Home / Knowledge Management

The Impact of Qttt on Employee Performance

employees and research on the impact of employee satisfaction on their job performance.

Figure 1.2 Impact of QTTT on employee performance



Becera et al., (2001) Ong and Lai, (2007) Yu et al., (2007)

Maybe you are interested!

Kulkarni et al., (2007) Thammakoranonta et al., (2011) Nguyen Kieu Ngan, (2012).

Hartline and Ferrell (1996) Yoon et al. (2001) Deery (2008)

The Impact of Qttt on Employee Performance

Ashill et al. (2008) Mulki et al., (2009) Lim and Teo (2010) Aboelmaged et al. (2012) Tseng et al., (2012) Kaparete et al., (2010) Gibbs et al. (2013)

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

JOB SATISFACTION

RESULTS OF EMPLOYEE WORK COMPLETION.


1.6.2 The impact of ethical environment on employee performance.

In summary, the author has not found any studies that hypothesize and test the direct impact of ethical environment on employee performance. However, many studies show that ethical environment affects employee job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Section 1.3.3). In addition, some other studies have found a relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment to employee performance.

Employees who are committed to the organization believe more in the strategy, common goals and work with high effort to bring success to the organization (Hunton and Norman, 2010; Lim and Teo, 2010). Mulki et al. (2008) studied the indirect impact of business ethics climate on the performance of sales staff. A sample of 333 questionnaires was obtained from sales staff in multinational pharmaceutical companies headquartered in North America. The results showed that business ethics climate affects employee satisfaction. On the one hand, employee satisfaction directly affects their performance, on the other hand, it indirectly affects through effort.


44

Similarly, in an organization with a positive ethical climate, employees are less stressed, have fewer conflicts, and gain more good experiences in dealing with customers. Employees, in this case, are more satisfied with their jobs, so their work performance is higher (Mulki et al., 2007).

In the banking service sector , employee satisfaction has a strong and positive impact on the performance of retail bank employees in Russia (Gibbs et al., 2013). However, Gibbs et al. was surprised by the results of their study when they analyzed the data and found that organizational commitment had no impact on the performance of bank employees. Gibbs et al. (2013) explained the possible reasons for the unexpected impact. In Russia, salaries and bonuses are important factors in motivating employees (Khlopova and Ozernicova, 2004; Gibbs et al., 2013). Meanwhile, the reward system in Russia is holistically oriented, meaning that employees are paid more not because of their own better performance but because of the company's higher business results. In other words, only when the organization's business results are higher, the performance of each employee is considered better (Khlopova and Ozernicova, 2004; cited by Gibbs et al., 2013). This has made organizational commitment no longer a good motivator to influence the performance of each employee.

The impact of organizational commitment on employee performance depends on the culture and ethical orientation of the organization. For organizations with a family business culture orientation - close to the caring ethical environment - organizational commitment has a higher impact on employee performance than organizations where employees must work according to regulations to achieve goals (Costigan et al., 2006; Jaramillo et al., 2005).

Thus, the impact of organizational commitment on employee performance is different depending on the culture, ethical environment; policies to encourage motivation to complete work of the organization; and ways to evaluate performance. However, the studies summarized above all show that organizational commitment has an impact.

positive on the work performance of bank employees .

Similarly, the study by Karatepe et al., (2010) also showed that the more satisfied bank employees are with the working environment with organizational support, exemplary leadership and good training orientation, the higher their work performance .

Figure 1.3 summarizes studies on the impact of ethical climate on organizational satisfaction and commitment as well as the impact of these two factors on employee performance.

Hartline and Ferrell (1996) Yoon et al. (2001) Deery (2008)

Ashill et al. (2008) Mulki et al., (2009) Lim and Teo (2010) Aboelmaged & Subbaugh (2012)

Kaparete et al., (2010) Gibbs et al. (2013)

The direct impact of ethical climate on bank employees' job performance has not been found in the author's theoretical review . However, the indirect impact through satisfaction and organizational commitment has been confirmed by many studies (Figure 1.3).


