Performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, and intent to leave the study of employees in the private sector

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business Do Thi Tuyet Nhung PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FAIRNESS, WORK ENGAGEMENT, AND INTENT TO LEAVE: THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEES IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours) Ho Chi Minh City - Year 2014 UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY International School of Business DO THI TUYET NHUNG PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FAIRNESS, WORK ENGAGEMENT, AND INTENT TO LEAVE: THE STUDY OF EMPLOYEES IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR ID: 21110013 MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours) SUPERVISOR: Nguyen Huu Lam, Dr Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2014 ACKNOWLEDGE I would like to express my gratitude to supervisor Dr Nguyen Huu Lam for his guidance, support, motivation, and understanding in all the time of my research Besides my supervisor, I would like to thank ISB committee for their encouragement, and insightful comments I would like to thank managers in HR Share and Care group and my classmates at ISB.MBus 2.3 for their sharing honestly in item generation and other phases They have provided important comments for my questionnaire as well as data analysis methods Especially, I am debted to my classmate Thai Van Trung Hieu for his supporting and sharing about SEM analysis In addition, I would like to thank participants in my investigation without charge In my daily work, I have been blessed with my chiefs and staffs at the Joton JSC for all their supports Especially, I am obliged to my direct chief Mr Hoang Minh Anh for his support and my subordinate Ms Nguyen Thi Hoang Anh for her assistant at work for me to finish thesis conveniently Finally, I would like to give my special thanks to my family whose love helped me to complete this work i ABSTRACT While Vietnam builds the Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2011-2020 with paying attention to human resource management and development, many organizations concern performance management and talent management in which performance appraisal, work engagement, and intent to leave are important concepts The study is conducted to identify whether perceived performance appraisal fairness can help employees to enhance their engagement at work as well as whether engaged employees can reduce their intent to leave organizations A sample of 170 employees from 15 organizations in the private sector was used to test hypotheses relating to these three concepts The results indicated that perceived performance appraisal fairness affected positively on work engagement and work engagement influenced negatively to intent to leave in Vietnam context Generally, the present study suggests important guidelines for private organizations to ensure fairness of performance appraisal system; thereby, it can help to enhance work engagement and manage employee turnover by controlling intent to leave Key words: performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, intent to leave ii TABLE OF CONTENTS AKNOWLEDGE .i ABSTRACT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS .iii LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIRGURES .vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Background 1.2 Research Problem 1.3 Research Objectives 1.4 Scope and Contribution of the Study 1.5 Thesis Structure Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Perception of Performance Appraisal Fairness 2.1.1 Performance Appraisal Overall .8 2.1.2 Fairness of Performance Appraisal System 11 2.2 Work Engagement .14 2.3 Intent to Leave 16 2.4 Perceived Performance Appraisal Fairness and