JOB SATISFACTION AND ABSENTEEISM AMONG SELECTED PRIVATE SECURITY COMPANIES IN THE SOUTHERN GAUTENG REGION

by

LIMPHO CYNTHIA MOKOTE

Student number: 20403178

Dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree

MAGISTER TECHNOLOGIAE

in the discipline

HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

in the

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

at the

VAAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

SUPERVISOR: Dr C. Marais

CO-SUPERVISOR: Prof M. Dhurup

September 2017

DECLARATION

STATEMENT 1

This dissertation is being submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Magister Technologiae: Human Resource Management

Signed…………………………

Date……………………………

STATEMENT 2

The dissertation is the result of my own independent work/ investigation, except otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended.

Signed………………………

Date…………………………

STATEMENT 3

I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying, for interlibrary loans and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations.

Signed…………………………………..

Date…………………………………….

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my utmost gratitude towards the following individuals and institutions for their contribution towards the completion of this study:

God Almighty, for His grace and for providing me with the opportunity, the ability and the motivation to initiate and complete this study; without, His love and guidance, this study would never have occurred.

My study leader, Dr C Marais, for her invaluable assistance, support, guidance and encouragement that made this dissertation possible. Thanks for believing in me through hard times; it has been an overwhelming experience to work with you. To my co-supervisor, Prof M Dhurup, thank you for the statistical analysis of the data. From you I have learned and received the biggest of all treasures, which is knowledge. I am what I am because of you.

My husband, Pule David Mphahlele, for his patience, encouragement and never failing to provide a seemingly inexhaustible supply of love and support in whatever form needed.

My family Lenka, Mapalesa, Palesa, Paballo, Pokello, Selloane Mokote and my nieces Kananelo, Tswaro, Bone and Buhle; thank you so much that you instilled and kept on reminding me the value of education in my life.

To my friends Morena Mokhathi, Makha Mofoka, Lesego Joy Senoelo and Kuda Marumo thank you, for all the intellectual exchanges we shared.

To all the staff at security companies, thank you so much for your kindness.

I also wish to thank Aldine Oosthuyzen, for the technical layout of the dissertation.

To the higher degree unit staff Ausi Beatrice Toti Phume and Nomathemba Kenke; thank you so much for your assistance, support and understanding.

1 CORINTHIANS 15:10

But by God’s grace I am, and the grace that He gave me was not without effect. On the contrary, I have worked harder than any of the other apostles, although it was not really my own doing but God’s grace working with me.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION	ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS	iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS	iv

LIST OF TABLES	xi

LIST OF FIGURES	xii

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS	xiii

ABSTRACT	xiv

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY	1

1.1	INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND	1

1.2	PROBLEM STATEMENT	2

1.3	OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY	3

1.3.1	Primary objective	3

1.3.2	Theoretical objectives	3

1.3.3	Empirical objectives	4

1.4	RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY	4

1.4.1	Literature review	4

1.4.2	Empirical study	4

1.4.2.1	Target population	4

1.4.2.2	Sampling technique	5

1.4.2.3	Sample size	5

1.4.2.4	Method of data collection	5

1.4.2.5	Measuring instrument	5

1.5	STATISTICAL ANALYSIS	6

1.6	VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY	6

1.7	ETHICS	6

1.8	CHAPTER OUTLINE	7

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW	8

2.1	INTRODUCTION	8

2.2	CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS	8

2.2.1	Job satisfaction	8

2.2.2	Absenteeism	10

2.2.3	Security officers	11

2.3	JOB SATISFACTION	12

2.3.1	Content theories of job satisfaction	13

2.3.1.1	Maslow hierarchy of needs	14

2.3.1.2	Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory	16

2.3.1.3	McClelland’s needs theory	18

2.3.1.4	Herzberg motivation-hygiene theory	19

2.4	FACTORS INFLUENCING JOB SATISFACTION	21

2.4.1	Payment	22

2.4.2	Promotion opportunities	22

2.4.3	Supervisors	23

2.4.4	Fringe benefits	24

2.4.5	Contingent rewards	25

2.4.6	Operating conditions	25

2.4.7	Co-workers	26

2.4.8	Nature of work	26

2.4.9	Communication	27

2.5	CONSEQUENCES OF JOB SATISFACTION	28

2.5.1	Job stress	28

2.5.2	Labour turnover	29

2.5.3	Organisational productivity	30

2.5.4	Employee absenteeism	31

2.6	STRATEGIES TO ENHANCE JOB SATISFACTION	32

2.7	ABSENTEEISM	33

2.7.1	Classification of absenteeism	34

2.7.1.1	Sickness absence	35

2.7.1.2	Innocent absence	36

2.7.1.3	Culpable absence	36

2.8	LEGISLATION CONSIDERATION WITH ABSENTEEISM	37

2.9	FACTORS LEADING TO EMPLOYEE ABSENTEEISM WITHIN THE ORGANISATION	38

2.9.1	Organisational factors	39

2.9.1.1	Employee incentive programs	40

2.9.1.2	Remuneration	41

2.9.1.3	Promotion opportunities	41

2.9.1.4	Career development and opportunities	41

2.9.1.5	Decentralisation	42

2.9.2	Work factors	42

2.9.2.1	Autonomy of employees	42

2.9.2.2	Employees teamwork	43

2.9.2.3	Job rotation	44

2.9.3	Supervisor factors	44

2.9.3.1	Leadership style of the supervisor	44

2.9.4	Employee factors	46

2.9.4.1	Gender	46

2.9.4.2	Qualifications	46

2.9.4.3	Age	47

2.10	CONSEQUENCES OFABSENTEEISM	47

2.11	STRATEGIES TO MANAGE ABSENTEEISM	49

2.12	THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY	50

2.13	CONCLUSION	53

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY	54

3.1	INTRODUCTION	54

3.2	RESEARCH METHODOLOGY	54

3.2.1	Research design	54

3.2.2	Target population	55

3.2.3	Sample frame	56

3.2.4	Sampling technique	56

3.2.5	Sample size	57

3.3	DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCHINSTRUMENT	58

3.3.1	Measuring instrument	58

3.3.2	Questionnaire design	58

3.3.3	Pilot study	59

3.4	STATISTICAL ANALYSIS	60

3.4.1	Descriptive analysis	60

3.4.2	Frequencies and measures of central tendency	60

3.4.3	Frequencies	61

3.4.4	Correlations	61

3.4.5	Analysis of variance (ANOVA)	62

3.4.6	Mann-Whitney U tests	62

3.4.7	Reliability	63

3.4.8	Validity	64

3.5	ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS	65

3.6	CHAPTER SUMMARY	66

CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS	67

4.1	INTRODUCTION	67

4.2	ANALYSIS OF THE PILOT STUDY	67

4.2.1	Reliability of variables at the pilot stage	67

4.3	ANYALYSIS OF THE MAIN SURVEY	69

4.3.1	Analysis of the demographic information	69

4.3.1.1	Gender	69

4.3.1.2	Age	70

4.3.1.3	Marital status	71

4.3.1.4	First language	71

4.3.1.5	Academic background	72

4.3.1.6	Security grades	73

4.3.1.7	Nature of employment contract	74

4.3.1.8	Promotion	74

4.3.1.9	Length of service	75

4.4	FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION REGARDING JOB STATISFACTION (SECTION C)	76

4.4.1	Job satisfaction	76

4.4.1.1	Pay	76

4.4.1.2	Promotion	77

4.4.1.3	Supervision	78

4.4.1.4	Fringe benefits	79

4.4.1.5	Contingent rewards	81

4.4.1.6	Operating conditions	82

4.4.1.7	Co-workers relations	83

4.4.1.8	Communication	84

4.5	ABSENTEEISM (SECTION D)	85

4.5.1	Work stress (D1)	86

4.5.2	Work motivation (D4)	87

4.5.3	Communication process within the organisation (D7)	87

4.5.4	Conflicts management within the organisation (D8 and D10)	88

4.5.5	Decision-making process (D9)	88

4.5.6	Lack of support from management (D11)	88

4.5.7	Stimulating tasks (D12)	89

4.5.8	Applying own ability (D13)	89

4.5.9	Control over job tasks (D15)	89

4.5.10	Perform duties without job description (D16)	90

4.5.11	Workload (D17)	90

4.5.12	Working hours (D18 and D30)	90

4.5.13	Flexible working schedules (D19)	91

4.5.14	Promotion opportunities (D21)	91

4.5.15	Training selection (D22)	91

4.5.16	Performance feedback (D23)	92

4.5.17	Reward systems (D24)	92

4.5.18	Unfair organisational policy (D25)	92

4.5.19	Implementing changes within the organisation (D26)	93

4.5.20	Oppression of power within the organisation (D28)	93

4.6	MEAN SCORES RANKINGS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF JOB SATISFACTION FACTORS	93

4.6.1	Pay sub-scale	95

4.6.2	Promotion sub-scale	95

4.6.3	Supervision sub-scale	96

4.6.4	Fringe benefits sub-scale	96

4.6.5	Contingent rewards sub-scale	96

4.6.6	Operating conditions sub-scale	96

4.6.7	Co-workers sub-scale	96

4.6.8	Communication sub-scale	97

4.7	MEAN SCORE RANKING AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ABSENTEEISM FACTORS	97

4.7.1	Personal factors	98

4.7.2	Supervisor factors	99

4.7.3	Work factors	99

4.7.4	Organisational factors	100

4.8	CORRELATIONS: JOB SATISFACTION (INTER-FACTOR CORRELATION ANALYSIS)	100

4.9	ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA)	102

4.10	MANN-WHITNEY TEST	105

4.11	RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE MEASUREMENT SCALES	106

4.12	CHAPTER SUMMARY	108

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS	109

5.1	INTRODUCTION	109

5.2	OVERVIEW AND OUTLINE OF CHAPTERS	109

5.3	CONCLUSIONS	110

5.4	RECOMMENDATIONS	115

5.5	LIMITATIONS	116

5.6	FUTURE RESEARCH	117

5.7	VALUE OF THE STUDY	117

5.8	CONCLUSION	118

BIBLIOGRAPHY	120

ANNEXURE A – INTRODUCTORY LETTER	167

ANNEXURE B – QUESTIONNAIRE	168

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1:	A staircase of Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs	15

Table 2.2:	Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory summary	17

Table 2.3:	Strategies to enhance job satisfaction	32

Table 2.4:	Consequences of absenteeism	48

Table 3.1:	Sample size and percentage of the study population	57

Table 3.2:	Improving the reliability measures of the questionnaire	63

Table 4.1:	Reliability statistics	69

Table 4.2:	Absenteeism response rate	85

Table 4.3:	Mean score rankings of the job satisfaction factors	94

Table 4.4:	Mean score rankings of the absenteeism factors	98

Table 4.5:	Job satisfaction inter-factor correlation	100

Table 4.6:	Absenteeism inter-factor correlations	101

Table 4.7:	Correlation analysis: Job satisfaction versus absenteeism	101

Table 4.8:	Analysis of variance: job satisfaction dimensions and nature of employment contract	102

Table 4.9:	Post-hoc analysis: nature of employment (contract) and satisfaction dimensions	104

Table 4.10:	Analysis of variance: job satisfaction dimensions and age	105

Table 4.11:	Mann-Whitney test: job satisfaction and gender	106

Table 4.12:	Reliability values for the job satisfaction sub-scales	107

Table 4.13:	Reliability values for the absenteeism sub-scales	107

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1:	Maslow’s hierarchy of needs	16

Figure 2.2:	Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory	18

Figure 2.3:	Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory: factors affecting job satisfaction	20

Figure 2.4:	Types of absence	35

Figure 3.1:	Southern Gauteng map	55

Figure 4.1:	Gender	70

Figure 4.2:	Age group	70

Figure 4.3:	Marital status	71

Figure 4.4:	First language	72

Figure 4.5:	Academic background	73

Figure 4.6:	Security grades	73

Figure 4.7:	Nature of employment contract	74

Figure 4.8:	Promotion	75

Figure 4.9:	Length of service	75

Figure 4.10:	Pay	77

Figure 4.11:	Promotion	78

Figure 4.12:	Supervision	79

Figure 4.13:	Fringe benefits	80

Figure 4.14:	Contingent reward	82

Figure 4.15:	Operating conditions	83

Figure 4.16:	Co-workers relations	84

Figure 4.17:	Communication	85

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

ANOVA	Analysis of variance

BCEA	Basic Conditions of Employment Act

DCS	Demand Control and support model

ERG	The existence, related and growth theory

LRA	Labour Relations Act

OHSA	Occupational Health and Safety Act

PSIRA	Private Security Regulatory Authority

SAPS	South African Police Services

SPSS	Statistical Package for Social Sciences

ABSTRACT

Keywords: job satisfaction, absenteeism and private security companies

Organisations are faced with the challenge of satisfying their employees in order for them to cope with the competitive environment. In order to increase productivity, efficiency and effectiveness and to show commitment in their work, organisations must ensure that they satisfy the needs of employees to avoid absenteeism. Over the past years, organisations have attempted to find solutions for recovering and developing management of employees’ resource, placing more emphasis on the reduction of employees’ work absenteeism. Management within the organisations has introduced different methods such as teamwork, shift work system and employee motivation as strategies to improve employees’ satisfaction, motivation and reducing absenteeism with the aim of improving overall organisational performance. Absence from work is a complex issue that can be influenced by multiple causes within an organisation or could be personal in nature. The purpose of this study is to examine job satisfaction and absenteeism among entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. A quantitative methodology with a non-probability survey administered to a convenience sampling was used to examine the relationship between the study constructs. In the empirical investigation, a sample of 200 was selected to participate in the study. In order to measure the study constructs, two survey materials were adapted. The participants were asked to complete two test instruments, namely a job satisfaction questionnaire (JSS) and an absenteeism questionnaire. Of the 200 questionnaires that were distributed to the identified sample of entry level security officers, 199 (n) responded. The collected data were computed through correlations analysis to evaluate the relationship between variables and the results are presented and discussed in detail. The findings of this study showed a low level of job satisfaction among entry level security officers in this particular region of Southern Gauteng. The three factors found to influence job satisfaction among security officers are lack of support from management, operating conditions and stimulating tasks. Furthermore, pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, rewards, operating conditions, relationship with co-workers and lack of communication seem to be correlated negatively with the personal, supervisory, work and organisational factors of absenteeism. Through ANOVA, three of the job satisfaction factors indicate significant variances. Differences were found for the operating conditions (p=0.000; p<0.055), co-workers (p=0.000; p<0.05), communication (p=0.000; p<0.05) and the type of employment. Further, the reliability of the job satisfaction and absenteeism sub-scales were found to be reliable. It is recommended that private security industry management could explore the relevance of the various job satisfaction factors that could influence the job and potentially cause low satisfaction among entry level security officers. The outcome of such a process could guide future actions aimed at improved job satisfaction. The private security sector should consider the implications of their staffing practices. It is recommended that terms of employment should be more permanent in nature to aid overall job satisfaction.

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

South Africans are increasingly making use of private security service providers (Wilkinson, 2015:1) in order to protect themselves and their assets because of increased feelings of insecurity due to high levels of crime in the country (Berg, 2010:290; Breetzke, 2010:447). According to Mthethwa (2012:1), the South African private security industry is “considered among the largest in the world with nearly 9,000 registered companies and 387,273 security personnel”. Despite the rapid growth in the industry and the fact that it employs thousands of people, it is a common perception that this is a notoriously low-paying sector characterised by poor benefits and stark working conditions, which are among the major causes of absenteeism (Claase-Schutte & Pillay, 2004:123).

Within this context, absenteeism is one of the most persistent problems for which there is no easy cure and which affects almost every type of organisation (Rhodes & Steers 1990:11; Lucas, Bii, Sulo, Keter, Yanom & Koskey, 2012:444). As an organisational phenomenon, it does not discriminate against individuals or sector based on sex, race or religion (Rosenblatt & Shirom, 2005:213). In addition, “it creates cost and productivity problems, puts an unfair burden on the majority of employees who show up for work, ultimately hinders customer satisfaction and drains the country’s economy”, which highlights the need for the effective management of absenteeism in the work context (Sagie 1998:156; Cohen & Golan, 2007:419).

Kim, Miller and Mire (2009:420) emphasise the possible impact of this phenomenon on an employee’s level of job satisfaction within the workplace. Azeem (2010:295) further maintains that often employees experience a lack of job satisfaction resulting in low levels of commitment, which, in turn, affects performance and the achievement of organisational goals. Lack of job satisfaction, therefore, is suggested to be one of the primary causes of absenteeism (Steers, Porter & Bigley, 1999:13; Patton & Johns, 2007:1560).

Mahmood and Mahmood (2010:215) propose that employee attendance is based on an employee’s motivation and ability to come to work, which is closely related to an employee’s general job satisfaction within their work context. It, therefore, could be argued that an employee who is absent from work due to a lack of job satisfaction shows a negative attachment to the organisation (Malik, Nawah, Naeem & Danish, 2010:18). According to Lu, While and Barriball (2005:213), low levels of job satisfaction can be associated with unfair procedures, long working hours, low levels of compensation and limited opportunities for promotion; the symptoms of these problems could result in low productivity, high absenteeism, labour unrest, industrial action and high labour turnover (Tumwesigye, 2010:944). It, therefore, is important for organisations to determine what affects job satisfaction and how to nurture it.

Acknowledging absenteeism as a phenomenon that affects businesses and countries worldwide (Wyatt, 2000:25; Aamodt, 2004:19; Böckerman & Ilmakunnas, 2008:523), the South African picture is no different and the country is fast joining the international culture of escalating absenteeism in the workplace. According to Obasan (2011:26), absenteeism in the workplace is receiving increasing attention and organisations are taking a closer look at the cost implications of absenteeism and how this relates to employee loyalty and commitment. It is estimated that 4.5 percent of the South African workforce are absent on any given day and in certain companies this figure is as high as 18 percent (Johnson, 2009:12; Lilford, 2009:15). Robbins and Judge (2009:63) argue that absenteeism is an obstacle to an organisation’s success within the South African context and cannot be ignored.

Although most South African employees are entitled to certain types of authorised leave because of their employment relationship, within the labour legislation context (RSA 1997:49; Du Toit, Bosch, Woolfrey, Godfrey, Rossouw, Christie, Cooper, Giles & Bosch, 2006:536), these benefits, in turn, may be abused. Bydawell (2000:18) highlights that some companies even allow their employees to exceed their paid time off benefits, but in these instances, it could be regarded as unpaid leave. The author further comments that “absenteeism seems to be a behaviour that organisations can never get rid of”, which implies the need to control and manage it. Within this context, it becomes vital that organisations recognise the extent of this problem due to the high costs associated with continued unscheduled absences.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Low satisfaction levels generally relate to high levels of absenteeism and vice versa. Biron and Bamberger (2012:902) point out that the “absence culture” in the workplace could be influenced by organisational policies, working conditions as well as the personal circumstances of employees. Punnett, Greenidge and Ramsey (2007:216) agree that if a correlation does exist between job satisfaction and absenteeism, managers would be able to formulate focused strategies around the various aspects of job satisfaction in an effort to reduce the absenteeism levels of employees.

Substantial economic evidence indicates that a satisfied workforce is viewed as beneficial to the firms and to wider society (Sharkh, 2005:115; Hinks, 2010:237). Job satisfaction is in turn associated with higher productivity, which affects organisations’ competitiveness and profits (Clark 1996:209; Warr 1999:230; Judge, Thorenson, Bono & Patton, 2001:379). Warr (1999:230); Griffeth, Hom and Gaertner (2000:475); Patterson, Warr and West (2004:195) further comment that a satisfied workforce, therefore, is less likely to “suffer” from absenteeism or contribute to increased labour turnover costs.

Absenteeism and employee turnover cost South African companies millions of rand per annum due to disruptions in business operations (Nel, Van Dyk, Haasbroek, Schultz, Sono &Werner, 2004:89; Dionne & Dostie, 2007:110). Cognisance should be taken of the various factors contributing to a lack of job satisfaction. Among these factors are the perception of poor salaries, limited flexibility, limited opportunities for promotion, work environment and management policies (Cullinan, 2005:11; Barrows & Watson, 2007:12).

The private security industry in South Africa has grown rapidly over the last twenty years. Despite this growth, the sector experiences high levels of absenteeism and the latest estimation done by the Private Security Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) in March 2008 was 14 million rand in a year (Minnaar, 2007:175; Darr & Johns, 2008:298). It is in the above context that this research will investigate job satisfaction and absenteeism among entry level security officers within the southern Gauteng region.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Primary objective

The primary objective of this study is to investigate job satisfaction and absenteeism among entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region.

Theoretical objectives

The following theoretical objectives are formulated for the study:

To explore the concept job satisfaction

To identify the factors affecting job satisfaction

To reflect on the current literature related to absenteeism within the South African labour context

To identify factors leading to absenteeism of entry level security officers.

Empirical objectives

The primary objective of the study will be achieved through the following empirical objectives:

To assess the level of job satisfaction of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region

To assess the level of absenteeism of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region

To explore a correlation between job satisfaction levels and absenteeism of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region

To examine whether there are any significant differences between the job satisfaction dimensions and employees nature of employment contract

To examine whether there are any significant differences between the job satisfaction dimensions and age

To examine whether there are any significant differences between the job satisfaction dimensions and gender.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Literature review

A literature review will be undertaken to explore the concept job satisfaction and the factors affecting job satisfaction. The current legislation related to absenteeism within the South African labour context will be reflected upon. The factors leading to absenteeism of entry level security officers will be identified in the study. Textbooks, journals, the Internet and the previous work of other researchers on related topics will be used as data sources to establish a conceptual framework for the study (Choy, 2010:17).

Empirical study

Target population

The target population is defined as “the total group to be studied, the grand total of what is being measured within a defined area” (Burns & Grove, 2007:82). The research will be restricted to entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. The companies were selected owing to the fact that the researcher was granted written permission to conduct research in these companies and the companies are located within the Southern Gauteng region, which enhances accessibility (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006:34).

Sampling technique

The non-probability sampling procedure utilised is convenience sampling. According to Hair, Bush and Ortinau (2009:217), within non-probability sampling the selection of the elements for the sample is not necessarily made with the aim of being statistically representatives of the population. The odds of selecting a particular individual are unknown. The selection of a respondent from the population is based on some form of convenience sampling (Gravetter & Forzano, 2003:118; Babbie & Rubin, 2011:360). A non-probability convenience sampling procedure was used to recruit respondents by selecting for inclusion, only those subjects that are most accessible (Malhotra, 2010:316). Convenience sampling was more appropriate for this study as it was difficult to access employees because of the different shifts and locations.

Sample size

The list of eight active private security companies registered with PSIRA was requested from Emfuleni Municipality. The researcher personally went to the given companies requesting permission to conduct the research and four companies granted the researcher permission. The total number of entry level security officers in the four companies was N=428. Details of the sample size are reported on in Chapter 3.

Method of data collection

A quantitative research design will be used within this study. According to Martin and Guerin (2006:167), quantitative research is an empirical investigation based on testing relationships and uses a summary of inferential statistics. A survey will be used to determine appropriate data through distributing questionnaires among entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region.

Measuring instrument

Data will be gathered using modified adapted job satisfaction and absenteeism questionnaire (Brochado, 2009:178). The questionnaire will be divided into four sections, Section A will be the inclusion criteria and Section B will consist of a biographical questionnaire to gather information regarding age, gender, race and reflection on the employment relationship of the entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. Section C will assess job satisfaction of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. Section D will explore the absenteeism of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. Responses will be measured by means of six-point Likert-type scales where a scale item of one will denote disagree very much and scale item of six will denote agree very much (McCoach & Adelson, 2010:798; Weijters, Cabooter & Schillewaert, 2010:242). A pilot study will be conducted to determine the reliability of measures used in the study.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

In order to reach the research objectives, the collected questionnaires will be submitted for statistical analysis to a statistician. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 20 for Windows, will be used to analyse the data (Salkind & Green, 2009:480).

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

The requirements for internal validity and reliability, as discussed by Cooper and Schindler (2003:232), will be applied during the research. These requirements entail the ensuring of the reliability of the research instrument and procedure, which in turn implies the consistency of the measurement of the phenomenon over a relatively short period. According to Cooper and Schindler (2003:236), Malhotra (2007:284), De Vos, Strydom, Fouche and Delport (2011:155) reliability refers to the extent to which a scale produces consistent results if repeated measurements are made on the characteristics. Cronbach alpha will be used to establish the reliability of the scale. Validity refers to the ability of a scale or measuring instrument to measure what the researcher intended to measure (De Vos et al., 2011:109; Zikmund, 2013:89). Validity will be examined from a number of different perspectives, including face, content, discriminant and construct validity (McDaniel & Gates, 2008:301).

ETHICS

According to McDaniel and Gates (2008:89), ethics are moral principles or values generally governing the conduct of an individual or group. The study will maintain research integrity by avoiding misinterpretation, omission of pertinent research data and treating respondents fairly (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010:105). Details of ethical considerations are reported on in Chapter 4.

CHAPTER OUTLINE

Chapter 1: Introduction and background to the study

This chapter comprised the background and scope of the study. The chapter highlighted the problem statement and research objectives. In addition, an outline of the research methodology, statistical analysis, ethics as well as validity and reliability within the study are highlighted.

Chapter 2: Literature review

Job satisfaction as construct is explored within the literature and the factors affecting job satisfaction are identified. This chapter explored the current legislation related to absenteeism within the South African labour context. Furthermore, the factors leading to absenteeism of entry level security officers are identified.

Chapter 3: Research design and methodology

The design and method of research used in the study is in this chapter. The level of job satisfaction and absenteeism of respondents is assessed. The existence of a correlation between job satisfaction levels and absenteeism of entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region is explored. In addition, reliability and validity issues are addressed.

Chapter 4: Results and findings

This chapter addresses the analysis, interpretation and evaluation of the research findings.

Chapter 5: Conclusion and recommendations

This chapter provides the conclusion, with a summary of problems and the possible solutions, the latter inclusive of the recommendations. Limitations and the implications for further research are highlighted.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

The literature review will provide a theoretical body of knowledge related to the two variables of the present study, namely job satisfaction and absenteeism. Absenteeism is a persistent problem in many organisations, as suggested by the literature, therefore, it is vital to focus on this behaviour within the organisation. Organisations are faced with the problem of employees not coming to work when they are expected to be at work. Absence is a complex variable as indicated by the literature and it is affected by numerous factors, both personal and organisational in nature. Böckerman and Ilmakunnas (2008:520) state that one of the factors identified to impact an employee is job satisfaction. Employers have been attempting to determine the validity of these factors and propose possible solutions to mitigate these absences.

CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS

Terre Blanche, Durrheim and Painter (2006:22) state that one of the purposes of definitions of concepts in a field of study is to ensure communication and understanding between all relevant parties within a particular knowledge sphere. The section below presents key concepts found in the literature and relevant to the current study thereby enhancing a clear understanding.

Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction has long been a topic of great interest for researchers. Authors have different approaches towards defining the concept of job satisfaction; the general agreement view of what job satisfaction entails is still debatable (Gautam, Mandal & Dalal, 2006:18). Tshabalala (2005:115) maintains that job satisfaction does not occur in a vacuum but in a workplace where both the employers and employees have expectations that need to be achieved in a manner that benefits the situation.

Job satisfaction is a work-related attitude (Aldag & Kuzuhara, 2002:108; West & Berman, 2009:328). This attitude entails the employee’s perception of their job, which in turn is linked directly to their job satisfaction. This results in committed employees being more likely to perform because of increased motivation levels. Acknowledging the importance of job satisfaction for organisational success is vital (Mohsan, Nawaz & Khan, 2012:7115).

Job satisfaction is considered a pre-requisite for employees’ performance in any organisation (Muindi, 2011:3). Job satisfaction gives a sense of security and fulfilment to the employee and in return it leads to employee commitment to the organisation, decreased absenteeism and reduced turnover (Hardy, Woods & Wall, 2003:308; Dalal, 2005:1243; Judge, Jackson, Shaw, Scott & Rich, 2007:108; Shed & Xiao Yan, 2012:320).

Robbins (2005:24) and Willem (2007:1012) define job satisfaction as a collection of feelings that an individual holds towards their job. When employees are hired, they enter the employment relationship with a set of needs and wishes, which influence their total job expectations (Robbins, 2005:25). Organisations’ reactions and responses to these needs will produce either a positive or a negative attitude among employees towards their job. Job satisfaction is not only important for behavioural assessment but also for managers to assess attitudes of employees towards their jobs (Cherrington, 2006:209). Therefore, it could be argued that it is the manager’s core responsibility to ensure that employees are satisfied within the organisation.

Shahnawas and Jafri (2009:160) further comment that job satisfaction presents the pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or an effective reaction to one’s job. Job satisfaction is perceived to be linked with personal well-being as well as productivity. This notion is supported by Aziri (2011:78), who agrees that job satisfaction implies doing a job one enjoys, doing it well and being rewarded for one’s efforts. Job satisfaction, therefore, implies commitment to the organisation and happiness with one’s job.

Job satisfaction generally is defined in terms of people’s emotional reactions to their jobs. Personal, interpersonal and organisational factors have been shown to be associated with job satisfaction (Jayasuriya, Whittaker, Halim & Matineau, 2012:2). Traditionally, job satisfaction has been regarded as an important predictor of labour market behaviours of workers that relate to their intention of leaving the organisation or being absent (Kristensen & Westergard-Nielson, 2004:360; Obasan, 2011:28). Parvin and Kabir (2011:113) assert that job satisfaction is a very important attribute in the perspective of organisation; the happier and more committed employees are within the organisation, the higher the success and development of that organisation. Satisfied workers tend to extend more effort in their jobs than dissatisfied employees do (Saari & Judge, 2004:395), thus, organisations benefit from creating a satisfied workforce. Job satisfaction, therefore, refers to employees’ general attitudes towards their job.

Job satisfaction, within the context of this study, is regarded as a collection of attitudes, feelings, beliefs and behaviour that employees have toward a job and work context. For the purpose of this study, it can be concluded that job satisfaction is a person’s satisfaction in a work situation, which is related to their state of mind and how they feel while performing their work.

Absenteeism

Absenteeism has long been viewed as a significant and universal problem in the workplace. Rhodes and Steers (1990:1) and Munro (2007:21) regard absenteeism as one of those human resource problems for which there is no easy cure. Different theories have been developed and numerous studies conducted to identify the cause of absenteeism (Obasan, 2011:26). Absenteeism is regarded as a complex phenomenon of which the meaning can vary depending on the context (Patton & Johns 2012:218).

Attempts have been made to define absenteeism (Lannegrand-Willems, Cosnefroy & Lecigne, 2011:1). Lambert, Hogan and Altheimer (2010:96) maintain that absenteeism occurs when an employee does not attend a scheduled work period. The reasons for this absence might be related to illness, transportation problems, family emergency or just to have a day off from work (Ose, 2005:162). Motivation to attend work is assumed a major factor determining how often an employee is absent.

Absenteeism occurs when employees are absent from work when expected to be there (Pillay, 2009:1). This has financial implications on organisation’s income and productivity (Senel & Senel, 2012:1142). As a result of employees who don’t show up at work, their colleagues are often called upon to perform additional, new and unfamiliar tasks, work overtime or increase their own production, all in an attempt to moderate against the consequences of the workplace absence by a fellow employee (Sheikha & Younis, 2006:64).

Employee absenteeism is widespread and has both direct and indirect consequences for the working environment. Leaker (2008:19) lists the direct costs of absence to employers as statutory sick pay, expense of covering absence with temporary staff and lost production. Indirect costs in turn refer to lower morale among staff members, which influences the overall levels of organisational output. According to Lambert, Edwards, Camp and Saylor (2005:166), disruption of workflow and reduction in product quality are additional effects associated with absenteeism (Robertson, 2008:316).

The impact of absenteeism on organisations and even on the country’s economy can be far-reaching, taking into account the direct and indirect costs associated with it. Absence does not only mean not being at work. According to Claassen (2012:1), being absent also refers to “arriving late at work, leaving early, extended toilet, tea or lunch breaks and attending to private business during working hours”.

An employment contract regards an employee that does not show up or attend to the assigned duties as absent (Bydawell, 2000:15, Bendix, 2010:323). Absenteeism can also be viewed in terms of physical presence. Böckerman and Ilmakunnas (2008:521) define absenteeism as “non- attendance when attendance was scheduled or clearly expected”. Although it is recognised that absenteeism may be caused by the employee's inability to come to work, motivation to attend work is assumed a major factor determining how often an employee is absent. Patton and Johns (2012:219) comment that absenteeism implies an individual’s lack of physical presence at a given location and time when there is a social expectation for the person to be there. A further differentiation is made when Kearney (2008:257) describes absenteeism in terms of excused or unexcused absence from work.

Absence from work is one of the everyday managerial certainties that have far-reaching implications for organisational operations (Sheikha & Younis, 2006:65). Within the context of this study, absenteeism means any failure to report for or stay away from work as scheduled, regardless of what the reason is.

Security officers

Adequate and effective security is vital for socio-economic development of any society (Wairagu, Kamenju & Singo, 2004:16). According to Karacan (2011:203), the private security industry was developed “to reduce terrorism and crime among citizens”; therefore, it has become a vital and critical component of modern business, industry and society. Due to high crime rates, South Africans are making greater use of private security companies than ever before in order to protect themselves and their properties (Claase-Schutte & Pillay, 2004:123; South African Police Services (SAPS), 2012:8). Abrahamsen and Williams (2007:132) points out that South Africa’s private security industry is counted amongst the largest in the world. Van Steden (2007:230) concurs, supporting that organisations rely heavily on private security for a wide range of functions, including protecting employees and property, patrolling, conducting investigations and providing information technology security.

A number of additional reasons for the expansion of this sector should also be noted. First, the scaling down and withdrawal of the South African police from some of its functions is related directly to the growth of private security (Minnaar, 2005:87). Secondly, is the need of employees to feel safe and protected in their working environment (Karacan, 2011:204). According to Abrahamsen and Williams (2007:132) and Dempsey (2010:58), security traditionally has been provided by countries to their citizens; however, in some developing countries this provision has been inadequate. Consequently, the majority of citizens in developing countries have resorted to using private security companies to address their needs. Kasali (2012:36) points that it is for this reason that there have been different efforts by stakeholders, especially governments, to develop frameworks to improve the security of their citizens and develop strategies to lessen the risk that both human and human threats can pose to the wellbeing of their citizens.

Private security can be defined as “a set of measures to protect and ensure safety against disruption, fire, theft, robbery, detention from work, health and body integrity of the workers to public or private institutions and organisations, which contribute to national economy” (Mericli 2004:30). In terms of the Private Security Industry Regulation Amended Bill of 2001 Section 1 of Act 56 (RSA, 2001:4), a security officer is defined as any natural person who is employed by another person, including an organisation or state, who receives or is entitled to receive from such a person any remuneration, reward, fee or benefit, for rendering one or more security services. In the Labour Relations Act, (LRA) Chapter 5 of Section 78 (RSA 1995:6) an employee means any person who is employed and is paid in the workplace. The researcher defines a security officer as an employed person who is paid mainly for performance of protecting property, assets or people.

JOB SATISFACTION

Employee job satisfaction is an issue that has received considerable attention from researchers and managers alike (Gautam et al. 2006:18). The ability of an organisation to achieve its goals is a function of its ability to attract, retain and maintain competent and satisfied employees (Adenike, 2011:152). Managers have to provide employees with jobs that are rewarding, challenging and satisfying (Robbins, 2005:23). Job satisfaction, therefore, focuses on the feelings that employees have towards their jobs, its content and context. Job satisfaction is an enjoyable and emotional state resulting from the evaluation of one’s job or job experiences (Danish & Usman, 2010:195).

Individuals who express high levels of satisfaction in their jobs are likely to be more creative and innovative, have high involvement in decision making and come up with breakthroughs that allow an organisation to grow and change positively with time (Sharma & Jyoti, 2009:52). This argument is supported by Roos and Van Eeden (2009:54), who state that employees who are satisfied with the work they do result in an organisational culture within which they stay motivated and continue their relationship with that organisation.

Chaudhury and Banerjee (2004:329) regard employees’ morale as a deciding factor in organisational efficiency. Organisations that work to satisfy and care about employees will have employees who work harder, thereby increasing profits (Maister, 2001:18; Saari & Judge, 2004:396). The response employees show towards their work illustrates how committed they are to the organisation. Managers, supervisors and human resource specialists are concerned with ways of improving job satisfaction (Al-Hussami, 2008:288), since job satisfaction generally is perceived to be linked directly to productivity as well as to personal well-being. Awang, Ahmad and Zin (2010:241) point out that job satisfaction provides a positive contribution to both job performance and the organisational commitment of employees. Job satisfaction, therefore, is regarded as a key ingredient that leads to recognition, income, promotion and the achievement of other goals that lead to a feeling of fulfilment (Aziri 2011:78).

The definition of job satisfaction has evolved through scholarly engagement and is described as a work-related positive affective reaction (Mehmood, Irum, Ahmed & Sultana, 2012:673). Sowmya and Panchanatham (2011:76) state that job satisfaction is influenced by many factors, which include personal traits and job characteristics. The relationship between employee traits, characteristics of the job and their relationship to job satisfaction is understood better through a theoretical framework. A theory presents a systematic way of understanding events behaviours and situations. Theories also help explain behaviour, as well as suggest how to develop more effective ways to influence and change behaviour (Creswell, 2008:108). Leedy and Ormrod (2010:62) point out that a theory is an organised body of concepts and principles intended to explain a particular phenomenon. Thus, theories explain how and why something operates as it does (Johnson & Christensen, 2007:7). Theories can be verified by and in turn influence methodological considerations. For this purpose the following content theories that relate to job satisfaction are presented, namely Maslow’s needs hierarchy (1943), Herzberg’s two factor theory (1959), Alderfer’s ERG theory (1969) and McClelland’s theory (1958) (Shajahan & Shajahan, 2004:90). In this study, the chronological order of content theories will not be followed, Herzberg’s two factor theory will be discussed as the final theory, as it shows that satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work arise from different factors.

