583712

research-article2015
ARPXXX10.1177/0275074015583712American Review of Public AdministrationKim and Fernandez

Article
American Review of Public Administration
1­–19
Employee Empowerment and © The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
Turnover Intention in the U.S. sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0275074015583712
Federal Bureaucracy arp.sagepub.com

Sun Young Kim1 and Sergio Fernandez1,2

Abstract
Reducing employee turnover in the U.S. federal government has been an ongoing goal of
policymakers in Washington, D.C. A large literature emerging during the last three decades has
identified a range of antecedents of turnover intention and actual turnover, including individual
characteristics, employee attitudes, organizational conditions, and managerial practices. Little
research has been done, however, on the impact of employee empowerment as a multifaceted
managerial approach on turnover options in the public sector. This study proposes a theoretical
model of the direct and indirect effects of employee empowerment on turnover intention in
the U.S. federal bureaucracy. The model is tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) and
data from the U.S. Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS). The empirical results support
the hypothesized model. Employee empowerment has negative direct and indirect effects on
turnover intention. In addition, the negative effect is greater on the likelihood of intention to
leave to another federal agency and intention to leave the federal government than on the
intention to retire.

Keywords
employee empowerment, turnover, federal bureaucracy

Although the concept of employee empowerment has deep roots stretching back to the Human
Relations Movement, widespread adoption of employee empowerment programs did not occur
until the 1990s. Employee empowerment has been defined as either a psychological state in
which employees experience increased intrinsic task motivation or enhanced feelings of self-
efficacy at work (e.g., Spreitzer, 1995; Thomas & Velthouse, 1990) or as a managerial approach
aimed at sharing information, resources, rewards, and authority with frontline employees (e.g.,
Bowen & Lawler, 1992, 1995). In a variety of industries, including food and hospitality, nursing,
education, and government, employee empowerment practices have been found to be effective at
raising performance (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Lawler, Mohrman, & Ledford, 1992, 1995; H.
Lee, Cayer, & Lan, 2006; Spreitzer, 1995), encouraging innovation (Fernandez & Moldogaziev,
2013b; Spreitzer, 1995), and improving employee attitudes like job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, and job involvement (Coye & Belohlav, 1995; Fulford & Enz, 1995; Guthrie, 2001;

1Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

2University of Johannesburg, Center for Public Management and Governance, Johannesburg, South Africa

Corresponding Author:
Sun Young Kim, Indiana University, 1315 E. Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.
Email: kimsun2@indiana.edu

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

2 American Review of Public Administration 

Kim, 2002; Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Lawler et al., 1992, 1995; H. Lee et al., 2006; Wright &
Kim, 2004; Wu & Short, 1996). We know less, however, about the effects of employee empower-
ment on turnover intention and actual turnover in the public sector.
Concerns about high turnover in the federal government are as old as the founding of the
American republic (White, 1948). During the last two decades, reports issued by the National
Commission on the Public Service (Volcker, 1989) and the U.S. Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs (United States Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs, 2000a, 2000b)
expressed growing concern about high turnover in the federal bureaucracy. More recently, a
study by the Society for Human Resource Management (2012) found that the federal government
had a voluntary turnover rate of 17% in 2011, a figure significantly higher than that found in vari-
ous other industries. The Federal Times reported that from 2010 to 2011, spikes in rates of retire-
ment and voluntary turnover had contributed to the largest decline in the federal workforce since
1999 (Losey, 2012). High turnover is of grave concern because of its deleterious effects on orga-
nizations, including loss of institutional knowledge and memory, declining morale, rising back-
logs, decreasing productivity, and additional costs for recruitment, selection, and training of new
employees (see Boushey & Glynn, 2012; Cho & Lewis, 2012; Kim, 2005; Selden & Moynihan,
2000).
A handful of studies exploring the impact of employee empowerment practices on turnover
indicate such practices can reduce turnover intention and actual turnover (Arthur, 1994; Gardner,
Wright, & Moynihan, 2011; Grissom, 2012; Moynihan & Landuyt, 2008). These studies have
made important contributions to the literatures on empowerment and turnover, but they have
their limitations. These studies have either conceptualized employee empowerment as a one-
dimensional construct (e.g., focusing just on discretion) or they have operationalized empower-
ment using a single indicator. As a result, they have not captured the full breadth and content of
employee empowerment as a managerial approach and a theoretical construct, respectively.
Moreover, these studies have analyzed the impact of employee empowerment practices on turn-
over as a binary outcome, to leave or to stay (e.g., Arthur, 1994; Gardner et al., 2011). They have
not examined the impact of employee empowerment on a range of turnover options in the public
sector, including transferring to another public organization, leaving the public sector, and
retiring.
In this study, we develop a theoretical model of how employee empowerment influences turn-
over intention in the U.S. federal bureaucracy. Employee empowerment is conceptualized as a
multifaceted managerial approach (see Bowen & Lawler, 1992, 1995). Turnover intention is
operationalized as a binary outcome as well as a nominal one to account for intention to stay, to
leave to another federal agency, to leave the federal government to seek work elsewhere, and to
retire. The model is tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) and data from the U.S.
Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS). The empirical results support the hypothesized
model. Employee empowerment has negative direct and indirect effects on turnover intention.
The negative impact is greater on the likelihood of intention to leave to another federal agency
and intention to leave the federal government than on the intention to retire.

Employee Empowerment
Employee empowerment has been viewed both as a cognitive state and a managerial approach.
From a psychological perspective, employee empowerment is a state of mind in which someone
believes strongly in his or her ability to perform a task (Conger & Kanungo, 1988) or experiences
a heightened level of intrinsic task motivation (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Spreitzer (1995)
described employee empowerment as a four-dimensional motivational construct composed of
four cognitions—meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact—that reflect an active
rather than passive orientation toward work. Alternatively, from a managerial perspective,

