A causal model of compensation and benefits and reward ... · PDF fileand rewards management...
Transcript of A causal model of compensation and benefits and reward ... · PDF fileand rewards management...
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research
© Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association
Research Article ISSN 2229 – 3795
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 44
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
A causal model of compensation and benefits and reward management on
organizational effectiveness of MNCs Sorasak Tangthong
King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Thailand
ABSTRACT
An empirical study is conducted to investigate the influence of compensation and benefits
and rewards management on Organizational Effectiveness of MNC in Thailand. The
conceptual model created for this study will comprise of compensation and benefits and
reward management as the independent observed variable, three HR mediating variables, and
Organizational Effectiveness as the dependent variable. A total of 7 theoretically-based
hypotheses are developed, indicating possible positive and negative relationships among the
variables in the model. Input consists of 224 top management, human resources
managers/leaders and line managers. The proposed model is empirically tested by using
AMOS of Path Analysis modeling. The test results found compensation and benefits and
rewards management and the three HR mediating variables have an influence on
Organizational Effectiveness, thereby better establishing compensation and benefits and
rewards management and Organizational Effectiveness, and confirming most of the findings
of previous research on the subject, while providing some fresh insights into the
interrelationships between the variables.
Keywords: Compensation and benefits and rewards management, Human resource
management (HRM) practices, Organizational effectiveness, Thailand’s manufacturing
industry
1. Introduction
Human resource practices are fast becoming an integral part of an organizational strategy to
enhance performance in an increasingly competitive global environment. As Porter (1986)
explained, competing internationally has become a necessity for many firms. The removal of
geographical boundaries, and the subsequent erosion of cultural and distance barriers, have
stimulated international business. As a result, multinational companies (MNCs) emerge as the
dominant players in the new global economy (Shah et al., 2012). These are companies with
operations in more than one country (Porter, 1990). To compete internationally, companies
must expand beyond their national boundaries and their success depends on the coordination
and control of their subsidiaries. In the case of human resource practices, the ability of MNCs
to design and adapt human resource practices from their headquarters to achieve human
resource objectives at the subsidiaries (Rosenzweig and Nohria, 1994) will determine their
performance. One of these practices is compensation and benefits and rewards management.
They are used by MNCs to attract, retain and motivate their employees (Harzing and
Ruysseveldt, 2005). To be able to introduce such practice across multiple countries is a
challenging and complex task, requiring HR practitioners to develop new concepts and skills
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
45
in managing people outside their traditional boundaries (Plessis, 2010). They will have to
take into account the diverse culture, laws and regulations, standards of living, to name a few,
of the different countries where MNCs are carrying out their international operations. Thus,
there are different levels and types of compensation and benefits and rewards management
being implemented in each of these countries. But despite the variations, its principle goal
remains, which is to attract, retain and motivate employees, thereby achieving success for the
organization.
To ensure that compensation and benefits and rewards management is able to achieve its goal,
it must be implemented fairly for all employees. Otherwise, as an example, Marsden et al.
(2002) has shown that employee motivation will be reduced where performance-based pay,
which is a compensation scheme, is not operating fairly, and unless it is seen as equitable
internally and competitive externally, good employees are more likely to leave the
organization (Schuler, 1998). Compensation and benefits and rewards management can be
expressed in monetary and non-financial forms. The former tend to focus on actual payment
to employees. To be able to provide payment that is fair and equitable has become an
important issue for organizations. For many, particularly among large MNCs, job evaluations
have been carried out to provide a firm base on which to build an equitable salary structure.
Job evaluation, itself, is used to cover a number of distinct methods for systematically
assessing the relative value of jobs within an organization (EL-Hajji, 2012). It is a way to
remove pay anomalies, disordered, irrational or illogical pay differences and to create a fair
pay system. Job evaluation can help to achieve this by acting as a procedural aid to pay equity
for work of equal value and is a useful means for pay determination that can be used towards
establishing a wage and salary structure (EL-Hajji, 2012). To create a payment structure
through job evaluation now seems to be the norm for most MNCs. One of the reasons that job
evaluations are needed in these organizations is due to the low levels of employee
performance, caused largely by incompetent and ineffective pay systems, or even lack of pay
systems. Thus, there is the need for either the development of a rational pay system or the
justification of existing ones in terms of consistency, equity, pay-differentials on grounds of
job requirement, job content, equal pay for work of equal value, and equal pay legislations
and policies (EL-Hajji, 2011).
In relation to the non-financial aspect of compensation and benefits and rewards management,
organizations are determined to motivate employees in other ways besides financial payments.
Reward and recognition programs have been considered as one of the ways to motivate
employees successfully and to influence their behavior in achieving greater organizational
efficiency (Oosthuizen, 2001). There are two types of reward, which are extrinsic and
intrinsic rewards. Extrinsic rewards are the tangible rewards that can be physically given to
employees. They can be provided directly by the organization to employees through salary
and incentives or indirectly through contributions made to employee’s benefit plans, such as
medical benefits and life insurance. Intrinsic rewards are the intangible rewards that
employees experience from doing their jobs, such as the feeling of satisfaction, involvement,
growth, autonomy and self-competence (Allen et al., 2004). This is an indication that
employees are no longer working for just monetary gains. They are also paying attention on
personal growth, such as the improvement of capabilities, and acquiring new skills and
knowledge. As for the organization, non-financial rewards, such as support and recognition,
are being given by managers to employees to motivate them (Eisenberger and Cameron,
1996). Recognition is a process of giving employees a certain status within the organization
(Danish and Usman, 2010). The recognition of employees’ performance can be in the form of
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
46
praise, awards or ceremonies (Yukl, 2002). Through reward and recognition programs,
employees’ morale will increase and a link will be created between the performance and
motivation of employees (Flynn, 1998).
The fact that employee motivation is needed to ensure organizational success illustrates the
idea that the relationship between compensation and benefits and rewards management, and
Organizational Effectiveness does not exist in a vacuum. There are other factors involved that
can have an impact on the relationship. For example, by taking into account employee
behavior (e.g. Morrison, 1996), they can help determine the best way to implement
compensation and benefits and rewards management and increase Organizational
Effectiveness. In this study, we focus on three such behaviors, which are job satisfaction,
employee engagement and employee motivation. They will mediate the relationship between
compensation and benefits and rewards management, and Organizational Effectiveness.
2. Theoretical background
The practice of using compensation and benefits and rewards management varies across
different organizations, particularly among MNCs, where they operate outside their national
boundaries. In addition, there are other factors, such as employee behavior, that can influence
the effectiveness of using compensation and benefits and rewards management. As a result,
several theories have been used to explain the consequences of different compensation
decisions, and how they can direct and control employee behavior to determine firm
performance.
