Report on Employee Retention. Why do employees stay with a company?

Report on Employee Retention Why do employees stay with a company? Prepared for Professor J. Vogel St. Joseph s College Patchogue, New York Prepared by John F. Rossi

Table of Contents Summary 1 Introduction 3 Methods Used 6 Analysis 8 Limitations of Study 11 Conclusions and Recommendations 14 Appendix A - Employee Retention Survey and Response Percentiles 19 Appendix B - Summary of Collected Data 22 Appendix C - Scoring Profiles 26 Appendix D - Weighted index of scores by all respondents for all statements 32 Appendix E - Top Responses for Each Analysis Group 33 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF THE AUTHOR. NO PORTION OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR CONVEYED IN ANY FORM OR MEDIA TYPE; KNOWN OR UNKNOWN WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF JOHN F. ROSSI. COPYRIGHT 2000 - JOHN F. ROSSI THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS NOT INTENDED FOR GENERAL RELEASE.

John F. Rossi Rossi 1 Professor Vogel Business 471 - Research Seminar in Organizational Management April 1, 2000 Employee Retention: Why do employees stay with a company? Summary During the Spring of 2000, a study was undertaken to determine the reasons why workers desire to remain employed by an organization. Without regard to sex, race, education or economic status, the researcher endeavored to discover those other types of satisfaction that are most often sought by employees. If people seek more than pure economic reward from the working environment, it might then be possible to create a profile that could be used to reduce or eliminate undesired employee turnover. To accomplish this research, a one page survey was distributed to capture the feelings of workers concerning twenty dimensions of their work environment. Some of these dimensions being under the total or partial control of the employee. Still others would find the employee having little or no control. Next, each individual responding to the survey would be asked whether they expected to be employed by their current organization in three years. Finally, each respondent is asked to clarify how long they had already served with the organization, whether it had been profitable in the prior year, how many people are employed by the organization and if they managed or supervised other employees.

Rossi 2 Responses were collected from individuals in various settings. To broaden the scope of responses the researcher developed the survey in both paper and electronic formats. Using traditional collection methods and the Internet, one hundred and fourteen surveys were assembled and analyzed. Indeed the results of this analysis reveal support for the theory of profiling as a method of lowering undesired employee attrition. With continued study, this theory could become a beneficial reality in the workplace.

Rossi 3 Introduction As the Bull Market of the 1990 s continues to rage into the next millennium, employers across the United States are finding it increasingly difficult to attract the qualified employees necessary to occupy the plentiful positions available in their individual corporations. To cope with this shortage, some employers have developed creative employment incentive programs. Others have cultivated labor in new and sometimes foreign markets. Many have resorted to the use of technology as a means of diminishing the severity of the shortage on their individual organization. Perhaps the best method of filling important vacancies is to insure that current qualified employees remain a part of the corporation. After all, current employees are a known factor. They a familiar with the internal workings of the organization. They have been previously trained in the use of the many methods and systems used by the organization and they have established the formal and informal networks that are required to help them remain productive within the context of the organization. Further, there are no recruitment costs associated with retaining a current employee. The research conducted for this report endeavors to discover those personal internal factors that motivate the employee to remain with an organization. A customized survey was created to accomplish this research. Each person taking the survey was asked to rank how true certain statements where in their individual circumstance. The survey then made specific queries concerning the number of employees in the respondents company, the number of years that the respondent

