International Journal of Business Management &

Research (IJBMR)
ISSN 2249-6920
Vol. 2 Issue 3 Sep 2012 26-44
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.,

IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE ON TURNOVER INTENTION:

AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS ON FACULTY MEMBERS OF TECHNICAL

EDUCATION OF INDIA
1
SAKET JESWANI & 2SUMITA DAVE
1
Sr. Assistant Professor, Shri Shankaracharya Institute of Technology and Management,
Bhilai, (C.G.), India
2
Professor, Faculty of Management Studies, SSGI, Bhilai, (C.G.), India
ABSTRACT

The study aims to explore the antecedents of organizational climate and its impact on turnover
intention of faculty members of various technical educational institutes of India. A 23-item instrument
was generated following a critical review of the literature. The data was collected from 205 faculty
members through structured questionnaires. Antecedents of Organizational climate viz Orientation,
Supervision, Communication, Decision Making and Reward Management are independent variables and
Turnover Intention is dependent variable. An 18 item instrument was generated with the help of
Turnover Intention scale adapted from Donnelly and Ivancevich (1985) and Organizational Climate
Questionnaire (OCQ) adapted from Litwin and Stringer (1968) measuring five factors. Principal
component analysis with varimax rotation was used to determine construct validity and Cronbach’s
coefficient alpha to determine the scale internal consistency. Regression analysis was used to determine
the causal relationship between both the variables. The results state that among all the five antecedents of
organizational climate only two antecedents viz. Orientation (X1) and Reward Management (X5) has
significant impact on turnover intention The hypothesis was tested on representative faculty members of
technical educational institutes across India.

KEYWORDS: Organizational Climate, Turnover Intention, Faculty Members, Technical Educational

Institutes

INTRODUCTION

Organizational Climate is a very important concept to study and to understand in the realm of
organizational behavior. The origin and the use of this concept is as old as the original concept of
management itself. However, since many decades various frameworks of organizational climate has been
developed both conceptual as well as operational under different sets of situations and their research
findings are highly diverse and often contradictory in nature.

Retaining valuable employees is one of the most crucial issue for today’s competitive
organizations as employees are considered as the most valuable asset and precious resource, which helps
27 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

to sustain in the dynamic environment. It is usually in the organizations best interest to put its energy and
time in retaining the quality employees that they already have instead of recruiting the new ones.
However, increasing employee turnover has been a fashion now a days and the issue of employee
turnover is the major reason for performance inefficiency in many organizations in India.

Indian organizations are being forced to undergo considerable transformation in their working
system in order to sustain in today’s competitive and dynamic environment. In this context, it would be
important to explore the factors that have the most positive impact on the performance of the
organization. Organizational performance largely depends on the presence of satisfied and committed
employees. Among various factors, attitudes and feelings of the individuals regarding their jobs have
been found to be significantly affecting their behaviors. (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson and Capwell,
1957; Iaffaldano and Muchinsky, 1985; Locke, 1970; Schwab and Cummings, 1970; Petty, McGee and
Cavender, 1984). Therefore, positive attitude towards job can be generated by a healthy organizational
climate resulting to a positive behavior towards turnover intention.

This empirical study aims to identify various antecedents of organizational climate and also to
investigate their impact on turnover intention of faculty members of technical educational institutes of
India. Five antecedents of organizational climate (Orientation, Supervision, Communication, Decision
Making, and Reward Management) identified as independent variables with the help of through literature
review of previous research in the associated field and broad discussion with faculty members. This
study will shed some light for technical educational institutes that encounter high turnover rates of
faculty members resulting from unfavorable organizational climate. Knowing more about faculty
member’s intent to leave with relation to organizational climate is important to develop general
guidelines to improve the relevant organizational climate factors that are found to be laking in the
organizations.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Organizational Climate

Organizational climate is a concept of employees’ attitude and feelings towards their

organization which has great impact towards their working ways and contributions; in consequence
organizational climate causes organization performance because this relates directly to employees’
satisfaction and commitment towards organization.