2.1 Reinforcement and expectancy theories
Reinforcement theory explains how a particular response, which is followed by a reward, can
happen again in the future (Thorndike's Law of Effect). In the case of compensation
management, high employee performance that is followed by a monetary reward will make
future high performance more likely. Thus, the key to this theory is that it emphasizes the
way someone is experiencing the reward. Similarly, expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) is
concerned with the link between rewards and behaviors, although it focuses more on
expected, rather than experienced, rewards. The expectancy theory has motivation as a
function of two other factors, which are expectancy and valence. Expectancy is the perceived
link between effort and performance. Valence is the expected value of outcomes.
Compensation systems vary according to their impact on these two factors. In relation to
expectancy, pay systems differ most in their impact on the perceived link between behaviors
and pay, whereas the valence of pay outcomes remain the same under different pay systems.
2.2 Equity theory
Equity theory describes employee perceptions of what they contribute to the organization,
what they get in return, and how their return-contribution ratio compares to others inside and
outside the organization. This will determine how fair employees perceive their employment
relationship to be (Adams, 1963). Their efforts must be comparable to the perceived reward
to be viewed as equitable (Adams, 1965). Any perceptions of inequity will cause employees
to take actions and restore equity.
2.3 Agency theory
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
47
Agency theory focuses on how employee compensation can be used to align the various
interests and goals of the organization’s stakeholders (Eisenhardt, 1989; Fama and Jensen,
1983). The divergent interests between the managers and their employees can lead to agency
costs. To reduce these costs, the interests between managers and employees need to be
aligned. The agency theory states that the managers (principle) must have a contracting
scheme that will help align the interests of employees (agent) with their interests. These
contracts can be classified into two types, which are behavior oriented, such as merit pay, and
outcome oriented, such as stock options, profit sharing and commissions. To determine which
type of contract should be used by organizations will depend on the following six factors
(Eisenhardt, 1989). First is risk aversion, where averting risks among agents can make
outcome-oriented contracts more costly. Second is outcome uncertainty, in which profit is an
example of an outcome and by linking pay to profits (outcome-based contract), is more costly
to the extent that profits vary, meaning there is a risk of low profits. Third is job
programmability. As jobs become less programmable or less routine and less structured, it
will be more difficult for organizations to monitor and, thus, more likely to use outcome-
oriented contracts. Fourth is measurable job outcomes, meaning as job outcomes become
more measurable outcome-oriented contracts are more likely to be used. Fifth is ability to pay,
where outcome-oriented contracts contribute to higher compensation costs due to the risk
premium. Sixth is tradition, which is the tradition or custom of using, or not using, outcome-
oriented contracts will make such contracts more, or less, likely.
2.4 Literature review and hypotheses
This section will be on previous literatures involving compensation and benefits and rewards
management as the independent variable, and its relationships with job satisfaction, employee
engagement, employee motivation as the mediating variables, and Organizational
Effectiveness, which consists of employee attrition, employee retention and employee
performance, as the dependent variable. Study indicates potential hypothetical associations
among these variables, which were derived after a systematic review of the theoretical and
empirical literatures. Altogether, 7 hypotheses were formulated, which are explained below.
2.5 Human resource management system
Compensation and benefits and rewards management is one of the many human resource
practices used by organizations to manage their employees and increase performance. To
understand the significance of human resource and its effect on firm performance as an
Organizational Effectiveness, the human resource process must be viewed as a whole.
Organizations can be viewed as systems (Ferguson, 2006; Rummler and Brache, 1995) and,
as a result, it is important to consider the human resource inputs, processes (practices) and
outputs that will lead to a sustained competitive advantage (Lado and Wilson, 1994) in
organizations. These allow the firm to acquire and develop its resources (inputs) to achieve
high performance (outputs), and thereby having a competitive advantage. The human
resource system is based on Barney’s (1991) resource-based view of the firm, consisting of
variables that a person brings to the firm, such as skills and motivation (Askov, 2000), and
the human resource processes, which include recruitment, selection, training, reward systems
and performance management (Den Hartog and Verburg, 2004; Huselid, 1995).
2.6 Firm performance and organizational effectiveness
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
48
Firm performance serves as a final outcome of an effective HR system. Organizational
effectiveness is part of that construct and has been defined as the ability of organizations to
produce desire results, the notion of how effectual an organization is in accomplishing the
results the organization aims to generate. Organizational effectiveness has been used as
measures of productivity, service quality and profitability in Stavrou-Costea (2005). These
measures were chosen because they would lead to a full examination of firm performance
(Dessler, 2000; Fox, Byrne and Roualt, 1999). Nevertheless, researchers have used both
financial and non-financial metrics to measure organizational performance (Khan, 2010). The
financial measures include profit, sales, and market share. Non-financial measures include
productivity, quality, efficiency, and the attitudinal and behavioural measures such as
commitment, intention to quit, and satisfaction (Dyer and Reeves, 1995). This study will
focus on the latter, and thus, employee attrition, employee retention and employee
performance are chosen as performance indicators in this study.
2.7 Human resource practices
Under the HR system, human resource practices act as processes to transform existing human
resource inputs (Lado and Wilson, 1994). They are a set of distinct yet interrelated activities,
functions, and processes aimed at attracting, developing, and maintaining a firm’s human
resources. These HR practices, which are sometimes referred to as “high performance work
practices” or “high involvement work practices”, may include single HR practices or the
entire HR management systems. This study, however, will only focus on just one of them,
which is compensation and benefits and rewards management.
2.8 Compensation and benefits and rewards management
Compensation and benefits and rewards management is a human resource practice that act as
incentives to employees. Compensation refers to all forms of financial returns and tangible
benefits that employee receives as part of the employment relationship. It is considered to be
one of the central pillars of human resource management. It is concerned with the
formulation and implementation of strategies and policies aimed at compensating people
fairly, equitably and consistently in accordance with their value to the organization
(Armstrong, 2005). Benefits are indirect financial and non-financial payments employees
receive for continuing their employment with an organization. Reward is anything that is
extrinsically or intrinsically reinforced, maintain and improve the employees’ behavior in an
organization. It is crucial for attracting and retaining employees with competence, knowledge
and skills in order to achieve organization's strategic goals and create a supportive culture
(Galbraith, 1973). Altogether, compensation and benefits and rewards management have a
direct relationship with firm performance and indirectly through job satisfaction, employee
engagement and employee motivation.