Rossi 4 was employed by the company, the profitability of the company during the previous year and whether the respondent functioned in a managerial or supervisory capacity. The answers provided by the many respondents where then analyzed in an attempt to develop a motivational profile which could be adapted to assist a corporation in determining which employees are at risk for departure within the following three years. There were a total of twenty-one statements listed on the survey. These included seventeen affirmative statements, such as, I work for a great company and There is room to grow. Three non-affirmative statements that are intermingled with the affirmative statements, so as to maintain a more even tone in the total survey. Finally, the respondent must react to the statement, I will be with this company in three years. An analysis of the percentile responses to this survey are presented in Appendix A of this report. The individual completing the survey is at first instructed to consider why they stay with a company. They are then asked to rank each statement on a scale of 1 to 5. Where 1 means that the statement is less true in their case and 5 indicates that the statement is more true. Together the statements listed on the survey are intended to capture the respondents reaction to different dimensions of their individual working environment. These dimensions include items over which the respondent will exercise most, some or little control. A job dimension for which a respondent is likely to have the most control is found in the statement, The commute is easy. In this instance a respondent faced with an undesirable commute can choose to cope with the commute, relocate,

Rossi 5 change the method of commuting or perhaps find a different job closer to home. Consider the statement, My job matches what I do best. Here the company and the respondent must interact to determine how this person can use their natural strengths to be most productive within the current context of the organization. A job dimension over which the majority of respondents will normally have little control is noted in the statement, This company has a clear mission and positive values. The dimensions viewed by the survey touch upon many aspects of the employment environment. When classed together they group into the larger categories of compensation and benefits, interpersonal relationships, personal growth and external factors. While each individual will have a customized mix among the dimensions, individuals having like intentions to stay with or leave the corporation, would be expected to exhibit similar behaviors in their individual responses to the survey. If this is true, an organization would have the ability to positively intervene with those essential employees exhibiting behaviors that tend to indicate that they are contemplating a jobs change. It may also be possible to determine those employees who are too far gone to retain. In these cases, the organization might determine to minimize any negative impact these individuals are having on other employees in the organization.

Rossi 6 Methods Used This study relies entirely on primary data collected in the form of a single page self directed survey distributed using traditional collection methods as well as being collected via the Internet in an electronic format. It is a cross-sectional study, attempting to capture responses from several demographic groups of employed American workers. All survey responses were tabulated and entered separately into spreadsheet and database programs. These entries were cross referenced to capture and eliminate systematic recording errors. After having been cross referenced all entries were then again audited to ensure the accurate recording of the collected data and to eliminate the possibility of analysis errors resulting from this type of system fault. It is important to note that due to time and budget constraints, random sampling techniques could not be utilized. For the same reasons, non-respondents have not been accounted for in this study. The survey itself is designed to be highly structured and self directed. This was considered to be the best method of obtaining and recording the honest perceptions of respondents. Additionally, statements appearing on the survey were designed to take an extreme position to which the respondent would react. The researcher aspired to mitigate the effect of respondents who might otherwise

themselves take the extreme position and skew the scoring of their individual Rossi 7 perceptions relative to one another. All responses were collected with the intention of providing absolute anonymity for the respondents. This was a simple manner when using the paper form of the survey. However, the electronic form of the survey relied on e-mail to deliver responses to the researcher. To maintain the anonymous nature of the study for these individuals, electronic responses were recorded onto paper forms. The transcription of responses was verified for accuracy. The original e-mail was then deleted to protect the privacy of the respondent.

Analysis Rossi 8 In analyzing the results of the survey, the researcher first grouped all surveys based on how each respondent reacted to the statement, I will be with this company in three years. Respondents scoring either 4 or 5, More True, became one group (4/5 Group). Those scoring 1 or 2, Less True, became a second (1/2 Group). Finally surveys scoring 3 were assembled into a third analysis group (3 Group). A summary of the collected data for the three analysis groups appears in Appendix B. Each survey statement was analyzed and response percentiles were calculated for each analysis group. The five statements answered most often as being either more true or less true in each group were separated from the total responses. These statements are listed for each group in Tables 1 through 6 of Appendix E. Surprisingly three statements consistently appear among the top five, More True, responses for all three groups. These statements are: (S4) I need the benefits (S6) I control how my work is accomplished, and, (S14) What I do is important to the company. Of the 54 respondents in the 4/5 group, 49 (90%) also scored at least two of these three statements as a 4 or 5. In the 3 group 19 of the 23 (82.6%) scored in this manner. Among the 1/2 group only 40% of the 37 respondents scored at least two of these three statements at the 4 or 5 level. Among all three groups two statements appear consistently in the top five responses for statements ranked as, Less True, by respondents. These include: (S18) I cannot earn this much elsewhere, and,

