Abstract

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

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

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

The findings of the interview indicated toward the dependency of organizational

commitment and job satisfaction however the responses in the questionnaire are
less aligned with the results of the interview.

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

The other limitation could have been the small size of the sample. The
questionnaire though distributed to around 60 employees, data could be collected
from only 41 of them. EPF has total employees of around 500 and hence the
questionnaire represents the view of only 8 pc of the total employee.

Each questionnaire had 7 optional scales from very high to very little and it was also
found that the respondents did not find the scales convenient and could not
interpret their thoughts/beliefs accordingly.

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

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

Human resources are undoubtedly the most important resources in an organization.

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

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

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

Employee job satisfaction is an attitude that people have about their jobs and the
organizations in which they perform these jobs. Methodologically, we can define job
satisfaction as an employee’s affective reaction to a job, based on a comparison
between actual outcomes and desired outcomes (Mosadeghrad, 2003b). Job
satisfaction is generally recognized as a multifaceted construct that includes
employee feelings about a variety of both intrinsic and extrinsic job elements. It
encompasses specific aspects of satisfaction related to pay, benefits, promotion,
work conditions, supervision, organizational practices and relationships with co-
workers (Misener et al., 1996).
Organizational commitment has an important place in the study of organizational
behavior. This is in part due to the vast number of works that have found
relationships between organizational commitment and attitudes and behaviors in
the workplace (Porter et al., 1974, 1976; Koch and Steers, 1978; Angle and Perry,
1981). Furthermore, Batemen and Strasser (1984) state that the reasons for
studying organizational commitment are related to “(a) employee behaviors and
performance effectiveness, (b) attitudinal, affective, and cognitive constructs such
as job satisfaction, (c) characteristics of the employee’s job and role, such as
responsibility and (d) personal characteristics of the employee such as age, job
tenure” (p. 95-96).

Multiple definitions of organizational commitment are found in the literature.

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

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

Employees Provident fund has eight department each headed by a department

head. Contributor Services and social security department is the biggest
department and is responsible for management of funds.

EPF is a organization having traditional management practices. The Administrator is

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

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

Unlike many organizations ‘turn-over’ has not been a serious problem in EPF though
the employees with technical background have shown high turn-over ratio. However
the percentage of technical staffs at EPF is very small and hence the turn-over looks
negligible on the whole.
Socially EPF is a respected organization, though unlike most of the other
government organization no high social status is associated with jobs at EPF still the
employees at EPF are highly recognized. The employees carry high level of pride on
being introducing them as staffs of EPF. Most of the employees opine that the clean,
fair and transparent image of EPF gives them a distinct recognition. EPF staffs also
claim that EPF is one of the very few government institutions that provide prompt
service.
Literature Review
Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is defined as the degree to which an individual feels positively or
negatively about his or her job (Goodman et al, 2007). Job satisfaction can be
conceived of as a multi-dimensional concept that includes a set of favorable or
unfavorable feelings by which employees perceive their job (Davis and Newstrom,
1999). Another definition for job satisfaction is; it is an emotional response to tasks,
leadership, peer relationships and organizational politics, as well as other physical
and social conditions of the workplace (Stewart, 1998).
Locke’s definition of Job satisfaction considers cognitive, affective and evaluative
reactions or attitudes when he defines job satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive
emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience”. Job
satisfaction is a result of employees’ perception of how well their job provides those
things that are viewed as important.
Tziner and Vardi (1984) defined work satisfaction as an affective response or
reaction to a wide range of conditions or aspects of one’s work such as pay,
supervision, working conditions and/or the work itself.
Others define it as an affective orientation towards anticipated outcome (Wanous &
Lawler, 1972) or a statement to describe the feelings of employees about their work
(Arches, 1991). This statement expresses the gap between what individuals feel
they should receive from their work (ideally speaking) and what they derive from
the actual situation. A sense of satisfaction or its absence is, thus, an individual’s
subjective, emotional reaction to his or her work (Abu-Bader, 1998).

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

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

Guest (1991) concludes that high organizational commitment is associated with

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

Gender

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

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

Age
There have been many investigations into the relationship between age and
different forms of job satisfaction. Significant variations across age are commonly
found, with older employees tending to report higher satisfaction than younger ones
(e.g. Doering, Rhodes & Schuster, 1983; Glenn, Taylor & Weaver, 1977; Warr,
1992), Observed age differences in overall job satisfaction are greater than those
associated with gender, education, ethnic background or income (Clark, 1993;.
Weaver, 1980). Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson & Capwell (1957) suggested that in
general, morale is high among young workers. It tends to go down during the first
few years of employment. The low point is reached when workers are in their
middle and late twenties or early thirties. After this period, job morale climbs
steadily with age. Thus there is a U-shaped pattern between job satisfaction and
age. Again researches conducted in different European countries have come up with
different results for example the data from surveys carried out in the Czech
Republic, Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden suggest an
increasing level of job satisfaction with age, however in Austria and Romania, the
trend is that job satisfaction decreases with age.
Position
There have been no conclusive findings on the effect of position on job satisfaction
and organizational commitment. The impact of position on job satisfaction depends
on the authority, span of control, pay and fringe benefits etc. It also depends upon
the nature of job itself. Higher position generally means higher pay and higher
benefits. Wages and salaries are recognized to be a significant but cognitively
complex and multidimensional factor in job satisfaction (Luthans).
Research Question
What is the level of correlation between the job satisfaction and organizational
commitment among the employees at EPF?

