Abstract

The research was conducted as a part of the EMBA, 3 rd term, MPP course requirement. The purpose of
the research was to study the relationship between gender, age, tenure, level and job satisfaction and
organizational commitment.

Design/Methodology/Approach
Two questionnaires (one for job satisfaction and another for organizational commitment) were
distributed to 41 staffs at Employees Provident Fund. The sampling method used was stratified sampling
method where the questionnaires were distributed to staffs at different sections of EPF. Later interviews
were also conducted as a more direct approach in understanding the level of job satisfaction and
organizational commitment among the staffs. Interview was conducted with employees serving EPF at
various levels and with different job tenure (hence age).

Findings
There was a positive co-relationship between age and job satisfaction, age and organizational
commitment, gender and job satisfaction, gender and organizational commitment. However the
relationship was not very strong as expected and as the findings of similar research in other
organizations. To study the variation brought about by age, gender, position and job tenure, single-factor
ANOVA test was also conducted however the ANOVA test’s result suggested that there was no variation
in Job satisfaction, organizational commitment across different age group, gender and level. The primary
data did show some variation which hinted that the job satisfaction, organizational commitment could
have depended on age group, gender and level however when these data were subjected to statistical
analysis no variation was seen. Negative correlation was observed between position and Job Satisfaction
whose analysis is also presented in the following sections of the report.

The findings of the interview indicated toward the dependency of organizational commitment and job
satisfaction however the responses in the questionnaire are less aligned with the results of the interview.

Research Limitations/implications
The major limitation of the research was the time. The requirement to submit a report within a month
left no time to review the data, reassess the response and conduct a well structured interview to a larger
number of people.

The other limitation could have been the small size of the sample. The questionnaire though distributed
to around 60 employees, data could be collected from only 41 of them. EPF has total employees of
around 500 and hence the questionnaire represents the view of only 8 pc of the total employee.
Each questionnaire had 7 optional scales from very high to very little and it was also found that the
respondents did not find the scales convenient and could not interpret their thoughts/beliefs
accordingly.

The respondents were given a week to submit their replies and were advised to complete the
questionnaire in a single sitting by being fair with their responses. Most of the respondents returned
back the filled questionnaire the same day some even within 30 minutes and hence the questionnaire
might not have been fairly filled.

The other intrinsic factors of the employees like ethnicity, values, family, educational background; culture
that is believed to have significant impact on job behavior was not studied.
Introduction and background

Human resources are undoubtedly the most important resources in an organization. The very existence
of an organization will be at stake without the efficient human resources, its goal remains unattainable
unless its human resources are motivated, satisfied and are committed to the organization. The root
source of quality and productivity gains is the employees. It is very important for organizations to see
employees as the fundamental source of improvement. The need for ensuring spirit of cooperation,
sense of commitment and satisfaction within the organization’s sphere of influence had never been such
an impending necessity.

It becomes very important for people to love what they do and enjoy what they do, the ‘enjoyment’
factor not only motivates the employee but also increases the efficiency on whole. At present times
when organizations are facing tough challenges in retaining their key employees, it has become
imperative to add elements in job that keeps employees attached to what they do and stick them to
work where they work. This need has been not less important in third world countries like ours where
the popular term ‘brain-drain’ is squeezing companies out of their skilled manpower, intelligent
executives and visionary managers. On the other front job satisfaction and organizational commitment
have a great impact on the successful performance of an organization? Satisfied and committed
employee identifies with the goals and values of the organization, and they put in that extra-effort that
plays the crucial role in leading the competition.

Job satisfaction is in regard to one’s feelings or state of mind regarding the nature of their work. Job
satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of factors e.g., the quality of relationship with their supervisor,
the quality of the physical environment in which they work and degree of fulfillment in their work, etc. It
can also be discovered through examining the employee’s values. It is good not only for employees but
employers, too to increase productivity and decreases staff change day by day. Job satisfaction is the
contentedness of individuals with their job.

Employee job satisfaction is an attitude that people have about their jobs and the organizations in which
they perform these jobs. Methodologically, we can define job satisfaction as an employee’s affective
reaction to a job, based on a comparison between actual outcomes and desired outcomes
(Mosadeghrad, 2003b). Job satisfaction is generally recognized as a multifaceted construct that includes
employee feelings about a variety of both intrinsic and extrinsic job elements. It encompasses specific
aspects of satisfaction related to pay, benefits, promotion, work conditions, supervision, organizational
practices and relationships with co-workers (Misener et al., 1996).

