International Journal of Human Resource Management and Research (IJHRMR) ISSN 2249-6874 Vol.

2, Issue 2 June 2012 108-119 TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.,

MOTIVATING FACTORS FOR JOB CHOICE: TOOL TO ACQUIRE & RETAIN TALENT IN THE ORGANIZATION
EKTA SHARMA Asst. Professor , Amrut Mody School of Management, Ahmedabad University , Gujarat , India

ABSTRACT
A potential employer spends days and funds searching for the right candidate. Over the past two decades recruiting top applicants has become increasingly difficult. Thousands graduate every year and yet there are thousands of vacancies! Is it because of the perception of todays future professionals in their job choice? Do they know their job expectations? What do these future professionals look for in a job? The objective of the present study is to analyze the following: Are the factors to be considered for job choice gender based? What are the motivating factors that prompt them to accept a job in an organization? The data has been collected from the future professionals i.e. students.

KEYWORDS: HR, Motivation Factors, Job Expectations. INTRODUCTION

Getting the right candidate at right place is the biggest challenge confronted by the employers. And even if they recruit the desired candidate, they have to confront the other monster: TURNOVER i.e. the selected candidate does not stay longer. Why is this so? Thousands graduate every year and yet there are thousands of vacancies! Is it because of the perception of todays future professionals in their job choice? Do they know their job expectations? What do these future professionals look for in a job? The objective of the present study is to analyze the following: Are the factors to be considered for job choice gender based? What are the motivating factors that prompt them to accept a job in an organization? The process of looking for a job has been studied earlier and is described as job choice. A potential employer spends days and funds searching for the right candidate. Over the past two decades recruiting top applicants has become increasingly difficult. Learning how to attract the best applicants is critical for recruiters in todays world (Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, and Jones 2005). The key is not just to attract the best applicants, but also to be able to retain them. The average cost of recruiting, hiring, and training a new recruit is around $4,000 (Prafder). This enormous cost makes it mandatory that the turnover rate remains low, but then the problem is: what attracts these top applicants and also motivate them to stay with the organization in the long term?

LITERATURE REVIEW
Over the past few decades, several studies note a shift in students' work values and expectations compared to the generations before them (Loughlin & Barling, 2001; Ng & Burke, 2006; Smola & Sutton, 2002). For example, in the 1950's, American graduates focused on promotional opportunities, high salaries, and job security, while students in the 1960's focused on the meaning of life, and students

109

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

of the 1970's and 1980's directed their careers towards individual achievement and reward. In the 1980's, students indicated their primary concerns for choosing a career path were future earning potential, promotional opportunities and employer location (Parmley, Parmley & Wooton, 1987). In the 1990's, students' primary concerns for choosing a particular career path focused on promotion, challenge and responsibility, working conditions and the type of work (Devlin & Petersen, 1994). Students at the turn of the century appear to be following in the footsteps of their parents--or are they? With the changing global landscape, future research is necessary to understand the career expectations of current students and the implications these student expectations have for organizations, recruiters and managers (Jarlstrom, 2000; Kirrane & Ryan, 2000; Rose, 2001; Ng & Burke, 2006). Several researches have been done on career expectations of students in relation to (1) choosing a career and company, (2) global and cultural issues, (3) gender issues, (4) differences for specific business functions, (5) recruitment, and (6) promotion, length of employment, ideal job acceptance, and the job search process. Moy and Lee (2002, p.340) state that job attributes are the most important factors that influence the choice of career among undergraduates. The job attributes that are important to undergraduates in choosing their career can be broadly categorized into three groups including the job itself, compensation or security and the company or work environment (Moy and Lee, 2002, p.341). Teo and Poon (1994) have used 10 factors such as pay, fringe benefits, working conditions, managerial quality and relationships, long-term career prospects, responsibility given, authority, involvement in decision making, marketability and job security in finding which of these job attributes or factors influenced the choice of employment of first year business undergraduate. Moy and Lee (2002) in their research of the business graduate perceptions of employment in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and Multi National Corporations (MNCs) have tested two hypotheses based on nine job attributes. Moy and Lee (2002, p.343) found that business undergraduates rated long term career prospects as the most important job attribute affecting their career choice, followed by pay, job security and managerial relationship. Harris, Grubb, and MacKenzie, (2006) have taken academic major, gender and personality into account to determine if there was any relationship between these three variables and business undergraduates preferred employment with SMEs and MNCs. They discovered that undergraduates who had management as major preferred to work in SMEs while the accounting, finance and marketing major preferred to work for MNCs. Female preferred employment with MNCs but male preferred SMEs. There was no finding of any significant relationship between personality and employment preference. The individuals who prefer to work for an organization feel such a career provides great development of knowledge and skills, job security, higher income, intellectual stimulation and the opportunity to work with people they admire and respect (Brenner, Pringle and Greenhaus as cited in Kolvereid, 1996, p.24). The individuals who preferred to work for an organization and those who prefer

