CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Commercial Banks offers the same types of products and services. It raises funds by collecting deposits from businesses and consumers via checkable deposits, savings deposits, and time (or term) deposits. It makes loans to businesses and consumers. It also buys corporate bonds and government bonds. Its primary liabilities are deposits and primary assets are loans and bonds.
They should have a competitive advantage and be distinguish to one bank from another. That is through their employee. The employee makes company grow. “In a global marketplace driven by ideas where information freely flows, brainpower remains the source of competitive advantage” (Kaye, Jordan-Evans & Career Systems International, 2002, p. 4).  Pfeffer (1998) says, Success comes from successfully implementing strategy, not just from having one.
This implementation capability derives, in large measure, from the organization’s people, how they are treated, their skills and competencies, and their efforts on behalf of the organization. A people-centered strategy facilitates higher levels of customer service and enables firms to compete on the basis of knowledge, relationships, and service, not just price. (p. 17).  Smart (1999) says, Proactively seeking out and employing the most talented people can have a multiplier effect on the creation of the competitive advantages.
High performers, the A players, contribute more, innovate more, work smarter, earn more trust, display more resourcefulness, take more initiative, develop better business strategies, articulate their vision more passionately, implement change more effectively, deliver higher quality work, demonstrate greater teamwork, and find ways to get the job done in less time with less cost. (p. 12).  Employees need great attention from the management. To discover how long an employee stays with in the bank determined by his or her relationship with his or her immediate supervisor.
This research provides commercial banks with the reason why employees leave the company, and the remedy being to ensure that the management provide supports to there employees. A high turnover affects commercial banks in several ways, not only banks, but also other companies. When long-time employees leave, they often take valuable institutional knowledge or intellectual assets with them. Seasoned staff members serve as morale boosters for work teams and help new employees progress more quickly. Having to replace these assets costs employers a lot in both time and money.
High employee turnover often forces commercial banks to focus their own efforts on staffing. Whether the employees being replaced are rank-and-file employees like teller, new account clerk, accounting staff bank owners often bear the responsibility of recruiting, interviewing and training new hires. And this is at a great cost. Companies’ costs of losing employees are expensive, but the costs can be even higher if the employee is a talented contributor in the company. Some of the cost factors are obvious, such as productivity loss due to a vacant position.
However, there are often unseen costs, like the reduced productivity from the departing employee who is inevitably distracted during his or her job search and therefore contributes less during this time period. There is no one simple solution to avoid high turn-over. There are many factors that affect an employee’s reasons for staying with in the company. Some prefer an employment relationship that allows them to try a number of different jobs as a way to gain experience and develop a broad skill set. Others want balance between work and commitments beyond work.
Still others are looking for a fast track that offers challenging work, quick advancement and high rewards. Attitudes and expectations such as these determine, in turn, which factors attract, retain and engage employees, adding a new spectrum of issues to the talent management challenge. (Towers Perrin, 2001, p. 3).  Because of this, company cannot expect one solution or program to avoid high turn-over of employees. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM It is essential for a commercial bank to understand how to retain employees and avoid high turn-over.
By identifying the reason why employees resign to their job, the bank has much greater chance of retaining their employees and future leaders. The following research questions served to guide the direction of the present study: 1. What are the average days for turnover of the outgoing employees? 2. Does the company have reserve applicant to the outgoing employees? 3. Why do employees resign? 4. How long did resigned employees stayed in the company? 5. Who are those employees, usually resigned? (varies to their age) 6. Why employees stayed in the company? How long there stay? 7.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of high turnover of employee in the bank? 8. What are the advantages and disadvantages of staying of employees in the company? 9. What will be the action should be taken by the company to prevent high turnover of employees? HYPHOTHESIS There is no high turn over ratio of rank-and-file employees in commercial banks, located in Metro Manila. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY Because employees are the future leaders of the company, it is essential for the banks to understand how to retain individuals after investing large amounts of time, money, and resources into their training and development.
By identifying, the reasons that influence employee’s decision to stay in the bank. The bank has a much greater chance of retaining their employees and be the future leaders. Using these research findings, once bank identifies the factors of resigning employees, the bank can develop new management and human resources policies, and utilize a more participative decision-making style to increase the probability of retaining employees and avoiding high turnover. SCOPE AND LIMITATION There are many factors that affect the high turnover ratio of rank-and-file employees in commercial banks.
This study only addressed the factors pertaining resignation of rank-and-file employees. There are many other factors that effect resignation. This study did not include any factors that attract employees in the bank, only factors that lead them to resign. Those employees who are in the rank-and-file position in the bank include tellers, new accounts clerk and accounting staff. This study will be conducted in metro manila, wherein there are a large numbers of banks that operates. Three banks were included in this research, Metrobank, Bank of the Philippine Island (BPI) and Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC).