Content theories of job satisfaction

Content theories deal with the dynamic interplay of employee needs at different times (Inamullah, Naseer & Hussain, 2008:10; Luthans, 2010:117). These theories further focus on the presence or absence of certain intrinsic and extrinsic job factors that could determine an individual’s satisfaction. McCormick (2008:408) points out that there are numerous theories attempting to explain job satisfaction, but content theories seem to be more prominent in the literature and amongst scholars. The focus of this study will be limited to content theory since it emphasises the factors and needs that encourage and inspire the behaviour as well as performance of individuals within the work context (Nel et al., 2004:127).

Maslow hierarchy of needs

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (1943) is “the most widely mentioned theory of motivation and satisfaction” (Weihrich & Koontz, 2005:205). De Brouwer (2009:360) points out that the formulation of Maslow hierarchy of needs by Abraham Maslow focuses on two important assumptions. The first is that people want more and their needs depend on what they already have. A need that has already been satisfied no longer motivates but only unsatisfied needs can influence behaviour. The second assumption relates to an individual who organises their needs in order of importance. This implies that the lower level needs must be satisfied first before an employee moves to the next level of needs; failure to do so may have an influence on the next level (Luthans, 2010:140). The more a job allows for growth and acquisition of higher-level needs, the more likely the individual is to report satisfaction within that job. Furthermore, the success of motivating people depends to a large degree on recognition of needs that are unsatisfied and helping individuals meet these needs. The needs as identified by Maslow are listed in Table 2.1.

Employees’ needs are influenced by the importance of different needs and the level to which those needs are fulfilled (Karami, 2007:92). Researchers have noted that Maslow’s theory was the first motivation theory that laid the foundation for the theories of job satisfaction (Kroth, 2007:6; Bushe, 2012:281). This theory serves as a starting point from which researchers explore the realities of job satisfaction within different work situations (Saif, Nawaz, Ali Jan & Khan, 2012:1386). Saif et al., (2012:1384) further comments that there is a similarity between Maslow and Hertzberg’s model because both theories propose that needs have to be satisfied for the employee to be motivated.

Table 2.1:	A staircase of Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs

NEEDS	EXPLANATION
Physiological	Known as basic needs Food, air, water and shelter Provision of salary and good working conditions
Safety	The need to feel safe Safe working conditions Salary increase, job security, fringe benefits
Social	Desire to be loved and to love Need for affection, belonging, social activities and friendship Interact with others through team works, picnic and trips
Esteem	Need for status, attention, reputation, appreciation Esteem needs met through merit pays, recognition and advancement
Self- actualisation	Development of one’s full potential Desire for self-fulfilment, growth and achieving goals Need met through employee skills development, creativity and promotions.

Sources: Adapted from Robbins, Odendaal and Roodt (2003:216); Steverink and Lindenberg (2006:283); Achua and Lussier (2010:81); Aamodt (2010:137).

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (1943) typically is displayed in a pyramid, with the basic need at the bottom and higher needs at the top as illustrated in Figure 2.1. The needs were depicted in this form to indicate the interplay of each need’s satisfaction upon the next need, with the most important and broadest category being the physiological needs at the base (Redmond, 2010:5).

Figure 2.1:	Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

Source: Adapted from Lunenburg & Ornstein (2004:112); Mullins (2007:261); Robbins and Judge (2009:65).

Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory

The existence, relatedness and growth theory (ERG) (1969) attempted to improve upon Maslow’s need hierarchy by allowing for more flexible of movement between need levels (Aamodt, 2010:218). The number of levels are decreased from five to three to allow the order of needs to vary by the individual and allowed for different needs to be followed immediately. Alderfer’s refined needs to existence needs, related needs and growth needs, thereby aiming to explore the relationship between satisfaction of needs and human desires (Robbins, Judge & Campbell, 2010:118). It does not assume lower-level satisfaction as a prerequisite for the emergence of the higher-level needs. This theory considers the intrinsic factors that cause a person to take specifications and the theory is useful in organisations seeking to understand and improve performance in the workplace. These three categories of needs are explained in Table 2.2 below.

Table 2.2:	Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory summary

NEEDS	EXPLANATION
Existence	Include forms of safety, physiological and material needs Safety needs are prevention for fear, anxiety, threat, danger and tension Physiological needs are leisure, excising and sleeping
Relatedness	Includes sense of security, belonging and respect People desire to be accepted as members of a group
Growth needs	Involves self-esteem and self-actualisation Self-esteem needs are confidence, feel competent and independency Self-actualisation needs are achievement and personality development

Source: Adapted from Westlund & Hannon (2008:4); Yang, Hwang and Chen (2011:7887).

ERG is a motivational construct concerned with understanding the factors that contribute to individual job satisfaction (Ivancevich, Konopaske & Mattenson, 2008:83). While Maslow’s theory was interpreted as portraying that satisfied needs are no longer a motivator (O’Connor & Yballe, 2007:749), ERG theory clearly states that all categories of needs can become more important as they are satisfied (Caulton, 2012:2). It suggests that the human needs can be accessed and satisfied simultaneously, rather than from the bottom up. Additionally, individuals may place greater emphasis on any single category as opposed to the rigid hierarchy moving from one need to the next. Figure 2.2 below demonstrates the steps that an individual will progress to when a specific need is satisfied.

Figure 2.2:	Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory

Source: Adopted from Redmond (2010:6)

McClelland’s needs theory

McClelland (1958) needs theory contends that three basic drivers motivate employees: achievement, affiliation and power (Royle & Hall, 2012:25). Each individual is likely to develop a dominant orientation towards one of these needs based their experiences. These needs not only motivate individuals but also include achievement of human goals and concerns. Cortina and Ingerick (2005:121) explain that these three needs play an important central role in explaining a wide range of organisational behaviours to include career success and leadership performance. The determinants of McClelland needs theory are defined as follows (Raeisi, Hadadi, Faraji & Salehian, 2012:1232):

Need for achievement (n-ACH). The n-ach individual is achievement motivated, therefore, seeks achievement, attainment of realistic but challenging goals and advancement in the job. Individual’s achievement needs are satisfied when they are able to actualise their own purpose relative to and regardless of other’s situation. Another characteristic of an individual who is motivated is to achieve success; that focuses to success itself more than the rewards of success.

Need for power (n-POW). The need for power denotes individuals’ desire to be influential. Individuals with a need for authority and the desire to control influence others and have responsibility for their performance. These individuals possess motivation and the need to increase personal status and prestige. This driver produces a need to be influential, effective and make an impact.

Need for affiliation (n-AFF). Those with a need for affiliation desire to belong to strong relationships and are motivated towards interaction with other people. The affiliation driver produces motivation and need to be liked and held in popular regard. This type of person is a team player and wants to be respected and liked.

Royle and Hall (2012:24) indicate that high achievers differentiate themselves from others by their desires to do things better. In addition, high achievers often show behaviours, which include having a major preoccupation with succeeding in whatever they do and set moderate challenging goals and perform to their best to achieve them. These individuals are motivated strongly by job situations with personal responsibility, feedback and an intermediate degree of risk.

Raeisi, Hadadi, Faraji and Salehian (2012:1232) indicate that most people possess and portray a mixture of these needs. Moore and Grabsch (2010:23) further comment that individuals have different needs, hence different things motivate them and the intensity of each varies from one person to the other. Some people display a strong bias toward a particular motivational need that, in turn, influences their behaviour and influences their working environment or management style (Redmod, 2010:512). They are shaped and acquired over time by the cultural background of an individual and their life experience. Nevertheless, each need is the domination on one depending on the personality of an individual (Lussier & Achua, 2007:108). Understanding the behaviour and motivation can be directed in such a way that will provide individual and organisational goals.

Herzberg motivation-hygiene theory

Frederick Herzberg motivation-hygiene (1959) is one of the theories that have been constructed to explain what makes people satisfied with the jobs (Islam & Ismail, 2008:346). Cooper and Locke (2000:166) point out that Herzberg developed one of the earliest theories of job satisfaction in 1959, during which 200 accountants and engineers were interviewed, which utilised incident method of data collection with two questions: “(1). When did you feel particularly good about your job – what turned you on? (2). When did you feel exceptionally bad about your job – what turned you off?” (Malik & Naeem, 2012:11938). Presenting these good and bad feelings, Herzberg argued that there are job-satisfiers (motivators) related to the job content and job-dissatisfiers (hygiene factors) that relate to the job context (Hong & Waheed, 2011:76).

The two factor theory proposes that people are motivated by motivating factors rather than hygiene factors (Hancer & George, 2003:86). Luthans (2010:118) indicated, “the motivator factors include aspects such as achievements, recognition, work itself, responsibility and promotion”. They are related to the job content of the work itself and produce job satisfaction. This in turn influences the employees’ to improve their performance in the workplace. When the motivating factors are achieved, it will lead to job satisfaction. They create positive and longer lasting effects on employees’ performance and are related to work itself (Griffin & Moorhead, 2009:54).

Hygiene factors, in turn, are those aspects that do not motivate/satisfy but rather prevent dissatisfaction. These factors are related to job context and concern the job environment, which includes aspects such as the company policy, administration, supervision, salary and working conditions (Spector, 2008:106). Proper attention to the hygiene factors tends to prevent dissatisfaction, but by itself does not create a positive attitude or motivation to work amongst employees (Mullins, 2007:112).

Researchers have used Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory as a theoretical framework in various fields to assist them in understanding job satisfaction (Karimi, 2007:91). Randolph and Johnson (2005:50) conclude that “if managers want to motivate workers, don’t put them in water fountain; but rather provide a bigger share of the job itself”. The finding of the Herzberg theory suggests that the factors involved in producing job satisfaction are separate and distinct from the factors that lead to job dissatisfaction as illustrated in Figure 2.3 below.

Figure 2.3:	Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory: factors affecting job satisfaction

Source: Adopted from Grobler, Warnich, Carrel, Elbert and Hatfield (2011:72)

Herzberg’s theory suggests that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction result from different causes. Satisfaction is only provided by motivators, whereas dissatisfaction is the result of the non-existence or failure of hygiene factors (Locke, 2000:412). Thus, if management wants to create positive motivation, attention must be paid to the hygiene factors as well as the motivators. It is, therefore, essential to explore the factors that contribute towards the varying degrees of job satisfaction or job dissatisfaction.

FACTORS INFLUENCING JOB SATISFACTION

Zhang, Yao and Cheong (2011:671) explain that in order to maintain or improve employee’s job satisfaction, there is a need to understand the factors that systematically influence job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is associated with a positive attitude towards the job and vice versa (Aarrevaara & Dobson, 2010:250). Many factors define and influence a person’s perception of their job satisfaction.

Researchers have shown that different factors have different effects on job satisfaction (McCausland, Pouliakas & Theodossiou, 2005:638; Spector, 2008:85; Malik, Danish & Munir, 2012:118). Understanding exactly what makes people feel satisfied about their work is a multi- faceted issue. According to Kekana, Du Rand and Van Wyk (2007:26), organisational factors and poor working conditions are strongly associated with job dissatisfaction while the social aspects of the job are regarded as a strong predictor of job satisfaction. Factors influencing job satisfaction, therefore, vary in nature as personal factors and expectations are involved (Muhammad, Muhammad & Malik, 2011:14).

Employees are normally satisfied or less satisfied with the factors that influence their job; this could imply that someone may be more satisfied with their salary but less satisfied with their working conditions or supervisor. According to Saba (2011:3), when the actual outcome is greater than the expected one, the employees would be more satisfied and vice versa. Hillier, Fewell, Cann and Shephard (2005:421) add that the fact that employees are satisfied does not necessarily mean that they will perform well, they may be satisfied because they do not have to work hard; conversely, employees who work hard may not be satisfied.

In the literature, the factors, causes, challenges and predictors of employee job satisfaction are used interchangeably (Spector, 2008:86). This interchangeability is presented below. The various aspects that contribute to workers positive or negative perceptions of their jobs are discussed in relation to the organisation, the work environment and the individual.

Payment

One of the key factors influencing job satisfaction through improving the service quality and organisational performance is said to be a good pay grade (Liu, Combs, Ketchen & Ireland, 2007:506). According to Bendix (2010:112), pay is defined as “the compensation in lieu of the services rendered by the employee which is specified in an employment contract”. The remuneration should correspond with the same type of work in similar organisation. Necessary adjustments should be made from time to time to keep pace with the rising cost of living and inflation (Nazir, Shah & Zaman, 2013:40).

Cydulka and Korte (2008:715) regard pay as a form of acknowledgement and reward to motivate and improve the employees’ behaviour towards the goals set by the employer. Although there are numerous social factors enhancing efficacy, pay is considered more tangible and effective. According to Qasim, Cheema and Syed (2012:34), pay is considered as the fundamental component of job satisfaction since it has a potentially powerful effect in determining job satisfaction. Boggie (2005:35) further indicates that poor pay and absence of recognition often leads to employee turnover.

Employee hold certain personal expectations in terms of the form and amount of rewards they should receive for the service they have provided. Remuneration should enable the employee to maintain a realistic standard of living and to make adequate provision for the future (Nieuwenhuizen, 2007:193). Therefore, it is essential that employees are satisfied with their pay as this may influence their attitudes and behaviours towards their work (Onukwube, 2012:44). When employees are not well remunerated, managers can expect high staff turnover, employees will lack motivation, unions will be in constant wage negotiations and productivity will suffer (Grobler et al., 2011:16).

Promotion opportunities

Although job satisfaction does not depend only on the economic dimension of jobs, the literature considers promotion a main human resources practice that affects employee satisfaction (Sharma & Jyoti, 2009:62). Promotion occurs when an employee makes a shift in the upwards direction in the organisational hierarchy and moves to a place of greater responsibility (Dessler, 2008:105). This provides opportunities for personal growth, increased responsibility and increased social status. It also assists the competitors to identify the productive employees in the industry while at the same time the employees are being recognised by the organisation. According to Naveed, Usman and Bushra (2011:301), employees feel that promotion is an effective contributor in their work life, therefore, will be more satisfied with their jobs.

Promotions can result in a significant increase in the salary of an employee as well as in the extent of authority and control (Blau & DeVaro, 2009:512; Kosteas, 2009:271). The organisations show an employee value through means of promotion, which leads to the morale of the relevant employee being boosted. Organisations can use promotion as a reward for highly productive workers creating an incentive for workers to exert greater effort and initiative (Markos & Sridevi, 2010:91). Promotions will only be an effective mechanism for drawing greater efforts if workers place significant value on the promotion itself. This in turn could result in accelerated performance because of fair promotional opportunities given to employees (Park, Mutsihashi, Fey & Bjorkman, 2003:1392; Wan, Sulaiman & Omar, 2012:101).

Supervisors

Supervisors act as agents and play an important role in the organisation through the responsibility of directing, evaluating and delivering feedback to the employees. Supervisors monitor their subordinates’ behaviour in such a manner as to increase work output and establish and maintain a positive relationship with their subordinates (Shanock & Eisenberg, 2006:689). Ozdemir (2009:104) points out that employee’ job satisfaction escalates more when working with a supervisor who show more concern on the job, supporting them in work related matters and their employee life challenges. This necessitates that supervisors provide unbiased treatment to all employees in the organisation (Coyle-Shapiro, Kessler & Purcell, 2004:87).

According to Straub (2012:16), supervisors control whether employees have access to and feel comfortable using work-life initiatives thus they have power to act as gatekeepers. It is important for supervisors to show support to employees due to rising workplace stress, which could potentially affect the organisation output (Kossek, Pichler, Bodner & Hammer, 2011:290). Hammer, Kossek, Yrafui, Bodner and Hanson (2009:838) mentions that supervisors’ supportive behaviours include creative work-life management, instrumental support, emotional support and role modelling behaviours; this motivates the employees to feel committed in their jobs.

The trust and behaviour that supervisors have towards employees leaves an impact on performance, commitment and honesty of their jobs (Knoll & Gill, 2011:314). Supervisors are required to possess interpersonal skills and the ability to communicate with subordinates (Mehbooh, Arif & Jalal, 2011:2984). McCroskey and McCroskey (2005:108) further comment that the recognition of employees’ attainment by the supervisors enhances their communication behaviour and their job satisfaction level increases.

Brown and Mcintosh (2003:1242) found that employees’ job satisfaction is influenced by a friendly supervisor-employee relationship in the organisation. This notion was supported by Porter, Wrench and Hoskinson (2007:129) who argued that the supervisor and employees’ communicative relationship has a significant possibility to affect both parties’ satisfaction. The supervisors’ treatment has a great impact on the employee perception and thus creates an obligation on the employee to treat the supervisor well in turn. The degree to which supervisors care and considers employees in the organisation is viewed as a strong contributing factor of job satisfaction (Self, Holt & Schaninger, 2005:134).

Fringe benefits

Fringe benefits act as an important component of worker compensation. The main aim of employee benefits is to maintain and improve the quality of life for employees by providing a level of protection and financial security for employees and their family members (Hussein, 2011:44). Bernadin (2007:253) further comments that it is the total compensation package other than pay for time worked provided as part of employment relationship. Fringe benefits are the effective potential way to attract, recruit and retain employees in the organisation (Messmer, 2006:8).

Fringe benefits, though a part of total compensation, embrace non-monetary forms of compensation ranging from health benefits, pension plans, paid time off, tuition reimbursement, recognition award, foreign service premiums, responsibility allowance, child care and on campus accommodation (Dessler, 2008:115). Artz (2010:627) concludes that fringe benefits are indirect financial and non-financial payments employees receive for continuing their employment relationship with an organisation. Employees are often unfamiliar with the value of their benefit package; however, involving them in the process of choosing benefits will lead to a better understanding of the values of the benefit (Iranmanesh & Farahani, 2012:113).

Arnold and Spell (2006:600) report that benefits have been found to influence certain outcomes in the workplace such as job satisfaction and perceptions of justice. Weathington and Jones (2006:293) identify that employees place differing amounts of importance on different benefits. Therefore, if fringe benefits make a match between the desired individuals’ benefits and the offered benefits, high satisfaction may result. Increasing intrinsic and extrinsic fringe benefits that attract an employee’s attention may subsequently increase their performance and induce higher levels of organisational commitment (Lumley, Coetze, Tladinyane & Ferreira 2011:101).

Contingent rewards

The reward and recognition programs serve as an important contingent factor in keeping employees’ self-esteem high and passionate. Employee recognition is the timely, informal or formal acknowledgement of a person or team’s behaviour effort that supports the organisation’s goals and values (Javed, Rafiq, Ahmed & Khan, 2012:351). Mallikarjuna (2012:11) indicates that employees’ recognition helps to improve overall employee engagement hence increasing organisational productivity. Positively influencing staff through recognition is one way to develop an environment and culture where employees want to do their best and want to stay (Newman & Sheikh, 2012:72).

Recognising employees makes them feel valued and enhances their self-esteem, sense of ownership, job satisfaction, team spirit and personal and professional well-being; all of which in turn increase their ability to achieve organisation goals (Kessuwan & Muenjohn, 2010:172). Performance-based rewards are important factors to foster greater job satisfaction on employees. In terms of non-monetary rewards, management should not only give appreciation and recognition to managerial levels but also non-managerial levels as non-managerial level employees often claim that management does not value them as one of the important parts of the organisation and they are not fairly treated by management (Luthans, 2010:301).

Operating conditions

Employers are obliged to provide the employee with safe working conditions in terms of Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) No. 155 of 2003 (RSA, 2003:3). Employees prefer operating conditions that are not dangerous and unpleasant. Newsham, Veitch and Charles (2008:272) state that the operating conditions “is a basic component influencing employee performance that supports the physical, physiological and psychological needs of an employee to provide an acceptable work context”. Favourable operating conditions are said to be a key element in creating employee job satisfaction (Nel, Van Dyk, Haasbroek, Schultz, Sono & Werner, 2008:115). Thus, it is important for organisations to emphasise the need to create a supportive operating conditions in order to promote the retention of employees.

Operating conditions motivate employees to go to extreme lengths to fulfil their responsibilities and feel connected to the organisation (Gavin & Vinten, 2005:24). Therefore, organisations should formulate operating conditions that impact on elements relating to the job content and context, in order to create employee job satisfaction so that they feel valued and perceive their job as meaningful. Operating conditions contribute to the success of the organisation and the type of employee-employer interaction will regulate the level of job satisfaction amongst employees.

Co-workers

Interactions and connections among the co-workers and employees of an organisation are of great importance, since they have an influence on the overall performance of the organisation and the organisational goals (Mehbooh et al., 2011:2984). When the work relationship with co- workers is strong and in positive direction then the satisfaction level of the individual will be high. Thus, employees experiencing good relations with their colleagues can have increased level of satisfaction in their jobs. Having good relations at work influences the employees to feel comfortable with colleagues hence, this lowers the feeling of insecurity and uncertainty (Hamilton, 2007:82). Liao, Joshi and Chuang (2004:970) explain that co-worker support is the extent that individuals view other colleagues at their organisation as being helpful and supportive. This type of support includes caring for fellow co-workers, mentoring another employee and providing them with useful information (Parris, 2003:73; Rousseau & Aube, 2010:323).

Thompson and Prottas (2006:102) clarify that a co-worker helps an employee in coping with the demands of one’s work and non-work life. Conversely, lack of teamwork, unfriendliness and interpersonal conflict between co-workers are reported to impact employee job satisfaction negatively (Dubinsky, 2004:89). Poor relations between the co-workers undermine the service quality in the workplace (Self et al., 2005:135). For employees to be productive, they need a considerate and friendly working environment. Ghazzawi (2008:3) further comment that co-workers, the groups they belong to and the culture to which an individual is exposed all have the potential to influence job satisfaction.

Nature of work

Work plays a prominent role in the lives of employees. The nature of the job as a determinant of job satisfaction focuses on how the job is structured (Ivancevich & Mattenson, 2005:240). Shah, Rehman, Akhtar, Zafar and Riaz (2012:2273) point out that work itself is viewed as a contributing factor towards the job satisfaction of employees. When the job fits well with individual personality traits, that person would be more satisfied with the job. Employee retention is enhanced by providing them with jobs matching their career expectations, which in turn enhance their enjoyment of their jobs, therefore, perform well (Chang, Wunn & Tseng, 2011:118).

Robbins et al. (2003:360) indicated that “the extent to which the job provides the individual with interesting tasks, opportunities for learning, personal growth and the chance to be responsible and accountable for results” employees will likely increase their performance and job satisfaction. Work takes up such a significant amount of a person’s life and by increasing the employees’ satisfaction with the nature of work they do increases an individual overall satisfaction and well- being including the organisational satisfaction (Wong & Heng, 2009:86). Employees’ should thus be provided with chances to improve in their field of interest to accept responsibilities entrusted in them within their job context (Kaur, 2012:49).

Gerber, Haasbroek, Nel, Schultz, Sono, Van Dyk and Werne (2011:201) conclude that interesting and challenging task enables individuals to become what they are capable of becoming. This provides them with a sense of recognition and feeling of self-fulfilment. Therefore, a job that allows some degree of autonomy and limited close supervision would be characterised by a trusting relationship, which leads to job satisfaction. A mentally challenging work that includes work that tests employees’ skills and abilities and allows them to set their own working pace is suggested to build a strong level job satisfaction that result in increased performance in the workplace (Robbins et al., 2010:166). Dubinsky (2004:117) further indicate that too much challenging work could result in increased experience, which eventually positively influences the intellectual inspiration of the employee.

Communication

Effective communication is seen as an essential element in the working environment that ought to inform employees of the industry’s challenges and strategic intent. It is a key to bring people together at one place to make it a workplace. Ali and Haider (2012:39) mention that communication plays an important role in designing rules, regulations and responsibilities and presenting to the members of the organisations. Communication is defined as “the process whereby people within an organisation give and receive messages” (Dwyer, 2005:105). He further clarifies that messages may move downward and upward between hierarchical levels or horizontally among employees at an equivalent level.

According to Bhatti and Qureshi (2007:56), communication elements include general organisational perspectives, personal feedback, organisational integration, supervisory communication, communication climate, subordinate communication, which are imperative to job satisfaction. Supportive and openness of communication is viewed as a source of employees’ job satisfaction. Thus, management should be responsible to align support systems in the strategic design so that employees can communicate their needs and frustrations, since this will keep an organisation functioning effectively and make the employees greatest resources (Ahmad, Ali, Ahmad, Ahmad, Ahmed & Nawaz, 2010:251).

As communication is highly valued by employees, management should establish a conducive environment by communicating with all employees so that they have a common understanding of activities taking place in the organisation as this directly influence the job satisfaction of employees (Farahbod, Salimi & Dorostkar, 2013:422). Altaf, Yousaf, Tahir and Bagram (2013:386) identify that when management practices are communicated to employees this communication result to increased job satisfaction, performance develop a positive psychological job contract and perception of fair pay.

The effects of job satisfaction can be far-reaching and this issue is of concern for organisations. Satisfaction on the job influences organisational variables, which do not only include productivity or turnover but also personnel or non-work variables such as health and life satisfaction. Less satisfied employees become unhappy with their jobs, therefore, this affects their performance in the organisation and this behaviour affects their co-workers. Roessler, Rugulies, Bilberg, Anderson, Zebis and Sjogaard (2012:2) found that workers who report low job satisfaction experienced several issues at work as a side-effect, which includes organisational productivity, increased labour turnover, workplace stress and employee absenteeism.

CONSEQUENCES OF JOB SATISFACTION

Job stress

Work stress affects employees and organisations globally (McCalister, Dolbier, Webster, Mallon & Steinhardt, 2006:183). This phenomenon has reached nearly all professions, ranging from management level to employees who are involved in the production process. Mansoor, Fida, Nasir and Ahmad (2011:52) identify numerous stressors that influence employees in the organisation, which includes interpersonal relationships at work, workload, lack of support from supervisors, lack of job control and conflicts with management policies. Because of job stress, employees tend to experience different symptoms of stress that harm their performance and further pose a threat of productivity decline in the working environment. Salami, Ojokuku and Hesanmi (2010:249) define stress as “the body’s reaction to a change that requires a physical, mental or emotional adjustment or response, which comes from any situation or thought that makes an individual feel frustrated, angry, nervous or anxious”. Moderate stress fuels employees to be creative and motivate them to achieve the organisational goals nevertheless; individual ability to withstand stress is often dependent on their personal characteristics (Thian, Kannusamy & Klainin-Yobas, 2013:25).

Employees can cope with stress for short periods but chronic stress produces prolonged changes in the physiological state (Vischer, 2007:177). However, the effectiveness of coping with behaviours depends on the situation in which they are used. Li and Lambert (2008:14) comment that in some situation coping behaviours may work well but not for others. Generally, coping is a strategy that helps people to reduce stress and solve problems within the organisation (Golbasi, Kelleci & Dogan, 2008:876). Employees have different coping strategies that they adopt when dealing with stressful situations. Ahsan, Abdullah, Gun Fie and Alam (2009:122) conclude that it is essential for employer and employees to recognise the stress and stressors that cause the negative effects in the working environment.

Labour turnover

Labour turnover is important to the organisation, individuals and management due to its impact on the organisation’s effectiveness (Shaw, Gupta & Delery, 2005:52; Chen, Ployhart, Thomas, Anderson & Bliese, 2011:160; Kuria & Ondigi, 2012:311). Mahdi, Zin, Nor and Naim (2012:1519) clarify that organisations are constantly investigating on what make employees stay or intend to leave the company. Employees leaving the organisation become a problem to managers; since they lose their valuable and experienced workforce (Mbah & Ikemefuna, 2012:275). Thus, management have to discover a successful mechanism of attracting and retaining valuable employees in the workplace (Holtom, Mitchell, Lee & Eberly, 2008:232). Employee turnover is described as the intention to exist in an organisation voluntarily or involuntarily (Nazim, 2008:240). Voluntary turnover is a decision of an employee to quit the job when their needs are not being satisfied by their present jobs. Involuntary turnover refers to when an individual is not in control, such as retirement, dismissal or death (Bawa & Jantan, 2005:69). Regardless of the good planning, organisations cannot retain all their employees, since staff wastage happens through resignations, natural deaths, transfer and retirement.

A minimum level of labour turnover is beneficial to the organisation in that it reduces the task of retrenchment and allows recruitment of new employees from the industry (Armstrong, 2009:213; Hausknecht & Irevor, 2011:354), thus, preventing in-breeding within the organisation and introduction of new ideas and innovation from new employees who become its competitive advantage. According to Barrick and Zimmenman (2005:161), the minimum rate of labour turnover is determined by the size of the labour force in the organisation or industry. Whereas there is no universal acceptable rate of labour turnover, the minimum rate varies from organisation to organisation.

Hana and Lucie (2011:85) comment that labour turnover has a number of advantages as an organisational attribute as analysed from managerial point of view. Measuring and conceptualising labour turnover at the organisational level allows for monitoring and assessment; thus opens the way for administrative intervention through changes in the organisational design and staffing arrangements (Lynch & Tuckey, 2008:8). Comparing labour turnover statistics with other organisations provides the opportunity to view how an organisations labour turnover rates looks when compared with rates in a similar industry. Mwangangi (2014:25) indicate that when labour turnover is not properly managed it would affect the organisation adversely in terms of personnel costs and in the long run it would affect its liquidity position.

Organisational productivity

Productivity is a key factor driving long-term economic growth and is the main determinant of national living standards, which quantifies how the resources are used by relating the quantity of inputs to outputs (Chaboki, Wahah & Ansari, 2013:82). According to Dehghan Nayeri, Nazari, Salsali, Ahmadi and Adib Hajbaghery (2006:52), productivity and efficiency are factors that constitute the success of the organisation by managers. Productivity is described as “value creation and efficient-making of human efforts in a society or organisation in order to achieve a better life and a better work quality (Olumuyima, Adelaja & Chukwuemeka, 2012:33)”. In general terms, productivity is the relationship between the outputs including goods and services produced by a manufacturing or service system and the inputs used to produce them. Hameed and Amjad (2009:4) clarify that increased productivity can improve processes, working relationships, individual and group behaviour, increase work motivation, increase employment status and salary levels.

Increasing productivity within the organisation is one of the positive outcome reflections, which are attained by maintaining employee satisfaction as well as paying attention to their socio- emotional and physical needs. Organisational productivity increases occur when more basic input such as increased labour, machines, money, materials and time, are employed in order to produce more outputs (Syverson, 2011:328). Productivity gains do not necessarily imply an increase in overall efficiency but can be achieved either by increasing the amounts of inputs used in production or by combining these inputs more efficiently (Dehghan et al., 2006:53). The literature reveals that organisational productivity strongly depends upon the performance of its workforce to ensure its survival and growth (Robbins et al., 2003:108; Taiwo, 2010:300). Bayat (2011:1630) concluded that organisations should retain motivated, well-trained and highly skilled workforce in order to maximise their productivity thus lowering chances of absenteeism.

Employee absenteeism

Employee absenteeism is a relevant and costly issue for organisations; constantly looking at its antecedents will assist to reduce the phenomenon (Kutzmits & Adams, 2009:280). Therefore, managing absence is critical for all organisations regardless of size and industry. Absenteeism is a gauge of the employee commitment to the organisation that affects organisational productivity. Anderson and Geldenhuuys (2011:22) describe absenteeism as “the time an employee is not on the job during working hours while expected, apart from a granted leave of absence, holiday or vacation time”. Munro (2007:21) clarify that absenteeism affects any organisation in terms of the service delivery, loss of revenue, the extra pressure on the co-workers who are present at work. Although absenteeism seems to be very costly to organisations, huge savings can be realised through effective management of non-attendance at work.

South African organisations are faced with reported losses of between R12 billion and R19 billion caused by absenteeism (Stats SA, 2012:23). Beira (2008:28) reports that in South Africa about 4.5 percent of the workforce are absent on any given day and in some organisations this figure is as high as 18 percent. Absenteeism is viewed as the highest severe discipline problem that managers of South African organisation should pay attention to (Borgongi, Russo, Miragha & Vecchione, 2013:130). Lowering absence rates is one of the important sources of cost savings in an organisation (Kelly, Kossek, Hammer, Durham, Bray, Chermack, Murphy & Kaskubar, 2008:307).

With regard to cost effect thereof, absenteeism is disruptive, expensive and difficult to manage (Armstrong, 2009:57). Absenteeism is a major concern for all managers because of having to deal with the same workload but with limited workforce. Saritha (2013:2139) concluded that there is a need to control the situation by taking a thorough and in-detail analysis to identify the critical reasons of absenteeism, which will assist to improve job satisfaction. Absence control can often be an important step in the process of reducing organisational costs (Singh & Khanna, 2011:3). The effective management of absenteeism depends on implementing the correct strategies that can lower absenteeism rates within the organisation.

STRATEGIES TO ENHANCE JOB SATISFACTION

One of the essential characteristics in organisational procedures is people management (Parvin & Kabir, 2011:113). In order for organisation to accomplish stable growth, it is vital to retain skilled and satisfied employees. Rane (2011:11) indicated that the success and productivity of an organisation strongly depends on motivated employees. Organisations that retain their employees for a longer term will likely propose methods, which will advance the organisation’s products and services, therefore, create a deeper commitment to the organisation (Goel, Sharma & Sharma, 2012:174).

Organisations that fail to increase job satisfaction are at threat of losing their highly skilled employees. Marchant (2011:64) reported that positively influencing employees is one way of developing an environment and culture where employees want to do their best and stay longer. Strategies included in improving and promoting job satisfaction of employees are addressed below in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3:	Strategies to enhance job satisfaction

Strategy	Explanation
Making jobs fun	Improve working environment strategies Develop the sense of autonomy Decrease boredom
Training and education	Generates motivation among employees Gain more skills and responsibility Becomes creative and productive
Positive working environment	Encourages employees to excel in their duties Lowers absenteeism and complaints Increase employee job satisfaction
Employee participation	Feel the sense of belonging to the organisation Increased organisational commitment Organisational objectives are easily achieved

Sources: Luthans (2010:216); Rane (2011:12); Goel et al., (2012:175).

An employee’s job satisfaction strongly depends on the positive mental, physical and emotional feelings that they have towards their jobs. The fact that employees spend a lot of time at work, therefore, job satisfaction plays an important role in their lives. Goel et al. (2012:178) mention that organisations that desire to enhance employee satisfaction could positively improve work motivation, productivity and work commitment. When job satisfaction becomes entrenched among the values of the organisation and the employees, this can translates to enhanced services offered to clients based on job satisfaction sustained among employees (Farmer, 2010:1). Furthermore, employees who report high job satisfaction in their work are unlikely to be absent from work.

ABSENTEEISM

Employee absenteeism is problematic for organisations, particularly in times of flux and crisis (Dineen, Noe, Shaw, Duffy & Wiethoff, 2007:624; Cascio & Boundreau, 2011:301). Universally, absenteeism has shown to be a key cause of poor productivity and lost working hours (Levy, 2007:1). Ose (2005:163), however, reported that some employees experience occupational accidents, family obligations, working environment and management, which forces them to be absent. There are numerous reasons and characteristics that influences employees from being absent at work.

Drakopoulos and Grimani (2013:3497) defined absenteeism as “non-attendance when attendance was scheduled or clearly expected”. Increased absenteeism generates many problems for managers causing upset and delays in work schedules. Employees who do repetitive work under bad and unsafe working conditions are likely not to report at work (Swarnalatha & Sureshkrishna, 2013:2), therefore, the level of job satisfaction among employees is normally evident by their absenteeism. Sichani, Lee and Robinson (2011:850) concluded that absenteeism results in productivity losses and loss of good will among employees.

In the employment relationship lies an agreement, whereby the employee agrees that within limits specified by the contract, they will perform the duties the employer requires them to perform while the employer undertakes to remunerate the employee for performance of such task (Obeng-Denteh, Yeboah & Esi Monkah, 2011:9). The employment contract specifies the number of working days and hours that employee is expected to be at work; therefore, the employee is expected to report every day at work and timeously. Munro (2007:21) suggested that an employee is required to submit a proof of not showing up at work as per employment contract. An employee who fails to report to work due to sickness should provide the employer with a medical practitioner certificate for being unfit to work as stipulated in Basic Conditions of Employment Act No.75 Section 22 of 1997 (RSA 1997:48).

Absence behaviour affects both the country and the organisation due to the economical and social cost (Drakopoulos & Grimani, 2013:3498). Rosenblatt and Shirom (2005:209) reported that absenteeism reflects negatively on work norms, such as social loafing, which continuously leads to demoralisation of employees. Due to undesirable working conditions that employees find themselves working in, they resort to certain behaviours such as lateness and taking a day off. In this context, absenteeism can be seen as part of a withdrawal syndrome (Johns, 2003:158).

When one or more employees are absent from work, it influences the capacity of the workgroup since the production becomes reduced. Employees’ absence impacts heavily on the organisation’s productivity and employers are concerned with its costs. Hargrave, Hiatt, Alexander and Shaffer (2008:284) indicated that organisations lose millions of dollars each year because of productivity costs. On average, employee absenteeism has increased sharply in South Africa. Employee absenteeism is estimated to cost South Africa economy between R12 billion to R 20 billion per year (Adcorp Employment Index, 2012:2). In this regard, absenteeism does not only affect the financial aspects in the organisation but also the days lost without working, therefore, understanding the factors that cause absenteeism can support managers to cope with employees absenteeism better, resulting in increased productivity and profitability (Beira, 2008:29). Carefully looking at different classification of employee absenteeism can help managers to identify reasons that cause employees from being absent from work.