In terms of a direct relationship, compensation is used by organizations to attract and retain
their most valuable and worthy assets (Khan, Aslam and Lodhi, 2011). It has a positive
relationship with employee retention (Hong et al., 2012) It can also be an incentive to
enhance employee performance (Gerhart and Milkovich, 1992). Benefits have been shown to
bond an employee to the organization, resulting in a strong relationship between benefits and
turnover (Shaw et al., 1998). Thus, there is a positive relationship between benefits and
employee retention (Gruber and Madrian, 1994; Lazear, 1986; Madrian, 1994). Rewards can
affect the performance of employees and their desire to stay with the organization
(Bamberger and Meshoulam, 2000; McDuffie, 1995). Thus, it has a direct relationship with
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
49
employee performance (Qureshi et al., 2010). Both compensation and rewards are also
known to have strong associations with turnover intent (Dhiman and Mohanty, 2010).
Therefore, we hypothesize that:
H1. Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management have a relationship with
Organizational Effectiveness.
With regards to the indirect relationship that compensation and benefits and rewards
management have on firm performance through job satisfaction, employee engagement and
employee motivation, they are found to have a positive and significant relationships with job
satisfaction, employee engagement and employee motivation. For instance, Khojasteh (1993)
found pay and security to be greater motivators and salary packages are of great importance
to create job satisfaction (Grace and Khalsa, 2003). Other researchers added that the main
factors that create greater job satisfaction includes financial rewards, faculty workload (Miller
et al., 2001), and compensation (Boyt et al., 2001). Furthermore, Rehman et al. (2010) have
found that job rewards are a strong determinant of job satisfaction, thereby supporting a
previous study by Clifford (1985). Bhattacharya and Mukherjee (2009) also explained how
rewards play a vital role in employee engagement, which depends on staff feeling that they
are fairly rewarded for their skills, knowledge and contribution. Rewards are seen as an
incentive to employee engagement. Most HR professionals now believe that it is not possible
to retain employees only by paying high salaries and offering attractive benefits. They need
to create enthusiasm for the employees’ roles, their works and the organizations, and ensure
that they are well integrated. Rewards, therefore, play a major role in this respect
(Bhattacharya and Mukherjee, 2009). In addition, Ram and Prabhakar (2011) have found that
both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are positively related to employee engagement. Ali and
Ahmed (2009) further found a positive relationship between rewards and benefits, and work
motivation.
Based on the above, we hypothesize that:
H2. Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management have a relationship with Job
Satisfaction.
H3. Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management have a relationship with
Employee Engagement.
H4. Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management have a relationship with
Employee Motivation.
2.9 Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is in regard to one's feelings or state-of-mind regarding the nature of their
work and is a positive emotional feeling, a result of one’s evaluation towards his job and his
job experience by comparing between what he expects from his job and what he actually gets
from it as well as a function of the range of specific satisfactions and dissatisfactions that
he/she experiences with respect to the various dimensions of work. This positive feeling
comes from the perception of the individual’s job as fulfilling or allowing the fulfillment of
their job values, provided these values are compatible with their needs (Dunnette and Locke,
1976). It is generally recognized in the organizational behavior field that job satisfaction is
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
50
the most important and frequently studied attitude (Islam et al., 2012). There are three
important dimensions to job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). The first is that job satisfaction is an
emotional response to a job situation. Second, job satisfaction is usually determined by how
well outcomes meet or exceed expectations. Third, job satisfaction represents several related
attitudes (Mitchell and Larson, 1987). Job satisfaction is listed as one of the primary concerns
in human resource management department because it helps retain the employees and raises
their performance level (Mehr et al., 2012). For organizations to be effective, they must
ensure the satisfaction of their employees (Likert, 1961; McGregor, 1960). Job satisfaction
has been cited numerous times as the main reason for employees to leave their jobs (Barak et
al., 2001). Job satisfaction also has a significant correlation to employee retention (Van Saane
et al., 2003). When employees are satisfied with their jobs, they will perform well in the
organization (Judge et al., 2001). Halkos and Bousinakis (2010) have found that increased
satisfaction by employees will lead to increased productivity.
From the above, we hypothesize that:
H5. Job Satisfaction has a relationship with Organizational Effectiveness.
2.10 Employee engagement
Employee engagement is the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles;
in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and
emotionally during role performances. Another definition is employees feel positive emotions
toward their work, find their work to be personally meaningful, consider their workload to be
manageable, and have hope about the future of their work and employee engagement as the
involvement with and enthusiasm for work. To become fully engaged is to be involved in and
enthusiastic about the work (Falcone, 2006). There are two aspects of employee engagement,
which are cognitive engagement and emotional engagement/physical engagement. Cognitive
engagement is the extent to which a worker is aware of their mission at work and their role in
the organization. Emotional engagement/physical engagement is the extent to which the
worker empathizes with others at work, and connects in a meaningful way with their co-
worker (Kahn, 1990, 1992; Luthans and Peterson, 2002). Most of the key measures that
reflect and drive organizational performance are products of engaged and committed
employees (Siddhanta and Roy, 2010). Baumruk and Gorman (2006) believed that if
employees exert extra time, effort and initiative in their work, then this will contribute to the
success of the business. Studies have, therefore, been conducted and have shown that there is
a positive relationship between employee engagement and organizational performance
outcomes like employee turnover and employee retention (Halbesleben and Wheeler, 2008;
Kgomo, 2010). With this kind of positive attitude, engaged employees have also been linked
to better performance (Harter, Schmidt and Hayes, 2002; Towers Perrin, 2007).
Thus, we hypothesize that:
H6. Employee Engagement has a relationship with Organizational Effectiveness.
2.11 Employee motivation
Employee motivation is one of the policies managers used to increase effectual job
management amongst employees in organizations and defined as something a need or desire
that causes a person to act as a psychological process that gives behavior purpose and
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
51
direction, include as an internal drives to satisfy an unsatisfied need and the will to
accomplish. Motivation, itself, is described by Hellriegel et al. (1992) as the force acting on
or within a person that causes the person to behave in a specific, goal-directed manner. It
stimulates the people into action and achieves a desired task (Luthans, 1998). A motivated
employee is a productive employee, who contributes to the effectiveness of the organization
(Matthew et al, 2009). The significance of employee motivation, influencing the behaviors of
employees to behave in certain ways, can ultimately decide the success or failure of an
organization (Manzoor, 2012). This would imply that organizational success depends heavily
on employee motivation. There is thus a relationship between employee motivation and
organizational effectiveness. For example, motivation at work is directly related to turnover
intention (Dysvik and Kuvaas, 2010). Employee motivation also influences employee
retention (Aguenza and Som, 2012). When motivation is high employees are more likely to
enjoy working, spend more time and energy in their work tasks, leading to better performance
(Deci and Ryan, 2000, 2002). In Solomon et al. (2012), findings have found a positive
correlation between motivation and employee productivity.