110

Ekta Sharma

to operate their own business concurred that their preferred career will provide greater opportunity for continued development, to earn a higher income and to work with people they admire and respect (Brenner et al., as cited in Kolvereid, 1996, p.25). Kolvereid (1996, p.28-29) has included security, economic opportunity, authority, autonomy, social environment, workload (working hours), challenge, self realization, participate in the whole process, responsibility, career opportunity as classes of reasons for employment status preferences in his study. His research found that individuals who chose to work for an organisation rated security, social environment, workload, avoidance of responsibility and career opportunity as the reasons. Those who preferred self-employment rated high on factors such as economic opportunity, authority, autonomy, challenge, self-realisation and participate in the whole process. In the early 1990's in both the United States and New Zealand, with respect to their first position following college, students placed high priority on long-term career oriented attributes, such as promotion and self-development (Devlin & Peterson, 1994). Do today's students still place high value on long-term career oriented attributes? What are the current perceptions? As recently as 2008, in a study of first semester MBA students in a western U.S. University, students' primary attribute for choosing a career was an individual emphasis on self-development, specifically favouring career benefits and wealth as leading factors (Ng, Burke, and Fidsenbaum, 2008). Family and non-family issues in career selection were not predictors of career decisions. Similarly, in a large study of Canadian undergraduate business students, students who participated in a cooperative exchange with a business had more realistic work expectations and a better understanding of their own abilities (Ng & Burke, 2006). Cooperative students placed a greater emphasis on 'work' and 'people' dimensions of a firm and less on the firm's reputation and benefits. For Canadian business students, good people to work with, reputation of the firm in the form of commitment to social responsibility, challenging work, and job security were critical factors of importance to students in obtaining their desired job and organizational attributes (Ng & Burke, 2006). Prior to today's recession, Ng and Burke (2006) suggest that given a shortage of skilled workers, students will be selecting the organizations they want to work for based on the kind of working conditions and flexibility employers can offer in terms of location, technology, workspace, and human resource policies. Similarly, in a large study of the United Kingdom's University senior year students' perception of organizational attributes, the five most important organizational attributes cited by students are companies that invest in their employees, care about their employees as individuals, have clear opportunities for promotion, daily work variety, and a dynamic forward-looking business approach (Terjesen, Vinnicombe & Freeman, 2007). Various studies have examined student career perceptions with respect to global and cultural issues. Gender difference in students' career aspirations and expectations were more important than ethnic difference in a study comparing black, Mexican American, and white college freshman (Arbona & Novy, 1991). As recently as 2006, the life goals among graduating high school seniors from a wide variety of cultural backgrounds differed but career expectations did not (Chang, Chen, Greenberger, Dooley, and Heckahusen, 2006).

