What factors affect to workers performance at SAMCO

RESEARCH PROJECT (BMBR5103) WHAT FACTORS AFFECT TO WORKER,S PERFORMANCES AT SAMCO STUDENT’S FULL NAME : NGUYEN CAO PHU STUDENT ID : CGS00019879 INTAKE : SEPTEMBER, 2015 ADVISOR’S NAME & TITLE : DR BUI PHI HUNG December, 2016 1|P a g e ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To complete the theme: “What factors affect to worker,s performances at SAMCO”, I would like to extend my sincere and deepest thanks to Dr Phi Hung, Lecturer of the Institute of International Education, HUTECH University, who imparted knowledge and scientific research methods with professional enthusiasm and passion He helped me to approach the scientific research methods to systematically and logically complete the subject Besides, I would like to thank all the classmates of the MBA course-OUM K19A for their continuous striving and efforts in research, learning and building harmonious relationships during the past time Special thanks to OUM-HUTECH for teaming up together to build this program, which offered me an opportunity to access and expand knowledge of the most advanced business administration of the world Once again, please accept my sincere thanks./ 2|P a g e REASSURANCES I assure master thesis “What factors affect to worker’s performances at SAMCO”the end results of the learning process, independent scientific research and serious The data in the thesis is collected from actual, trustworthy, honest and objective source and hasnever been published in any other projects./ Ho Chi Minh City, December 2016 Student Nguyen Cao Phu 3|P a g e ADVISOR’S ASSESSMENT Advisor’s signature DR BUI PHI HUNG 4|P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Abstract of the subject 1.2 Research objectives 1.3 Research Question 10 1.4 Object and scope of study 10 1.5 Research into methodology 10 1.6 Practical significance of the thesis 10 1.7 Structural dissertation 11 CHAPTER 2: LITERURE REVIEW 12 2.1 The stress at work 12 2.1.1 The concept of tension 12 2.1.2 The concept stress at work 12 2.2 Measuring stress at work 13 2.3 Results work 14 2.4 The relationship between stress at work and the results of work 15 2.5 Some studies have associated 16 2.6 Proposed research model 17 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION METHOD 25 3.1 Research Process 25 3.2 Research Methodology 25 3.2.1 Qualitative research 25 3.2.2 Quantitative research 31 CHAPTER 4:RESULTS, FINDINGS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA 37 4.1 Overview of SAMCO 37 4.1.1 Introduction of SAMCO 37 4.1.2 Field work 37 4.1.3 Some financial indicators 38 5|P a g e 4.2 Description sample 38 4.3 The statistical tests 38 4.3.1 Cronbach's Alpha Accreditation 38 4.3.2 Exploring factor analysis (EFA) 41 4.4 Regression Analysis 46 4.5 Detects a violation of assumptions required in linear regression 49 4.5.1 Accreditation phenomenon of residual variance change 49 4.5.2 Inspection of the normal distribution of the surplus 50 4.5.3 Inspection of linear relationship 51 4.5.4 Inspection of the independence of error 52 4.6 Accreditation difference of qualitative variables 52 4.6.1 Gender 52 4.6.2 On the qualifications, age and income 53 4.7 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 57 CHAPTER 5: ANALYSIS RESULTS DISCUSSION 58 5.1 INVESTIGATE ANALYSIS 58 5.2 THE STATISTICAL TEST 59 5.2.1 Cronbach's Alpha Accreditation 59 5.2.2 Exploring factor analysis (EFA) 60 5.3 REGRESSION ANALYSIS 61 5.3.1 Multiple regression analysis 61 5.3.2 Detects a violation of assumptions required in linear regression 64 5.3.3 Inspection of linear relationship 65 5.3.4 Inspection of the independence of error 65 5.4 Accreditation