M anagement 2012, 2(4): 106-112 DOI: 10.5923/j.mm.20120204.
Perceptions of Organizational Downsizing and Job Satisfaction Among Survivors in Nigerian Banks
Darius Ngutor Ikyanyon
Department of Business M anagement, Benue State University, M akurdi, 970001, Nigeria
Abstract The object ive of the study was to determine how survivors’ perception of downsizing as financially effective,
inevitable, and liberating for v ictims affect their job satisfaction. Data was collected fro m 150 survivors in 8 banks operating in Makurdi metropolis. Pearson product moment correlation coefficient and regression were tools of data analysis. The study revealed that survivors’ perception of downsizing as financially effective and inevitable negatively affect their job satisfaction. Though the relationship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as liberating for victims and job satisfaction was positive, it was not statistically significant. The analysis of variance showed that there was no difference in survivors’ perception of downsizing among the banks studied, while their level o f job satisfaction varied. On the whole, we conclude that downsizing negatively affects the job satisfaction of survivors.
Keywords Downsizing, Job Satisfaction, Su rvivors, Ban ks, Nigeria
originally expected. Emp loyees who are unaffected by downsizing and remain with the organ izat ion subsequent to downsizing are known as survivors[18-19]. Since downsizing affects work processes wittingly or unwittingly, survivors have to adjust to the new forms of organization. Their ability to cope with the changes in the organization and perform effect ively determines the success of downsizing[21-22]. It has been observed that survivors confront difficu lt situations like work overload, wh ich causes fatigue and ultimately leads to dissatisfaction. Job satisfaction has received serious attention in organizational behaviour research due to its potential benefits to individuals and organizations. For instance, it has been reported that emp loyees who are satisfied are productive[23-24], co mmitted to the cause of the organization[25-30] and less likely to exhib it negative work-related attitudes which are costly to the organization such as intention to quit, turnover and absenteeism[31-32]. Research on survivors’ work-related attitudes however show that survivors exhibit a p lethora of negative attitudes and behaviours such as intent to quit, decline in organizat ional commit ment, loyalty and trust, feelings of job insecurity, and job dissatisfaction[33-34],,[35-36]. Banks in Nigeria have embarked on massive downsizing in recent times, with a view to ensuring more efficient management to enable them deliver better returns to stakeholders. There is therefore the need to examine the effect of downsizing on job satisfaction of survivors in Nigerian banks. However, most of the previous studies on survivors’ work- related attitudes, for example,, were carried out in Western societies. It is therefore
Maintaining the right size of workforce is central to the survival of every organization. Emp loyees remain the most important resources of an organization and are key to gaining competitive advantage. There is therefore the need for emp loyees to be managed effectively if an organization is to survive. As a result of changes taking place within the business environment, occasioned by globalization, competi tion is not only tough but fierce. To co mpete effectively, organizations need to maximize productivity, increase effectiveness and imp rove efficiency, which entails cost reduction as well. Since organizations find themselves operating in more co mplex, unpredictable, and dynamic environments, they employ different strategies to achieve their goals, with downsizing one of the favoured strategies . “Org an izat io n al d o wn s izin g is an o rg an izat io n ’s conscious use of permanent personnel redu ct ions in an attempt to improve its efficiency and/or effectiveness”[5, p. 70]. Th is i mp lies t h at do wns izin g is delib erat e and undertaken by organizat ions to reduce its workforce[5-8]. Secondly, organizat ions that downsize are concerned with imp rov ing o rgan izat ional efficiency and/o r effect iveness [9-11]. However, some research evidence[12-17] suggests that most downsizing init iatives have not been as effective in achieving organizational effect iveness and/or efficiency as
* Corresponding author: email@example.com (Darius Ngutor Ikyanyon) Published online at http://journal.sapub.org/mm Copyright © 2012 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved
tard iness. This is because employees’ perception of downsizing influences their work-related attitudes following organizational downsizing. among other negative attitudes. survivors experience so me pressure fro m work and as a result are d issatisfied following organizational downsizing. This is especially true of surviving emp loyees as. it involves the reduction in personnel and frequently results in work redesign in order to improve organizat ional productivity. Emp loyees may perceive organizational downsizing as being financially effective. These affect their work-related attitudes such as job satisfaction. These survivors exhib it symptoms such as low mo rale. dissatisfaction. and effectiveness. Framework for the Study
On the basis of the framework for the study. It is therefore impo rtant to recognize emp loyees’ career needs and educate them on the new organizational v ision and structure. 2(4): 106-112
important to enhance our understanding of organizational downsizing and job satisfaction of survivors in a non-western country. survivors are in a unique position to judge the fairness of downsizing and that they respond positively to this perception by becoming mo re committed to the organizat ion. One of the reasons for the poor performance of organizations that downsize is that too often. lack of reciprocal commit
Figure 1. Framework for the Study
The manner in wh ich downsizing is imp lemented determines the success of the strategy in achieving organizational effect iveness. while helping them process their feelings. and liberating for victims. the following hypotheses will be tested. The objective of this study therefore. Organizations have often under-estimated the negative effects of downsizing and do not consider the difficu lties in motivating survivors to achieve greater productivity which is paramount to organizat ional success and employee job satisfaction. guilt and fear[57-58]. but must also be perceived by all e mp loyees to be clear. The feelings and concerns experienced by survivors are. reduced risk taking and motivation. This suggests that downsizing causes dissatisfaction rather than job satisfaction since survival syndrome constitutes a mixed bag of antecedents of job dissatisfaction.