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 3

employee empowerment describes managerial behavior or practices aimed at sharing information,

resources, rewards, and authority with lower level employees. For instance, Kanter (1979) viewed
empowerment as a process by which managers provide employees with access to three sources of
power: supply of essential resources, information and feedback, and support and authority to act.
Arnold, Arad, Rhoades, and Drasgow (2000) and Ahearne, Mathieu, and Rapp (2005) define
employee empowerment as a leadership style or approach. For Arnold et al., an empowering lead-
ership style involves behaviors that enhance the meaningfulness of work, foster participation in
decision making, express confidence in high performance, and provide autonomy from bureau-
cratic constraints. For Ahearne et al., empowering leadership entails leading by example, involv-
ing others in decision making, coaching, informing, and showing concern for others.
One of the most well-known conceptualizations of employee empowerment is that developed
by Bowen and Lawler (1992, 1995). They view employee empowerment as a multifaceted
approach to service delivery in which managers share with their employees four organizational
ingredients: “(1) information about the organization’s performance, (2) rewards based on the
organization’s performance, (3) knowledge that enables employees to understand and contribute
to organizational performance, and (4) power to make decisions that influence organizational
direction and performance” (Bowen & Lawler, 1992, p. 32). We chose this conceptualization of
employee empowerment for several reasons. Doing so allows us to compare our results to a
growing body of research on employee empowerment as a managerial approach or set of prac-
tices (e.g., Arthur, 1994; Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2013a, 2013b; Gardner et al., 2011; Grissom,
2012; Kim, 2002; H. Lee et al., 2006; Moynihan & Landuyt, 2008; Perry, 2004; Wright & Kim,
2004). In addition, the concept of employee empowerment as a managerial approach (see Bowen
& Lawler, 1992, 1995, also see Ahearne et al., 2005; Arnold et al., 2000; Gardner et al., 2011)
resonates with normative theory in public administration calling for humanism and democratiza-
tion of the workplace (Denhardt, 1984). Golembiewski (1967, 1972) argued that practices and
policies that enhance self-determination, personal growth, and sharing of information serve to
improve job satisfaction and performance as well as promote a Judeo–Christian ethic in the
workplace. Kirkhart (1971), a contributor to the first Minnowbrook Conference, stressed the
need for public sector leaders to distribute power more evenly within hierarchies and encourage
employee participation in decision making. Finally, this conceptualization of employee empow-
erment points to a set of familiar practices or interventions used by managers today (e.g., feed-
back, training, and delegation). Importantly, such practices have been found to be antecedents of
psychological empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995), demonstrating the connection between manage-
rial and psychological conceptualizations of this construct.

Theoretical Model
In this section, we develop a theoretical model of how employee empowerment impacts turnover
intention. We propose that the effect of employee empowerment on turnover intention is mostly
indirect and mediated by job satisfaction. Each of the links in this hypothesized causal structure
is described below.
Scholars have devoted considerable time studying how to reduce turnover. Research has iden-
tified a number of antecedents of turnover, including personal characteristics like employee age
and length of employment (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Griffeth, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000; Kellough
& Osuna, 1995) and employee attitudes toward work, including organizational commitment, job
involvement, and satisfaction with work, pay, benefits, and promotional opportunities (Bertelli,
2007; Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Griffeth et al., 2000; Guthrie, 2001; Kim, 2005; Shaw, Delery,
Jenkins, & Gupta, 1998). Employees with more favorable attitudes toward their job and work
have stronger affective ties to their organization, feel a greater sense of belonging, and are there-
fore less likely to seek work elsewhere.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

4 American Review of Public Administration 

A range of managerial practices and policies have also been found to be effective at reducing
turnover, including fostering open communication, enriching jobs, promoting fairness, instilling
identification with the organization, and supporting family life (Cho & Lewis, 2012; Cotton &
Tuttle 1986; Griffeth et al., 2000; Moynihan & Landuyt, 2008; Selden & Moynihan, 2000). Such
practices make work more fulfilling and promote interpersonal trust, thereby leading to positive
affective responses to work and organizations. Voluntary turnover theories and empirical tests
indicate that employee attitudes are influenced by the kinds of practices and policies just men-
tioned and that they act as the primary antecedents of turnover intention and actual turnover
decisions (T. W. Lee & Mowday, 1987; Michaels & Spector, 1982; Steers & Mowday, 1981).

Employee Empowerment and Job Satisfaction

Bowen and Lawler (1992, 1995) argued that employee empowerment improves job satisfaction
by giving employees a sense of control and making work more meaningful. Empirical evidence
from manufacturing, health care, basic and higher education, and other service industries cor-
roborates this proposition (Fulford & Enz, 1995; Lawler et al., 1995; Wu & Short, 1996). These
results are consistent with those from large meta-analyses showing that practices aimed at pro-
viding feedback and granting autonomy are positively related to job satisfaction (Fried & Ferris,
1987; Kinicki, McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim, & Carson, 2002). Studies from the public sector also
reveal a positive relationship between employee empowerment practices and job satisfaction
(Kim, 2002; H. Lee et al., 2006; Wright & Kim, 2004).
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) offers insight into how employee empowerment positively
impacts job satisfaction (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000). SDT posits that
people have an innate tendency toward growth and intrinsic motivation, which necessitates sat-
isfaction of the three psychological needs for relatedness, competence, and autonomy (Deci &
Ryan, 1985; Gagne & Deci, 2005; Ryan, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000). In many social settings,
external regulations or stimuli are used to induce desired behavior. To the extent that the needs
for relatedness, competence, and autonomy are satisfied, people internalize and integrate external
regulations. Through this process of internalization and integration, extrinsically prescribed
behavior becomes internally or autonomously regulated and motivation becomes
self-determined.
Organizational policies, supervisory styles, and other managerial interventions that promote
satisfaction of the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness have been found to posi-
tively influence work-related attitudes, including organizational commitment (Gagne & Koestner,
2002), commitment to change (Gagne, Koestner, & Zuckerman, 2000), work engagement (Deci
et al., 2001), task enjoyment (Black & Deci, 2000), and job satisfaction (Deci, Connell, & Ryan,
1989; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, & Ryan, 1993; Vansteenkiste et al., 2007). Ilardi et al. (1993) found
that employees who felt strongly that their work allowed them to experience autonomy, compe-
tence, and relatedness reported higher levels of job satisfaction. The findings from Deci et al.
(1989) indicate that a managerial orientation that promotes self-determination positively influ-
ences general work satisfaction. Vansteenkiste et al.’s (2007) findings indicate that employees
who experience working conditions that promote intrinsic (vs. extrinsic) motivation are more
satisfied with their job and life than others.
Managerial practices and behavior that promote self-determination, including empowerment
practices like granting employees more discretion and providing them with the feedback and
skills needed to perform their jobs, may increase job satisfaction in different ways. They may
increase employees’ trust and feelings of psychological safety, thereby encouraging employees to
satisfy their own needs at work (Deci et al., 1989). They may also promote job satisfaction by
making employees feel they have more control over their work, an important correlate of job
satisfaction (Spector, 1986). In addition, managerial interventions that provide greater autonomy

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 5

and feedback may increase job satisfaction by making work more meaningful and intrinsically
satisfying (Fried & Ferris, 1987; Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Finally, efforts to promote self-
determination in the workplace may increase employees’ self-esteem (Deci et al., 1989; Ilardi et
al., 1993), an important antecedent of job satisfaction (Judge, Locke, & Durham, 1997). To be
sure, not every one of Bowen and Lawler’s empowerment practices is likely to have a positive
effect on job satisfaction. In particular, the practice of offering tangible rewards linked to behav-
ior is considered to undermine the need for autonomy and lead to a more externally perceived
locus of causality, thereby reducing intrinsic motivation and satisfaction (Deci, Koestner, &
Ryan, 1999). However, we expect the positive effects of the other three empowerment practices
to outweigh this potentially negative one. Hence, our first hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Employee empowerment will have a positive effect on job satisfaction.