Organizational commitment has an important place in the study of organizational behavior. This is in part
due to the vast number of works that have found relationships between organizational commitment and
attitudes and behaviors in the workplace (Porter et al., 1974, 1976; Koch and Steers, 1978; Angle and
Perry, 1981). Furthermore, Batemen and Strasser (1984) state that the reasons for studying
organizational commitment are related to “(a) employee behaviors and performance effectiveness, (b)
attitudinal, affective, and cognitive constructs such as job satisfaction, (c) characteristics of the
employee’s job and role, such as responsibility and (d) personal characteristics of the employee such as
age, job tenure” (p. 95-96).

Multiple definitions of organizational commitment are found in the literature. Bateman and Strasser
state that organizational commitment has been operationally defined as “multidimensional in nature,
involving an employee’s loyalty to the organization, willingness to exert effort on behalf of the
organization, degree of goal and value congruency with the organization, and desire to maintain
membership” (p.95). Mowday, Steers, and Porter (1979) identified commitment-related attitudes and
commitment-related behaviors. Porter et al. (1974) discuss three major components of organizational
commitment as being “a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals, a willingness to exert
considerable effort on behalf of the organization, and a definite desire to maintain organizational
membership”. Sheldon (1971) defines commitments as being a positive evaluation of the organization
and the organizations goals. According to Buchanan (1974) most scholars define commitment as being a
bond between an individual (the employee) and the organization (the employer), though his own
definition of commitment
Employees Provident Fund
Employees Provident Fund is a fund management cum social security organization with a history of forty
eight years. The organization enjoys being the richest organization in the country and currently employs
around 500 employees. The average age of the employee is 42 years and the average tenure is 22 years.
The organization has altogether 8 branches and has central office located at Pulchowk. The Thamel
branch is the largest in terms of volume of transaction and number of staffs. There are around 300 staffs
in the Thamel branch alone.

The questionnaire was distributed to staffs in the Thamel branch however the interview was conducted
with staffs at Thamel, Biratnagar and Pulchowk.

Employees Provident fund has eight department each headed by a department head. Contributor
Services and social security department is the biggest department and is responsible for management of
funds.

EPF is a organization having traditional management practices. The Administrator is the Chief Executive
Officer of the organization and is the only power center in the organization. Though there are various
departments in EPF it is the Administrator who takes most of the decisions in the operation of the
departments. The culture has been to seek approval from the Administrator even in using the legitimate
authority given to the department heads and the managers. This practice is reflected in the whole EPF
system. In every department managers seek approval from their department head to use their power.
There has been less interest shown by the department head, Chief Officer and Administrator in
delegating their authority and encourage the independent use of legitimate authority by staffs under
them. Due to this reason the decision process in EPF is not swift and many times ineffective.

In terms of pay and benefits, EPF is comparatively in better position than other state owned institutions.
There are various allowance (medical, cloth), fringe and grade benefits that the employees enjoy. The
basic salary scale is same as that of government. Apart from these facilities, EPF staffs can take loan from
organization in the form of Social activity loan, home loan, house-maintenance loan, vehicle loan,
computer loan etc. at very low interest rate (3 p.a.).

Unlike many organizations ‘turn-over’ has not been a serious problem in EPF though the employees with
technical background have shown high turn-over ratio. However the percentage of technical staffs at EPF
is very small and hence the turn-over looks negligible on the whole.