(S20) The atmosphere is relaxed. Rossi 9 As there seemed to be minimal like patterning among all response scoring in each analysis group, it was decided to analyze the number of times that each respondent scored 1,2,3,4 or 5 for each statement on the survey form. When the survey responses are analyzed in this manner, it is discovered that individual respondents in each group tended to have similar response patterns. Individuals in the 4/5 Group tended to respond to more statements with a 4 or 5 and less with a 1,2 or 3. Among the 3 Group, these individuals tended to have a relatively equal number of statements scored as 3,4 or 5 and fewer scored 1 or 2. Within the 1/2 group, more statements were scored as 1 or 2 and less were scored as 3, 4 or 5. Scoring Profiles based on the respondents scoring of statement 21, have been graphed and appear in Appendix C. A combined weighted analysis of scoring for all survey statements appears in Appendix D. Weighting of responses was desired to ascertain the relative importance of each statement across all responses. Having completed the rudimentary analysis of the survey statements, attention was next given to the questions appearing on the survey. The questions, Approximately how many people work for this company? and Was the company profitable last year?, did not appear to affect how the respondent reacted to the statement, I will be with this company in three years. In the case of the question, How many years have you worked for this company?, there appears a correlation between time with a company and appearance in any of the three analysis groups. The greater the number of years with a company, the more likely that a respondent

would be in the 4/5 group. Indeed respondents in the 1/2 group tended to have Rossi 10 the least time with the organization. The population in the 4/5 and 3 analysis groups tended to be evenly split on the question, Do you manage or supervise others? However in the 1/2 group, 70.3% of the respondents answered Yes. Analysis Group Approximate # of employees # of years with this company Profitable last year Manage or Supervise others 4/5 10659 (Average) 300 (Mode) 400 (Median) 8.7 (Average) 5.0 (Mode) 8.0 (Median) 68.5% (Yes) 13.0% (No) 18.5% (N/A) 53.7% (Yes) 46.3% (No) 3 8519 (Average) 3000 (Mode) 500 (Median) 7.8 (Average) 3.0 (Mode) 4.0 (Median) 78.3% (Yes) 13.0% (No) 8.7% (N/A) 52.2% (Yes) 47.8% (No) ½ 11428 (Average) 300 (Mode) 350 (Median) 5.7 (Average) 1.0 (Mode) 3.0 (Median) 83.8% (Yes) 16.2% (No) 0.0% (N/A) 70.3% (Yes) 29.7% (No) Table 1 - Question responses for each analysis group

Limitations of Study Rossi 11 While every attempt has been made to compile and validate the collected data, certain limitations exist which must now be examined. The single greatest limitation placed on this project has been the restricted period available for data collection and continued study. For this reason only 114 completed surveys have been collected for this project. This constitutes a limited sample size from which to perform analysis. The surveys themselves were collected from three sources. These include: Students of the St. Joseph's College New York Accelerated Weekend Bachelors of Organizational Management program. These students tend to be more career oriented and are likely more motivated than would be members of the general population. A large percentage of individuals in this group manage or supervise others. This group accounts for 60 of the 114 (~55.26%) responses collected. Internet based employment bulletin boards and randomly selected e-mail addresses. Typical internet users tend to be from middle & upper economic groups. They are also more often from White(non-Hispanic) segments of the general population. The bulletin boards available on the internet site, www.ivillage.com were used to solicit responses for this project. This site is designed to attract mostly women. Also, one of the bulletin board forums on this site was selected precisely because it catered to Black Females. 33 (~28.94%) responses where generated by individuals in these groups. The