Organisational climate forms part of the broader climate concept, which includes aspects of the
social environment that are consciously perceived by the organisational members (Patterson et al., 2004).
The concept dates back to the early 1900s, with the work of Lewin et al. (1939) and Lewin (1951), who
suggested that climate is a characterisation of the salient environmental stimuli and is an important
determinant of motivation and behaviour. This has resulted in organisational climate being the direct or
indirect subject of much organisational behaviour and emerging as a construct with many behavioural
consequences. The subject gained momentum with the work of Litwin and Stringer (1968), who
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 28

conceptualised climate in relation to its influence on motivation and behaviour. They stated that
organisational climate is: “A set of measurable properties of the work environment, perceived directly or
indirectly by people who live and work in this environment and assumed to influence their motivation
and behaviour” (Litwin and Stringer, 1968)

Litwin and Stringer (1968) conducted the first comprehensive study on organisation climate that
was based on theory developed by McClelland et al. (1953) and focused on how climate affects human
motives for achievement, power and affiliation. They developed the Litwin and Stringer Organisational
Climate Questionnaire (LSOCQ), a theoretically based scale for measuring climate with the nine
dimensions aimed at satisfying three management needs, namely accurately describe the situation,
relating the dimensions to specific motivations and motivated behavior, and enable management to
measure changes in the situation.

In order to influence climate, numerous factors, such as physical structure and settings,
procedures and practices, and leadership style, need to be considered. Litwin and Stringer’s (1968) model
suggests that the concept of organisational climate needs to be integrated with other theories of
organisational behaviour such as motivation. The integration of these organisational behaviour theories
with organisational climate shows the relationship and importance of factors like leadership style,
management practices, decision-making processes, technology, formal organisational structures and
social structures on the formation of climate.

An initial assumption of theory and research in the area of organizational climate was that social
environments could be characterized by a limited number of dimensions. For example, Campbell,
Dunnette, Lawler, and Weick (1970) identified four dimensions common to a number of climate studies
(individual autonomy; degree of structure imposed on the situation; reward orientation; and
consideration, warmth, and support). James and his colleagues (James & James, 1989; James &
McIntyre, 1996; James & Sells, 1981) describe four dimensions they identified across a number of
different work contexts: (1) role stress and lack of harmony; (2) job challenge and autonomy; (3)
leadership facilitation and support; and (4) work group cooperation, friendliness, and warmth. James
suggested that individuals developed a global or holistic perception of their work environment (e.g.,
James & Jones, 1974), which could be applied to any number of contexts and industries.

However, over the years the number of climate dimensions identified as targets of assessment
has proliferated, leading to confusion and slow theoretical progress. For example, Glick’s (1985) review
of the field described an abbreviated list of climate dimensions including leader’s psychological distance
(Payne & Mansfield, 1978), managerial trust and consideration (Gavin & Howe, 1975), communication
flow (Drexler, 1977), open-mindedness (Payne & Mansfield, 1978), risk orientation (Lawler, Hall, &
Oldham, 1974), service quality (Schneider, Parkington, & Buxton, 1980); equity (James, 1982), and
centrality (Joyce & Slocum, 1979). Since Glick’s review, the development of new climate scales has
continued. For example, the Business Organization Climate Index (Payne & Pheysey, 1971) was revised
29 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

in 1992 with the addition of scales measuring concern for customer service, the impact of information
quality, and ability to manage culture (Payne, Brown, & Gaston, 1992).

The lack of a theoretical basis for many climate instruments has resulted in much of the
variation in climate dimensions employed in different measures. For example, Wilderom, Glunk, and
Maslowski (2000) located and summarized 10 studies relating climate to organizational performance.
They reported that different aspects of climate emerged as important in different studies. This diffuse
pattern of results is likely to be due, in part, to the variety of methods of assessment of climate employed
in these studies.

The inability to draw clear research conclusions through a lack of theory and subsequent
inconsistent operationalization of climate is compounded by the fact that most climate instruments have
not been validated. With the exception of some domain-specific climates such as Schneider’s service
climate (Schneider et al., 1998), there are few measures with demonstrated reliability and validity.