Socially EPF is a respected organization, though unlike most of the other government organization no
high social status is associated with jobs at EPF still the employees at EPF are highly recognized. The
employees carry high level of pride on being introducing them as staffs of EPF. Most of the employees
opine that the clean, fair and transparent image of EPF gives them a distinct recognition. EPF staffs also
claim that EPF is one of the very few government institutions that provide prompt service.
Literature Review
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is defined as the degree to which an individual feels positively or negatively about his or
her job (Goodman et al, 2007). Job satisfaction can be conceived of as a multi-dimensional concept that
includes a set of favorable or unfavorable feelings by which employees perceive their job (Davis and
Newstrom, 1999). Another definition for job satisfaction is; it is an emotional response to tasks,
leadership, peer relationships and organizational politics, as well as other physical and social conditions
of the workplace (Stewart, 1998).
Locke’s definition of Job satisfaction considers cognitive, affective and evaluative reactions or attitudes
when he defines job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the
appraisal of one’s job or job experience”. Job satisfaction is a result of employees’ perception of how well
their job provides those things that are viewed as important.
Tziner and Vardi (1984) defined work satisfaction as an affective response or reaction to a wide range of
conditions or aspects of one’s work such as pay, supervision, working conditions and/or the work itself.
Others define it as an affective orientation towards anticipated outcome (Wanous & Lawler, 1972) or a
statement to describe the feelings of employees about their work (Arches, 1991). This statement
expresses the gap between what individuals feel they should receive from their work (ideally speaking)
and what they derive from the actual situation. A sense of satisfaction or its absence is, thus, an
individual’s subjective, emotional reaction to his or her work (Abu-Bader, 1998).

Organizational Commitment
As an attitude, organizational commitment is most often defined as (1) a strong desire to remain a
member of a particular organization; (2) a willingness to exert high levels of effort on behalf of the
organization; and (3) a definite belief in, and acceptance of, the values and goals of the organization
(Luthans, Organizational behavior 10th edition).

Furthermore, Batemen and Strasser (1984) state that the reasons for studying organizational
commitment are related to “(a) employee behaviors and performance effectiveness, (b) attitudinal,
affective, and cognitive constructs such as job satisfaction, (c) characteristics of the employee’s job and
role, such as responsibility and (d) personal characteristics of the employee such as age, job tenure” (p.
95-96).
Meyer and Allen (1991) and Dunham et al (1994) identified three types of commitment; affective
commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Affective commitment is defined
as the emotional attachment, identification, and involvement that an employee has with its organization
and goals (Mowday et al, 1997, Meyer& Allen, 1993; O’Reily & Chatman). Continuance commitment is
the willingness to remain in an organization because of the investment that the employee has with
“nontransferable” investments. Normative commitment (Bolon, 1993) is the commitment that a person
believes that they have to the organization or their feeling of obligation to their workplace.

Guest (1991) concludes that high organizational commitment is associated with lower turnover and
absence, but there is no clear link to performance. It is probably wise not to expect too much from
commitment as a means of making a direct and immediate impact on performance. It is not the same as
motivation. Commitment is a broader concept and tends to withstand transitory aspects of an
employee's job. It is possible to be dissatisfied with a particular feature of a job while retaining a
reasonably high level of commitment to the organization as a whole.

Gender

Several researchers have examined the relationship between job satisfaction and gender (Mason, 1995).
However, the results of the many studies concerning the relationship between job satisfaction and
gender of the employees have been contradictory. In fact, from the 1950s to date, the findings regarding
gender differences in job satisfaction have been inconsistent (Hickson and Oshagbemi, 1999). While
some studies have found women to be more satisfied than men (Ward and Sloane, 1998), other studies
have found men to be more satisfied than women (Forgionne and Peters, 1982).

Many researches have shown that the job satisfaction across different gender is often dependent on the
type of the job. For example gender differences were found to be apparent in the job satisfaction levels
of university teachers. Female faculties were more satisfied with their work and co-workers, whereas
their male colleagues were more satisfied with their pay, promotions, supervision and overall job
satisfaction.

Age
There have been many investigations into the relationship between age and different forms of job
satisfaction. Significant variations across age are commonly found, with older employees tending to
report higher satisfaction than younger ones (e.g. Doering, Rhodes & Schuster, 1983; Glenn, Taylor &
Weaver, 1977; Warr, 1992), Observed age differences in overall job satisfaction are greater than those
associated with gender, education, ethnic background or income (Clark, 1993;. Weaver, 1980). Herzberg,
Mausner, Peterson & Capwell (1957) suggested that in general, morale is high among young workers. It
tends to go down during the first few years of employment. The low point is reached when workers are
in their middle and late twenties or early thirties. After this period, job morale climbs steadily with age.
Thus there is a U-shaped pattern between job satisfaction and age. Again researches conducted in
different European countries have come up with different results for example the data from surveys
carried out in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden suggest an
increasing level of job satisfaction with age, however in Austria and Romania, the trend is that job
satisfaction decreases with age.