We note that another potential mediator of the relationship between employee empowerment
and turnover is organizational commitment. Several empirical studies have examined the mediat-
ing role of organizational commitment, most focusing on affective commitment. They have
found that employee empowerment reduces turnover intention and actual turnover by enhancing
individuals’ commitment to the organization (Arthur, 1994; Gardner et al., 2011; Paré & Tremblay,
2007). Employee empowerment increases organizational commitment because empowered
employees believe that their contributions are more valued and supported by the organization and
the organization makes greater investments in having them involved. They are more likely to be
emotionally attached to the organization, feel a sense of belonging, and identify with the organi-
zation’s goals and values. Drawing on SDT, Gardner et al. (2011) argued that empowerment
practices satisfy employees’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness and lead to feel-
ings of organizational belonging and increased commitment. Employees with a strong commit-
ment help their organization achieve its goals and take actions that are beneficial to the
organization. They wish to continue their employment with the current organization, and there-
fore, organizational commitment reduces employee turnover (Griffeth et al., 2000; Mathieu &
Zajac, 1990; Tett & Meyer, 1993). While data limitations prevent us from estimating the indirect
effect of employee empowerment on turnover intention as mediated by organizational commit-
ment, we use an alternative approach to deal with this potential mediator.

Job Satisfaction and Turnover

Employee satisfaction has been a prevailing theme in research on employee turnover.
Dissatisfaction with certain facets of work, including pay (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Shaw et al.,
1998), fringe benefits (Ippolito, 1987; Shaw et al., 1998), and growth and promotional opportuni-
ties (Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Griffeth et al., 2000), has been found to increase the likelihood of
turnover. A large body of empirical research also points to a consistent and inverse relationship
between job satisfaction and turnover (Carsten & Spector, 1987; Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Porter,
Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974), with job satisfaction typically defined as a general feeling or
attitude toward one’s job rather than toward a particular facet of a job.
Voluntary turnover research points to job satisfaction as a key predictor of turnover intention,
which in turn leads to actually leaving an organization, and shows that job satisfaction has con-
sistently negative effects on turnover intention and actual turnover. Employee turnover occurs in
response to dissatisfaction with one’s job (Mobley, 1977; Porter & Steers, 1973). That is, when
employees experience unfavorable work situations and are dissatisfied with their job, they are
likely to think of quitting, reduce their contributions, and seek employment elsewhere. Job satis-
faction is considered an immediate antecedent to an individual’s intention to leave (Steers &
Mowday, 1981), and empirical tests of turnover models also suggest that job satisfaction has a

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

6 American Review of Public Administration 

direct and negative effect on turnover intention (T. W. Lee & Mowday, 1987; Michaels & Spector,
1982). Meta-analytic studies provide further support for the relationship between job satisfaction
and turnover intention (Griffeth et al., 2000; Tett & Meyer, 1993).
Turnover intention is usually studied as a simple binary variable that indicates either intending
to leave the organization or to stay. However, employees may express different kinds of turnover
intention. In the federal government, for example, employees have multiple options when it
comes to leaving: they may choose to retire, to leave to another federal agency, or to leave the
federal government (to work in state or local governments, nonprofits, or business organiza-
tions); state and local government employees have the same or similar turnover options. As all of
these turnover options are considered a form of leaving a current organization, we hypothesize
that job satisfaction will be negatively related to turnover intention regardless of the reasons for
leaving. However, it is also quite possible that the effects of job satisfaction vary in magnitude
based on the kind of turnover intention being expressed. For example, Whitford and Lee (2015)
found that employee loyalty, voice, and other attitudes toward work influence the likelihood of
exit or turnover intention. However, the impact of loyalty and voice varied by exit option (retire,
transfer to another federal agency, or leave for a job outside of the federal government). Thus, we
also analyze the impact of job satisfaction on the likelihood of someone expressing his or her
intention to leave to another federal agency, to leave the federal government, and to retire, versus
to stay.

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Job satisfaction will have a negative effect on turnover intention.

Data and Method

In this section, we describe the data, variables, measures, and methods used in the empirical
analysis.

Data
Data for the empirical analysis were drawn from 2011 FEVS. This survey was conducted by the
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and was administered to 540,727 federal govern-
ment employees working in cabinet level and independent agencies. Among them, 266,376
employees completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 49.3%. Due to missing data on one
or more variables, the final sample size was reduced to 200,055. There were no meaningful dif-
ferences between those observations that were included in the final sample and those that were
dropped due to missing data.

Variables
The variables in the analysis are employee empowerment, job satisfaction, and turnover inten-
tion. Employee empowerment and job satisfaction are treated as latent variables in our structural
equation models because they are unobservable constructs that are measured using multiple
observable indicators. Turnover intention is measured using a single item and treated as an
observable indicator.
The latent variable employee empowerment represents a multifaceted managerial approach
composed of four practices: providing information about goals and performance (observable
variable Practice 1), offering rewards based on performance (observable variable Practice 2),
providing access to job-related knowledge and skills (observable variable Practice 3), and grant-
ing discretion to change work processes (observable variable Practice 4; Bowen & Lawler, 1992,
1995). It is measured using four summated rating scales, one for each practice, that are created