111

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

Studies have also explored the differences between men and women in career selection. In 1985, a study of differences between men and women college students at a private New England College found that women limited their career expectations due to sex role socialization issues (Hesse-Biber, 1985). By 2000, new entrants to the workforce were highly career-conscious and the persistence of sexrole stereotypes in relation to career priority still existed (Kirrane & Ryan, 2000). By 2007, in the United Kingdom, differences between men and women still existed on the importance of organizational attributes and the perceived extent of their presence (Terjesen et al., 2007). Women felt care about individual, daily work variety, friendly informal culture, commonalities amongst co-workers, degree skill utilization, stress-free working environment, internationally diverse mix of co-workers, and standardized work hours were important attributes. Men ranked a high salary as the critical attribute--above the others cited by women. In a different career path than business, physical therapy students reported that there is a difference between men and women with regard to career expectations, and men expected to be promoted quicker and to have a higher income in the first year of employment (Johnson, 2007). However, by 2008, in the United States, differences in factors affecting career choice between men and women in management were not evident (Ng et al., 2008). Company recruiters seek the best 'match' for their company in terms of individual attributes in relation to company needs and culture. However, given the changing perceptions of today's students, the need for recruiters to modify their recruiting strategies exists (Jarlstrom, 2000). Researchers have assisted recruiters in this matter. For example, with the 'employer knowledge framework', applicants evaluate a firm based on the employer information regarding physical attributes of the employer (e.g. firm size, geographical location), job information (e.g. pay, benefits, promotional opportunities) and people information (that is, potential coworker information) (Cable & Turban, 2001). Money and pay are not the only extrinsic awards an employee may receive from a job, although, according to past research, salary is one of the most important factors in a persons decision to accept or reject a job offer (Rynes, Gerhart, and Minette 2004, Judge and Bretz 1992). Some say that job security, type of work, advancement opportunity, company characteristics, and pay are just a few of these that are weighed in any decision (Jurgensen 1978, Judge and Bretz 1992). Judge and Bretz (1992) also found that promotion opportunities are one of the most important job attributes leading to a job choice decision. In a study conducted 30 years ago, the top three factors in a job were benefits, hours, and pay. Even though benefits and hours ranked higher, there seemed to be a rise in importance of pay (Jurgensen 1978). In a more recent study, extrinsic rewards have been defined as pay, stock options, and bonuses, gain sharing, promotions and benefits (Cummings and Worley 2007).

METHODOLOGY
The sample includes 640 business graduates. Out of 640, 416 are males and 224 are females. The data has been collected through questionnaire which has fourteen variables. The variables are Job Security, Adequate salary, Fringe Benefits, Opportunities for Promotion, Comfortable working condition, Interesting Work, Sound company policies & practices, Respect & Recognition,

112

Ekta Sharma

Responsibility & Independence, Doing something Worthwhile, Considerate & Sympathetic supervisor, technically competent supervisor, Hours of work, Pay according to ability & competence. The respondents are expected to rank these variables in order of importance for them in choice of job. The mean ranks of all variables have been derived. Independent sample t-test is used to analyze the impact of gender on the job choice variables

HYPOTHESIS FORMULATION
1. Job security is the important criteria of Job choice. Individuals prefer job security in choice of job.(Brenner, Pringle and Greenhaus as cited in Kolvereid, 1996, p.24). 2. The job choice is dependent on gender. There is a difference between men and women with regard to career expectations, and men expected to be promoted quicker and to have a higher income in the first year of employment (Johnson, 2007). 3. Salary is the important criteria of Job choice. Salary is one of the most important factors in a persons decision to accept or reject a job offer (Rynes, Gerhart, and Minette 2004, Judge and Bretz 1992). 4. Working condition is the important criteria of job choice:

The students will be selecting career paths based upon the working conditions, opportunities, and flexibility that employers can offer, and firms will need to re-evaluate their recruitment procedures to mirror these expectations (Ng & Burke, 2006). 5. Interesting work is not important than salary.

HYPOTHESIS TESTING
1. Job security is the important criteria of Job choice.

Mean rank of Job security is 4.48, which is third in series, so the hypothesis is rejected. (Table 4) 2. The job choice is dependent on gender.

The mean ranks of the variable differ with the gender. Hence hypothesis is accepted. (Table 2) 3. Salary is the important criteria of Job choice.

The mean rank of salary is 3.71, which is the highest rank. Hence hypothesis is accepted. (Table 4. Working condition is the important criteria of job choice.

Working condition ranks fourth in the series with mean of 5.90. This implies that the working condition is an important factor of job choice and hence, the hypothesis is accepted. (Table 4)

113

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

5.

Interesting work is not important than salary.

Interesting work has lower rank (3.86) than the adequate salary (3.71) (Table 4)

DISCUSSION
The study reveals that females ranked interesting work as the most important criteria, in contrast to the males who ranked adequate salary as the most important criteria. The mean of ranks for Job security is almost equal, irrespective of the gender. The competence & behaviour of supervisor is the last ranked variable by both the genders. 81% respondents have ranked adequate salary in first five & 71% respondents have ranked interesting work in first five.(Table 1) The Independent t-test (Table 3) shows that the job choice variables are dependent on gender e.g. adequate salary, Fringe benefits, interesting work.