Classification of absenteeism

Stormer and Fahr (2010:8) argue that understanding the cause of absenteeism better can be appreciated for organisations and policy makers; hence, governments are intensively researching improved ways of tackling this problem. Barmby, Ercolani and Ireble (2004:66) reported that there is difficulty in reaching employee absence solutions because absence is not only a medical condition. While employees may be absent due to sickness, other employees use sickness absence just to take a day off from work, as indicated in Figure 2.4.

Employees absence in the workplace can be divided into three main types, namely sickness, innocent and culpable absence. Different groupings of absenteeism require varying strategies for effective non-discriminatory attendance management.

Figure 2.4:	Types of absence

Source: Adapted from Robbins, Judge, Odendaal and Roodt (2009:108)

Employees can be absent from work for several reasons, which differ from person to person. Absences that will require some type of employer intervention are identified under three distinct categories: sickness, innocent and culpable. It is essential that these three types of absence are differentiated, recorded separately and resolved differently.

Sickness absence

An employee who fails to report at the workplace and asserts illness as an excuse for not showing up can be categorised as absence as a result of illness. When an employee is absent from work, a medical certificate is produced to serve as a proof, as per organisations policy and the BCEA No. 75 of 1997 Section 32 (RSA 1997:46). The BCEA further added that the minimum number of days an employee is permitted to stay away from work due to sickness is 12 days per year or 36 days per three-year cycle.

Kivimaki, Head, Ferrie, Hemingway, Shipley, Vahteraand and Marmot (2005:99) clarify that among the working populations, sickness absence have long been measured as a reflector of health status. In the literature, absence due to illness is a considerable economic and social problem, which is known to be linked to certain behavioural attitudes and psychosocial work factors including high job stressors and low social support (Otsuka, Takahashi, Nakata, Haratani, Kaida, Fukasawa, Hanada & Ito, 2007:225). Organisations utilise sickness absence in measuring the ill health of employees and as a cause of lost productivity. According to Roelen, Koopmans, Notenbomer and Groothoff (2008:567), “sickness is a substantial economic drain in communities where employees receive sick leave benefits from the state or employers even when they did not render services”.

Innocent absence

Mathis and Jackson (2008:53) identify that there is some absenteeism, which is unavoidable. Innocent absenteeism is viewed as absenteeism, where its legitimate concerns are beyond the employee control such as injury, unexpected transportation problems, or the need to take care of a sick family member, maternity leave, study leave, vacation leave or retirement purpose (Sagie 1998:157). Hitt, Miller and Colella (2009:651) comment that due to the fact illness and death in the family are reasonable absence notices; employers have sick leave policies that allow employees a certain amount of paid absenteeism. Since this type of absence is usually scheduled, the effect to the organisation can be absorbed fairly and easily because the employer would have assigned work for other team members in time guaranteeing appropriate management of the workflow (Anderson, 2009:14).

Innocent absenteeism in the workplace should not be addressed through disciplinary measures but rather use the approach on the basis of identifying and understanding the medical needs of the employee and any restrictions as identified by the employees’ health care practitioner (Babaita, 2008:7). He further mentions that this could include strategies that can possibly modify the work to ensure that the employee is able to come to work on a regular basis.

Culpable absence

Unscheduled absence from work gives rise to serious management problems (Roelen, Koopmans, Notenbomer & Groothoff, 2011:307). Culpable absence refers to lateness or absence problems for which the employee should be held responsible because the problems are within the employee’s power to address and correct (Lokke Nielsen, 2008:1330). According to Romero and Strom (2011:1), these absences can be in the form of taking a day off, extended weekends, excessive lateness, false explanation for an absence, failure to call in and report as per collective agreement provisions or standard operating procedures or not providing a doctor’s certificate when required.

Organisational planning cannot be implemented effectively when a certain number of employees are absent. Absenteeism transforms the organisation into unusual workplace behaviour where employees disrupt the norms of the organisation, which leads to negative outcomes (Swarnalatha & Sureshkrishna, 2013:2). According to Dessler (2013:115), within the labour relation context, culpable absence can be addressed through progressive discipline and when determining the discipline, the nature and frequency of the offence must be taken into consideration. Tyson and York (2005:233) further state that sick-pay schemes are sometimes blamed for influencing those who are not genuinely ill to stay at home, because the threat of loss of earning has been removed.

Due the negative impact that absenteeism has on economy and social aspects of the organisation, there has been an increased concern of what really causes absenteeism. Drakopoulos and Grimani (2013:3498) point out that various efforts have been made to determine techniques and policies to minimise absenteeism through studying its causes, therefore, different absenteeism models have been developed in an attempt to discover the cause of absenteeism.

LEGISLATION CONSIDERATION WITH ABSENTEEISM

The BCEA (RSA 1997:8) ensures that employees appreciate the employment conditions in the organisation where they work. For this reason, the contract of employment may not contain less favourable working conditions. According to the Act, employees are entitled to the maximum of 40 working hours per week including meal intervals and rest periods. Moreover, employees are given 21days annual leave by the employer depending on the number of days they work per week.

In every 36-month cycle, employees are granted paid sick leave of 30 days according to the LRA (RSA 1995:9). Du Plessis, Fouche and Van Wyk (2006:317) comment that the employee sick leave begins on the first day of the commencement of work and is renewed every three years thereafter. When an employee is absent or ill as a result of an accident contracted in the course of employment, the employee is compensated in terms of Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Disease Act No.130 of 1993 (RSA 1993:4); therefore, the employer may not require an employee to work while on sick leave (Coomber & Barriball, 2006:294).

Therefore, employees’ absence is not counted as part of sick leave and absenteeism. Absence without a valid reason becomes a breach of contract between the employer and employee because the contract of employment stipulates that an employee will render services to the employer who in return pays for the services (Bendix, 2010:314). An employee, who does not show up at work continually and does not have a valid reason, is considered absent from work by the employer. The employer has to apply disciplinary measures on the employee for misconduct.

The LRA (RSA 1995:2) confers on the employee the right not to be unfairly dismissed. Nevertheless, in terms of the LRA Act, an employee may be dismissed for incapacity or misconduct but all alternatives should be investigated first. Before dismissal is guaranteed, the employer should consider the extent and the duration of misconduct and not necessarily the exact nature of the illness as this may only be disclosed to the employer with the employee’s consent (Nel, Swanepoel, Kirsten, Erasmus & Tsabadi, 2005:115). Grossett (2004:45) states that for an employee to be dismissed from the organisation, there are certain disciplinary procedures that have to be followed in order to constitute dismissal to be procedurally and substantively fair.

Depending on the nature of the offence and the circumstances under which it is committed, the sanction can range from a verbal warning to a written warning, a final written warning, suspension and the last resort is dismissal. The verbal warning normally is applied when the employee committed a minor offence, where the matter is resolved by the employee and the supervisor (Du Plessis et al., 2006:85). Failure of the employee to comply with the verbal warning conditions and to repeat the same offence warrants stricter disciplinary actions and a written warning will then be issued. Holley, Jennings and Wolters (2008:208) point out that a fair procedure have to be followed before issuing the written warning, which gives the employee accused an opportunity to present their case in answer to the charges against them.

A further step, which is more serious and stricter, is a final written warning. According to Bendix (2010:402), the final written warning is issued if the offence of the similar nature is repeated and it is the last attempt for the employer to avoid suspension and dismissal. Suspension and dismissal will be issued to the employee if they failed to heed the seriousness of and the requirement of the final written warning. Section 188 of the LRA (1995:10) stipulates that dismissal is unfair when the employer fails to prove fair reasons for dismissal. The employer has to justify dismissal reasons based on the misconduct or incapacity of the employee’s operational requirements and that dismissal is effected in accordance with a fair procedure (Venter, Levy, Holtzhausen, Canradie, Benderman & Dworzanowski-Venter, 2011:119).

FACTORS LEADING TO EMPLOYEE ABSENTEEISM WITHIN THE ORGANISATION

Absenteeism influences the productivity of the organisation and the shift work patterns because of little changes that have to be done due to absent employees. Langon (2006:18) stipulated that employee absenteeism is a serious and frustrating problem for employers. Cristofoli, Turrini and Valotti (2012:78) also clarify that absenteeism rates differ significantly between years and countries, therefore, in each organisation absenteeism differs. High rates of absenteeism often are linked with low employee morale (Bushman, 2007:1). Easton and Goodale (2005:460) claimed that the principal reasons for culpable absence are unlikely to be reduced. Many causes of absence reveal individual characteristics such as illness, therefore, absence is normally studied and analysed on an individual basis (Hausknecht, Hiller & Vance, 2008:1223). Organisational absence changes the workplace into a different behaviour due to employees’ absence. Pillay (2009:1) reported that family responsibilities, stress and sickness are considered personal factors influencing employee absence in the workplace. Absenteeism levels and fluctuation can be seen as choices made by individual workers and managers. For the individual workers, the choice of coming to work or not is dependent on the costs and benefits of absence, which in turn are related to organisational factors, supervisor factors, work factors and employee factors (Swarnalatha & Surenshkrishna, 2013:2).

Organisational factors

Organisational climate is defined by perceptions of employees that are useful in differentiating organisations according to their procedures and practises, both formal and informal (Kuenzi & Schminke, 2009:635). The success of the organisation can be influenced by a good organisational climate. Wallace and Chen (2006:530) maintain that the organisational climate differs from organisation to organisation based on perceptions of the employees about the policies and practices; therefore, different climates attract and motivate different kinds of employees.

According to Ahmad, Ahmad, Ahmed and Nawaz (2010:216), a positive organisational climate has a positive relationship with job satisfaction while a negative organisational climate has a negative relationship with absenteeism. Cohesiveness of colleagues, recognition of tasks performed, supportive management with regards to personal concerns, innovative style of performance, fairness in rewards are the norms and attitudes that influence the behaviour of employees at work (Aarons & Sawitzky, 2006:63). It is crucial to analyse organisational climate characteristics that lead to employee absenteeism problems. These involve characteristics such as absence control policies, employee incentives programmes, remuneration, promotion, career development and opportunities and decentralisation.

Employers have to put the focus on creating a committed workforce and an atmosphere where the good attendance is valued; thus reducing the level of absenteeism by showing employees that they do not tolerate excessive absenteeism through the application of progressive disciplinary control programs (Harter, 2001:53). The author further comments that management should effectively communicate the policies and procedures of absenteeism with the employees and the bargaining strategies and absenteeism control programs used to reduce employee absenteeism in the organisation. The absence control policy, which is credible and successful needs to be understood throughout an organisation and applied consistently and fairly. According to Hayday (2005:1), a formal attendance policy can help to ensure that attendance problems are dealt with fairly and by putting the policy in writing, it creates an agreement between an employer and employee.

The policy should include details that address absence, tardiness, leaving early, inconsistent discipline, charges of illegal discrimination and complaints about favouritism. Paulson (2006:1) states that organisations should sustain a balance between work and other aspects of employees lives in order to reduce absenteeism. This can be achieved through implementing strategies to increase employee morale and flexible working hours (Johnson, Croghan & Crawford, 2003:337). According to Bakker, Demerouti, De Boer and Schaufeli (2003:342), research has shown that taking a proper approach on managing absence can positively improve attendance and identify health problems of employees at an early stage. It is essential that persistent absence is dealt with promptly, firmly and consistently in order to show both the employee concerned and other employees that absence is regarded as a serious matter and may result in dismissal.

Employee incentive programs

Rozycki (2006:1) describes an incentive program as the planned activity designed to motivate employees to achieve predetermined organisational objectives. The benefits of conducting incentive programs within an organisation includes an increase in sales, improves client services, improved employee morale and building employee loyalty and trust. These programs show appreciation for employees’ diligent efforts and establish a sense of participation in the well-being of the company that a pay check cannot convey. In addition, a successful incentive program has the ability to point employees in the direction the employer wants them to go and gives them the motivation they need to achieve phenomenal results.

According to Baicker, Cutcler and Song (2010:305), for employee incentive programs to be successful, it is essential that all employees understand it, be committed to it and believe that it will be administered fairly. Rewarding employees for their good attendance and remunerating them for unused sick leave serves as an incentive for decreasing absenteeism in the workplace (Ariely, Bracha & Meler, 2009:545). Nevertheless, employees not only want good pay and benefits, they also want to be valued and appreciated for their work, treated fairly and have opportunities for advancement and involvement in the organisation. For the success and survival of the organisation, incentive programs should be tailored in line with the organisational needs and be monitored in order to reap the best benefits (Rossi 2010:29).

Remuneration

Remuneration is an important element in the employment relationship. Luthans (2010:125) states that employees see pay as a reflection of how management views their contribution to the organisation. Poor working conditions, low income, poor training opportunities and low morale are viewed as contributing factors that increase employee absence in the workplace (Belita, Mbindyo & English, 2013:4). When employees are well paid in the organisation, they become committed to their work hence absenteeism decreases. Robbins et al., (2010:66) states that pay correlate with absenteeism and employee overall happiness.

There is no doubt that monetary rewards play a very influential role in determining job satisfaction and absenteeism. Although money is important to individuals, research has shown that employees who earn more are not necessarily more satisfied with their jobs (Spector, 2008:66). Managers should consider salary structures, which should include an organisational attachment to each job, payment according to performance, personal or special allowances, fringe benefits and pension as examples.

Promotion opportunities

Blau and DeVaro (2007:513) mention that promotions are an important aspect of an employee’s career and life, affecting other facets of their work experience. Promotions constitute an important aspect of employees’ labour mobility, most often carrying substantial wage increases and can have a significant impact on other job characteristics such as responsibilities and subsequent job attachments (Kosteas, 2009:175). Promotions act as a major influence in enhancing job satisfaction because they cause employees to feel more recognised and appreciated in their responsibilities (Greene, 2010:103); thus contributing to their overall growth and development, both economically and in career growth. Generally, promotions provide opportunities for personal growth, more responsibilities and increased social status (Robbins et al., 2010:66). Khalid, Irshad and Mahmood (2012:127) state that promotions based on merits and performance evaluations are perceived by academicians as equitable and fair and result in a greater degree of job satisfaction and high degree of productivity.

Career development and opportunities

Career development means matching the employees present and future career goals needs together with the goals of the organisation (Grawitch, Gottschalk & Munz (2006:131). According to Sullivan and Mainiero (2007:48), career development practises in the workplace help organisations attract and retain high performing employees. Employees are more likely to stay in the organisation if offered the opportunity to develop, therefore, the amount of career support received by employees is positively correlated to their stated intention to remain with their current employers (Kappia, Dainty & Price 2007:240).

O’Donnell (2007:6) mentions effective career development practices such as employee growth and development programs can facilitate healthy organisations. Practices that contribute to employee development have been linked to employee commitment to the organisation, increased productivity and decreased absenteeism and turnover. The employee growth and development programs include continuing education courses, tuition reimbursement, career development skills training, coaching, mentoring and leadership development programs (Monis & Sreedhara, 2011:119).

Decentralisation

Decentralisation is a type of organisational structure in which daily operations and decision- making responsibilities are delegated by top management to middle and lower-level managers within the organisation (Collins, Omar, Adhikari, Dhakal, Emmel, Dhakal, Chand, Thapa & Singh, 2007:536). Decentralisation can unleash creativity for employee to make innovation because it gives them control of their own actions in the workplace. Ezigbo (2012:126) states that it can also unite organisations if it is controlled or coordinated properly. In decentralised organisations, the employees have the urgency to perform better and contribute more to the organisation as they are given greater freedom, autonomy and responsibility and eventually this will enhance their morale as well. According to Lutwana, Roos and Dalamo (2012:3), decentralisation can bring about employee’s inner sense to be more innovative and freedom in generating ideas and taking risk at work. Generally, decentralisation can be observed as a natural development when the organisation grows large and complex.

Work factors

Structural models such as the demand control support model (DCS) focus on specific aspects in the complex psychosocial work environment to explain how individuals perceive and react to their job (Karasek & Theorell 1990:150; Hussain & Khalid, 2011:568). Work factors entail autonomy of employees, employees’ teamwork and job rotation.

Autonomy of employees

The BCEA No.75 of 1997 (RSA 1997:8) has explicitly promoted the cause of freedom, equity, security and dignity on the employees work in the organisations. The ability of employees to control their work situation is called autonomy. Empowerment, autonomous work, teams and organisational practise are grounded in giving employees more discretion over their work (Dysvik & Kuvaas, 2011:368). According to Saraigh (2011:204), job autonomy will enhance performance because employees with high job autonomy will perceive that they are trusted to perform their tasks. Furthermore, Kauffeld (2006:18) also found a positive relationship between job autonomy and employees’ competency and creativity. When job autonomy is high, work outcomes will be viewed by employees as depending substantially on their own efforts, initiatives and decisions, rather than on the adequacy of instructions from the manager or in a manual of procedures. Raza Naqvi, Ishtiaq, Kanwal and Ali (2013:98) conclude that employees who have the freedom of choice and held accountable for their decisions are believed to be productive and happier. Lack of job autonomy and decision latitude is related to increased risk of health problems and absenteeism (Vaananen, Kalimo, Toppinen-Tanner, Mutanen, Peiro, Kivimaki & Vahtera, 2004:4427).

Employees teamwork

Teamwork assists in promoting knowledge that occurs through interaction, problem solving, dialogue, cooperation and collaboration within the workplace. Manzoor, Ullah, Hussain and Ahmad (2011:112) indicate that teamwork is one of the fastest growing forms of employee involvement used by organisations. A team is described as “a group of people gathered in one department or task area, with common skills or product output in their goals” (Mattick & Miller, 2006:32). Effective teamwork can affect the successful deliveries and implementation of organisational goals. Successful teamwork relies upon the existing team members, creating an environment where they are all willing to contribute and participate in order to promote and support a positive affective team environment.

According to Montes, Moreno and Morales (2005:1160), one of the potential advantages of teamwork is that it reduces fluctuations in performance and improves work morale. All members of the team should understand their goals and be committed to achieving them. In a team, employees should be given a chance to cooperate, enhance individual skills and provide constructive feedback without any conflict between individuals (Jones, Richard, Paul, Sloane & Peter, 2007:35). Organisations that emphasise teamwork have results of increased employee performance, greater productivity, better problem solving skills and decreased employee absenteeism; but to succeed in this they also need to pay attention to the quality and type of teamwork offered (Froebel & Marchington, 2005:258).

Job rotation

Jorgensen (2005:1723) defines job rotation as “working at different tasks or in different positions for set periods of time in a planned way, using lateral transfers aiming to allow employees to gain a range of knowledge, skills and competencies”. The advantage of employees who undergo job rotation at work is the prevention of monotony, fighting lack of commitment and loss of motivation to come to work (Azizi, Zolfaghari & Liang, 2009:72). According to Adomi (2006:66), employees moving from one position to another in set periods acquire new experiences, new professional fields and increase morale and motivation. Correct implementation of job rotation should provide an employee a chance to experience various stages of the production process as a whole (Kaymaz, 2011:70).

Supervisor factors

The discussions covered factors that will revolve around the different management leadership styles and its impact on absenteeism.

Leadership style of the supervisor

Leadership style in an organisation is one of the factors that plays a significant role in enhancing the interest and commitment of individuals in the organisation. Leadership is a process of interaction between leaders and followers where the leader attempts to influence followers to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2010:160). Spector (2008:231) comments that when managers adopt their subordinates’ preferred style, giving employees the respect and fair treatment they deserve, it will increase the level of job satisfaction and decrease employee absenteeism, which will eventually improve the functioning of the organisation.

Excellent leaders not only inspire subordinate’s potential to enhance efficiency in the organisation but also meet their requirements in the process of achieving organisational goals. Effective leaders are important because they are one of the factors determining the success or failure of the organisation, a group or even a whole country (Ocheni & Atakpa, 2012:120). Leadership is less about the leader and more about the needs of people and the organisation being led (Maqsood, Bilal, Nazir & Baig, 2013:140). Walters (2009:1) mentions there is a significant relationship between leadership style and absenteeism that can either de-motivate or motivate employees. Thus, leaders adopt different leadership styles, which they use in managing employees in the organisation (Chen & Chen, 2008:146).

Participative leadership

Participative leadership is defined as “a management style in which other members of the organisation or department, especially subordinate employees are involved in discussions and making decisions that are important to the organisation or teamwork” (Jayasingam & Cheng, 2009:55). Schermerhorn, Hunt and Osborn (2008:115) mention that participative leaders have a tendency to strive for feedback from those who report to them and consider their suggestions before making decisions. This, by far, is the commonly used management style in the organisation, since there is an involvement of team members and employees as being part of the decision making (Yun, Cox, Sims & Salam, 2007:174). Although there is employee participation, the leader is given the responsibility of coming up with the final decision.

A potential advantage of using a participative leadership in the organisation is that employees become motivated at work because they can recognise that their recommendations are being taken into consideration (Yukl, 2010:115). Druskat and Wheeler (2003:438) noted that participative leaders are expected to lead by encouraging team members to discover new opportunities and challenges and learning through knowledge sharing. The participation process in the workplace helps ensure that unanticipated problems that arise during the work can be tackled directly and immediately by those affected by the problem. Moreover, open communication processes that are common in participative style can assist in lowering barriers between individuals (Gharibvand, 2012:290).

Directive style

Jogulu and Wood (2006:237) define directive leaders as leaders who are very strict and make use of their powers of influence from positions to control rewards and force the followers to comply with their instruction. The leader dominates and controls all the decisions and actions by giving instruction on what to do, when to do it and how to do it. This leadership style can be applied on tasks that need to be urgently completed, with dependent associates in unstable working groups (Jordan, 2010:6). Highly directive leaders enhance goal attainment by serving as a source of feedback for employees and achieve the highest rates of in-role performance.

Researchers have demonstrated the negative outcomes that are associated with directive leadership style as negative emotions experienced by employees, low satisfaction and absenteeism (De Hoogh & Hartog, 2009:1060). In the organisation where directive leadership is used, the leader has complete control over the employees even though they have important views that will be beneficial to the organisation success. Thus, employees tend to be absent from the workplace since their opinions about the success of the organisation are not taken into consideration. Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi and Shaikh (2012:193) added that this not only decreases job satisfaction but also does not give employees an opportunity to be involved in teamwork, which also lowers the development of people’s skills.

Laissez-faire leadership

In organisations where laissez-faire management is used, leaders leave their employees to work on their own but the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made (Popa, 2012:124). This type of leadership style can be effective if the leader monitors what is being achieved and communicates this back to the team regularly. According to Alkahtani, Abu-Jarad and Sulaiman (2011:72), laissez-faire leadership is highly beneficial when individual employees are very experienced. These leaders seldom offer guidance to the team and delegate decision-making to team members they trust and in whom they have confidence. When using this style, the leaders believe that they cannot do everything, thus they delegate certain tasks and set priorities (Mullins, 2007:203). Sandra (2011:20) further mentions that employees have the freedom of doing their job, operate within minimum rules and often make decisions that guide the organisation.

Employee factors

The discussion around employee factors will incorporate gender, qualifications and age.

Gender

Female labour market participation rates are lower than those of men and their choice of employment may be driven by the need to combine work, caring for the family, lower job satisfaction and poorer health (Patton & Johns 2007:1560). Laaksonen, Martikainen, Rahkonen and Lahelma (2007:326) note that the pattern of absenteeism in the workplace differs by gender and that require separate equations to be run. Women that are within the child-bearing age are more likely to take time off, which leads the employer avoiding employment of them (Jensen & McIntosh, 2007:128). Nyathi and Jooste (2008:14) further comment that family responsibilities increase the probability of female workers being absent while work-family conflicts among female workers increase the odds of being on long-term sickness absence.

Qualifications

Scott, Swortzel and Taylor (2005:3) comment that the abilities, skills, attitudes and knowledge possessed by the employees determine their levels of professional competence, which in turn may be higher or lower than those required in their current jobs. A higher educational level is expected to lead to high wages and good quality jobs, which positively decreases absenteeism in the workplace. Employees with high levels of education face fewer hazards and have greater chance to use initiatives, but in practise, they are found to have lower rates of absenteeism within the organisation. The lower level employees take more time off than the employees in managerial levels do, but this may reflect the relative inability to conceal their absence (Aydogdu & Asikgil, 2011:44).

Age

Age influences on absenteeism are indeterminate. Older employees are more likely to be ill, but have a strong commitment to the organisation due to financial constraints (Tripathi, Mohan, Tripathi, Verma, Masih & Pandey, 2010:144). Innocent sickness absence rates are high among older workers while culpable sickness absences are high among younger workers. Additionally, Kivimaki, Makinen, Elovainio, Vahtera, Virtanen and Firth-Cozens (2004:470) stipulate that younger employees and those employed as casual workers show a higher rate and duration of absence in the workplace. Younger workers who are enthusiastic and energetic about the job are considered less absent from work (Isah, Omorogbe & Oyovwe, 2008:6).

Due to the impact that organisations feel regarding efficiency, employee morale, operations and cost effectiveness caused by absenteeism, it is highly important for organisations to manage absence, in spite of their size and type of industry (Munro, 2007:22). In order to reduce absence in the workplace, employers have to handle forms of absenteeism in a fair and transparent manner to satisfy both parties. Therefore, management will have to look into different approaches that can be used due to increased stress, as employees’ physical health gets affected; thus, the job activities of the employees are disturbed (Swarnalatha & Sureshkrishna, 2013:2). When absenteeism is not controlled in the organisation, it leads to undesirable consequences that affect both employer and employee.

CONSEQUENCES OFABSENTEEISM

Excessive employee absenteeism is one of the common and frustrating issues faced by employers. Hargrave et al., (2008:284) emphasise that in every organisation absenteeism changes the workflow of employees, wasting the supervisors’ time that have to assign work to other employees to cover for those who did not show up at work. Supervisors have to ensure that the work of the absent employees is done by hiring another worker, which costs the organisation a lot of money. Johnson (2007:19) maintains that in terms of lost hours of work, morale and money, absenteeism is considered a costly problem to employer and employee. The consequences associated with absenteeism are highlighted in Table 2.4 below.

Table 2.4:	Consequences of absenteeism

Individual	Reduction of job stress Benefit from compensation for non- work activities	Loss of pay Discipline (formal and informal) Altered job perception
Co-worker	Job variety Skill development Overtime pay	Increased workload Undesired overtime Increased accidents Conflict with absent worker
Workgroup	Workgroup’s knowledge of multiple jobs Greater flexibility in responding to absenteeism and to production problems	Increased accidents Decreased productivity
Union officer	Power position is strengthened as they are often seen by management as a means to get employees back to work	Where absence is high lose credibility for being unable to control their members Increased costs in processing grievances
Family	Opportunity to deal with health or illness problems, marital, child and other family related issues	Less earning Decline in work reputation
Society	Reduction of job stress and mental health problems Participation in community political processes	Loss of productivity

Source: Adapted from Goodman and Atkin (2008:25)

Organisations should constantly observe and manage absenteeism conditions (Senel & Senel, 2012:1144). Navarro and Bass (2006:27) point out maintaining absenteeism in the workplace assists in improving productivity, establishes a healthy corporate culture and reduces costs. Biron and Bamberger (2012:901) clarify that controlling and reducing absenteeism in the organisation can be performed in a variety of applications. Some of these are to make the work more attractive to employees, to make absenteeism less desirable to employees and to reduce the difficulties regarding their job (Jex, 2002:108).

STRATEGIES TO MANAGE ABSENTEEISM

While often employers use disciplinary procedures as a code to resolve absenteeism problems, some utilise incentives to minimise absenteeism (Kocakulan, Kelley, Mitchell & Ruggiem, 2009:82). Organisations cannot tolerate culpable absence due to the competitive pressure that they are faced with; hence, they are aiming on how to reduce culpable absence. Even though culpable absence does not have a cure in the organisation, employers can try to recognise the problems associated with absenteeism and tackle the problem accordingly. One of the important steps in the method of minimising organisational costs is through absence control (Coughlan, 2004:3). Extensive strategies can often be essential to organisations in overcoming the problem of regular absence and includes incentives as well as sanctions (Beira, 2008:29). Effective absence management will reduce the risk of human capital loss through burnout, exhaustion and fatigue.

Managing sick leave absence provides insight into genuine medical needs that can be supported through well-structured employee health, lifestyle and wellness programmes. It provides support for employees who really need assistance and will save up to 40 percent of existing paid sick leave costs by preventing abuse of the attendance system. These savings can be reinvested in employee support programmes (Beira, 2008:29). Employers utilise various strategies when trying to minimise employees’ absenteeism rates in the workplace. According to Kautish and Kautish (2009:201), Pillay (2009:7) and Sanchez (2012:2) some of these strategies are as follows:

Address debt in the workplace: An early intervention of what really causes employees absence is essential because it reduces barriers to attendance. Workshops facilitated by trained debt counsellors can be utilised by organisations to address employees on the direct and indirect costs caused due to absenteeism. When the outcomes of the workplace are positive, absenteeism will deteriorate.

Conduct ‘return to work’ interviews: This is also known as legal intervention, where legal procedures will be followed in order to understand why employees are absent. It is useful to introduce a ‘return to work interview form’ for the immediate supervisor to complete each time an employee returns from sick leave. This will serve as a form of ‘visible’ management of the problem as the company will be seen to be addressing matters as they arise and will discourage those regular ‘entitlement’ offenders.

An effective employee assistance programme: This includes wellness programmes. Employers need to think of their contributions to these programmes not only in terms of the provision of a benefit to employees but as an investment in productivity for the organisation. Most medical aids schemes offer wellness and testing days where employees are tested for blood pressure, sugar and body mass index (BMI) and are encouraged to get active by joining a gym and buying and eating healthy foods.

HIV/AIDS policy: The challenge posed by HIV/Aids to businesses in South Africa demands that the nation’s corporate leaders address the deadly disease with far greater urgency than ever before. Sick employees cost the employer money and an economically viable workplace HIV management programme costs less. This is a form of a targeted intervention, where employers can organise peer monitors to address the employees. Employers are also encouraged to handle HIV-related incapacity with empathy and efficiency as it reduces prolonged exposure to harsh office conditions, which tend to intensify the symptoms.

Ask employees what they want and implement what is possible: Suggestion boxes and surveys that seek anonymous feedback about the workplace provide information about interest and engagement among employees. Often what management thinks is important to employees is not always and implementing many of these suggestions is free or inexpensive. Time off for community involvement and charity does everyone good.

A carefully planned absenteeism process that incorporates the above and is both fair and clear to the employees, can be an invaluable tool to minimise the costs associated with absence from work, reduce the risks of legal action for terminating employment and ensure that an organisation’s employees will be here today and still be here tomorrow. Employee absenteeism can be a problem that if left unattended can become a major expense to any organisation, which includes a loss in productivity. Absenteeism may not be eliminated from the workplace but it may very well decrease levels of good employee and employer relations (Pillay, 2009:10).

THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY

Safety and security are basic needs required by people. The private security industry plays an important role in securing the nation and its citizens globally. According to Van Steden (2007:230), the industry has grown in size and scope in recent years and work across extensive regions rendering services covering corporate security, security guard companies, armed car businesses and investigative services. South Africa has the largest private security industry provider in the world, as such, an effective regulation of this industry needs to be revised in order to address security threats according to Private Security Industry Regulation Act, 2001 Act No. 56 of 2001 (RSA, 2001:5). The PSIRA annual report, 2012/13, reported that there are 9969 private security businesses registered as security service providers, which have increased by 18.35 percent as compared to the number of companies registered for the previous financial year. The report further indicated that the number of private security guards registered was under 1.7 million and it is estimated that over 400 000 are registered guards active within the industry.

The private security industry comprises a function of providing protection for people and property under contract and for profit. Security can be defined as “freedom from danger, that is, a sense of safety from physical or direct violence and freedom from fear, that is, a sense of safety and relative well-being in political, legal, socio-economic and measure of protection from structural violence” (Wairagu, Kamenju & Singo, 2004:16). Within the private security industry, there are a number of functions performed and guarding is the biggest aspect. The role of guarding includes guarding in the shopping malls, airport or government buildings, conducts risk assessments for companies and industries, to intelligence gathering and armed convoy escorts in conflict zones amongst others. According to Goodenough (2007:8), it remains undoubtedly that the issue of security is important for the socio-economic survival of any person, thus the governments are making efforts to develop frameworks to advance security of their people. New strategies are developed to lessen the risks that both human and non-human threats can pose to wellbeing of the people. Worley and Worley (2012:1) further support that the enormous responsibility of security officers is being conscious on citizen judged harmful to lives in the society. Security guards mainly are remunerated to protect some of the most fundamental aspects in the community (Souryal, 2009:22). Recently, the living conditions of citizens have advanced from poor to good through the installation of technological devices that monitor their safety and security. Karacan (2011:204) highlights that when organisations are growing rapidly, the crime rate is also increasing, therefore, security guards services are required to protect the organisations. Mthethwa (2012:1) reported that South Africa’s security of the public and private organisations is provided by private security companies.

Globally, private security services have become an important sector to condense the load of work that the police have in reducing crime in the country and securing the property and lives of citizens (Carlan, 2007:75). In contrary, even though security guards protect the lives of the people, they have to be satisfied while doing their daily duties. Karacan (2011:206) clarify that employees do not get satisfaction through monetary alone but they have objectives, desires and goals that also have to be met. This notion was supported by Lane, Esser, Holte and McCusker (2010:17) when they emphasise that employees whose needs, goals and objectives are not met by the organisation are likely to show low job satisfaction and low commitment to the organisation.

In terms of working conditions, security guards carry out challenging duties where they maintain stability of the nation by protecting properties from dangers, threats and attack while also protecting themselves (Leander & Van Munster, 2007:202). While rendering their services to the nation, security guards needs have to be achieved so that they can be satisfied with their jobs and stay with the organisation. Dempsey (2010:68) comments that for security companies to flourish job satisfaction is an essential aspect to the employers; therefore, management should develop strategies to increase the level of job satisfaction.

Saari and Judge (2004:395) added that in every organisation employees formulate different attitudes depending on their relationship with the management. The attitude can be either negative or positive; the positive work experience of the employee is called job satisfaction while the negative is job dissatisfaction (Vidal, Valle & Aragon, 2007:1273). Thus, as employees are the life blood of the organisation and a major resource, their behaviour and attitude in the organisation is of importance (Guest, 2002:258).

Employers often require employees to work hard in improving their performance in order to increase the level of production. Lumley et al., (2011:101) clarify that organisation management should pay attention to the fact employees productivity increases only when their needs are achieved, motivated and satisfied with their jobs. Job satisfaction happens when job characteristics and employees demands obey one another (Westlund & Hannon, 2008:2); the greater the harmony, the more the level of job satisfaction.

The security officers are entitled to work for 12 hours pay shift (3 days day shift, 3 days night shift and 3 days off), rendering services under poor working conditions and getting little remuneration. According to the Department of Labour (2012:3), the monthly salary rates of the private security sector grade A level, which is the highest level is R3 658 per month. The salary they get cannot sustain them and their families, as some are the breadwinners at home. When the basic needs such as housing, transport and food for lower graded employees are not met, it becomes difficult for them to show up at work. Despite monthly salary increments, prices of basic commodities continue to rise and employees cannot sustain their lives on such low salaries.

A security officer’s primary duty is the prevention and avoidance of crime. Crime affects both the smallest and most successful organisations. South African organisations fear participating in the development growth of their country’s economy due to severe threats modelled by increased rates of crime (Maree & Prinsloo 2002:97). It hinders citizens from communicating with one another freely, from engaging in economic activities and prevents organisations together with investors from taking advantage of the opportunities that the country offers (Bartol & Bartol, 2005:108). According to South African Police Services report (2011/2012), it is estimated that in Gauteng province the rate of crime is 4576.1, KwaZulu Natal is 2666.9 and Limpopo is 1873.3. The private security industry is mandated to protect the country from external and internal aggression and to ensure that society is as close to crime-free as possible.

It has become a major source of employment especially for young and unskilled workers. Adequate and effective security is the foundation for the socio-economic development of the nation, thus it is crucial that security guards are well trained and satisfactorily remunerated.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, job satisfaction has been outlined in different ways. Theories of job satisfaction have been discussed. A level of factors influencing job satisfaction has been highlighted as well as the consequences of job satisfaction. The strategies to enhance job satisfaction in the workplace are also discussed. There seem to be numerous reasons that lead to employees’ lower satisfaction in their jobs. A number of internal reasons are payment, communication, supervisors, promotion, benefits, rewards, operating conditions, co-workers and nature of work.

Absenteeism, classifications of absenteeism and legislation consideration with absenteeism was reviewed. The consequences of absenteeism were discussed and the strategies to manage absence in the organisation. The private security industry has been highlighted in this chapter. In numerous organisations, employee absence has proved to be an ongoing challenge. Lower levels of job satisfaction lead to higher levels of absenteeism. One of the greatest and most effective ways of improving productivity is to reduce absenteeism but often it is the most overlooked method of reducing organisation’s costs. Consequential from absenteeism, organisations are confronted with delayed productivity, incompetent service delivery and low performance, thereby affecting sustainability.

In the next chapter, the researcher will identify and discuss research design and methodology in details. This will include target population, sampling, data collection method, measuring instruments, piloting and statistical analysis.