Elci and Alpkan (2006) Ambrose et al. (2008) Tsai and Huang (2008) Deshpande (2011) Goldman and Tabak (2010)

ETHICAL ENVIRONMENT

BUSINESS

The Harmony

heart in work

RESULT

JOB

Team commitment

function


Cullen and ctg (2003) Ambrose and ctg (2008)

Jaramillo et al. (2005) Costigan et al. (2006) Deery (2008)

Carver and Candela, (2008) Meer and Ringdal, (2009) Lim and Teo (2010) Hunton and Norman (2010) Subbaugh M. (2012)

Figure 1.3 Impact of MTĐĐKD on employee performance

1.6.3 Correlation between ethical environment, knowledge management and employee performance.

Knowledge is often considered a personal asset. Employees fear losing the value of their intellectual property and the advantage of owning knowledge in the organization if they share their knowledge with others (Aedichvili et al., 2003; Detert et al., 2007). Therefore, there may be a conflict, an irreconcilability between personal knowledge and knowledge acquired in an organization. With three common types of ethical climate in an organization: self-interest, caring and regulatory, Tseng et al.'s (2012) study shows that, except for the self-interest ethical climate, the remaining ethical climates all support the hypothesis that the ethical climate affects information sharing and application. The self-interest ethical climate exists in the organization but has no significant impact on their personal evaluation and behavior towards knowledge management (Tseng et al., 2012).

Organizational members will not limit the benefits of information sharing if they do not want to further strengthen their personal interests and core values ​​(Leana et al., 1999; Janz et al., 2003). In other words, individuals limit knowledge sharing because they want to further strengthen their personal interests and core values ​​for the organization, especially in a self-interested ethical environment.

In contrast to the findings of Janz et al. (2003), two studies by Wasko et al. (2000); Detert et al. (2007) suggest that people are more willing to engage in knowledge management out of a sense of personal responsibility than out of personal gain or reward expectations. Compliance with organizational norms implies a consensus among members about what is acceptable in the organization. An organization with a morally caring or normative orientation can be developed to shape a cooperative relationship among members that is consistent with stakeholder expectations regarding what is socially acceptable and in the organization’s best interests (Blau, 1964; Thibaut et al., 1986).

All members of an organization perceive knowledge as a common asset that shapes ethical standards in determining right or wrong behavior, facilitates cooperation among members, and enhances their awareness of attitudes and behaviors toward management.

knowledge value (Haslam, 2000).

Tseng et al. (2012) study identified the presence of ethical climates, which help members define who they are and what they should do. This is considered as the ethical standards of each individual so that they commit to organizational knowledge management activities as a way to demonstrate ethical behavior in their work. Therefore, Tseng et al. (2012) believe that with the right ethical climate, knowledge management that is implemented as an organizational strategy and achieves shareholder values, will not only contribute to increasing the work performance of members but also promote organizational effectiveness.

Unlike the self-interested ethical climate, the caring ethical climate and the normative ethical climate of the organization have a positive impact on knowledge management (Tseng et al., 2012). Explaining this result, Tseng et al. (2012) suggested that the stronger influence of the caring ethical climate and the normative ethical climate, the normative of the organization on knowledge management may lie in the “collectivistic cultural aspect”. In the assessment of the behavioral norms of the two ethical climates with the “collectivistic cultural aspect”, achieving group norms and collective recognition are more important than individual rewards. The collectivistic culture will encourage individuals to be willing to help other members by sharing what they own (Paul et al., 2006). Organizational members can receive support and help from each other when they need advice and solutions to different problems.

With professional standards, group norms and spiritual values ​​become two factors that influence members to share ideas, information and expectations in a way that is more mutually caring than self-interested (Brickson, 2000).

However, the research results of Tseng et al. (2012) show that the stronger the ethical environment of the organization, the higher the support attitude and active participation in knowledge management of the organization's members. The results of employees' work completion increased because they were more satisfied with organizational knowledge management. At the same time, knowledge management was more strongly affected when employees had a more positive perception of the organizational ethical environment. The above results also show that when there is a combination of common knowledge and individual knowledge, the organizational ethical environment does not hinder the collection of benefits.

48

This finding seems to be consistent with the results of Jarvenpaa et al. (2001) which showed that perceptions of personal knowledge ownership and organizational knowledge ownership can coexist and develop positively in an organization.

Figure 1.4 summarizes the results of studies on the impact of ethical environment on knowledge management and employee performance.


