IJIRMPS | Volume 6, Issue 5, 2018 ISSN: 2349-7300

EMPLOYEE RETENTION: ROLE OF

COMMUNICATION SATISFACTION, PROCEDURAL
OF JUSTICE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP
BEHAVIORS IN A PRIVATE HIGHER LEARNING
INSTITUTION IN MALAYSIA
1
Erni Tanius, 2Lee Siew Pheng, 3Che Manisah Mohd Kasim

Lecturer
University Selangor

Abstract: Employee retention (ER) has become the primary concern of organizations regardless of any industry and
countries. The prosperous and the sustainability of the organization very much depend on the ability to retain their talented
employees. Hence, this study attempts to understand the role of communication satisfaction (CS), procedural justice (PJ),
and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) in employee retention. Furthermore, the study would like to identify if ER
relates to the dependent variables. 195 academicians in a private university in Selangor, Malaysia joined in this survey. The
variables in the questionnaire adapted from previous related studies and simple random sampling used to select the
respondent. Meanwhile, the Structural Equation Modelling using a Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach uses as the
method of analyzing data. Furthermore, a bootstrapping procedure with 1000 resamples was run to generate the t-values
in order to estimate the structural model. The result indicated that CS and PJ influence ER and the bootstrapping analysis
showed that there is an indirect effect between CS and ER as well as between PJ and ER. Thus the study recommended that
employers must support and practice CS and PJ in the work environment. As a result, the relationship becomes closer and
subsequently reduces the likelihood of employees to leave the organization.

Keywords: Employee retention, Communication satisfaction, Procedural justice, Organizational citizenship behaviors,
Private higher learning institution, Malaysia

1. INTRODUCTION

The role of employees is very crucial for organizational effectiveness and sustain in global competitiveness. Literature shows that
the role of employees is critical for reaching the organization business goals, mission and vision [1], effectiveness [2-3], as well as
for the sustainability of the organization [4]. Literature also found out that retaining highly motivated, skilled and committed
employees are the main issue currently faced by employers in 78% organizations, besides, struggle to keep their employees around
[5]. Study on 2,000 U.S and U.K. employees' and HR leaders' indicated that nearly half (49%) of the HR leaders agreed that retention
was theirfirst priority [6]. Another issue is the change of career and workplace become a new now a trend now. Reported by U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics in March 2016 alone, 3.0 million or 2.1% of employees resign, and majority due to change of career and
only 1.7 million were laid-off and discharged [7]. Furthermore, in Singapore, statistics show the turnover rate in 2015 was 2.2%
[8]. In the meantime, the study in Malaysia indicated that employees are likely to leave their organization within two years; 2015,
36% versus 29% in 2012 [9]. Hence, to overcome such problems, the talent competition also increases across industries needed
[10]. Besides, organizations should focus on identifying the factors that impact retention toward the growth and success of
organizations [11]. As literature found, the important factors are communication, coaching, and establishing clear performance
metrics, holding employees accountable for delivering their jobs [12], procedural justice [13], career development [14], Talent
Management [15], time, money, and commitment [16] as well as learning and working climate [17]. Another important action,
organization need to emphasize the importance of conducting the regular survey. It is to identify employees' satisfaction, therefore,
indirectly the organization able to retain their talented employees [18]. Communication satisfaction and procedural justice
significantly contributed to employee retention [19].

Since the retention issues become critical and impact on organization success, therefore, this study would like to investigate the role
of communication satisfaction, procedural justice, and organizational citizenship behavior in retaining the employees. Besides,
suggest a model of employee retention. The result can become guideline and provide an overview of the role of communication
satisfaction, procedural justice, and organizational citizenship behavior on employees' motivation to remain in an organization.
Finally, the study indirectly contributes to the ability of the organization to sustain and compete in the global market. Last but not
least, the study will fill the gap in the current literature, especially in the Malaysian context.

IJIRMPS1809037 Website : www.ijirmps.org Email : editor@ijirmps.org 184

IJIRMPS | Volume 6, Issue 5, 2018 ISSN: 2349-7300

Method
The Structural Equation Modelling using a Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach used as the method of analyzing data. We used
the SmartPLS 3.0 software to analyze the data by using the application of a bootstrapping technique in order to identify the
significance levels for loadings and path coefficients. Following the recommended two-stage analytical procedures and the validity
and goodness of the measurement model first tested followed by an examination of the relationships outlined in the structural model.