Work Engagement 18 2.5 Work Engagement and Intent to Leave 20 2.6 The conceptual model and hypotheses of the research 20 Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 22 3.1 Research design 22 3.1.1 Research Method 22 3.1.2 Research Process 23 3.1.3 Population and Sampling Method 24 3.1.4 Measurement Instruments 25 3.1.5 Coding 27 3.1.6 Sample Size 27 3.1.7 Data Collection 28 3.1.8 Data Analysis Method 28 3.2 Item Generation 33 3.3 Pilot Study 34 3.4 Main Study 36 Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 38 4.1 Participants’ Demographic 38 4.2 Assessment of Scales 39 4.2.1 Assessment of Scale by Cronbach’s Alpha Cofficient 40 4.2.2 Assessment of Scale by Exploratory Factor Analysis 41 4.2.3 Assessment of Scale by Confirmatory Factor Analysis 42 4.3 Saturated Measurement Model 45 4.4 Structural Model 48 4.4.1 Maximum Likelihood Method 48 4.4.2 Bootstrap Method 50 4.5 Testing the Hypotheses .51 4.6 Discussions for Findings .52 Chapter 5: FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS 55 5.1 Conclusions 55 5.2 Management Implications 56 5.3 Limitations and Directions for Further Researches 57 REFERENCES APPENDICES LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1: Characteristics of the participants 38 Table 4.2: Correlation between constructs of perceived performance appraisal fairness 44 Table 4.3: Correlation between research concepts 46 Table 4.4: Results of reliability and average variance extracted 47 Table 4.5: Result of regression weights 49 Table 4.6: Regression weights by maximum likelihood and bootstrap 50 Table 4.7: Results of testing hypotheses .52 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Performance appraisal process 10 Figure 2.2: Greenberg's Taxonomy of Justice Perceptions Applied to Performance Appraisal 13 Figure 2.3: The conceptual model 21 Figure 3.1: Research process 23 Figure 4.1: CFA for perceived performance appraisal fairness scale 43 Figure 4.2: CFA for work engagement and intent to leave scale 45 Figure 4.3: CFA for saturated measurement model 47 Figure 4.4: Result of structural equation modeling .49 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AMOS : Analysis of Moment Structures AVE : Average variance extracted value CFA : Confirmatory Factor Analysis CR : Critical ratio value EFA : Exploratory Factor Analysis HRM : Human resource management KMO : Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy ML : Maximum Likelihood exploratory program PAF : Principal Axis Factoring PCA : Principal Component Analysis SEDS : The Socio-Economic Development Strategy SEM : Structural Equation Modeling SPSS : Statistical Packed of Social Sciences UWES : Utrecht Work Engagement Scale vii Chapter INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Background The fact that Viet Nam has been a member of the World Trade Organization since January 11, 2007 is a successful step in the efforts to integrate into the global marketplace The current economic development is believed to be attributable to the political and economic reforms (Doi Moi), which was launched in 1986 (Nghiep & Quy, 2000) The new policies have prompted Vietnamese economy from a closed system into a multi-sector, globally integrated market economy with socialist characteristics The World Bank reports that Vietnam has developed from one of the poorest countries in the world, with per capita income below 100 dollars, to a lower middle-income country within a quarter of a century with per capita income of 1,130 dollars by the end of 2010 (Vietnam overview, n.d) One of the most remarkable achievements of Vietnam’s economic transition is the emergence of more dynamic and stronger private sector (Hakkala & Kokko, 2007) Asian Development Bank defines the private sector as all individuals or groups of individuals who invest or use private capital