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE The purpose of this review of the literature is to present an overview of the relevant information on high turnover, retention, and the effects of the changing workplace on retention. High Turnover of Employees Employee turnover occurs when employees voluntarily leave their jobs and must be replaced. It is different from layoffs, which involve the termination of employees with the discretion of the employer. Compensation is one of the obvious contributors to turnover. This can be observed regularly at all levels.
However, money is not often the root cause of turnover, even when it is a factor in an employee’s decision to quit. “Some experts believe that high turnover persists in certain jobs and companies because they have an atmosphere in which employees look for reasons to leave, and money is a convenient and sometimes compelling justification. In one survey, for example, more than half of the respondents didn’t even list pay in the top three reasons they believed people quit their jobs. Indeed, there is a whole school of thought that claims pay is not a direct determinant of job satisfaction.  Environmental aspect is also one of the contributors to turnover, in terms of management practices. When employees feel they are taken advantage of, where they feel undervalued or ignored, and where they feel helpless or unimportant. “If managers are impersonal, arbitrary, and demanding, there is greater risk of alienation and turnover. Management policies can also affect the environment in basic ways such as whether employee benefits and incentives appear generous or stingy, or whether the company is responsive to employees’ needs and wants.
Management’s handling of major corporate events such as mergers or layoffs is also an important influence on the work environment afterwards. ” “Some turnover is demographically specific, particularly for women who are balancing significant work and family duties at the same time. Such women (or men) may choose to leave a company instead of sacrificing their other interests and responsibilities in order to make the job work out. Some women elect to quit their jobs at childbirth, rather than simply taking a maternity leave.
Women’s perceptions of their career paths might also be tinted by their awareness of the glass ceiling, which may lower their level of commitment to any particular firm, since they believe they’re not in contention for top-level jobs. These factors translate into higher turnover rates for women in many companies. ” “Retirement of experienced employees can cause high rates of turnover and extreme loss in productivity, particularly in industries where there is little competition. Work stress experienced at particular types of jobs can also create turnover. ”
High turnover is a serious obstacle at firms of all sizes. “For the smallest of companies, a high turnover rate can mean that simply having enough staff to fulfil daily functions is a challenge, even beyond the issue of how well the work is done when staff is available. Turnover is no less a problem for major companies, which often spend millions of dollars a year on turnover-related costs. For service-oriented professions, such as management consulting or account management, high employee turnover can also lead to customer dissatisfaction and turnover, as clients feel little attachment to a revolving contact.  “Some research studies have found that turnover from transient workers has lasting effects on loyal employees who stay with a company. One study tested productivity among workers who were exposed to a management-planted person who quit in the middle of a task, citing dissatisfaction with the job and the company. A second group of employees worked with another planted person who had to leave the task because of illness. The group exposed to the employee who quit had lower productivity levels than the group exposed to the ill employee.
The employees apparently took the complainer’s statements to heart while the ill employee had nothing bad to say about the company. ” According to the survey, conducted by the Business Environment, last September 12 to September 25, 2007. “Turnover appears, as in the June 2006 survey, to be lower than popular myth suggests as well. Two-thirds of the companies indicated a rate below 20% and 30% indicated a turnover rate of 5-10% compared with 38% in the previous survey. However, turnover rates were incremental higher in the current survey.
BPA/P introduced this line of inquiry for the current survey. Most employees leave their companies due to higher wages and benefits offered by other companies in the industry (67%) and because they are offered jobs abroad (47%)” Employee Retention Employee retention gives different meaning based on who you ask. For some it can mean retaining the most talented employees, or preventing people from leaving the organization, or the way employees are compensated, or the extra benefits that employees are given such as stock options, day care, and lexible work hours. Employee retention is something that is specific to each individual organization. “The term employee retention began to be used in the business environment in the 1970s and early ‘80s. Prior to that, the majority of employees worked for the same organization for the length of their career” (McKeown, 2002, p. 4).  In the 1970s there was a substantial increase in job mobility because of the availability of jobs in various parts of the United States.