Measurement Model
The questionnaire is containing to measure communication satisfaction, procedural justice, distributive justice, and employee
retention used. Firstly, the measurement model of all constructs checked for reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant
validity, before testing the hypothesized of the model. Table 1 shows the scores obtained from the analysis of the measurement
model. Based on Table 1, it can see that all loadings for each construct were higher than 0.70 which is the cut of point. The average
variance extracted (AVE) of all constructs exceeded 0.5 while the composite reliability scores (CR) were all higher than 0.7. As
such we can conclude that convergent validity is achieved. Meanwhile, Table 2 shows the results for the discriminant validity
test.
Table 2 shows the results for the discriminant validity test. As recommended, the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) score are
using to assess the discriminant validity between reflective constructs. Whereas, if the HTMT value is below 0.90, discriminant
validity established between two reflective constructs. As shown in Table 2, all constructs meet this criterion indicating the
constructs have discriminant validity.
The loadings of measured variables (i.e., items) should be higher than the cross-loadings by at least 0.1 to indicate sufficient
discriminant validity. As shown in Table 3 the loadings of all constructs satisfy this criterion. As such we can conclude that
discriminant validity is achieved.
Table 1: Measurement Model
Construct Items Loadings AVE CR
Communication A3 0.733
Satisfaction A6 0.740
0.637 0.875
A7 0.838
A8 0.871
Procedure of justice B1 0.833 0.666 0.941
B2 0.787
B3 0.841
B4 0.762
B5 0.807
B6 0.858
B7 0.852
B8 0.783
Organizational C2 0.792 0.643 0.878
Citizenship Behaviors C3 0.838
C4 0.807
C5 0.770
Employee Retention D1 0.840 0.621 0.919
D2 0.767
D3 0.855
D4 0.835
D5 0.768
D7 0.710
D8 0.726

IJIRMPS1809037 Website : www.ijirmps.org Email : editor@ijirmps.org 185

IJIRMPS | Volume 6, Issue 5, 2018 ISSN: 2349-7300

Table 2: Discriminant validity (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio)

Communication Employee Organizational
Satisfaction Retention Citizenship Behaviors
Employee Retention 0.439
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors 0.319 0.856
Procedural Justice 0.414 0.364 0.380

Table 3: Cross Loading

Organizational
Communication Procedural Employee
Citizenship
Satisfaction Justice Retention
Behaviors
A3 0.733 0.307 0.217 0.284
A6 0.740 0.305 0.126 0.227
A7 0.838 0.210 0.229 0.351
A8 0.871 0.318 0.256 0.325
B1 0.278 0.833 0.377 0.352
B2 0.259 0.787 0.282 0.322
B3 0.266 0.841 0.266 0.230
B4 0.306 0.762 0.204 0.246
B5 0.309 0.807 0.157 0.168
B6 0.317 0.858 0.351 0.384
B7 0.303 0.852 0.283 0.258
B8 0.263 0.783 0.228 0.210
C2 0.229 0.246 0.792 0.663
C3 0.190 0.194 0.838 0.632
C4 0.193 0.360 0.807 0.551
C5 0.247 0.326 0.770 0.504
D1 0.274 0.240 0.587 0.840
D2 0.208 0.213 0.597 0.767
D3 0.278 0.311 0.600 0.855
D4 0.242 0.307 0.628 0.835
D5 0.339 0.302 0.548 0.768
D7 0.469 0.312 0.498 0.710
D8 0.290 0.243 0.593 0.726

Structural Model
Table 4 represents the mean, Standard deviation, Cronbach's alpha and correlation matrix of the constructs. The alpha coefficient
varies from 0.856 to 0.929 concurs with the minimum acceptable value of 0.700. There exists a correlation among all the variables
and ranges from 0.391 to 0.698. Further, all the constructs are significantly related to Organizational Citizenship Behavior and
Employee Retention.

In order to estimate the structural model, a bootstrapping procedure with 1000 resamples was run to generate the t-values. Figure 1
presents the structural model while
Table 5 presents the results of the hypothesis testing. As shown in Figure 1, there is a positive relationship (β = 0.166, p< 0.05)
between Communication Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior Citizenship, 16.6% variance. The procedure of justice was also
positively related (β = 0.290, p< 0.05) to Organizational Behavior Citizenship explaining 29% variance. Organizational Behavior
Citizenship also positively related (β = 0.684, p< 0.01) to Employee Retention, explaining 68.4% variance. Thus H1, H2, and H3
were supported.
For testing the mediating effect of Organizational Behavior Citizenships, the Preacher and Hayes (2004; 2008) method of
bootstrapping the indirect effect applied. The bootstrapping analysis showed that the indirect effect between Communication

IJIRMPS1809037 Website : www.ijirmps.org Email : editor@ijirmps.org 186

IJIRMPS | Volume 6, Issue 5, 2018 ISSN: 2349-7300

Satisfaction and Employee Retention with β = 0.113 (0.166*0.684) was significant at T-value of 2.220 and indirect effect between
procedural of justice and Employee Retention with β = 0.198 (0.29*0.684) was significant at T-value of 3.930. Thus we can
conclude that the mediation effect is statistically significant, indicating that H4 and H5 supported.
Table 4. Mean, Standard deviation and Cronbach’s alpha & correlation of factors

Factors Mean Cronbach’s SD 1 2 3 4

Alpha
1. Communication 22.94 0.856 5.295
Satisfaction
2. Procedural 25.19 0.929 6.348 0.385**
Justice
3. Organizational 27.38 0.869 5.208 0.256** 0.351**
Citizenship
Behaviors
4. Employee 28.48 0.901 5.679 0.391** 0.348** 0.698** 1
Retention
SD= Standard Deviation, **p < 0.01,

