See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323656852

Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Employee Turnover Intention

Article · November 2012

CITATIONS READS

3 2,700

1 author:

Razi Sultan Siddiqui

DHA Suffa University
8 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Razi Sultan Siddiqui on 21 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Relationship between Job Satisfaction & Employee
Turnover Intention
By
Razi Sultan Siddiqui, Faculty Member, Department of Management Sciences,
DHA Suffa University, Karachi
&
Dr. Nadeem Ahmad Syed, Associate Professor, FAST School of Management
&
Atif Hassan, Assistant Professor, Department of Management Sciences,
DHA Suffa University, Karachi.

Abstract

The study has been designed to determine the relationship between the factors that contribute
towards the turnover intention of faculty members of different colleges of Karachi. A sample
of 70 faculty members who are performing their duties as lecturer, assistant professor and
associate professor falling within the age range of 25-60 years, with education level from
Masters to PhD has been drawn randomly. Personal information of the participants is
collected through demographic information sheet. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire
administered, descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) is applied to study the
sample characteristics and linear regression to investigate the relationship between variables.
For achievement of the objectives ten factors were considered to have an important bearing
on the turnover intention. Six out of ten factors are found as significant predictors of turnover
intention that are satisfaction with pay, security, working condition, principal, promotion and
recognition.

Key words: Job Satisfaction, Turnover Rate, Turnover Intention, Job Security, Job Recognition.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background of the Study

On the topic of job satisfaction and turnover intention many researches are available, Arnold
and Feldman, (1982). It is also found out that there is a requirement of some indigenous
on the relationship between turnover intention and job satisfaction. The main factors that
create turnover intention are some what vague in the colleges of Karachi. Teacher of the
colleges in private sectors quit their college very frequently without prior notice to the head
of the college. Hiring new teachers on urgent bases becomes very difficult and costly for
the management. Higher turnover rate also increase the hazard of recruitment and wastage
of the time of the management and principals on advertisement, selection, orientation and
guidance of the upcoming incumbent. It seems very essential to carry out a research to
identify the main reasons that increase the turnover intention that leads to actual turnover
in the faculty members of private sectors colleges of Karachi. For the achievement of this
purpose researcher identified the factors like pay, promotion, security social status, students,
recognition, colleagues, nature of work, working conditions and behavior of head of institution
that may impact on the turnover intention that may lead to dissatisfaction and actual turnover
rate among the faculty members of colleges of Karachi.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 39

1.2. Problem Statement

As compare to the other enterprises education institution play very pivotal role in the
development of social, economic, political and cultural development of the country. Like
other enterprises, if the intention of turnover increase it may cause actual turnover rate and
dissatisfaction among the faculty members of colleges that decreases the quality of education
of the country and also leave very negative effect on the growth and development of the
colleges and overall education system of the Karachi and overall country.

1.3. Research Objectives

This study is designed to test that how few factors that may affect the satisfaction level of
an employee can affect the turn over intention of faculty members. The main purpose of
this study is:
1. To study the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intentions in the
education institutions.
2. To find out the effects of job satisfaction on turnover intentions
3. To check which factor is more significantly predict the turnover intention.

1.4. Hypothesis

The review of literature of this study has helped to develop the following hypothesis:

Ho: There would be no relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention
among employees

H1: Job satisfaction would predict turnover intention among employees

1.5. Research Methodology

1.5.1. Sampling

This research study has been carried out in different colleges of Karachi, who are providing
intermediate and master levels education, convenient sampling methods has been used
due to the financial and time limits for the collection of the data. The sample size is 70 faculty
members from four colleges including lecturer, assistant professor or associate professor.
The age ranges of participants were from 25 to 60 years having Masters to PhD qualification.