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

INTRODUCTION

Research methodology is “an aspirational framework within which raw data are placed so that their meaning may be seen more clearly” with the aim of transforming data into information (Booth, Colomb & Williams 2008:163). This chapter describes the research design in terms of the methods and procedures followed in conducting the study. The research objectives guided the research design. The target population, demarcated area and sampling considerations are described. The instrument used to collect and analyse data are explained within the context of the validity and reliability thereof. The pilot study and actual administration of questionnaires is highlighted. Statistical analysis of data are explained. In conclusion, ethical considerations that informed this study will be presented.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research design

The focus of research design is on identifying the appropriate methods used to collect and analyse the data. De Vos, Strydom, Fouche and Delport (2011:73) define research design as a “set of logical arrangements from which prospective researchers can select one suitable for their specific research goals”; a map that explains, when, where and how information will be collected and analysed (Parahoo, 2006:110). The research design enables the smooth running of the various research operations thus creating efficiency in the study. The research problem ultimately guides the paradigm selection, which in the case of this study will be quantitative in nature (Babbie & Rubin, 2011:245).

Sousa, Driessnack and Mendes (2007:503) mention that quantitative research design is often about the validation of facts, estimates, relationships, predictions and an objective reality can be measured. In quantitative research, the researcher tries to understand the facts of a research investigation from an outsider’s perspective (Burns & Grove, 2009:102). Polit and Beck (2010:72) comment that it generally focuses on size, prevalence, frequency and quantifiable aspects of a phenomenon. The research design utilised within the context of this study is a non-experimental quantitative descriptive survey design. A descriptive study is undertaken in order to ascertain and be able to describe the characteristics of the variable of interest in a situation (Sekaran & Bougie, 2011:73). Bless, Higson-Smith and Kagee (2006:87); Zikmund, Babin, Carr and Griffin (2013:186) indicate that descriptive surveys provide a quick, inexpensive, efficient and accurate means of assessing information about the population.

Target population

In order for research objectives to be answered, it is important to think of people who hold the answers to the questions being posed (O’Leary, 2010:85). Target population is viewed as a clearly defined group of entities that have some of the characteristics relevant to the study in common (Boyce, 2003:43). Babbie (2010:199) describes a target population as the group or collection of individuals or elements that the researcher is interested in generalising about. Irrespective of how well the measuring instrument is designed, when the wrong respondents are targeted the data will lose its value (Creswell, 2008:47). Therefore, it is important for the researcher to provide clear specifications as to the number of individuals or elements that need to be included/excluded in the population (Banerjee & Chaudhury, 2010:62). The map below (see Figure 3.1) illustrates the geographic region of Southern Gauteng where the target population is situated.

Figure 3.1:	Southern Gauteng map

Source: Municipal Demarcation Board (2011)

The Southern Gauteng region is an industrialised region. It covers an area of 987, 45 kilometres and consists of three main town centres, namely Meyerton, Vereeniging and Vanderbijlpark. According to Census 2011, the Southern Gauteng region had a total population of 721 663 (Stats SA, 2011:4). McDaniel and Gates (2008:330) reported that the specified population or interest often is expressed in terms of product usage characteristics, geographic area and demographic characteristics. The list of eight active private security companies registered with PSIRA was requested from Emfuleni Municipality database. The researcher personally went to the given companies requesting permission to conduct the research and four companies granted the researcher permission. The total target population of this study consists of the entry level security officers of four security companies situated in Vanderbijlpark and Vereeniging, namely company A, B, C and D. Pseudonyms were used to safeguard company confidentiality and anonymity. The total target population is N = 428.

Sample frame

Once the target population has been well defined by the researcher, the next step is to find the sample frame from the population. Babbie (2010:208) defines sampling frame as a list of units composing a population from which a sample is selected. Due to large sizes of populations, sample frames are adequate because the researchers often cannot test every individual because it is expensive and time consuming. The sample must be representatives of the population from which it was drawn and it must have minimal size to warrant good statistical analysis (Malhotra, 2010:63).

Properly drawn samples enable the researcher to provide information appropriate for describing the population of elements composing the sampling (Brynard & Hanekom 2005:44). From the four security companies that granted the researcher permission to conduct research, the total number of entry level security officers was 428, which was obtained from the human resources database. Company A had 126 entry level security officers, Company B had 108 entry level security officers, Company C consisted of 112 entry level security officers and Company D comprised 82 entry level security officers.

Sampling technique

O’Leary (2010:162) mentions that samples allow the researcher to explore groups of people, organisation and events that simply could not be accessed in totality. Sampling techniques are based on the selection procedure that the researcher uses when choosing the sample from the target population (Zikmund et al., 2013:395). Adopting and implementing an appropriate sampling technique in a study is important for the success of any research project that requires the use of a sample for data collection. In this study, a non-probability convenience sampling approach was applied.

In non-probability sampling, the probability that any element or unit of analysis will be included cannot be specified (Grinnell & Unrau, 2008:143). In some instances, certain members may have no chance at all of being included in such a sample. According to Marlow (2005:45); Shiu, Hair, Bush and Ortinau (2009:475) convenience sampling is the process of including whoever happens to be available at the time the study was carried out, thereby often resulting in a valid representation of the defined target population. The motivation for choosing this sampling is that the samples are selected due to the fact they are easily accessible and in the vicinity. The advantages of non-probability sampling are that the cost is relatively low and it is fast (De Vaus, 2009:87).

Sample size

The fundamental rule of sampling is the larger the sample the better (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010:213). According to Bless et al. (2007:107), larger samples, enable researchers’ to draw more representative and conclusions that are more accurate and make more accurate predictions than in smaller samples. Sample size depends on what the researcher wants to know, the purpose of the inquiry, what is at stake, what will be useful, what will have credibility and what can be done with the available time and resources.

Jones, Carley and Harrison (2005:454) refer to sample size as “the subset of the total population required in the study”. Sample size permits the researcher to gather information from the population using fewer respondents in order to capture the thoughts, knowledge, attitudes, feelings and beliefs that are generalised to make the research process manageable. The sample size should be selected from the right population in order to avoid bias and invalid results (Levy & Lemeshow, 2008:210).

Table 3.1:	Sample size and percentage of the study population

Total target population	Sample percentage	Sample size
428	47%	201

Table 3.1 indicates the sample size of this study. Burger and Silima (2006:656) strongly advise researchers selecting a sample not to choose less than 100 cases in order to be able to use descriptive statistics correctly. The sample size of 201was rounded off to 200, therefore, a sample size of n=200 was deemed adequate. Furthermore, the figure represents approximately half of the total population.

DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCHINSTRUMENT

Measuring instrument

McDaniel and Gates (2008:242) describe measurement as “a process of assigning numbers or labels to persons, objects or events in accordance with specific rules for representing quantities or qualities of attributes”. Measurement implies describing an object and this description is aimed at enables the researcher to make judgements regarding that object (Grinnell & Unrau, 2008:106). The adequacy of the scores obtained depends on the adequacy of the rules according to which these numbers are assigned (Booth et al., 2008:108). According to Welman, Kruger and Mitchell (2005:95), survey design involves the collection of information from a sample of individuals through their responses to questions. Babbie (2010:255) indicated that a survey study is the best method available for the researcher who is interested in collecting original data from a population too large to observe directly. Furthermore, surveys are exceptional vehicles for measuring attitudes, behaviours, beliefs and orientations in a large population (Welman et al., 2005:152). Adapted job satisfaction and absenteeism questionnaires were used to collect data from the sample size.

Questionnaire design

The most frequently used instrument for data collection is a questionnaire (Proctor, 2005:120). The questionnaire is “a summarised, pre-planned set of questions designed to yield specific information to meet a particular need for research information about a pertinent topic” (Welman et al., 2005:174). Its design is critical to the success of a study. Zikmund et al. (2013:93) report that the choice of questions as well as their structure, wording and sequencing in the questionnaire could affect the relevancy, bias and accuracy of the collected data. For data collection, Nyathi and Jooste (2008:18) granted the researcher permission to adapt the absenteeism questionnaire and the job satisfaction survey questionnaire was adapted from Spector (1994:3) with permission. In determining the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism of security officers, a modified adapted job satisfaction and absenteeism questionnaires was used. When gathering information, questionnaires were self-distributed to the population.

A six-point Likert scale was used in the construction of the measurement instruments. Burns and Grove (2009:203) report that in survey research Likert scales are repeatedly used. Closed-ended questions were used in this study where the respondents were asked to select an answer from the list provided by the researcher (Levy & Lemeshow, 2008:98). Engel and Schutts (2013:83) maintain that close-ended questions are advantageous because they provide a greater uniformity of responses and more easily processed. The questionnaire was divided into four sections:

Section A measured an inclusion criteria of respondents that assesses if they are entry level security officer and can read English.

Section B consisted of biographical questions to gather information regarding age, gender, race, employee tenure, years employed in current rank and years employed in the organisation.

Section C gathered information regarding job satisfaction of entry level security officers.

Section D focussed on absenteeism of entry level security officers.

The questionnaires were self-administered. The questionnaires were hand delivered to the respondents by the researcher so that they can complete them in their own time. No field workers were used. De Vos et al. (2011:188) clarify that an appointment should be made for the collection of questionnaires and if possible not more than 48 hours after delivery. The questionnaires were collected by the researcher after two days to accommodate shift changes in the companies.

Pilot study

When a new measuring instrument is developed, it is advisable to test the instrument before applying it to the actual sample. According to Welman et al. (2005:144), the process for testing the questionnaires is called a pilot study, which entails administering the questionnaire to a limited number of respondents from the same population for which the eventual project is intended. At the initial stage of the study, the researcher should ensure that the measurement procedures, the measurement and instruments to be used have acceptable levels of reliability and validity (De Vos et al., 2005:172).

Conducting a pilot study will confirm the feasibility of conducting a larger scale study. A pilot study helps the researcher detect problems with research methodology as well as develop and refine instruments for data collection. According to Welman et al. (2005:145), the purpose of a pilot study is to detect possible flaws in the measurement procedures, to identify unclear or ambiguously formulated items and an opportunity for researchers and assistants to notice non- verbal behaviour among respondents. A pilot study is particularly useful if the researcher has compiled the measuring instrument specifically for the purpose of research.

Respondents who participated in a pilot study were not permitted to take part in the main study. A pilot study serves as a guide for a larger study to examine specific aspects of the research in order to establish whether the selected procedures will actually work as intended. Results of the pilot study are reported in Chapter 4.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Statistical analysis is defined as “the process of translation of what the researcher presented from the raw data to meaningful picture patterns and relationships” (Royse, 2008:318). The statistical procedures and techniques of the study are identified and described in detail as part of the research plan. The purpose of analysis is to reduce the data to an intelligible and interpretable form so that the relationship of the research objectives can be studied and tested and conclusions drawn. Choosing the appropriate statistical techniques is established largely by the research design, research objectives and the kind of data that is collected. According to Monette, Sullivan and De Jong (2008:364), statistical analysis is viewed as “procedures for assembling, classifying, tabulating and summarising numerical data to obtain meaning or information”. Statistical methods and analyses are often used to communicate the research finding to support the research aims and to give credibility to research methodology and conclusions. This requires an understanding of statistics on the part of the researcher to ensure informed, credible useful application of data and resultant decisions (Creswell, 2008:106).

Descriptive analysis

Descriptive analysis was undertaken using SPSS in this study. Descriptive analysis is defined as “statistical computations describing either the characteristics of a sample or the relationship among variables in a sample” (Babbie & Rubin, 2011:518). The main objective of descriptive statistics is to act as a medium that describes data in a manageable and clear manner. The grouping of the data are often presented and described through figures and tables using frequencies, measures of central tendency and measures of dispersion (De Vos et al., 2010:251). The type of measurement and the level of scale both influence the form of statistical analysis (Walliman, 2011:371). A discussion of the descriptive statistics is pursued in the foregoing section.

Frequencies and measures of central tendency

Measures of central tendency are used to determine the typical or average score of a group of scores (Wallgren, Wallgren, Person, Jorner & Haaland, 2006:81). Measures of central tendency provide a convenient way of describing a set of data with a single number.

Frequencies

The construction of frequency distribution first starts within descriptive analysis. This includes the construction (mostly by computer) of a table that shows in absolute and relative terms, (i.e. percentages) how often the different values of the variable are encountered in the sample. Frequency distribution indicates how popular the different values are among the units of analysis (Welman et al., 2005:230).

Means: Means are important for descriptive studies because they provide information about the average participant’s score on a measure (Johnson & Vanderstoep 2009:92). It shows the arithmetic mean of the sample data. It is calculated by adding up all of the scores and dividing that total by the number of scores.

Median: Values are arranged in rank order from large to small or vice versa, the median is the value occurring exactly in the middle of the list. When the total number of values is an odd number, the median is that middle value having exactly equal values above and below (Zikmund et al., 2013:107). The median does not take into account every score; it focuses on the middle scores. Although the median appears as a rather simple index to be determined, it cannot always be arrived at by simply looking at the scores.

Mode: Shows the most common value in the data set. A given set of data can contain more than one mode, or it can contain no mode at all. The mode is not established through calculation; it is determined by looking at a set of scores or at a graph of scores and seeing which score occurs most frequently (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson & Tatham, 2006:113).

Standard deviation: Standard deviation is used when data are interval or ratio and is by far the most frequently used index of variability. It is the square root of the variance of the data (Goddard & Melville, 2001:54), where the variance is the average squared distance of the recorded values from the calculated mean. It is the most stable measure of variability and includes every score in calculation.

The current study made use of frequencies, means and standard deviations, which are reported in Chapter 4.

Correlations

Correlation differs in direction and magnitude (Johnson & Vanderstoep, 2009:95). It can be defined as the relation between two sets of data. When the value of one variable increases, the value of the other variable also increases (a positive correlation). Whereas, a negative correlation happens when the value of one variable increases and the other variable decreases. Correlation techniques are used to obtain a numerical value for the strength of such correlation (Fox & Bayat, 2007:69). This value is expressed statistically as a correlation coefficient. A strong correlation between two variables means that they are related but do not necessarily show causality. The correlation coefficient represents the strength of variation between two variables by means of a number that can range from -1 to 1 (Khan & Adil, 2013:3). High correlation coefficients reflect strong levels of association between variables, regardless of the direction. Wegner (2008:112) proposed the following rule of thumb, which was used for this particular study:

0 to + 0.49 (or -0.49) indicates little or weak relationship

+ 0.50 (-0.50) to + 0.99 (or -0.99) indicates a moderate to strong relationship

+1 (or -1) indicates a perfect relationship.

Details of correlation results are reported in Chapter 4.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to investigate and model the relationship between a response variable and one or more independent variables. It can be thought of as an extension of the t-test for two independent samples to more than two groups. The purpose is to test for significant differences between class means and this is done by analysis of the variances. ANOVA is the most commonly quoted advanced research method in the professional business and economic literature (Eva & Ostertug, 2013:256). This technique is very useful in revealing important information particularly in interpreting experimental outcomes and in determining the influence of some factors on other processing parameters.

Mann-Whitney U tests

The Mann-Whitney U test is a non-parametric statistical technique that is used to analyse differences between the medians of two data sets (Nachar, 2008:14). It can be utilised in place of a t-test for independent samples in cases where the values within the sample do not follow the normal or t-distribution but also when the distribution of values is unknown. Cooper and Schinder (2006:97) point out that in order for the Mann-Whitney U test to be applied, values need to be measurable on an ordinary scale and comparable in size. The fact that all values are compared makes it distinct from the t-test, which compares the sample means. The Mann-Whitney U is used to test the null hypothesis, subject to both samples coming from the same basic set or having the same median value (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011:34).

Reliability

In research, the findings are considered reliable when a certain method is applied repeatedly to the same object and the same results are obtained each time (Welman et al., 2005:145). Reliability depends on the stability of the measurement procedure. Sarantakos (2005:85) also added that reliability is characterised by precision and objectivity. The purpose of reliability testing is to ensure that the questionnaire is robust and not sensitive to changes of the researcher, the respondent or the research condition. A questionnaire that is planned carefully is adequately important for the quality of data collection. Neuman and Kruger (2003:179-180) stipulated that even though it is rare to obtain perfect reliability, they recommend that the following approach helps improve reliability measures as indicated in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2:	Improving the reliability measures of the questionnaire

Tactic	Explanation
Clearly conceptualise all constructs.	Develop an unambiguous clear theoretical definition for each construct.
Increase the level of measurement.	High levels of measurements are more reliable.
Use multiple indicators of variables.	Use two or more indicators to measure each aspect of a variable.
Use pre-tests, pilot studies and replications.	Test variable before applying them to final version in a hypothesis-testing situation.

Source: Neuman & Kruger (2003:179)

The reliability of the measuring instrument is important to the researcher as some questionnaire items have to be positively and some negatively formulated to reflect bias and diverse background of respondents (Maree, 2010:218). Reliability can be classified into different approaches, which include test-retest reliability, equivalent form reliability, split-half reliability and internal reliability. Expositions of the general types of reliabilities are reported briefly in the foregoing section. However, only internal reliability (Cronbach alpha) is elaborated on, as this primary method was used in the study.

Babbie and Rubin (2011:197) explained that internal consistency reliability assumes that the instrument contains multiple items, each of which is scored and combined with scores of the other items to produce an overall score. The assessment of the internal consistency reliability of the measuring instrument is stated through Cronbach alpha coefficient. The Cronbach alpha ranges between 0-1 consistency and one shows a highly reliable scale (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011:53). Cronbach alpha is a coefficient that describes how well a group of items focuses on a single idea or construct (Gadermann, Guhn & Zumbo, 2012:2). It also measures the interrelatedness (inter- correlations) of a set of items. The Cronbach alpha, also known as the alpha coefficient, is the most frequently used measure of internal consistency. Cronbach’s alpha estimates the correlation coefficient of measurement items in a test (Malhotra 2007:285). The Cronbach alpha, assumes that each measurement item’s observed score is the result of adding the item’s true score, measurement error and all measurement items are presumed to carry equal loadings and variance and the uni-dimensionality of measurement items (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011:53). Details of the internal reliability of the research constructs are reported in Chapter 4.

Validity

In terms of measurement procedures, validity is the ability of an instrument to measure what it is designed to measure (Burns & Grove 2009:71). Validity is defined as the degree to which the study has measured what it set out to measure. According to Creswell (2008:82), the common definition of validity is epitomised by the question: “Are we measuring what we think we are measuring”. Babbie and Mouton (2007:175) affirm that validity refers to the extent to which an empirical measure adequately reflects the real meaning of the concept under consideration. Researchers should aim to achieve validity, which they consider the strength of their research, since it frees data from interference and contamination, control or variable manipulation (Brynard & Hanekom, 2005:93).

Validity can be either internal or external. Internal validity refers to the degree to which observed changes in a dependent variable can be attributed to changes in an independent variable while external validity refers to the extent to which the results of a study can be generalised (Polikandrrioti, Goudevenos, Michallis, Nikalaou, Dilanas, Olimios, Votteas & Elisaf, 2011:138). For the purpose of this study, content validity, construct validity and convergent validity was used. Content and face validity may be established before the gathering of data while criterion and construct validity are established once the instrument has been used to collect data (Babbie, 2010:154). These types of validities are elaborated in Chapter 4.

Content validity: (also known as face validity) is the extent to which a measure covers the range of meanings included within a concept (Babbie, 2007:147). Punch (2005:97) states that content validity focuses on whether the full content of a conceptual definition is represented in the measure. Therefore, a valid measure would provide an adequate or representative sample of all the content, or elements, or instances of the phenomenon being measured. Details of establishing content validity are elaborated in Chapter 4.

Construct validity: Construct validity is concerned with meaning of the instrument; what it is measuring and how and why it operates the way it does. It also determines the instrument’s degree to measure the theoretical construct successfully. Thus, construct validity is based on the logical relationship among variables (Babbie, 2007:14). Tests of construct validity offer a weight of evidence that a measure taps the quality the researcher wants it to measure (Malhotra, 2010:321). Details of construct validity are reported in Chapter 4.

Discriminant validity consists of testing whether concepts or measurements that are supposed to be unrelated are, in fact, unrelated and do not correlate strongly (Bryman, Bell, Hirschsohn, Dos Santos, Du Toit, Masenge Van Aardt & Wagner, 2014:38). It, therefore, is essential for the researcher to perform confirmatory factor analysis in order to demonstrate discriminant validity between the measures of job satisfaction and absenteeism. Details of discriminant validity are reported in Chapter 4.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ethics is the central integrity of research. Ethical issues relate to the concerns, dilemmas and conflicts that arise while conducting research (Newman, 2006:129). Ethics implies preferences that influence behaviour in human relations, conforming to a code of principles, the rules of conduct, the responsibility of the researcher and the standards of conduct of a given profession (Babbie, 2007:74). The principles underlying research ethics are universal and concern issues such as honesty and respect for the rights of individuals (Williams, 2007:67). It is essential that throughout the research process the researcher follows and abides by ethical guidelines. Written permission was obtained from the managers of private security companies to conduct research. Participants were not obliged to reveal their personal information on the questionnaire, therefore, anonymity and confidentiality was guaranteed throughout the study (Hair, Bush & Ortinau, 2009:71). The participants were given an opportunity to raise their concerns regarding the study addressed and misunderstandings corrected. Participation was voluntary and participants were informed to withdraw any time from the study. The data gathered will be analysed in aggregate and responses will not be ascribed to any respondent.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter explained the research design, sampling method, data gathering procedure and statistical techniques that were employed in an attempt to answer the research questions of the study. Modified job satisfaction and absenteeism questionnaires were used to conduct this research study. The collected data were analysed by a statistician and the results are presented and interpreted in Chapter 4.

CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS

INTRODUCTION

The previous chapter entailed a discussion of the research design and methodology of the study. A detailed description of the sample selection and composition, questionnaire development as well as data collection and statistical analysis was provided.

The essence of this chapter is to report on the results of the empirical findings of the study. The results of the pilot tests are explained, followed by the explanation of the main survey results. Self- administered questionnaires were used to collect data among entry level security officers in the Southern Gauteng region and SPSS was used for the analysis. Statistical methods used for analysis in this study were descriptive statistics in the form of means, standard deviation and frequency distributions. Correlations, analysis of variance and non-parametric tests were used in the analysis of the data. Finally, reliability, validity and ethical issues are discussed.

ANALYSIS OF THE PILOT STUDY

The purpose of pilot testing the questionnaires was to examine their reliability. The questionnaire was divided into four sections, namely sections A, B, C and D as outlined in Chapter 3. Section A covered an inclusion criteria of respondents that assesses if they are entry level security officer and can read English. Section B covered the demographic aspects of the entry level security officers. Section C covered the job satisfaction and Section D covered the entry level security officers’ absenteeism questions. In the pilot study, 45 questionnaires were distributed to respondents. The scale items sections B and C were anchored with six-point Likert scales with six denoting strongly agree and one denoting strongly disagree to the various statements.

Reliability of variables at the pilot stage

Preliminary investigation of the nature of work construct showed very low reliability values and inter-item correlations. The construct was removed from the scale. Moreover, on examination of the nature of work sub-scale showed that very few items in fact relate to overall job satisfaction. These questions are outlined below:

C6: Many company policies make doing a good job difficult.

C7: I like people I work with.

C8: I sometimes feel my job is meaningless.

C15: My efforts to do a good job are rarely disturbed by unnecessary procedures.

C17: I like doing the things I do at work

C25: I often feel that I do not know what is going on with the organisation

C26: I feel a sense of pride in doing my job.

C34: My job is enjoyable.

27 variables remained, on which reliability tests were run.

Moreover, due to low inter-item correlations and low reliabilities, some of the absenteeism measuring items were removed. These items are outlined below:

D1: I have financial problems.

D3: I experience transport problems.

D5: I want to do what colleagues do in the workplace.

D6: I do not like one man power leadership style.

D14: I lack social relations with co-workers.

D20: I have to work overtime.

D27: I encounter unfair punishment applied on some security.

D29: I need to be praised on the good work done.

Reliability was tested on the 22 items remaining.

Table 4.1 shows the reliability statistics at a pilot stage for both job satisfaction and absenteeism questionnaire. The reliability was obtained by computing the Cronbach-alpha coefficient for the overall scale. According to Malhotra (2010:268), the Cronbach alpha of 0.70 and above is acceptable. The Cronbach alpha reliability returned a value of 0.970 on the job satisfaction construct and 0.927 on absenteeism construct. The reliability obtained indicated satisfactory results.

Table 4.1:	Reliability statistics

Questionnaire	Cronbach’s alpha	Number of items
Job satisfaction	0.970	27
Absenteeism	0.927	22

ANYALYSIS OF THE MAIN SURVEY

This section provides an overview of the descriptive statistics that were used in the preliminary data analysis. For analysing the demographic data (Section A), descriptive analysis was undertaken. A total of 200 questionnaires were self-administered to the entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region, one questionnaire was discarded due to incomplete answers resulting in 199 usable questionnaires.

Analysis of the demographic information

The following section describes the demographic characteristics of the sample. The demographic data consisted of gender, age, home language, nature of employment contact, time in current position, total period of service and occupational level in the security company. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to identify frequencies and percentages.

Gender

Figure 4.1 illustrates that there were more male respondents, 56 percent (n=112) than female 44 percent (n=87) in the sample. This is in keeping with the fact that in the Gauteng province males made up the larger proportion of the population (Statistics SA 2011:2).

Figure 4.1:	Gender

Age

The age categories of respondents are depicted in Figure 4.2. The highest percentage of respondents were between 30 to 39 years (46.2%; n=92), followed by those who were in the 40 to 49 years range (28.6%; n=57) and those who were between 20 to 29 years (21.1%; n=42). Security officers aged 50 years and above constituted the remainder of the sample (4%; n=8).

Figure 4.2:	Age group

Marital status

Figure 4.3 provides a breakdown of the security officers’ marital status. The majority of the respondents were single (48%; n=95), followed by married respondents (34%; n=67), those who were separated (7%; n=13), those who were divorced (6%, n=12) and those who were widowed (4%; n=9). The remainder (1.5%; n=3) of the security officers did not disclose their marital status.

Figure 4.3:	Marital status

First language

Figure 4.4 outlines the composition of the respondents in terms of their language. The most frequently spoken home language is Sesotho (27.6%; n=55), followed by Xhosa (14.6%; n=29), those who speak IsiZulu (13.1%; n=26) and those who spoke Setswana (13.1%; n=26). The remainder of the security officers spoke one of the following languages: English, Afrikaans, Ndebele, Sepedi, Swati, Tshvivenda and Xitsonga (31.6%, n= 63). Sesotho and Xhosa are highly dominating languages amongst them.

percentages Figure 4.4:	First language

Academic background

Figure 4.5 depicts the academic background of the security officers. The results indicate that 2 percent (n=4) of the security office have obtained grade 10 certificate and 11 percent (n=22) have attained a grade 11 certificate. A high number of security officers, 82 percent (n=163) were in possession of grade 12 certificate. A low 3 percent (n=6) of security officers reflect that they obtained FET certificates and only 1 percent (n=2) have obtained national diploma. About 1 percent (n=2) was missing because these security officers did not disclose their academic backgrounds.

percentange Figure 4.5:	Academic background

Security grades

Figure 4.6 demonstrates the categories of security grades attained by the respondents. A high number of the security officers, 66.7 percent (n=133) have obtained security Grade C, followed by 19.1 percent (n=38) who have achieved Grade B security. Furthermore, only 8.1 percent (n=16) have attained security Grade D, while 4.6 percent (n=9) were in possession of security Grade A and the remaining 1.5 percent (n=3) have obtained security Grade E.

Figure 4.6:	Security grades

Nature of employment contract

The participants’ nature of employment contract is outlined in Figure 4.7. The majority (65%; n=129) of the security officers are employed permanently in their organisations, followed by those that were employed on a fixed term contract (32%; n=63) and those that were employed on a part-time basis (3%; n=7).

Figure 4.7:	Nature of employment contract

Promotion

Figure 4.8 indicates the years the participants have been promoted in the current organisation. The majority, 24 percent (n=48), of security officers have been promoted within 1-5 years of their service in the organisation, with 4 percent (n=8) of security officers promoted within 6-10 years. A large percentage, 72 percent (n=143), of the security officers revealed that they have never been promoted.

Figure 4.8:	Promotion

Length of service

Figure 4.9 identified the year’s respondents have been employed in their current position. The majority, 88 percent (n=175), of security officers have been working in the current position for 1- 5 years, followed by those who worked for 6-10 years, 6% (n=12) and those who worked for 11-15 years, 5% (n=10). A small percentage, 1% (n=2), of the security officers did not disclose their length of service in the organisation they worked for.

Figure 4.9:	Length of service

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION REGARDING JOB STATISFACTION (SECTION C)

For the sake of brevity, the responses in this section were grouped into two categories, agree and disagree, in the analysis. Categories agree slightly, agree moderately and agree very much were grouped together as agree while disagree slightly, disagree moderately and disagree very much were grouped together as disagree.

Job satisfaction

The results from Section C revealed patterns of responses based on security officers’ job satisfaction towards their work. The aim of the questions was to assess the employees’ job satisfaction level in the areas of pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers relations and communication within the organisation. These findings are discussed in the foregoing section.

Pay

Figure 4.10 illustrates pay responses of security officers. In terms of overall satisfaction with regard to the pay increases, 64.4 percent (n=128) security officers were satisfied with their pay increases, while 35.6 percent (n=71) were in disagreement. With reference to pay received, 64.8 percent (n=129) of the security officers felt unappreciated with the pay that they received, while 35.2 percent (n=70) acknowledged the pay they received. Approximately, 63.8 percent (n=127) of the security officers felt that the salary increases that they received were little, while 36.2 percent (n=72) were in disagreement. With regard to the pay that security officers received, 68.3 percent (n=136) were of the opinion that the pay they received was fair, while 31.7 percent (n=63) were in disagreement with the fact that their pay was fair. These findings support Sarwar and Abugre (2013:24)’s claim that the higher the job satisfaction, the more likely employees will hold a positive attitude towards their jobs and are more likely to be committed to the organisation.

Pay plays an important role in the human capital intensive firms to attract and retain expert workforce (Sajuyigbe, Olaoye & Adeyemi, 2013:28); and it does not only assist people to attain their basic needs, but also acts as an instrument in satisfying the higher-level needs of people (Luthans, 2010:147). Kalyar (2012:74) posits that there is a positive influence of pay satisfaction on job satisfaction and it can be observed in every field of life. Ojokuku and Sajuyigbe (2009:88) state that, “the greater the financial reward, the less worry employees have concerning their financial state, thereby enhancing their impression of their self-worth to the organisation”.

Employees enjoying high salaries are more likely to be supportive to their organisation (Sweet, Nelson & Moberg 2006:329). However, pay is not the only indicator of job satisfaction; the degree to which employees become satisfied with their salaries will be determined by the overall assessment of different factors such as comparing salaries with other employees in similar positions from other organisations (Purani & Sahadev, 2008:478). Heywood and Wei (2006:528) are of the view that the pay structure should be appropriate, reasonable, equal and competitive to those in the industry for employees to be satisfied.

Figure 4.10:	Pay

Promotion

Figure 4.11 outlines the security officers’ responses in relation to their promotion within the organisation. With reference to the promotion chances that security officers received 63.8 percent (n=127) agreed that they are satisfied with promotion chances while 36.2 percent (n=72) were in disagreement. Approximately 96.9 percent (n=193) of the security officers felt that those who do well on their jobs stand a chance of being promoted while 3.1 percent (n=6) were in disagreement. In terms of promotion that security officers received, 58.2 percent (n=116) were of the belief that the promotion they received was reasonable while, 41.8 percent (n=83) of the security officers were in disagreement that the promotion they got was fair. The results show that promotion plays an important role in the satisfaction level of the employees. Robbins et al., (2009:47) maintain that promotions provide opportunities for increased responsibility, increased social status and personal growth. Studies have shown that if employees feel that the career advancement opportunities are limited within the organisation, this affects their job satisfaction negatively (Mudor & Tookson 2011:43). A study undertaken by Danish and Usman (2010:196) affirmed a positive significant relationship between promotional opportunities and job satisfaction. Wan, Sulaiman and Omar (2012:105) argue that employees who perceived promotion decisions as fair are more likely to be committed to the organisation, experience career satisfaction and perform better within the organisation.

Figure 4.11:	Promotion

Supervision

Figure 4.12 depicts the security officers’ responses on supervision satisfaction within the workplace. Approximately 65.4 percent (n=130) of the security officers revealed that they liked their supervisors, however, 34.6 percent (n=69) revealed that they did not like their supervisors. With regard to supervisors interests on subordinates feelings, 66.4 percent (n=132) appreciated the support they received from their supervisors, while 33.6 percent (n=67) were in disagreement. Approximately 64.3 percent (n=128) of the security officers felt that the supervision they received was fair while 35.7 percent (n=71) indicated that the supervision they received was lacking. With regard to the supervision that security officers received, 90.5 percent (n=180) were of the opinion that their supervisors are skilled in their jobs while 9.5 percent (n=19) were in disagreement.

Good managerial actions and supervision can improve productivity and performance of employees. Koonmee, Singhapakdi, Virakul and Lee (2010:21) noted that supervision is one of the significant factors that increase the employees’ job satisfaction within the organisation. In the favour of this view, Spector and Fox (2002:280) recommended that supervisors who demonstrate trust and confidence on employees and ability to show personal interest in others are strongly increases job satisfaction of employees. The majority of the participants indicated that they were satisfied with their supervisors, therefore, the results show that trust between the supervisors and employees. Ariani (2015:35) affirms that a good relationship between the supervisor and employee can promote a feeling of belonging, which positively influences job satisfaction.

Figure 4.12:	Supervision

Fringe benefits

Figure 4.13 summaries the security officers’ responses with reference to fringe benefits they received. About 58.8 percent (n=101) of the security officers revealed that there are benefits they should have received, which they did not receive, while 49.2 percent (n=98) were in disagreement. With regard to the benefit package that the security officers received, 63.9 percent (n=127) stated that the benefit package offered was fair, while 36.1 percent (n=72) were in disagreement. Approximately 95 percent (n=189) of the security officers felt that the benefits they received in the organisation are as good as those offered in other organisations, however, 5 percent (n=10) were in disagreement. In terms of fringe benefits that security officers received, 66.8 percent (n=133) were of the belief that the fringe benefits they received were equitable while 33.2 percent (n=66) of the security officers were in disagreement that the fringe benefits they received were fair.

Benefits play an important role on employees’ job satisfaction. From Artz (2010:626) point of view, the nature of the benefits that employees receive in the organisation influences employee satisfaction in their jobs. From this study, the majority of respondents point out that they are satisfied with the fringe benefits they get in the organisation. These findings are in support of the previous findings which suggest that employers need to offer benefits that are commensurate and valuable enough to motivate employees to stay longer with the organisation (Hussein 2011:45). Weathington and Jones (2006:294) found out that the quality benefit and satisfaction with benefit cost are related positively to perceptions of the fairness of processes used to allocate resources. They also identified that employees place differing amount of importance on different benefits offered by the organisation. Employee benefits packages can play a strategic role in raising organisational performance and profitability. On the other hand, employees are often unfamiliar with the value of their benefit packages. In this setting Asgari, Iranmanesh and Farahari (2012:2279) highly encouraged the employees’ involvement in the process of choosing benefits, which will lead to a better understanding of the benefits values.

Figure 4.13:	Fringe benefits

Contingent rewards

Figure 4.14 reflects the security officers’ views on their contingent rewards. Organisations use contingent rewards as a strategy to retain and build sustainable relationships with the employees by recognising how valuable they are to the success of the organisation. The majority of the security officers, 61.9 percent (n=128) revealed that their efforts are rewarded equitably; nevertheless 38.1 percent (n=76) showed that their efforts are unfairly rewarded. With regard to the rewards that security officers received, 59.9 percent (n=119) appreciated the rewards that the organisation offered, while 40.1 percent (n=80) were in disagreement. Approximately 66.9 percent (n=133) of the security officers felt that their work was valued, however, 33.1 percent (n=66) indicated that their work was not valued. With regard to the praise that security officers receive after performing well on the job, 96.5 percent (n=192) were of the belief that they received enough praise after doing a good job while, 3.5 percent (n=7) disagreed that they do not receive praise for a job well done.

Percentages Bass (1998:105) defined contingent rewards as the interactions between the follower and leader where there is an agreement about the work that needs to be performed and in exchange of rewards for satisfactorily completing the assignments. In general, this study reveals that the security officers were satisfied with the contingent rewards offered in their organisation. Similar findings were made by Voon, Lo, Ngui and Ayob (2011:30), which demonstrated that the positive relationship between contingent rewards and job satisfaction components imply that the use of contingent rewards may enhance employee satisfaction with the working conditions and work assignments. The results are consistent with the findings made by Judge and Piccolo (2004:757) that posited that contingent rewards are related positively to co-worker satisfaction.

Figure 4.14:	Contingent rewards

Operating conditions

Results reported in Figure 4.15 evaluate employees’ perceptions concerning their operating conditions within the organisation. The majority of the security officers, 56.8 percent (n=112) indicated that they had a lot of paper work to do, while 43.8.7 percent (n=87) indicated that their work does not involve a lot of paper work. With regard to the operating conditions that security officers worked in, 55.2 percent (n=110) were of the opinion that they have too much workload whereas, 44.8 percent (n=19) were in disagreement.

Percentages Operating conditions play an important role on the employee’s decisions of either staying with or leaving the organisation and employee’s job satisfaction (Parvin & Kabir 2011:116). The respondents’ perception concerning the operating conditions in the organisation was less favourable. Greenberg and Baron (2003:190) point out that employees’ desire operating conditions that will improve their physical comfort and convenience. The absence of good operating conditions can impact negatively on the employee’s physical and mental well-being.