With this, the notion of working for just one organization began to deteriorate and employees began to make voluntary job changes. Employers found themselves dealing with a new issue – retention of employees. According to Stuckberry (n. d. ) of Ernst and Young, “Retention is about developing strategies that reduce the number of people who leave the organization for avoidable reasons. Organizations need to retain employees with the required balance of skills and experience to ensure that the business can be maintained” (p. 3). 13] “Today’s businesses are more dependent than ever before on their top performers to innovate and provide services that differentiate a company from its fierce competitors. In other words, corporations are reliant upon their human assets to survive and thrive” (Ware & Fern, 1997, p. 1).  Michaels, Handfield-Jones, & Axelrod (2001) explain, In 1997, we at McKinsey & Company coined the term the war for talent and soon realized we had named a phenomenon that many people had been experiencing but had not fully articulated. The war for talent began in the late 1980’s with the birth of the Information Age.
With it, the importance of hard assets-machines, factories, and capital-declined relative to the importance of intangible assets such as proprietary networks, brands, intellectual capital, and talent. Companies’ reliance on talent increased dramatically over the last century. (p. 1).  Tulgan (2001) adds, The talent wars are growing out of a fundamental paradigm shift in the employer-employee relationship: from the old slow-moving rigid, pay-your-dues-and-climb-the-ladder model, to the new fast-moving increasingly efficient free market for talent.
This is the essence of the talent wars. In the new economy, every term of the employment – schedules, location, assignments, co-workers, pay, and more – will be open to negotiations, whether [organizations] like it or not. The most valuable talent will have the most negotiating power. In the new economy, the best people are the most likely to leave. If an employer has any hope of retaining the best people for the long term in the new economy, this retention will have to happen one person at a time, one day at a time, on the basis of an ongoing negotiation. p. 10).  Kaye & Jordan-Evans, (2000) found that, “Retaining key employees is corporate America’s number one problem. A solution means more profitable companies, happier, more productive employees, and more satisfied customers. Once a company has captured talented people, the return-on-investment requires closing the back door to prevent them from walking out” (p. 1).  Understanding employee retention the organizations will ultimately have a competitive advantage. History of Retention “Today’s workplace is not the workplace of a generation ago.
Fifty years ago, most workers fit into a similar mold: male, full-time, eight to five, blue collar, hourly wage workers who had learned most of the skills on the job. Then, for those lucky enough to find a niche in a large company, the expectation of continued employment and steady advancement made a homogeneous pattern of work an ideal arrangement” (American Workplace Report 2001, p. 34).  Drucker (1992) says, “All organizations now say routinely, ‘People are our greatest asset. ’ Yet few practice what they preach, let alone truly believe it.
Most still believe, though perhaps not consciously, what nineteenth-century employers believed: people need us more than we need them” (p. 100).  Landry (n. d. , p. 46) said, During the past half-century, businesses have had to adopt the new realities of the Information Age-while being expected to follow old ‘rules of the business game’ set in the long-gone Industrial Age. The Industrial Age valued people as physical assets – bought and sold as extensions of machines. Only organizations that transcend that approach have become leaders in the Information Age.
Organizations ill-equipped to manage change have had a tumultuous time in transitioning from one age to the next. Hallmarks of the change abound: (1) Two-thirds of the Fortune 500 companies that existed in the early 1950s are no longer on the list today, (2) During the past 20 years, the number of people employed by America’s largest firms has dropped by one-third, (3) In the early 1950s, manufacturing in the US accounted for 34% of the gross national product (GNP) compared to 16% today, and (4) Over the last hundred years, farming has gone from 40% of the GNP to 1. % today.  Booz-Allen & Hamilton (2001) state, In the 1970s and early 1980s, people still talked about ‘lifetime employment’ and a career within a company. Starting in the late 80s, however, the pendulum started swinging. The unspoken employer/employee contract was broken, as companies across industries restructured operations and reduced head count. People then started talking about ‘owning their own careers’ collecting experiences and skills in various jobs at various companies to enhance their ongoing employability. (p. 1). 
According to Kinnie, Hutchinson & Purcell (1997), “Downsizing and its associated euphemism ‘rightsizing’ became part of the managerial lexicon in the 1980’s and early 1990’s… By the mid-1990’s, however, doubts were emerging about whether downsizing was the route to success that it was first thought” (p. 296). “The downsizing environment in the 1980’s and early 1990’s further discouraged some companies from investing in succession management. As a result, many companies developed severe bench strength problems and are now facing a shortage in top management successions” (Holt, 2001, p. ).  Michaels, Handfield-Jones & Axelrod, (2001, p. 2) say, In 1900, only 17% of all jobs required knowledge workers; now over 60% do. In addition to this broad demand for talent, the demand for high-caliber managerial talent is growing. The late 1990s through the year 2000 was a period of extraordinary economic growth as U. S. unemployment levels hovered near 30-year lows. Against a backdrop of sustained economic growth, new economy companies proliferated creating millions of new jobs, and rewriting the rules of recruiting and retention.