3. lack of t rust. Downsizing has been used to avoid bankruptcy and secure survival and is co mmon ly adopted by firms after making large investments in labour saving technologies. distrust and betrayal. The thinking is that employees who remain with the organization are relieved for not loosing their jobs. lack of management cred ibility. and a sense of permanent change. depression. This is perhaps one of the reasons for massive downsizing in the sector since technology has replaced most human jobs. Issues relating to survival syndrome can be painful and far reaching at both the individual and organizational levels.
. was to examine how survivors’ perception of downsizing affects their job satisfaction in Nigerian banks. As a result of changes in wo rk processes. lower morale.107
M anagement 2012. have shown that downsizing is not a guarantee of organizat ional success. efficiency.
2. the focus is on employees who are released while those that remain are neglected. Literature Review
Downsizing constitutes a particular form of organizational restructuring. dissatisfaction with planning and communication. job insecurity. Organizations that downsize still perform poorly. Survival syndrome is exp ressed in increasing an xiety and risk aversion[54-55]. increased levels of absenteeism. low productivity. Banks in Nigeria have invested in technologies as could be seen in the proliferat ion of ATMs and internet banking. Th is survival syndrome is defined as the mixed bag of behaviours and emotions often exhib ited by emp loyees follo wing o rganizat ional downsizing. In this study. cynicism. lack of strategic direction. unfairness. Reference found that downsizing has imp roved the efficiency and profitability of banks in Nigeria. according to. appropriate. fatigue. Emp loyees often rationally understand and defend the need for downsizing but find it difficult to accept it emot ionally... anxiety. dissatisfaction with the layoff process. short-term profit orientation. we consider three ways employees perceive downsizing since perception affects their attitudes after downsizing. The authors suggest that the criteria used in selecting emp loyees for downsizing must not only be clear and appropriate. The negative attitudes employees exhibit subsequent to downsizing is described as survival syndrome or sickness. inevitable.[14-15]. Surv ivors are not only concerned about the outcome of downsizing but the rationale for downsizing and how it was done. and fair. turnover. Previous studies.