One of the best-known general measures of organizational climate is the Organizational Climate
Questionnaire (OCQ) by Litwin and Stringer (1968). It comprises 50 items that assess nine dimensions
of climate. A number of studies (e.g., Sims & LaFollette, 1975; Muchinsky, 1976) have suggested that a
six-factor structure is more appropriate and pointed out that the existing nine scales showed poor split-
half reliabilities. A review by Rogers, Miles, and Biggs (1980) showed that most studies had found six
factors and that there was virtually no agreement among researchers regarding which items loaded best
on the different factors. They concluded that the OCQ lacked validity and was not a consistent
measurement device.

For the purpose of this research study, in the light of various theories and models on organizational
climate given by various theorist and management practioners and after the broad discussion with faculty
members, five antecedents of organizational climate was identified as important and more prevalent
among the educational settings.

Antecedents of Organizational Climate

On the basis of through literature review & broad discussions with faculty members, five
antecedents of organizational climate have been identified with the help of Organizational Climate
Questionnaire (OCQ) by Litwin and Stringer (1968): Orientation, Supervision, Communication, Decision
making, and Reward management.

1. Orientation: A concern with clearly defining the goals of the organization to the employees.
(Locke, 1991)

2. Supervision: the extent to which employees experience support and understanding from their
immediate supervisor (Cummins, 1990; Eisenberger et al., 2002).

3. Communication: The free sharing of information throughout the organization. (Callan, 1993;
Hargie & Tourish, 2000)
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 30

4. Decision making: Employees have considerable influence over decision-making activities in the
organization. ( Miller & Monge, 1986; Hollander & Offerman, 1990)

5. Reward management: Reward identifies the feeling of being rewarded fairly and equitably as
well as the perceived organization’s promotion policies. If an employee feels that he or she is
unlikely to obtain a good evaluation or promotion even after having great endeavours in such a
working environment, he or she will probably search for another job elsewhere (Ing-Chung
Huang et al, 2003).

Turnover Intention

Employee Turnover is acting like an incurable disease now-a-days as it is becoming very

difficult for the organizations to retain their valuable employees, which are the means of gaining
competitive advantage. Intention to leave and actual turnover are often highly correlated. For this reason,
researchers often use intent to leave as a proxy for turnover. Price (1977) developed a model of turnover
which proposes that intention to leave is influenced by personal characteristics, role related
characteristics, facility characteristics, turnover opportunities, and job characteristics. Mobley (1982), on
the other hand classes the causes and correlates of turnover into a simple model, which presents the
determinants into external economy, organizational variables and individual variables.

Turnover intention is defined as a conscious and deliberate wilfulness to leave the organization
(Tett and Meyer, 1993). High turnover often means that employees are unhappy with the work or
compensation, but it can also indicate unsafe or unhealthy conditions, or that too few employees give
satisfactory performance (due to unrealistic expectations or poor candidate screening). The lack of career
opportunities and challenges, dissatisfaction with the job-scope or conflict with the management has also
been cited as predictors of high turnover. Low turnover indicates that none of the above is true:
employees are satisfied and their performance is satisfactory to the employer.

This study on employee’s intention to quit, however, is zooming in at the organizational levels.
One of the organizational variables used is organizational climate which potentially correlates to
individual’s turnover intention. Employees tend to leave organizations that endure unfavourable
organizational climate. Implementing employee retention strategies by changing organizational climate
could be time-consuming and it would not probably show significant results in the short term. It is hoped
that this study will shed some light for organizations that encounter high turnover rates resulting from
unfavourable organizational climate. Knowing more about why people intent to leave is important to
develop general guidelines to improve the relevant organizational climate factors that are considered
short-coming in the organizations.

Links between Organizational climate and Turnover Intention

Research has suggested that climate perceptions are associated with a variety of important
outcomes at an individual, work group, and organizational as a whole. One of the important outcome and
also the focus of this study is turnover intention (Rousseau, 1988; Rentsch, 1990).
31 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

Lewin (1951) proposed that behaviour of an individual within an organisation is a function of

the individual and the organisational environment as depicted by the following equation:

Behaviour = f (P, E)

Where,

P is the characteristics of the individual; and

E is the characteristics of the environment that the individual operates in.

This formula summarises the essence of environmental influences on an individual’s behaviour.

It is therefore also indicative of the effect that organisational climate has on behaviour. The behavior can
be depicted as turnover intention of faculty members.

RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

Based on the above literature and the study of Litwin & Stringer (1968), which depicts the
relationship between the five antecedents of organizational culture and turnover intention. The
hypothesis generated based on literature review is tested on the sample population of faculty members of
technical educational institutes of India. This study seeks to test the following hypotheses:

H1: Orientation has a significant impact on turnover intention of faculty members.

H2: Supervision has a significant impact on turnover intention of faculty members.

H3: Communication has a significant impact on turnover intention of faculty members.

H4: Decision Making has a significant impact on turnover intention of faculty members.

H5: Reward Management has a significant impact on turnover intention of faculty members.

RESEARCH MODEL

The purpose of this study is to investigate the links between antecedents of organizational
climate and turnover intentions of faculty members of technical educational institutes of India. The study
focus on determining the various antecedents of organizational climate those most significantly influence
their decisions to quit or stay. In addition, the study sought to describe the importance of retaining
efficient faculty members and developing strategies to enhance their retention practices.

There are five antecedents of organizational climate, which have a direct relationship on turnover
intention among the faculty members. A Organizational Climate – Turnover Intention Model is
generated on the basis of literature review for the purpose to check the extent of sound organizational
climate and its probable relationship with the decision to quit or stay as shown in fig 1.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 32

Figure 1: Organizational Climate – Turnover Intention Model

INDEPENDENT & DEPENDENT VARIABLES

An appropriate instrument is required for survey in order to conduct the study properly. This
instrument needs some base and background. Table 1 & 2 depicts the Independent & Dependent
Variables.

Independent Variables Source Dependent Variable

Turnover intention is broadly
defined as attitudinal (thinking
of quitting), decisional
(intention to leave), and
behavioral (searching for a
new job) processes proceeding
voluntary turnover (Sager et
Organizational Climate – al., 1998, Khatri 2000).
Climate has been described as an
experientially based description of the
work environment and, more
specifically, employees’ perceptions
of the formal and informal policies,
practices and procedures in their
organization (Schneider, 2008).
“Climate can be defined as the Litwin & Stringer, 1968
perceived attributes of an organization
and its sub-systems as reflected in the
way an organization deals with its
members, groups and issues”. (Litwin
& Stringer, 1968)
33 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

Table 2: Independent & Dependent Variables

Table 2:
Independent
&
Dependent
Variables
Dependent
Items Independent Variables Source Variable
Litwin
and
Stringer
X1 Orientation (1968)
(Clearly defining the
goals of the Organizational
organization) Climate
X2 Supervision
(The extent to which
employees experience
support and
understanding from their
immediate supervisor)
X3 Communication
(The free sharing of
information throughout
the organization)
X4 Decision Making
(Employees have
considerable influence
over decision-making)
X5 Reward Management
(Feeling of being
rewarded fairly and
equitably as well as the
perceived organization’s
promotion policies)

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

The above study helps in developing the survey instrument. 3 items scale has been generated for
turnover intention of faculty members adapted from Donnelly and Ivancevich (1985), which states that
‘Actively searching for a new job next year’, ‘thinking about quitting present job’, and ‘leave the job as
soon as possible’ are the three instruments representing the turnover intention. 15 items scale has been
generated for five antecedents of organizational climate (3 items for each antecedent) for eg. ‘clearly
defined goals’ represents the orientation, ‘support from superior’ represents the supervision, ‘ free
sharing of information’ represents communication, ‘autonomy in work related decisions’ represents
decision making and ‘fair and uniform salary structure’ represents reward management. The 18
instruments comprises to form the research instrument of the study for developing the questionnaire in
order to prove the hypothesis generated as shown in Table 3.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 34

Table 3: Research Instrument

Table 3:
Research
Instrument
Variable Items Scale Source
Actively
searching for a
Turnover new job next
Intention (Z) Z1 year Adapted from

Often think
about quitting Donnelly and
Z2 present job Ivancevich (1985)

Leave as soon
Z3 as possible

Organizational Clearly defined

Climate X11 goals Adapted from

Organizational
Climate
Flexibility in Questionnaire
solving (OCQ) by Litwin
(X) X12 problems and Stringer (1968)