New competitors vied daily with traditional companies for key skills-not only technological savvy but also more traditional marketing, finance, and partnership building expertise. Exacerbating this explosion in demand was a projected tightening of supply in key segments of the labor pool. The result: an employment market where demand far outweighed supply and where employers no longer ‘held all the cards.  Booz-Allen & Hamilton (2001) states, “By the year 2000, due to a growing imbalance between an expanding demand for talent and the limited supply, we reached the other extreme in the pendulum’s swing.
Employees became ‘free agents’, more concerned, some would argue, with their own employability and personal gain than with long-term job security – or their employer’s success” (p. 1).  The makeup of the workforce has also changed over time. Management Development Core (2000, p. 2) article indicates, In each decade between 1950 and 1990, women increased their share of the labor force by about 4%. In 1950, women made up 29. 6% of the labor force, in 1960 they made up 33. 4%, in 1970 they were 38. 1%, in 1980 they were 42. 5%, and by 1990 women had become 45. 3% of the civilian labor force.
The percentage of the labor force went from 33. 9% in 1950 to 51. 5% in 1980 and very nearly 60% in 1990. Beginning in about 1963, and continuing until about 1986, there was a second phenomenon expanding the labor force, when the baby boomers came of age. In 1963, the first wave of this huge American population had turned 17, and began to enter the labor force. The number of annual live births in the U. S. from 1940-1945 averaged 2,858,667. From 1946-1951, it was 3,661,500 an increase of 28%. ” The Hannigan Consulting Group has identified specific timeframes at which employees are at the greatest risk of leaving an organization.
They found that the risk of leaving an organization is within the first year that an employee is hired because of the underwhelming assignments, the volume of work, or bad chemistry with the boss. The second period of risk is after two years where the employee is ready and eager for a promotion that may or may not be available. The third risk period is at five years when the promotions are fewer and farther between, and the employee begins to look elsewhere for opportunities (Branch, 1998).  State of the Workplace
To understand the importance of retention in today’s world of the twenty-first century, it helps to look at the factors throughout the several decades that have led to the issue of retaining employees. This will help to explain how the problem evolved and the importance of retaining individual in organizations. The workplace, which had been so stable for years, was now quickly and dramatically changing. Fields (2001) says, I often refer to the period starting in the late 1980s and continuing through the mid-1990s as “The Age of the Disposable Employee. ” Think about how organizations acted during that time period.
They tried to become lean, mean machines by cutting their fat (by downsizing, reorganizing and ostracizing their employees). By the mid-1990s, America was back on top of the global marketplace, and many organizations seemed to realize their goals; revenues increased, and so did the stock prices. What many managers didn’t bargain for was how great a job they had done in rebuilding America, but how poor a job they had done in preparing our current and future workforce’s skills for the challenges that came with improved technology – namely, more jobs that required higher technological skills than in the past.
As the year 2000 approached, employers were suddenly in for an enormous Y2K, new millennium surprise. However, if they really thought about it, they would have seen it gaining momentum for a number of years. The end of the Age of the Disposable Employee had arrived. The ranks of workers with the right technological and managerial stuff to survive and thrive shrank and those ‘with the goods’ started to flex their workforce muscle and demand some heretofore unthinkable things if they were to be recruited and retained in an organization.
In other words, the movement has switched from the Age of Disposable Employee to that of the Indispensable Employee. What American managers didn’t plan for, however, were the impending labor shortage and the “skills gap” – that is, the difference between the technical proficiency necessary in the workforce, and the labor force’s actual general lack of know-how and skills. Additionally, economic growth was expected to remain ahead of population growth. Simply put, there would be many more jobs available than qualified and technically proficient workers to fill them. (p. 20). 27] The idea of not only attracting but also retaining the right employees for an organization in order to stay competitive is new. Fields (2001) also says, As economic times improved by the late 1990s and as survivor’s syndrome employees recovered from their condition, some extremely interesting dynamics took place in the workplace. As the old “supply and demand” tenet kicked in, skilled and talented employees slowly began to recognize their value and worth. Suddenly, working for the same company and being loyal to one employer for 10 or 20-plus years didn’t matter as much.
After all, the employer hadn’t been loyal to them, their families, and/or their significant others when times were bad. The supply was short while their skills and talents were tall and in demand. Unfortunately, because of a strong economy, employers are having a more difficult time holding onto valuable talent, who are just not patient enough for a company to ‘get its act together and back on its feet. ’ (p. 22).  Retention cannot be solved in the usual sense. Cappelli (1999) says,
There will be no silver bullet program or set of programs that will bind employees to the organization in the presence of attractive opportunities elsewhere. Employers can and should work hard to eliminate problems in the workplace that might drive their valued employees into the arms of competitors. But, as noted earlier, most people who quit do so to take jobs elsewhere, and dissatisfaction with current jobs drives turnover only when other positions are available. The “pull” of alternatives is the major driver of turnover, not just as the “push” of problems in the current workplace.