1.5.2. Data Collection Method

The respondents were informed about the objectives of the research study. Once the
communication with the respondent established, the personal information sheet was worked
out which focused on the respondent's work experience, age, marital status, gender, level
of education, order of current job and main reasons of leaving last job. Michigan Organizational
Assessment Questionnaire in order to check employees turnover intention and Minnesota
Satisfaction Questionnaire administered to assess the satisfaction with promotion, colleagues,
working condition, recognition, pay, head of institution, status and job security.
Participants responded on a five point Likert Scale. To study the collected data statistically,
help was taken by SSPS, Vol. 12 for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics (mean and

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 40

standard deviation) is used to examine the sample and linear regression has been used
to examine the relationship between various variables.

1.6. Limitation and Scope of the Study

The sample size was based on 70 faculty members of four institutions because of the time
and financial limits. Administrative staff and the teachers who left the college may also be
included for further studies.

Another contributing factor is that only the occupational classes of faculty members were
under consideration in the study. Because of this reason, the results cannot be applied to
other occupational classes in other same types of institutions and hence, the external validity
of the study may be compromised.

2. Literature Review

In this study the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention of the employees
of different colleges of Karachi is investigated. It has been measured that an employee first
desire to quit then think seriously about to quit and then create intention and quit. This
process starts with the cognitive stage when an employee evaluate his or her present job
then another stage of emotion start in this stage employee come in the state of satisfaction
or dissatisfaction, in case of dissatisfaction employee start to think about ‘to leave’ the
organization and at the end after evaluation of possible alternative and on the basis of
perceived cost and benefit an employee start to search the alternatives, if employee get
success to search favourable alternative then take the actual decision to quit.

It has been acknowledged by many researchers that turnover intention is a best predictor
of actual turnover (Mobley,1977; Home and Griffeth, 1995; Michaels and Spector, (1982;
Mobley et al., 1978; Brodie, 1995; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1974). Mobley et al. (1979).

Van Vianen, Feij, Krausz, and Taris (2004) describe two types of motives for employees
turnover; pull and push. The availability of the job in the market that motivate employees
to switch the current organization and join better opportunity in the market is a pull factor,
whereas push factor is related with direct dissatisfaction with one's current job. Nevertheless,
the relationship between the turnover rate and job satisfaction is not same across different
organizations, Aizen & Fishbein, (1977).

Van Dick et al. (2004) identified many proofs that organizational identification predicts
turnover rate but the bond was partly mediated by satisfaction of the job. Employee turnover
rate not only affect those employee's behaviour who are leaving the organization because
of the dissatisfaction but also leave a negative impact in the behaviours of those who are
staying in the organization. This results in the low morale of employees who are overburdened,
and can, in turn, affect the effectiveness and efficiency level of employees. In this study,
researcher tackles this latter issue through evaluation of the impact of employee's turnover
intention on other performance.

Like other organizations, lower level of satisfaction and high turnover rate in the education
institutions are always being considered as a serious issue because this behaviour of
employees play a very negative role in the positive growth and development of education
system.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 41

Locke (1969) raises the matter of satisfaction of employee that was measured in various
researches. Robbins and Coulter (1996) said many times in various studies that job
satisfaction of employees is a general attitude towards his/her job. Research finding says
the satisfied people stay relatively longer (Locke, 1976).

In a research Harrington et al. (2001) observed that dissatisfaction with pay and promotion
are the main predictors of turnover intention. There are many sources of job satisfaction
like nature of work, social status, job security, recognition, role clarity, authority and participation
in the process of decisions making, the behaviour of supervisor, and cohesiveness and
supportive behaviour of colleagues in the work place.

Satisfaction of the job may also reduce the absenteeism and turnover rate, it reduce the
chances of accidents during working hours in an organization and also decrease the chances
of the loss of expert employees and increase morale (Cascio, 2002).

Brough and Frame (2004) found that job satisfaction is a significant predictor of turnover
intention. In a study on software developers Steven and John took nine factors (facets) of
job satisfaction to analyse the impact on turnover intention, they found significant negative
correlation with all nine facets.

In another study conducted by Nazim (2008) found strong positive association with all nine
facets of job satisfaction.