Therefore, we hypothesize that:
H7. Employee Motivation has a relationship with Organizational Effectiveness.
2.12 Research framework
Having reviewed the literature, it is possible to develop a comprehensive framework,
presented in Figure 1, consisting of Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management as
the independent variables, Job Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, Employee Motivation as
the Mediating variable and Firm performance in terms of Organizational Effectiveness as an
observed variable, which has three factors of employee attrition, employee retention and
employee performance, as the dependent variable.
CBR - Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management; JS – Job Satisfaction; EEG - Employee
Engagement; EM – Employee Motivation; OE – Organizational Effectiveness
Figure 1: Initial structural model
3. Research methodology
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
52
3.1 Scope of the study
Study focuses on a causal model of HRM Practices as a compensation and benefits and
rewards management on firm performance, in terms of organizational effectiveness, in
Thailand’s MNCs within the manufacturing industry. Research was conducted in FDI’s
manufacturing in the key industrial zone of the country, represented mainly in Eastern
Seaboard industrial estate, Rayong province, the key industrial zone of Thailand. These areas
attracted the most investment (www.boi.go.th).
3.2 Research variables
The variables involved in the relationships between compensation and benefits and rewards
management and firm performance were identified after reviewing the literature. Each of
these variables was operationalized using the following number of items: compensation and
benefits and rewards management, three mediating variables, and observed variable as an
organizational effectiveness with three factors, as stated in the research framework and
hypothesis section. The majority of these items were used in previous empirical studies on
the relationship between HRM practices and firm performance, particularly in the field of
manufacturing industry. To check the face validity of the variables used, the following
complementary actions were taken:
1. The list of items extracted from the literature was mixed, and a panel of experts was
asked to independently classify them into categories, based on the theoretical
definitions given for each variable.
2. Another panel of experts was separately asked to assign labels to unlabeled groups of
items, based again on the definitions given for each variable.
Both tasks were repeated until members of each panel have reached a final agreement on the
items contained in their categorizations.
3.3 Survey instrument
Questionnaire was used as the primary research instrument. It was in the form of a self-
assessment and can be divided into ten parts. Part one contains eight items, asking for
information about the organization, such as the industry sector that they are in, whether or not
they provide direct investment from overseas, their country of origin, whether they have
received investment promotion (BOI) in Thailand and the number of employees in the
organization. These questions are part of the selection process to find out which organizations
are relevant in this study. Part two contains six items, concerning personal information of the
respondents, such as gender, age, current title/position, level of education and years of work
experience. Part three has a total of six items, regarding Compensation and Benefits and
Rewards Management. They were developed from Ferguson (2006), Kgomo (2010) and
Martin (2011). Part four to Part six involves the mediating variables, which are Job
Satisfaction with six items, Employee Engagement with eight items and Employee
Motivation with seven items, respectively. These were adapted from Carden (2007), Kgomo
(2010) and Springer (2010). Part seven has a total of sixteen items that are made up of three
factors of Organizational Effectiveness, namely employee attrition with six items, employee
retention with five items and employee performance with five items These were developed
from Bhattacharya (2000), Carden (2007), Chew (2004), Ferguson (2006), Kgomo (2010),
Martin (2011), Rose (2012) and Springer (2010). Lastly, Part eight allows for the respondents
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
53
to provide any further comments about the questionnaire and whether they intend to use this
study, once the data has been analyzed, to manage human resource in their organizations.
From Part three to Part seven of the questionnaire, the respondents are asked to describe on a
5-point Likert scale with: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, 4 = Moderately
Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree. To reduce the possibility of the existence of key information
bias, a set of questions in the survey contain some revert questions for some of the variables,
such as Employee Attrition and Job Satisfaction, to ensure that the respondents were
confident about answering the questions contained in the questionnaire (Cannon and
Perreault, 1999). The questionnaire was first written in English and then translated into Thai.
In order to ensure linguistic consistency, this was back-translated into English by an
experienced translator, and the necessary corrections were made in the Thai version. The
questionnaire was pre-tested to about 30 managers to find out whether reliability by Alpha –
Coefficient of Cronbach was positive in between 0.80-0.90, regarding the relationship of
compensation and benefits and rewards management and firm performance, in terms of
organizational effectiveness.
3.4 Population, sample and data collection
The population being studied are from MNCs with FDI that have been promoted under BOI.
It refers to foreign investment with projects involving foreign capital of at least 10% to invest
in the key industrial Zone 2 of Eastern Seaboard, Rayong Thailand. There are a total of 255
firms at the targeted zone as a unit of analysis. This research defined FDI for data collection
using stratified sampling of first step and simple sampling for the second step. Top
management, Human Resource Manager/Leader and Line/Functional Manager will be
selected as representatives of those affected by the organizations using HRM practices. In
total, there are 224 samples. There were two channels for distributing the questionnaire. The
questionnaire was sent electronically via email and distributed to all target respondents, but
before doing so, Human Resource, which is the main department to answer the questionnaire,
was contacted by telephone, so as to allow them to coordinate with other line managers and
top management about completing the questionnaire. Questionnaire was also sent by using a
cover letter, explaining the purpose of the study, as well as a copy of the questionnaire. To
encourage participation in answering the questionnaire, respondents were promised that they
would receive a summary of the research findings after the fieldwork is completed. Within
eight weeks, we collected the questionnaires and those that were sent by email were also
received. 224 were returned and adequately completed.
3.5 Statistical method
To test the conceptual model, we used path analysis. The main reason that this technique was
used is that path analysis is a flexible, powerful and robust statistical method that can be used
to examine the relationships between measured (observed) variables, which also require a
highly flexible and comprehensive statistical methodology. The hypotheses are tested by
using AMOS. Results are provided in the following tables and figures.
