1 Relationship with immediate supervisor is good

0.233 Q2.2 Job security 0.165 Q2.2 The company culture



0.224 Q3.1 My industry is lucrative 0.160 Q2.1 Benefits are good compared to other companies in

the same industry

0.209 Q2.1 My company offers job security 0.154 Q2.2 The work itself

0.194 Q2.2 Career development opportunities 0.153 Q1.4 Job Status

0.189 Q2.2 Career advancement opportunities 0.145 Q3.2 The growth prospects of my job function is good

0.187 Q2.1 I have flexibility to balance life and work 0.130 Q3.1 My industry is lucrative

0.180 Q2.2 The work itself 0.122 Q2.1 I have flexibility to balance life and work

0.172 Q2.2 Flexibility to balance life and work 0.118 Q2.1 Compensation/pay is good compared to other

companies in the same industry

0.160 Q2.1 My company's financial position is healthy 0.113 Q2.1 Relationships with co-workers are good

0.156 Q3.1 The growth prospects of my industry is good 0.101 Q2.2 Job security

0.150 Q2.2 What factors about your current company

attracted you to join it in the first place? Company's reputation as a great place to work

0.078 Q3.1 The growth prospects of my industry is good

0.148 Q2.2 The company culture 0.077 Q2.1 My company offers job security

0.138 Q2.2 Benefits 0.063 Q2.2 Compensation/pay

0.128 Q1.5 Level of Position 0.058 Q2.2 Benefits

0.122 Q3.1 This industry is stable 0.041 Q2.2 Career advancement opportunities

0.086 Q1.4 Job Status 0.033 Q2.2 Career development opportunities

0.073 Q2.1 Work stress level is acceptable 0.027 Q3.1 This industry is stable

0.037 Q2.2 The business/industry of the organization 0.023 Q2.2 What factors about your current company

attracted you to join it in the first place? Company's reputation as a great place to work

0.033 Q1.3 Educational Level 0.009 Q2.1 My company's financial position is healthy



0.029 Q2.2 Compensation/pay -0.008 Q1.8 How large is the organization you currently work

for?

0.016 Q1.8 How large is the organization you currently work

for? -0.019 Q2.2 The business/industry of the organization

0.012 Q1.6 How long have you been working with your current

company? (Tenure) -0.049 Q2.1 Work stress level is acceptable

-0.059 Q1.1 Your age -0.086 Q2.2 Company's financial position

-0.060 Q1.2 Your gender -0.122 Q1.3 Educational Level

-0.067 Q2.2 Company's financial position -0.207 Q1.2 Your gender