3. Data Collection

In the current research the sample was gathered from different institutions of Karachi. The
total size of the sample is 70 (25 males, 45 females) and their mean age was 37.74 years.
They all have acquired higher education from Masters to PhD. The respondents were
communicated about the research objectives. Once the communication was developed the
personal information sheet was worked out that was based on the respondent's level of
education, working experience, age, gender, marital status, number of current job and main
causes of leaving the last job. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire administered to assess
the satisfaction, Questionnaire from the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire
for intention to leave. Participants responded on a Likert scale having five points. Higher
score on the research questionnaire reflected higher level of job satisfaction.

Figure 1: Mean Age of Employees across Gender

Female, 35.25
Male, 41.72

Source: Computed
Figure 1 is showing that mean age of female employees is lower than male employees.
The total mean age of both genders was 24 years minimum and 57 years maximum.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 42

 Figure 2: Frequencies of Sample according to Gender and Marital Status

40
35
30
25
20 Male
15 Female
10
5 Female
0
Male
Married
Un Married

Source: Computed

Figure 2 is showing that married male and female employees are more in numbers than
the unmarried employees; it may be due to the mean age that is 24 years minimum and
57 years maximum.

Figure 3: Mean Score on Job Satisfaction of Male Employees

Job Satisfaction of Male Different Variable

18
16
14
Stisfaction Level

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Nature of Social Principal Turnover Working
Pay Security Promotion Recognition Co-workers Students
Work Status Behavior Intern Conditions

Variables 10.4 15.68 11.36 6.44 7.08 7.56 11.08 8.84 9.88 7.92 10.2

Source: Computed

Figure 3 is showing that male employees are more satisfied on nature of work variable and
least on the variable of security it shows that employees like their work but their jobs are
insecure.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 43

Figure 4: Mean Score on Job Satisfaction of Female Employees

Job Satisfaction of Female Different Variable

18
16
14
Stisfaction Level

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Nature of Social Principal Turnover Working
Pay Security Promotion Recognition Co-workers Students
Work Status Behavior Intern Conditions

Variables 8.93 15.71 11.29 6.53 7.08 8.31 10.49 8.47 9.91 7.51 10.73

Source: Computed

Figure 4 is showing that female employees are also more satisfied on nature of work variable
and least on the variable of security like male employees. These both facets of job satisfaction
need more attention of college management.

Figure 5: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different

Colleges on the Variable of Pay

Pay College 4 Pay College 1

8.57 10.13

Pay College 3 Pay College 2

9.9 8.55

Source: Computed

Figure 5 is showing that job satisfaction level of college 1 and college 3 is more than the
college 2 and college 4 on the variable of pay. Mean age of college 1 and 3 (42.2 and 36.2
respectively) is also more than the college 2 and 4 (34.1 and 33 respectively) it means that
during the initial stages of life, expectation of pay become higher than the latter age.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 44

 Figure 6: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different
Colleges on the Variable of Nature of Work

Nature of Nature of
Work College 4 Work College 1
15.43 16.22

Nature of Nature of
Work Work
College 3 College 2
16.55 14.35

Source: Computed

Figure 6 is showing that again job satisfaction level of college 1 and college 3 is higher than
the college 2 and college 4 on the variable of nature of work. Employees of colleges having
higher satisfaction on this facet showing that the people higher mean of age become adjusted
and satisfying than the employees with lesser mean age (see figure 5 for mean age).

Figure 7: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different

Colleges on the Variable of Social Status

Social Status Social Status

College 4 College 1
10.71 11.26

Social Status Social Status

College 3 College 2
11.85 11.05

Source: Computed

Figure 7 is showing that job satisfaction level of college 4 is lowest among the other colleges
on the variable of social status. Designation wise employees of college 4 are more junior
than the other three colleges. It may be a major reason of dissatisfaction on this facet of
job satisfaction.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 45

 Figure 8: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different
Colleges on the Variable of Security

Security Security
College 4 College 1
5.86 6.3

Security Security
College 3 College 2
7.1 6.35

Source: Computed

Figure 8 is showing that again job satisfaction level of college 4 is lowest among the other
three colleges on the variable of security. Being more junior employees they are more
insecure also.