CONCLUSIONS & FURTHER RESEARCH

The study is an usher for recruiters, professors and advisors who need to analyze current career expectations. This will lead to a win-win situation for recruiters as well as aspirants. As future employees are attempting to find the right fit, organizations are also attempting to find and hire the best and the brightest talent to fill any vacancies. If an organization can successfully adapt their job characteristics to cater to the prospective employees, they will have a higher probability of finding the best-fit candidate. This will in turn increase the Return On Investment, as there will be committed workforce with less turnover. There can be further research in this field. There is possibility of finding job choice variables across different countries. Is there a difference? Does Herzbergs two factor theory stand true for the present generation as well? Is there a change in these variables with the increasing work experience?

REFERENCES
1. Arbona, C. and Novy, D. (1991). Career aspirations and expectations of black, Mexican American, and white students. The Career Development Quarterly. Alexandria: Mar 1991.39(3), 231 2. Brenner, O. C., Charles D. Pringle, and Jeffrey H. Greenhaus(1991). "Perceived Fulfillment of Organizational Employment Versus Entrepreneurship: Work Values and Career Intentions of Business College Graduates," Journal of Small Business Management 29(3), 62-74.

3.

Cable, D.M. and Turban, D.B. (2001). Establishing the dimensions, sources, and value of job seekers' employer knowledge during recruitment. In Ferris, G.E. (Ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, Elsevier Science, New York, NY.

114

Ekta Sharma

4.

Chang, E. S., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Dooley, D. and Heckhausen, J. (2006). What do they want in life?: The life goals of a multi-ethnic, multi-generational sample of high school seniors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35 (3), June 2005, 321-332.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 928 944. Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2007). Essentials of Organizational Development and Change. Mason, Ohio: Cengage Learning.

10. Devlin, J. and Peterson, R. (1994). Student perceptions of entry-level employment goals: An international comparison. Journal of Education for Business. Washington: Jan 1994.69(3), 154. 11. Harris, M., Grubb., W.L. and MacKenzie, W.I., 2006. Business students perceptions of

employment in small and medium-sized enterprises versus multinational corporations: Investigating the moderating effects of academic major, gender and personality [online]. In: USASBE/SBI 2006 Best Paper Award Winner. Available [Assessed from: 20

www.usasbe.org/conference/2006/Best%20Paper%20Award%20Winners.pdf August 2007]

12. Hesse-Biber, S. (1985). Male and female students' perceptions of their academic environment and future career plans: Implications for Higher Education. Human Relations. New York: Feb. 1985.38(2), 91-96.

13. Jarlstrom, M. (2000). Personality preferences and career expectations of Finnish business. Career Development International. Bradford: 2000.5(3), 144. 14. Johnson, M. A. (2007). Sex differences in career expectations of physical therapist students. Physical therapy. 87(9), 1199-1211. 15. Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (June 1992). Effects of Work Values on Job Choice Decisions. Journal of Applied 16. Psychology, 77 (3), 17. Jurgensen, C. E. (1978). Job Preference (What Makes a Job Good or Bad?). Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, No. 3

115

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

18. Kirrane, M. and Ryan. A. (2000). Career expectations of the New Workforce: New beginnings or enduring stereotypes. Management Research News, 23, 9-11. 19. Kolvereid, L., 1996. Organizational employment versus self-employment: Reasons for career choice intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Spring, 1996, 23-31. 20. Kolvereid, L., 1997. Prediction of employment status choice intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Fall, 1996, 47-57. 21. Loughlin, C. and Barling, J. (2001). Young workers' work values, attitudes and behaviours. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 543-58. 22. Moy, J.W. and Lee, S.M., 2002. The career choice of business graduates: SMEs or MNCs? Career Development International, 7(7/6), 334-347. 23. Ng, E, Burke, R. and Fidsenbaum, L. (2008). Career choice in management: findings from US MBA students. Career Development International. Bradford: 2008.13(4), 346. 24. Ng, E. and Burke, R. (2006). The next generation at work--business students' views, values and job search strategy: Implications for universities and employers. Education Training, 48(7), 478-492. 25. Parmley, W.K., Parmley, J. and Wooton, C.W. (1987). The on-campus recruitment process: A survey of students' viewpoints. Mid-south Business Journal. 7(2), 21-22. 26. Prafder, E. W. Hiring Your First Employee. Entrepreneaur.com, Retrieved February 28, 2012, from www.entrepreneur.com 27. Rose, M.L. (2001). Personality types and information technology career expectations: A pilot study. Proceedings of the Academy of Educational Leadership, 6(1), 79-83. 28. Rynes, S. L, Gerhart, B., & Minette, K. A. The Importance of Pay in Employee Motivation: Discrepancies Between What People Say and What They Do. Human Resource Management, Winter 2004, Vol. 43, No. 4. 29. Smola, K.W. and Sutton, C.D. (2002). Generational differences: revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363-82. 30. Teo, H.A. and Poon, J.T.F., 1994. Career choice of undergraduates and SMEs in Singapore. The International Journal of Career Management, 6(3), 20-26. 31. Terjesen, S., Vinnicombe, S. and Freeman, C. (2007). Attracting generation Y graduates: Organisational attributes, likelihood to apply and sex differences. Career Development International. 12(6), 504-522.