Figure 4.15:	Operating conditions

Co-workers relations

Figure 4.16 illustrates the respondents’ opinions on their co-workers relations. The findings of this study indicated that 65.3 percent (n=130) of the security officers have the impression that they enjoy their co-workers; however, 34.7 percent (n=69) were in disagreement. Approximately, 25.7 percent (n=51) of the security officers felt that there are many clashes at work while, 74.3 percent (n=148) were in disagreement that there are clashes at work. In terms of co- workers relations that security officers experienced at work, 66.4 percent (n=132) were of the belief that they had to work harder at their jobs due to lack of skills their co-worker had although, 33.6 percent (n=67) were in disagreement.

Percentages Friendly and supportive colleagues enhance the rate of job satisfaction in the workplace (Luthans 2006:114; Kessuwan & Muenjohn 2010:169; Saeed, Lodhi, Iqbal, Nayyab, Mussawar & Yaseen 2013:1479).The results of this study indicate that security officers are satisfied with their co-worker relationship in the organisation. These findings are in line with those of Berta (2005:8) who figured out that the close friendships quality was related to both job satisfaction and career success among employees. Their research showed that the friendship network among co-workers influences the outcomes of the workplace.

Figure 4.16:	Co-workers relations

Communication

Figure 4.17 summarises how the respondents acknowledged communication in the organisation. Approximately 70.4 percent (n=140) of the security officers were of the belief that their work assignments were not fully clarified to them, although 29.6 percent (n=59) indicated that their work assignments were fully explained to them. The majority of the security officers, 65.9 percent (n=131), stated that the goals of the organisation are not clearly explained while 34.1 percent (n=68) revealed that the goals of the organisation are clarified to them. With regard to the flow of information within the organisation, 96.0 percent (n=191) of the security officers were of the opinion that communication seemed good within the organisation whereas, 4.0 percent (n=8) were in disagreement.

Communication is crucial when creating an effective organisation (Bartels, Pruyn, De Jong & Joustra 2007:174). Kamasak and Bulutlar (2008:134) emphasise that a positive communication climate would increase the level of job satisfaction and strengthen the perception of employees’ external image of the organisation. From the results, it is apparent that the respondents felt that the colleagues and managers are willing to share the information within the organisation. In the same way, Barrett (2006:387) reveals that good communication fosters trust, understanding and inspiration and allows employees to follow effectively. According to Ali and Haider (2012:39), poor communication always results in failure of organisational goal accomplishment.

Percentages

Figure 4.17:	Communication

ABSENTEEISM (SECTION D)

Section D required respondents to reflect upon their reasons for absenteeism in the organisation. The questions were based on six-point Likert scales with 1=disagree very much, 2=disagree moderately, 3=disagree slightly, 4=agree slightly, 5=agree moderately and a value of 6= agreeing very much with the statements. For simplicity sake, the responses in this section were grouped into two categories, agree and disagree in the analysis. Categories agree slightly, agree moderately and agree very much were group together as agree and disagree slightly, disagree moderately and disagree every much were grouped together as disagree.

Table 4.2:	Absenteeism response rate

Disagree	Agree
Frequency	Percentage	Frequency	Percentage
D2	24	12	175	88
D4	41	20	158	80
D7	39	20	160	80
D8	139	70	60	30
D9	40	20	159	80
D10	141	70	58	30
D11	57	28	142	72
D12	25	12	174	88
D13	118	59	81	41
D15	43	21	156	79
D16	184	92	15	8
D17	50	25	149	75
D18	37	19	162	81
D19	188	94	11	6
D21	41	29	158	71
D22	40	20	159	80
D23	42	21	157	79
D24	17	9	182	91
D25	18	9	181	91
D26	40	20	159	80
D28	119	60	80	40
D30	9	5	190	95

Table 4.2 indicates the responses of participants to absenteeism questionnaire where the majority of the participants who disagreed and agreed with the statements were revealed in red. The responses on employee’s reasons for absenteeism revealed that they have different reasons for not showing up at work.

Work stress (D1)

One of the consequences of employee’s low job satisfaction and absenteeism in the workplace is work stress. Robbins et al., (2009:84) refer work stress as “a kind of mental torture given to the employee to do the job well or leave the job created by the supervisors”. When an employee experiences work-stress, his/her future activities are unable to be accomplished due to loss of physical health (Goswami 2015:52). With regard to work stress related-illness, 88 percent (n=175) of the security officers were of the opinion that they do not show up at work due to work stress related-illness whereas, 12 percent (n=24) were in disagreement. Some organisations use work-stress as the methodology to eliminate employees. Muthukrishman, Sajimon and Chaubey (2011:63) express that improving absence and job satisfaction in the workplace should be achieved via effective regulation of factors influencing work-stress.

Work motivation (D4)

Work motivation is an important factor that affects the employee output and a driving force that put the willingness in a person to perform the task. However, motivation is not only an inner cause that pushes individuals to learn with enthusiasm and willingness but also an intensive desire for learning and acquiring knowledge (Kong 2009:1460). From the findings of this study, the majority of the security officers, 80 percent (n=158) confirmed that lack of motivation to go to work is one of the reasons security officers become absent from work while 20 percent (n=41) were in disagreement. These results are in line with the study conducted by Thirulogasundaram and Sahu (2014:64), which revealed that the primary cause of absenteeism is reflected by low work motivation. The relationship between the organisation and its members is influenced by what motivates them to work and the rewards and fulfilment they derive from it (Wong-on-Win, Guo & Lui 2010:134). Motivated employees achieve their own goals, by directing their own efforts toward accomplishing organisational goals.

Communication process within the organisation (D7)

Communication is one of the crucial factors in organisational functioning and it is known that employees devote a considerable portion of their work life collecting and disseminating information concerning fundamental matters such as organisational policies, performance feedback, role expectations and task instructions (Bartels et al., 2007:175). The findings of this study indicated that 80 percent (n=160) of the security officers have the impression that managers use one way communication in the organisation, however, 20 percent (n=39) were in disagreement. The results are in line with the findings of Hsing (2006:89) who emphasises that using one way communication negatively impacts on employees’ job satisfaction.

Communication satisfaction among employees and managers relies on the mode and type of communication as well as the quality of consistency of communication exchange.

Conflicts management within the organisation (D8 and D10)

Disagreement and challenging relations, whether involving individuals or groups, happen in every organisation. De Dreu (2008:742) emphasises that workplace conflicts are awful, harmful and destructive to the organisations and the employees as well. Approximately 70 percent (n=139) of the security officers disagreed that they are involved in clashes that are not satisfactorily solved, while 30 percent (n=60) agreed. Moreover, 70 percent (n=141) of the security officers were in disagreement that they experienced clashes with their managers, however, 30 percent (n=58) agreed that they come into conflicts with the managers. Yasmi, Guernier and Colfer (2009:99) state that workplace conflicts become positive when they inspire transformation, creativity and the development of human capabilities to handle interpersonal differences.

Decision-making process (D9)

Kuye and Sulaimon (2011:2) demonstrate that managers should allow employees to take part in decision-making processes, for the reason that when given a role to contribute in decisions affecting them, they will feel they can take ownership of the work. In terms of decisions made within the organisation, 80 percent (n=159) of the security officers were of the view that managers make decisions alone in the workplace without involving them, while 20 percent (n=40) of the security officers reflected that they are involved in managerial decisions. When employees are not involved in organisational decision-making, they conclude that they are not valued by the management, which can lead to strikes and low motivation to show up at work. As a result, employees’ satisfaction with their jobs is influenced by participation in decision-making processes (Ugboro & Obeng 2000:249).

Lack of support from management (D11)

Managers play an important role in motivation through supporting and encouraging employees in their work (Pathirage, Jayawardena & Rajapaksha 2011:229). The majority of the security officers (72%, n= 142) were of the view that they were not satisfied with the support they receive from their managers, while 28 percent (n=57) were in disagreement. LaMastro (2008:6) posits that unless employees perceive organisations as supportive, they may view their tasks as displeasing and this may increase their absence in the workplace. Moreover, employees are more satisfied with their tasks if they perceive that the organisational support is not only given to valuable employees. Several methodological studies showed that employees who are supported by their organisations are satisfied with their jobs (Riggle, Edmondson & Hansen, 2009:1028). A high level of perceived organisational support may help to restore the balance between the benefits awarded by the organisation and the contributions of the individual.

Stimulating tasks (D12)

Chimanikire, Mutandwa, Gadzirayi, Muzondo and Mutandwa (2007:168) opine that employees prefer work situations that allow them to use all their skills, mentally and physically, freedom and quick feedback on their work performance. About 88 percent (n=174) of the security officers revealed that they experience boredom due to their work routines in the workplace while, 12 percent (n=25) of the security officers were pleased with their work routines. The results are supported by Kass, Vodanivich and Callender (2001:320) who claim that the reason employees do not show up at work or change employment, are that they perceive their work as repetitive and tedious.

Applying own ability (D13)

Individuals that are given an opportunity to apply their own ability on their jobs are likely to be satisfied with their jobs, thus employees with high personal growth are more satisfied when given responsibility to choose their own work methods (Latham 2007:31). About 59 percent (n=118) of the security officers were in disagreement that their skills are not fully used in the organisation, whilst 41 percent (n=81) agreed that their skills are used for the fulfilment of organisational goals. Pillay (2009:3) affirms that employees’ satisfaction with their jobs is influenced by the work that allows for application of their own ability.

Control over job tasks (D15)

Krapohl, Manojlovich, Redman and Zhang (2010:492) discovered that the extent to which employees has control over what they do will give them a sense of ownership and an employee uses this as a measure to determine or evaluate the satisfaction with his or her job. Employees’ satisfaction with their jobs is influenced by the nature of control in what they are doing (Begat, Ellefsen & Severinsson, 2005:221). About 79 percent (n=156) of the security officers were of the opinion that they experience difficulty in making decisions in the absence of their supervisors, however, 21 percent (n=43) were in disagreement. Due to certain procedures or protocols followed, security officers may find it difficult to do the work without assistance from the supervisor. Pierce, Rubenfeld and Morgan (1991:121) emphasise that employees’ motives are rearranged from a dormant state of receiving orders and directions from their supervisors, to a dynamic sense of assumed ability to make their own decisions when they have the power to exercise control over their work situation.

Perform duties without job description (D16)

Herzberg’s motivational theory states that jobs that do not offer achievement, recognition and stimulating work do not provide satisfaction, whereas those offering achievement and stimulating work provide motivation. It, therefore, is noted that the majority of security officers, 92 percent (n=184), indicated that their duties are fully explained by the supervisors, whereas 8 percent (n=15) of the security officers confirmed that they perform duties without a job description. Before every security officer is assigned a job to perform, the supervisors should fully explain duties to them. A study by Al-Rawi (2008:98) reveals that employees find it difficult to perform when they are not sure about what is expected of them. Mtimkulu, Naranjee and Karodia (2014:18) further affirm that this worsens conflicts, tension and hostility among employees due to lack of the clear work scope.

Workload (D17)

High workloads impact negatively on employee performance. Approximately 75 percent (n=149) of the participants experienced a lot of workload, in contrast to the 25 percent (n=50) who indicated that they were very satisfied with their workload. Esmaeili, Moosazadeh, Alizadeh and Afshari (2015:1455) revealed that the high number of participants showing that they are not satisfied with their workload could be attributed to issues such as absence of staff. Approximately 96 percent (n=181) of the security officers agreed that they are given many duties to perform, whilst 4.5 percent (n=9) were in disagreement.

Working hours (D18 and D30)

With reference to the hours that security officers work daily, 81 percent (n=162) agreed that they work for long hours while, 19 percent (n=37) were in disagreement. The findings of this study showed that 95 percent (n=190) of the security officers confirmed that they are delegated a number of duties, however, 5 percent (n=9) of security officers were in disagreement. Organisations should improve working conditions and job satisfaction through effective regulations of working hours (Gerber 2008:519).

Flexible working schedules (D19)

Organisational support, through providing the flexitime option to the employees, is a very important factor that can improve productivity, at the same time reducing absence from work (Solanki 2013:10). The majority of the security officers 94 percent (n=188) disagreed that they lack flexible working rosters and the remaining 6 percent (n=11) claimed that their working roster lacks flexibility. The reason for the high percent to this statement is that they consider their work rosters as flexible due to the fact they allocated working days and resting days. Armstrong (2009:978) narrated that good work-life balance policies can lower absence, help to tackle low morale and high work stress that can lead to retention of employees. Research have shown that flexible scheduling increases perceptions of control over work and family matters and this, in turn lowers work-family conflicts (Michel & Clark 2009:64).

Promotion opportunities (D21)

Park et al., (2003:1393) emphasise that if organisations want to accelerate employees’ performance, fair promotional opportunities should be given to employees. Promotion opportunities determine the degree of satisfaction to the employee (Sageer, Rafar & Agarwal 2012:34). Within this context, it seems that 71 percent (n=158) of the security officers experienced unfair promotion chances to the next rank, however, 29 percent (n=41) were in disagreement. Muhammad and Akhter (2010:226) maintain that organisations that have sufficient scope for promotion tend to foster job satisfaction among employees, than those that do not offer such opportunities.

Training selection (D22)

Employees who perceive that their employers have taken their training and development into consideration feel valued and view their profession as highly important in the organisation (Elnaga & Imran 2013:137). Rama Devi and Shaik (2012:15) narrated that training in organisations unlocks the potential growth and development opportunities to achieve a competitive edge. Concerning security officers being selected for training, 80 percent (n=159) disclosed that the training selection was unfair, while 20 percent (n=40) found the selection to be fair. These findings are congruent with the results of Langer and Mehra (2010:16) who depicted that a fair training selection should be implemented in the organisation to promote satisfaction among employees, thus training opportunities also help reduce absenteeism and turnover (Atif, Ur-Rehman, Nasir & Safwan 2010:2681).

Performance feedback (D23)

Employees tend to prefer jobs that offer them an opportunity to apply their skills and abilities, which also offer them variety and freedom as well as jobs where they get constant feedback on how well they are doing (Thirulogasunduram & Sahu 2014:65). Feedback is widely acknowledged to be central to not only employee motivation and performance, but also to job satisfaction. About 79 percent (n=157) of the security officers indicated that they get poor feedback from their supervisors with regard to their work performance, whereas 21 percent (n=42) were in disagreement. McDowell and Fletcher (2004:11) indicated that for feedback to be accepted by the employees, it is necessary that it is perceived to be fair. These findings are in line with the research of Ahmed, Ramzan, Mohammad and Islam (2011:17) that reports a lack of transparency in performance feedback can adversely affect employee’s trust in the management and increase absenteeism. Moreover, performance feedback can provide an indication of areas of training needed as well as leadership development.

Reward systems (D24)

Moneymaking is an essential way of reward, thus employees value money. When employees are rewarded on the basis of merit, they get motivated to work hard so that they can gain from such rewards that are attached to good performance (Gohari, Kamakar, Hosseinipour & Zohoori 2013:572). Mujtaba and Shuaib (2010:113) highlight that besides matching the rewards of employees as being fair, rewards must also meet the legal requirements in each country as well. The findings of this study showed that 91 percent (n=182) of the security officers confirmed that they have noticed lack of fair reward systems from the managers for their excellent performance in the workplace, however, 9 percent (n=17) of security officers perceived the reward systems to be fair. Employees will give their maximum inputs when they have a feeling that management will reward their efforts (Hafiza, Shah, Jamsheed & Zaman 2011:327).

Unfair organisational policy (D25)

Fatt, Khin and Heng (2010:57) state that organisations without awareness of fairness and justice find it impossible to guide and motivate employees. When employees experience unfairness in the organisation, they become more likely to be absent from work and they may even retaliate against the organisation (Ozer & Gunluk 2010:1501). Whiteside (2015:22) comments that fairness in organisations demonstrates a positive behaviour of employees towards the organisation. The results show that 91 percent (n=181) of the security officers observed unfair application of absence policy on the subordinates in the workplace and fewer security officers, 9 percent (n=18) were in disagreement with the statement. Cropanzano, Bowen and Gilliland (2007:35) assert that when justice is advocated as a core value of an organisation’s management philosophy, it can build a culture of justice.

Implementing changes within the organisation (D26)

Caldwell, Chatman, O’Reilly, Ormiston and Lapiz (2008:125) observe that innovation and change fail because organisations are incapable of effectively implementing them. A planned process of change is expected to result in a high quality of communication within the organisation. The findings of this study indicate that the majority of the security officers, 80 percent (n=159) revealed that they are not informed about the changes applied in the workplace, while 20 percent (n=40) acknowledged that changes made within the organisation are communicated with them. These findings are also consistent with the research findings of Burke (2010:51) who reveals that it is highly important to communicate effectively with the lower level employees during the implementation phase of change in the organisation in order to overcome the barriers to change.

Oppression of power within the organisation (D28)

Management of employees is dependent largely on the quality of leadership in organisations (De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007:43). Furthermore, Cummings, MacGregor, Davey, Lee, Wong, Lo, Muise and Stafford (2010:364) also proclaims that management is often concerned with the output of the employees and not taking care of their feelings; fail to attain best efforts of the employees. When organisations want to produce a positive influence on employees, then leadership should be broadened from old, rigid, autocratic style to a friendly style. A significant number of the security officers, 60 percent (n=119) showed that they do not experience daily oppression power from their managers while about 40 percent (n=80) agreed that they do experience oppression power from their managers. According to the study conducted by Mosadeghrad and Ferdosi (2012:123), employees that have good relationships with their leaders and receive leadership support are more satisfied with their jobs, therefore, come to work on a regular basis. As noted by Kodjo (2015:70), the leadership style of management should respond to the aspirations and needs of the workers compared to the climate of work and the level of communication.

MEAN SCORES RANKINGS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF JOB SATISFACTION FACTORS

Table 4.3. reveals the mean score rankings that were compiled with a view to provide a rating on the identified constructs with job satisfaction in terms of the level of agreement/disagreement from the perspective of the entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. The minimum (1) and maximum (6) values are based on the lowest and highest values on a six-point Likert scale. The means were calculated by summating the response values of variables that comprised each dimension divided by the number of variables in each dimension. The pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, co-workers and communication means vary from 3.286 to 4.869. For the sake of brevity, only the highest mean scores will be discussed.

Table 4.3:	Mean score rankings of the job satisfaction factors

Dimension/ Construct	Mean Score Ranking	Mean factor scores	Standard Deviation
Pay	1	Fair amount (JS1)	4.181	2.197
3	Little salary increases (JS10)	3.452	1.866
2	Unappreciated with pay (JS19)	3.769	1.623
4	Satisfied with salary increases (JS28)	3.417	1.730
Promotion	3	Less promotion chances (JS2)	3.794	2.219
1	Promoted due to performance (JS11)	4.688	0.727
2	People get ahead fast here (JS20)	4.638	1.150
4	Satisfied with promotion chances (JS33)	3.497	1.814
Supervision	1	Supervisor is very skilled (JS3)	4.276	0.765
3	Supervisor unfair to me (JS12)	4.045	2.219
4	Supervisor show little interest to co-workers (JS21)	3.864	1.023
2	I like my supervisor (JS30)	4.141	2.184
Fringe benefits	2	Not satisfied with the benefits (JS4)	3.633	1.548
1	Benefits are good like in other companies (JS13)	4.497	0.840
3	Benefit package is fair (JS22)	3.623	1.857
4	There are benefits we have to get (JS29)	3.462	0.863
Contingent rewards	1	Receive praise for the good job (JS5)	4.734	0.844
2	My work is not valued (JS14)	4.025	0.972
4	Few rewards (JS23)	3.452	1.855
3	Little rewards for my efforts (JS32)	3.608	1.388
Operating conditions	2	Too much work load (JS24)	3.573	1.093
1	Too much paperwork (JS31)	3.588	0.877
Co-workers	1	Work hard due to lack of skills from my co-workers (JS16)	3.975	1.027
2	Too many clashes (JS34)	3.286	0.950
Communication	1	Good communication (JS9)	4.869	0.638
4	Company goals not clear (JS18)	3.849	0.869
3	Do not know what is going on in the company (JS26)	3.920	0.912
2	Work assignments not fully explained (JS36)	4.095	0.993
Minimum mean value=1 Maximum mean value= 6

Pay sub-scale

Regarding the pay dimension, salary increase was ranked first on the mean scores as revealed by the high mean score value (M=4.181; SD=2.197). This indicates that the security officers agreed that their salary increases were fair.

Promotion sub-scale

The findings of this study revealed that promotion due to performance (M=4.688; SD=0.727) and people get ahead fast here as in other organisations (M=4.638; SD=1.150) had the highest mean score rankings in the overall promotion dimension scale, respectively. These findings reveal that the security officers were promoted due to excellent performance they show in their jobs, therefore, these dimensions are moderately important in contributing towards the employee satisfaction within security companies. Hence, in order for management to maintain the morale of professionals, a balance should be maintained when promoting security officers with a view to create a fulfilling working experience.

Supervision sub-scale

As shown in Table 4.3 under the supervision dimension, the supervisor is very skilled was ranked the most important dimension (M=4.276; SD=0.765). This means score suggested that security officers were satisfied with the supervision provided to them. A possible reason for these results may be that satisfaction may be judged from fairness and support.

Fringe benefits sub-scale

Item JS13 comprised the highest mean score of (M=4.497; SD=0.840), which indicated that respondents felt that the benefits they receive are as good as in other companies.

Contingent rewards sub-scale

Regarding the contingent rewards; been praised for the good job was ranked first on the mean scores as revealed by the high mean score value (M=4.734; SD=0.840). This indicates that the security officers agreed that been praised for the good job was an important issue that influenced their job satisfaction.

Operating conditions sub-scale

Item JS31 had a mean score of (M=3.588; SD=0.877) indicating that the respondents were not satisfied with too much paperwork done in the organisation and was ranked first. This is consistent with the opinion of Robbins and Coulter (2012:104) stating that employee perception about the operating conditions will affect the employee performance, meaning that the provision of conducive operating conditions by the organisation will improve employee performance.

Co-workers sub-scale

Item JS 16 was ranked first on the scale with the mean score rating (M=3.975; SD=1.027) revealing that the respondents have to work hard due to lack of skills from the co-workers. This shows that when recruiting people for a certain position, it is highly important to place people that have skills for the vacant position so that co-workers are not overloaded with work.

Communication sub-scale

The findings of this study revealed that good communication (M=4.869; SD=0.638) and work assignments that are not fully explained (M=4.095; SD=0.995) had the highest mean score rankings in the overall communication dimension scale, respectively. These findings reveal that the majority of security officers felt that their co-workers and managers are willing to share information and employee feedback is highly encouraged in the organisation.

MEAN SCORE RANKING AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ABSENTEEISM FACTORS

Table 4.4 reveals the mean score rankings that were compiled with a view to provide a rating on the identified constructs with absenteeism in terms of the level of agreement/disagreement from the perspective of the security officers within the southern Gauteng province. The minimum (1) and maximum (6) values are based on the lowest and highest values on a six-point Likert scale. The means were calculated by summating the response values of variables that comprised each dimension divided by the number of variables in each dimension. As shown in Table 4.4, the overall mean score of 5.27. (maximum score = 6) for the overall absence level proposes that respondents were slightly in agreement with the reasons for not showing up at work. This may be because employees within the organisation have different reasons for not showing up at work.

Table 4.4:	Mean score rankings of the absenteeism factors

Dimension/ Construct	Mean Score Ranking	Mean factor scores	Standard Deviation
Personal factors	2	Suffer from work stress illness (D2)	4.583	0.960
1	Lack of motivation to go to work (D4)	5.161	5.156
Supervisors factors	1	Managers use one way communication (D7)	4.688	1.368
5	Clashes not suitably solved (D8)	2.844	0.985
2	Managers make decisions alone (D9)	4.598	1.329
6	Have clashes with the managers (D10)	2.698	1.059
3	Lack of support from managers (D11)	3.724	1.314
4	Experience oppression from the manager (D28)	3.427	1.269
Work factors	2	Tired of routine work (D12)	5.246	1.358
6	My skills are not fully used (D13)	3.161	0.918
5	Difficulty in making decisions in the absence of supervisor (D15)	3.588	0.943
8	I perform duties without job description (D16)	2.281	0.877
4	Too much work load (D17)	4.216	1.218
1	Work for long hour (D18)	5.271	1.427
7	Lack of flexible working rosters (D19)	2.377	0.720
3	Perform a lot of duties (D30)	4.643	0.634

Personal factors

Regarding the personal factors, lack of motivation to go to work was ranked first on the mean scores as revealed by the high mean score value (M=5.161;SD=5.156) indicates that the security officers agreed very much that lack of motivation was an important issue that influenced their absence level. With reference to the mean score value (M =4.583; SD=0.960), it was observed that the security officers slightly agreed that they suffer from work-related stress, which was ranked second.

Supervisor factors

The findings of this study revealed that managers use one-way communication (M=4.688; SD=1.378) and managers make decisions alone in the organisations (M=4.598; SD=1.329) had the highest mean score rankings in the overall supervisor factors dimension scale, respectively. However, lack of support from managers within the organisation was ranked the third with a mean score value M =3.794; SD=1.314 followed by the fact that respondents experience oppression from managers, which was ranked forth with the mean score value (M=3.497; SD=1.269). The respondents were not satisfied with the fact that the clashes within the organisation were not suitably solved with the mean score value (M=2.844; SD=0.985), which was ranked fifth while the lowest ranked and mean rating among the identified constructs turned out to be if the respondents have clashes with the managers (M=2.698; SD=1.059). These findings reveal that the majority of security officers indicated that the supervisors make the decisions alone in the organisation without hearing the employees’ point of view; therefore, these dimensions are moderately important in contributing towards the employee satisfaction within security companies.

Work factors

Item D18 had a mean score of (M=5.271; SD=1.427) revealing that the respondents agreed very much that they work for long hours in the organisation and was ranked first. Item D12 comprised the second highest mean score of (M=5.246; SD=1.358), which indicated that respondents agreed very much that they are tired of routine work. Item D30 had a mean score of (M=4.643; SD=0.634) reflecting that the respondents slightly agreed that they perform many duties in the organisation, followed by item D17 with the mean score value of (M =4.216; SD=1.218) showing that the security officers experience work overload. Of concern, however, was the mean score of (M=3.161; SD=0.918) for item D29 indicating that the respondents were not satisfied that their skills are not fully used in the organisation. Item D19 had a mean score of (M=2.377; SD=0.720) reflecting that the respondents working rosters lack flexibility and item D16 was ranked last with the mean score value (M=2.281; SD=0.877) revealing that security officers were not satisfied with performing duties without description.

Organisational factors

Item D21 was ranked first indicated that respondents agreed very much to the unfair promotion chances with the mean score value of (M=5.111; SD=1.642) followed by poor performance feedback (D23) with the mean score value of (M=4.950; SD=1.466), which indicates that respondents slightly agreed with the statement. With reference to lack of fair rewards (D24), it was ranked third with the mean score value of (M=4.704; SD=1.095) pointing out that respondents agreed slightly to the statement. Item D26 revealed that respondents had little information about changes in the workplace and it was reflected by the mean score value of (M=4.397; SD=0.953), followed by item D22 with the mean score value of (M=4.296; SD=1.313), which revealed that respondents agreed slightly to unfair selection for security officers training. Item D25 was ranked last with the mean score value (M=3.884; SD=0.824) revealing that respondents were not satisfied with unfair application of absence policy on other employees.

CORRELATIONS: JOB SATISFACTION (INTER-FACTOR CORRELATION ANALYSIS)

The Spearman correlation coefficient (r) was computed to analyse the relationship between the dimensions of job satisfaction and absenteeism with regard to direction and strength. This was chosen as the ideal statistical co-efficient because the data are not normally distributed and hence it tends to be non-parametric in nature (Churchill & Iacobucci, 2002:89). Table 4.5 reports on the correlations between the dimensions of job satisfaction, which were significant at the 0.01 level (2- tailed test).

Table 4.5:	Job satisfaction inter-factor correlation

Factors	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1.Pay	1.000
2.Promotion	.925**	1.000
3.Supervision	.729**	.785**	1.000
4.Benefits	.862**	.875**	.773**	1.000
5.Rewards	.798**	.832**	.853**	.839**	1.000
6.Conditions	.630**	.638**	.739**	.739**	.769**	1.000
7.Co-workers	.417**	.416**	.525**	.541**	.466**	.659**	1.000
8.Communication	.613**	.625**	.756**	.728**	.728**	.835**	.786**	1.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The job satisfaction inter-factor correlation matrix in Table 4.5 shows that there are statistically significant relationships between job satisfaction constructs. The highest correlation is between pay and promotion (r= 0.925; p<0.01) and the lowest correlation is between co-workers and promotion (r= 0.416, p<0.05). Overall, the results show moderate to strong correlation among the variables that comprise job satisfaction.

Table 4.6 reports on the inter-factor correlations of the absenteeism scale.

Table 4.6:	Absenteeism inter-factor correlations

DIMENSION	Personal factors	Supervisor factors	Work factors	Organisational factors
Personal factors	1.000
Supervisor factors	.617**	1.000
Work factors	.604**	.597**	1.000
Organisational factors	.713**	.508**	.597**	1.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Strong correlations were observed among the constructs significant at p<0.05. The strongest correlation is between organisational and personal factors (r=0.713; p<0.05).

Table 4.7:	Correlation analysis: Job satisfaction versus absenteeism

DIMENSION	Personal factors	Supervisor factors	Work factors	Organisational factors
Pay	-.098	.008	-.183**	-.119
Promotion	-.007	.035	-.151*	-.094
Supervision	-.003**	-.130	-.321**	-.305**
Benefits	-.262**	-.125	-.353**	-.271**
Rewards	-.197**	-.054	-.301**	-.302**
Conditions	-.529**	-.285	-.627**	-.539**
Co-workers	-.474**	-.529	-.718**	-.522**
Communication	-.555**	-.529	-.632**	-.603**
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

In terms of Table 4.7, it may seem that there are negative statistically significant relationships between job satisfaction and absenteeism dimensions. A negative correlation is where higher scores on one variable correspond with lower scores on another variable. The strongest correlation between absenteeism and job satisfaction dimension were co-workers and work factors (r=-0.718; p<0.01), communication and work factors (r= -0.632; p<0.01), furthermore, operating conditions and work factors (r=-0.627; p<0.01). The results thus point out that there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism dimensions. This shows that a low level of employee satisfaction is related to an increased absence amongst the security officers.

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA)

ANOVA is a technique for analysing the way in which the mean of variables is affected by the different types and combinations of factors (Bewick, Cheek & Ball 2004:130). The mean scores for each factor were computed and compared with the help of ANOVA technique to investigate the discriminatory power of alternatives on the measurement scales. Two independent analysis of variances were conducted. Table 4.8 reports on the ANOVA results of the job satisfaction dimensions and the nature of employment contract.

Table 4.8:	Analysis of variance: Job satisfaction dimensions and nature of employment contract

Factors	Groups	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Squares	F	Sig.
Pay	Between groups	3.525	2	1.763	.566	.569
Within groups	607.506	195	3.115
Promote	Between groups	4.623	2	2.312	1.041	.355
Within groups	433.140	195	2.221
Supervise	Between groups	8.681	2	4.340	2.299	.103
Within groups	368.183	195	1.888
Benefits	Between groups	2.190	2	1.095	1.035	.357
Within groups	206.267	195	1.058
Rewards	Between groups	4.334	2	2.167	1.865	.158
Within groups	226.624	195	1.162
Operating Conditions	Between groups	23.270	2	11.635	15.496	.000**
Within groups	146.418	195	.751
Co-workers	Between groups	20.513	2	10.256	14.265	.000**
Within groups	140.205	195	.719
Communication	Between groups	7.282	2	3.641	8.430	.000**
Within groups	84.228	195	.432
** Significant at p<0.05

First, ANOVA was computed between (B9) employment contract category of the respondents, namely 1 (fixed term contract), 2 (part time contract) and 3 (permanent); job satisfaction dimensions, namely pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, rewards, operating conditions, co- workers and communication. The results are shown in Table 4.8 presenting significant differences (p<0.000) that exist among the three of the eight job satisfaction factors (operating conditions, co-workers and communication) and employment contract. This analysis was conducted in order to establish whether security officers vary in their perceptions of their job satisfaction, based on the type of contract that they have.

The F-test used to assess statistically the difference between the employment and job satisfaction, reveals that the means are significantly different. Of the eight job satisfaction dimensions, three of the factors indicate significant variances. Differences were found for the operating conditions (p=0.000; p<0.055), co-workers (p=0.000; p<0.05) and communication (p=0.000; p<0.05).

As a result, a post-hoc multiple comparison test was conducted to establish which groups have significant differences between the three job satisfaction factors and employment categories. The results are depicted in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9:	Post-hoc analysis: Nature of employment (contract) and satisfaction dimensions

Dependent Variable	(l) B9 (contract)	(j) B9 (contract)	Mean Difference (l-J)	Std Error	Sig.
Operating conditions	2 (part time) M=2.50	3 (permanent) M=3.81	-1.30859*	.33635	.000
3 (permanent) M=3.81	1(fixed term) M=3.21	.59431*	.13336	.000
2 (part time) M=2.50	1.30859*	.33635	.000
Co-workers	2 (part time) M=2.50	3 (permanent) M=3.84	-1.33594*	.32914	.000
3 (permanent) M=3.84	1 (fixed term) M=3.32	.51848*	.13050	.000
2 (part time) M=2.50	1.33594*	.32914	.000
Communication	3 (permanent) M=4.29	2 (part time)	.90011*	.25511	.000
* The mean difference is significant at p< 0.05

Table 4.9 provides an overview of where the differences lie in terms of operating conditions, co- workers and communication based on the type of employment of security officers. With regard to operating conditions, part-time employees seem to be less satisfied (M=2.50) as compared to permanent employees M=3.81). Moreover, permanent employees (M=3.81) also seem to be more satisfied with their jobs (M=3.81) when compared to fixed term employees (M=3.21).

With regard co-worker relationships and their contract of employment, the same pattern seems to emerge. Part-time employees (M=2.50) seem to be less satisfied with getting along with co- workers when compared to permanent employees (M=3.84) and fixed term employees (M=3.32). Finally, a comparison of part-time employees and permanent employees with regard to the communication dimension of job satisfaction, revealed that permanent employees (M=4.29) seem to be more satisfied with the communication in the organisation when compared to their part-time counterparts (M=3.39).

The second analysis of variance was between (B4) age groups of the respondents, namely 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years as well as 50 + years and job satisfaction dimensions, namely pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers and communication. Table 4.10 reports the job satisfaction dimension and age category. There is no statistical significant difference between job satisfaction dimensions and age category of respondents because all age categories perceive job satisfaction dimensions as the same. Since p>0.05 on all the job satisfaction dimensions, the post-hoc multiple comparison was not undertaken to establish which means differ significantly among job satisfaction dimensions and age category.

Table 4.10:	Analysis of variance: Job satisfaction dimensions and age

Factors	Groups	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Squares	F	Sig.
Pay	Between groups	12.100	3	4.033	1.309	.273
Within groups	600.618	195	3.080
Promote	Between groups	4.638	3	1.546	.694	.557
Within groups	434.340	195	2.227
Supervise	Between groups	6.512	3	2.171	1.139	.335
Within groups	371.723	195	1.906
Benefits	Between groups	1.790	3	.597	.560	.642
Within groups	207.567	195	1.064
Rewards	Between groups	4.077	3	1.359	1.165	.324
Within groups	227.516	195	1.167
Operating Conditions	Between groups	.497	3	.166	.189	.904
Within groups	171.217	195	.878
Co-workers	Between groups	.839	3	.280	.337	.799
Within groups	161.764	195	.830
Communication	Between groups	1.302	3	.434	.931	.427
Within groups	90.878	195	.466
** Significant at p<0.05

MANN-WHITNEY TEST

The measure is used to test for differences between two independent groups on a continuous measure. This test is a non-parametric alternative to the t-test for independent samples. The Mann- Whitney U test compares the medians between the groups. Mann-Whitney test was computed in order to establish whether there are significant relationships between the dimensions of job satisfaction and respondents gender. Table 4.11 provides an overview of the results.

Table 4.11:	Mann-Whitney test: Job satisfaction and gender

Mann-Whitney U	Wilcoxon W	Z	Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
Pay	4441.000	8269.000	-1.078	.281
Promotion	4548.000	8376.000	-8.11	.417
Supervision	4615.500	10943.500	-.660	.509
Benefits	4663.000	8491.000	-.522	.602
Rewards	4678.000	8506.000	-.487	.626
Conditions	4676.000	8504.000	-.505	.613
Co-workers	4714.000	8542.000	-.400	.689
Communication	4581.500	8409.500	-.738	.461

From Table 4.11 the p-values >0.05 on all the job satisfaction dimension; therefore, there is no statistical significance difference between the males and females with regards to their perception on pay, promotion, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers and communication.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE MEASUREMENT SCALES

Kimberlin and Winterstein (2008:2278) comment that evaluating the validity and reliability of measuring instruments is vital towards validating an instrument’s effectiveness. Cronbach alpha values for the job satisfaction sub-scales ranged between 0.721 and 0.868 showing adequate reliability of the subscales. Furthermore, the Cronbach alpha coefficient for the entire scale was 0.967. Therefore, these results corroborate the sufficiency of the scale in capturing the elements included as the job satisfaction factors that contribute towards the job satisfaction of security officers within a South African context. These results are reported in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12:	Reliability values for the job satisfaction sub-scales

Dimension/Construct	N	Number of Items	Cronbach alpha
Promotion	199	4	.721
Supervision	199	4	.839
Fringe benefits	199	4	.758
Contingent rewards	199	4	.833
Working conditions	199	2	.868
Co-workers	199	2	.808
Communication	199	4	.800
Overall Cronbach alpha for the entire scale = 0.967 (28 items on the scale)

The reliability of the entire absenteeism instrument was ascertained by computing the Cronbach alpha coefficient values. Table 4.13 indicates that alpha values for absenteeism sub-scales as follows: 0.852 (personal characteristics), 0.855 (work factors), 0.918 (supervisor factors) and 0.924 (organisational factors) indicating satisfactory reliabilities. The standardised Cronbach’s alpha value for the entire scale was 0.890. Therefore, these results offer sufficient evidence to suggest that the instrument that was used in the current study was able to capture all the elements that were fundamental towards unveiling absenteeism determinants among entry level security officers.