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 7

from multiple survey items (see the appendix for variables and measures). The Cronbach’s alphas
for these scales range from .75 for Practice 3 to .87 for Practice 2. Previous work using higher
order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the method developed by Fornell and Larcker
(1981) offers evidence of both convergent and discriminant validity for this four-dimensional
measure of employee empowerment (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2013b).
The latent variable job satisfaction represents the cognitive and affective response to one’s
job. It is measured using two survey items (observable measures Job Satisfaction 1 and Job
Satisfaction 2) that represent global measures of overall job satisfaction rather than measures of
satisfaction with facets of a job such as pay, promotion, benefits, and supervision. Global and
faceted measures of job satisfaction do not correlate very strongly, leading some to argue that
they are not measuring the same construct, or that the whole is not the sum of its parts (Scarpello
& Campbell, 1983). We follow Judge and Church’s (2000) lead and use a two-item rather than
single-item global measure of job satisfaction, as the former tends to be somewhat more
reliable.
The observable variable turnover intention is measured using one survey item in which
respondents are asked if they are considering leaving their organization during the next year.
Response categories include “No,” “Yes, to retire,” “Yes, to take another job within the federal
government,” “Yes, to take another job outside the federal government,” and “Yes, other.” In the
2011 FEVS, 71.6% of the respondents stated they were not considering leaving their organiza-
tion, 6.6% were considering leaving to retire, 15.3% to take another job within the federal gov-
ernment, 3.0% to take another job outside the federal government, and 3.5% for other reasons.
In our structural equation models, turnover intention is operationalized in two ways, as a
binary variable and as a nominal variable to account for the likelihood of different types of turn-
over intention. First, to capture the overall intent to voluntarily leave the organization, the
responses are coded 1 for “Yes, to retire”; “Yes, to take another job within the federal govern-
ment”; “Yes, to take another job outside the federal government”; and “Yes, other.” “No” is
coded 0. Employees who express a desire to take another job within the federal government may
have different motives from those wanting to leave the federal service altogether. From the per-
spective of an agency, however, both scenarios signal the likely voluntary departure of an
employee and have similar adverse consequences. Thus, we include both responses in our first
operationalization of turnover intention.
We also operationalize turnover intention as a nominal variable with four distinct response
categories: intention to stay (“No”), intention to retire (“Yes, to retire”), intention to leave to
another federal agency (“Yes, to take another job within the federal government”), and intention
to leave the federal government (“Yes, to take another job outside the federal government”). The
“Yes, other” category is omitted because it does not indicate a particular reason for leaving and
its meaning is ambiguous.
The pattern of correlations in Table 1 offers evidence of convergent and discriminant validity
for the variables in the analysis, with all correlations being in the predicted direction. As expected,
employee empowerment has a stronger correlation with job satisfaction (r = .65) than with turn-
over intention (r = −.33). The correlation between job satisfaction and turnover intention (r =
−.36) is somewhat stronger than the latter’s correlation with employee empowerment (r = −.33).

Modeling
A series of structural equation models are developed and tested using Mplus 7. In our models, the
indicators for the latent variable job satisfaction and the observable indicator turnover intention
are categorical. For the first model with a binary turnover intention variable, we use a robust
weighted least squares mean- and variance-adjusted (WLSMV) estimator. The WLSMV estima-
tor uses a diagonal weight matrix with robust standard errors and a robust mean- and

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

8 American Review of Public Administration 

Table 1.  Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix.

M SD Minimum Maximum 1 2 3
1. Employee empowerment 3.46 0.83 1 5 1.00  
2. Job satisfaction 4.04 0.81 1 5 .65 1.00  
3. Turnover intention 0.28 0.45 0 1 −.33 −.36 1.00

Note. Employee empowerment and job satisfaction are measured using summated rating scales, and turnover intention
is measured using a single item (see the appendix).

Practice 1 Job Job

Satisfaction 1 Satisfaction 2
1.00a

1.00a 1.67***
Practice 2 1.02***

Employee Turnover
Job Satisfaction
0.93*** Empowerment 0.62*** -0.61*** Intention

Practice 3
1.12***
-0.19***

Practice 4

Figure 1.  Results from Probit Structural Equation Model of Employee Empowerment, Job Satisfaction,
and Turnover Intention (Model 1).
Note: Unstandardized coefficients are reported.
aThe parameter is fixed and not tested.

***p < 0.001.

variance-adjusted chi-square test statistic; it is the default estimator in Mplus for models with at
least one binary or ordered categorical dependent variable (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2012). The
WLSMV estimator provides superior model fit and more precise path coefficients than does the
maximum likelihood (ML) estimator, especially when the number of categories is low (e.g., two
or three; Beauducel & Herzberg, 2006). Alternatively, the ML estimator with the logit link is used
for the multinomial logit model with a nominal turnover intention variable that has four response
categories. The regression coefficients for binary dependent variables with the WLSMV estima-
tor are probit coefficients, whereas those for nominal dependent variables with the ML estimator
are logit coefficients.

Results
We begin by focusing on a probit model with turnover intention operationalized as a binary
variable (Model 1; see Figure 1 and Table 2). Although we hypothesized, based on theory and
previous research, that the relationship between employee empowerment and turnover inten-
tion is mediated by job satisfaction, we tested alternate models with and without a direct path
from employee empowerment to turnover intention to see which model fits the data better.
The following two models are estimated: one with the direct path (χ2 = 3,621.601, df = 12,

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 9

Table 2.  Parameter Estimates for Probit Structural Equation Model (Model 1).

Unstandardized Standardized
Parameter coefficient SE coefficient
Factor loadings
  Employee empowerment → Practice 1 1.00a 0.87***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 2 1.02*** 0.00 0.80***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 3 0.93*** 0.00 0.88***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 4 1.12*** 0.00 0.89***
  Job satisfaction → Job Satisfaction 1 1.00a 0.62***
  Job satisfaction → Job Satisfaction 2 1.67*** 0.01 1.04***
Direct effects
  Employee empowerment → Job satisfaction 0.62*** 0.00 0.77***
  Employee empowerment → Turnover intention −0.19*** 0.01 −0.15***
  Job satisfaction → Turnover intention −0.61*** 0.01 −0.38***
Measurement error variances
  Practice 1 0.20*** 0.00 0.25***
  Practice 2 0.34*** 0.00 0.35***
  Practice 3 0.16*** 0.00 0.23***
  Practice 4 0.20*** 0.00 0.21***
Disturbance variances
  Job satisfaction 0.16*** 0.00 0.41***
aThe parameter is fixed and not tested.

***p < .001.

root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.039, comparative fit index [CFI] =
0.993, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = 0.987) and the other without the direct path (χ2 =
4,622.292, df = 13, RMSEA = 0.042, CFI = 0.991, TLI = 0.985). The chi-square difference
test is conducted using the “difftest” option in Mplus and indicates that the model with the
direct path has a somewhat better fit than the model without the path (Δχ2 = 810.320, Δdf = 1,
p < .001). Other fit statistics also suggest the model with the direct path fits slightly better.
Thus, we conclude that employee empowerment has a direct effect on turnover intention as
well as an indirect effect through its influence on job satisfaction. The fit statistics show that
our final model (Model 1), which includes the direct path from employee empowerment to
turnover intention, fits the data well. CFI and TLI are greater than 0.95, which are indicative
of good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). RMSEA is smaller than 0.05, also suggesting good model
fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1993).
In Model 1, the effect of employee empowerment on job satisfaction is positive and significant
(b = 0.62, p < .001). This lends support to H1. The relationship between job satisfaction and
turnover intention is negative and significant (b = −0.61, p < .001). This offers support for H2.
The indirect effect of employee empowerment on turnover intention via job satisfaction is tested
using the bootstrapped confidence intervals (CIs). The indirect effect is negative (b = −0.38) and
the 99% CI = [−0.39, −0.36] suggests that it is statistically significant. The direct effect of
employee empowerment on turnover intention is negative and significant (b = −0.19, p < .001),
but it is noticeably smaller than the indirect effect through job satisfaction, providing support for
the mediating role of job satisfaction. As the direct path from employee empowerment to turnover
intention may also be picking up other mediating effects not included in the model, these results
suggest that any mediating influence of organizational commitment is significantly weaker than
the mediating influence of job satisfaction in the relationship between employee empowerment
and turnover intention.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