3.6 Reliability and validity
This research has tested reliability analysis of all items to measure Cronbach’s Alpha for the
scale items to ensure internal consistency. Multi-item measures were developed base on
Cronbach’s alpha > 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). This research then calculated Cronbach’s Alphas
for each variable. For all items, the reliability measure was 0.945.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
54
Table 1: Profile of respondents
Variable Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 140 62.5
Female 84 37.5
Age
21-30 37 16.5
31-40 115 51.3
41-50 67 29.9
51 and above 5 2.2
Position / Title**
Line Manager 173 77.23
HR Leader 33 14.70
Top Management 18 8.00
Country of Origin
Asia 151 67.4
Europe 40 17.9
North America 28 12.5
Middle East and Africa 3 1.3
Australia 2 0.9
Note: Position/Title** Top Management: CEO, Managing Director, General Manager: HR
Leader: HR Director, Sr. HR Manager, HR Manager, HR Leader,. : Line Manager: Any Line
Manager in manufacturing, such as Manufacturing Manager, Production Manager, Quality
Manager and others.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for major variables
Variable Mean Std. Deviation
HRM Practices( HRMP) 3.8612 0.45368
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors( OCB) 4.1094 0.42817
Job Satisfaction( JS) 3.7641 0.44871
Employee Engagement( EE) 4.0268 0.48907
Employee Motivation( EM) 3.7806 0.49188
HR Flexibility( HRF) 3.5050 0.58622
Organizational Effectiveness 3.9621 0.5579
Table 3: Results of measurement model
Item Result
CMIN / DF 1.674
GFI 0.977
CFI 0.981
NFI 0.965
RMSEA 0.060
Notes: Based on a five –point Likert scale ranging from “Strongly disagree” (1) to “Strongly
agree” (5); Fit statistics for measurement model are in Table 4.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
55
Table 4: Pearson’s correlation coefficients
CBR JS EEG EM OE
CBR -
JS 0.351** -
EEG 0.464** 0.617** -
EM 0.320** 0.339** 0.614** -
OE 0.464** 0.589** 0.509** 0.445** -
N=376
Notes: **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 4 provides a general picture of associations between the constructs, where Pearson’s
correlation coefficients were estimated. Standard is between -1.00 to 1.00. The fact that none
of the calculations is above 0.80 indicates the non-existence of Multicollinearity problems.
4. Test results
We tested the proposed hypothesis using path analysis. For the conceptual framework, we
found that this path analysis complies with the empirical data:, CMIN/DF 1.647, as well as the
favorable nature of the other fit indices (RMSEA=0.060(<0.08), NFI=0.965(>0.90),
CFI=0.981(>0.90), GFI=0.977(>0.90), which were taken at an acceptable threshold level
(Hooper et al., 2008; Kline, 2005). Results are shown in Table 3. The standardized path
coefficients are presented in Figure 2 to ensure the relationships exist between the variables,
so as to be in line with the hypotheses. The results in Figure 2 present the following:
1. Compensation and Benefits and Rewards Management has direct, significant and
positive influence on Organizational Effectiveness (β=0.24**, ρ < 0.01), positive
influence on Job Satisfaction (β=0.27**, ρ < 0.01), positive influence on Employee
Engagement (β=0.19**, ρ <0.01), and positive influence on Employee Motivation
(β=0.32**, ρ <0.01), thus supporting H1, H2, H3, H4.
2. Job Satisfaction has direct, significant and positive influence on Organizational
Effectiveness (β=0.43**, ρ <0.01), thus supporting H5.
3. Employee Motivation has direct, significant and positive influence on Organizational
Effectiveness (β=0.22**, ρ <0.01), thus supporting H7.
4. There are no direct influence on Organizational Effectiveness, and thus no support for
the following hypotheses test on H6 of Employee Engagement and Organizational
Effectiveness.
5. However, results from the test have found new relationships between the variables
that have significant influences: Job Satisfaction has direct, positive influence on
Employee Engagement (β=0.41**, ρ <0.01). Employee Motivation has direct, positive
influence on Job Satisfaction (β=0.25**, ρ <0.01), and Employee Engagement
(β=0.41**, ρ <0.01) respectively.
According to the results of the hypotheses, the only significant results obtained are those
reported in the final model, shown in Figure 2.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
56
Note: N = 376
Figure 2: Structural model
5. Study results and discussions
According to the test results, shown above, they have provided some fresh insights into the
relationships between the variables. They have confirmed that there is a positive relationship
between compensation and benefits and rewards management (CBR), and organizational
effectiveness (β=0.24**, ρ <0.01). This is in line with previous studies like Shaw et al.
(1998), Hong et al. (2012), Qureshi (2010), Dhiman and Mohanty (2010), and are examples
of how important it is that to increase performance in organizations, CBR must be
implemented to prevent employees from leaving the organizations, retain them and increase
their performance. In relation to the mediating variables, the relationship between CBR and
organizational effectiveness, as shown in Table 5, and from the results in Figure 2, CBR is
also indirectly related to organizational effectiveness through the mediating variables. Thus,
there are all still significant positive relationships between CBR and organizational
effectiveness.
Table 5: The indirect relationship between CBR and organizational effectiveness
CBR 0.27** ---> Job Satisfaction 0.43** ---> Organizational Effectiveness = 0.12**
CBR 0.32** ---> Employee Motivation 0.22** ---> Organizational Effectiveness = 0.07**
As for the relationship between the three meditating variables: job satisfaction and
organizational effectiveness, results have shown a positive correlation between job
satisfaction and organizational effectiveness (β=0.43**, ρ <0.01), thus supporting previous
findings (Barak et al., 2001; Van Saane et al., 2003; Halkos and Bousinakis, 2010). It is also
important that employees are motivated so that they can increase organizational effectiveness,
as the findings demonstrate. It has a positive relationship with organizational effectiveness
(β=0.43**, ρ <0.01), thus supporting previous findings (Dysvik and Kuvaas, 2010; Aguenza
and Som, 2012; Solomon et al., 2012). However, there is no connection between employee
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
57
engagement and organizational effectiveness. Findings contradict earlier researches by
Kgomo (2010), and Halbesleben and Wheeler (2008). But in Kgomo (2010), research was
conducted in South Africa’s contact center service industry, whereas this study was done in
Thailand’s manufacturing industry. In Halbesleben and Wheeler (2008), study was conducted
in a variety of industries, such as education, healthcare, and banking, not just the
manufacturing industry, and it was done in the US, not Thailand. But given the above
explanations, employee engagement is not the only factor that has an effect on organizational
effectiveness. Employees are satisfied with their jobs through the use of CBR (β=0.27**, ρ
<0.01), as shown in the results, further supporting these previous studies (Rehman et al.,
2010; Clifford, 1985). Employee engagement is also influenced by CBR, as shown in the
result (β=0.19**, ρ <0.01), and further supported by Bhattacharya and Mukherjee (2009), and
Ram and Prabhakar (2011). Employees are motivated through the implementation of CBR, as
the result clearly shows (β=0.32**, ρ <0.01), and supported by Ali and Ahmed (2009).
Study also finds additional relationships, such as job satisfaction has a direct and positive
effect on employee engagement (β=0.41** ρ <0.01), further supporting Garg and Kumar
(2012), who have reported in their research that job satisfaction is an important driver of
employee engagement. Employee motivation has a direct and positive effect on job
satisfaction (β= 0.25**ρ <0.01), which is further supported by Saleem et al. (2010), and
employee engagement (β=0.41** ρ <0.01), although the latter has no known studies to
support such findings.
