Hypothesis Testing

Based on the literature framework of this study, there were two hypotheses formulated. The statistical tests conducted on the observed data yielded considerable results underpinning theoretical and factual importance for the conceptual model. Based on the summary in Table 19 we can see that all null hypotheses were tested and rejected; thus all alternative hypotheses yielded significant statistical support.

As part of the hypotheses test, a p- value is calculated using SPSS. The p - value represents the support or lack of support that a observed sample provides for the null hypotheses. If the p-value is equal or less than the required level of significance, the null hypotheses (H0) will be rejected

-.971

-.222

.408

and the alternative hypothesis accepted (Field, 2009). The tolerated level of significance set for this study is 0.05 or less. Rejecting the null hypotheses is referred to as making a type I error. Based on the above the two hypotheses were tested.

Hypothesis 1 is supported mainly due to the fact that the correlation coefficient is strongly negative (R= -.549) and significant (P < .001) at a 99% confidence level.

Hypothesis 2 is also supported mainly due to the fact that the regression coefficient of the interaction term is significant (β = -.222, P < .05) at a 95% confidence level.

Table 19: Hypotheses Test Result Summary

Hypothesis Test Theorized Observed Result Values

H1A: Job satisfaction is negatively related to employees’ intention to leave the organization One-tailed Pearson Partial correlation Negative Relationship Negative Relationship (Strong) Supported H1A: Accepted R = -.549 P < .001 After controlling for the control variables

HA2:

Perceived available job alternatives moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and employees’ intent to leave the organization

Hierarchical Regression Moderating Effect Moderating Effect Supported HA2: Accepted B = -.222 t=-2.113 P< .05 After controlling for the control variables

Source: Author generated table.

In regard to hypothesis 1 results show that there exists a significant negative relationship between job satisfaction and employees’ intent to leave the organization. The results provide evidence of a strong and significant association between JS and TI. Therefore, H1o is rejected and H1a accepted.

Looking at these results we see that as expected based on the theoretical framework, JS is negatively related to TI. JS was defined as a “pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisa1 of one's job or job experiences” (Locke, 1976). The JS variable was construed as being a summation of satisfaction of different facets. JS was thus operationalized by pay, promotion, supervisor, co-workers and nature of work.

Additional correlation results show that these facets are positively correlated with JS as they are part of JS (see appendix F). Furthermore, these facets are also negatively related to TI. This tells us that looking at JS as a summation of different facets or looking at JS separately, would still yield negative associations with TI.

Another noteworthy fact is that the effects of the control variables have been controlled in order to assess the true effect of the JS - TI relationship. The relationship remained significant before and after controlling for the control variables.

Concerning hypothesis 2, results show that there exists a significant moderating effect on the JS- TI relationship. The effect is of moderate strength but highly significant. Therefore, H2o is rejected and H2a accepted.

Looking at these results, we see that as expected, based on the theoretical framework, the JS-TI relationship can differ at various levels of PAJA. The interaction effect also called the moderating effect shows that the JS-TI relationship moderately increases in strength when PAJA increase.

Another interesting result was the significant positive relation between PAJA and TI. It should be noted that this relationship is not included in the proposed conceptual model but is not strange or unexpected.

The reader is referred back to chapter 2 wherein this relationship was argued as being ambivalent. For the relationship between JS and PAJA no significant results were obtained initially but after controlling for the demographic variables a weak negative significant correlation was found.

4.8 Summary

This chapter presented the statistical results and findings related to the observed data. The data was computed and analyzed in SPSS version 19. The findings were analyzed through Pearson correlation tests, Pearson partial correlation tests, simple and multiple linear regressions and finally a hierarchical regression.

The main findings can be summarized as follows:

• There is a significant strong negative relationship between job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intention (R= -.549, P<.01)

• There is a significant moderate positive relationship between perceived available job alternatives and employees’ turnover intention (R= .398, P<.01)

• There is a significant weak negative relationship between perceived available job alternatives and job satisfaction (R=-.171, P<.05)

• There is a significant moderating effect (β = -.222, P<.05) of perceived available job alternatives on the negative relationship between job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intention

Other relevant findings related to the dependant variable and the control variables are:

• employees’ turnover intention is weakly and negatively related to age (R= -.187, P<.01) • employees’ turnover intention is weakly and negatively related to tenure (R= -.257,

P<.01)

• employees’ turnover intention is moderately and positively related to educational level (R= .321, P<.01)

• perceived available job alternatives is weakly and positively related to educational level (R=.241, P<.01)

Secondary findings are that the “salaried” employees of Suralco indicate:

• slight agreement in experiencing job satisfaction (Mean = 3.86); thus they are satisfied (when considered a rounded mean of 4)

• slight disagreement in satisfaction with pay and promotion (Mean = 3.02 & 2.95); thus they are dissatisfied with pay and promotion

• slight agreement in satisfaction with supervisors and co-workers (Mean = 4.43 & 4.18); thus they are satisfied with supervisor and co-workers

• agreement in satisfaction with nature of work (Mean = 4.72); thus they are satisfied with nature of work

• slight disagreement in having turnover intentions (Mean = 3.02); thus they do not have turnover intentions.

• slight agreement in perceiving available job alternatives (Mean = 3.99); thus they have perceived available job alternatives (when considered a rounded mean of 4)