Communication Β4=0.113
Satisfaction P < 0.05 Employee Retention
Β3=0.684
Β1=0.166 R2=0.578
P < 0.05
P < 0.05 Organizational
Citizenship
Behaviors
Β2=0.290 R2=0.145
P < 0.05
Β5=0.198
P < 0.05
Procedural Justice

Figure 1: Framework of the model

Table 5. Results of the hypothesis testing [n = 195]

Hypothesis Std Beta Std Error T-Value P-Value Decision

H1: Communication Satisfaction positively related B1 = 0.166 0.075 2.216 0.027 Support
to Organizational Citizenship Behavior
H2: Procedural Justice positively related to B2 = 0.290 0.071 4.084 0.000 Support
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
H3: Organizational Citizenship Behavior B3 = 0.684 0.039 17.465 0.000 Support
positively related to Employee retention

Conclusion:
It can conclude that respondents perceived that communication satisfaction and procedural justice play essential roles for them to
remain in an organization. How employees observed communication satisfaction and procedural justice were similar across gender
and indifferent despite their years of service in the organization. The above results and interpretations, however, are bound to
limitations of the study. Due to the limitation that our respondents were mostly lecturers from a private institution in Malaysia,
readers need to be cautious in generalizing our results on other types of employees. Therefore, we highly recommend future research
to look into another area of jobs and include various types of organizations. The present study, importantly, has concluded one
model to show the relationships between communication satisfaction, procedural justice, and retention. Therefore, this contribution
could use as a base for future studies.
Acknowledgments: This research funded by Universiti Selangor (UNISEL) under Bestari Grants 2016. The authors gratefully
thankto UNISEL and all respondents for their cooperation to conduct this study.

IJIRMPS1809037 Website : www.ijirmps.org Email : editor@ijirmps.org 187

IJIRMPS | Volume 6, Issue 5, 2018 ISSN: 2349-7300

References:
[1] Mayhew R. (2016) Importance of Employee Performance in Business Organizations,
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/importance-employeeperformance-business-organizations.
[3] Nanda, K. (2014) Employees are Valuable Assets of an Organization and the Key to Success,
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141002144109- 199280649.
[4] Merriman, K. K., Sen, S., Felo, A. J. , Litzky, B. E., (2016) "Employees and sustainability: the role of incentives," Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 31(4), 820-836.
[5] Straz M. (2014) Data Reveal the 7 Factors for Optimal Employee Retention, https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/237248
[6] Saba (2015) The Employee Retention Study, https://workplacetrends.com/the-employee-retentionstudy.
[7] BLS (2016) Bureau of Labor Statistics – Newsroom http://www.bls.gov/newsroom
[8] Ministry of Manpower (2016) Labour Market Statistical Information, http://stats.mom.gov.sg
[9] Watson, T. (2015) Employee Retention Remains A Key Challenge in Malaysia, https://www.towerswatson.com
[10] Bersin J. (2013) Employee Retention Now a Big Issue: Why the Tide has Turned,
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20130816200159- 131079.
[11] Agrela, R., Carr, R., Veyra, v,., Dunn, c., Ellis, D., Gandolfi, A., Gresham, B., King, L., Sims, A., & Troutman, (2008).
Retention issues and solutions: tools to ensure the University of California becomes an employer of choice.
http://www.ucop.edu/cucsaldocuments.
[12] Bajic E (2013), The 6 Steps For Retaining Good Employees, http://www.forbes.com/sites/elenabajic/201 3/07/15. [13) Paré P.
Tremblay M. (2007), The Influence of HighInvolvement Human Resources Practices, Procedural
[13] Ramayah, T., Yeap, J. A. L., & Ignatius, J. (2013). An empirical inquiry on knowledge
[14] Davis, P, J. (2015) "Implementing an employee career development strategy: How to build commitment and retain employees,"
Human Resource Management International Digest, 23(4), 28 – 32. [15] Jyotsna Bhatnagar, (2007) "Talent management strategy
of employee engagement in Indian ITES employees: the key to retention," Employee Relations, 29(6), 640 – 663.
[16] Randall P. Bandura, Paul R. Lyons, (2014) "Short-term fixes fall short when it comes to keeping the best employees:
Successful firms invest time, money and commitment in retention," Human Resource Management International Digest, 22(5 ), 29
– 32.
[17] Natalie Govaerts, Eva Kyndt, Filip Dochy, Herman Baert, (2011) "Influence of learning and working climate on the retention
of talented employees," Journal of Workplace Learning, 23(1), 35 – 5.
[18] Kate Pritchard, (2014) "Using employee surveys to attract and retain the best talent," Strategic HR Review, 13(2), 59 – 62.
[19] Erni Tanius, Lee Siew Pheng, Che Manisah Mohd Kasim, Astri Yulia (2017), The Relationship Between Communication
Satisfaction and Procedural Justice

IJIRMPS1809037 Website : www.ijirmps.org Email : editor@ijirmps.org 188