Self-interest

3(-)

Environment

morality

Care about

Management

knowledge

treat

1(+)

Result

job

staff

2(+)

4b (+)

4c (+)

Regulations

Satisfaction with

job

4 (+)

Figure 1.4 Impact of business environment on employee performance and job satisfaction.

In which: (+) positive impact; (-) negative impact

(1) and (2): Paul et al. (2006); Tseng et al. (2012) (3): Leana et al. (1999); Janz et al. (2013)

(4): Haslam (2000); Tseng et al. (2012)

(4) (4b) and (4c): Tseng et al. (2012)


1.6.4 The impact of ethical climate and risk tolerance on employee performance.

Research on risk tolerance and ethical issues has been of interest to a number of researchers (Saini et al., 2009). For example, the research of Drennan (2004) or Francis and Armstrong (2003); (Quoted from Saini et al., 2009). Before Saini et al. (2009), no study has conducted a study on the effects of different types of ethical environments on

how directly it affects organizational performance. Saini et al. (2009) conducted a study with two types of ethical climates: self-interest and concern. Saini et al. (2009) hypothesized that self-interest ethical climate has a direct, positive impact while concern ethical climate has a direct, negative impact on risk tolerance. Risk tolerance then directly affects organizational performance. With a sample of 174 collected from senior and middle management departments of manufacturing plants in two industries: commercial goods manufacturing and electronic technology manufacturing in the US, the results were contrary to the hypothesis. The more concern ethical orientation in an organization, the greater the risk tolerance. Conversely, risk tolerance was lower in organizations with a self-interest ethical framework. Saini et al (2009) argued that in a self-interested ethical climate, employee compensation is based on organizational performance. When individual rewards are based on the overall performance of the organization, it will limit and reduce risk-taking even if self-interest is dominant in the organization. In organizations with a caring ethical climate, salaries are usually fixed. People in these organizations are willing to accept risky business decisions if it does not affect or increase the spirit of solidarity, caring for teammates, and good harmony in the organization.

3 (+)

The literature review found that several studies confirm the indirect effect of ethical climate on organizational outcomes through risk tolerance . Figure 1.5 summarizes the results of these studies.


Self-interest

2 (+)

Environment

morality

Care about

4 (+)

Ability

power

5(+)

accept risk

Organization results

function

Regulations

1 (+)

Figure 1.5 Summary of research on the impact of MTĐĐKD and CNRR capability on

organization results

In which: (+) positive impact; (-) negative impact

(1): Browman (1984); (1), (2): Phillip (1991); (3), (4), (5): Saini et al. (2009)

As a result of the theoretical review, the author has not found any studies that have conducted research on the impact of risk tolerance on individual outcomes.

1.6.5 Research on factors affecting work performance of employees in the banking sector

In the banking sector, the hypothesis that Karetepe et al. (2006) proposed about the direct impact of work-family burden and job demotivation on the performance of bank employees was rejected. In other words, there was no statistical evidence of the direct impact of work-family burden and job demotivation on the performance of employees but there was an indirect impact through job satisfaction. Work-family burden and job demotivation affected job satisfaction. Then satisfaction affected the performance of bank employees. The authors argued that work-family burden not only occurs with employees who have young children but also with those who are single or married but have no children. Because according to Karatepe et al. (2006), all employees, in addition to their responsibilities for their work, are also responsible for building and maintaining relationships with friends, relatives, and other team communities outside the organization. In addition to satisfaction, employee internal strength is also determined by Karatepe et al. (2006) to have a direct impact on the work performance of bank employees.

Research by Yavas et al. (2010) confirms that support from supervisors and managers helps employees exert more effort at work while encouraging positive behaviors and ultimately reducing employees' intention to quit (Bell et al., 2004; Ito et al., 2005; Citing Yavas et al., 2010). Professional and soft skills training programs help increase employees' commitment to the organization and reduce their intention to quit (Tsui et al., 1997; Citing Yavas et al., 2010). In addition, both organizational commitment and employee motivation are important factors in determining employee turnover (Tsui et al., 1997; Citing Yavas et al., 2010).

Job satisfaction and job performance have been shown by many previous studies to have an impact.

Comment


Agree Privacy Policy *