Organization
helps to achieve
X13 individual goals
X21 Support

Understanding
among
X22 employees

Proper
supervision and
X23 directions

Free sharing of
information
among
X31 employees
35 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

Communication
of future
X32 direction

Free sharing of
information
between
management
X33 and employees

Autonomy in
work-related
X41 decisions

Work-related
decisions
without prior
X42 permission

Involvement in
institutional
X43 level decisions

Fair and
uniform salary
X51 structure
Fair
promotional
X52 policies

Reward for
X53 achievements

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The conclusive research design was applied in this study to identify the antecedents of
organizational climate and to find out their relationship with faculty members intention to leave or stay.
Non-probability convenience sampling method was adopted. The sample comprised 205 faculty
members of technical educational institutes of India. The India was divided into 5 zones viz. East, West,
North, South & Central. Various popular states of all the 5 zones were chosen for data collection. The
data was collected from faculty members including Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and
Professors.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 36

Procedure

The data was collected through online survey (Questionnaire). The questions were asked on
seven point likert scale from the respondents. The questionnaire consisted of three sections i.e. turnover
intention and antecedents of organizational climate. Turnover intention was the dependent variable.
Finally, the third section asked was about the respondents’ demographic characteristics. To increase the
response rate, the employees were informed regarding the research objective and confidentiality. The
response rate was 20.5% (205/1000) targeting sample size of 200 from each zone of India. (n = 205)

Measures

Based on the theoretical framework presented above, a new measure of organizational climate
was developed with the help of Organizational Climate Questionnaire (OCQ) by Litwin and Stringer
(1968). Both deductive and inductive processes were used for item generation (Hinkin; 1995, 1998). Item
generation was initiated with the following steps: (1) a comprehensive review of the literature on
psychological ownership, turnover intention and related terms, and (2) discussions with faculty members
of various technical institutes. From the review of literature and group discussions, five antecedents of
organizational climate was identified and considered as independent variables for the purpose of the
study viz. Orientation, Supervision, Communication, Decision making, and Reward management.
Turnover Intention of faculty members is considered as dependent variable.

In the next step, 18 items were generated for data collection representing the five antecedents of
organizational climate and turnover intention. Then the guidelines of Stanton, Sinar, Balzer, and Smith
(2002) for item reduction were followed. Specifically, item reduction is often done on the basis of
maximizing internal consistency. Accordingly, the scale’s internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was
maintained by selecting items based on reliability with each item removed, and the corrected item-total
correlations. The instruments were prepared keeping in mind the faculty members of technical
educational institutes of India. The survey questionnaire with a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) was used.

VALIDITY & RELIABILITY OF INSTRUMENTS

The 18 items were subjected to a principal component analysis with varimax rotation, the results
of which are shown in Table 4. In line with expectations, the factor analysis yielded four components
corresponding to the five variables. The result of factor analysis shows that Z1, Z2 and Z3 items of
turnover intention are loaded under 3rd component with high loading values of 0.812, 0.827 and 0.824.
X1, X2 & X3 variables i.e. Orientation, Supervision and Communication are loaded under 1st component.
As loadings of orientation items X11, X12, X13 are 0.823, 0.784 & 0.797 respectively is high as compared
to supervision & communication items, it is only considered for further analysis. Both the supervision
&communication items will not be considered. X41 & X42 items of Decision Making are loaded under
4th component with loadings of 0.787 & 0.844 respectively, whereas X43 is weakly loaded (0.481), so
will not be considered. X51, X52 and X53 items of Reward Management are loaded under 2nd component
37 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

with loadings of 0.827, 0.832 and 0.674 respectively. Therefore, after factor analysis, Turnover Intention
will be considered as dependent variable whereas 3 items of orientation, 2 items of decision making and
3 items of reward management are considered as independent variables for further multivariate analysis.

Reliability or internal consistency of the instruments is estimated with the help of Cronbach
coefficient alpha to check whether the items are all measuring the same thing or not. The closer the value
of Cronbach’s alpha to one, the higher the reliability estimate of the instrument. As the scale is multi-
dimensional, consisting of numerous subscales, coefficient alphas are estimated for each subscale as
shown in table 4 and the values depicts that the data gathered for all the subscales are reliable.