to produce or trade goods or services Therefore, in Vietnam, this definition includes formal and informal enterprises and collectives, domestic and foreign (ADB, 2005) Bartram, Stanton, and Thomas (2009) states that the Vietnamese government encourages a multi-sector economy and actively promotes the growth of private enterprises as crucial factors shaping the development of the economy Lussier, R.N., & Hendon, J.R (2012) Human resource management: Functions, applications, skill development California: Sage Publications Mitchell, O., MacKenzie, D., Styve, G., & Gover, A (2000) The impact of individual, organizational, and environmental attributes on voluntary turnover among juvenile correctional staff members Justice Quarterly, 17, 333-357 Morrell, K., Loan-Clarke, J & Wilkinson, A (2001) Unweaving leaving: The use of models in the management of employee turnover Business School Research Series, 1-65 Nghiep, L T., & Quy, L H (2000) Measuring the impact of Doi moi on Vietnam’s gross domestic product Asian Economic Journal, 14(3), 317–332 Nguyen, T D (2007) Factors affecting the utilization of the internet by internationalizing firms in transition markets: Evidence from Vietnam Marketing intelligence & Planning, 25(4), 360-376 Nguyen, T D (2011) Research method in business Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Labor – Society Publisher Pallant, J (2011) SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS program (4th ed.) New York: Open University Press Perez, M (2008) Turnover Intent Unpublished diploma dissertation, University of Zurich Retrieved from www.hrm.uzh.ch/static/fdb/uploads/da_mylene_perez.pdf Pfeffer, J (1999) Producing sustainable competitive advantage through effective management of people Academy of Management Executive , 9(1), 55 – 72 Rich, B.L., Lepine, J.A., & Crawford, E.R (2010) Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-35 Ruge, B (2011, March) Engaging Talent in a Growing Vietnam Economy Towers Watson Vietnam News Retrieved May 13, 2013, http://www.towerswatson.com/en-VN/Insights/IC-Types/Survey-ResearchResults/2011/03/Engaging-Talent-in-a-Growing-Vietnam-Economy from Saks, A.M (2006) Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21 (7), 600-619 Schaufeli, W B., & Bakker, A B (2004) Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293-315 Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M (2006) The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-16 Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A.B (2002) The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92 Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R (2009) Research methods for business: A skill building approach (5th ed.) John Wiley & Sons Ltd Shah, B (2012) A multivariate analysis technique: Structural equation modeling Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research,1 (4), 73-81 Simpson, M.R (2009) Engagement at work: A review of the literature International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(7), 1012-1024 Sousa-Poza, A., & Henneberger, F (2002) Analyzing job mobility with job turnover intentions: An international comparative study Research institute for labour economics and labour law, 82, 1-28 Tan, A (2011, February16) The truth is most performance management system fail Available from http://topforesight.com/2011/02/performance-management-systemfail/ Thang, L.C, Rowley, C., Quang, T., & Warner, M (2007) To what extent can management practices be transferred between countries? The case of human resource management in Vietnam Journal of World Business, 42, 113–127 Thurston, Jr P W (2001) Clarifying the structure of justice using fairness perceptions of performance appraisalpractices Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University at Albany, State University of New York Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304760141/accountid=45905 Truong, Q., Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M & Rowley, C (2010) Globalisation, competitiveness, and human resource management in a transitional economy: The case of Vietnam International Journal of Business Studies, 18(1), 75–100 Udo, G.J., Guimaraes, T., & Igbaria, M (1997) An investigation of the antecedents of turnover intention for manufacturing plant managers International Journal of Operations and Production Management,17(9), 912–930 Van Teijlingen, E R., & Hundley, V (2002) The importance of pilot studies Nursing Standard, 16 (40), 33-36 Vietnam Overview (n.d.) Retrieved May 10, 2013, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/vietnam/overview Walsh, M B (2003) Perceived fairness of and satisfaction with employee performance appraisal Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Louisiana State University Retrieved http://search.proquest.com/docview/305320208/accountid=45905 from APPENDICES APPENDIX I: Source of measurement scales Measurement scale Code Source PERCEIVED PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FAIRNESS Procedural justice I have influence the outcomes of performance appraisal procedures PROFA1 (*) The procedures followed during performance appraisal process PROFA2 have been applied consistently in my organization The procedures followed during performance appraisal process are PROFA3 free of bias The performance appraisal procedures are based on accurate Gupta and Kumar (2013) PROFA4 information I can appeal against the outcomes arrived at by the performance PROFA5 appraisal procedures Distributive justice The outcome of performance appraisal process reflects the effort I DISFA1 have put into my work The outcome of performance appraisal process is appropriate for the work I completed The outcome of performance appraisal process reflects what I have contributed to the organization DISFA2 Gupta and DISFA3 The outcome of performance appraisal process is justified, given my performance DISFA4 Kumar (2013) Interpersonal justice 10 During the performance appraisal meeting, my supervisor treated me in a polite manner INTFA1 11 My supervisor treated me with dignity during the performance appraisal meeting INTFA2 12 My supervisor treated me with respect during the performance appraisal meeting INTFA3 Gupta and Kumar 13 My supervisor refrained from improper remarks or comments (*) INTFA4 (2013) APPENDIX I: Source of measurement scales (continuous) Measurement scale Code Informational justice 14 My supervisor was candid in (his/her) communications with me INFFA1 15 My supervisor explained the procedures of the performance INFFA2 Source appraisal process thoroughly 16 My supervisor gave reasonable explanations regarding the INFFA3 Kumar procedures 17 My supervisor tailored (his/her) communications to my Gupta and INFFA4 (2013) specific needs WORK ENGAGEMENT At my work, I feel bursting with energy WOENG1 At my job, I feel strong and vigorous WOENG2 When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work WOENG3 I am enthusiastic about my job WOENG4 My job inspires me WOENG5 Schaufeli, I am proud of the work that I WOENG6 Bakker, and I feel happy when I am working intensely WOENG7 Salanova WOENG8 (2006) I am immersed in my work I get carried away when I am working TURNOVER INTENTION Presently, I am actively searching for other job WOENG9 INTLE1 INTLE2 In the last few months, I have seriously thought about looking for a new job I intend to leave the organization in the near future Note: (*) the items were removed after pilot survey Alam and Mohamad INTLE3 (2009) APPENDIX II: VIETNAMESE QUESTIONNAIRE PHIẾU KHẢO SÁT Kính chào Anh/ Chị, Tơi tên Đỗ Thị Tuyết Nhung, học viên Viện Đào Tạo Quốc Tế (ISB) thuộc Trường Đại Học Kinh Tế TP HCM (UEH) Hiện