Rossi 12 geographic region of the these respondents is unknown. It is taken for granted that at least some of these responses arrived from geographic areas other than New York and the Northeast U.S. but this cannot be verified. A sampling of residents of the town of Central Islip, New York. This town has a population that is predominantly upper lower and lower middle economic blue and white collar workers. However only 18 (~15.78%) responses were received from this group. A minimum of 78 (68.42%) of the 114 responses were generated in the Long Island, New York area. Long Island is a generally affluent suburb of New York City in the Northeast of the United States. There is a high probability that the majority of responses are from individuals having a middle class and white collar status. The survey used for this project made no attempt to distinguish the age, sex, education, location, or economic status of any of the respondents. It is possible that the sample may not be reflective of the demographics of the general U.S. population. Due to the limited time, scope and budget of this research effort, it will not be possible to track respondents over the next several years. As this is the case, the researcher will have no opportunity to determine whether respondents have remained with or departed from their current company during the next three years. Finally, the unusual state of the U.S. economy may have a euphoric effect on answers provided by respondents. As the unemployment rate in the United States is

Rossi 13 at historic lows, many people may for the first time have the opportunity to be less concerned with the pure economics of working. Therefore, their responses might be atypical during less advantaged economic periods. Without the ability to survey similar groups during other economic cycles, it will not be possible to determine if the current conditions are stimulating respondents higher order needs and desires.

Conclusions and Recommendations Rossi 14 The research performed for this report indicates that factors beyond mere economic reward, do indeed influence the decision of an employee to remain with an organization. There is also evidence to support the theory of profiling as a practical device in determining which employees are at risk for departure from the organization. In reviewing the responses of those who participated in the survey, several themes were consistent among the various analysis groups. Many respondents believed that they could earn more by joining other organizations. Despite this, they still responded favorably to the notion that they would remain with their current employer. There seemed a strong need in all analysis groups to feel that what they did at work was important to the organization. Also, personal autonomy in accomplishing tasks was very significant. In a practical sense, properly training managers to promote these beliefs, should have a significant impact on the psyche of every employee. A considerable number of respondents felt that the workplace was not relaxed. Maybe this meant that the pace was too furious, or that the work space was somehow lacking. Perhaps they had an overbearing co-worker or supervisor. Considering the number of hours most people spend in the workplace, it seems obvious that this would be an important dimension for many, if not, most people. From a practical standpoint, every company can take simple steps to create an environment that is more favorable to the employees ability to perform well.

Rossi 15 Most surprising in this study, was the fact that the majority of those indicating the strongest desire to leave the organization were individuals who manage or supervise others? Respondents in this group were least likely to think that they work for a great company. Many indicated that their company was less likely to have a clear mission and positive values. These are factors over which the organization exercises significant control. Most respondents in this group felt they could earn more elsewhere. They also felt it less true that there was room for them to grow in the organization. A person in this group was the least likely to feel that their work matched their best abilities. In viewing these responses, it seems more obvious why people fall into this analysis group. Most of those in this group seem fixated on fulfilling their personal higher order needs. This group clearly had the most muted unenthusiastic responses. This study confirms that the longer a person is with an organization, the more likely they are to want to stay with that organization. The number of years with the company dropped in order from the highest scoring analysis group to the lowest. This characteristic of each group may explain why respondents desire to remain with an organization over the long term. It stands to reason that the longer someone is with a company the more competent they are likely to be in their position. This alone could permit individuals to focus on more personal than economic needs. Driving down the time required for an individual to feel most competent in their job would seem to be in the best interests of both employee and employer. The researcher found it most alarming that nearly 3/4 of respondents felt that they needed the benefits supplied to them by their organization. There was an