difference of qualitative variables 66 5.4.1 Gender 66 5.4.2 On the qualifications, age and income 66 5.5 Discuss findings 68 6|P a g e CHAPTER 6: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 72 6.1 Summarize findings 72 6.2 Suggestions and proposals 73 6.2.1 Recommended, general recommendations for businesses 73 6.2.2 Proposals and recommendations specific to each enterprise 77 6.3 These contributions, limitations of the study and research the next 80 6.3.1 The contribution of the study 80 6.3.2 The limitations of the study and research followed 81 REFERENCES 82 APPENDICES 86 THE QUESTION 86 7|P a g e CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Abstract of the subject The employees are always valuable asset and greatest giftin a business It is the work efficiency that employees bring help businesses survive and sustainable its development Therefore, the study of issues affecting work efficiency of the employees are always a subject matter for organizations both domestically and globally The stress at work is one of the factors that greatly affect the workers and their working efficiency The world, according to statistics from the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 2012 said that about 20% of the world population was under excessive stress at work And in Vietnam, according to research, the average percentage of people under stress at work in the country is more than 52%, especially in the industrial sector, in the factories, 71% of workers have tremendous stress Rescission has impacted manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles as these sectors require skilled workers and lack of the skills has lead to stress in the jobs Our country is in the process of industrialization and modernization There is abundant human resources in the industry of assembly and repair of automobiles This sector has become one of the important sectors in the country and in general the Corporation of Transport Engineering Saigon - Limited, one of the Corporation that holds sectoral task mechanic, with the Government planning in one of the four corporations that takes over pivotal development of the automobile industry in Vietnam The effects of the recession the global economy has faced in the recent years has caused difficulties for businesses in manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles Along with the adjustment of business strategies, the quality of human resources, effective work of the employees Several studies worldwide have demonstrated a relationship between stress at work and the results of the employee performance at work Research by Ali et al (2013) discovered the elements of work stress and its effects on the work outcomes: (1) Pressure overload of work and time, (2) The non-compliance between level of training and work, 8|P a g e (3) the relationship between work and family, (4) relations with colleagues, (5) Lack of administrative support, (6) occupational Risks, (7) the relationship with customers, (8) The general stress factors According to the research by Karunanithy and Ponnampalam (2013) with elements in work stress effects on work outcomes include: (1) Overload at work, (2) The pressure of time, (3 ) the uncertainty about the role, (4) Conflict of roles, (5) responsibility In my research and Barabankaran Kaveri (2013) with elements of job stress affect work efficiency, they are: (1) The uncertainty about the responsibilities and powers, (2) Uncertainty of the work, (3) the volume of work overload, (4) Calendar working unreasonable, (5) Lack of support from the company, (6) working environment pollution, toxic, ( 7) an imbalance between work and life The stress