5.1 Implications, limitations and recommendations for further studies
Based on the results, we can conclude that CBR of MNC’s have a directly significant and
positive influence on organizational effectiveness, which consists of employee attrition,
employee retention and employee performance. In particular, results suggest a strong
correlation between CBR and organizational effectiveness. This can prove useful to managers
who wish to retain employees in their organizations and increase their performance. Thus,
CBR should be used by managers, where employees are given positive recognition and
reward when they perform well. Appropriate compensation should be provided for the
amount of work or quality of work that employees do. Benefits that employees receive should
be equitable.
While the results clearly show a strong direct and positive relationship between CBR and
organizational effectiveness, there is also an indirect relationship between CBR and
organizational effectiveness, affecting the two mediating variables of employee motivation
and employee job satisfaction, and these in turn have a positive effect on organizational
effectiveness. Managers should develop a program for both of these variables to reduce the
level of employee attrition, where employees may leave their jobs and look for a new one,
and to increase employee performance, where employees perform better at work and their
performance can also exceed expectation. In relation to job satisfaction, managers should
make their employees feel that their jobs are significant and their work should always be
appreciated. As for employee motivation, there should be a program where employees are
encouraged to make improvements at work that are acceptable by the organization, and to get
ahead, thus allowing them to fulfill their ambitions.
Overall, our findings show that CBR still has a high and positive effect on organizational
effectiveness, whether directly or indirectly. Such findings can be beneficial for managers
intending to manage human resources by using CBR, and increase performance in their
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
58
organizations. This study has, thus, created a perfect model to persuade both organizations
and academics to understand the importance of using HRM practices, particularly CBR. They
can help firms find ways to better implement CBR that are in line with corporate business
strategies. Furthermore, job satisfaction and employee motivation play a crucial role as
mediators in the relationship between CBR and organizational effectiveness. Therefore,
organizations should understand the importance of developing programs and activities
relating to these two mediating variables to enhance organizational effectiveness.
Although this study has shown the positive influences of compensation and benefits and
rewards management on organizational effectiveness, it does have its limitations. Firstly, the
study was conducted in Thailand and was limited only to the one key industrial FDI’s zone.
Thus, the findings and conclusions drawn from this research only represent the Thai context.
Recommendations for future research is to include other countries, particularly those in
Southeast Asia that are going to be involved in the development of the AEC (ASEAN
Economic Community) in 2015. By doing this will enable studies on CBR to become more
intricate due to the additional contexts of diversity and cross culture. The present study
focuses on just one HRM practices, which means that any future studies could be done for
other HRM practices like hiring and recruitment, training and development, and employee
relation, employee diversity to which these practices have an effect on organizational
effectiveness. As for foreign direct investment, the current study focuses on all FDIs in
Thailand. Future research could be to focus on a particular FDI from their country of origin,
such as America, Europe, and Asia, especially Japanese investment firms, which are the
largest group of foreign investors in Thailand (http://thailand.prd.go.th). Study should also
not be limited to local companies in Thailand. Lastly, since this research focuses on all
sectors of the manufacturing industry, it would be more beneficial if further research was
done on a particular sector of the manufacturing industry, such as the automotive, electronics,
and foods and beverage. Study can be expanded to other industries, such as service,
hospitality and airline.
5.2 Conclusion
This study highlights the usefulness of having compensation and benefits and rewards
management, as one of the key human resource practices, that organizations can use as a
management tool to attract, retain and motivate their employees. However, it is not the only
factor that can determine the effectiveness of organizations. There are other variables
involved besides the two mediating variables that have already been discussed above. While
these two variables may have helped to further understand the relationship between
compensation and benefits and rewards management, and organizational effectiveness,
organizations also need to consider other aspects to determine the performance outcome of
organizations, such as leadership, culture, working process, policies, and so on.
6. References
1. Adams, J.S., (1963), Toward an understanding of inequity, Journal of abnormal
psychology, 67, pp 422-436.
2. Adams, J.S., (1965), Inequity in social exchange, Advances in experimental social
psychology, 2, pp 267-299.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
59
3. Aguenza, B.B. and Som, A.P.M., (2012), Motivational factors of employee retention
and engagement in organizations, International journal of advances in management
and economics, 1(6), pp 88-95.
4. Ali, R. and Ahmed, M.S., (2009), The impact of reward and recognition programs on
employee’s motivation and satisfaction: An empirical study, International review of
business research papers, 5(4), pp 270-279.
5. Allen, R.S., Takeda, M.B., White, C.S. and Helms, M.M., (2004), Rewards and
organizational performance in Japan and the United States: A comparison, Compens.
Ben. Rev., 36(1), pp 7-14.
6. Armstrong, M., (2005), A handbook of human resources management practices,
Kogan, UK.
7. Askov, E.N., (2000), Workplace literacy: Evaluation of three model programs, Adult
basic education, 10, pp 100-108.
8. Bamberger, P. and Meshoulam, I., (2000), Human resource management strategy.
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
9. Barak, M.E., Nissly, J.A. and Levin, A., (2001), Antecedents to retention and turnover
among child welfare, social work and other human service employees: What can we
learn from past research? A review and metanalysis, Soc. Serv. Rev., 75, pp 625-661.
10. Barney, J.B., (1991), Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of
management, 17(1), pp 99-120.
11. Baumruk, R. and Gorman, B., (2006), Why managers are crucial to increasing
engagement, Strategic HR review, 5(2), pp 24-27.
12. Bedeian, A.G., (1993), Management, 3rd edition, Dryden Press, New York.
13. Bernadin, H.J., (2007), Human resource management: An exponential approach, 4th
edition, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.
14. Bhattacharya, M., (2000), People as a competitive edge: Examining the empirical
relationship between human resource flexibility and firm performance, Unpublished
PhD dissertation, Business administration, Graduate school of syracuse university,
New York.
15. Bhattacharya, S. and Mukherjee, P., (2009), Rewards as a key to employee
engagement: A comparative study on I.T. professionals, ASBM journal of
management, II(1), pp 160-175.
16. Boyt, T.E., Lusch, R.F. and Naylor, G., (2001), The role of professionalism in
determining job satisfaction in professional services: A study of marketing
researchers, Journal of service research, 3(4), pp 321-330.
17. Cannon, J.P. and Perreault, W.D., (1999), Buyer-supplier relationships in business
markets, Journal of marketing research, 31(4), pp 439-60.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
60
18. Carden, L.L., (2007), Pathways to success for moderately defined careers: A study of
relationships among prestige/autonomy, job satisfaction, career commitment, career
path, training and learning, and performance as perceived by project managers,
Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Educational Human Resource Development, Texas
AandM University.