The growing need to find talent in the outside market will become the main driver of the retention problem, although employers exacerbate the problem by focusing employee attention on the labor market and giving them more information on other jobs, increasing the likelihood that they will leave. (p. 188).  CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Figure 1 demonstrate the conceptual framework of the study. Illustration shows employees assess the employee’s program, incentives and rewards. The study objectively revised the current program to establish the program state of the art.
It answered the question how and what is the nature of the program. The conceptual framework helped the researcher identify the factors that contributing the effectiveness of the employee’s retention. DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms are defined for the purpose of this study: Bank – a financial institution that acts as a payment agent for customers, and borrows and lends money. Bookkeeper – Someone who records the transactions/ keeps account in the company. Company – is a form of business organization.
Commercial Banks – A financial institution that accepts demand deposits and makes loans and provides other services for the public. Glass ceiling – situations where the advancement of a qualified person within the hierarchy of an organization is halted at a particular level because of some form of discrimination. Manager – an individual who is a first-level supervisor, middle manager or executive in a private organization to whom an individual reports. Rank-and-file – The ordinary members of an organization, as opposed to officers or managers. Resign – Leave voluntarily; of a job, post or position
Retention – a company’s ability to maximize the value of intellectual property by keeping employees engaged for the long term. Teller – Employee of a depository institution who waits on customers, usually from behind a counter or some other partition. Tellers accept deposits, provide cash or checks for withdrawals, and perform most other routine customer services involving transfers of funds. Turnover – expressed as an annual percentage of the total workforce. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The descriptive method of research was used in this study. Descriptive method of research is used to obtain information concerning the current tatus of the phenomena to describe “what exists” with respect to variables or conditions in a situation. A fact-finding study with adequate and accurate interpretation of the finding. The methods involved range from the survey which describes the status quo, the correlation study which investigates the relationship between variables, to developmental studies which seek to determine changes over time. The primary objective of this research is to identify the factors present in the turnover of rank-and-file employees, which affects the retention of individual.
The study investigated the employee’s perception as to how effectively his or her expectations to the company are being met. The survey design was selected in method of collecting data, since it would effectively address the problem statement and the nine research questions. This method allows honest and anonymous feedback about the subject. There are total of 9 local commercial banks in the Philippines. And having been selected 3 local commercial banks that were located in Metro Manila. The subjects for this study included rank-and-file employees from Metrobank, RCBC and BPI.
The sample selection for the rank-and-file subjects was determined by meeting with human resource representatives from each of the bank companies to determine who was to be included in the study. Selection of the rank-and-file subjects was based on each bank company’s various identification methods used to select their employees. There are a total of 21 branches of Metrobank, 15 branches of RCBC and 65 branches of BPI located in Metro Manila. A total of 505 rank-and-file employees are identified in the three commercial banks.
There are many surveys found in the literature regarding employee retention. After reading and studying, the researcher, then prepare his own questionnaire. For validation purposes, the questionnaire was given to 10 rank-and-file employees for them to fill up. These rank-and-file employees were not included in the study. After they had filled up, the researcher will asked them if all items in the questionnaires are clear. If there were some questions were unclear, it will be revise for more clarity and definiteness. The copies of questionnaire were then distributed personally to the respondents.
After a few days, all copies distributed were retrieved also personally. SAMPLING DESIGN The population sample was identified by a simple random sampling. In simple random sampling, particular sampling units are selected using random numbers, and all possible selections of a given number of units are equally likely. A total of nine local commercial banks were operating in the Philippines. From the top commercial banks, the population size was selected to this research. The Metrobank, RCBC, and BPI were the top financial institution in the Philippines.
The research was conducted in Metro Manila, having a large number of branches and employees. With the population size of 505 rank-and-file employees, includes the Teller, New Accounts Clerk and Accounting staff. Given the 3% margin of error the computation for the sample population was: Formula: n = N___ 1 + Ne2 n = size of the sample N = the size of the population e = the margin of error n = 505_____ 1 + 505 (3%)2 n = 16 Having been selected and computing the sample size, 16 sample or rank-and-file employees answered the questionnaire that was distributed to them.
STATISTICAL TREATMENT Descriptive statistics (weighted mean, mean rankings, percentage & frequency distributions, anova, and regressions analysis) were used to examine the data for which Bank Company will determine the important retaining rank-and-file employees and how these employees and bank companies in meeting their expectations. These analyses determined the important factors in retaining all rank-and-file employees in commercial banks. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the data to determine the turnover ratio valued by each of the rank-and-file employees.