at work is increasingly intriguing researchers worldwide for analysis and further research on it as well.As this influences many aspects of life, including work and efficiency of workers In Vietnam a similar study was doneand according to the study, stress at work has its impact on workers in various industries According to Tran Thi Thanh Tam (2011) on the impact of stress on the satisfaction of faculty and staff management block of City Economics University Ho Chi Minh City, the Thuy Duong Thi Luu (2013) studied that the stress of work and the results of the work of the sales staff in the city In Ho Chi Minh however, to date there is no research on the effects of stress on the job “What factors affect to worker’s performances at SAMCO” a member of the proposed research with the desire to help for businesses manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles in SAMCO better understand the effects of stress factors in the work results of employees work - the source of their greatest assets, thereby helping businesses with reasonable policies to help workers reduce the harmful effects of stress at work causes to improve productivity and work efficiency of the enterprise 1.2 Research objectives This study aims to achieve the following objectives: (1) Identify the components of the stress at work (2) Determine the impact of the components of stress at work and the results of it on the employees 9|P a g e (3) To propose a number of recommendations designed to help businesses manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles in SAMCO factors and minimize negative impact of stress on the job for employees and to help them achieve the best performance 1.3 Research Question (1) What is the components of the stress at work? (2) The degree of the impact of these components on the job stress results in a worker's work like? (3) Solutions according to research, which should be take to reduce stress and improve productivity for workers at SAMCO? 1.4 Object and scope of study - Research Subjects: The factors causing stress at work of workers and the impact of these factors resulted in a worker's work at SAMCO - Scope of the study: The study in 12 companies manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles under SAMCO Statistical data of the last years (2012-2014) and data collected by the author in 2015 - Subjects were surveyed: the workers are working in the business of production, assembly and repair of automobiles under SAMCO 1.5 Research into methodology Research into methodology of the research is the hybrid method, combining the method of qualitative research and quantitative research Qualitative research for detection, additional scale Quantitative research to collect, analyze survey data, reaffirmed components as well as the value and reliability of the scale components of the stress at work, the scale of work and test results of theoretical model 1.6 Practical significance of the thesis - Theoretically: Adding the evidence in practice of Vietnam on the factors causing stress at work which affect the results of the laborers working in enterprises - At a practical level: The findings help businesses and entrepreneurs in general manufacturing, assembly and repair of automobiles in a particular way The more the 10 | P a g e 27 376 1.253 97.132 28 345 1.151 98.283 29 273 911 99.194 30 242 806 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Appendix 6: Analytical results EFA  Independent factor KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 713 2.489E3 df 406 Sig .000 Rotated Component Matrixa Component OD1 OD2 OD3 OD4 KL1 KL2 KL3 KL4 KL5 HT2 HT3 HT5 HT6 HT7 MT2 MT3 MT4 MT5 MT6 MT7 CN1 CN2 CN3 