nay, nghiên cứu mối liên hệ công hoạt động đánh giá thực công việc cá nhân với gắn kết nhân viên công việc ý định nghỉ việc nhân viên khu vực kinh tế tư nhân Việt Nam Rất mong quý Anh/chị dành thời gian để trả lời Bảng khảo sát Anh/Chị người làm có trãi nghiệm việc đánh giá thực cơng việc cá nhân doanh nghiệp Việc tham gia khảo sát hồn tồn tự nguyện khơng thể danh tính Tơi cam kết đảm bảo thơng tin Anh/chị cung cấp giữ bí mật sử dụng cho nghiên cứu Tác giả sẵn lòng hồi đáp Anh/Chị qua email: do.tuyetnhung2012@gmail.com điện thoại 0916809157 q trình thực khảo sát có nhu cầu tham khảo kết khảo sát Tôi chân thành cảm ơn giúp đỡ hợp tác Anh/Chị! Nếu Anh / Chị làm việc tại:  Doanh nghiệp có vốn góp Nhà nước 50% ◻ Anh/Chị vui lòng dừng khảo sát  Các loại hình doanh nghiệp khác ◻ Anh/Chị vui lịng tiếp tục tham gia khảo sát NỘI DUNG KHẢO SÁT (Lưu ý thuật ngữ “đánh giá” dùng để hoạt động đánh giá thực công việc cá nhân Đánh giá thực công việc cá nhân hoạt động có liên quan đến việc đo lường kết công việc mà cá nhân thực so với tiêu chuẩn, tiêu cơng việc đề ra.) Hồn tồn khơng đồng ý 1 Tơi có ảnh hưởng toàn việc thiết lập thủ tục đánh giá (*) Toàn thủ tục đánh giá áp dụng quán tổ chức Toàn thủ tục đánh giá tổ chức công Các thủ tục đánh giá xây dựng sở liệu xác Tơi khiếu nại thủ tục đánh giá Kết đánh giá phản ánh nỗ lực công việc Kết đánh giá thích đáng cơng việc mà tơi hồn thành Kết đánh giá phản ánh đóng góp tơi tổ chức Kết đánh giá công chứng minh cho thành công việc 10 Người quản lý có thái độ hịa nhã với tơi họp đánh giá 11 Người quản lý có thái độ nghiêm túc với họp đánh giá 12 Người quản lý có thái độ tơn trọng với họp đánh giá 13 Người quản lý cố gắng tránh đưa nhận xét bình luận khơng thích hợp(*) 14 Người quản lý thẳng thắn trao đổi với tơi 15 Người quản lý giải thích thấu đáo thủ tục đánh giá 16 Người quản lý trả lời hợp lý vấn đề liên quan đến thủ tục đánh giá 17 Người quản lý hướng trao đổi vào vấn đề cụ thể Hoàn toàn đồng ý Hoàn toàn không đồng ý 18 Tôi cảm thấy tràn đầy lượng làm việc 19 Tôi cảm thấy hăng hái hưng phấn làm việc 20 Tôi mong muốn làm việc thức dậy vào buổi sáng 21 Tơi nhiệt tình với cơng việc tơi 22 Công việc tạo cho hứng khởi 23 Tôi tự hào công việc 24 Tôi cảm thấy hạnh phúc làm việc hăng say 25 Tôi say mê công việc 26 Công việc lơi tơi 27 Tơi tích cực tìm chọn công việc khác 28 Trong tháng gần đây, nghiêm túc nghĩ việc tìm kiếm cơng việc 29 Tôi dự định rời bỏ tổ chức thời gian tới PHẦN 2: THÔNG TIN CÁ NHÂN Anh/Chị vui lịng cho biết vài thơng tin cá nhân: Độ tuổi khoảng: Dưới 25 tuổi Từ 25 - 34 tuổi Từ 35 - 44 tuổi Trên 45 tuổi Giới tính: Nam Nữ Vị trí cơng việc: Nhân viên (khơng quản lý ai) Quản lý nhân viên Quản lý từ đến 10 nhân viên Quản lý 10 nhân viên Thời gian làm việc công ty: Dưới năm Từ - năm Từ - năm Từ - năm Trên 10 năm Note: (*) the items were removed after pilot survey Hoàn toàn đồng ý APPENDIX III: Reliability test before removing PROFA1 and INTFA4 in pilot survey Item Corrected Item-Total Correlation Procedural justice (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.75) Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted PROFA1 0.348 0.775 PROFA2 0.632 0.665 PROFA3 0.542 0.706 PROFA4 0.635 0.671 PROFA5 0.485 0.722 Distributive justice (Cronbach’s alpha:0.85) DISFA1 0.750 0.792 DISFA2 0.728 0.797 DISFA3 0.754 0.792 DISFA4 0.579 0.866 Interpersonal justice (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.79) 0.686 INTFA1 0.686 INTFA2 0.734 0.667 INTFA3 0.651 0.714 INTFA4 0.381 0.860 Informational justice (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.81) 0.635 INFFA1 0.750 INFFA2 0.688 0.724 INFFA3 0.668 0.735 INFFA4 0.506 0.807 Work engagement (Cronbach’s alpha:0.90) 0.578 WOENG1 0.898 WOENG2 0.785 0.883 WOENG3 0.613 0.896 WOENG4 0.594 0.897 WOENG5 0.776 0.884 WOENG6 0.692 0.890 WOENG7 0.716 0.888 WOENG8 0.712 