Frequency Distribution was used to describe the profile of the respondent in terms of their age, sex, length of service in the bank and educational attainment. The following were the formulae used: For the Percentage: % = n / N x 100 where: % = Percent n = number of participant bank N = total number of employees For Frequency: F = x / N where: f = frequency x = number of participant bank N = total number of employees Weighted mean was used to establish the statistical measures of the extent of factors and interventions general observation and standards and practices f the bank company according to the respondent’s perceptions. Mw = ? fx N where: Mw = weighted mean X = item value N = total number of respondent f = frequency ? = sum of total The weighted mean was used also in interpreting data. It was used when the option to the items of the questionnaires are assigned points. In this study, the weighted mean interpreted using Likert Scale: |SCALE |MEAN VALUE RANGE |VERBAL INTERPRETATION | |5 |4. 0 to 5. 00 |Extremely important/ Exceeds my expectations/ | | | |Great | |4 |3. 50 to 4. 49 |Very important/ Frequently exceeds my | | | |expectations/ Large | |3 |2. 50 to 3. 9 |Moderately Important/ Meets my expectations/ | | | |Some | |2 |1. 50 to 2. 49 |Somewhat important/ Sometimes does not meet my| | | |expectations/ Small | |1 |1. 00 to 1. 49 |Not at all important/ Does not meet my | | | expectations/ Little | Anova Analysis of Variance test the researcher used the following formula: Total sum of Square: k n 2 SST = E E xy – Tii i=j j=1 nk Sum of Square of Column: k 2 2 SSC = E T – Tii i=1l nk n Sum of Square Errors: SSE = SST –SSC Total Sum of Square: k n 2 SST = E E ( xiy-x… ) i=1 j=1 k 2 SSC = E( xiy-x… ) i=1 k n 2 SST = E E ( xiy-x… ) i=1 j=1 Analysis of Variance for the One Way Analysis Source of Variation |Sum of Square |Degree of Freedom |Mean Square |Computed F | |Column means |SSC |k-1 |S1 = SST | 2 2 | | | | |k-1 |S1/S2 | |Error |SSE |k(n-1) |S2=SSE | | | | | |k(n-1) | | |Total |SST |nk-1 | | | Multiple Regression Analysis was used in the evaluation data to extract the relation among the variables considered in the Study the statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software was used in the statistical calculation. REFERENCES American Workplace Report 2001: Building America’s Workforce for the 21st century. (2001).
Washington, DC: Employment Policy Foundation. Retrieved December 21, 2007. http://www. epf. org//abor01/getpdf01. asp. Axelrod, E. L. , Handfield-Jones, H. & Welsh, T. A. (2001). War for talent: Part two. McKinsey Quarterly Number 2. Retrieved December 18, 2007. http://www. mckinseyquarterly. com Booz-Allen & Hamilton. (2001). The shape of the digital organization: Managing the talent pipeline. Retrieved December 23, 2007. http://www. ebusinessforum. gr/links/reports/booz_allen/shape. pdf. BPA/P Business Processing Association PHILIPPINES, Business Environment Survey. Retrieved: December 19, 2007. http://209. 85. 173. 104/search? q=cache:-BQg1XValH0J:www. bpap. rg/bpap/research/111307_Periodic_Survey_Three_Summary. pdf+Business+Environment+September+12+to+ September+25,+2007+turnover+ratio=en=clnk=1 Branch, S. (1998, November 9). You hired ‘em. But can you keep ‘em? Fortune, 247-250. Caplan, Gayle, and Mary Teese. Survivors: How to Keep Your Best People on Board after Downsizing. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1997. Capelli, P. (1999). The new deal at work: Managing the market-driven workforce. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Cole, Joanne. “E&Y Creates Office of Retention and Turnover Rates Drop. ” HR Focus, April 1999. Drucker, P. F. (1992, September-October). The new society of organizations.
Harvard Business Review, 95-104. Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html Fields, M. (2001). Indispensable employees: How to hire them, how to keep them. Franklin Lakes, N. J. : Career Press. G. M. Clarke and D. Cooke. A Basic Course in Statistics, Arnold 1998. Griffeth, Peter Hom, and Rodger Griffeth. Employee Turnover. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing, 1992. Harris, Jim, and Joan Brannick. Finding & Keeping Great Employees. New York: AMACOM, 1999. Kaye, B. , Jordan-Evans, S. & Career Systems International. (2002, February).