Rossi 16 almost manic reaction by respondents to this statement. Only about twenty percent of the individuals indicated that this was less true for them. Why this particular perception exists, should be thoroughly studied. This is particularly the case in the small business setting where an organization may not have the resources required to present a robust benefit package to current or prospective employee. This is also very troubling as it speaks to the dependence individuals feel with regard to benefits. It would seem from these responses that benefits such as medical insurance, are well beyond the reach of most workers. This has great potential to harm employers, because the group scoring highest on the statement "I need the benefits" was also the group most likely to indicate a desire to stay with the organization. It is possible that a change or reduction in benefits could have a tremendous effect on the perceptions of these employees. The cost implications of this are disturbing. When considering the twenty dimensions of the workplace examined in this research study, it is safe to conclude that altering even a few of an employees perceptions can help increase the desire to stay with the organization. The proper training of managers and supervisors to recognize the profile of each individual, coupled with training in how to turn around perceptions that the organization controls can considerably improve retention efforts. It is very unlikely that a current employee would honestly complete the survey used for this report for their current employer. However, understanding the dimensions which motivate retention, it is possible for an organization to create mechanisms to help each manager capture this important information while there is still time to positively intervene.

Rossi 17

Appendixes Rossi 18

Rossi 19 Appendix A - Employee Retention Survey and Response Percentiles Please take a moment to consider why you stay with a company. Next, read each statement and indicate how true the statement is in your case. Place an X in the box to the right of the statement which best describes how the statement applies to you. All survey responses will be kept in the strictest confidence. Statement Less True <<< More True >>> (S1) I work for a great company. 6.1% 14.9% 32.5% 30.7% 15.8% (S2) This company has a clear mission and positive values. 7.0% 14.0% 25.4% 32.5% 21.1% (S3) My job is exciting. 10.5% 14.9% 32.5% 27.2% 14.9% (S4) I need the benefits. 13.3% 8.0% 13.3% 22.1% 43.4% (S5) My effort is appreciated. 11.4% 8.8% 27.2% 30.7% 21.9% (S6) I control how my work is accomplished. 4.4% 7.0% 18.4% 36.0% 34.2% (S7) Work life and home life are easily balanced. 11.4% 15.8% 34.2% 23.7% 14.9% (S8) My job matches what I do best. 11.4% 19.3% 21.1% 25.4% 22.8% (S9) The people I work with are very professional. 8.8% 23.0% 29.2% 24.8% 14.2% (S10) My coworkers are wonderful. 4.4% 13.2% 34.2% 31.6% 16.7% (S11) I really like my boss. 14.9% 12.3% 25.4% 36.0% 11.4% (S12) I live paycheck to paycheck. 17.5% 24.6% 20.2% 14.9% 22.8% (S13) There is room to grow. 19.3% 21.1% 12.3% 28.1% 19.3% (S14) What I do is important to the company. 3.5% 5.3% 19.3% 38.6% 33.3% (S15) The commute is easy. 13.2% 8.8% 17.5% 22.8% 37.7% (S16) My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 16.7% 15.8% 27.2% 28.9% 11.4% (S17) The fringe benefits are more than adequate. 11.5% 18.6% 31.9% 21.2% 16.8% (S18) I can not earn this much elsewhere. 27.2% 23.7% 22.8% 16.7% 9.6% (S19) My job is secure. 7.9% 14.0% 27.2% 31.6% 19.3% (S20) The atmosphere is relaxed. 15.8% 22.8% 26.3% 20.2% 14.9% (S21) I will be with this company in three years. 21.1% 12.3% 19.3% 23.7% 23.7% Approximately how many people work for this company? Average=10641 Median=400 Mode=300 How many years have you worked for this company? Average=8.36 Median=5 Mode=1 Was this company profitable last year? (Y or N) Yes=75.44% No=13.16% N/A=11.4% Do you manage or supervise others? (Y or N) Yes=58.77% No=39.47% N/A=1.75%