Table 4.13:	Reliability values for the absenteeism sub-scales

Dimension/Construct	N	Number of Items	Cronbach alpha
Personal factors	199	2	.852
Supervisor factors	199	6	.918
Work factors	199	8	.855
Organisational factors	199	6	.924
Overall Cronbach Alpha for the entire Scale = 0.890 (22 items on the scale)

Content validity was assessed during the pilot study to check if the scale variables adequately covered the construct under investigation. This was done by an extensive review of the literature and by the item-total correlation of each scale item that comprised the construct. Scale items showing item-total correlations <0.50 were deleted from the scales. The study constructs were assessed for convergent validity through correlation analysis. Correlation analysis was conducted for the job satisfaction sub-scales and the absenteeism sub-scales. Moderate to strong correlations were observed between the constructs in the job satisfaction and absenteeism thus providing evidence of convergence of the measuring instrument. Discriminant validity was assessed again through correlation analysis whereby the job satisfaction dimensions were correlated with the absenteeism dimensions. Negative correlations were found between the job satisfaction and absenteeism, showing inverse relationship thus providing evidence of discrimination between the scale items.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

In this chapter, the data from the empirical study were analysed and interpreted, with specific reference to the job satisfaction and absenteeism factors that were identified through the literature study. Descriptive analysis was undertaken in order to establish the levels of job satisfaction and absenteeism among security officers. Spearman’s non-parametric correlations, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Mann-Whitney U test were used to establish relationships and differences in various constructs included in the study. Moreover, the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments were discerned.

In the next chapter, conclusions will be drawn and recommendations emanating from this study made. In addition, the limitations of the study and the implications for future research will be discussed.

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION

Chapter 5 represents a synopsis of a study having gone full circle − a summary of the research process in relation to both the theoretical and empirical objectives. Conclusions will be drawn and recommendations based on the findings presented in the previous chapter will be highlighted. Considerations for future research will be contemplated while also acknowledging the study’s limitations. Finally, the application value of the study’s findings will be postulated.

OVERVIEW AND OUTLINE OF CHAPTERS

Chapter 1 provided an introductory overview of the scope, context and focus of the study. Emanating from the problem statement, the need to examine job satisfaction and absenteeism among selected private security companies within the Southern Gauteng region became indisputable. The theoretical objectives focused on exploring the concept job satisfaction as well as the factors influencing job satisfaction from the literature. In addition, the role of absenteeism within the South African labour context was explored. Finally, consideration was given to characteristics that could lead to absenteeism within the security sector. The empirical objectives focused on the assessment of both job satisfaction and absenteeism levels, as well as the correlation between these variables, within private security companies in Southern Gauteng region. The quantitative research methodology proposed was both literature and data driven. Lastly, a provisional chapter outline was presented.

Chapter 2 provided a detailed literature review guided by set theoretical objectives. The initial focus was on the clarification of the concepts job satisfaction, absenteeism and security officer. The content theories related to job satisfaction including Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory, McClelland’s needs theory and Herzberg motivation-hygiene theory was presented. In addition, factors influencing job satisfaction, the consequences of job satisfaction and strategies to enhance job satisfaction were explored from the literature.

Absenteeism as organisational reality was introduced. The various types of absenteeism were highlighted. The implications of legislative stipulations related to the management of absenteeism in the workplace were emphasised. Factors leading to employee absenteeism as well as the consequences of such absenteeism were highlighted. A strategy for the management of absenteeism was explored. Finally, the role and importance of the private security industry in South Africa was presented.

Chapter 3 described the research methodology that shaped the entire study. The overarching aims, as well as the theoretical and empirical objectives of the study were delineated. This chapter bears testament to such a quantitative research design. The target population was described and limited to four private PSIRA registered security firms within the Southern Gauteng that granted permission for the study to be conducted amongst their employees. The target population comprised of a total of n=428 entry level security officers within these firms. A non-probability convenience sampling approach was applied to select a sample size of n=200 entry level private security guards who represent approximately half of the total population. The questionnaire design, administration and statistical analysis thereof were described. The data collection and analysis of the actual study was preceded by a pilot study. The overall reliability of the job satisfaction sub scale was 0.967 while for the absenteeism sub scale it was 0.890. These results provided an indication that the two questionnaires were suitable to be utilised for data collection of the main study.

Chapter 4 provides a detailed representation and discussion of the empirical findings based of the statistical analysis of collected data. The findings on the demographic information, job satisfaction and absenteeism were illustrated by making use of graphical and descriptive statistics. Pie charts, tables and bar charts were used to illustrate these results. The results demonstrated that security officers were in moderate agreement on issues of job satisfaction factors and characteristics leading to absenteeism.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the literature as well as the empirical study, the following conclusions have been drawn with respect of the stated research objectives:

Objective 1: Explore the concept of job satisfaction

The purpose of this objective was to comprehend, from existing scholarship, the concept of job satisfaction as workplace phenomenon (see Chapter 2, Section 2.3). This concept was discovered to be well conceptualised theoretically and described based on reliable and leading theories of job satisfaction, which relate to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Alderfer’s existence, relatedness and growth theory, McClelland’s needs theory and also Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory. Researchers highlight that the popularity of this topic is triggered primarily by its multidisciplinary nature and multidimensional structure, targeting a variety of professions, industries and disciplines (Ferdousi 2012:62).

Job satisfaction is regarded as an important source of work motivation and can be used as a tool to energise employees to get things done and thereby get the organisation to work better and cost less. Pettinger (2010:235) identify that the suitable use of human resources is based on both positive and constructive measurements, providing the full or relative satisfaction of employees in organisations. Thus, job satisfaction provides a positive contribution to both job performance as well as the organisational commitment of employees. Therefore, it could be stated that managers would prefer to have satisfied employees who feel positive about their work engagement in their employment.

Objective 2: Identify the factors that influence job satisfaction

In concurrence with the literature, a number of factors were recognised as factors affecting job satisfaction (see Chapter 2, Sections 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6). These factors related to payment, promotion opportunities, supervisors, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers, nature of work and communication. Knowledge related to the factors that influence the level of job satisfaction can be used in pursuit of the improvement of productivity and organisational profit. It, therefore, is essential to keep employees satisfied with their job by discovering the factors that have an influence on job satisfaction.

Baah and Amoako (2011:4) emphasise that these job satisfaction factors help employees to establish their worth within the organisational context. In addition, high levels of job satisfaction have the potential to manifest in increased levels of internal happiness, which in turn adds to an overall sense of satisfaction. Parvin and Kabir (2011:115) recommend that the policy makers and managers should focus on the factors that affect employee job satisfaction if they want to enhance their businesses. Overall satisfaction, therefore, focuses on the individual’s general state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Objective 3: Reflect on the current literature related to absenteeism within the South African labour context

An overview of absenteeism within the South African labour context was presented (see Chapter 2, Sections 2.7, 2.8 and 2.9). Academic scholars generally classify absenteeism into three types that relate to the presence of one of the following phenomenon, namely sickness, innocent and culpable absence. The BCEA No. 75 of 1997 Chapter 3 (RSA 1997:12), stipulates the kinds of leave that an employee is entitled to which can be used as a reason for being absent from work. Although most South African employees are entitled to certain types of authorised leave per annum because of their employment relationship within the labour context (RSA 1997:49), these benefits may in turn be abused. Contrary to this notion of absenteeism as discussed in legislation, Pierce (2009:7) strongly views absenteeism as a breach of contract between employer and employee; it, therefore, is advisable that employees should be absent with a valid reason. The BCEA identifies the possibility of involuntary absence (innocent) in circumstances when employees do not show up at work due to reasons beyond their control. The problem, however, arises when the system is abused by those who are frequently away for reasons that could be controlled (culpable absence). Marsden (1995:9) argues that it is in the interest of the employee to conduct themselves generally in accordance with the accepted practice and policy of the employer, as an employee who commits breach of contract by being absent from work may be dismissed by the employer upon legal disciplinary procedures. Scholars agree that absenteeism is the single biggest cause of lost time and decreased productivity within the modern day work context.

Objective 4: To identify factors leading to absenteeism of security officers

Guided by the existing literature, characteristics leading to absenteeism of security officers were identified (see Chapter 2, Section 2.10). These characteristics relate to the organisation, the supervisor, the work itself and finally the individual employee. Scholars confirmed that when employees feel happy at work, they are less likely to be absent from work. The DCS model (Kristensen 1995:18) assumes that work factors lead to high levels of stress, which will lead to increased illness and eventually to sickness absence (Hwang & Ramadoss 2017:55). Prabhu (2013:86) affirms this notion and states that higher rates of employee absence may signal weak labour-management relations, resulting in low productivity. He further comments that absenteeism in the organisation affects the country’s economy when the productivity decreases. An in-depth literature review of the consequences of absenteeism also was presented. In addition, the strategies to manage absenteeism were addressed. The private security sector was conceptualised with the aim of describing the importance of the sector and its origins, with the intention of ensuring that households in the Southern Gauteng region are secure.

Objective 5: To assess the level of job satisfaction of entry level security officers within Southern Gauteng region

This objective was achieved as indicated in Section 4.6 and Table 4.5 (overall means of the constructs in the study) in Chapter 4, where the dimensions of satisfaction were extracted. The means were obtained by computing the summated means of items that made up the sub-construct (for example pay) in Section 4.6.1, when analysing participants’ reactions on their level of job satisfaction. The overall mean for job satisfaction was 4.08 providing an indication that the security officers were in moderate agreement on issues of pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, relationships with co-workers and general communication.

Objective 6: To assess the level of absenteeism of entry security within officers within Southern Gauteng region

This objective was achieved as indicated in Section 4.7 and Table 4.6 (overall means of the constructs in the study) of Chapter 4. The means were obtained by computing the summated means of items that made up the sub-construct (for example personal characteristics) in Section 4.7.1, when analysing respondents’ feedback on their level of absenteeism. The overall mean for absenteeism was 4.08 providing an indication that the security officers were in moderate agreement on issues of personal characteristics, supervisor characteristics, work characteristics and organisational characteristics.

Objective 7: To explore a correlation between job satisfaction levels and absenteeism of entry level security officers within Southern Gauteng region

With reference to this empirical objective, conclusions are drawn based on the findings in Section 4.8 of this study (see Table 4.7). Spearman’s correlation coefficient was computed to test the inter-factor correlations between the factors influencing job satisfaction and factors leading to absenteeism. The results revealed a negative relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism dimensions. The strongest correlation between absenteeism and job satisfaction dimension was identified as co-workers, operating conditions and work factors. The results confirmed that there is an inverse relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism dimensions. This shows that a low level of employee satisfaction is related to increased absence amongst the security officers. This is in line with the results of Drakopoulos and Grimani (2013:3499), which also revealed an inverse relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism. Camp and Lambert (2006:148) indicate that dissatisfied employees utilise their sick leave to withdraw from the workplace. Josias (2005:7) highlights that when a job is satisfying employees show up at work more often, thus implying that they enjoy their work. These results confirm that absenteeism reflects invisible attitudes such as low levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction among employees (Martochio & Jimeno 2003:230). The literature further affirms that employees who dislike their jobs will avoid them temporarily by being absent (Cohen & Golan 2007:418).

Objective 8: To examine whether there are any significant differences between the job satisfaction dimensions and employees’ nature of employment contract

Objective 8 was achieved as indicated in Chapter 4 and demonstrated in Table 4.8 (analysis of variance). The results revealed that there is a significant difference between three of the eight job satisfaction factors, namely operating conditions, co-workers and communication with the nature of employment. Therefore, a post-hoc multiple comparison test was conducted to establish what groups have significant differences between the three job satisfaction and employment categories. The results revealed that permanent employees seemed to be more satisfied with their jobs than fixed term employees and part-time employees since the planning of current and future life activities is constrained (Gash, Mertens & Gordo 2007:431).

Permanent employees face a relatively high job security and may assess the pure employment status less valuable than temporarily employed workers, whose jobs are much more insecure. Origo and Pagani (2009:549) further comment that employees who work under fixed-term contract exhibit low levels of job satisfaction because of employment instability as a result of the status of their contracts of employment. Fixed-term contracts have negative correlations with job satisfaction (Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Van Praag 2006:185). Moreover, temporary employees are less likely to be committed to the organisation and, consequently, the knowledge these temporary employees obtained is lost when they find employment elsewhere (Aldrich & Ruef 2006:97).

Objective 9: To examine whether there are any significant differences between job satisfaction dimensions and age

This objective was achieved and the outcomes are presented in Section 4.9 (see Table 4.10). The results revealed that there is no statistical significant difference between job satisfaction dimensions and the age category of respondents. This is in contrast to Boumans (2011:333) and Iroegbu (2015:112) who demonstrate that older employees (45 years and above) experience a higher job satisfaction compared to that of younger employees. The reason for this finding might be that older employees have reached the establishment stage in their careers and would not want to move from one job to another in order not to lose the retirement benefits they have accumulated.

Kanfer and Ackerman (2004:443) believe that age has been observed as a positive predictor of job satisfaction for a variety of reasons. As employees get older, they gain more experience in their organisation and obtain better, higher-paying jobs; thus the possibility of experiencing positive emotions towards the organisation increases and negative emotions decrease (Ng & Feldman 2010:679). Park (2000:11) argues that when employees grow older, even though their general knowledge remains stable or even increases, they might experience some reduction in several alternative employment options, making their current job more attractive. Furthermore, it could be argued that younger employees are in the exploratory stage of their careers and have opportunities of moving from one organisation to another over time (Moyes, Williams & Koch 2006:538).

Objective 10: To examine whether there are any significant differences between the job satisfaction dimensions and gender

These results are reported in Sections 4.9 (see Table 4.11). No significant differences were found between job satisfaction and gender of security guards. Gender has been recognised to influence employees' level of job satisfaction. Rajasekhar and Devi (2015:9) reported that there is no significance difference between male and female employees with regards to job satisfaction, while some studies have concluded that male workers have higher job satisfaction (Crossman & Harris 2006:31). Contrary to these findings, Gazioglu and Tansel (2006:1165) assert that women are more satisfied with different characteristics of their job as compared to men. Moyes et al., (2006:541) as well as Cesar, Carmen, Martinez and Garcia (2013:21) agree that females had a higher level of job satisfaction than their male counterparts; despite being paid less or being engaged in less desirable occupations. This could be attributed to the fact that males are often the bread winners of the family and much responsibility is shouldered by these bread winners.

Men and women have different experiences of responsibility, expectations and meaningfulness from their jobs and the types of jobs they perform vary giving them different experiences. Clark (1997:343); Bender, Donohue and Heywood (2005:482) as well as Bellou (2010:7) established that men often are motivated by promotions, whilst women are motivated by work itself and relations with co-workers. Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza (2007:897) identify that there is no significant gender difference in job satisfaction. The findings of this study reveal that males and females view job satisfaction dimensions as the same. Job satisfaction is determined by intrinsic factors of the job rather than gender.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are based on the above conclusions:

The private security industry management could explore the relevance of the various job satisfaction factors that could influence the job and potentially cause low satisfaction among entry level security officers. The outcome of such a process could guide future actions aimed at improved job engagement.

The private security sector should consider the implications of their staffing practices. It is recommended that terms of employment should be more permanent in nature to aid overall job satisfaction.

Security officers should be allowed sufficient rest periods in accordance with legislated employment standards. This could aid in the reduction of work-related fatigue levels.

It is recommended further that the role of promotion opportunities, career advancement and improved rewarding systems among the security officers should be considered. The private security companies could benefit from ongoing career advancement initiatives such as short courses, coaching and mentoring programs, counselling programs and workshops. Such growth opportunities could increase the level of job satisfaction among security officer and, consequently, counteract the prevalence of absenteeism.

It also is recommended that the sectoral minimum wages (RSA 2012:5) be re-assessed to ensure that security officers are able to fulfil their financial obligations.

Consideration could be given to the facilitation of reliable transport, especially for night shift workers, by the employers as a pro-active approach to the management of potential absenteeism.

The private security sector could benefit from continually reassessing their absenteeism policies to ensure fairness and transparency. Consultation with all stakeholders could aid this process.

The private security sector could consider rewarding employees for their good attendance. A monetary reward in lieu of unused sick leave within a particular leave cycle is proposed.

Finally, the private security sector could raise awareness of the consequences of absenteeism for the sector. Promoting the notion of ‘team effort’ in the combating of absenteeism could facilitate buy-in from all relevant parties.

LIMITATIONS

The researcher postulates the following as limitations of the study:

A small sample size of 200 private security officers who were centered in only one province (Southern Gauteng) was used. It, therefore, becomes essential to employ caution when generalising the findings of the present study to other populations and contexts.

Secondly, quantitative research approach was utilised in this study, which limits the information collected. The respondents individually completed the questionnaire and the researcher had no control over the responses, hence the researcher had to depend on information provided by the respondents. A qualitative research approach could be employed through in-depth interviews with the aim of gathering information that is more valuable.

Lastly, the study is limited further in that it is based on only two work-related factors (job satisfaction and absenteeism) when it is known that there are other significant factors that may be extended to the current framework.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Possibilities for future research in this field could include:

Constructs such as status of employment contract, level of education, position/rank, employment tenure could be explored further within the private security sector.

It would be beneficial to conduct a longitudinal study that gathers more information, which could render additional and accurate understanding into the constructs job satisfaction and absenteeism within Southern Gauteng region.

The scope of the study could be expanded to incorporate security officers working in the private security sector within the greater Gauteng region. This would aid in enhancing the generalisability of the results and in reinforcing the reliability and validity of such findings.

This study further proposes more research is required to examine the relationship between job satisfaction and other variables such as organisational justice and turnover.

Finally, it is advised that the relationship between Sectoral Determination 6: Private Security Sector stipulations, job security and absenteeism be explored. The concept of minimum wages is relevant especially in the lives of entry level security guards.

VALUE OF THE STUDY

The value of the study is presented as follows:

The study improves knowledge in respect of the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism among entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region.

The findings of this study could help management in generating a more favourable working environment for both current and newly hired security officers.

This study could contribute to the management of the private security companies’ observations of their employees’ job satisfaction and absenteeism. The results and the recommendations could be used for future policymaking and organisational planning.

The information collected throughout this research project may aid in instituting motivating or job satisfaction factors that will help in assisting security officers in retaining their current employees.

The private security industry could also utilise the findings when considering the implementation of strategies to manage absenteeism and enhance job satisfaction.

The Department of Labour could use the findings of this study when reviewing the stipulation of Sectoral Determination 6 for future legislative reforms in the security sector.

This research could also aid as reference material to future academic scholars.

CONCLUSION

This chapter provided a summary and sequence of all the chapters; discussed how the objectives of the study were achieved; made recommendations in respect of the findings; discussed the limitations of this study; outlined the future research opportunities emanating from this study and discussed the value of this study. This study investigated the level of job satisfaction and absenteeism among entry level security officers within the Southern Gauteng region. The primary objective was to explore whether absenteeism is a significant variable in revealing lower job satisfaction among security officers. Also examined was the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism. The results indicated that there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism dimensions.

The findings in this research have shown a low level of job satisfaction among entry level security officers concerning management support. Management support is known to have a positive influence on organisational success and have a positive impact on job satisfaction. It, therefore, is important for supervisors to support entry level security officers, not only to increase their work-related well-being, but also to improve the organisational performance. Providing constructive feedback to their employees about their performance is also a vital step for supervisors. Giving the employees more decision-making authority, increased responsibility and constructive feedback definitely raises their self-esteem, commitment and dedication to the organisation and that in turn increases the well-being.

Employee absenteeism is an expensive management problem that concerns employers. The failure of management to manage absenteeism adequately in the workplace can contribute to the perpetuation of the problem. It, therefore, is important for the organisation to have measures in place to reduce absenteeism. Reducing the absenteeism rate by just one day per employee per month; organisations can boost productivity, improve morale and improve the profit ratio significantly (Nel, 2013:148). Incentives in the form of awards, prizes and recognition certificates may encourage workers to refrain from being absent.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AAMODT, M.G. 2004. Absenteeism in the workplace. Journal of Organisation Psychology, 5(18):19-54.

AAMODT, M.G. 2010. Applied industrial/organisational psychology. 6th ed. Chicago: Cengage Learning.

AARONS, G. & SAWITZKY, A.C. 2006. Organisational culture and climate and mental health provider attitudes towards evidence-based practice. Psychological Services, 1:61-72.

AARREVAARA, T. & DOBSON, I.R. 2010. Do engineering academics in Finland have job satisfaction? World Transactions on Engineering and Technology in Technology, 8(3):250-255.

ABRAHAMSEN, R. & WILLIAMS, M. 2007. Introduction: the privatisation and globalisation of security in Africa. International Relations, 219(2):131-141.

ACHUA, F.C. & LUSSIER, N.R. 2010. Effective leadership. 5th ed. South-Western: Cengage Learning.

ADCORP EMPLOYMENT INDEX. 2012. Adcorp’s index shows job losses, absenteeism costing the country. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.adcorpgroup.com./ news/pages/Adcorp’sindexshowsjoblosses,absenteeismcostingthe country.aspx>. Accessed: 03/05/2013.

ADENIKE, A. 2011. Organisational climate as a predictor of employee job satisfaction: evidence from Covenant University. Business Intelligence Journal, 4(1):151-165.

ADOMI, E. 2006. Job rotation in Nigeria university libraries. Library Review, 55(1):66-78.

AHMAD, Z.Z., AHMAD, Z., AHMED, I. & NAWAZ, M.M. 2010. Organisational climate as employees’ satisfier: empirical evidence from pharmaceutical sector. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(10):214-222.

AHMAD, Z., ALI, L., AHMAD, N.,AHMAD, Z.,AHMED, I. & NAWAZ, M.M. 2010. Satisfaction as an outcome of communication and organisational structures: an outcome based approach. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2(5):249-257.AHMED, I., RAMZAN, M., MOHAMMAD, S.K. & ISLAM, T. 2011. Relationship between perceived fairness in performance appraisal and OCB: mediating role of organisational commitment. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(5):15-20.

AHSAN, N., ABDULLAH, Z., GUN FIE, Y.D. & ALAM, S. S. 2009. A study of job stress on job satisfaction among University staff in Malaysian: empirical study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1):120-131.

ALDAG, R. T. & KUZUHARA, L. W. 2002. Organizational behaviour and management: Anintegrated skills approach. 3rd ed. South-Western: Prentice-Hall.

ALDRICH, H.E. & RUEF, M. 2006. Organisations evolving. 2nd ed. London: Sage publications.

AL-HUSSAMI, M. 2008. A study of nurses’ job satisfaction: The relationship to organisational commitment, perceived organizational support, transactional leadership, transformational leadership and level of education. European Journal of Scientific Research, 22(2):286-293.

ALI, A. & HAIDER, J. 2012. Impact of internal organisational communications on employee job satisfaction: A case of some Pakistan Banks. Journal of Business Studies, 1(10):38-44.

ALKAHTANI, A. H., ABU-JARAD, I. & SULAIMAN, D. 2011. The impact of personality and leadership style on leading change capability of Malaysian managers. Australian Journal of Business and Management, 2(1):70-99.

AL-RAWI, K. 2008. Cohesiveness within teamwork: the relationship to performance effectiveness- case study. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, 1(2):92-106.

ALTAF, M., YOUSAF, U., TAHIR, M. & BAGRAM, M.M.M. 2013. Job satisfaction and employees participation in government sector organisation of Pakistan. Asian Journal Research, 3(2):384-393.

ANDERSON, B. 2009. The relationship between absenteeism and on-site employer-sponsored childcare. M.A. Dissertation. Pretoria: University of South Africa.

ANDERSON, B. & GELDENHUYS, D.J. 2011. The relationship between absenteeism and employer-sponsored child-care. Southern African Business Review, 15(3):21-45.

ARIELY, D., BRACHA, A. & MELER, S. 2009. Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosaically. American Economics Review, 99(1):544-555.

ARIANI, D.W. 2015. Relationship with supervisor and co-workers, psychological condition and employee engagement in the workplace. Journal of Business and Management, 4(3):34-47.

ARMSTRONG, M. 2009. A handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page Limited.

ARNOLD, T. & SPELL, T. C. 2006. The relationship between justice and benefits satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(4):599-620.

ARTZ, B. 2010. Fringe benefits and job satisfaction. International Journal of Manpower, 31(6):626-644.

ASGARI, E., IRANMANESH, H. & FARAHANI, A.F. 2012.Desired fringe benefits for employees: a case study of a R & D organisation. International Journal of Humanities and Applied Sciences, 1(4):2277-4386.

ATIF, A., UR-REHMAN, I., NASIR, A. & SAFWAN, N. 2010. Employee retention relationship to training aand development: a compensation perspective. African Journal of Business Management, 5(7):2679-2685.

AWANG, Z., AHMAD, H. J. & ZIN, M. N. 2010. Modeling job satisfaction and work commitment among lecturers: a case of UiTM Kelatan. Proceedings of the Regional Conference on Statistical Sciences, 241-255.

AYDOGDU, S. & ASIKGIL, B. 2011. An empirical study of the relationship among job satisfaction, organisational commitment and turnover intentions. International Review of Management and Marketing, 1(3):43-53.

AZEEM, S. 2010. Job satisfaction and organisational commitment among employees in the Sultanate of Oman. Psychology, 1:295-299.

AZIRI, B. 2011. Job satisfaction: literature review. Management Research and Practice, 3(4):77-86.

AZIZI, N., ZOLFAGHARI, S. & LIANG, M. 2009. Modeling job rotation in manufacturing systems: The study of employee’s boredom and skill variations. International Journal of Production, 40(5):69-85.

BABAITA, I. 2008. The effect and measurement of workplace absenteeism in the banking industry in Nigeria. LAPAI International Journal of Management and Social Science, 1(1):1-15.

BAAH, K. & AMOAKO, G. K. 2011. Application for Frederick Herzberg's two factor theory in assessing and understanding employee motivation at work: A Ghanaian perspective. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(9):1-8.

BABBIE, B. & RUBIN, A 2011. Research methods for social work. 7th ed. South Western: Cengage Learning.

BABBIE, E. & MOUTON, J. 2007. The practice of social research. 2nd ed. Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa.

BABBIE, E. 2007. The practice of social research. 10th ed. California: Cengage Learning.

BABBIE, E. 2010. The practice of social research. 12th ed. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.

BAICKER, K., CUTCLE, D. & SONG, Z. 2010. Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Affairs, 29(2):304-311.

BAKKER, A.B., DEMEROUTI, E., DE BOER, E. & SCHAUFELI, W.B. 2003. Job demands and job resources as predictors of absence, duration and frequency. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 62:341-356.

BANERJEE, A. & CHAUDHURY, S. 2010. Statistics without tears: Populations and samples. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 19(1):60-65.

BARMBY, T., ERCOLANI, M. & IREBLE, J. 2004. Sickness absence in UK 1984-2004. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 11:65-88.

BARRETT, D.J. 2006. Leadership communication: a communication approach for senior level managers. In D.J. Barrett (eds.). Handbook of Business Strategy. Emerald Group Publishing. Pp. 385-390.

BARRICK, M.R. & ZIMMERMAN, R.D. 2005. Reducing voluntary avoidable turnover through selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1):159-166.

BARROWS, D. & WATSON, T. 2007. A comparative analysis of job satisfaction among public and private sector professionals. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.job-satisfaction2.htm>. Accessed: 21/10/2010.

BARTELS, J., PRUYN, A., DE JONG, M. & JOUSTRA, I. 2007. Multiple organisational levels and impact of perceived external prestige and communication climate. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 28(2):137-260.

BARTOL, A.M. & BARTOL,C.R. 2005. Criminal behaviour: a psychological approach. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

BASS, F. 1998. Transformational leadership: Industry, military and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

BAWA, M.A. & JANTAN, M. 2005. Human resource practice as determinants of employee turnover: an empirical investigation. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 10(2):69-80.

BAYAT, R.F. 2011. Impact on the productivity of human resources management, performance evaluation. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(12):1629-1635.

BEGAT, B., ELLEFSEN, B. & SEVERINSSON, E. 2008. Nurses’ satisfaction with their work environment and outcomes of clinical nursing supervision on nurses’ experience of well being. Journal of Nursing Management, 13(3):221-230.

BEIRA, B. 2008. Debunking absenteeism. HR Highway, 2:28-29.

BELITA, A., MBINDYO, P. & ENGLISH, M. 2013. Absenteeism amongst health workers developing a typology to support empiric work in low-income countries and characterising reported associations. Human Resources for Health, 11(34):1-10.

BELLOU, V. 2010. Organisational culture as a predictor of job satisfaction: the role of gender and age. Career Development International, 15(1):4-19.

BENDER, K.A., DONOHUE, S.M. & HEYWOOD, J.S. 2005. Job satisfaction and gender segregation. Oxford Economic Papers, 57(3):479-496.

BENDIX, S. 2010. Industrial relations in South Africa. 5th ed. Cape Town: Juta.

BERG, J. 2010. Seeing like private security: evolving mentalities of public space protection in South Africa. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 10(3):287-301.

BERNADIN, H.J. 2007. Human resource management: an exponential approach. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

BERTA, D. 2005. Put on a happy face: High morale can lift productivity. Nation’s Restaurant News, 39(20):8-10.

BEWICK, V., CHEEK, L. & BALL, J. 2004. Statistics review 9: one way analysis of variance. Critical Care, 5(2):130-136.

BHATTI, K.K. & QURESHI, T.M. 2007. Impact of employees participation on job satisfaction, employee commitment and employee productivity. International Review of Business Research Papers, 3(2):54-68.

BHATTI, N., MAITLO, G.M, SHAIKH, N., HASHMI, M.M. & SHAIKH, F.M. 2012. The impact of autocratic and democratic leadership style on job satisfaction. International Business Journal, 5(2):192-201.

BIRON, M. & BAMBERGER, P. 2012. Aversive workplace conditions and absenteeism: Taking referent group norms and supervisor support into account. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4):901-912.

BLAU, F.D. & DEVARO, J. 2007. New evidence on gender difference in promotion rate: an empirical analysis of a sample of new hires. Industrial Relations, 46:511-525.

BLESS, C., HIGSON-SMITH, C. & KAGEE, A. 2007. Fundamentals in social research. 2nd ed. Cape Town: Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BÖCKERMAN, P. & ILMAKUNNAS, P. 2008. Interaction of working conditions, job satisfaction and sickness absences: Evidence from a representative sample of employee. Social Science and Medicine, 67:520-528.

BOOGIE, T. 2005. Unhappy employees. Credit Union Management, 28(4):34-37.

BOOTH, W. C., COLOMB. G. C. & WILLIAMS, J. M. 2008. The craft of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

BORGONGI, L., RUSSO, D.S., MIRAGLIA, M. & VECCHIONE, M. 2013. The role of self-efficacy and job satisfaction on absence from work. European Review of Applied Psychology, 63(3):129-136.

BOUMANS, N.P. 2011. Age difference in work motivation and job satisfaction: the influence of age on the relationship between work characteristics and workers outcomes. International Journal of Aging Human Development, 73(4):331-350.

BOYCE, J. 2003. Marketing research: An applied approach. 6th ed. London: Pearson.

BREETZKE, D. G. 2010. Modelling violent crime rates: a test of social disorganisation in the city of Tshwane, South Africa. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(1):446-452.

BROCHADO, N. 2009. Comparising alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(2):174-190.

BROWN, J.S. & MCINTOSH, G. 2003. Job satisfaction in the lower wage service sector. Applied Economics, 35:1241-1254.

BRYMAN, A., BELL, E., HIRSCHSOHN, P., DOS SANTOS, A., DU TOIT, J., MASENGE, A., VAN AARDT, I. & WAGNER, C. 2014. Research methodology: business and management contexts. Cape Town: Oxford Press.

BRYNARD, P.A. & HANEKOM, S.X. 2005. Introduction to research in public administration and related disciplines. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

BURGER, A. & SILIMA, T. 2006. Sampling and sampling design. Journal of Public Administration, 41(3):656-668.

BURKE, L.M. 2010. Feeling strategies to optimise performance: training high or training low? Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sport2:48-58.

BURNS, C. & GROVE, S. K. 2007. Understanding nursing research: Building an evidence- based practice. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

BURNS, N. & GROVE, S.K. 2009. The practice of nursing research: appraisal, synthesis and generation of evidence. 6th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders.

BUSHE, B. 2012. Factors that determine academic staff retention and commitment on private tertiary institutions in Botswana: Empirical review. Global Advanced Research Journal of Management and Business Studies, 1(9):279-299.

BUSHMAN, M. 2007. Tips for improving employee morale and absenteeism. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.voices.yahoo.com/tips-improving-employee-morale-reducing- absenteeism/>. Accessed: 29/10/2012.

BYDAWELL, M. 2000. Managing people who do not come to work. People Dynamics, 18:15- 19.

CALDWELL, D.F., CHATMAN, J., O’REILLY, C.A., ORMISTON, M.C. & LAPIZ, M. 2008. Implementing strategic change in a health care system: the importance of leadership and changes readiness. Health Care Management Review, 124-133.

CAMP , S.D. & LAMBERT, E.G. 2006. Influence of organizational incentives on absenteeism: sick leave use among correctional workers. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17:144-72.

CARLAN, P. 2007. The search for job satisfaction: a survey of Alabama policing. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(2):74-86.

CASCIO, W. & BOUNDREAU, J. 2011. Investing in people: financial impact of human resource initiatives. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.

CAULTON, J.R. 2012. The development and use of the theory of ERG: a literature review. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 5(1):2-8.

CESAR, C.G., CARMEN, M.D. R.MARTINEZ, M.E. & GARCIA, C.I.G. 2013. Job satisfaction among Health workers: role of gender and age. Latimo-Am-Epfermagent, 2960; 19-35.

CHABOKI, H.M., WAHAH, A.F.A. & ANSARI, M. 2013. The impact of visibility and privacy in the workplace on organisational productivity as conducted through informal interactions. Journal of Business and Management, 7(5):82-88.

CHANG, R.D., WUNN, K.T. & TSENG, Y.C. 2011. A study of the relationship between career orientation, achievement, motivation, job satisfaction and intention to stay for auditors: using big CPA firms as an example. Journal of Business and Economics Research, 1(4):116- 132.

CHAUDHURY, S. & BANERJEE, A. 2004. Correlation of job satisfaction in medical officers. Medical Journal of Armed Forces India, 60(4):329-332.

CHEN, G., PLOYHART, R.E., THOMAS, H.C., ANDERSON, N. & BLIESE, P.D. 2011. The power of momentum: a new model of dynamic relationship between job satisfaction change and turnover intentions. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1):159-181.

CHEN, K.J. & CHEN, S.I. 2008. Personal traits and leadership styles of Taiwan’s higher educational institution in innovative operations. Journal of American Academy Business, Cambridge, 12(2):145-150.

CHERRINGTON, D. 2006. Job satisfaction as an economic variable. Economic Letter in USA, 30(6):206-210.

CHIMANIKIRE, P., MUTANDWA, E., GADZIRAYI, C.T.,MUZONDO, N. & MUTANDWA, B. 2007. Factors affecting job satisfaction among academic professionals in tertiary institutions in Zimbabwe. African Journal of Business Management, 1(6):166-175.

CHOY, J. 2010. The importance of literature search and review in research based Master of Science degree. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.Ezinearticles.com/? expert + Justine Choy>. Accessed: 18/10/2010.

CHURCHILL, G.A. & IACOBUCCI, D. 2002. Marketing research: methodological foundations. 8th ed. London: South-Western Publishers.

CLAASE-SCHUTTE, C. & PILLAY, K. 2004. Private security officers as victims of trauma and stress: The South African experience and initiatives to manage it. Acta Criminologal, 17:121- 128.

CLAASSEN, A. 2012. The South African labour guide: your guide to labour in law in South Africa. March 2012. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.labourguide.co.za/general/inspections- by-the-department-of-labour-404>. Accessed: 12/09/2012.

CLARK, A. 1996. Job satisfaction in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34(2):189- 217.

CLARK, A. 1997. Why are women so happy at work. Labour Economic, 4:341-372.

COHEN, A. & GOLAN, R. 2007. Predicting absenteeism and turnover intensions by past absenteeism and work attitudes. Journal of Public Administration, 12(5):416-432.

COLLINS, C., OMAR, M., ADHIKARI, D., DHAKAL, R., EMMEL, N., DHAKAL, M.R., CHAND, P., THAPA, D. & SINGH, A.B. 2007. Health system decentralisation in Nepal: identifying the issues. Journal of Health Organisation and Management, 21(6):535-545.

COOMBER, B. & BARRIBALL, K.L. 2006. Impact of job satisfaction components on intent to leave and turnover from hospital-based nurses: a review of the research literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(1):294-314.

COOPER, C. & LOCKE, E. A. 2000. Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking theory with practice. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

COOPER, D.R. & SCHINDLER, P.S. 2003. Business research methods. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

COOPER, D.R. & SCHINDLER, P.S. 2006. Marketing research. New York: McGraw-Hill.