Position
There have been no conclusive findings on the effect of position on job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. The impact of position on job satisfaction depends on the authority, span of control, pay
and fringe benefits etc. It also depends upon the nature of job itself. Higher position generally means
higher pay and higher benefits. Wages and salaries are recognized to be a significant but cognitively
complex and multidimensional factor in job satisfaction (Luthans).
Research Question
What is the level of correlation between the job satisfaction and organizational commitment among the
employees at EPF?

What is the correlation between the predictors (age, gender, tenure, position) and the dependent job
dimensions (job satisfaction and organizational commitment)?

Research Method
The research team distributed two questionnaires one for job satisfaction and the other for
organizational commitment. The former had 16 questions that tried to study different aspects of job
satisfaction like general satisfaction, pay and fringe, job security, satisfaction from co-workers and
perceived opportunities. Each questions had a scale of 1 to 7. 41 respondents filled the questionnaire
that represents 8% of the total workforce at EPF. A structured interview (individual and group) was
conducted as a direct approach to understand the level of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment.

The sampling was stratified sampling as the respondents were classified according to age, gender and
level. The respondents were classified under three age groups the youngest being of age less than 31
and in the early stage of career while the another range included employees between 31 and 40 in
stable career period while the other group consisted of employees having age greater than 40 who were
either in the stable period or at retiring stage.

The other approach was to group the respondents in terms of the position which includes three groups,
the sub-ordinate staffs are data entry operators, tellers, and messengers, the other group was that of the
officers who supervise the sub-ordinates, sanction and approve transactions and the third group
consisted of managers who supervise the whole section, make plans and who is responsible for the
entire operation of their section.

Instruments
As stated in the earlier paragraph we used two sets of questionnaire for job satisfaction and
organizational commitment each. Apart from this interviews were also conducted as a direct approach to
study the level of job satisfaction and organizational commitment.

The interviews focused on assessing interest in jobs, colleagues, perceived opportunities, leadership,
communication and recognition.

Theoretical framework
The dependent variables in the study were job satisfaction and organizational commitment which are
affected by independent variables like age, gender, level and tenure.
Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1

Gender Vs. Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis
Null hypothesis
There is no difference in the mean job satisfaction between the male and female employees

Alternate hypothesis
There is some difference in the mean job satisfaction between the male and female employees

Method

Student t-Test was used to check the difference in the mean of the samples and the results are shown
below:

At first ‘F-test’ was conducted to check whether the t-Test for equal variance should be used or t-Test for
unequal variance needs to be used. The result of ‘F-test’ at 0.05 level of confidence is shown below

F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

FEMALE MALE
Mean 69.46166667 62.41241379
Variance 97.89650606 195.153019
Observations 12 29
df 11 28
F 0.501639721
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.114061402
F Critical one-tail 0.387357752

Since F<=f (0.05<0.114) we determined the use of ‘t-Test’ with equal variance. The ‘t-Test’ results are
shown below

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances

FEMALE MALE
Mean 69.46166667 62.41241379
Variance 97.89650606 195.153019
Observations 12 29
Pooled Variance 167.7216948
 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 39
t Stat 1.585791781
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.060431303
t Critical one-tail 1.684875122
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.120862606
t Critical two-tail 2.022690901

Since this is a two-tailed test and from the above t-test table we can see that P(T<t) i.e. 0.05<0.12. Since
the p value is greater than the confidence level 0.05 we reject the null hypothesis. Hence we can say that
there is a significant difference between the job satisfaction between the male and female employees.

Analysis
Gender vs. Organizational Commitment
Null hypothesis
There is no difference in the mean job satisfaction between the male and female employees

Alternate hypothesis
There is some difference in the mean job satisfaction between the male and female employees

Method
Student t-Test was used to check the difference in the mean of the samples and the results are shown
below:

At first ‘F-test’ was conducted to check whether the t-Test for equal variance should be used or t-Test for
unequal variance needs to be used. The result of ‘F-test’ at 0.05 level of confidence is shown below

F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

FEMALE MALE
Mean 62.54083333 66.56758621
Variance 34.70059015 51.14461897
Observations 12 29
df 11 28
F 0.678479786
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.25337244
F Critical one-tail 0.387357752