Rossi 20 Percentage responses to each statement based on the score provided 100% 90% 80% Percentage this response 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Statement 5's 4's 3's 2's 1's

Rossi 21 Average, Standard Deviation, Median and Mode for Statements 1 to 21 6.00 5.00 4.00 Value 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Statement Average Standard Deviation Median Mode

Appendix B - Summary of Collected Data Rossi 22 Table 1: Indicated below are the percentage of responses for each statement when the respondent answered either 4 or 5 to the statement I will be with this company in three years. Less True (1 or 2) S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Size Years Profit Mgmt 5.6 9.3 16.7 16.7 9.3 3.7 18.5 22.2 22.2 14.8 14.8 44.4 29.6 5.6 18.5 20.4 20.4 37.0 5.6 25.9 0 10659 8.7 68.5 53.7 % Yes or AVG 3 22.2 27.8 20.4 5.6 24.1 9.3 35.2 16.7 27.8 33.3 22.2 20.4 5.6 13.0 11.1 24.1 29.6 33.3 27.8 25.9 0 300 5.0 13.0 46.3 % No or MODE More True (4 or 5) 72.2 63.0 63.0 77.8 66.7 87.0 46.3 61.1 50.0 51.9 63.0 35.2 64.8 81.5 70.4 55.6 50.0 29.6 66.7 48.1 100 400 8.0 18.5 0.0 % N/A or Table 1 Table 2: Indicated below are the percentage of responses for each statement when the respondent answered 3 to the statement I will be with this company in three years. Less True (1 or 2) S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Size Years Profit Mgmt MEDIAN 21.7 13.0 26.1 30.4 26.1 8.7 21.7 26.1 34.8 17.4 30.4 39.1 30.4 4.3 13.0 34.8 21.7 56.5 21.7 47.8 0 8519 7.8 78.3 52.2 % Yes or AVG 3 43.5 21.7 39.1 13.0 30.4 21.7 26.1 17.4 21.7 34.8 26.1 13.0 17.4 17.4 34.8 30.4 39.1 13.0 26.1 26.1 100 3000 3 13.0 47.8 % No or MODE More True (4 or 5) 34.8 65.2 34.8 56.5 43.5 69.6 52.2 56.5 43.5 47.8 43.5 47.8 52.2 78.3 52.2 34.8 39.1 30.4 52.2 26.1 0 500 4 8.7 0.0 % N/A or Table 2 Table 3: Indicated below are the percentage of responses for each statement when the respondent answered 1 or 2 to the statement I will be with this company in three years. Less True (1 or 2) S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Size Years Profit Mgmt MEDIAN 43.2 43.2 35.1 24.3 32.4 24.3 43.2 45.9 45.9 21.6 40.5 40.5 62.2 16.2 32.4 48.6 48.6 64.9 43.2 51.4 100 11428 5.7 83.8 70.3 % Yes or 3 40.5 24.3 48.6 24.3 29.7 29.7 37.8 29.7 35.1 35.1 32.4 24.3 18.9 29.7 18.9 32.4 32.4 16.2 29.7 27.0 0 300 1 16.2 29.7 % No or MODE More True (4 or 5) 16.2 32.4 16.2 51.4 37.8 45.9 18.9 24.3 18.9 43.2 27.0 35.1 18.9 54.1 48.6 18.9 18.9 18.9 27.0 21.6 0 350 3 0.0 0.0 % N/A or Table 3 AVG MEDIAN

Rossi 23 Percentage responses for all statements when the respondent scored either 1 or 2 to statement 21 100% 90% 80% 70% percentage 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Statement Less True (1 or 2) 3 More True (4 or 5)

Rossi 24 Percentage responses for all statements when the respondent scored 3 to statement 21 100% 90% 80% 70% Percentage 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Statement Less True (1 or 2) 3 More True (4 or 5)