Building loyalty and commitment in the workplace: Global organizations share engagement and retention practices. Retrieved December 15, 2007. http://www. cuic. com/ATM/Human20%20Resources/HRFeb2003. pdf. Kinnie, N. , Hutchinson, S. & Purcell, J. (1997, October). Downsizing: is it always lean and mean? Personnel Review, 27:4, 296-311. Landry, J. A. (n. d. ). Valuing human capital: A guide for the information age. HR Director. Retrieved December 23, 2007. http://www. andersen. com/resource2. nsf/PDFs/HC_Valuing_Humancap. pdf. Management Development Core. (2000, May). Workforce recruitment and retention in the 21st century. Retrieved December 18, 2007. http://www. recr-web. pdf. McKeown, L. (2002). Retaining top employees. NY, NY: McGraw Hill.
Middlebrook, John F. “Avoiding Brain Drain: How to Lock in Talent. ” HR Focus, March 1999. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Purcell, P. (2000, October). Older workers: Employment and retirement trends. Monthly Labor Review, 19-30. Smart, B. D. (1999). Topgrading: How leading companies win by hiring, coaching and keeping the best people. Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall Press. Smith, G. (2001). Here today, here tomorrow: Transforming your workforce from high-turnover to high-retention. Chicago, IL: Dearborn Trade Publishing. Spreitzer, G. M. , McCall, M. W. & Mahoney, J. (1997).
Early identification of international executive potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 6-29. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 4th ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Stuckberry, J. (n. d. ). Retaining your top talent. Ernst & Young. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. ey. com/global/download. nsf/Australia/The_Business_of_HR_-B3_Retaining_your_top_talent/$file/B3Retainingyourtoptalent. pdf. Towers Perrin. (2002, June). Cost and value: A delicate balancing act for hr. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. towers. com/towers_publications/publications/tp_research/pdfs/tp_track_4_costusvalue. pdf. Towers Perrin. (2001).
New Realities in today’s workforce: The towers perrin talent report 2001. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. towers. com/towers-publications/publications/tp_research/pdfs/talent_mgmt_report_2001. pdf. Tulgan, B. (2001). Winning the talent wars. NY, NY: W. W. Norton & Co. Ware, B. L. & Fern, B. (1997). The challenge of retaining top talent: The workforce attrition crisis. Integral Training Systems. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. itsinc. net/retention-research. htm. APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE What’s Important To You? Instructions: This survey is asking you to rate how important each item is to your staying with the current bank institution,.
There are three sections to the survey: Section A below asks you for your background information. Section B includes questions on the factors that may retain you. Section C contains general questions. And the last section, D includes open-ended questions to answer. To complete this survey you may use a pencil or a pen. There are no wrong or right answers. What you think or feel is what is important for this survey. Please try to respond to all the questions. A. Background Information Place a check in one box for each item. |1). Gender |2). Age | |??
Male Female |23 or under 24-42 | | |43-60 61 or older | |3). Length of Service in the Bank | | |; 1year 1-2 years | | |3-5 years 6-10 years | | |11 years or more | | |4).
Highest Level of Education Completed | | |High school graduate | | |Some college, but no degree | | |2 year degree/vocational certificate | | |College graduate | | |Post-graduate work, no degree | | |Post-graduate degree | | B. Retention Factors Instructions: There are 36 items in this section. Please rate each item twice. First, for each of the items, rate how important that aspect is to you; second, go through the items again and rate them on how well your bank company does that. Please use the following response formats:
Importance to your staying with the organization: 1 = Not at all important 2 = Somewhat important 3 = Moderately Important 4 = Very important 5 = Extremely important My Employer: 1 = Does not meet my expectations 2 = Sometimes does not meet my expectations 3 = Meets my expectations 4 = Frequently exceeds my expectations 5 = Exceeds my expectations My Employer: Importance My Employer To Staying |1. |Supports me in attending training to develop new skills. |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 | |36. |Overall, how motivated are you to continue performing your |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 | | |job? | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |37. |Rank the five statements, from 1 to 5, according to what is most important to you in your job. A rank of 1 indicates | | |what is most important and a 5 indicates what is least important. | |_______ Included in decision making | | |_______ Freedom to perform your job | | |_______ Opportunity to contribute and make a difference | | |_______ Utilize your strengths and talents | | |_______ Developmental opportunities | | | |38. Intention to stay. Check only one. | |I plan to stay with my job. | |I would like to leave the company. | |I plan to leave the company within a year. | |I plan to leave the company in the next few years. | | | ———————–  Kaye, B. , Jordan-Evans, S. & Career Systems International. (2002, February).