786 1.055 -.074).7%) were female.3%) were male wh ile 55 (36. the table shows that though the relationship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as liberating for victims and job satisfaction was positive ( r = .806 15.074 . standard deviations and correlations between the variables of the study is presented in table 1.295** . Methodology
This study adopted the survey research design since data was collected fro m the participants without imposing any condition or treat ment on them.369 N 150 150 150 150 142 127 150 150 .37 1. and Mainstreet Bank.Darius Ngutor Ikyanyon: Perceptions of Organizational Downsizing and Job Satisfaction Among Survivors in Nigerian Banks
H1a: There will be no significant positive relat ionship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as financially effective and job satisfaction.064 -. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation for Study Variables Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Perception of Downsizing as Financially Effective Perception of Downsizing as Inevitable Perception of Downsizing as Liberating for Victims Sex Education Job Status Job Satisfaction Mean 14. The correlations in table 1 indicate that survivors’ perception of downsizing as financially effective negatively correlates with job satisfaction (r = .969 3.. H1c: There will be no significant positive relat ionship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as liberating for vict ims and job satisfaction.266 7. The study sought to determine how survivors perceptions of organizational downsizing affects their job satisfaction. United Bank for Africa (UBA).199* .05).019 -.158 .680.644 3.926 45.84) between survivors’ perception of downsizing as inevitable and job satisfaction. This was measured on a 5 point Likert Scale anchored fro m 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 =
5.165. The scale has sub-scales measuring survivors’ perceptions of downsizing as financially effective. A structured questionnaire was distributed to 180 layoff survivors in 8 banks operating in Makurdi metropolis namely.060 -.072 -. First Bank.006 -.579.039 -. TH1b : here will be no significant positive relat ionship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as inevitable and job satisfaction. The means.98 2..3%) were Degree holders. There was also a negative correlation ( r = . The reliability of the scale was 0.203 -. Pearson’s correlation and Regression analysis were the statistical tools used to determine the relat ionship between the independent and dependent variables. The scale measured job satisfaction on a 5 point Likert scale anchored fro m 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “ Strongly Agree”.880 . H2: Organizational downsizing negatively affects job satisfaction of survivors.085 -. inevitable.084 .180* -. First City Monument Bank (FCMB).709 . Fidelity Bank.091 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
**Correlation is significant at . and liberat ing for vict ims.116 . working at low level management (56%). Downsizing was measured using a scale adapted fro m. Results and Discussion
Data analysis was based on 150 questionnaires that were duly co mpleted and returned. The demographic characteristi cs of the respondents shows that 95 (63. The reliability of the scales was 0.605** .037 -.152 .135 -. 3. Access Bank.484 . Downsizing was considered the independent variable while job satisfaction was considered the dependent variable.
“Strongly Agree”. Un ion Bank. This scale has been used with success among Nigerian samples.039 -.
4. the relationship was not significant (p > .766 S. A total of 150 questionnaires (83. p < . Eco Bank.33%) were duly co mp leted and returned. Furthermore.
T able 1.05 level (2 tailed)
.050 . Majo rity of the respondents (47.056 .64 16.90 -.657** .662* -. D.165* . Job satisfaction was measured using the job satisfaction index (JSI).05).173 15.530 3.01 level (2 tailed) *Correlation is significant at .
01).063).056. p > .05). p > . Perception of Downsizing as inevitable.055. The relationship between sex and perception of downsizing as liberating fo r vict ims was not significant (r = .060. This means though that survivors are concerned about those who leave the organization as a result of downsizing. survivors at Mainstreet bank had the lowest level of job satisfaction (Mean = 14. 142 = 4. While survivors of Fidelity bank had the highest level of job satisfaction (Mean = 19.881 df 7 Mean Square F Level of Significance .134)
.301 . The result suggests that irrespective of bank. Although the relationship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as liberating for vict ims and job satisfaction was positive.449
The result in Table 3 shows that there was no significant difference in survivors perceptions of downsizing among the banks studied (F 7..888). There was a positive but insignificant relationship between survivors’ perception of downsizing as liberating for vict ims and job satisfaction ( β = .05) as well as no significant relat ionship between education and job satisfaction (r = . p > .158.953 142 52. Overall. p > . Conclusions
We conclude that survivors’ perception of downsizing as financially effective and inevitable negatively affect their job satisfaction.019. the regression analysis was applied and presented in Table 2. p > .109
M anagement 2012.05). ANOVA Results of Perception of Downsizing and Job Satisfaction among Banks studied Sum of Squares Downs izing Between Groups Within Groups Total Job Satisfa ction Between Groups Within Groups Total 666.000
1320.890 (p = .
.. Hypotheses 2 is therefore accepted.087.. Perception of Downsizing as financially effective.05) and perception of downsizing as liberat ing for vict ims.203. p > . there was a significant but negative relationship between job status and job satisfaction ( r = .. similarly.890.05).180. Table 1 further shows no significant relat ionship between sex and job satisfaction ( r = . the differences in the job satisfaction of survivors among the banks indicate that survivors’ response to downsizing depends on how the organization treats them. p > .833 149 269. This is because layoff survivors often feel discouraged. 1b and 1c. p > .214). 142 = 1..05). the survivors among the banks studied were not satisfied. p > . p > .. It was also not significant for education (r = .05).05).05).087
. The table shows that survivors’ perceptions of downsizing as financially effective negatively predict their level of job satisfaction ( β = . Regression Results for Perception of Downsizing and Job Satisfaction Predictor Variable 1. survivors’ perception of downsizing was the same.05). education and perception of downsizing as financially effect ive ( r = .138 9.822
7425. The relat ionship was however significant for education and perception of downsizing as inevitable (r = .037
1. assert that downsizing may create negative outcomes for individuals and organizations.295 8092.487 4. it was not statistically significant. job status (r = . p > ..019. Ho wever..135.05). The relat ionship between sex and perception of downsizing as inevitable was not significant (r = . p > . fearful and have low morale due to downsizing. 2(4): 106-112
In order to determine how much survivors’ perception of downsizing predicts their level of job satisfaction. Previous studies indicate that downsizing negatively affects the job satisfaction of layoff survivors. 146 = 1.822. We therefore accept hypotheses 1a. 2. p < . and job status and perception of downsizing as financially effective (r = .155.05).287
6. p < . 3. liberating for victims b Dependent variabl es: Job Satisfaction
There was no significant relat ionship between sex and perception of downsizing as financially effective (r = .