0.888 WOENG9 0.600 0.897 Intent to leave (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.91) 0.822 INTLE1 0.873 INTLE2 0.888 0.818 INTLE3 0.761 0.914 APPENDIX IV: Results of EFA after removing PROFA1 and INTFA4 in pilot survey Item Factor DISFA PROFA2 PROFA3 PROFA4 PROFA5 DISFA1 DISFA2 DISFA3 DISFA4 INTFA1 INTFA2 INTFA3 INFFA1 INFFA2 INFFA3 INFFA4 TVE INFFA 0.020 -0.053 0.301 -0.093 -0.145 -0.172 0.242 0.327 0.073 -0.152 -0.015 0.089 0.092 -0.074 0.197 0.802 0.953 0.719 0.522 -0.012 -0.028 0.198 -0.198 -0.077 0.198 0.058 39.769 INTFA 0.124 0.174 -0.292 0.143 -0.079 -0.067 0.317 0.235 0.842 0.692 0.601 0.486 0.089 0.057 -0.091 -0.106 0.106 0.111 -0.036 -0.039 -0.073 -0.133 0.112 0.707 0.920 0.598 0.279 -0.058 0.029 -0.032 0.670 0.877 0.679 0.543 15.803 PROFA 8.917 7.370 Eigenvalue 5.965 2.371 1.338 Principal Axis Factoring Method with Promax Rotation 1.105 Item Factor WOENG INTLE WOENG1 WOENG2 WOENG3 WOENG4 WOENG5 WOENG6 WOENG7 WOENG8 WOENG9 INTLE1 0.499 0.778 0.670 0.624 0.774 0.637 0.769 0.797 0.727 0.082 -0.178 -0.069 0.038 -0.026 -0.078 -0.153 0.003 0.063 0.146 INTLE2 INTLE3 0.063 -0.157 0.924 0.995 0.724 TVE 51.874 12.659 Eigenvalue 6.225 1.519 Principal Axis Factoring Method with Promax Rotation APPENDIX V: Results of reliability by EFA in main survey Item Corrected ItemTotal Correlation Procedural justice Cronbach's Alpha 0.82 PROFA2 0.687 PROFA3 0.658 PROFA4 0.645 PROFA5 0.594 Distributive justice 0.87 DISFA1 0.736 DISFA2 0.742 DISFA3 0.662 DISFA4 0.732 Interpersonal justice 0.88 INTFA1 0.829 INTFA2 0.786 INTFA3 0.709 Informational justice 0.78 INFFA1 0.513 INFFA2 0.646 INFFA3 0.635 INFFA4 0.557 Work engagement 0.92 WOENG1 0.682 WOENG2 0.798 WOENG3 0.632 WOENG4 0.686 WOENG5 0.768 WOENG6 0.738 WOENG7 0.766 WOENG8 0.774 WOENG9 0.693 Intent to leave 0.90 INTLE1 0.787 INTLE2 0.844 INTLE3 0.787 APPENDIX VI: Results of validity by EFA in main survey Item Factor WOENG DISFA PROFA INTLE INTFA INFFA PROFA2 0.043 -0.038 0.822 -0.021 -0.050 -0.041 PROFA3 0.000 0.028 0.753 0.035 0.059 -0.133 PROFA4 -0.055 0.194 0.692 0.024 -0.076 0.046 PROFA5 0.049 -0.078 0.624 -0.022 0.160 0.032 DISFA1 -0.003 0.745 0.024 -0.092 0.062 0.112 DISFA2 0.077 0.862 0.046 -0.020 -0.027 -0.129 DISFA3 0.077 0.558 -0.031 0.062 0.014 0.185 DISFA4 0.001 0.694 0.022 0.062 0.150 -0.010 INTFA1 -0.085 0.093 -0.016 0.039 0.832 0.085 INTFA2 0.034 0.085 -0.051 -0.043 0.777 0.088 INTFA3 0.010 0.023 0.148 -0.020 0.658 0.087 INFFA1 0.064 -0.217 0.085 -0.048 0.207 0.519 INFFA2 -0.053 0.044 -0.073 0.009 0.076 0.764 INFFA3 0.057 0.118 -0.215 -0.017 0.120 0.647 INFFA4 -0.119 0.095 0.115 0.090 -0.014 0.602 WOENG1 0.534 0.042 0.164 0.001 -0.064 0.142 WOENG2 0.656 -0.077 0.144 -0.016 -0.042 0.279 WOENG3 0.637 0.041 -0.007 -0.045 -0.269 0.235 WOENG4 0.729 0.096 0.005 -0.149 0.012 0.010 WOENG5 0.718 0.025 -0.047 0.073 -0.127 0.195 WOENG6 0.777 -0.067 -0.029 0.078 0.198 -0.103 WOENG7 0.768 0.010 -0.017 0.141 0.077 -0.098 WOENG8 0.995 0.047 -0.134 -0.002 0.087 -0.264 WOENG9 0.749 -0.002 0.123 -0.038 -0.004 -0.121 INTLE1 -0.021 0.044 -0.044 -0.811 0.009 -0.036 INTLE2 0.084 -0.071 0.040 -0.983 0.033 0.019 INTLE3 -0.117 0.068 -0.019 -0.780 -0.023 -0.037 TVE (%) 36.231 9.597 6.385 4.497 3.321 2.821 Eigenvalue 10.148 2.916 2.047 1.581 1.270 1.134 Principal Axis Factoring Method with Promax Rotation APPENDIX VII: Computation of composite reliability and average variance extracted Standardized loadings PROFA5 PROFA4 PROFA3 PROFA2 DISFA4 DISFA3 DISFA2 DISFA1 INTFA3 INTFA2 INTFA1 INFFA4 INFFA3 INFFA2 INFFA1 WOENG1 WOENG2 WOENG3 WOENG4 WOENG5 WOENG6 WOENG7 WOENG8 WOENG9 INTLE1 INTLE2 INTLE3 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < - PROFA PROFA PROFA PROFA PROFA DISFA DISFA DISFA DISFA INTFA INTFA INTFA INFFA INFFA INFFA INFFA WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG DISFA INTFA INFFA WOENG INTLE 0.731 