10 American Review of Public Administration 

To check the robustness of the results from Model 1, we modified the binary operationaliza-
tion of turnover intention by coding responses “Yes, to retire” as 0. The new results are generally
consistent with those obtained when “Yes, to retire” is coded 1, except that the effect of job sat-
isfaction on turnover intention gets slightly stronger when turnover intention does not include
intent to retire (b = −0.68, p < .001). In addition, we tested Model 1 using data from the 2006 and
2008 Federal Human Capital Survey (FHCS) and the 2010 FEVS and find that the additional
results are generally consistent with those obtained using 2011 FEVS data.
For an additional robustness check, we examined whether the results from Model 1 are
consistent across 41 federal agencies. There are 42 additional agencies that participated in the
2011 FEVS, but they are smaller and did not have sufficient respondents to estimate a SEM
model. Using a multiple group analysis, we tested equality constraints on the three causal paths
(from employee empowerment to job satisfaction, from employee empowerment to turnover
intention, and from job satisfaction to turnover intention) across the 41 agencies. The follow-
ing two models are estimated: one with the equality constraints (χ2 = 7,408.195, df = 1092,
RMSEA = 0.034, CFI = 0.987, TLI = 0.990) and the other in which the three causal paths are
allowed to vary across agencies (χ2 = 8,218.356, df = 972, RMSEA = 0.039, CFI = 0.985, TLI
= 0.987). The chi-square difference test indicates that the model without the equality con-
straints fits better (Δχ2 = 757.023, Δdf = 120, p < .001), whereas other fit statistics such as
RMSEA, CFI, and TLI show that the model with the equality constraints has a slightly better
fit. Even when the path coefficients are allowed to vary freely, however, the results are gener-
ally consistent across the 41 agencies. Nevertheless, there is some variation in terms of magni-
tude of the effect. The effect of employee empowerment on job satisfaction is positive for all
41 agencies (M = 0.65), with a range from 0.54 (Broadcasting Board of Governors) to 0.79
(Department of Defense). The relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention is
always negative across the 41 agencies (M = −0.60), ranging from −0.88 (Broadcasting Board
of Governors) to −0.17 (Railroad Retirement Board). And the direct effect of employee empow-
erment on turnover intention is always negative—or in a handful of cases zero—across the 41
agencies (M = −0.19), with a range from −0.65 (National Gallery of Art) to 0 (Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission).
We conducted another set of multiple group analyses for age groups and supervisory levels.
Equality constraints on the causal paths are tested across three age groups (age 29 and under;
30-49; and 50 or older) and three supervisory levels (nonsupervisors/team leaders, supervisors,
and managers/executives). All of the fit statistics and the chi-square difference tests indicate
that the equality constraints do not hold across age groups or supervisor levels. Although the
results do not vary greatly among age groups or supervisory levels, we find some interesting
patterns. For age groups, people at age 50 or older have a somewhat weaker relationship
between job satisfaction and turnover intention compared with those who are younger (b =
−0.72, p < .001, for age 29 and under; b = −0.77, p < .001, for age 30-49; b = −0.57, p < .001,
for age 50 or older). Also, the negative effect of employee empowerment on turnover intention
gets weaker as age increases (b = −0.32, p < .001, for age 29 and under; b = −0.23, p < .001,
for age 30-49; b = −0.12, p < .001, for age 50 or older). These results suggest that as federal
employees get older, factors like retirement eligibility and retirement finances have a greater
influence on the decision to turnover than satisfaction with work or the influence of employee
empowerment.
For supervisory levels, however, the positive effect of employee empowerment on job satisfac-
tion gets stronger for higher level employees (b = 0.56, p < .001, for nonsupervisors/team leaders;
b = 0.63, p < .001, for supervisors; b = 0.72, p < .001, for managers/executives). Differences in
how public managers and their subordinates perceive the public sector workplace may account for
this pattern. People who work in the public sector often face greater constraints and enjoy less
autonomy and flexibility than their private sector counterparts, and these differences appear to

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 11

-0.37***

Practice 1 Job Job

Satisfaction 1 Satisfaction 2
Intention to
1.00a leave the federal
governmentb
1.00a 174.45***
Practice 2 1.01*** -0.75***

Intention to
Employee
Job Satisfaction leave to another
0.90*** Empowerment 1.30*** -0.63*** federal agencyb

Practice 3
1.05*** -0.23***
-0.15***
Intention to
retireb

Practice 4

-0.53***

Figure 2.  Results from Multinomial Logit Structural Equation Model of Employee Empowerment, Job
Satisfaction, and Turnover Intention (Model 2).
Note: Unstandardized coefficients are reported.
aThe parameter is fixed and not tested.
bBase category = intention to stay.

***p < 0.001

become more acute at managerial and supervisory levels than on the frontline (Rainey, 2014).
Employee empowerment may be more effective at removing these constraints and increasing
autonomy for those at higher levels of the hierarchy than lower level employees. As a result,
employee empowerment has a greater impact on job satisfaction among supervisors and managers
than rank-and-file employees.
The discussion now turns to the results from the multinomial logit model with turnover
intention operationalized as a nominal variable with four distinct response categories (Model
2; see Figure 2 and Table 3). The response categories are intention to stay, intention to retire,
intention to leave to another federal agency, and intention to leave the federal government; the
first response category, intention to stay, is used as a base category for comparison. The results
are consistent with our previous findings. The relationship between employee empowerment
and job satisfaction is positive and significant (b = 1.30, p < .001). The effect of job satisfac-
tion on turnover intention is negative and significant for all turnover intention categories com-
pared with the intention to stay, which means that those who are more satisfied with their job
are significantly less likely to report their intention to retire, to leave to another federal agency,
or to leave for a job outside the federal government. These results provide further support to
H1 and H2. The variable job satisfaction has a significantly larger negative effect on the likeli-
hood of intention to leave the federal government (b = −0.75, p < .001) and to leave to another
federal agency (b = −0.63, p < .001), compared with intention to stay, than on the likelihood of
intention to retire (b = −0.23, p < .001), compared with intention to stay. In addition, we find
that the direct effect of employee empowerment on turnover intention is negative and signifi-
cant for all turnover intention categories compared to the intention to stay. The variable
employee empowerment has a noticeably larger negative effect on the likelihood of intention to
leave the federal government (b = −0.37, p < .001) and to leave to another federal agency (b =
−0.53, p < .001), compared with intention to stay, than on the likelihood of intention to retire
(b = −0.15, p < .001), compared with intention to stay.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

12 American Review of Public Administration 

Table 3.  Parameter Estimates for Multinomial Logit Structural Equation Model (Model 2).