116

Ekta Sharma

Tables Table 1: Ranking of Variables 12. Technically Competent Supervisor 9. Responsibility and Independence 5. Comfortable working conditions

10. Doing something worthwhile

11. Considerate and Sympathetic Supervisor

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15.6 15.6 13.1 12.5 12.5 7.5 5.6 5.6 6.3 1.3 2.5 .6 1.3 0

24.4 18.8 17.5 13.1 8.1 3.8 3.8 1.9 1.9 2.5 0 .6 2.5 1.3

.6 5.6 2.5 5.6 3.8 9.4 8.8 8.1 12.5 10.6 10 8.8 4.4 9.4

2.5 7.5 17.5 10.6 15 15 8.1 5.6 7.5 5.6 1.9 1.3 .6 .6

8.1 8.8 8.1 15 13.8 8.8 8.1 7.5 5.6 2.5 5 4.4 3.1 .6

36.9 15 6.9 6.3 6.3 8.1 5 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 1.9 .6 .6

1.3 3.1 1.3 4.4 3.8 6.3 8.1 11.3 8.1 13.1 8.8 11.9 9.4 9.4

6.3 10 11.3 14.4 7.5 6.3 7.5 10 13.8 5.6 3.1 1.9 0 2.5

2.5 5 11.3 6.9 6.9 10.6 11.3 15.6 9.4 4.4 7.5 5.6 2.5 .6

6.3 6.9 5 6.9 10.6 4.4 10 6.3 8.8 6.3 6.3 10 7.5 5

.6 .6 1.9 1.3 2.5 3.1 1.3 5 3.8 13.1 21.3 14.4 16.3 15

.6 .6 2.5 0 3.1 .6 1.3 3.8 6.3 10.6 15.6 16.3 16.9 21.9

1.9 1.9 3.1 3.8 4.4 9.4 6.9 2.5 8.1 7.5 7.5 17.5 24.4 1.3

1.9 9.4 3.1 7.7 6.3 8.8 7.7 5.6 6.9 8.8 5 10.9 12.5 5.6

14.Pay according to competence

7. Sound Company Policies and Practices

4. Opportunities for promotion

3. Fringe Benefits (Perks etc.)

13. Restricted hours of work

8. Respect and Recognition

6. Interesting Work

2. Adequate Salary

1. Job Security

RANKS

117

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

Table 2: Means of Variables as Per Gender

Group Statistics Gender 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 N 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 416 224 Mean 4.51 4.43 3.48 4.13 8.33 9.25 5.37 6.18 6.17 5.39 4.22 3.18 9.09 9.64 5.94 6.02 6.93 6.98 7.77 7.27 10.41 11.66 10.92 11.79 10.66 10.13 8.31 8.00 Std. Deviation 2.962 2.796 2.997 2.947 3.659 2.772 2.849 2.652 3.500 3.105 3.604 2.625 3.289 3.261 3.375 2.986 3.112 3.127 3.918 3.833 2.947 2.203 2.915 2.386 3.582 3.462 3.956 3.731 Std. Error Mean .145 .187 .147 .197 .179 .185 .140 .177 .172 .207 .177 .175 .161 .218 .165 .199 .153 .209 .192 .256 .145 .147 .143 .159 .176 .231 .194 .249