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

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

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

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

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

The interviews focused on assessing interest in jobs, colleagues, perceived

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

Gender Vs. Job Satisfaction

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

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

Method

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

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

F-Test Two-Sample for

Variances

FEMALE MALE
69.46166 62.41241
Mean 667 379
97.89650 195.1530
Variance 606 19
Observations 12 29
df 11 28
0.501639
F 721
0.114061
P(F<=f) one-tail 402
0.387357
F Critical one-tail 752

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

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances

 FEMALE MALE
69.46166 62.41241
Mean 667 379
97.89650 195.1530
Variance 606 19
Observations 12 29
167.7216
Pooled Variance 948
Hypothesized Mean
Difference 0
df 39
1.585791
t Stat 781
0.060431
P(T<=t) one-tail 303
1.684875
t Critical one-tail 122
0.120862
P(T<=t) two-tail 606
2.022690
t Critical two-tail 901

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

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

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

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

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

F-Test Two-Sample for

Variances

FEMALE MALE
62.54083 66.56758
Mean 333 621
34.70059 51.14461
Variance 015 897
Observations 12 29
df 11 28
0.678479
F 786
0.253372
P(F<=f) one-tail 44
0.387357
F Critical one-tail 752

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

t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal

Variances

FEMALE MALE
62.54083 66.56758
Mean 333 621
34.70059 51.14461
Variance 015 897
Observations 12 29
46.50655
Pooled Variance 956
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 39
-
1.720265
t Stat 836
0.046655
P(T<=t) one-tail 518
1.684875
t Critical one-tail 122
0.093311
P(T<=t) two-tail 037
2.022690
t Critical two-tail 901
Since this is a two-tailed test and from the above t-test table we can see that P(T<t)
i.e. 0.05<0.09. Since the p value is greater than the confidence level 0.05 we reject
the null hypothesis. Hence we can say that there is a significant difference between
the organizational commitment between the male and female employees.

Analysis

Age vs Job Satisfaction

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

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

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different
Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Averag Varian
Groups Count Sum e ce
420.6 60.092 110.78
LESS THAN 31 7 5 86 91
MORE THAN 30 LESS 681.5 157.28
THAN 41 10 4 68.154 85
1541. 64.221 200.49
MORE THAN 40 24 31 25 01

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
271.31 135.65 0.7703 0.4699 3.2448
Between Groups 8 2 9 75 32 18
6691.6 176.09
Within Groups 04 38 48

6962.9
Total 22 40

Interpretation

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

Age vs Organizational Commitment

Hypothesis

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

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single
Factor
SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
450.4
YOUNG 7 7 64.3528 70.973
649.5
MID_AGE 10 4 64.954 46.3354
1580.
OLD_AGE 24 94 65.8725 47.5438

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 15.0179
Groups 2 2 7.5089 0.14735 0.8634 3.2448
1936.36
Within Groups 54 38 50.9569

1951.38
Total 33 40

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

Position vs Job Satisfaction

Hypothesis

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

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single
Factor

SUMMARY
Averag Varian
Groups Count Sum e ce
1281. 67.452 154.66
Sub-ordinates 19 59 11 82
 1189. 62.585 189.64
Supervisors 19 12 26 96
172.7 57.596 193.50
Managers 3 9 67 8

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
378.1853 189.09 1.0912 0.3460 3.2448
Between Groups 536 2 27 39 91 18
6584.736 173.28
Within Groups 456 38 25

6962.921
Total 81 40

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

Position vs. Organizational Commitment

Hypothesis

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

Alternate hypothesis
At least one is different

Anova: Single
Factor

SUMMARY
Averag Varian
Groups Count Sum e ce
SUB_ORDINATE 1225. 64.511 58.530
S 19 71 05 41
1245. 65.563 40.757
SUPERVISORS 19 71 68 52
209.5 69.843 44.726
MANAGERS 3 3 33 23
ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 74.748 37.374 0.7567 0.4761 3.2448
Groups 07 2 04 87 11 18
1876.6 49.385
Within Groups 35 38 14

1951.3
Total 83 40

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

References

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