Figure 9: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different

Colleges on the Variable of Principal

Principal Principal
College 4 College 1
6.14 6.91

Principal Principal
College 3 College 2
7.7 7.5

Source: Computed

Figure 9 is showing that again job satisfaction level of college 4 is lowest among the other
colleges on the variable of principal. Lower level of satisfaction on this facet also showing
that employees of college 4 having some major problems.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 46

 Figure 10: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different
Colleges on the Variable of Working Condition

Working Working
Condition College 4 Condition College 1
9.86 10.87
Working Working
Condition Condition
College 3 College 2
10.55 10.95

Source: Computed

Figure 10 is showing that college 4 having lowest job satisfaction on the variable of working
condition also.

Figure 11: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different

Colleges on the Variable of Promotion

Recognition Recognition
College 4 College 1
7.71 10.04

Recognition
College 3 Recognition
College 2
10.5
9.9

Source: Computed

Figure 11 is showing the different result on the variable of promotion, according to the result
college 1 having lowest job satisfaction on the variable of promotion than the other colleges.
It may be due to the highest mean age of employees of this college (i.e. 42.2) than the other
colleges.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 47

 Figure 12: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different
Colleges on the Variable of Recognition

Promotion Promotion
College 4 College 1
9 7.83

Promotion Promotion
College 3 College 2
8.75 9.2

Source: Computed

Figure 12 Employees of college 4 provide business education that is the highest degree
of qualification among other three colleges but on this facet of job satisfaction they again
having lowest job satisfaction level. It means that they need more recognition than the
employees of other colleges.

Figure 13: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different

Colleges on the Variable of Co-workers

Co-workers Co-workers
College 4 College 1
7.86 7.96

Co-workers Co-workers
College 3 College 2
7.35 7.55

Source: Computed

Figure 13 is showing that the employees of college 4 having highest job satisfaction level
on the variable of co-workers that shows high cohesiveness among the employees of
college.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 48

 Figure 14: Mean of Job Satisfaction Level of Different
Colleges on the Variable of Students

Students Students
College 4 College 1
10.14 10

Students Students
College 3 College 2
11.45 10.4

Source: Computed

Figure 14 is showing that the college 3 that provide only intermediate education having
highest satisfaction level on the variable of students. The result also shows the intermediate
college students be more submissive than the students of higher education.

Figure 15: Overall Mean of Different Colleges on

Overall Job Satisfaction Level

Overall Satisfaction Overall Satisfaction

Level College 4 Level College 1
101.29 104.61

Overall Satisfaction Overall Satisfaction

Level College 3 Level College 2
109.9 104.05

Source: Computed

Figure 15 is showing that the employees of college 4 having the lowest job satisfaction level
and the employees of college 3 having the highest job satisfaction level on overall variables.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 49

4. Research Findings

Table 1(a)
Model Summary of Total Job Satisfaction as a predictor of Turnover intention

a. Predictors: (Constant), Total

Table 1(b)
ANOVA of Total Job Satisfaction as a predictor of Turnover intention

a. Predictors: (Constant), Total

b. Dependent Variable: Turnover Intention

Table 1(c)
Coefficients of Total Job Satisfaction as a predictor of Turnover intention

a. Dependent Variable: Turnover Intention

Table 11 is showing that Total Job Satisfaction is a insignificant {F=(1,68=69)
1.375; p <.05} predictor of turnover intention and leads to 2% variation