19. Chew, J.C.L., (2004), The influence of human resource management practices on the
retention of core employees of Australian organizations: An empirical study,
Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.
20. Clifford, J.M., (1985), The relative importance of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards as
determinants of work satisfaction, Soc. Quart., 26(3), pp 365-385.
21. Danish, R.Q. and Usman, A., (2010), Impact of reward and recognition on job
satisfaction and motivation: An empirical study from Pakistan, International journal
of business and management, 5(2), pp 159-167.
22. Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M., (2000), The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behavior, Psychological inquiry, 11(4), pp 227–
268.
23. Deci, E. and Ryan, R., (2002), Handbook of self-determination research, University of
Rochester Press, Rochester, NY.
24. Den Hartog, D.N. and Verburg, R.M., (2004), High performance work systems,
organizational culture and firm performance, Human resource management journal,
14(1), pp 55-78.
25. Dessler, G., (2000), Human resource management, 8th edition, Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice-Hall, NJ.
26. Dhiman, G.R. and Mohanty, R.P., (2010), HRM practices, attitudinal outcomes and
turnover intent: An empirical study in Indian oil and gas exploration and production
sector, South Asian journal of management, 17(4), pp 74-104.
27. Dunnette, M.D. and Locke, E.A., (1976), The nature and causes of job satisfaction,
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Rand McNally College
Publishing Company, Chicago.
28. Dysvik, A. and Kuvaas, B., (2010), Exploring the relative and combined influence of
mastery-approach goals and work intrinsic motivation on employee turnover
intention, Personnel review, 39(5), pp 622-638.
29. Eisenberger, R. and Cameron, J., (1996), Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or
myth? American psychologist, 51(11), pp 1153-1166.
30. Eisenhardt, K.M., (1989), Agency theory: An assessment and review, Academy of
management review, 14(1), pp 57-74.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
61
31. EL-Hajji, M.A., (2011), An analytical approach to the unequivocal need of
organizations for job evaluation, International journal of business and social science,
2(18), pp 8-13.
32. EL-Hajji, M.A., (2012), Protocol of job evaluation: A bird's eye view, International
journal of human resource studies, 2(1), pp 27-39.
33. Falcone, P. (2006), Preserving restless top performers: Keep your top performers
engaged so they don’t jump ship once job opportunities arise, HR Magazine,
http://www.allbusiness.com/humanresources/workforcemanagementhiring/8749791.h
tml, Accessed April 2011.
34. Fama, E.F. and Jensen, M.C., (1983), Separation of ownership and control, Journal of
law and economics, 26(2), pp 301-325.
35. Ferguson, K.L., (2006), Human resource management systems and firm performance,
Unpublished PhD Dissertation, College of Education and Human Development,
University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
36. Flynn, G., (1998), Is your recognition program understood? Workforce, 77(7), pp 30-
35.
37. Fox, D., Byrne, V. and Roualt, F., (1999), Performance improvement: What to keep in
mind, Training and development, 53(8), pp 895-915.
38. Galbraith, J.K. (1973), Controls or competition - What's at issue? Review of
economics and statistics, 55(4), pp 524-538.
39. Garg, A. and Kumar, V., (2012), A study of employee engagement in pharmaceutical
sector, International journal of research in IT and management, 2(5), pp 85 – 98.
40. Gerhart, B. and Milkovich, G.T., (1992), Employee compensation: research and
practice. In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (2nd ed.), Handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology, Consulting psychologists press, Palo Alto, CA.
41. Gibbons, J., (2006), Employee engagement: A review of current research and its
implications, The conference board.
42. Goodale, J., Koerner, M. and Roney, J., (1997), Analyzing the impact of service
provider empowerment on perceptions of service quality inside an organization,
Journal of quality management, 2(2), pp 191-215.
43. Grace, D.H. and Khalsa, S.A., (2003), Re-recruiting faculty and staff: The antidote to
today’s high attrition, Independent school, 62(3), pp 20-27.
44. Gruber, J. and Madrian, B., (1994), Health insurance and job mobility: The effect of
public policy on job-lock, Industrial and labor relations review, 48(1), pp 86-101.
45. Halbesleben, J.R.B. and Wheeler, A.R., (2008), The relative roles of engagement and
embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave, Work and stress,
22(3), pp 242-256.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
62
46. Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L., (2002), Business unit level relationship
between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A
meta-analysis, Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), pp 268-279.
47. Harzing, A.W., Ruysseveldt, J.V., (2005), International Human Resource
Management, London, SAGE Publication Ltd.
48. Hellriegel, D., Woodman, R.W. and Slocum, J.W. Jr., (1992), Organizational
behavior, 6th edition, West publishing company, St. Paul.
49. Hong, E.N.C., Hao, L.Z., Kumar, R., Ramendran, C. and Kadiresan, V., (2012), An
effectiveness of human resource management practices on employee retention in
institute of higher learning: A regression analysis, International journal of business
research and management, 3(2), pp 60-79.
50. Huselid, M.A., (1995), The impact of human resource management practices on
turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance, Academy of management
journal, 38(3), pp 635-672.
51. Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K., (2001), The job satisfaction-
job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review, American
Psychological Association Inc, 127(3), pp 376-407.
52. Kahn, W.A., (1990), An exercise of authority, Organizational behavior teaching
review, 14(2), p 2842.
53. Kahn, W.A., (1992), Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work, Academy of management journal, 33(4), pp 692-724.
54. Kgomo, F.L., (2010), Employee engagement model facilitating agent retention in the
contact centre industry, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Faculty of Management
Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa.
55. Khan, M.A., (2010), Effects of human resource management practices on
organizational performance: An empirical study of oil and gas industry in Pakistan.
European journal of economics, Finance and administrative sciences, 24, pp 157-175.
56. Khan, R.I., Aslam, H.D. and Lodhi, I. (2011), Compensation management: A strategic
conduit towards achieving employee retention and job satisfaction in banking sector
of Pakistan, International journal of human resource studies, 1(1), pp 89-97.
57. Khojasteh, M., (1993), Motivating the private vs. public sector managers, Public
personnel management, 22(3), pp 391-401.
58. Lado, A.A. and Wilson, M.C., (1994), Human resource systems and sustained
competitive advantage: A competency based perspective, Academy of management,
19(4), pp 699-727.
59. Lazear, E.P., (1986), Salaries and piece rates, Journal of business, 59(1), pp 405-431.
60. Likert, R.L., (1961), The human organization. McGraw-Hill, New York.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
63
61. Locke, E.A. (1976), The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.P. Dunnette (ed.),
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL.