1. Job Security 2. Adequate Salary 3. Fringe Benefits (Perks etc.) 4. Opportunities for promotion 5. Comfortable working conditions 6. Interesting Work 7. Sound Company Policies and Practices 8. Respect and Recognition 9. Responsibility and Independence 10. Doing something worthwhile 11. Considerate and Sympathetic Supervisor 12. Technically Competent Supervisor 13. Restricted hours of work 14. Pay according to ability and competence

118

Ekta Sharma

Table 3: Independent Sample T-Test

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper -.392 -.384 -1.129 -1.127 -1.472 -1.430 -1.266 -1.257 .232 .251 .506 .554 -1.090 -1.089 -.603 -.585 -.557 -.558 -.131 -.128 -1.688 -1.652 -1.309 -1.283 -.038 -.032 -.326 -.315 .554 .546 -.159 -.161 -.374 -.417 -.360 -.370 1.328 1.309 1.579 1.532 -.023 -.024 .452 .434 .458 .459 1.134 1.130 -.806 -.842 -.416 -.442 1.115 1.109 .937 .926

F 1. Job Security Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 2. Adequate Salary Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 3. Fringe Benefits Equal variances (Perks etc.) assumed Equal variances not assumed 4. Opportunities for Equal variances promotion assumed Equal variances not assumed 5. Comfortable working Equal variances conditions assumed Equal variances not assumed 6. Interesting Work Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 7. Sound Company Equal variances Policies and Practices assumed Equal variances not assumed 8. Respect and Equal variances Recognition assumed Equal variances not assumed 9. Responsibility and Equal variances Independence assumed Equal variances not assumed 10. Doing something Equal variances worthwhile assumed Equal variances not assumed 11. Considerate and Equal variances Sympathetic Supervisor assumed Equal variances not assumed 12. Technically Equal variances Competent Supervisor assumed Equal variances not assumed 13. Restricted hours of Equal variances work assumed Equal variances not assumed 14. Pay according to Equal variances ability and competence assumed Equal variances not assumed 1.667

Sig. .197

t .337 .343

df 638 479.799 638 463.358 638 568.655 638 485.461 638 505.445 638 582.812 638 460.016 638 506.547 638 454.782 638 465.358 638 573.661 638 538.487 638 470.254 638 480.161

Mean Sig. (2-tailed) Difference .736 .732 .009 .009 .001 .000 .000 .000 .005 .004 .000 .000 .041 .041 .779 .771 .848 .848 .120 .118 .000 .000 .000 .000 .067 .064 .343 .334 .081 .081 -.644 -.644 -.923 -.923 -.813 -.813 .780 .780 1.043 1.043 -.556 -.556 -.076 -.076 -.049 -.049 .501 .501 -1.247 -1.247 -.863 -.863 .538 .538 .305 .305

Std. Error Difference .241 .237 .247 .246 .280 .258 .231 .226 .279 .269 .273 .249 .272 .271 .269 .259 .258 .259 .322 .320 .225 .206 .227 .214 .293 .290 .321 .316

.778

.378

-2.609 -2.622

32.908

.000

-3.300 -3.580

.491

.484

-3.527 -3.604

7.508

.006

2.796 2.898

35.726

.000

3.818 4.187

.000

.988

-2.047 -2.052

7.317

.007

-.281 -.291

.001

.974

-.191 -.191

.039

.844

1.556 1.566

14.476

.000

-5.553 -6.047

1.625

.203

-3.797 -4.029

.151

.698

1.835 1.854

2.926

.088

.950 .967

119

Motivating Factors for Job Choice: Tool To Acquire & Retain Talent in The Organization

Table 4: Mean of Variables N 1. Job Security 2. Adequate Salary 3. Fringe Benefits (Perks etc.) 4. Opportunities for promotion 5. Comfortable working conditions 6. Interesting Work 7. Sound Company Policies and Practices 8. Respect and Recognition 9. Responsibility and Independence 10. Doing something worthwhile 11. Considerate and Sympathetic Supervisor 12. Technically Competent Supervisor 13. Restricted hours of work 14. Pay according to ability and competence Valid N (listwise) 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 Mean 4.48 3.71 8.65 5.65 5.90 3.86 9.28 5.97 6.95 7.59 10.85 11.23 10.48 8.20 Std. Deviation 2.903 2.993 3.402 2.807 3.385 3.330 3.287 3.242 3.115 3.893 2.773 2.770 3.547 3.878