0.757 0.75 0.781 Sum of loadings 3.019 0.769 0.72 0.786 0.813 3.088 0.776 0.87 0.91 2.556 0.668 0.747 0.767 0.59 2.772 0.672 0.796 0.65 0.714 0.805 0.783 0.827 0.817 0.727 INTLE INTLE INTLE 6.791 0.846 0.908 0.856 AVE 0.570 0.597 0.729 0.485 0.573 0.758 Composite reliability 0.841 0.855 0.889 0.789 0.923 0.904 2.610 Item Reliabilities 0.534 0.573 0.563 0.610 0.591 0.518 0.618 0.661 0.602 0.757 0.828 0.446 0.558 0.588 0.348 0.452 0.634 0.423 0.510 0.648 0.613 0.684 0.667 0.529 0.716 0.824 0.733 Sum of Item Reliabilities 2.280 2.389 2.187 1.941 5.159 2.273 Delta 0.466 0.427 0.438 0.390 0.409 0.482 0.382 0.339 0.398 0.243 0.172 0.554 0.442 0.412 0.652 0.548 0.366 0.578 0.490 0.352 0.387 0.316 0.333 0.471 0.284 0.176 0.267 Sum of delta 1.720 1.611 0.813 2.059 3.841 0.727 APPENDIX VIII: Results of regression weights (standardized) by ML method WOENG PROFA DISFA INTFA INFFA < < < < < - PPAFA PPAFA PPAFA PPAFA PPAFA INTLE PROFA5 PROFA4 PROFA3 PROFA2 DISFA4 DISFA3 DISFA2 DISFA1 INTFA3 INTFA2 INTFA1 INFFA4 INFFA3 INFFA2 INFFA1 WOENG1 WOENG2 WOENG3 WOENG4 WOENG5 WOENG6 WOENG7 WOENG8 WOENG9 INTLE1 INTLE2 INTLE3 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < - WOENG PROFA PROFA PROFA PROFA DISFA DISFA DISFA DISFA INTFA INTFA INTFA INFFA INFFA INFFA INFFA WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG WOENG INTLE INTLE INTLE Estimate 0.663 0.620 0.784 0.766 0.823 -0.526 0.731 0.756 0.750 0.781 0.769 0.720 0.786 0.813 0.776 0.870 0.910 0.668 0.747 0.767 0.590 0.672 0.796 0.649 0.714 0.805 0.783 0.827 0.816 0.726 0.846 0.908 0.856 APPENDIX IX: Results of regression weights (standardized) by bootstrap method Parameter SE SE-SE Mean Bias SE-Bias WOENG < - PPAFA PROFA < - PPAFA DISFA < - PPAFA 0.083 0.003 0.661 -0.002 0.004 0.052 0.002 0.618 -0.001 0.003 0.055 0.002 0.781 -0.002 0.003 INTFA INFFA INTLE PROFA5 PROFA4 PROFA3 PROFA2 DISFA4 DISFA3 DISFA2 DISFA1 INTFA3 INTFA2 < - PPAFA < - PPAFA < - WOENG < - PROFA < - PROFA < - PROFA < - PROFA < - DISFA < - DISFA < - DISFA < - DISFA < - INTFA < - INTFA 0.049 0.002 0.766 0.000 0.003 0.046 0.002 0.827 0.004 0.002 0.067 0.003 -0.518 0.007 0.004 0.041 0.002 0.730 -0.002 0.002 0.045 0.002 0.756 -0.001 0.002 0.048 0.002 0.749 -0.001 0.003 0.044 0.002 0.782 0.001 0.002 0.043 0.002 0.769 0.001 0.002 0.048 0.002 0.720 0.000 0.003 0.042 0.002 0.786 0.001 0.002 0.037 0.001 0.813 0.000 0.002 0.041 0.002 0.775 -0.001 0.002 0.030 0.001 0.868 -0.002 0.002 INTFA1 < - INTFA INFFA4 < - INFFA INFFA3 < - INFFA INFFA2 < - INFFA INFFA1 < - INFFA WOENG1 < - WOENG WOENG2 < - WOENG WOENG3 < - WOENG WOENG4 < - WOENG WOENG5 < - WOENG WOENG6 < - WOENG WOENG7 < - WOENG 0.028 0.001 0.907 -0.003 0.002 0.043 0.002 0.663 -0.005 0.002 0.044 0.002 0.745 -0.002 0.002 0.039 0.001 0.767 0.000 0.002 0.060 0.002 0.587 -0.002 0.003 0.057 0.002 0.671 -0.001 0.003 0.037 0.001 0.793 -0.003 0.002 0.050 0.002 0.646 -0.003 0.003 0.059 0.002 0.709 -0.005 0.003 0.046 0.002 0.800 -0.005 0.002 0.033 0.001 0.786 0.003 0.002 0.030 0.001 0.830 0.004 0.002 WOENG8 < - WOENG WOENG9 < - WOENG INTLE1 < - INTLE INTLE2 < - INTLE INTLE3 < - INTLE 0.036 0.001 0.819 0.003 0.002 0.057 0.002 0.726 0.000 0.003 0.026 0.001 0.844 -0.002 0.001 0.026 0.001 0.908 0.000 0.001 0.027 0.001 0.854 -0.003 0.001 ... method was applied in this study to investigate aspects of the performance appraisal fairness, work engagement, and intent to leave in the private sector in Vietnam Sekaran and Bougie (2009) consider... following hypothesis: Hypothesis (H2): The higher the work engagement, the lower the intent to leave 2.6 The conceptual model and hypotheses of the research The conceptual model presented in figure... According to Mobley et al (as cited Lambert, 2006), intent to leave, also known as turnover intention, is the cognitive process of thinking, planning, and desiring to leave a job and there are