Table 4: Validity Test (Factor Analysis)

Table 4: Validity
Test (Factor
Analysis)
Rotated
Component
Matrix
Cronbach’s
Variable Items 1 2 3 4 Alpha
Turnover Intention Z1 -0.081 -0.125 0.812 -0.2 0.825
Z2 -0.178 -0.121 0.827 -0.081
Z3 -0.226 -0.234 0.824 -0.002
Orientation X11 0.823 0.105 -0.164 0.095 0.874
X12 0.784 0.099 -0.13 0.209
X13 0.797 0.323 -0.154 0.191
Supervision X21 0.731 0.402 -0.13 0.213 0.874
X22 0.756 0.333 -0.142 0.302
X23 0.737 0.419 -0.099 0.162
Communication X31 0.546 0.442 -0.083 0.328 0.915
X32 0.678 0.177 -0.222 0.357
X33 0.614 0.246 -0.223 0.419
Decision Making X41 0.336 0.161 -0.157 0.787 0.775
X42 0.234 0.221 -0.05 0.844
X43 0.479 0.293 -0.202 0.481
Reward
Management X51 0.217 0.827 -0.234 0.218 0.881
X52 0.309 0.832 -0.215 0.217
X53 0.437 0.674 -0.182 0.143
Extraction Method:
Principal
Component
Analysis.
Rotation Method:
Varimax with
Kaiser
Normalization.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 38

Organizational Climate was measured using 15 items instrument for all the five antecedents
using Organizational Climate Questionnaire (OCQ) by Litwin and Stringer (1968). The Cronbach alpha
was 0.950. Overall the internal consistency for all the 18 items was checked and the Cronbach alpha was
0.872 (Table 5).

Table 5: Reliability Statistics

for Main Study (n=205)
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
0.872 18

DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (Version 17) was used to facilitate
analysis. The psychometric properties of the instrument were analyzed using principal component
analysis with varimax rotation to determine construct validity and Cronbach’s coefficient alpha to
determine the scale’s internal consistency reliability. Finally, the regression analysis was conducted to
determine the impact of five antecedents of organizational climate on turnover intention (table 6, 7 & 8).
The value of R Square is 0.238 i.e. 23.8% which reveals that data collected is reliable as shown in table 6

Table 6: Model Summary

Table 6:
Model
Summary
Std. Error
Adjusted R of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1 0.488 0.238 0.227 1.575
Predictors:
(Constant),
X5, X1, X4

Table 7 reveals that organizational climate has a significant impact on turnover intention of
faculty members as F value (20.955) is greater than Fcrit (2.649).
39 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

Table 7: ANOVA

Sum of Mean Significance

Model Squares df Square F p
Fcrit
1 Regression 2.649
155.874 3 51.958 20.955 0
Residual 498.388 201 2.48
Total 654.262 204
Predictors:
(Constant),
X5, X1, X4
Dependent
Variable:
Z

Among all the five antecedents of organizational climate only two antecedents viz. Orientation
(X1) and Reward Management (X5) has significant impact on turnover intention with p values of 0.000 &
0.027 (p<0.05) respectively as shown in table 8. Therefore research hypothesis H1 and H5 is accepted
whereas null hypothesis (H0) is accepted for other three antecedents viz. Supervision (X2),
Communication (X3) & Decision making (X4) i.e H2, H3 and H4 are rejected.

Table 8: Coefficients

Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
Std.
B Error Beta
1 (Constant) 5.372 0.351 15.315 0
X1 -0.203 0.091 -0.18 -2.223 0.027
X4 0.086 0.129 0.073 0.667 0.506
X5 -0.424 0.108 -0.418 -3.927 0
Dependent
Variable:
Z

The beta coefficients for significant antecedents of organizational climate i.e. orientation and
reward management are -0.203 and -0.424 respectively as shown in figure 2. The negative sign indicates
the inverse relationships between the antecedents of organizational climate and turnover intention among
faculty members.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 40

Figure 2: Result of Hypothesis Test (H1 to H8)

CONCLUSIONS

The study set out to develop a theory-driven multi-dimensional measure of organizational

climate and then its impact on turnover intention of faculty members of technical educational institutes of
India. The result of this empirical investigation support that organizational climate has a significant
impact on turnover intention of faculty members. The study results revealed that orientation and reward
management are the two antecedents of organizational climate, which has an inverse significant impact
on turnover intention. i.e. if faculty members are clear about the organizational and individual goals and
rewards within the institute is properly managed than it is less likely for the them to quit the organization.