CORTINA, J.M. & INGERICK, M.J. 2005. Personality in industrial/organisational psychology: not much more that cheese. International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, 20:119-148.

COUGHLAN, A. 2004. Employee absenteeism: a guide to managing absence. The Irish Business and Employers Confederation. 6 September 2004.

COYLE-SHAPIRO, J. A. M., KESSLER, I. & PURCELL, J. 2004. Exploring organisationally directed citizenship behaviour in a Nation health service setting. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1): 85-106.

CRESWELL, J. W. 2008. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating qualitative and qualitative research. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

CRESWELL, J.W. & PLANO CLARK, V. L. 2011. Designing and conducting mixed research. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publication.

CRISTOFOLI, D., TURRINI, A. & VALOTTI, G. 2012. Coming back soon: assessing the determinants of absenteeism in the Public sector. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 13(1):75-89.

CROPANZANO, L.M., BOWEN, D.E. & GILLILAND, S.W. 2007. The management of organisational Justice. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34-49.

CROSSMAN, A. & HARRIS, P. 2006. Job satisfaction of secondary school teachers. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 34: 29-49.

CULLINAN, K. 2005. Framework no cure for health employee’s ills, but a tonic for talks, Cape Times, p. 11, 4 February.

CUMMINGS, G.G., MACGREGOR, T., DAVEY, M., LEE, H., WONG, C.A., LO, E., MUISE, M. & STAFFORD, E. 2010. Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: a systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(3):363-385.

CYDULKA, K.R. & KORTE, P. 2008. Career satisfaction in emergency medicine: the ABEM longitudinal study of emergency physicians. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 51(6):714-722.

DALAL, R.S. 2005. A meta-analysis of relationship between organizational citizenship behaviour and counterproductive work behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90:1241-1255.

DANISH, R.Q. & 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):194-205.

DARR, W. & JOHNS, G. 2008. Work strain, health and absenteeism: a meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13:293-318.

DE BROUWER, P.J.S. 2009. Maslowian portfolio theory: an alternative formulation of the behavioural portfolio theory. Journal of Asset Management, 9(6):359-363.

DE DREU, C.K.W. 2008. Task versus relationship conflict, team performance and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 168:741-749.

DEHGHAN NAYERI, N.N., NAZARI, A.A., SALSALI, M., AHMADI, F. & ADIB HAJBAGHERY, M. 2006. Iranian staff nurses’ view of their productivity and management factors improving and impending it: a qualitative study. Nurse Health Sciences, 8(1):51-60.

DE HOOGH, A.H.B. & HARTOG, D.N.D. 2009. Neuroticism and locus of control as moderators of the burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94:1058-1067.

DE JONG, J.P.J. & DEN HARTOG, D.N. 2007. How leaders influence employees’ innovative behaviour. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1):56-63.

DEMPSEY, J.S. 2010. Introduction to private security. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Cengage Learning.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR. 2012. Private security sector minimum wage set for a rise. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.labour.gov.za>. Access on: 12/05/2012.

DESSLER, G. 2008. Human resource management. 11th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

DE VAUS, D.A. 2009. Surveys in social research: London: University of Chicago Press.

DE VOS, A.S., STRYDOM, H., FOUCHÉ, C.B. & DELPORT, C.S.L. 2005. Research at grass roots for the social sciences and human service professionals. 3rd ed. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

DE VOS, A.S., STRYDOM, H., FOUCHÉ, C.B. & DELPORT, C.S.L. 2011. Research at grass roots for the social sciences and human service professionals. 4th ed. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

DINEEN, R., NOE, R., SHAW, J., DUFFY, M. & WIETHOFF, C. 2007. Level and dispersion of satisfaction in teams: using foci and social context to explain the satisfaction-absenteeism relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3):623-643.

DIONNE, G. & DOSTIE, B. 2007. New evidence on the determinants of absenteeism using linked employer-employee data. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 61(1):108-120.

DRAKOPOULOS, S.A. & GRIMANI, K. 2013. Injury-related absenteeism and job satisfaction: insights from Greek and UK data. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(18):3496-3511.

DRUSKAT, V.U. & WHEELER, J.V. 2003. Managing from the boundary: the effective leadership of self-managing work teams. Academy of Management, 46(4):435-457.

DUBINSKY, M. 2004. Human resources management. 6th ed. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.

DU PLESSIS, J.V., FOUCHE, M.A. & VAN WYK. M.W. 2006. A practical guide to labour law. 8th ed. Durban: Butterworth.

DU TOIT, T., BOSCH, C. WOOLFREY, D., GODFREY, S., ROSSOUW, J., CHRISTIE, S., COOPER, C., GILES, G. & BOSCH, D. 2006. Labour relations law. 4th ed. Durban: Butterworth.

DWYER, B. 2005. Communication in business. 5th ed. French Forest: Prentice-Hall.

DYSVIK, A. & KUVAAS, B. 2011. Intrinsic motivation as a moderator on the relationship between perceived job autonomy and work performance. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 20(3):367-387.

EASTON, F. & GOODALE, J. 2005. Scheduled recovery: unplanned absences in service operations. Decision Science, 38(3):459-488.

ELNAGA, A. & IMRAN, A. 2013. The effect of training on employee performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(4):137-147.

ENGEL. R.J. & SCHUTTS, R.K. 2013. The practice of research in social work. 3rd ed. Boston: Sage.

ESMAEILI, R., MOOSAZADEH, M., ALIZADEH, M. & AFSHARI, M. 2015. A systematic review of the workload of nurses in intensive care using NAS. Acta Medica Medeterranea, 31:1455-1460.

EVA, O. & OSTERTUG, O. 2013. Methodology and application of one way ANOVA. American Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 17(1):256-261.

EZIGBO, C. 2012. Achieve organisational effectiveness by decentralisation. European Journal of Business and Management, 4(20):125-135.

FARAHBOD, F., SALIMI, S.B. & DOROSTKAR, K.R. 2013. Impact of organisational communication in job satisfaction and organisational commitment. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 5(4):419-430.

FARMER, D. 2010. Increasing job satisfaction sustained among social workers. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(18):1-8.

FATT, C.K., KHIN, E.W.S. & HENG, T.N. 2010. The impact of organisationaljustice on employee’s job satisfaction: the Malaysian companies perspectives. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 2(1):56-63.

FERDOUSI, F. 2012. An empirical assessment of job satisfaction of Public knowledge in Bangladesh. Journal of Economic and Sustainable Development, 3(6):62-70.

FERRER-I-CARBONELL, A. & VAN PRAAG, B. M. 2006. Insecurity in the labour market: the impact of the type of contract on job satisfaction in Spain and Netherlands. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

FOX, W. & BAYAT, M. S. 2007. A guide to managing research. Cape Town: Juta.

FROEBEL, P. & MARCHINGTON, M. 2005. Teamwork structures and worker perception: a cross national study in pharmaceuticals. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 16(2):256-276.

GADERMANN, A.M., GUHN, M. & ZUMBO, B.D. 2012. Estimating ordinal reliability for likert-type and ordinal item response data: a contemptual, empirical and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 17(3):1-13.

GASH, V., MERTENS. A. & GORDO, L.R. 2007. Are fixed-term jobs bad for your health? A comparison of West Germany and Spain. European Societies, 9(3):429-458

GAUTAM, M., MANDAL, K. & DALAL, R.S. 2006. Job satisfaction of faculty members of veterinary sciences: an analysis. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 18(6):15-22.

GAVIN, T. & VINTEN, G. 2005. Job satisfaction in the workplace and its financial implications. Credit Control, 20(7):22-29.

GAZIOGLU, S. & TANSEL, A. 2006. Job satisfaction in Britain: individual and job related factors. Applied Economics, 38(10):1163-1171.

GERBER, R.J.A. 2008. Job satisfaction of hospital doctors: results of a study of a national sample of hospital doctors in Germany. Journal of Public Health, 8(9):519-524.

GERBER, P.D., HAASBROEK, G.D., NEL, P.S., SCHULTZ, H.B., SONO, T., VAN DYK, D. S. & WERNER, A. 2011. Human resources management. 5th ed. Cape Town: Juta.

GHARIBVAND, S. 2012. The relationship between Malaysian organisational culture, participative leadership style and employee job satisfaction among Malaysian employees from semi-conductor industry. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(16):289-298.

GHAZZAWI, I. 2008. Job satisfaction antecedents and consequences: a new conceptual framework and research agenda. Business Review, 11(2):1-11.

GOEL, A., SHARMA, R. & SHARMA, A. 2012. Improving job satisfaction: an HR strategy. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies, 2(4):173-181.

GODDARD, W. & MELVILLE, S. 2001. Research methodology: an introduction. 2nd ed. Lansdowne: Juta.

GOHARI, M.Z.P., KAMKAR, A., HOSSEINIPOUR, S.J. & ZOHOORI, M. 2013. Relationship between rewards and employee performance: a mediating role of job satisfaction. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 5(3):571-597.

GOLBASI, Z., KELLECI, M. & DOGAN, S. 2008. The relationship between coping strategies, individual characteristics and job satisfaction in a sample of hospital nurses: cross section questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(12):875-885.

GOODENOUGH, C. 2007. Potential for the private security industry to become proactive. SA Crime Quarterly, 20:7-12.

GOODMAN, P. & ATKIN, R.S. 2008. Absenteeism: new approaches to understanding, measuring and managing employee absence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

GOSWAMI, T.G. 2015. Job stress and its effect on employee performance in banking sector. Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, 6(2):51-56.

GRAVETTER, F.J. & FORZANO, L.B. 2003. Research methods for the behavioural sciences. 2nd ed. Belmount: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

GRAWITCH, M.J., GOTTSCHALK, M. & MUNZ, D.C. 2006. The path to a health workplace: a critical review linking healthy workplace practise, employee well-being and organisation improvements. Consulting Psychology Journal Practise and Research, 58(3):129-147.

GREENBERG, J. & BARON, A.R. 2003. Behaviour in organisations. 9th ed. Cornell: Pearson Prentice Hall.

GREENE, R. 2010. Rewarding performance, guiding principles, customs and strategies. 2nd ed. New York: Taylor & Francis Publishers.

GRIFFETH, R.W., HOM, F.W. & GAERTNER, S. 2000. A mete-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: updates moderator tests and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26:463-488.

GRIFFIN, W. & MOORHEAD, G. 2009. Organisational behaviour: Managing people and organisations. 9th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning.

GRINNELL, R.M. & UNRAU, Y.A. 2008. Social work research and evaluation: foundations of evidence-based practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

GROBLER, P.S., WARNICH, M.R., CARRELL, N., ELBERT, F. & HATFIELD, R. D. 2011. Human resources management in South Africa. 4th ed. United Kingdom: Cengage Learning.

GROSSETT, M. 2002. Discipline and dismissal. Cape Town. Oxford University Press.

GUEST, D.A. 2002. Perspectives on the study of work-life balance. Social Science Information, 41(2):255-279.

HAFIZA, N.S., SHAH, S.S., JAMSHEED, H. & ZAMAN, K. 2011. Relationship between rewards and employees’ motivation in the non-profit organisations of Pakistan. Business Intelligence Journal, 4(2):327-334.

HAIR, J., BUSH, R., ORTINAU, D. & SHIU, E. 2009. Marketing research. 5th ed. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.

HAIR, J.F., BLACK, W.C., BABIN, B.J., ANDERSON, R.E. & TATHAM, R.L. 2006. Multirative data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

HAIR, N.A., BUSH, R.P. & ORTINAU, D.J. 2009. Marketing research. McGraw Hill: Higher Education.

HAMEED, A. & AMJAD, S. 2009. Impact of office design on employees’ productivity: a case study of banking organisations of Abbottabad, Pakistan Public Affairs. Administration and Management, 3(1):1-13.

HAMILTON, E.A. 2007. Firm friendship: examining functions and outcomes of workplace friendship among a law firm associates. M.A. Doctoral Dissertation. Boston College. Boston.

HAMMER, L.B., KOSSEK, E., YRAGUI, N.L., BODNER, T.E. & HANSON, G.C. 2009. Development and validation of a multidimensional measure of family supportive supervisor behaviours. Journal of Management, 35(4):837-856.

HANA, U. & LUCIE, L. 2011. Staff turnover as a possible threat to knowledge loss. Journal of Competitiveness, 3:84-98.

HANCER, M. & GEORGE, R.T. 2003. Job satisfaction of restaurant employee’s: an empirical investigation using the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 27(1):85-100.

HARDY, G.E., WOODS, D. & WALL, T.D. 2003. The impact of psychological distress on absence from work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88:306-314.

HARGRAVE, G.E., HIATT, D., ALEXANDER, R. & SHAFFER, I.A. 2008. EAP treatment on presenteeism and absenteeism: implications for return on investment. Journal of Workplace Behavioural Health, 2(23):282-293.

HARTER, J.W. 2001. Minimizing absenteeism in the workplace: strategies for nurse managers. Nursing Economics, 19(2):53-55.

HAUSKNECHT, J.P. & IREVOR, C.O. 2011. Collective turnover at the group, unit and organisational levels: evidence, issues and implications. Journal of Management, 37(1):352-388.

HAUSKNECHT, J., HILLER, N. & VANCE, R. 2008. Work-unit absenteeism: effects of satisfaction, commitment, labour market conditions and time. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6):1223-1245.

HAYDAY, S. 2005. Managing absence effectively. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.employment-studies.co.uk>. Access on: 22/08/2013.

HEYWOOD, J.S. & WEI, X. 2006. Performance pay and job satisfaction. Journal of Industrial Relation, 48:523-540.

HILLIER, D., FEWELL, F., CANN, W. & SHEPHARD, V. 2005. Wellness at work: enhancing the quality of our working live. International Review of Psychiatry, 17(5):419-431.

HINKS, T. 2010. Job satisfaction and employment equity in South Africa. Journal of African Economics, 19(2):237-255.

HITT, M.A., MILLER, C.C. & COLELLA, A. 2009. Organisational behaviour: a strategic approach. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Johns Wiley.

HOLLEY, W.H., JENNINGS, K.M. & WOLTERS, R.S. 2008. The labour relations process. 9th ed. Mason: Cengage Learning.

HOLTOM, B., MITCHELL, T., LEE, T. & EBERLY, M.B. 2008. Turnover and retention research: a glance at the past, a closer review of the present and a venture into the future. Academy of Management Annals, 291:231-274.

HONG, T.T. & WAHEED, A. 2011. Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory and job satisfaction in the Malaysian retail sector: the mediating effect of love of money. Academy of Management Journal, 16(1):73-94.

HSING, Y.T. 2006. Communication factors which promote employee’s job satisfaction in Taiwan high-tech industries: A personality traits study. M.A. Dissertation. Ohio: University of Akron.

HUSSAIN, N. & KHALID, K. 2011. Impact of Karasek job demand control model on the job satisfaction of employees of Nadra. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(5):566-594.

HUSSEIN, A. 2011. Employees’ awareness and perceptions of fringe benefit packages: a case of local and foreign owned companies in Tanzania. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3(2):43-53.

HWANG, W. & RAMADOSS, K. 2017. The job demands-control-support model and job satisfaction across gender: the mediating role of work-family conflict. Journal of Family Issues, 38(1):52-72.

INAMULLAH, H.M., NASEER, M. & HUSSAIN, I. 2008. Perception of students regarding motivational techniques used by the principals of colleges in N. W. F. P. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 1(1):7-13.

IRANMANESH, E.A.H. & FARAHANI, A.F. 2012. Desired fringe benefits for employees: a case study of an R & D organisation. International Journal of Humanities and Applied Sciences, 1(4):112-116.

IROEGBU, M.N. 2015. Do age and gender have anything to do with job satisfaction: a practical outlook on the Nigerian Public Sector? American Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(4): 111-114.

ISAH, E.C., OMOROGBE, V.E., ORJI, O. & OYOVWE, L. 2008. Self-reported absenteeism among hospital workers in Benin City, Nigeria. Ghana Medical Journal, 42(1):2-7.

ISLAM, R. & ISMAIL, A. 2008. Employee motivation: a Malaysian perspective. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 18:344-362.

IVANCEVICH, J.M. & MATTENSON, M.T. 2005. Organisational behaviour and management. Chicago: Irwin.

IVANCEVICH, J.M., KONOPASKE, R. & MATTENSON, M.T. 2008. Organisational behaviour and management. 8th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

JAVED, M., RAFIG, M., AHMED, M. & KHAN, M. 2012. Impact of HR practises on employee job satisfaction in public sector organisations of Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(1):348-362.

JAYASINGAM, S. & CHENG, M.Y. 2009. Leadership style and perception of effectiveness: enlightening Malaysia manager. Asian Social Science, 5(2):54-78.

JAYASURIYA, R., WHITTAKER, M., HALIM, G. & MATINEAU, T. 2012. Rural health workers and their work environment the role inter personal factors on job satisfaction of nurses in Papua New Guinea. BMC Health Services Research, 12:1-12.

JENSEN, S. & MCINTOSH, J. 2007. Absenteeism in the workplace: results from Danish sample survey data. Empirical Economics, 32:125-139.

JEX, S. M. 2002. Organisational psychology: a scientist-practitioner approach. New York: John Wiley.

JOGULU, U.D. & WOOD, G.J. 2006. The role of leadership theory in raising the profile of women in management. Equal Opportunities International, 25(4):236-250.

JOHNS, G. 2003. How methodological diversity has improved our understanding of absenteeism from work. Human Resource Management Review, 13:157-184.

JOHNSON, B. & CHRISTENSEN, L. 2007. Educational research quantitative, qualitative and mixed research. [Online]. Available at: <http//.www.southalabama.edu/col/best/Johnson/dr-johnson>. Accessed: 22/03/2013.

JOHNSON, C.J., CROGHAN, E. & CRAWFORD, J. 2003. The problem and management of sickness absence in the NHS: considerations for the nurse. Journal of Nursing Management, 11:336-342.

JOHNSON, D.D. & VANDERSTOEP, S.W. 2009. Research methods for everyday life: bending qualitative and quantitative approaches. San Francisco: John Wiley.

JOHNSON, J. 2009. Absenteeism trends in South African companies. Journal of Human Capital Review, (1):12-34.

JOHNSON, S. 2007. Absenteeism trends in South African companies: the biggest cause of absenteeism. Human Capital Review. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.humancapitalreview.org/content/default.asp?article>. Accessed: 02/10/2012.

JONES, A., RICHARD, B., PAUL, D., SLOANE, K. & PETER, F. 2007. Effectiveness of team building in organisation. Journal of Management, 5(3):35-37.

JONES, S.R., CARLEY, S. & HARRISON, M. 2005. An introduction to power and sample size estimation. Emergency Medical Journal, 20: 453-458.

JORDAN, M. 2010. Leadership of the future: Strategies for success. [Online]. Available at: <http:www.vcg.software.com//Article-Leadership of the future>. Accessed: 6/07/ 2013.

JOSIAS, B.A. 2005. The relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism in a selected field services section within an electricity utility in the Western Cape. M.Com. Thesis. Western Cape: UWC.

JORGENSEN, M. 2005. Characteristics of job rotation in the Midwest US manufacturing sector. Ergonomics, 48(15):1721-1733.

JUDGE, J.A., JACKSON, C.L., SHAW, T.C., SCOTT, BA. & RICH, B. L. 2007. Self-efficiency and work-related performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92:107-127.

JUDGE, T. & PICCOLO, R. 2004. Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta- analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 5:755-768.

JUDGE, T., THORENSON, C., BONO, J. & PATTON, G. 2001. The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: a quantitative and qualitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3):376:407.

KALYAR, M. 2012. Exploring the relationship between salary satisfaction and job satisfaction: a comparison of public and private sector organisations. The Journal of Commerce, 3(4):69-85.

KAMASAK, R. & BULUTLAR, F. 2008. Impact of communication climate and job satisfaction on employees’ external prestige perceptions. Management and Economy, 15(2):133-144.

KANFER, R. & ACKERMAN, P.L. 2004. Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 29, 440–458.

KAPPIA, J.G., DAINTY, A.R.J. & PRICE, A.D.F. 2007. Prioritising career development in relation to recruitment and retention: a trade and craft perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 25:239-253.

KARACAN, E. 2011. Job satisfaction of private security guards. Journal of Social Sciences Institute of the University of Kacaeli, 22(2):203-239.

KARASEK, R.A. & THEORELL, T. 1990. Healthy work: stress, productivity and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books.

KARIMI, S. 2007. Factors affecting job satisfaction of faculty members of Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamehan Iran. Scientific and Research Quarterly of Mazandaran University, 23(6):89-104.

KASALI, M.A. 2012. Analysing the evolution of private security guards and their limitations to security management in Nigeria. African Journal of Criminology and Justice Studies, 5(2):35-48.

KASS, S.J., VODANOVICH, S.J. & CALLENDER, A. 2001. State-trait boredom relationship to absenteeism tenure and job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(2):317-327.

KAUFFELD, S. 2006. Self-directed work groups and team-competence. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 49:1-21.

KAUR, R. 2012. The role of factors on job satisfaction of employees: an empirical study. Journal of Business and Management, 49-52.

KAUTISH, P. & KAUTISH, S. 2009. Managing employee absenteeism: economic challenger. India: Athena Information Solution.

KAYMAZ, K. 2011. The effect of job rotation: a research on managers in the automotive organisations. Business and Economic Research Journal, 1(3):69-85.

KEARNEY, C.A. 2008. An interdisciplinary model school absenteeism in youth to inform professional practise and policy. Educational Psychology Review, 20:257-282.

KEKANA, H.P., DU RAND, E.A. & VAN WYK, N.C. 2007. Job satisfaction of registered nurses in a community hospital in Limpopo province in South Africa. Journal of Nursing Academy, 30(2):24-35.

KELLY, E., KOSSEK, E., HAMMER, L., DURHAM, M., BRAY, J., CHERMACK, K., MURPHY, L. & KASKUBAR, D. 2008. Getting there from here: research on the effects of work-family initiatives on work family conflict and business outcomes. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1):305-349.

KESSUWAN, K. & MUENJOHN, N. 2010. Employee satisfaction: work-related and personal factors. International Review of Business Research Papers, 6(3):168-177.

KHALID, S., IRSHAD, M.Z. & MAHMOOD, B. 2012. Job satisfaction among academic staff: a comparative analysis between public and private sector universities of Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of Business Management, 7(1):126-136.

KHAN, M.N. & ADIL, M. 2013. Data analysis techniques in service quality literature: essentials and advances. Serbian Journal of Management, 8(1): 1-8.

KIM, B., MILLER, S. & MIRE, S. 2009. Predictors of job satisfaction among police officers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 237:419-426.

KIMBERLIN, C.L. & WINTERSTEIN, A.G. 2008. Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(1):2276-2284.

KIVIMAKI, M., HEAD, J., FERRIE, J.E., HEMINGWAY, H., SHIPLEY, M.J., VAHTERA, T. & MARMOT, M.G. 2005. Working while ill as a risk factor for serious coronary events: the Whiteball II study. Management Review, 120: 98-112.

KIVIMAKI, M., MAKINEN, A., ELOVAINIO, M., VAHTERA, J., VIRTANEN, M. & FIRTH- COZENS, J. 2004. Sickness absences and the organisation of nursing care among hospital nurses. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 30(6):468-476.

KNOLL, D. & GILL, H. 2011. Antecedents of trust in supervisors, subordinates and peers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(4):313-330.

KOCAKULAN, M.C., KELLEY, G.A., MITCHELL, K.M. & RUGGIEM, M.P. 2009. Absenteeism problems and costs: causes effects and cures. International Business and Economics Research Journal, 8(5):81-88.

KODJO, E.I. 2015. Guaging the issue of absenteeism in the workplace: evidence from public sector. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 6(2):65-71.

KONG, Y. 2009. A brief discussion on motivation and ways to motivate students in English language learning. International Education Studies, 2(2):145-149.

KOONMEE, K., SINGHAPAKDI, A., VIRAKUL, B. & LEE, B. 2010. Ethics institutionalisation, quality of work life and employee job-related outcomes: a survey of human resource managers in Thailand. Journal of Business Research, 63(1):20-26. [Online]. Available at: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.006>. Access 14 August 2012.

KOSSEK, E., PICHLER, S. BODNER, T. & HAMMER, L.B. 2011. Workplace social support and work-family conflict: a meta-analysis clarifying the influence of general and work-family specific supervisor and organisational support. Personnel Psychology, 64(2):289-313.

KOSTEAS, Y.D. 2009. Job satisfaction and promotions. Social Science Research Network, 1(2):170-286.

KRAPOHL, G., MANOJLOVICH, M., REDMAN, R. & ZHANG, L. 2010. Nursing specialty certification and nursing-sensitive patient outcomes in the intensive care unit. American Journal of Critical Care, 19(6):490-498.

KRISTENSEN, N. & WESTERGARD-NIELSON, N.C. 2004. Does low job satisfaction lead to job mobility. IZA Discussion papers 1026, Institute for the study of Labour (IZA).

KRISTENSEN, T. S. 1995. The demand-control-support model: methodological challenges for future research. Stress Medicine, 11:17-26.

KROTH, M. 2007. Maslow-move aside! A heuristical motivation model for leaders in career and technical education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(2):5-36.

KUENZI, M. & SCMINKE, M. 2009. Research agenda for the organisational work climate literature assembling fragments into a lens: a review, critique and proposed. Journal of Management, 35(3):634-717.

KURIA, S. & ONDIGI, A. 2012. Assessment of causes of labour turnover in three and five-star rated hotels in Kenya. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(15):311-317.

KUTZMITS, F. & ADAMS, A. 2009. Improving employee attendance with no-fault absenteeism. The Business Review, 14:280-285.

KUYE, O.L. & SULAIMON, A.A. 2011. Employee involvement in decision making and firms performance in the manufacturing sector in Nigeria. Serbian Journal of Management, 6(1):1-15.

LAAKSONEN, M., MARTIKAINEN, P., RAHKONEN, O. & LAHELMA, E. 2007. Explanations for gender differences in sickness absence: evidence from middle-aged municipal employees from Finland. Occupational and Environment Medicine, 65(5):325-330.

LAMBERT, E.G., HOGAN, L.N. & ALTHEIMER, I. 2010. An exploratory examination of the consequences of burnout in terms of life satisfaction, turnover intent and absenteeism among private correctional staff. The Prison Journal, 90(1):94-114.

LAMBERT, E., EDWARDS, C., CAMP, S., & SAYLOR, W. 2005. Here today, gone tomorrow, back again the next day: absenteeism and its antecedents among federal correctional staff. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33: 165-175.

LAMASTRO, V. 2008. Commitment and perceived organizational support. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 13(2):1-12.

LANE, K.A., ESSER, J., HOLTE, B. & MCCUSKER, M.A. 2010. A study of nurse faculty of job satisfaction in community colleges in Florida. Teaching, Learning and Nursing, 5:16-26.

LANGER, N. & MEHRA, A. 2010. How training jump-starts employee performance. Indian Management Journal, 49(6):14-18.

LANGON, A. M. 2006. Chronically absent employees: how can employers cope? Employment Law Bulletin, No. 2. 8 February 2006.

LANNEGRAND-WILLEMS, L., COSNEFROY, O. & LECIGNE, A. 2011. Prediction of various degrees of vocational secondary school absenteeism: importance of the organisation educational system. School Psychology International, 33:294-307.

LATHAM, G.P. 2007. Work motivation: history, theory, research and practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage publication.

LAWS see REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA.

LEAKER, D. 2008. Sickness absence from work in the UK. Economic and Labour Market Review, 2(11):18-22.

LEANDER, A. & VAN MUNSTER, R. 2007. Private security contractors in the debate about Darfur: reflecting and reinforcing neo-liberal government. International Relations, 21(2):201- 216.

LEEDY, P.D. & ORMROD, J.E. 2010. Practical research: planning and design. 9th ed. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

LEVY, A. 2007. The vanishing workplace. Corporate absenteeism management solutions. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.camsolution.co.za/httml/>. Accessed: 27/05/2012.

LEVY, S.P. & LEMESHOW, S. 2008. Sampling of population: methods and applications. 4th ed. New Jersey: John Wiley.

LI, J. & LAMBERT, V.A. 2008. Workplace stressors, coping, demographics and job satisfaction in Chinese intensive care nurses. Nursing Critical Care, 13(1):12-24.

LIAO, H., JOSHI, A., & CHUANG, A. 2004. Sticking out like a sore thumb: Employee dissimilarity and deviance at work. Personnel Psychology, 57:969-1000.

LILFORD, N. 2009. Absenteeism reaches new heights in South Africa. [Online]. Available at: <http:www.hrfuture.net/display webarticle.php?article id=144&category id=5> Accessed: 30/08/2010.

LIU, Y., COMBS, J.G., KETCHEN, J.R.D.J. & IRELAND, R.D. 2007. The value of human resource management for organisational performance. Business Horizons, 50(6):503-516.

LOCKE, E. A. 2000. Motivation, recognition and action: an analysis of studies of task goals and knowledge: Applied psychology. An International Review, 49:408-429.

LOKKE NIELSEN, A.K. 2008. Determinants of absenteeism in public organisations: a unit level analysis of work absence in a large Danish municipality. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(7):1330-1348.

LU, H., WHILE, A. & BARRIBALL, K. 2005. Job satisfaction among nurses. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42(2):211-227.

LUCAS, O., BII, P. K., SULO, T., KETER, B., YANOM, M. E. & KOSKEY, N. 2012. School principal’s leadership style: a factor affecting staff absenteeism in secondary schools. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 3(4):444-446.

LUMLEY, E.J., COETZEE, M., TLADINYANE, R. & FERREIRA, N. 2011. Exploring the job satisfaction and organisational commitment of employees in the information technology environment. Southern African Business Review, 15(1):100-118.

LUNENBURG, F.C. & ORNSTEIN, R. 2004. Educational administration: concepts and practices. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson.

LUSSIER, R.N. & ACHUA, C.F. 2007. Leadership: theory application, skill development. 3rd ed. Mason: Thomson South-Western.

LUTHANS, F. 2010. Organisational behaviour. 10th ed. New Jersey: McGraw-Hill.

LUTWANA, G.W., ROOS, J.H. & DALAMO, L.B. 2012. A descriptive study on health workplace performance after decentralisation of health service in Uganda. Human Resources for Health, 10(41):1-10.

LYNCH, J. & TUCKEY, M. 2008. The police turnover problem: fact or fiction policing. An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 31(1):6-18.

MAHDI, A.F., ZIN, M.Z. M., NOR, M.R.M. & NAIM, A.S.A. 2012. The relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention. Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(9):1518-1526.

MAHMOOD, A. & MAHMOOD, A. 2010. Effect of work motivation on job satisfaction in mobile telecommunication service organisations of Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11):213-222.

MAISTER, D. H. 2001. Employee attitudes affect a company’s financial success. Employment Relations Today, 28(3):17-33.

MALHOTRA, N.K. 2007. Marketing research: an applied orientation. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

MALHOTRA, N.K. 2010. Marketing research: an applied orientation. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

MALIK, E.M., DANISH, R.G. & MUNIR, Y. 2012. Determinants of learning organisation in higher education institutes of Pakistan: a correlation study. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 3(2):117-120.

MALIK, M.E. & NAEEM, B. 2012. Towards understanding controversy on Herzberg theory of motivation. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2(11):11936-11941.

MALIK, M.E., NAWAH, S., NAEEM, O. & DANISH, R.Q. 2010. Job satisfaction and organisational commitment of university teachers in public sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(6):17-26.

MALLIKARJUNA, N.L. 2012. Human resources responsibility on job satisfaction. Journal of Business and Management, 2(1):11-14.

MANSOOR, M., FIDA, S., NASIR, S. & AHMAD, Z. 2011. The impact of job stress on employee job satisfaction: a study of telecommunication sector of Pakistan. Journal Business Studies Quarterly, 2(3):50-56.

MANZOOR, S.R., ULLAH, H., HUSSAIN, M. & AHMAD, Z.M. 2011. Effect of teamwork of employee performance. International Journal of Learning and Development, 1(1):110-126.

MAQSOOD, S., BILAL, H., NAZIR, S. & BAIG, R. 2013. Management’s leadership styles and employee’s job satisfaction. Human and Social Science Research, 1(2):139-144.

MARCHANT, T. 2011. Strategies for improving individual performance and job satisfaction at Meadowvale Health. Journal of Management Practice, 2(3):63-70.

MAREE, A. & PRINSLOO, J. 2002. The cause of crime: is South Africa on the right track? Strategic Review for Southern Africa, 24(2):95-185.

MAREE, K. 2010. First Steps in Research. 6th ed. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

MARKOS, S. & SRIDEVI, M.S. 2010. Employee engagement: key to improving performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12):89-96.

MARLOW, C.R. 2005. Research methods for generalist social work. London: Thomson Brooks/Cole.

MARSDEN, D. 1995. Impact of industrial relations practices on employment and unemployment. Centre of economic performance, Discussion paper No.240, May 1995.

MARTIN, S.C. & GUERIN, D.A. 2006. Using research to inform design solution. Journal of Facilities of Management, 4(3):167-180.

MARTOCHIO, J.J. & JIMENO, D.I. 2003. Employee absenteeism as an affective event. Human Resource Management Review, 13:227-241.

MASLOW, A.H. 1943. Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.

MATHIS, R.L. & JACKSON, J.H. 2008. Human resource management. 2nd ed. London: McGraw- Hill.

MATTICK, B. & MILLER, G. 2006. Team work pays. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 30-33.

MBAH, S.E. & IKEMEFUNA, C.O. 2012. Job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intentions in total Nigeria PLC, in Lagos state. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(14):275-287.

McCALISTER, K.T., DOLBIER, C.L., WEBSTER, J.A., MALLON, M.W. & STEINHARDT, M.A. 2006. Hardiness and support at work as predictors of work stress and job satisfaction. American Journal of Health Promotion, 2(3):183-192.

McCAUSLAND, W.D., POULIAKAS, K., & THEODOSSIOU, I. 2005. Some are punished assome are rewarded: a study of the impact of performance pay on joy satisfaction. International Journal of Manpower, 26(8):636-659.

McCOACH, B.D. & ADELSON, L.J. 2010. Measuring the mathematical attitudes of elementary students: the effects of a 4-point or 5-point Likert type scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(5): 796-807.

McCORMICK, E.J. 2008. Industrial and organisational psychology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

McCROSKEY, J.C. & McCROSKEY, L.L. 2005. Organisational communication for survival. 3rd ed. New York: Pearson Education.

McDANIEL, C. & GATES, R. 2008. Marketing research essentials. 6th ed. US: John Wiley.

McDOWELL, A. & FLETCHER, C. 2004. Management development from an organisational justice perspective, Personnel Review, 53:8-30.

McMILLAN, J.H. & SCHUMACHER, S. 2006. Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry. 6th ed. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman.

MEHBOOH, M., ARIF, I. & JALAL, M. 2011. Analysis of effect of supervisors’ behaviour on subordinates’ job satisfaction. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(12):2984- 2993.

MEHMOOD, N., IRUM, S., AHMED, K. & SULTANA, A. 2012. A study of factors affecting job satisfaction: evidence from Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(6):673-684.

MERICLI, A. 2004. Private security: directors and employees. Istanbul: Color Printing House.

MESSMER, M. 2006. Benefits: gain a competitive edge with offerings employees want. Strategic Finance, 88(5):8-10.

MINNAAR, A. 2005. Private-public partnership: private security crime prevention and policing in South Africa. Acta Criminologica: Southern Africa Journal of Criminology, 18(1):85-114.

MINNAAR, A. 2005. Private-public partnership: private security crime prevention and policing in South Africa. Acta Criminologica: Southern Africa Journal of Criminology, 18(1):85-114.

MINNAAR, A. 2007. The implementation and impact of crime prevention/crime control open street closed-circuit television surveillance in South African central business districts. Surveillance and Society Journal, 4(3):174-207.

MICHEL, J.S. & CLARK, M.A. 2009. Has it been affected all along? A test of work-to-family amd family to work models of conflict, enrichment and satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(3):163-168.

MOHSAN, F., NAWAZ, M.M. & KHAN, M. 2012. Impact of job rotation on employee motivation, commitment and job involvement in banking sector of Pakistan. African Journal of Business Management, 6(24):7114-7119.

MONETTE, D.R., SULLIVAN, T.J. & DE JONG, C.R. 2008. Applied social research: a tool for the human services. 7th ed. New York: Cole Publishing.

MONIS, H. & SREEDHARA, T.N. 2011. Employee satisfaction with career development practise: a comparative study of Indian and foreign MNC BPO firms. Journal of Arts Science and Commerce, 11(1):110-120.

MONTES, F.J.L., MORENO, A.R. & MORALES, V.G. 2005. Influence of support leadership and teamwork cohesion on organisational learning, innovation and performance: an empirical examination. Technovation, 25:1159-1172.

MOORE, L.L. & GRABSCH, D.K. 2010. Using achievement motivation theory to explain student participation in a residential leadership learning community. Journal of Leadership Educational, 9(2):22-34.

MOSADEGHRAD, M. A. & FERDOSI, M. 2013. Leadership, job satisfaction and organisational commitment in health care sector: proposing and testing a model. Journal of Academy of Medical Sciences, 25(2):121-126.

MOYES, G.D., WILLIAMS, P.A. & KOCH, B. 2006. The effects of age and gender upon the perceptions of accounting professionals concerning their job satisfaction and work-related attributes. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(5):536-561.

MTHETHWA, N. 2012. South African has world’s largest private security industry: needs regulations. [Online]. Available at: <http:www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28306>. Accessed 06/02/2013.

