Understanding Employees’ Preferences: Their Work Values, Environment, Interaction and Activities
Science Journal of Education
Volume 5, Issue 6, December 2017, Pages: 236-243
Received: Oct. 14, 2017;
Accepted: Oct. 30, 2017;
Published: Dec. 12, 2017
Views 1203 Downloads 45
Emeliza Torrento Estimo, Research Department, John B. Lacson Colleges Foundation, Bacolod City, Philippines
Geneveve Mandado Aguilar, Research Department, John B. Lacson Colleges Foundation, Bacolod City, Philippines
This descriptive study aimed to find out the preferred work values, environment, interactions, and activities of employees in a Maritime institution. A survey questionnaire was administered to a group of respondents composed of 146 faculty and non-teaching staff who represent the sample size from the total population of 231 employees. Results of the study showed evidence that the employees place the highest value on spirituality, mutual respect, reaching goals, open communication, strong support system, cohesiveness, effective leadership, transparency, and recognition, among others. As a whole, they respond most positively to a fast-paced, result-oriented, and organized work environment. Building from the findings gathered, the study recommends the alignment of the employees’ preferences with the institution’s core values and priorities. Since being recognized for their efforts and contribution is important to them, recognition must be given where and when it is deemed best. It is also recommended that more workshops must be held to provide the employees an opportunity to revisit their value system in relation to themselves and others in the organization. Priorities in relation to work must also be reassessed or redefined through these workshops.
Emeliza Torrento Estimo,
Geneveve Mandado Aguilar,
Understanding Employees’ Preferences: Their Work Values, Environment, Interaction and Activities, Science Journal of Education.
Vol. 5, No. 6,
2017, pp. 236-243.
Hansman, R. (2010). "Sustainability Learning": An Introduction to the Concept and Its Motivational Aspects (Sep 2010): 2873-2897.
Sherren, K. (2006). International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 7.4: 400-413.
Urde, M. (2003). Core value-based corporate brand building", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Iss: 7/8, pp.1017 – 1040 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm? articleid=853872. Date Retrieved: May 1, 2014.
Cornelissen, J. (2008), Corporate Communication: A Guide to Theory and Practice, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, London.
Franz-Balsen, A., & Heinrichs, H. (2007). Managing sustainability communication on campus: Experiences from lüneburg. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8 (4), 431-445. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14676370710823591.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to Kill Creativity. Harvard Business Review. PMID: 10185433.
Isfahani, S. S., Hosseini, M. A., Khoshknab, M. F., Peyrovi, H., & Khanke, H. R. (2015). What really motivates Iranian nurses to be creative in clinical settings? A qualitative study. Global Journal of Health Science, 7 (5), 132-142. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1667047575?accountid=33508.
Steve, H. (2013). Spiritual Intelligence Improve Creativity Motivation. Project Management Institute. Retrieved from www.pmi.org/.../spiritual-intelligence-impr.
Akinbode, G. A., & Fagbohungbe, B. O. (2011). Gender, tenure and organizational factors as predictors of job involvement among Nigerian workers. Gender & Behaviour, 9 (2), 4005-4038. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/906339826?accountid=33508.
Patel, M. K. (1999). A study of the impact of age on job involvement and organizational commitment of nationalized and cooperative bank employees. sch. sagepub. com/ content/ 34/ 2/ 122.full.pdf.
Vecchio, R. P., & Boatwright, K. J. (2002). Preferences for idealized styles of supervision. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 327–342.
Gambrell, A. D. (2006). An examination of preferred and perceived required work style differences between men and women managers (Order No. 3196721). Available from ABI/INFORM Global. (304908149). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304908149?accountid=33508.
Robbins, S. (2009). Organizational behavior. The International Version, 13/E. Pearson Higher Education.
Glass, G. V. & Hopkins, K. D. (1984). Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology, 2nd Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Goforth, C. (2015). Using and Interpreting Cronbach’s Alpha. University of Virginia Library Research Date Services + Sciences. Date retrieved: October 27, 2017. Retrieved at http://data.library.virginia.edu/using-and-interpreting-cronbachs-alpha/.
George, D., &Mallery, P. (2003). Reliability test, SPSS for windows step by step: A simple Guide and Reference, 4th Edn., Chapter 18. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com.ph?scholar?hl=en&q=George+and+Mallery+%282003%29+reliability&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=.Accessed 8 August 2015.
Happiness research: Benefits to make staff happy. (2007). Employee Benefits, 53. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224702645?accountid=33508.
Gursoy, D., Geng-Qing Chi, C., & Karadag, E. (2013). Generational differences in work values and attitudes among frontline and service contact employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32, 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.002.
Dockins, J. F. (2004). Person-environment congruence, job stability, and job satisfaction: An examination of Holland's theory of vocational personalities and work environments in the nursing profession (Order No. 3127324). Available from ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source. (305039820). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305039820?accountid=33508.
Yousef, D. A. (1998). Satisfaction with job security as a predictor of organizational commitment and job performance in a multicultural environment. International Journal of Manpower, 19 (3), 184-194. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/231902524?accountid=33508.