These findings had the support of a previous study by Singh (1985) who found that faculty
members in a more open climate performed much better than faculty members in a less open climate and
are less likely to leave the organization.

The results from this empirical investigation may have significant implications for how positive
organizational climate is conceived. The results hopefully suggest that these two antecedent may
represent what constitutes a theoretically broadened and enriched understanding of organizational
climate in relation to faculty members of technical educational institutes of India.

Suggestions

In this competitive world, technical educational institutes require satisfied and committed faculty
members to generate value for the institution. The result of this study was in the hypothesized directions
in which perceived positive organizational climate decreases intention to leave. This relationship was in
41 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

line with previous findings reported and thus this study managed to validate the results obtained by past
researchers.

To create positive organizational climate, management of the educational institutes needs to

focus more on two antecedents of organizational climate i.e. Orientation and Reward Management, as
they have significant impact on intention to quit which is inversely related. Orientation techniques should
be properly defined and practiced within the educational institutes like faculty members must be clearly
defined with the goals of the institute. There must be provisions of flexibility in solving problems and at
last management of the institutes needs to help the faculty members to achieve their individual goals.

Sound policies regarding reward management needs to be formulated and implemented

including fair and uniform salary structure among all the faculty members and fair promotional polices.
Management of the educational institutes needs to formulate such strategies to instill a positive
organizational climate and thus reduce turnover of faculty members.

Limitations

A major limitation of this study is the population factor. Only faculty members of technical
educational institutes of India were used leaving out students and non-academic staff. This poses a threat
to generalizability of the study in relation to prediction of organizational climate in Indian institutes – the
study may not be generalized for the entire academic community. It is not certain that similar results
would be obtained when a study is conducted using all the subgroups (academic, non-academic and
students) for estimation of organizational climate.

Another limitation is dearth of current literature in the area of organizational climate in relation to
turnover intention in educational settings.

REFERENCES

1. Callan, V. J. (1993). Subordinate–manager communication in different sex dyads: consequences

for job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 66, 13–27.

2. Campbell, J. P., Dunnette, M. D., Lawler, E. E., & Weick, K. E. (1970). Managerial behavior,
performance, and effectiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.

3. Cummins, R. C. (1990). Job stress and the buffering effect of supervisory support. Group and
Organization Studies, 15, 92–104.

4. Donnelly, J.H.and Ivancevich, J.M. (1985). Role clarity and the Salesman. Journal of
Marketing, 39, 1-71.

5. Drexler, J. (1977). Organizational climate: its homogeneity within organizations. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 62, 38–42.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 42

6. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I., & Rhoades, L. (2002).
Perceived supervisor support: contributions to perceived organizational support and employee
retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 565–573.

7. Gavin, J. R., & Howe, J. G. (1975). Psychological climate: some theoretical and empirical
considerations. Behavioral Science, 20, 228–240.

8. Glick, W. H. (1985). Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate:

pitfalls in multilevel research. Academy of Management Review, 10, 601–616.

9. Hargie, O., & Tourish, P. (2000). Handbook of communication audits. London: Routledge.

10. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R.O. and Capwell, D.F. 1957. Job Attitudes: Review of
Research and Opinion. Pittsburgh: Psychological Service of Pittsburgh.

11. Hollander, E. P., & Offerman, L. R. (1990). Power and leadership in organizations:
relationships in transition. American Psychologist, 45, 179–189.

12. Ing-Chung Huang, Chih-Hsun Jason Chuang & Hao-Chieh Lin. (2003), ‘The Role of Burnout in
the Relationship between Perceptions of Organizational Politics and Turnover Intentions. Public
Personnel Management’, ProQuest Education Journals, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 519-531.

13. James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 67, 219–229.

14. James, L. A., & James, L. R. (1989). Integrating work environment perceptions: explorations
into the measurement of meaning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 739–751.

15. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. (1974). Organizational climate: a review of theory and research.
Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1096–1112.

