RESEARCH PROCESS

3.5.1 The questionnaire as data-collection tool

A self-administered questionnaire was chosen as the data-collection tool, the reason being that this is an acceptable data-collection method to use when individuals are the unit of analysis in a study. The choice of use of a questionnaire as data-collection method was also motivated by a desire to ensure anonymity of the respondents, and to try to ensure truthful, or honest, responses (Salkind, 2012: 148).

When considering the format of the questionnaire, the researcher made certain that the questions were evenly spread out, and that simple and understandable language was used. Furthermore, subsections were used, and questions were presented in the form of a table, which made it easy for the respondents to read and select their answers. Consideration was also given to the ordering of items in the questionnaire, as well as the general appearance of the questionnaire.

The questionnaire consisted of two sections, namely Section A, which solicited biographical data from the respondents, and Section B, which consisted of two unabridged questionnaires, measuring work values and work ethics, respectively. Participants were given clear instructions to complete the questionnaire. In addition, each subsection started with a short overview of the content and the purpose of the subsection, to ensure that the respondents understood the subsection, to ensure that they selected appropriate responses to the questions

posed. An introductory letter was attached to the questionnaire which was sent out to the respondents (see Appendix B).

3.5.2 Measuring instruments

A self-administered questionnaire was designed, which consisted of two sections. The sections were arranged in such a way that it made it easy for the respondents to understand the purpose of the items in each subsection. The two constituent sections of the questionnaire will be discussed below.

3.5.2.1 Section A: Biographical information

Section A of the questionnaire required the respondents to provide their biographical information, and it included five questions, relating to the respondents’ population group, their gender, their age (to determine the respondent’s generational cohort), years of service with the current organisation, and highest academic qualification. Responses to the question regarding highest academic qualification were used as a guide to indicate whether respondents had an adequate level of literacy to read, understand, and respond to the questions in the questionnaire. The information collected was used to describe the sample from which the data was collected. It was decided to start the questionnaire with general biographical questions, as it was deemed that this would make the respondents comfortable with answering the questionnaire.

3.5.2.2 Section B: Work values and work ethics

Section B of the questionnaire consisted of two unabridged questionnaires, which were used to measure work values and work ethics, respectively. To measure work values, the Values Scale was used, and to measure work ethics, the Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile was used.

3.5.2.2.1 Values Scale

The Values Scale (VS) was developed by Langley (1992: 2) with the aim of determining the value of certain work-related aspects to individual respondents. Statements are rated on a four-point Likert scale, with options ranging from “of little importance” (1) to “very important” (4). Respondents had to select the most appropriate option. The VS includes questions such as “I find pleasure in the beauty of my work”, and “I make my own decisions at work”, to determine individual preferences, and, most importantly, generational differences with regard to work values. In a study by Boonzaier (2008: 83), it was found that the VS is a reliable instrument to use for a South African population. Langley (1992: 2) reported a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.7 for the VS for a South African sample. Thus, based on previous research findings, the VS can be used with confidence in the South African context to measure work values.

3.5.2.2.2 Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile

The Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile (MWEP) was developed by Miller et al. in 2002. The MWEP is a 65-item scale that was developed to “measure seven conceptually and distinct facets of the work ethic construct” (Miller et al., 2002: 1).

The seven constructs are identified as hard work, self-reliance, leisure, centrality of work, morality/ethics, delay of gratification, and wasted time (Miller et al., 2002: 12). Participants were requested to select the most appropriate option from a five- point Likert scale, with options ranging from “strongly agree” (1), to “neutral” (3), to “strongly disagree” (5). Miller et al. (2002: 30) states that the MWEP is a reliable measure of overall work ethics and the dimensions thereof. In order to ensure that the questionnaire is reliable for a South African sample, a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient will be determined for the current sample.

3.5.3 Pilot study

Although use of a questionnaire as data-collection method may have numerous advantages, the opposite is also true. One of the weaknesses of using a questionnaire as data-collection method is that participants may potentially interpret questions differently, and may potentially respond differently based on their level of reading and writing skills (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013: 190). In the current study, this limitation was minimised by conducting a pilot study, and by including only those participants that had an acceptable literacy rate. From the biographical data presented in Table 3.1, it was indicated that only 10 participants (3.3%) had a qualification lower than Grade 12. However, the participating organisations indicated that the minimum academic qualification of employees was Grade 10, which implies acceptable literacy levels.

Ten respondents from the target population were included in the pilot study. The aim was to check for any ambiguous, biased, or leading questions, and to determine the minimum time required to complete the questionnaire. Thus, face validity was determined (Jonck, 2014: 347). In addition, two psychologists were requested to provide insight into the content of the questionnaire items, in order to determine initial content validity (Jonck, 2014: 347). Respondents that were used

for the pilot study were not considered for the final sample. All questionnaires were then returned, and comments were considered. Changes were made to the layout of the questionnaire, after which the final questionnaire was distributed to the sample.

3.5.4 Questionnaire administration

The questionnaires were distributed to the sample, and the researcher collected the questionnaires within 14 days of distributing them. This allowed the respondents sufficient time to complete the questionnaire in their own time and at their own convenience. After completion, respondents were requested to place the completed questionnaires in a sealed envelope. The researcher collected the questionnaires personally from the respondents at a central point. This ensured that the questionnaires were treated confidentially.

3.5.5 Data analysis

The analysis of the responses was planned and directed by the researcher in collaboration with the study supervisor, and the statistical analysis was carried out by an independent research psychologist. The responses on the returned questionnaires were captured on an Excel spreadsheet, after which the data was analysed by the independent research psychologist, using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) version 20.

Statistical analysis was performed by means of descriptive analysis, including frequencies, percentages, medians, means, and standard deviations. Cross- tabulation of the biographical variables for each generational cohort was performed to provide a generational perspective on these variables. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov

test was performed to assess the normality of the distribution (Pallant, 2011: 63). The results of this test indicate that the data was not normally distributed. Hence, non-parametric tests were used to investigate the null hypothesis. As such, the Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were executed to determine the influence of the sociodemographic variables on the dependent variables (i.e. work values and work ethics). Spearman rank-order correlations were used to determine the relationship between the subcategories of the dependent variables. To determine the reliability of the measuring instruments, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were determined. The results are presented in Chapter 4.