Unstandardized Standardized
Parameter coefficient SE coefficient
Factor loadings
  Employee empowerment → Practice 1 1.00a 0.88***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 2 1.01*** 0.00 0.82***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 3 0.90*** 0.00 0.87***
  Employee empowerment → Practice 4 1.05*** 0.00 0.87***
  Job satisfaction → Job Satisfaction 1 1.00a 0.61***
  Job satisfaction → Job Satisfaction 2 174.45*** 16.46 1.00***
Direct effects
  Employee empowerment → Job satisfaction 1.30*** 0.00 0.74***
  Employee empowerment → Intention to leave −0.37*** 0.03 −0.23***
the federal governmentb
  Employee empowerment → Intention to leave to −0.53*** 0.01 −0.35***
another federal agencyb
  Employee empowerment → Intention to retireb −0.15*** 0.02 −0.28***
  Job satisfaction → Intention to leave the federal −0.75*** 0.02 −0.82***
governmentb
  Job satisfaction → Intention to leave to another −0.63*** 0.01 −0.71***
federal agencyb
  Job satisfaction → Intention to retireb −0.23*** 0.01 −0.78***
Measurement error variances
  Practice 1 0.19*** 0.00 0.22***
  Practice 2 0.33*** 0.00 0.34***
  Practice 3 0.17*** 0.00 0.25***
  Practice 4 0.24*** 0.00 0.25***
Disturbance variances
  Job satisfaction 0.91*** 0.00 0.46***
aThe parameter is fixed and not tested.
bBase category = intention to stay.
***p < .001.

Discussion and Conclusion

In this study, we tested a theoretical model of how employee empowerment impacts turnover
intention in the U.S. federal bureaucracy. The results of the empirical analysis offer significant
support for the proposed model. Specifically, we find that employee empowerment has a positive
and substantively meaningful effect on job satisfaction, which in turn has a negative and substan-
tively meaningful effect on turnover intention. Thus, the relationship between employee empow-
erment and turnover intention is negative and mediated by job satisfaction. We also find that
employee empowerment has a direct negative effect on turnover intention but the direct effect is
not as strong as the indirect effect via job satisfaction.
Scholars have pointed to other variables in addition to job satisfaction that could mediate the
relationship between employee empowerment and turnover intention. For example, Steers and
Mowday (1981) propose that employee attitudes such as organizational commitment and job
involvement serve as immediate antecedents of turnover intention. By testing the direct path from
employee empowerment to turnover intention, we also intended to capture the potential effects of
these alternative mediators. The finding that the indirect effect via job satisfaction is significantly
stronger than the direct effect suggests that job satisfaction is the most important single variable
that mediates the relationship between employee empowerment and turnover intention.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 13

Unlike previous research on employee empowerment and turnover in the public sector, our
findings suggest that not just one element of empowerment (e.g., discretion or involvement in
decision) but employee empowerment as a multifaceted managerial intervention can reduce
intention to leave the federal bureaucracy. Our findings are also unique in that they suggest that
the impact of employee empowerment on turnover intention differs by type of turnover intention.
Previous studies of employee empowerment in the public sector combined different forms of
turnover intention, thereby concealing the differential effects of employee empowerment on
intention to transfer within the federal government, leave for a job in another sector, or retire. In
our analysis, we find that employee empowerment has stronger direct as well as indirect effects
on the intention to leave an organization either to another federal agency or for a job outside the
federal government than on the intention to retire. These results suggest the need to look at quit-
ting an organization and retiring as distinct forms of turnover. Conceptually, intending to leave
an agency or the federal government to take another job implies continued employment else-
where whereas intending to retire generally involves decreased commitment to workforce par-
ticipation and is often followed by discontinuation of regular employment (Feldman, 1994).
Also, empirical research on organizational withdrawal reports that quit and retirement intentions
have several unique predictors (Adams & Beehr, 1998; Schmidt & Lee, 2008). Intention to quit
an organization is more likely to be influenced by work-related factors including organizational
and job characteristics, managerial practices, employment relations, and job attitudes. However,
intention to retire might be more closely related to lifestyle choices and other nonwork variables
such as retirement finances, commitment to family and leisure, health status, and age. Thus, the
effects of employee empowerment and of job satisfaction on turnover intention are weaker for
retirement intention than for the intention to quit and seek work elsewhere.
A limitation of SEM is that the complexity of the statistical modeling often prevents the
researcher from controlling for covariates beyond the variables of primary interest. As many equa-
tions in the measurement and structural models are estimated simultaneously, adding just a few
control variables can increase complexity to the point where SEM no longer converges to produce
a unique solution. This is more likely to occur when there is a degrees of freedom problem and/or
when insufficient covariance information is available to compute valid estimates. In our SEM
analysis, we were able to statistically control for several variables such as work location, age,
gender, minority status, supervisory level, and tenure and found that the results remained the same
while the model fit became worse. Thus, we left these variables out of the models reported above.
Relying on the 2011 FEVS as the only source of data for our analysis raises the issue of common
method variance or monomethod bias. Common method variance is believed to produce artificially
inflated correlations (Crampton & Wagner, 1994; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003),
although in some cases the bias can also deflate correlations (Cote & Buckley, 1988; Williams &
Brown, 1994). Crampton and Wagner (1994) conclude that while one should be cognizant of the
potential for common method variance, researchers have overstated the magnitude of this problem.
Spector (2006) has gone as far as calling common method bias an urban legend, a distortion and
oversimplification that is not supported by empirical evidence, as his analysis shows.
We probed our data by performing a Harman’s single factor test, a commonly used but fairly
weak diagnostic test to detect common method bias. The test produced a multifactor solution,
thus failing to find glaring evidence of common method variance. Evidence of discriminant
validity provides stronger evidence against the presence of common method variance. The vari-
ables employee empowerment and turnover intention are correlated at just r = −.33. More impor-
tant, application of the Fornell and Larcker (1981) method offers evidence of discriminant
validity among measures representing the four underlying dimensions of employee empower-
ment. These four dimensions are strongly correlated as they converge on a higher order construct.
Had common method variance been significant, it would have inflated these strong correlations
even further, making it very unlikely that we would find evidence of discriminant validity.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