Building loyalty and commitment in the workplace: Global organizations share engagement and retention practices. Retrieved December 15, 2007. http://www. cuic. com/ATM/Human20%20Resources/HRFeb2003. pdf.  Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.  Smart, B. D. (1999). Topgrading: How leading companies win by hiring, coaching and keeping the best people. Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall Press.  Towers Perrin. (2001). New Realities in today’s workforce: The towers perrin talent report 2001. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. towers. com/towers-publications/publications/tp_research/pdfs/talent_mgmt_report_2001. pdf.  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. h tml  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. om/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html  Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. , Employee Turnover. Ads by Google. Retrieved December 19, 2007. http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/encyclopedia/Eco-Ent/Employee-Turnover. html  BPA/P Business Processing Association PHILIPPINES, Business Environment Survey. Retrieved: December 19, 2007. http://209. 85. 173. 104/search? q=cache:-BQg1XValH0J:www. bpap. org/bpap/research/111307_Periodic_Survey_Three_Summary. df+Business+Environment+September+12+to+September+25,+2007+turnover+ratio=en=clnk=1  McKeown, L. (2002). Retaining top employees. NY, NY: McGraw Hill.  Stuckberry, J. (n. d. ). Retaining your top talent. Ernst & Young. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. ey. com/global/download. nsf/Australia/The_Business_of_HR_-B3_Retaining_your_top_talent/$file/B3Retainingyourtoptalent. pdf. Towers Perrin. (2002, June). Cost and value: A delicate balancing act for hr. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. towers. com/towers_publications/publications/tp_research/pdfs/tp_track_4_costusvalue. pdf.  Ware, B. L. & Fern, B. (1997). The challenge of retaining top talent: The workforce attrition crisis.
Integral Training Systems. Retrieved December 16, 2007. http://www. itsinc. net/retention-research. htm.  Axelrod, E. L. , Handfield-Jones, H. & Welsh, T. A. (2001). War for talent: Part two. McKinsey Quarterly Number 2. Retrieved December 18, 2007. http://www. mckinseyquarterly. com  Tulgan, B. (2001). Winning the talent wars. NY, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.  Kaye, B. , Jordan-Evans, S. & Career Systems International. (2002, February). Building loyalty and commitment in the workplace: Global organizations share engagement and retention practices. Retrieved December 15, 2007. http://www. cuic. com/ATM/Human20%20Resources/HRFeb2003. pdf. 18] American Workplace Report 2001: Building America’s Workforce for the 21st century. (2001). Washington, DC: Employment Policy Foundation. Retrieved December 21, 2007. http://www. epf. org//abor01/getpdf01. asp.  Drucker, P. F. (1992, September-October). The new society of organizations. Harvard Business Review, 95-104.  Landry, J. A. (n. d. ). Valuing human capital: A guide for the information age. HR Director. Retrieved December 23, 2007. http://www. andersen. com/resource2. nsf/PDFs/HC_Valuing_Humancap. pdf.  Booz-Allen & Hamilton. (2001). The shape of the digital organization: Managing the talent pipeline. Retrieved December 23, 2007. http://www. ebusinessforum. gr/links/reports/booz_allen/shape. pdf. 22] Kinnie, N. , Hutchinson, S. & Purcell, J. (1997, October). Downsizing: is it always lean and mean? Personnel Review, 27:4, 296-311.  Axelrod, E. L. , Handfield-Jones, H. & Welsh, T. A. (2001). War for talent: Part two. McKinsey Quarterly Number 2. Retrieved December 18, 2007. http://www. mckinseyquarterly. com  Booz-Allen & Hamilton. (2001). The shape of the digital organization: Managing the talent pipeline. Retrieved December 23, 2007. http://www. ebusinessforum. gr/links/reports/booz_allen/shape. pdf.  [pic]()+45BC„…†›? rs? A[ oe? oIAI???? }l}`}`}?? G1hOyµh? UB*[pic]CJOJQJ^JaJnH4phtH4hS%OManagement Development Core. (2000, May).
Workforce recruitment and retention in the 21st century. Retrieved December 18, 2007. http://www. recr-web. pdf.  Branch, S. (1998, November 9). You hired ‘em. But can you keep ‘em? Fortune, 247-250.  Fields, M. (2001). Indispensable employees: How to hire them, how to keep them. Franklin Lakes, N. J. : Career Press.  Fields, M. (2001). Indispensable employees: How to hire them, how to keep them. Franklin Lakes, N. J. : Career Press.  Capelli, P. (1999). The new deal at work: Managing the market-driven workforce. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. ———————– INPUT OLD & NEW EMPLOYEES OUTPUT RETENTION OF EMPLOYEES PROCESS