CN4 DM2 DM3 DM4 DM5 DM6 004 110 021 089 037 022 -.041 048 -.046 -.206 -.029 -.080 012 088 067 -.102 -.053 -.014 004 120 -.061 117 092 422 668 675 715 705 690 005 003 090 -.008 -.055 -.039 004 -.014 070 636 678 774 745 734 -.042 -.031 -.054 -.008 063 020 -.164 -.083 064 -.050 -.074 -.163 066 -.026 000 065 015 093 -.068 019 027 -.002 -.016 037 -.071 063 -.024 111 -.077 650 724 507 753 673 579 005 128 -.015 -.021 -.047 024 002 149 -.044 049 021 -.021 035 662 689 755 717 623 -.059 -.103 033 -.001 066 094 034 099 -.027 004 -.040 007 024 -.004 -.020 -.098 002 051 008 038 802 766 740 655 074 064 -.022 -.079 050 133 -.184 -.082 126 085 -.007 066 -.083 050 131 -.059 -.025 003 065 125 020 042 072 -.008 075 039 048 -.058 093 -.054 092 -.006 033 -.029 -.084 -.090 -.066 069 -.065 -.106 044 -.038 019 082 062 757 731 839 632 144 022 092 077 009 -.008 -.066 -.159 294 044 -.275 -.175 151 251 048 -.160 -.057 074 040 -.284 213 577 206 -.227 065 -.090 -.059 078 145 291 086 -.028 -.153 -.133 101 | P a g e Rotated Component Matrixa Component OD1 OD2 OD3 OD4 KL1 KL2 KL3 KL4 KL5 HT2 HT3 HT5 HT6 HT7 MT2 MT3 MT4 MT5 MT6 MT7 CN1 CN2 CN3 CN4 DM2 DM3 DM4 DM5 DM6 004 110 021 089 037 022 -.041 048 -.046 -.206 -.029 -.080 012 088 067 -.102 -.053 -.014 004 120 -.061 117 092 422 668 675 715 705 690 005 003 090 -.008 -.055 -.039 004 -.014 070 636 678 774 745 734 -.042 -.031 -.054 -.008 063 020 -.164 -.083 064 -.050 -.074 -.163 066 -.026 000 065 015 093 -.068 019 027 -.002 -.016 037 -.071 063 -.024 111 -.077 650 724 507 753 673 579 005 128 -.015 -.021 -.047 024 002 149 -.044 049 021 -.021 035 662 689 755 717 623 -.059 -.103 033 -.001 066 094 034 099 -.027 004 -.040 007 024 -.004 -.020 -.098 002 051 008 038 802 766 740 655 074 064 -.022 -.079 050 133 -.184 -.082 126 085 -.007 066 -.083 050 131 -.059 -.025 003 065 125 020 042 072 -.008 075 039 048 -.058 093 -.054 092 -.006 033 -.029 -.084 -.090 -.066 069 -.065 -.106 044 -.038 019 082 062 757 731 839 632 144 022 092 077 009 -.008 -.066 -.159 294 044 -.275 -.175 151 251 048 -.160 -.057 074 040 -.284 213 577 206 -.227 065 -.090 -.059 078 145 291 086 -.028 -.153 -.133 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Component Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings % of % of Total Variance Cumulative 3.588 2.780 2.605 2.398 2.021 1.820 1.040 12.373 9.587 8.982 8.267 6.967 6.276 3.585 12.373 21.960 30.942 39.209 46.177 52.453 56.038 Total 3.588 2.780 2.605 2.398 2.021 1.820 1.040 % of Variance 12.373 9.587 8.982 8.267 6.967 6.276 3.585 Cumulative % 12.373 21.960 30.942 39.209 46.177 52.453 56.038 Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total 2.709 2.664 2.649 2.446 2.374 2.330 1.079 % of Variance % of Cumulative 9.343 9.186 9.135 8.433 8.187 8.035 3.719 102 | P a g e 9.343 18.529 27.664 36.097 44.284 52.319 56.038 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 970 933 828 814 754 731 713 660 613 590 587 552 526 498 485 465 394 390 376 347 276 247 3.344 3.216 2.856 2.808 2.600 2.519 2.459 2.277 2.113 2.035 2.025 1.902 1.815 1.717 1.672 1.603 1.360 1.344 1.297 1.197 952 852 59.382 62.598 65.453 68.262 70.862 73.381 75.840 78.117 80.231 82.265 84.290 86.192 88.007 89.724 91.396 92.999 94.359 95.702 96.999 98.196 99.148 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Appendix 7: Analytical results EFA  Independent factor KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 714 2.388E3 df 378 Sig .000 Rotated Component Matrixa Component OD1 OD2 OD3 OD4 KL1 KL2 KL3 KL4 001 109 017 089 035 021 -.041 046 003 004 093 -.018 -.059 -.033 009 -.022 079 012 097 -.055 023 014 -.024 001 053 025 -.013 026 660 699 759 713 799 766 734 665 072 056 -.025 -.079 034 040 -.072 108 -.053 073 -.018 041 103 | P a g e KL5 HT2 HT3 HT5 HT6 HT7 MT2 MT3 MT5 MT6 MT7 CN1 CN2 CN3 CN4 DM2 DM3 DM4 DM5 DM6 -.048 -.208 -.030 -.083 009 087 063 -.103 -.017 002 118 -.056 119 097 425 669 675 715 704 693 059 633 685 775 741 734 -.036 -.038 -.016 070 016 -.161 -.081 063 -.054 -.082 -.165 069 -.020 009 053 -.064 044 -.018 126 -.084 654 727 770 664 597 -.003 132 -.020 -.009 -.024 037 003 149 -.074 615 -.059 -.098 036 000 065 107 029 -.030 015 -.038 013 030 -.004 -.021 -.106 001 053 016 040 054 136 -.184 -.083 127 092 -.025 064 045 118 -.068 -.025 000 072 131 028 044 074 -.012 080 -.015 -.079 -.097 -.069 073 -.062 -.126 056 030 066 064 751 724 842 637 159 024 087 063 -.002 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Component Total % of Variance Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings % of Cumulative Total % of Variance % of Cumulative Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance % of Cumulative 3.581 12.791 12.791 3.581 12.791 12.791 2.712 9.686 9.686 2.739 9.782 22.572 2.739 9.782 22.572 2.662 9.506 19.192 2.483 8.869 31.442 2.483 8.869 31.442 2.446 8.735 27.927 2.323 8.296 39.737 2.323 8.296 39.737 2.441 8.718 36.645 2.014 7.192 46.929 2.014 7.192 46.929 2.371 8.468 45.113 1.820 6.498 53.428 1.820 6.498 53.428 2.328 8.314 53.428 973 3.475 56.902 967 3.454 60.357 873 3.119 63.476 10 828 2.957 66.432 11 811 2.896 69.328 12 731 2.610 71.939 13 713 2.547 74.486 14 665 2.375 76.861 15 625 2.231 79.092 16 600 2.144 81.237 17 587 2.097 83.334 18 567 2.026 85.360 19 551 1.967 87.327 20 525 1.876 89.204 104 | P a g e 21 497 1.776 90.979 22 470 1.679 92.658 23 397 1.418 94.077 24 394 1.405 95.482 25 377 1.346 96.828 26 352 1.259 98.087 27 288 1.029 99.116 28 248 884 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Appendix 8: Results of regression analysis Variables Entered/Removedb Model Variables Removed Variables Entered Method DM, KL, MT, HT, OD, CNa Enter a All requested variables entered b Dependent Variable: KQ Model Summaryb Model R 715a Adjusted R Square R Square 512 Std Error of Durbin-Watso the Estimate n 503 46022 1.978 a Predictors: (Constant), DM, KL, MT, HT, OD, CN b Dependent Variable: KQ ANOVAb Sum of Squares Model df Mean Square Regression 70.628 11.771 Residual 67.354 318 212 137.982 324 Total F 55.576 Sig .000a a Predictors: (Constant), DM, KL, MT, HT, OD, CN b Dependent Variable: KQ 105 | P a g e Coefficientsa Unstandardized Coefficients Model B Std Error (Constant 8.004 ) 290 OD -.363 038 KL -.340 HT Standardized Coefficients Beta Collinearity Statistics t Sig Tolerance VIF 27.583 000 -.379 -9.480 000 963 1.039 039 -.338 -8.609 000 994 1.006 -.171 037 -.184 -4.632 000 968 1.033 MT -.251 038 -.259 -6.564 000 989 1.011 CN -.134 038 -.148 -3.563 000 889 1.125 DM -.194 039 -.208 -5.029 000 896 1.116 Chart remainder normal distribution 106 | P a g e Appendix 9: Results analyzed differences 107 | P a g e  Independent Sample T-Test Workers’ sex Group Statistics Your Sex KQ N Male Female Mean Std Deviation Std Error Mean 310 2.9202 65782 03736 15 2.7667 53005 13686 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances F KQ Equal variances assumed 1.095 Equal variances not assumed Sig t-test for Equality of Means t 296 889 df 95% Confidence Interval of the Sig Mean Std Error Difference (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper 323 374 15349 17258 -.18603 49302 1.082 16.160 295 15349 14187 -.14701 45400  Oneway Anova Worker’s age Descriptives KQ 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N 50 Total 116 161 32 16 325 Std Mean Deviation Std Error 2.7759 3.0714 2.7656 2.6094 2.9131 05705 05224 11389 11173 03620 61448 66287 64426 44692 65259 Lower Bound 2.6629 2.9683 2.5333 2.3712 2.8419 Upper Bound 2.8889 3.1746 2.9979 2.8475 2.9843 Minimum Maximum 1.50 1.75 1.50 2.00 1.