16. James, L. R., & McIntyre, M. D. (1996). Perceptions of organizational climate. In K. R. Murphy
(Ed.), Individual differences and behavior in organizations (pp. 416–450). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

17. James, L. R., & Sells, S. B. (1981). Psychological climate: theoretical perspectives and
empirical research. In D. Magnusson (Ed.), Toward a psychology of situations: An interactional
perspective (pp. 275–292). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

18. Joyce, W. F., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1979). Climates in organizations. In S. Kerr (Ed.),
Organizational behavior (pp. 317–333). Columbus, OH: Grid.

19. Laffaldano, M.T. & Muchinsky, P.M. 1985. “A Meta-analysis of the Relationships between
Individual Job Satisfaction and Individual Performance”, Academy of Management Review, 9,
pp. 712-721.
43 Impact of Organizational Climate on Turnover Intention: An Empirical Analysis on
Faculty Members of Technical Education of India

20. Lawler, E. E., Hall, D. T., & Oldham, G. R. (1974). Organizational climate: relationship to
organizational structure, process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Performance,
11, 139–155.

21. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper.

22. Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. & White, R.K. (1939). “Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally
created social climates.”, Journal of Social Psychology, 10: 271-299.

23. Litwin, G. H. & Stringer, R. A. (1968), Motivation and organizational climate, Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Business School, Division of Research.

24. Locke, E. A. (1991). The motivation sequence, the motivation hub, and the motivation core.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 288–299.

25. Miller, K. I., & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction and productivity: a meta-
analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 727–793.

26. Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee Turnover: Causes, Consequences, and Control. Addison-
Wesley Publishing, Philippines.

27. Muchinsky, P. M. (1976). An assessment of the Litwin and Stringer Organizational Climate
Questionnaire: an empirical and theoretical extension of the Sims and LaFollette study.
Personnel Psychology, 29, 371–392.

28. Payne, R., & Mansfield, R. (1978). Correlates of individuals’ perceptions of organization
climates. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 51, 209–218.

29. Patterson, M. G.,Warr, P. B., & West, M. A. (2004). Organizational climate and company
performance: the role of employee affect and employee level. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 77, 193–216.

30. Payne, R. L., Brown, A. D., & Gaston, K. (1992). Reliability and validity of an updated version
of the Business Organisation Climate Index (BOCI). (Discussion paper). Sheffield, England:
Sheffield University Management School.

31. Payne, R. L., & Pheysey, D. C. (1971). G.G. Stern’s organizational climate index: a
reconceptualization and application to business organizations. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 6, 77–78.

32. Petty, M.M., McGee, G.W. & Cavender, J.W. (1984). A Meta-analysis of the Relationships
between Individual Job Satisfaction and Individual Performance. Academy of Review, 9, pp.
712-721.

33. Price, James L. (1977). The Study of Turnover, Iowa State University Press, Iowa.

34. Rentsch, J. (1990). Climate and culture: interaction and qualitative differences in organizational
meanings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 668–681.
Saket Jeswani & Sumita Dave 44

35. Schneider, B., Parkington, J. J., & Buxton, V. M. (1980). Employee and customer perceptions
of service in banks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 252–267.

36. Rousseau, D. M. (1988). The construction of climate in organizational research. In C. L.

Cooper, & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational
psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 139–158). New York: Wiley.

37. Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Linking service climate and customer
perceptions of service quality: tests of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150–
163.

38. Schwab, D.P. & Cummings, L.L. (1970). “Theories of Performance and Satisfaction: A
Review”, Industrial Relations, 9, pp.408-490.

39. Sims, H. P., & LaFollette, W. (1975). An assessment of the Litwin and Stringer Organizational
Climate Questionnaire. Personnel Psychology, 28, 19–38.

40. Tett, R., & Meyer, J. (1993). Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Turnover Intention
and Turnover: Path Analyses Based on Meta-Analytic Findings. Personnel Psychology, v46: pp.
259-93.

41. Wilderom, C. P. M., Glunk, U., & Maslowski, R. (2000). Organizational culture as a predictor
of organizational performance. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M. Wilderom, & M. F. Peterson
(Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp. 193–209). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.