T able 2.
T able 3.087
. financially effective.412 7 38.091.050..05). there was a significant difference in the job satisfaction of survivors among the banks studied (F 7. It has also been reported that downsizing does not improve organizations as a result of negative consequences.193 149
. The overall influence of downsizing on job satisfaction shows that survivors’ perception of downsizing does not predict their level of job satisfaction (F 3. p > ..155
.90. Perception of Downsizing as liberating for victims β Level of Significance R2 F – Statistics
p > . p > . survivors’ perception of downsizing as inevitable negatively predict their level of job satisfaction ( β = .05).05). p < .072.269 1. The findings were somewhat in line with those of.063
.138.781 142 1590.. this is
a Predictors: (Constant). Ho wever. However. The correlation between downsizing and job satisfaction as shown in Table 1 indicates a negative relationship between downsizing and job satisfaction (r = . In the same vein. This means downsizing negatively affects the job satisfaction of survivors.05). but was not significant for job status and perception of downsizing as inevitable (r = .
J. Management and Organizational Behaviour. Group & Organizational Management. 23(3). Organizational commitment: Does sector matter? Public Productivity and Management Review 19.
 Kozlowski. 46 – 70. S. Announced Layoffs: Their Effects on Corporate Financial Performance. Budros.. downsizing negatively affects the job satisfaction of survivors. Organizat ions need to adopt strategies to improve the job satisfaction of survivors since the success of downsizing rests on the shoulders of survivors who must provide both the core competencies and corporate memo ry necessary for moving fo rward into a new era of business prosperity. 38 (Nov/Dec) 31 – 44. A. J. G. (1993). S. Ahmad. J. Human Resource Management. 213 – 238. Business Quarterly. Organizational Downsizing and Innovation. & Johnston. M . Cooper & I. J.  Sutton. A. Organization Science. Either. J. The Emerging Flexible Organization: Perspective from Silicon Valley.) New York: Prentice Hall. The Lessons of Survivor Literature in Communicating Decisions to Downsize. Organizational Downsizing and Redundancies: The New Zealand Workers Experience. Patrick Apaa and Kizito Ikyanyon in facilitating data collection. L. (1994). transactional leadership. and Casper. Freeman. J. 14 (2) 194 -212. (1997).
 De M euse. 376-407. Human Relations. 286-295..
   M ullins. 33(2). J. Sandra Aondowase. B. 21. (1992). T. T. Downsizing: what do we know? What have we learned.  M one. S. B. Vanderheiden P.  M cLellan. perceived organizational support. African Journal of Business Management. Cameron. L. A. Decreasing Organizational Size: Untangling the Effects of People and M oney. K. W. Strategies for Successful Organizational Downsizing. Human Resource Management. Career Development International. (6th Ed. 59 (Autumn) 95 – 104. (2001). New York : Wiley. Alternative models for antecedents and outcomes of work centrally and job satisfaction of high-tech personnel. & M arcolin. 261 – 279. J.  Guiniven. 567 – 88. Special thanks to Tersoo Apaa for his assistance in data analysis as well as Ephraim Agber for formatting this work. K. M . 1537-1562. C. A. (2002). 3rd Edition. (2006). R. K. 1-22. F. M. 69 – 82. P.  Judge. E.  Cascio.  Lewin. Explaining how survivors respond to downsizing: the roles of trust. Bahrami. Academy of Management Executive. (1989). W. M alik. Bono. & Bergman. & M ishra. (Eds. E. empowerment. Thoresen C. 33-52. M . (1995). H. K. J. & Sommer. (1993). W.. J. (1998). The impact of downsizing on workplace attitudes. J. 127. K.