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 3.50 4.50 108 | P a g e Test of Homogeneity of Variances KQ Levene Statistic 1.171 df1 df2 Sig 321 321 ANOVA KQ Sum of Squares Between Groups (Combined) Linear Unweighted Term Weighted Deviation Within Groups Total Mean Square df F Sig 8.393 2.798 6.930 000 957 957 2.371 125 011 011 027 870 8.382 129.589 137.982 321 324 4.191 10.381 404 000 Multiple Comparisons KQ LSD (I) age (J) age 50 Mean Difference (I-J) Std Error 95% Confidence Interval Sig Lower Bound Upper Bound * 07738 000 -.4478 -.1433 41-50 01024 12687 936 -.2394 2598 >50 50 50 University Total Std Std Mean Deviation Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum 69 2.9855 173 2.9465 81 2.7809 61370 07388 64898 04934 67475 07497 2.8381 2.8491 2.6317 3.1329 3.0439 2.9301 1.75 1.50 1.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 2.8750 1.23744 87500 -8.2429 13.9929 2.00 3.75 325 2.9131 65259 03620 Test of Homogeneity of Variances 2.8419 2.9843 1.50 4.50 KQ Levene Statistic 1.193 df1 df2 Sig 321 312 ANOVA KQ Sum of Squares Between Groups Within Groups Total df 1.974 136.008 137.982 Mean Square 321 324 658 424 F Sig 1.553 201 Wokers’ income Descriptives KQ N Std Mean Deviation Std Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 10M 81 3.0802 56710 06301 2.9549 3.2056 2.00 4.50 110 | P a g e Descriptives KQ Std Mean Deviation N 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Std Error Minimum Maximum 10M Total Test of Homogeneity of Variances KQ Levene Statistic df1 319 df2 322 Sig .727 ANOVA KQ Sum of Squares Between Groups Mean Square df F Sig (Combined) 5.490 2.745 6.672 001 Linear Unweighted Term Weighted 5.423 5.423 13.179 000 5.411 5.411 13.152 000 079 132.492 137.982 322 324 Deviation Within Groups Total 079 411 191 662 Multiple Comparisons KQ LSD Mean Difference (I-J) Std Error 95% Confidence Interval (I) earnings (J) earnings Sig Lower Bound Upper Bound < million - 10 million -.21525* 08776 015 -.3879 -.0426 > 10 million -.36822* 10143 000 -.5678 -.1687 111 | P a g e .21525* 08776 015 0426 3879 -.15297 08703 080 -.3242 0182 * 10143 000 1687 5678 15297 08703 - 10 million * The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level .080 -.0182 3242 - 10 million < million > 10 million > 10 million < million 36822 Enterprise employees are working Descriptives KQ 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Std Std Lower Upper N Mean Deviation Error Bound Bound Minimum Maximum Enterprise Industrial and 33 3.0076 Automotive Service Industrial and Motor 10 2.9750 Service Enterprise Automotive Service 2.6000 Enterprise ISUZU Lac JSC Automotive Thai 2.2188 Co., Ltd Toyota Tsusho 19 2.7500 Saigon JSC Hang Xanh Motors 13 2.1154 Service Western Coach Station 35 2.5714 Joint Stock Co Co Automotive Toyotsu 4.1000 Samco An Lac Automotive 60 2.7917 Engineering Enterprise An Lac Specialized Automotive Engineering 2.3333 Enterprise Isuzu Vietnam Company 66 3.4735 Limited Company TNHH Co., Ltd Mercedes Benz 62 2.8871 Vietnam Total 325 2.9131 59452 10349 2.7968 3.2184 2.00 4.00 29930 09465 2.7609 3.1891 2.75 3.50 82158 36742 1.5799 3.6201 2.00 4.00 24776 08760 2.0116 2.4259 2.00 2.50 56519 12966 2.4776 3.0224 2.00 4.00 31648 08778 1.9241 2.3066 1.50 2.50 50574 08549 2.3977 2.7452 1.50 3.50 28504 12748 3.7461 4.4539 3.75 4.50 50875 06568 2.6602 2.9231 1.50 4.50 50000 16667 1.9490 2.7177 1.50 3.00 48661 05990 3.3539 3.5931 3.00 4.50 63806 08103 2.7251 3.0491 1.50 4.50 65259 03620 2.8419 2.9843 1.50 4.50 112 | P a g e Test of Homogeneity of Variances KQ Levene Statistic df1 1.182 