14 American Review of Public Administration 

Finally, we note that nearly all of the survey items used in our analysis measure prevailing prac-
tices and policies in federal agencies as observed by survey respondents and not their own par-
ticular behavior. These more objective assessments of conditions within organizations should be
less susceptible to common method variance than self-reported data on employee behavior. In
short, we have reason to believe common method variance is not a serious problem in this study.
Nevertheless, care should be taken in interpreting the results.
We conclude by discussing the findings’ implications for policy and practice. The United
States is witnessing unprecedented levels of distrust in public institutions. Given recent scandals
and management failures in the U.S. Veterans Administration, the Department of Health and
Human Services, and elsewhere, the federal bureaucracy is unlikely to escape the public’s scorn.
This does not bode well for retention of skilled and experienced federal employees who become
increasingly dissatisfied with public service. Widespread antibureaucratic sentiment puts citizens
in a quandary. It can undermine the morale of public employees, lead to loss of human capital in
the public sector, and give rise to further performance problems that were the source of dissatis-
faction and distrust of the bureaucracy in the first place. Now more than ever, retention of scarce
human talent has become imperative for an effective federal bureaucracy, especially in light of
improvements in the labor market and growing competition from the private sector to attract the
best and brightest in the federal workforce. Previous research points to a range of managerial
practices and policies that are negatively related to turnover. Our study indicates that multifac-
eted employee empowerment programs aimed at sharing information, resources, rewards, and
authority with lower level employees can be added to the arsenal of weapons used by federal
executives and managers to mitigate turnover and its negative consequences. FHCS/FEVS data
show widespread use of employee empowerment practices across federal agencies since 2002.
These are fairly common managerial practices that can be readily observed, emulated, and dis-
seminated further with modest effort and without the added costs of additional reforms. Moreover,
adoption of employee empowerment practices, in addition to reducing turnover, can improve
flexibility, performance, and innovativeness. Rarely has a managerial intervention offered so
much leverage to improve management and performance in the public sector.

Appendix
FHCS/FEVS Variables and Measures

Employee empowerment
Practice 1 (providing information about goals and performance)
•• Managers review and evaluate the organization’s progress toward meeting its goals and objectives.
(1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• Supervisors/team leaders provide employees with constructive suggestions to improve their job
performance. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management on what is going on in
your organization? (1 = very dissatisfied to 5 = very satisfied)
Practice 2 (offering rewards based on performance)
•• Promotions in my work unit are based on merit. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• Employees are rewarded for providing high-quality products and services to customers. (1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree)
•• Awards in my work unit depend on how well employees perform their jobs. (1 = strongly disagree to
5 = strongly agree)
(continued)

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 15

Appendix  (continued)
Practice 3 (providing access to job-related knowledge and skills)
•• I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my organization. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 =
strongly agree)
•• The workforce has the job-relevant knowledge and skills necessary to accomplish organizational
goals. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• Supervisors/team leaders in my work unit support employee development. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 =
strongly agree)
Practice 4 (granting discretion to change work processes)
•• Employees have a feeling of personal empowerment with respect to work processes. (1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
•• How satisfied are you with your involvement in decisions that affect your work? (1 = very dissatisfied
to 5 = very satisfied)
Job satisfaction
Job Satisfaction 1
•• I like the kind of work I do. (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)
Job Satisfaction 2
•• Considering everything, how satisfied are you with your job? (1 = very dissatisfied to 5 = very satisfied)
Turnover intention
•• Are you considering leaving your organization within the next year, and if so, why? (0 = No; 1 = Yes,
to retire; Yes, to take another job within the federal government; Yes, to take another job outside the federal
government; and Yes, other)

Note. FHCS = Federal Human Capital Survey; FEVS = Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Adams, G. A., & Beehr, T. A. (1998). Turnover and retirement: A comparison of their similarities and dif-
ferences. Personnel Psychology, 51, 643-665.
Ahearne, M., Mathieu, J., & Rapp, A. (2005). To empower or not to empower your sales force? An empiri-
cal examination of the influence of leadership empowerment behavior on customer satisfaction and
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 945-955.
Arnold, J. A., Arad, S., Rhoades, J. A., & Drasgow, F. (2000). The empowering leadership question-
naire: The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring leader behaviors. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 21, 249-269.
Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover.
Academy of Management Journal, 37, 670-687.
Beauducel, A., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means
and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 13, 186-203.
Bertelli, A. M. (2007). Determinants of bureaucratic turnover intention: Evidence from the Department of
the Treasury. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 235-258.
Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous
motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education,
84, 740-756.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

16 American Review of Public Administration 

Boushey, H., & Glynn, S. J. (2012, November 16). There are significant business costs to replacing employ-
ees. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.
org/issues/labor/report/2012/11/16/44464/there-are-significant-business-costs-to-replacing-employees
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler, E. E., III. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: What, why, how, and
when. Sloan Management Review, 33, 31-39.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler, E. E., III. (1995). Empowering service employees. Sloan Management Review,
36, 73-84.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long
(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
Carsten, J. M., & Spector, P. E. (1987). Unemployment, job satisfaction, and employee turnover: A meta-
analytic test of the Muchinsky model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 374-381.
Cho, Y. J., & Lewis, G. B. (2012). Turnover intention and turnover behavior: Implications for retaining
federal employees. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32, 4-23.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice.
Academy of Management Review, 13, 471-482.
Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1988). Measurement error and theory testing in consumer research: An illus-
tration of the importance of construct validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 579-582.
Cotton, J. L., & Tuttle, J. M. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review with implications for
research. Academy of Management Review, 11, 55-70.
Coye, R. W., & Belohlav, J. A. (1995). An exploratory analysis of employee participation. Group &
Organization Management, 20, 4-17.
Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A. (1994). Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An
investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 67-76.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 74, 580-590.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the
effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627-668.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New
York, NY: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagne, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfac-
tion, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former eastern bloc country: A cross-
cultural study of self-determination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 930-942.
Denhardt, R. B. (1984). Theories of public organization. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Feldman, D. C. (1994). The decision to retire early: A review and conceptualization. Academy of
Management Review, 19, 285-311.
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2013a). Employee empowerment, employee attitudes, and performance:
Testing a causal model. Public Administration Review, 73, 490-506.
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2013b). Using employee empowerment to encourage innovative behav-
ior in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 155-187.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis.
Personnel Psychology, 40, 287-322.
Fulford, M. D., & Enz, C. A. (1995). The impact of empowerment on service employees. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 7, 161-175.
Gagne, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26, 331-362.
Gagne, M., & Koestner, R. (2002, April). Self-determination theory as a framework for understanding
organizational commitment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Gagne, M., Koestner, R., & Zuckerman, M. (2000). Facilitating acceptance of organizational change: The
importance of self-determination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1843-1852.
Gardner, T. M., Wright, P. M., & Moynihan, L. M. (2011). The impact of motivation, empowerment, and
skill-enhancing practices on aggregate voluntary turnover: The mediating effect of collective affective
commitment. Personnel Psychology, 64, 315-350.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 17