I appreciate the efforts of Terna Uza.  M adrick. T. & Ahlstrom. & Perry. see references . In C. M . J. . New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations. (2000). M. Smith. A. The Job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative an quantitative review. (1994). 29 (2) 63 – 87. Psychological Bulletin. European Journal of Scientific Research. & Patton. Corporate Surveys. M . Baruch.
. 53 – 71.  and.  M acky. Academy of Management Review. Organizational Downsizing as Convergence or Reorientation: Implication for Human Resource M anagement. Lilly. & Hedlung. 278-288. January. How Downsizing affects the Job Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction of Layoff Survivors. (1999).) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2004). George. Organizational behaviour. Academy of Management Review. G. 1. Doing M ore with Less: An Analysis of Work Life Balance among Layoff Survivors. & Hussain.  Virick M . 12 (5). A. J .Darius Ngutor Ikyanyon: Perceptions of Organizational Downsizing and Job Satisfaction Among Survivors in Nigerian Banks
not enough to improve their job satisfaction. & Cameron. M ishra. 24(1). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. K. (2001). justice work redesign. G. T. 33(2). Y. (2008). K. A. 50(2). 33(4) 509 – 530. Can’t Find a Productivity Revolution.E. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. Competitiveness Review. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration. (1997). Human Resource Management. R. P. On the whole. & Spreitzer. 4(16). 3564-3570. A. (2007). D. California Management Review. 15 (1). The Impact of Downsizing and Restructuring on Organisational Competitiveness. 95 – 104. and level of education. 10.  Richtner. F. (1999). Chao. J. (1994). 463 – 480.  M ishra. & D’Aunno. B. I. 309 – 339. The Role of M utual Trust in Effective Downsizing Strategies. A study of nurses’ job satisfaction: The relationship to organizational commitment. J. & Jones. A Conceptual framework for analyzing why organizations downsize. Organizational Downsizing: Strategies. 33(2) 189 – 211. 7(1). S. G. Challenge.  Steinhaus. S. (1994) Information Technology Outsourcing. and Tal. Sena Ingbian. T. How we got along after the Downsizing: Post – downsizing Trust as a Double-edged Sword. (2010). C. S. 22(2).  M annheim. (2002). K. 34 (Summer). (1996). Human Resource Management. E.  Al-Hussami. L. For suggestions on how organizations can cushion the negative effects of downsizing on survivors. Luthans.. Public Administration Quarterly. Robertson. K. J. Interventions and Research Implications. (1994). S.
J. N. K. S. S. G. job satisfaction. N. S. Labib.  Lee. (1997).. 215 – 32. (1988). R. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. organizational commitment. (2006). M cKinley. L. (1991). (1989). Administrative Science Quarterly. M ishra. Freeman. Helping survivors to stay on board. Academy of Management Executive. Management Review. D. (1993). R. Ayeni. Organizational Downsizing and Restructuring: Issues Relating to Learning. S. Corporate Downsizing Demystified: a Scholarly Analysis of a Business Phenomena. Study on relationship between organizational commitment and its determinants among private sector employees of Pakistan. F.. Perceptions of Organizational Downsizing. M .  Carbery. N.  Gandolfi. Theory and Practice.  Cameron. (2011). M . 11 – 40.111
M anagement 2012. Individual Responses to Job Loss: Perceptions. Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: M eta-analysis and assessment of causal effects. C. Job satisfaction. 176-199.  M arkowich.  Warsi. R. J. M. K. K. Delage. (1998) Downsizing Organizations: the Dilemmas of Change. & Lee. Saunders. Downsizing. and M ishra. & Parumasur. (2005). T. New York: AM ACOM . Perceived Breach of Contract for one’s own Layoff vs. 13. J. J. (2004) . J. 237 – 250. L. Journal of Management. S. and Turnover: Path Analyses based on M eta-Analytic Findings. S. Human Resource Management. Career Development International. K. A. International Journal of Business and Management Tomorrow. (2005). Best practice in white – collar downsizing managing contradictions. and organizational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo state. 89(9). Downsizing in a Learning Organization: Are There Hidden Costs? Academy of Management Review. J. International Review of Business Research Papers.  Tella. & Garavan. F. 6-11. (2011). B. 21(3). C. W. (1990).  De Vries. 310-321. Reactions and Coping Behaviours. W. (1994) Lifeboat Strategies for Corporate Renewal. & Gault. 81 – 98. April. & Popoola. 488 – 522. 11 (3). (1993).  Thornhill. The Survivor Syndrome: Aftermath of Downsizing. S. C. (1998). N.. & Corbett.. Journal of Managerial Psychology.& Edwards. F. M . S. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies. 14-21. Research in Organizational Behaviour.. 18 (4). SA Journal of Industrial Psychology. (1998). & M acky. A.. M . (2000).  Hui. Journal of Marketing Research. (1988). & M cKinley. T. 278-286. Someone else’s Layoff: Personal pink slips hurt more. R. Downsizing: Survivors’ assessments. W. 35(4). L. 2(4): 106-112
 Brown. Nigeria.  Rust. K.  Tomasko. Downsizing Organizations: Uses. 259-293. N. M . P. K. C. Delayering – But where’s the Commitment? Personnel Review. L. 72 – 83. L.  Doherty. 5(3). European Journal of Social Sciences. P. 12(4). (1997). Corporate Downsizing and Profitability in Canada. R. Hyderabad: ICFAI University Press. The Perceived Impact of Downsizing and Organizational Transformation on Survivors. M . Healing the Wounds: Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizations. D... (2003).