MTIMKULU, D. S. & NARANJEE, N. & KARODIA, A. M. 2014. An evaluation of the leadership styles of managers and their impact on human capital factors of motivation, performance and absenteeism of employees at selected hospitals in eastern Free State, South Africa. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 4(2):10-41.

MUDOR, H. & TOOKSOON, P. 2011. Conceptual framework on the relationship between human resources management practices, job satisfaction, and turnover. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 2(2), 41-49.

MUHAMMAD, U., MUHAMMAD, A.N. & MALIK, M.S. 2011. A study of job stress and job satisfaction among universities facility in Lahore, Pakistan. Journal of Management and Business Research, 11(9):13-17.

MUHAMMAD, N. & AKHTER, M. 2010. Supervision, salary and opportunities for promotion as related to job satisfaction. ASA University Review, 4(1):224-238.

MUINDI, F.K. 2011. The relationship between participation in decision-making and job satisfaction among academic staff in the school of business, university of Nairobi. Journal of Human Resources Management Research, 1(1):1-34.

MUJTABA, B. & SHUAIB, S, 2010. An equitable total rewards approach to pay for performance management. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 11(4):111-121.

MULLINS, L. J. 2007. Management and organisational behaviour. 7th ed. England: Pearson Education.

MUNICIPAL DEMARCATION BOARD. 2011. Map: Southern Gauteng region. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.demarcation.org.za/PORT MAPS/Munics/GT42l.jpg>. Accessed: 9/12/2013.

MUNRO, L. 2007. Absenteeism and presenteeism: cause and solutions. The South African Radiographer, 45(1):21-23.

MUTHUKRISHMAN, N., SAJIMON, M.R. & CHAUBEY, D.S. 2011. Factors driving occupational stress of employees working in hospital in Dehradun. International Journal of research in IT and Management, 62-77.

MWANGANGI, F. W. 2014. Factors affecting employees’ turnover in the pharmaceutical industry: a case of Phillips group of companies Kenya. M.B.A. Dissertation. Zambia: University of Africa.

NACHAR, N. 2008. The Mann-Whitney U: a test for assessing whether two independent samples come from the same distribution. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(1):13-20.

NAVARRO, C. & BASS, C. 2006. Guidelines for managing employee absence. Benefits and Compensation Digest, 43(9):32-34.

NAVEED, A., USMAN. A. & BUSHRA, F. 2011. Promotion as predictor of job satisfaction: a study of glass industry of Lahore (Pakistan). International Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 2(16):301-305.

NAZIM, A. 2008. Factors affecting overall job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Journal of Management Sciences, 2(2):239-252.

NAZIR, T., SHAH, S.F.H. & ZAMAN, K. 2013. The relationship between job satisfaction and remuneration in Pakistan: higher education institutes perspectives. Academia Arena, 5(2):39-42.

NEL, J.K. 2013. Attacking Absenteeism. Randburg: Knowres Publishing.

NEL, P.S., SWANEPOEL, B.J., KIRSTEN, M., ERASMUS, B.J. & TSABADI, M.J. 2005. South African employment relations: theory and practice. 4th ed. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

NEL, P.S., VAN DYK, P.S., HAASBROEK, H.D. SCHULTZ, H.B., SONO, T. & WERNER, A. 2004. Human resource management. 6th ed. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

NEL, P.S., VAN DYK, P.S., HAASBROEK, G.D., SCHULTZ, H.B., SONO, T.J. & WERNER, A. 2008. Human resource management. 8th ed. Cape Town: Oxford.

NEUMAN, W.L. & KRUGER, L.W. 2003. Social work research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

NEWMAN, W.L. 2006. Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approach. 6th ed. Boston: Pearson.

NEWMAN, A. & SHEIKH, A.Z. 2012. Organisational rewards and employee commitment: a Chinese study. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(1):71-89.

NEWSHAM, G.R., VEITCH, J.A. & CHARLES, K.E. 2008. Risk factors for dissatisfaction with the indoor environment in open-plan offices: an analysis of COPE field study data. Indoor Air, 18(4):271-282.

NG, T.W.H., & FELDMAN, D.C. 2010. The relationships of age with job attitudes: a meta- analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63(3): 677-718.

NIEUWENHUIZEN, C. 2007. Business management for entrepreneurs. Cape Town: Juta.

NORTHOUSE, P.G. 2010. Leadership, theory and practice. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

NYATHI, M. & JOOSTE, K. 2008. Working conditions that contribute to absenteeism among nurses in a provincial hospital in the Limpopo province. Curationis, 31(1):28-37.

O’CONNOR, D. & YBALLE, L. 2007. Maslow revisited: constructing a road map of human nature. Journal of Management Education, 31(6): 738-756.

O’DONNELL, M.P. 2007. Psychologically healthy workplaces. American Journal of Health Promotion, 21(3):4-25.

O’LEARY, Z. 2010. The essential guide to doing your research project. 3rd ed. London: Sage.

OBASAN, K.A. 2011. Impact of job satisfaction on absenteeism: a correlative study. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(1):25-49.

OBENG-DENTEH, W., YEBOAH, E.A. & ESI MONKAH, C.J. 2011. The impact of student and teacher absenteeism on student performance at the junior high school: the case of Kumasi- metro school district. Continental Journal of Education Research, 4(1):7-17.

OCHENI, S. & ATAKPA. M. 2012. Re-engineering organisation success through effective leadership. European Journal of Business and Social Science, 1(3): 119-130.

OJOKUKU, R.M. & SAJUYIGBE, A.S. 2009. Effect of pay satisfaction dimensions on job performance in selected tertiary institutions in Osun state, Nigeria. African Journal Institute and Development, 4(2):86-95.

OLUMUYIWA, O.S., ADELAJA, S.A. & CHUKWUENEKA, O.E. 2012. Effective planning and organisational productivity: a case study of Sterling Bank Nigeria Plc. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 5(5):31-39.

ONUKWUBE, H.N. 2012. Correlates of job satisfaction amongst quantity surveyors in consulting firms in Lagos, Nigeria. Australasian Journal of Construction Economic and Building, 12(3):43-54.

ORIGO, F. & PAGANI, L. 2009. Flexibility and job satisfaction in Europe: the importance of perceived and actual job stability for well-being at work. Labour Economics, 16(5): 547-555.

OSE, S.O. 2005. Working condition, compensation and absenteeism. Journal of Health Economics, 24:161-188.

OTSUKA, K., TAKAHASHI, M., NAKATA, A., HARATANI, C., KAIDA, K., FUKASAWA, K., HANADA, T. & ITO, A. 2007. Sickness absence in relation to psychosocial work factors among daytime workers in an electric equipment manufacturing company. Industrial Health, 45:224-231.

OZDEMIR, S. 2009. Factors influencing job satisfaction in Azerbaijan companies. Journal of Qafqaz University, 26:102-108.

OZER, G. & GUNLUK, M. 2010. The effects of discrimination perception and job satisfaction on Turkish public accountants’ turnover intention. African Journal of Business Management, 4(8):1500-1509.

PARAHOO, K. 2006. Nursing research: Principles, process and issues. 2nd ed. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.

PARK, D. C. 2000. The basic mechanisms accounting for age-related decline in cognitive function. Psychology Press, 3-22.

PARK, H., MITSUHASHI, H., FEY, C. & BJORKMAN, I. 2003. The effect of human resource management practise on Japanese MNC subsidiary performance: a partial mediating model. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(8):1391-1406.

PARRIS, M.A. 2003. Work teams: perceptions of a ready-made support system? Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 15, 71-83.

PARVIN, M.M. & KABIR, M.M.N. 2011. Factors affecting employee job satisfaction of pharmaceutical sector. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(9):113-123.

PATHIRAGE, Y.D., JAYAWARDENA, L.N.A.C. & RAJAPAKSHA, J.N. 2012. Impact of management support for team performance: a Sri Lankan case study in appeal industry. Tropical Agricultural research, 23(3):228-236.

PATTERSON, M., WARR, P. & WEST, M. 2004. Organisational climate and climate and company productivity the role of employee effect and employee level. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 77:193-216.

PATTON, E. & JOHNS, G. 2007. Women’s absenteeism in the popular press: evidence for a gender-specific absence culture. Human Relations, 60: 1579-1612.

PATTON, E. & JOHNS, G. 2012. Context and the social representation of absenteeism: absence in the popular press and in academic research. Human Relations, 65(2):217-241.

PAULSON, R. 2006. How to reduce absenteeism by 40% and improve employee productivity and morale while you’re at it. Pfizer Global Research and Development, 1-2.

PETTINER, G. 2010. Orgainsational behaviour: performance management in practice. New York: Routledge.

PIERCE, J.L., RUBENFELD, S.A. & MORGAN, S. 1991. Employee ownership: a conceptual model of process and effects. Academy of Management Review, 16:121-144.

PIERCE, K. 2009. The impact of absenteeism in the public service context of government employees medical schemes. [Online]. Available at: <www.germs.gov.za>. Accessed 2013/10/03.

PILLAY, M. 2009. Absenteeism in the workplace. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.siyakha.co.za>. Accessed: 12/09/2012.

POLIKANDRRIOTI, M., GOUDEVENOS, I. MICHALLIS, L., NIKALAOU, V., DILANAS, C., OLIMIOS, C., VOTTEAS, V. & ELISAF, M. 2011. Validation and reliability analysis of the questionnaire “Needs of hospitalised patients with coronary artery disease.” Health Science Journal, 5(2):137-148.

POLIT, D.F. & BECK, C.T. 2010. Essentials of nursing research: appraising evidence for nursing practice. 7th ed. London: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.

POPA, B.M. 2012. The relationship between leadership effectiveness and organisational performance. Journal of Defence Resources Management, 3(1):123-126.

PORTER, H., WRENCH, J.S. & HOSKINSON, C. 2007. The influence of supervisor temperament on subordinate job satisfaction and perceptions of supervisors’ communicative orientation and approachability. Communication Quarterly, 55(1):129-152.

PRABHU, M. 2013. A study in steel organisation on employees absenteeism. Indian Journal of Economics and Development Research, 1(3):86-90.

PROCTOR, T. 2005. Essentials of marketing research. 4th ed. New Jersey. Prentice-Hall.

PUNCH, C.K. 2005. Introduction to social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 2nd ed. London: Sage.

PUNNETT, J.N., GREENIDGE, D. & RAMSEY, J. 2007. Job attitude and absenteeism: a study in the English speaking Caribbean. Journal of World Business, 42:214-227.

PURANI, K. & SAHADEV, S. 2008. The moderating role of industrial experience in the job satisfaction, intention to leave relationship: an empirical study among salesmen in India. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 23(7):475-485.

QASIM, S., CHEEMA, F.E.A. & SYED, N.A. 2012. Exploring factors affecting employees’ job satisfaction at work. Journal of Management and Social Science, 8(1):31-39.

RAEISI, M., HADADI, N., FARAJI, R. & SALEHIAN, M.H. 2012. McClelland’s motivational needs: a case study of physical education teacher in West Azarbaijan. European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2(4):1231-1235.

RAJASEKHAR, T. & DEVI, R.M. 2015. Job satisfaction and life satisfaction among male and female employees in a major thermal power station. Research Journal of Management Sciences, 4(7):8-10.

RAMA DEVI, V. & SHAIK, N. 2012. Evaluating training and development effectiveness: a measurement model. Asian Journal of Management Research, 2(1):722-735.

RANDOLPH, D.S. & JOHNSON, S.P. 2005. Predicting the effect of extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction factors on recruitment and retention of rehabilitation professional. Journal of Healthcare Management, 50(1):49-60.

RANE, R.D. 2011. Employee job satisfaction: an essence of organisation. HRM Review, 11(7):10-16.

RAZA NAQVI, S.M.M., ISHTIAQ, M., KANWAL, N. & ALI, M. 2013. Impact of job autonomy on organisational commitment and job satisfaction: the moderating role of organisational culture in fast food sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(17):92-102.

REDMOND, B.F. 2010. Need Theories: what do I want when I work? Work attitudes and motivation. The Pennsylvania State University World Campus.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1993. Occupational Health and Safety Act, No. 85 of 1993. Pretoria: Government Printers.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1993. Occupational Injuries and Disease Act, No.130 of 1993. Pretoria: Government Printers.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1995. Labour Relations Act, No.66 of 1995. Pretoria: Government Printer.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 1997. Basic Conditions of Employment Act, No. 75 of 1997. Pretoria: Government Printer.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2001. Private Security Industry Regulation Amended, No: 56 of 2001. Pretoria: Government Printers.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. 2003. Occupational Health and Safety Act, No. 93 of 2003. Pretoria: Government Printers.

RHODES, S.R. & STEERS, R.M. 1990. Managing employee absenteeism. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

RHODES, S.R. & STEERS, R.M. 1999. Managing employee absenteeism in the workplace. Massachusetts: Wesley Publishing.

RIGGLE, R.J., EDMONDSON, D.R. & HANSEN, J.D. 2009. A meta-analysis of the relationship between perceived organisational support and job outcomes: 20 years of research. Journal of Business Research, 62(10):1027-1030.

ROBBINS, S.P. 2005. Organisational behaviour. New York: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

ROBBINS, S.P. & JUDGE, T.A. 2009. Organisational behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

ROBBINS, S.P. & JUDGE, T.A. 2009. Organisational behaviour. 14th ed. New York: Prentice-Hall.

ROBBINS, S.P. & JUDGE, T.A., CAMPBELL, T.T. 2010. Organisation behaviour. 14th ed. New York: Prentice Hall.

ROBBINS, S.P. & COULTER, M.A. 2004. Management. 11th ed. New Jersey: Pearson.

ROBBINS, S.P., ODENDAAL, A. & ROODT, G. 2003. Organisation behaviour: global and Southern African perspective. 9th ed. Cape Town: Prentice Hall.

ROBBINS, S., JUDGE, T.A., ODENDAAL, A. & ROODT, G. 2009. Organisational behaviour: global and Southern African perspectives. 2nd ed. Johannesburg: Pearson Education

ROBERTSON, T. 2008. Worker absenteeism shows up in bottom line. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Boston.

ROELEN, C.A.M., KOOPMANS, P.C., NOTENBOMER, A. & GROOTHOFF, J.W. 2008. Job satisfaction and sickness absence a questionnaire survey. Occupational Medicine, 58:567- 571.

ROELEN, C.A.M., KOOPMANS, P.C., NOTENBOMER, A. & GROOTHOFF, J.W. 2011. Job satisfaction and short sickness absence due to the common cold. Work, 39(3):305-311.

ROESSLER, K.K., RUGULIES, R., BILBERG, R., ANDERSON, L. L., ZEBIS, M.K. & SJOGAARD, G. 2012. Does work-site physical activity improve self-reported psychosocial workplace factors and job satisfaction? A randomized controlled intervention study. International Archives of Occupational and Environment Health Journal, 2(1):1-11.

ROMERO,T.A. & STORM, K.J. 2011. Absenteeism in a represented environment. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(15):1-11.

ROOS, W. & VAN EEDEN, R. 2009. The relationship between employee motivation, job satisfaction and corporate culture. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(1):54-63.

ROSENBLATT, Z. & SHIROM, A. 2005. Predicting teacher absenteeism by personal background factors. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(2): 209-225.

ROSSI, A. 2010. Wellness programs on rise. Biotechnology Health Care, 7(1):29-30.

ROUSSEAU, V., & AUBE, C. 2010. Social support at work and affective commitment to the organization: the moderating effect of job resource adequacy and ambient conditions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(4):321-340.

ROYLE, M. T. & HALL, A. T. 2012. The relationship between McClelland theory of needs, feeling individual accountable and informal accountability for others. International Journal of management and marketing, 5(1): 21-42.

ROYSE, D. D. 2008. Research methods in social work. 5th ed. California: Cengage Learning.

ROZYCKI, L. A. 2006. Effective employee incentive programs bring out the best in your firm. Available at: <http://www.lrmarketinggroup.com/articles/Incentive-programs.pdf>. Accessed on: 12/08/2013.

RSA see REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA.

SAARI, L.M. & JUDGE, T.A. 2004. Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43(4):395-407.

SABA, I. 2011. Measuring the job satisfaction level of the academic staff in Bahawalpur Colleges. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 1(1): 1- 8.

SAEED, R., LODHI, R.N., IQBAL,A.,NAYYAB, H.H., MUSSAWAR, S. & YASEEN, S. 2013. Factors influencing job satisfaction of employees in telecom sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 16(11):1476-1482.

SAGEER, A., RAFAT, S. & AGARWAL, P. 2012. Identification of variables affecting employee satisfaction and their impact to the organisation. Journal of Business and Management, 5(1):32-39.

SAGIE, A. 1998. Employee absenteeism, organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 52:156-171.

SAIF, K.S., NAWAZ, A., ALI JAN, F. & KHAN, I.M. 2012. Synthesizing the theories of job satisfaction across the cultural/attitudinal dimensions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9): 1382-1396.

SAJUYIGBE, A.S., OLAOYE, B.O. & ADEYEMI, M.A. 2013. Impact of reward on employee performance in a selected manufacturing companies in Ibadan: Oyo state in Nigeria. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 2(2):27-32.

SALAMI, A.O., OJOKUKU, R.M. & HESANMI, O.A. 2010. Impact of job stress on managers’ performance. European Journal of Scientific Research, 45(2):249-260.

SALKIND, J.N. & GREEN, B. 2009. Using SPSS for windows and Macintosh: Analysing and understanding data. 5th ed. Durban: Prentice-Hall.

SANCHEZ, M. 2012. Collaborative approaches to reducing absenteeism among K-12 students Stanford University. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.examiner.com/approaches-to-reduce-absences-in-detroit/>. Accessed: 09/08/2012.

SANDRA, M.A. 2011. Leadership and tipping in workplace transformation: a critical review. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(5):18-22.

SAPS. 2012. Crime statistics. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.saps.gov.za>. Accessed: 15/04/2013.

SARAIGH, S. 2011. The effects of job autonomy on work outcomes: Self-efficacy as an intervening variable. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 4(3):203-215.

SARANTAKOS, S. 2005. Social research. 3rd ed. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

SARITHA, S. 2013. A study on employee absenteeism on Sugar and Allied Products Ltd., Chittoor. International Journal of Computer Science and Management Research, 2(3):2138- 2148.

SARWAR, S. & ALBUGRE, J. 2013. The influence of rewards and job satisfaction on employees in the service industry. The Business and Management Review, 3(2):22-32.

SCHERMERHORN, J.R., HUNT, J.G. & OSBORN, R.N. 2008. Organisational behaviour. 10th ed. New Jersey: John Wiley.

SCOTT, M., SWORTZEL, K.A. & TAYLOR, N.W. 2005. The relationship between selected demographic factors and the level of the job satisfaction of extension agents. Journal of Agricultural Education, 46(3):2-11.

SEKARAN, U. & BOUGIE, R. 2011. Research methods for business: a skill building approach. 5th ed. New Delhi: John Wiley.

SELF, D.R., HOLT, D.T. & SCHANINGER, W.S. 2005. Work-group and organisational support: a test of distinct dimensions. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 78(1):133-140.

SENEL, B. & SENEL, M. 2012. The cost of absenteeism and the effect of demographic characteristics and tenure on absenteeism. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Research, 4(5):1142-1151.

SHAH, M., REHMAN, M., AKHTAR, G., ZAFAR, H. & RIAZ, A. 2012. Job satisfaction and motivation of teachers of public educational institutions. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8): 2271-2281.

SHAHNAWAS, M. & JAFRI, H. 2009. Job attitudes as predictors of employee turnover among stayers and leavers/hoppers. Journal of Management Research, 9(3):159-166

SHAJAHAN, D.S. & SHAJAHAN, L. 2004. Organisation behaviour. New York: New Age International Publications.

SHANOCK, L.R. & EISENBERG, R. 2006. When supervisors feel supported: relationships with subordinates’ perceived supervisor support, perceived organisational support and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3):689-695.

SHARKH, M.A. 2005. Is the ILO custodian of happiness? How work satisfaction impacts overall well-being, International Labour Organisation, Programme on Socio-Economic Security, Geneva.

SHARMA, R.D. & JYOTI, J. 2009. Job satisfaction of university teachers: an empirical study. Journal of Services Research, 9(2):51-80.

SHAW, J.D., GUPTA, N. & DELERY, J.E. 2005. Voluntary turnover and organisational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4):594-606.

SHED, N. & XIAO YAN, L. 2012. Impact of high performance human resource management practise on employee job satisfaction: empirical analysis. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(2):318-342.

SHEIKHA, N.A.A & YOUNIS, A.R.M. 2006. Administrative factors affecting employees’ absenteeism in academic and public libraries in Jordan. The International Information and Library Review, 38(2):64-88.

SHUI, E., HAIR, J., BUSH, R. & ORTINAU, D. 2009. Marketing research. London: McGraw-Hill.

SICHANI, M.S., LEE, S. & ROBINSON, F.A. 2011. Understanding construction workforce absenteeism in industrial construction. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 38(8):849-858.

SINGH, R.K. & KHANNA, P. 2011. Effect and impact of employee absenteeism and personnel constant turnover in an organisation. Journal of Applied Management and Computer Science, 3:1-21.

SOLANKI, K.R. 2013. Flexitime association with job satisfaction, work productivity, motivation and employee stress levels. Journal of Human Resource Management, 1(1):9-14.

SOURYAL, S.S. 2009. Determining corruption by prison personnel: a principle-based perspective. The Prison Journal, 89(1):21-45.

SOUSA, V.D., DRIESSNACK, M. & MENDES, I.A.C. 2007. An overview of research designs relevant to nursing, Part 1: Quantitative research designs. Latin Journal of Nursing, 15(3):502- 507.

SOUSA-POZA, A. & SOUSA-POZA, A.A. 2007. The effect of job satisfaction on labour turnover by gender: an analysis for Switzerland. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36:895-913.

SOWMYA, R.K. & PANCHANATHAM, N. 2011. Factors influencing job satisfaction of banking sector employees in Chennai, India. Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 3(5):76-99.

SPECTOR, P. 1994. Job satisfaction survey (JSS). Department of Psychology, University of University of South Florida. [Online]. Available at. <http://shell.cas.usf.edu/ ~spector/scales/ jssovr.html>. Accessed 10 June 2014.

SPECTOR, P. 2008. Industrial and organisational psychology: research and practice. 5th ed. South Florida: John Wiley.

SPECTOR, P.E., & FOX, S. 2002. An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: some parallels between counterproductive work behavior (CWB) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Human Resource Management Review, 12, 269–292.

STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA. 2011. Census report of 2011. Government Gazette. 452 (24607), Notice 117 of 2011.

STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA. 2012. Report on crime rates. Government Gazette. 452 (24607), Notice 433 of 2012.

STATISTICS SOUTH AFRICA. 2012. Report on crime rates. Government Gazette. 452 (24607), Notice 433 of 2012.

STEERS, R., PORTER, L. & BIGLEY, G. 1999. Motivation and leadership at work. 6th ed. Cape Town: McGraw-Hill.

STEVERINK, N. & LINDENBERG, S. 2006. Which social needs are important for subject well-being? What happens to them with aging? Psychology and Aging, 21(2):281-290.

STORMER, S. & FAHR, R. 2010. Individual determinants of work attendance: Evidence on the role of personality. Discussion paper, No. 4927:1-31.

STRAUB, C. 2012. Antecedents and organisational consequences of family supportive supervisor behaviour: a multilevel conceptual framework for research. Human Resource Management Review, 22(1):15-26.

SULLIVAN, S.E. & MAINIERO, L.A. 2007. Kaleidoscope careers: bench-marking ideas for fostering family-friendly workplaces. Organisational Dynamics, 36(1):45-62.

SWARNALATHA, C. & SURESHKRISHNA, G. 2013. Absenteeism - a menace to organisation in building job satisfaction among employees in automotive industries in India. Tactful Management Research Journal, 1(4):1-6.

SWEET, J., NELSON, N. & MOBERG, P. 2006. The TCN/AACN 2005 salary survey professional practise, beliefs and incomes of US neuropsychologists. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20(3)325-364.

SYVERSON, C. 2011. What determines productivity? Journal of Economic Literature, 49(2):326-365.

TAIWO, A.S. 2010. The influence of work environment on workers’ productivity: a case of selected oil and gas industry in Lagos Nigeria. Africa Journal of Business Management, 4(3):299-307.

TAVAKOL, M. & DENNICK, R. 2011. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2: 53-55.

TERRE BLANCHE, M.T., DURRHEIM, K. & PAINTER, D. 2006. Research practise. 2nd ed. Cape Town: UCT Press.

TERRE BLANCHE, M., DURRHEIM, K. & PAINTER, D. 2009. Research in Practice. 5th ed. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.

THIAN, H.J., KANNUSAMY, P. & KLAININ-YOBAS, P. 2013. Stress, positive affecting and work engagement among nurses: an integrative literature review. Singapore Nursing Journal, 40(1):24-33.

THIRULOGASUNDARAM, V.P. & SAHU, P.C. 2014. Job satisfaction and absenteeism interface in corporate sector- a study. Journal Humanities and Social Sciences, 19(3):64-68.

THOMPSON, D. & PROTTAS, J.L. 2006. Relationships among organisational family support, job autonomy, perceived control and employee well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11:100-118.

TRIPATHI, M., MOHAN, U., TRIPATHI, M., VERMA, R., MASIH, L. & PANDEY, H.C. 2010. Absenteeism among nurses in a tertiary care hospital in India. The National Medical Journal of India, 23(3):143-146.

TSHABALALA, M. 2005. Job insecurity, organisational commitment and job satisfaction of engineers in a parastatal. M.A. Dissertation. Potchefstroom: NWU.

TUMWESIGYE, G. 2010. The relationship between perceived organisational support and turnover intentions in a developing country: the mediating role of organisational commitment. African Journal of Business Management, 4(6):942-952.

TYSON, S. & YORK, A. 2005. Essentials of HRM. 4th ed. London: Elsevier.

UGBORO, I.O. & OBENG, K. 2000. Top management, employee empowerment, job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in TQM organisations: an empirical study. Journal of Quality Management, 5(1):24-272.

VAANANEN, A., KALIMO, R., TOPPIENEN-TANNER, S., MUTANEN, P., PEIRO. J.M., KIVIMAKI, M. & VAHTERA, J. 2004. Role clarity, fairness and organisational climate as predictors of sickness absence: a prospective study in the private sector. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 32:4426-434.

VAN STEDEN, R. 2007. Privatising policing: describing and explaining the growth of private security. Amsterdam: Boom Legal Publishers.

VENTER, R., LEVY, A., HOLTZHAUSEN, M., CONRADIE, M., BENDESMAN, H. & DWORZANOWSKI-VENTER, B. 2011. Labour relations in South Africa. 4th ed. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

VIDAL, M.E.S., VALLE. R.S. & ARAGON, B.M.I. 2007. Antecedents of repatriats’ job satisfaction and its influence on turnover intentions: evidence from Spanish repatriated manager. Journal of Business Research, 60:1272-1281.

VISCHER, J.C. 2007. The effects of the physical environment on job performance: towards a theoretical model of workplace stress. Stress Health, 23(3):175-184.

VOON, M.L., LO, M.C., NGUI, K.S. & AYOB, N.B. 2011. The influence of leadership style on employees’ job satisfaction in public sector organisation in Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Management on Social Sciences, 2(1)24-32.

WAIRAGU, F., KAMENJU, J.N. & SINGO, M. 2004. Private security in Kenya. Nairobi: Security research and information centre.

WALLACE, C. & CHEN, G. 2006. A multi-level integration of personality, climate, self- regulation and performance. Personnel Psychology. 59(3):529-557.

WALLGREN, A., WALLGREN, B., PERSSON, R., JORNER, U. & HAALAND, J. 2006. Graphics, statistics and data: creating better charts. California: Sage.

WALLIMAN, N. 2011. Research methods: the basic. New York: Routledge.

WALTERS, M. T. 2009. Handling employee absenteeism. [Online]. Available at: <http://www.articlebase.com/management-articles/handling-employee.html>. Accessed: 24/04/2012.

WAN, H., SULAIMAN, M. & OMAR, A. 2012. Procedural justice in promoting decisions of managerial staff in Malaysia. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18(1):99-121.

WARR, P. B. 1999. Well-being and the workplace: understanding quality of life. New York: Sage.

WEATHINGTON, B. L. & JONES, B. 2006. Measuring the value of non-employee benefits: Building a model of the relationship between benefit satisfaction and benefit value. Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 132(2):292-328.

WEGNER, T. 2008. Applied business statistics: methods and excel-based applications: solutions manual. 2nd ed. Lansdowne: Juta.

WEIHRICH, H. & KOONTZ, H. 2005. Management: a global perspective. 11th ed. Singapore: McGraw Hill.

WEIJTERS, B., CABOOTER, E. & SCHILLEWAERT, N. 2010. The effect of rating scale format on response styles: the number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(3):236-247.

WELMAN, C., KRUGER, F. & MITCHELL, B. 2005. Research methodology. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

WEST, J.P. & BERMAN, E. 2009. Job satisfaction of public managers in special districts. Review of Public Administration, 29:327-353.

WESTLUND, S.G. & HANNON, J.C. 2008. Retaining talent: Assessing job satisfaction facets most significantly related to software developer turnover intentions. Journal of Information Technology Management, 19(4): 1-15.

WHITESIDE, D.B. 2015. Promoting fairness in the workplace: identifying and overcoming the barriers to managerial fairness in organisations. D Management. Thesis. Canada: Wilfred Laurier University.

WILKINSON, K. 2015. Does SA have the largest private security industry in the world? [Online] Available at: Available at: <https://www.africacheck.org/reports/does-sa-have-the-largest-private-security-industry-in-the-world/>. Accessed: 30/10/2015.

WILLEM, B.J. 2007. Impact of organisational structure on nurse’s job satisfaction: a questionnaire survey. International of Journal of Nursing Studies, 44:1011-1020.

WILLIAMS, C. 2007. Research methods. Journal of Business and Economic Research. 5(3): 65- 72.

WONG-ON-WIN, B., GUO, L. & LUI, G. 2010. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation ad participating in budgeting: antecedents and consequences. American Accounting Association, 22(2):133-153.

WONG, E.S.K. & HENG, N.T. 2009. Case study of factors influencing job satisfaction in two Malaysian universities. International Journal of Business Research, 2(2): 86-98.

WORLEY, R.M. & WORLEY, V.B. 2012. Games guards play: a self-reported study of institutional deviance within the Texas. Department of criminal justice. Criminal Justice Studies, 1:1-18.

WYATT, W. 2000. Cost of employee absenteeism up. 6th ed. Canada: Watson Wyatt Publishing.

YANG, C.L., HWANG, M. & CHEN, Y.C. 2011. An empirical study of the existence, relatedness and growth (ERG) theory in consumer’s selection of mobile value-added services. African Journal of Business Management, 5(19):7885-7898.

YASMI, Y., GUERNIER, J. & COLFER, C.J. 2009. Positive and negative aspects of forestry conflict: lessons form a decentralised forest management in Indonesia. International Forestry Review, 11(1):98-110.

YUKL, G. 2010. Leadership in organisations. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

YUN, S., COX, J., SIMS, H.P. & SALAM, S. 2007. Leadership and teamwork: the effects of leadership and job satisfaction on team citizenship. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(3):171-193.

ZHANG, Y., YAO, X. & CHEONG, J.O. 2011. City manager’s job satisfaction and frustration: factors and implications. The American Review of Public Administration, 41: 670-685.

ZIKMUND, W.G. 2013. Business research methods. 7th ed. Ohio: Thomson South Western.

ZIKMUND, W.G., BABIN, B. J., CARR, J. C. & GRIFFIN, M. 2013. Business research methods. 9th ed. Canada: Cengage Learning.

ANNEXURE A – INTRODUCTORY LETTER

Vaal University of Technology

Private Bag X021

Vanderbijlpark

1900

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am currently conducting research for my M-Tech study at the Vaal University of Technology. My intention is to investigate the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism among selected private security companies within Southern Gauteng region.

Please be assured that all the information provided will be treated as confidential. Your identity will not be disclosed. Participation in this study is voluntary and you are free to withdraw from the study at any time. I kindly request you to complete the enclosed questionnaire and answer all the questions as honestly as possible. Details on how to complete the questionnaire are provided. Once the questionnaire has been completed, a field worker will collect it from you.The questionnaire will be hand delivered by the researcher in a sealed envelope. The questionnaire will take 15 minutes to be completed.

Thank you for your time and inputs in this study.

Kind Regards

________________________

Ms. Limpho C. Mokote

Cell no: 073 3567 750

Email:	mokotelc@webmail.co.za

ANNEXURE B – QUESTIONNAIRE

SECTION A

INCLUSION CRITERIA

A1. Are you able to read English?

Yes No

A2. Are you a security guard?

No Yes

If you answered yes to above questions please continue with section B.

SECTION B

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

This section seeks to obtain background information about the individual taking part in the study. Please choose the alternative that best describes your characteristics and indicate the answer by crossing (x) the appropriate block.

B1. Indicate your gender:

Male	Female

B2. Ethnicity:

Black
Coloured
Indian/Asian
White
Other (Specify)

B3. Nationality:

South African
Kingdom of Lesotho
Botswana Republic
Swazi
Other (Specify)

B4.Age group:

20-29 years	30-39 years	40-49 years	50 + years

B6. Marital status:

Single	Married	Divorced	Widow/Widower	Separated

B7.First language:

Afrikaans	Setswana
English	Swati
Ndebele	Tshivenda
Sepedi	Xitsonga
Sotho	Zulu
South Sotho

B8. Academic background:

Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
FET certificate
Diploma
Other (specify)

B9. Security grade attained:

Grade E
Grade D
Grade C
Grade B
Grade A

B10. Nature of employment contract:

Fixed term
Part-time
Permanent

B11.Length of service in your organisation:

1-5 years
6-10 years
11-15 years
16 years and more

B12. Have you been promoted in the last:

Never
1-5 years
6-10 years
11-15 years
16 years and more

SECTION C

JOB SATISFACTION

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ONE NUMBER FOR EACH QUESTION THAT COMES CLOSEST TO REFLECTING YOUR OPINION ABOUT IT.

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY (Copyright Paul E. Spector 1994, All rights reserved.)	Disagree very much	Disagree moderately	Disagree slightly	Agree slightly	Agree moderately	Agree very much
C1	I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I do.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C2	There is less chances for promotion in my job.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C3	My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her job.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C4	I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C5	When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for it that I should receive.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C9	Communications seem good within this organisation.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C10	Salary increases are little.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C11	Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance of being promoted.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C12	My supervisor is unfair to me.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C13	The benefits we receive are as good as most other organisations offer.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C14	I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C16	I find I have to work harder at my job because of the lack of skills from people I work with.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C18	The goals of this organisation are not clear to me.	1	2	3	4	5	6

Section C: Job satisfaction (Continues…………)

JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY (Copyright Paul E. Spector 1994, All rights reserved.)	Disagree very much	Disagree moderately	Disagree slightly	Agree slightly	Agree moderately	Agree very much
C19	I feel unappreciated by the organisation when I think about what they pay me.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C20	My supervisor shows too little interest in the feelings of the subordinates.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C21	The benefit package we have is fair.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C22	There are few rewards for those who work here.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C23	I have too much workload at work.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C24	I enjoy my co-workers.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C27	I feel satisfied with my chances for salary increases.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C28	There are benefits we do not have which we should have.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C29	I like my supervisor.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C30	I have too much paperwork.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C31	I don't feel my efforts are rewarded the way they should be.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C32	I am satisfied with my chances for promotion.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C33	There are too many conflicts at work.	1	2	3	4	5	6
C35	Work assignments are not fully explained to me.	1	2	3	4	5	6

SECTION D

ABSENTEEISM

PLEASE RATE EACH ITEM IN TERMS OF HOW TRUE IT IS OF YOU. PLEASE CIRCLE ONE AND ONLY ONE LETTER FOR EACH QUESTION.

Absenteeism (Copyright Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P. & Guion, R. M. 1989, All rights reserved. adopted by Nyathi, M. 2008 and modified by Mokote, L. C. with permission)	Disagree very much	Disagree moderately	Disagree slightly	Agree slightly 4 4 4	Agree moderately 4	Agree very much 4 4
As a security guard, I am absent because I
D2	Suffer from work stress-related illness.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D4	Lack motivation to go to work.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D7	Managers use one-way communication.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D8	I am involved in conflicts which are not satisfactorily solved.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D9	The managers make decisions alone, in the workplace.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D10	Come into conflicts with their manager.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D11	Experience insufficient support from my managers.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D12	I am tired of routine work in the workplace.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D13	My skills are under-utilised.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D15	Have difficulty in making decisions in the absence of the supervisors.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D16	Perform duties without a job description.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D17	Have a lot of workload.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D18	Work for long hours.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D19	Lack of flexible working schedules.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D21	Experience unfair promotion opportunities to the next rank.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D22	Observe unfair selection of security guards for training.	1	2	3	4	5	6

Section D: Absenteeism (Continues……………..)

Absenteeism Copyright Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P. & Guion, R. M. 1989, All rights reserved. Adopted by Nyathi, M. 2008, modified by Mokote, L. C. with permission)	Disagree very much	Disagree moderately	Disagree slightly	Agree slightly 4 4	Agree moderately 4 4	Agree very much 4 4
As a security guard, I am absent because I
D23	There is irregular feedback about work performance.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D24	Observe lack of fair rewards systems for excellent performance in the workplace.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D25	Of unfair implementation of absence policy to the staff in the workplace.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D26	Get inadequate information about changes being implemented in the workplace.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D28	Experience managers’ coercion power in the daily duties.	1	2	3	4	5	6
D30	Am delegated a number of duties.	1	2	3	4	5	6

Thank you for your time in completing this questionnaire