df2 11 313 Sig .298 ANOVA KQ Sum of Squares Between Groups (Combined) Linear Unweighted Term Weighted Deviation Within Groups Total Mean Square df F Sig 49.265 11 4.479 15.801 000 2.079 2.079 7.336 007 4.271 4.271 15.069 000 44.994 88.717 137.982 10 313 324 4.499 15.874 283 000 Multiple Comparisons KQ Dunnett t (2-sided) 95% Confidence Interval (I) ENTERPRISE Mean (J) Difference Std Lower Upper ENTERPRISE (I-J) Error Sig Bound Bound Enterprise Industrial and Automotive Service Automotive Service Enterprise ISUZU Lac JSC Automotive Thai Ben Thanh Co., Ltd Toyota Tsusho Saigon Toyota Car JSC Hang Xanh Motors Service Enterprise JSC Passenger Western and Services Co Automotive Toyotsu Samco An Lac Automotive Engineering Enterprise -.03258 19218 1.000 -.5711 5060 -.40758 25549 627 -1.1236 3084 -.78883* 20981 002 -1.3768 -.2009 -.25758 15332 561 -.6872 1721 -.89219* 17433 000 -1.3807 -.4036 -.43615* 12918 008 -.7982 -.0741 1.09242* 25549 000 3764 1.8084 -.21591 11538 418 -.5393 1074 113 | P a g e An Lac Specialized Automotive -.67424* 20021 009 -1.2353 -.1132 Engineering Enterprise Isuzu Vietnam Company Limited 46591* 11351 001 1478 7840 Co., Ltd Mercedes Benz Vietnam -.12048 11472 950 -.4420 2010 * The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level Schedule 10:The average value of the observed variables factor Instability in work Statistics OD1 N Valid OD3 OD4 325 325 325 325 0 0 3.72 3.18 4.58 3.85 Missing Mean OD2 Overload workload Statistics KL1 N Valid KL3 KL4 KL5 325 325 325 325 325 0 0 3.30 2.74 4.45 3.92 3.53 Missing Mean KL2 Lack of support from the company Statistics HT2 N Valid HT5 HT6 HT7 325 325 325 325 325 0 0 2.40 2.51 2.70 3.10 3.37 Missing Mean HT3 Toxic, polluted working environment Statistics MT2 N Valid Missing Mean MT3 MT5 MT6 MT7 325 325 325 325 325 0 0 3.26 3.43 3.43 3.60 3.32 114 | P a g e The difficulty of new technologies Statistics CN1 N Valid CN3 CN4 325 325 325 325 0 0 3.49 3.47 3.90 3.18 Missing Mean CN2 Lack of passion, excitement for the job Statistics DM2 N Valid Missing Mean DM3 DM4 DM5 DM6 325 325 325 325 325 0 0 2.99 3.87 3.62 3.42 3.46 Appendix 11: Statistical results of worker working in 12 enterprises in SAMCO No 10 11 12 INTERPRISE Enterprise Industrial and Automotive Service Automotive Service Enterprise ISUZU Lac JSC Automotive Thai Co., Ltd Toyota Tsusho Saigon JSC Hang Xanh Motors Service JSC Passenger Western and Services Co Automotive Toyotsu Samco An Lac Automotive Engineering Enterprise An Lac Specialized Automotive Engineering Enterprise Isuzu Vietnam Company Limited Co., Ltd Mercedes Benz Vietnam Enterprise Industrial and Automotive Service OD KL HT MT CN DM 3.89 3.27 2.67 3.45 3.61 3.70 3.93 3.64 3.00 3.38 3.08 3.10 4.00 4.04 2.20 3.52 3.20 3.36 4.09 3.85 3.18 3.65 3.78 3.85 3.97 3.76 2.97 3.59 3.80 3.34 4.31 3.78 3.12 3.71 3.67 3.60 3.99 3.55 2.91 3.53 3.55 3.62 3.50 2.72 2.52 3.40 3.45 3.16 3.92 3.61 2.73 3.39 3.70 3.48 4.06 3.84 2.80 3.67 3.78 3.78 3.49 3.59 2.73 3.15 3.31 3.28 3.77 3.62 2.89 3.38 3.44 3.48 115 | P a g e ...ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To complete the theme: ? ?What factors affect to worker,s performances at SAMCO? ??, I would like to extend my sincere and deepest thanks to Dr Phi Hung, Lecturer of the Institute of International... however, to date there is no research on the effects of stress on the job ? ?What factors affect to worker’s performances at SAMCO? ?? a member of the proposed research with the desire to help for... subject matter for organizations both domestically and globally The stress at work is one of the factors that greatly affect the workers and their working efficiency The world, according to statistics