Golembiewski, R. T. (1967). Men, management, and morality: Toward a new organizational ethic. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Golembiewski, R. T. (1972). Renewing organizations: The laboratory approach to planned change. Itasca,
IL: F. E. Peacock.
Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of
employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium.
Journal of Management, 26, 463-488.
Grissom, J. A. (2012). Revisiting the impact of participative decision making on public employee reten-
tion: The moderating influence of effective managers. American Review of Public Administration, 42,
400-418.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence from New
Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 180-192.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional
criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratings of motivation:
Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and adjustment in a factory setting.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1789-1805.
Ippolito, R. A. (1987). Why federal workers don’t quit. Journal of Human Resources, 22, 281-299.
Judge, T. A., & Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice. In C. L. Cooper & E. A.
Locke (Eds.), Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking theory with practice (pp.166-198).
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core
evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151-188.
Kanter, R. M. (1979). Power failure in management circuits. Harvard Business Review, 57, 65-75.
Kellough, J. E., & Osuna, W. (1995). Cross-agency comparisons of quit rates in the federal service: Another
look at the evidence. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 15, 58-68.
Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for management leadership. Public
Administration Review, 62, 231-241.
Kim, S. (2005). Factors affecting state government information technology employee turnover intentions.
American Review of Public Administration, 35, 137-156.
Kinicki, A. J., McKee-Ryan, F. M., Schriesheim, C. A., & Carson, K. P. (2002). Assessing the construct
validity of the job descriptive index: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,
14-32.
Kirkhart, L. (1971). Toward a theory of public organizations. In F. Marini (Ed.), Toward a new public
administration: The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 309-331). San Francisco, CA: Chandler.
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team
empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 58-74.
Lawler, E. E., III, Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E. (1992). Employee involvement and total quality man-
agement: Practices and results in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lawler, E. E., III, Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E. (1995). Creating high performance organizations:
Impact of employee involvement and total quality management. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lee, H., Cayer, N. J., & Lan, G. Z. (2006). Changing federal government employee attitudes since the Civil
Service Reform Act of 1978. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26, 21-51.
Lee, T. W., & Mowday, R. T. (1987). Voluntarily leaving an organization: An empirical investigation of
Steers and Mowday’s model of turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 721-743.
Losey, S. (2012, October 15). Retirements surge, new hires plummet. Federal Times. Retrieved from http://
archive.federaltimes.com/article/20121015/PERSONNEL02/310150001/Retirements-surge-new-
hires-plummet
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and con-
sequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
Michaels, C. E., & Spector, P. E. (1982). Causes of employee turnover: A test of the Mobley, Griffeth,
Hand, and Meglino model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 53-59.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

18 American Review of Public Administration 

Mobley, W. H. (1977). Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job satisfaction and employee
turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 237-240.
Moynihan, D. P., & Landuyt, N. (2008). Explaining turnover intention in state government: Examining the
roles of gender, life cycle, and loyalty. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 28, 120-143.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Paré, G., & Tremblay, M. (2007). The influence of high-involvement human resources practices, procedural
justice, organizational commitment, and citizenship behaviors on information technology profession-
als’ turnover intentions. Group & Organization Management, 32, 326-357.
Perry, R. W. (2004). The relationship of affective organizational commitment with supervisory trust.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24, 133-149.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in
behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88, 879-903.
Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and
absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 151-176.
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job
satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603-609.
Rainey, H. G. (2014). Understanding and managing public organizations (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality,
63, 397-427.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
Scarpello, V., & Campbell, J. P. (1983). Job satisfaction: Are all the parts there? Personnel Psychology,
36, 577-600.
Schmidt, J. A., & Lee, K. (2008). Voluntary retirement and organizational turnover intentions: The differen-
tial associations with work and non-work commitment constructs. Journal of Business and Psychology,
22, 297-309.
Selden, S. C., & Moynihan, D. P. (2000). A model of voluntary turnover in state government. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 20, 63-74.
Shaw, J. D., Delery, J. E., Jenkins, G. D., Jr., & Gupta, N. (1998). An organization-level analysis of volun-
tary and involuntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 511-525.
Society for Human Resource Management. (2012). Executive brief: Examining the relationship between
turnover, average tenure, HR investments. Retrieved from http://www.shrm.org/Research/bench-
marks/Documents/Turnover%20by%20Type_FINAL.pdf
Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy
and participation at work. Human Relations, 39, 1005-1016.
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational
Research Methods, 9, 221-232.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and
validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
Steers, R. M., & Mowday, R. T. (1981). Employee turnover and post-decision accommodation processes.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 235-281.
Tett, R. P., & Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and
turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46, 259-293.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model
of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
United States Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs. (2000a). Management challenges facing the
new administration (Report of Senator Fred Thompson, Chairman of the Committee on Governmental
Affairs). Washington, DC: Author.
United States Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs. (2000b). Report to the President: The crisis
in human capital (Report prepared by Senator George V. Voinovich, Chairman of the Subcommittee
on Oversight of Government Management, Restructuring, and the District of Columbia). Washington,
DC: Author.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015

Kim and Fernandez 19

Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C. P., Soenens, B., De Witte, H., & Van Den Broeck, A. (2007).
On the relations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes:
A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80,
251-277.
Volcker, P. A. (1989). Leadership for America: Rebuilding the public service. Washington, DC: National
Commission of the Public Service.
White, L. D. (1948). The federalists: A study in administrative history. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Whitford, A. B., & Lee, S.-Y. (2015). Exit, voice, and loyalty with multiple exit options: Evidence from the
U.S. federal workforce. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 373-398.
Williams, L. J., & Brown, B. K. (1994). Method variance in organizational behavior and human resources
research: Effects on correlations, path coefficients, and hypothesis testing. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 57, 185-209.
Wright, B. E., & Kim, S. (2004). Participation’s influence on job satisfaction: The importance of job char-
acteristics. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24, 18-40.
Wu, V., & Short, P. M. (1996). The relationship of empowerment to teacher job commitment and job satis-
faction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 23, 85-89.

Author Biographies
Sun Young Kim is a doctoral candidate in Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs.
Her research interests include employee empowerment, leadership, and behavioral ethics in public
organizations.
Sergio Fernandez is Associate Professor and Director of the PhD in Public Affairs and Joint PhD in Public
Policy Programs in Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs. He is also a Research
Associate in University of Johannesburg Center for Public Management and Governance. His research
focuses on employee empowerment, representative bureaucracy, employee attitudes in the federal bureau-
cracy, and government outsourcing.

Downloaded from arp.sagepub.com at EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIV on June 1, 2015