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 50

 Table 2
Summary of all Predictors

5. Conclusion & Discussion

Statistical Analysis indicating that six factors are significant predictors of turnover intention:
Pay {F=(1,68=69) 25.184; p>.05} predictor of turnover intention and leads to 27% variation,
Working Conditions {F=(1,68=69) 14.958; p>.05} predictor of turnover intention and leads
to 18% variation, Security {F=(1,68=69) 9.490; p>.05} predictor of turnover intention and
leads to 12.2% variation, Promotion {F=(1,68=69) 6.291; p>.05} predictor of turnover intention
and leads to 8.5% variation, Recognition {F=(1,68=69) 5.413; p>.05} predictor of turnover
intention and leads to 7.4% variation, and Principal {F=(1,68=69) 4.698; p>.05}predictor of
turnover intention and leads to 6.5% variation. While four factors are insignificant predictors
of turnover intention including Nature of work {F=(1,68=69) 1.861; p<.05} predictor of turnover
intention and leads to 2.7% variation, Co-workers {F=(1,68=69) 1.039; p<.05} predictor of
turnover intention and leads to 1.5% variation, Students {F=(1,68=69) .781; p<.05} predictor
of turnover intention and leads to 1.1% variation and Social Status {F=(1,68=69) 0.697;
p<.05} predictor of turnover intention and leads to 1% variation.

The finding of present study indicates that six out of ten factors are significant predictors
of turnover intention among the employees of different colleges of Karachi. These factors
are salary, job security, recognition, promotion, working conditions and principal, so special
attention should be given to these six factors in order maintain the satisfaction levels of
faculty members.

6. Areas of Further Research

To see the substantial relationship between turnover and job satisfaction, the large size of
sample may be studied. The concepts of job satisfaction may be clearer in future if detailed
interview could be conducted with employees who recently resigned from their job. An
important issue for further research study is to study the effects of job satisfaction on daily
life issues which are associated to happiness and motivation such as health, interpersonal
conflict, and achievement so on.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 51

References

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977), Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review
of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin. (84): 888-918.

Brodie, A. S. (1995), Salesforce Turnover in Direct Selling Organizations in the United

Kingdom and France, Masters Thesis, Keele University.

Brough, P. and Frame, P. (2004), Predicting Police Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions:
The role of Social Support and Police Organizational Variables. New Zealand Journal of
Psychology, (33): 8-16.

Cascio, W.F. (2002), Responsible restructuring: Creative and Profitable Alternatives to

Layoffs. Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Fishbein, M.; and Ajzen, I. (1974), "Attitudes Toward Objects as Predictors of Single and
Multiple Behavioral Criteria", Psychological Review, Vol. 81, pp. 59-74.

Harrington, D.; Bean, N.; Pintello, D.; and Mathews, D. (2001), "Job Satisfaction and Burnout:
Predictors of Intentions to Leave a Job in a Military Setting", Administration in Social Work,
Vol. 25, No.3, pp. 1-16.

H.J. Arnold and D.C. Feldman, (1982), "A multivariate analysis of the determinants of job
turnover" Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3): 350-360; A.C.

Hom, P.W.; and Griffeth, R. W. (1995), Employee Turnover, OH : South-Western College,

Cincinnati.

Locke, E. A. (1969), What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance.
(4): 309-336.

Locke, E. A. (1976), "The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction", In M. D. Dunnette (Eds.),
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, pp. 1297-1349, Rand McNally,
Chicago.

Michaels, C. E.; and Spector, P. E. (1982), "Causes of Employee Turnover: A Test of the
Mobley, Griffeth, Hand and Meglino Model", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67, pp. 53-
59.

Mobley, W.H. (1977), Intermediate Linkages in the Relationship between Job Satisfaction
and Employee Turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology (62): 237-240.

Mobley, W. H.; Horner, S. 0.; and Hollingsworth, A. T. (1978), "An Evaluation of Precursors
of Hospital Employee Turnover", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 63, pp. 408-414.

Mobley, W. H.; Griffeth, R. W.; Hand, H. H.; and Meglino, B. M. (1979), Review and
Conceptual Analysis of the Employee Turnover Process", Psychological Bul/etin, Vol. 86,
pp. 493-522.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 52

Nazim (2008), Factors affecting Overall Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention. Journal
of Managerial Science, Vol. 2, pp. 245.

Robbins, S.P. & M. Coulter (1996), Management (Fifth Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Van Dam, K. (2004), Antecedents and consequences of employability-orientation. European

Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology.(13): 29-51.

GMJACS Volume 2 Number 1 2012 53