My friend recently quit her job. It wasn’t exactly a “big deal” in the grand scheme of things — she worked there part-time, using the money to help pay for school — but she probably would have continued working at the restaurant until she graduated if it hadn’t been for the new owner. Now, I won’t say that she ever really enjoyed working there, but the old owners were nice and gave her a consistent schedule, so she seemed to think that it was alright. Unfortunately, about a year ago, they ended up selling, and the restaurant got a new owner. He was young and used curse words at work, which apparently meant that he was supposed to be “cool.” Too bad it didn’t mean that he could run a business.
The changes came slowly, and looking back, it’s almost like he was trying to sneak it past them. He began with occasionally understaffing them and not ordering enough supplies, and soon that became the new norm. The plants on the patio died around a month after he took over, and their dead carcasses stuck around for the next six months. At first, she thought that everything would get better with time. There is a learning curve to any new endeavor. However, around the time they started to consistently run out of things like napkins and bleach, she’d lost all hope. I mean, a customer would ask for some napkins, and she’d have to apologize and offer them some paper towels that were meant for the restroom. The restroom. That’s an indignity no customer service employee should have to suffer.
It was all downhill from there. More and more people began to quit, call off work, show up late, and display other withdrawal behaviors (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2012). Eventually, she ended up quitting as well. Not only was this a pain for her, since she had to find a new job and become acclimated to a new environment, but it’s also bad for the business itself. As Schneider et al. (2012) point out, increased turnover leads to an increase in expenses. Not only has the organization lost the time they invested in the employee who quit, but they must now reinvest in a new individual who may or may not work out (Schneider et al., 2012).
Withdrawal behaviors can stem from a number of interconnected influences. For example, Darr and Johns’ (2008) meta-analysis postulates that work strain is, indirectly, one of the major contributors to absenteeism. While job satisfaction does not strongly correlate with an individual’s likelihood to miss work, illness does, and work strain is a big contributor to illness (Darr & Johns, 2008). This understanding of absenteeism — that it is more likely to be an involuntary reaction to stress rather than laziness or rebellion — is important to note. If a business notices that they have suddenly an increase in absenteeism, they should consider whether or not their employees have been under an unusually high level of stress and act accordingly. A company who takes care of their employees will be more likely to retain them.
On the other hand, voluntary turnover has been moderately linked to job satisfaction. Mobley’s (1977) intermediate linkages turnover model supports this correlation and details the seven potential stages an employee might go through when considering whether or not they are going to quit. This includes considering the pros and cons of quitting and looking for and comparing job alternatives (Mobley, 1977). Wittmer, Shepard, and Martin (2014) tested Mobley’s model and found that their research largely supported it. However, they did find that other factors, like organizational commitment, age group, relationship status, and mobility, also contributed to whether or not an employee who intends to quit actually goes through with it. This could help explain why job satisfaction is only moderately correlated with voluntary turnover. Many people want to quit but have other commitments or factors that prevent them from doing so. Therefore, preventing job dissatisfaction should be an important goal for organizations. While Big Business may not care about an individual employee’s feelings, they do care about their bottom line. Engaging in strategies aimed at increasing job satisfaction is mutually beneficial and helps alleviate stress both on the employees and the organization’s wallet.
References
Darr, W., & Johns, G. (2008). Work strain, health, and absenteeism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 293-318.
Mobley, R. (1977). Intermediate linkages in the relation between job satisfaction and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2), 237-240.
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J.A., & Coutts, L.M. (2012). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Wittmer, J. L., Shepard, A., & Martin, J. E. (2014). An application of Mobleys intermediate linkages turnover model to a full-time employee group typology. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,87(4), 806-812. doi:10.1111/joop.12080
Tags: absenteeism, employee withdrawal behaviors, intermediate linkages turnover model, Organizational life and teams, voluntary turnover