 Leana. and Peterson. Ivancevich. (2007). 399-410. 76 – 100.. and Stead. 26(2). Pepper. 602-611. A. C. Perceived Control as an Antidote to the Negative Effects of Layoffs on Survivors. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences. K. Journal of European Industrial Training. Executive Actions for M anaging Human Resources before
. G. & Collins-Nakai. Human Relations. N. C. A. 46(2).  Noer. 26 (2). Downsizing: Reshaping the Corporation of the Future. Job Stress. S. & Weinberg. 5(3) 57 – 73. R. Downsizing Outcomes: Better a Victim than a Survivor. 36. (Eds. & Power.. 35 – 41. G. Sydney. (2005). Library Philosophy and Practice.  Schweiger.  Ikyanyon. 29 (6). R. (2006). The Impact of Downsizing on Competitiveness of Banks in Nigeria: A Study of Selected Banks in M akurdi M etropolis. M . A. A.  Armstrong-Stassen. Fatima. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. 50 (1). Organizational Commitment and Job Performance. 63-77.  Jamal. 25 (1) 244 – 251.  Ndlovu. (1993). Spretizer. Business Horizons. People Management. D.  M entzer. D. (1997).  Brockner. 42(2). Personnel Psychology. 89-108. 31(2). and Cummings. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences. H. and Sahibzada.  Tett.  Samad. Reay. R. J. (2009). Greenwich. S. 30 (1). A. M . 1(3). Downsizing the Federal Government: A Longitudinal Study of M anagers’ Reactions.). O. The Downside of Downsizing. Human Resources Management Bulletin. 109 – 124. M .. (2000). In Staw.  Appelbaum. P.  Isabella. Journal of Management. & Feldman.  Littler. 2(6). J. 14 (3) 375 – 389. Journal of Small Business Management. Turnover Intention. 59 – 61 .  Brockner. & White. B. & M eyer. N.  Ryan. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. Training and Employability of Survivors. 29-45. CCH Australia Limited.. The effects of work layoffs on survivors: Research. J.  Fisher. 48-57. C. R. & Horsted. A. (2006). (1996). J. O.  Devine.  Sronce. J. Stainton.. CT: JAI Press. 15(4). Outcomes and Strategies. C. Hochwarter. S. (1995). 1(1) 26 – 31. Satisfaction and M ental Health: An Empirical Examination of Self Employed and Non-self Employed Canadians. Work motivation. R. M oderating effects of organization-based self-esteem on organizational uncertainty: employee response relationships. The effect of job satisfaction on organizational commitment and job performance relationship: A case study of managers in manufacturing companies. 1-16. L. The Impact of Downsizing on Employees’ Affective Commitment. (1997). & Balazs. 49. (1987).
(1993). Human Resource Professional. Today and Tomorrow. H. Helping survivors stay on track. 12-14. (1990). 1 (2) 127 – 138.  Greenberg. Academy of Management Executive. J. 16 (2) 399-432. Journal of Management. Organizational Justice: Yesterday.Darius Ngutor Ikyanyon: Perceptions of Organizational Downsizing and Job Satisfaction Among Survivors in Nigerian Banks and after Acquisition. 5(4). E.