Since F<=f (0.05<0.25) we determined the use of ‘t-Test’ with equal variance. The ‘t-Test’ results are
shown below

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances

FEMALE MALE
Mean 62.54083333 66.56758621
Variance 34.70059015 51.14461897
Observations 12 29
Pooled Variance 46.50655956
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 39
-
t Stat 1.720265836
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.046655518
t Critical one-tail 1.684875122
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.093311037
 t Critical two-tail 2.022690901
Since this is a two-tailed test and from the above t-test table we can see that P(T<t) i.e. 0.05<0.09. Since
the p value is greater than the confidence level 0.05 we reject the null hypothesis. Hence we can say that
there is a significant difference between the organizational commitment between the male and female
employees.

Analysis

Age vs Job Satisfaction

The respondents were divided into three age groups the fresher were grouped in group one, the mid-
aged had age range between 31 and 41 while the elder employees (age>40) formed the third group.
Their job satisfaction data was subjected to single factor ANOVA at confidence level of 0.05.

Hypothesis

Null hypothesis:
The mean job satisfaction for all age group is same
µ1= µ2= µ3

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different
 Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
LESS THAN 31 7 420.65 60.09286 110.7891
MORE THAN 30 LESS THAN
41 10 681.54 68.154 157.2885
MORE THAN 40 24 1541.31 64.22125 200.4901

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 271.318 2 135.659 0.770375 0.469932 3.244818
Within Groups 6691.604 38 176.0948

Total 6962.922 40

Interpretation

We can see that the mean job satisfaction less at early age then it rises in the middle age and then again
drops. However we can see in the ANOVA table that Fcrit>Fcalc therefore we accept the null hypothesis
which means we have no enough evidences to say that there is a variation in mean job satisfaction
between different age groups.

Age vs Organizational Commitment

Hypothesis

Null hypothesis:
The mean organizational commitment for all age group is same
µ1= µ2= µ3

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single
Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
YOUNG 7 450.47 64.3528 70.973
MID_AGE 10 649.54 64.954 46.3354
 OLD_AGE 24 1580.94 65.8725 47.5438

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 15.01792 2 7.5089 0.14735 0.8634 3.2448
Within Groups 1936.3654 38 50.9569

Total 1951.3833 40

We can see that the mean organizational commitment is fairly similar across different age group. We can
also see in the ANOVA table that Fcrit>Fcalc therefore we accept the null hypothesis which means we
have no enough evidences to say that there is a variation in mean organizational commitment between
different age groups.

Position vs Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis

Null hypothesis:
The mean job satisfaction for all position is same
µ1= µ2= µ3

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
Sub-ordinates 19 1281.59 67.45211 154.6682
Supervisors 19 1189.12 62.58526 189.6496
Managers 3 172.79 57.59667 193.508

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 378.1853536 2 189.0927 1.091239 0.346091 3.244818
Within Groups 6584.736456 38 173.2825

Total 6962.92181 40
We can see that the mean job satisfaction declines with rise in position. However we can also see in the
ANOVA table that Fcrit>Fcalc therefore we accept the null hypothesis which means we have no enough
evidences to say that there is a variation in mean job satisfaction among employees at different
positions.

Position vs. Organizational Commitment

Hypothesis

Null hypothesis:
The mean organizational commitment for all position is same
µ1= µ2= µ3

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single
Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
SUB_ORDINATES 19 1225.71 64.51105 58.53041
SUPERVISORS 19 1245.71 65.56368 40.75752
MANAGERS 3 209.53 69.84333 44.72623

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 74.74807 2 37.37404 0.756787 0.476111 3.244818
Within Groups 1876.635 38 49.38514

Total 1951.383 40

We can see that the mean organizational commitment similar across different position. We can also see
in the ANOVA table that Fcrit>Fcalc therefore we accept the null hypothesis which means we have no
enough evidences to say that there is a variation in mean organizational commitment among employees
at different positions.
References

http://www.swissmc.ch/Media/Ranya_Nehmeh_working_paper_05-2009.pdf
http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~nschultz/documents/knowledge/organizational.commitment.pdf
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/tella2.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22108379/A-Study-About-Gender-Education-Level-Salary-And-Job-
Satisfaction
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21616918/job-satisfaction- ‫כללי‬
http://www.stattutorials.com/EXCEL/EXCEL_TTEST1.html