Rossi 25 Percentage responses for all statements when the respondent scored either 4 or 5 for statement 21 100% 90% 80% 70% Percentage 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 Statement Less True (1 or 2) 3 More True (4 or 5)

Appendix C -Scoring Profiles Rossi 26 Average number of responses at each scoring level by score for the statement, "I will be with this company in three years 8.00 7.00 Number of statement response 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 # of 5's # of 4's # of 3's # of 2's # of 1's Level of statement responses S21=5 S21=4 S21=3 S21=2 S21=1

Rossi 27 Scoring profile when the respondent scored 5 to the statement, 'I will be with this company in three years". 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 # of 5 responses # of 4 responses # of 3 responses # of 2 responses # of 1 responses

Rossi 29 Scoring profile when the respondent scored 3 to the statement, 'I will be with this company in three years". 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 # of 5 responses # of 4 responses # of 3 responses # of 2 responses # of 1 responses

Rossi 31 Scoring profile when the respondent scored 1 to the statement, 'I will be with this company in three years". 25 20 15 10 5 0 # of 5 responses # of 4 responses # of 3 responses # of 2 responses # of 1 responses

Appendix D Rossi 32 Weighted index of scores by all respondents for all statements (S20) The atmosphere is relaxed. 4.3 (S19) My job is secure. 4.9 (S18) I can not earn this much elsewhere. 3.7 (S17) The fringe benefits are more than adequate. (S16) My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 4.4 4.5 (S15) The commute is easy. 5.3 (S14) What I do is important to the company. 5.7 (S13) There is room to grow. 4.4 (S12) I live paycheck to paycheck. 4.4 Question (S11) I really like my boss. (S10) My coworkers are wonderful. 4.6 5.0 (S9) The people I work with are very professional. 4.5 (S8) My job matches what I do best. 4.8 (S7) Work life and home life are easily balanced. 4.6 (S6) I control how my work is accomplished. 5.6 (S5) My effort is appreciated. 5.0 (S4) I need the benefits. 5.4 (S3) My job is exciting. 4.6 (S2) This company has a clear mission and positive values. (S1) I work for a great company. 4.9 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Score

Appendix E - Top responses for each analysis group Rossi 33 S6 I Control how my work is accomplished. 87.0% S14 What I do is important to the company. 81.5% S4 I need the benefits. 77.8% S1 I work for a great company. 72.2% S15 The commute is easy. 70.4% Table 1 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 4 or 5 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years. S12 I live paycheck to paycheck. 44.4% S18 I cannot earn this much elsewhere. 37.0% S13 There is room to grow. 29.6% S20 The atmosphere is relaxed. 25.9% S8/ S9 My job matches what I do best. The people I work with are very professional. 22.2% Table 2 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 4 or 5 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years. S14 What I do is important to the company. 78.3% S6 I Control how my work is accomplished. 69.6% S2 The company has a clear mission and positive values. 65.2% S8 My job matches what I do best. 56.5% S4 I need the benefits. 56.5% Table 3 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 3 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years.

Rossi 34 S18 I cannot earn this much elsewhere. 56.5% S20 The atmosphere is relaxed. 47.8% S12 I live paycheck to paycheck. 39.1% S16 My compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 34.8% S9 The people I work with are very professional. 34.8% Table 4 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 3 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years. S4 I need the benefits. 51.4% S14 What I do is important to the company. 54.1% S6 I Control how my work is accomplished. 45.9% S10 My coworkers are wonderful. 43.2% S5 My effort is appreciated. 37.8% Table 5 - Statements answered most often as Most True among those scoring 1 or 2 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years. S18 I cannot earn this much elsewhere. 64.9% S13 There is room to grow. 62.2% S20 The atmosphere is relaxed. 51.4% S17 The fringe benefits are more than adequate. 48.6% S16 My Compensation is fair and reflects my efforts. 48.6% Table 6 - Statements answered most often as Less True among those scoring 1 or 2 to statement 21, "I will be with this company in three years.