62. Luthans, F. (1998), Organisational behavior, 8th edition, McGraw-Hill, Boston.
63. Luthans, F. and Peterson, S.J., (2002), Employee engagement and manager self-
efficacy: Implications for managerial effectiveness and development, Journal of
management development, 21(5), pp 376-387.
64. Madrian, B., (1994), Employment-based health insurance and job mobility – Is there
evidence of job lock, Quarterly journal of economics, 109(1), pp 27-54.
65. Manzoor, Q.A., (2012), Impact of employees motivation on organizational
effectiveness, Business management and strategy, 3(1), pp 1-12.
66. Marsden, D., French, S. and Kubo, K., (2002), Why does performance pay de-
motivate? Financial incentive versus performance appraisal. In T. Hanami (ed.),
Global integration and challenges for industrial relations and human resource
management in the 21st century: Selected papers from twelfth IIRA World Congress,
Institute of Labour, Tokyo, Japan.
67. Martin, M.J., (2011), Influence of human resource practices on employee intention to
quit, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Faculty of Virginia polytechnic institute and state
university, Blacksburg, VA.
68. Matthew, J., Grawhich and Barber, L.K., (2009), Are you focusing both employees
and organizational outcomes? Organizational Health Initiative at Saint Louis
University, (ohi.slu@edu), 1-5.
69. McDuffie, J.P., (1995), Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance,
Industrial and labour relations review, 48(2), pp 197-221.
70. McGregor, D., (1960), The human side of enterprise, McGraw-Hill, New York.
71. Miller, M., Jackson, J. C. and Pope, M.L., (2001), Faculty recruitment and retention:
A case study of the chair’s role, San Jose State University, San Jose, CA.
72. Mitchell, T.R. and Larson, J.R., (1987), People in organizations: Introduction to
organizational behavior, 3rd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
73. Morrison, E.W., (1996), Organizational citizenship behavior as a critical link between
HRM practices and service quality, Hum. Resource Manage., 35(4), pp 493-512.
74. Nelson, D.L. and Simmons, B.L., (2003), Health psychology and work stress: A more
positive approach. In J.C. Quick and L.E. Tetrick (eds), Handbook of occupational
health psychology, American psychological association, Washington, DC.
75. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric theory, 2nd edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
64
76. Odunlade, R.O., (2012), Managing employee compensation and benefits for job
satisfaction in libraries and information centres in Nigeria, Library Philosophy and
Practice, p 714.
77. Oguntimehin, A., (2001), Teacher effectiveness: Some practical strategies for
successful implementation of universal basic education in Nigeria, African journal of
educational management, 9(1), pp 151 – 161.
78. Oosthuizen, T.F.J., (2001), Motivation influencing worker performance in a technical
division of Telkom SA, Acta Commercii, 1, pp 19-30.
79. Plessis, A.J., (2010), International human resource management: An overview of its
effect on managers in global organizations, Interdisciplinary journal of contemporary
research in business, 2(4), pp 178-192.
80. Porter, M.E., (1986), Competition in global industries: A conceptual framework. In
M.E. Porter, (ed.), Competition in global industries, Harvard business school press,
Boston, MA.
81. Porter, E.M., (1990), The competitive advantage of nations, The Free Press, New
York.
82. Qureshi, M.I., Zaman, K. and Shah, I.A., (2010), Relationship between rewards and
employee’s performance in the cement industry in Pakistan, Journal of international
academic research, 10(2), pp 19-29.
83. Ram, P. and Prabhakar, G.V., (2011), An enquiry into the mediatory role of employee
engagement: Evidence from the hotel industry in Jordan, Far east journal of
psychology and business, 5(2), pp 41-59.
84. Rehman, M.Z.U., Khan, M.R., Ziauddin, J. and Lashari, J.A., (2010), Effect of job
rewards on job satisfaction, moderating role of age differences: An empirical evidence
from Pakistan, African journal of business management, 4(6), pp 1131-1139.
85. Rose, K., (2012), Organizational citizenship behaviors in higher education:
Examining the relationships between behaviors and performance outcomes for
individuals and institutions, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Workforce Development
Education, University of Arkansas, Arkansas.
86. Rosenzweig, P.M. and Nohria, N., (1994), Influences on human resource management
practices in multinational corporations, Journal of international business studies,
25(2), pp 229-251.
87. Rummler, G.A. and Brache, A.P., (1995), Improving performance: How to manage
the white space on the organizational chart, 2nd edition, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco,
CA.
A causal model of compensation & benefits and reward management on organizational effectiveness of
MNCs
Sorasak Tangthong
ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Volume 5 Issue 1, 2014
65
88. Saleem, R., Mahmood, A. and Mahmood, A., (2010), Effect of work motivation on
job satisfaction in mobile telecommunication service organizations of Pakistan,
International journal of business and management, 5(11), pp 213-222.
89. Schuler, R.S. (1998), Personnel and human resources management, 3rd edition, West
Publishing Company, Toronto.
90. Shah, F.A., Yusaff, R. Md, Hussain, A. and Hussain, J.A., (2012), Critical review of
multinational companies, their structures and strategies and their link with
international human resource management, IOSR journal of business and
management, 3(5), pp 28-37.
91. Shaw, J.D., Delery, J.E., Jenkins, G.D. Jr. and Gupta, N., (1998), An organization-
level analysis of voluntary and involuntary turnover, Academy of management
journal, 41(5), pp 511-525.
92. Siddhanta, A. and Roy, D., (2010), Employee engagement: Engaging the 21st century
workforce, Asian journal of management research, 1, pp 170-189.
93. Solomon, O., Hashim, N.H., Mehdi, Z.B.T. and Ajagbe, M.A., (2012), Employee
motivation and organizational performance in multinational companies: A study of
Cadbury Nigeria Plc., International journal of research in management and
technology, 2(3), pp 303-312.
94. Springer, G.J., (2010), Job motivation, satisfaction and performance among bank
employees: A correlational study, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Faculty of the
School of Psychology, North Central University, Prescott Valley, Arizona.
95. Stavrou-Costea, E., (2005), The challenges of human resource management towards
organizational effectiveness, Journal of European industrial training, 29(2), pp 112-
134.
96. Towers Perrin., (2007), Global workforce study, Available at:
www.towerswatson.com
97. Van Saane, N., Sluiter, J.H., Verbeek, A.M. and Frings-Dresen, M.H.W., (2003),
Reliability and validity of instruments measuring job satisfaction-a systematic review,
Occupational medicine, 53(3), pp 191-200.
98. Vroom, V.H., (1964), Work and motivation, Wiley, New York.
99. Yukl, G., (2002), Leadership in organizations, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.