CHƯƠNG 5 HÀM Ý VÀ KẾT LUẬN
5.3 Hạn chế đề tài và hướng nghiên cứu tiếp theo
Các đối tượng khảo sát trong đề tài chưa xác định rõ về quy mơ hoặc loại hình cơng ty mà đáp viên đang làm việc vì thế về yếu tố văn hóa việc làm sẽ có khác biệt giữa Nhà Nước và tư nhân, nước ngồi. Đây là một thiếu sót trong q trình thực hiện đề tài.
Do nghiên cứu thực hiện cịn một số hạn chế và thiếu sót nhất định, nên có thể được hồn chỉnh hơn nhờ các nghiên cứu mới. Một số nghiên cứu tiếp theo có thể dựa trên nền tảng ý tưởng của nghiên cứu này. Thực hiện khảo sát nghiên cứu với đối tượng nghiên cứu rộng hơn để việc tính tốn các ước lượng được chính xác và có khả năng suy diễn rộng hơn, phương pháp chọn mẫu có thể ưu tiên các phương pháp chọn mẫu xác suất để việc tính tốn các giá trị thống kê khách quan hơn.
TÀI LIỆU THAM KHẢO
Bachrach, D.G., Bendoly, E. and Podsakoff, P.M. (2001), “Attributions of the ‘causes’ of group performance as an alternative explanation of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and organizational performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 6, pp. 1285-1293. Barnard, C.I. (1938), The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Black, J.S. and Stevens, G.K. (1989), “The influence of the spouse on American expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments”, Journal of Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 529-544.
D’Amato, A. and Herzfeldt, R. (2008), “Learning orientation, organizational commitment and talent retention across generations: a study of European managers”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 929-953.
Dekas, K.H., Bauer, T.N., Welle, B., Kurkoski, J. and Sullivan, S. (2013), “Organizational citizenship behavior, version 2.0: a review and qualitative investigation of OCBs for knowledge workers at Google and beyond”, The Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 219-237
Gupta, A., Singh, V., (2018), “Enhancing intention to stay among software professionals”, Academia Revista Latinoamerica de Administracion, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 131-133.
Islam, T., Khan, M.M., Bukhari, F.H., (2016) “The role of organizational learning culture and psychological empowerment in reducing turnover intention and enhancing citizenship behavior”, The Learning Organization, Vol. 23 No.2, pp.156- 169.
Johanim, J., Yean, T.F, Adnan, J., (2012), “Promoting Employee Intention to Stay: Do Human Resource Management Practices Matter”, International Journal of Economics and Management, Vol. 6 No.2, pp. 396-416.
Lau, P., McLean, G., Lien, B. and Hsu, Y. (2016), "Self-rated and peer-rated organizational citizenship behavior, affective commitment, and intention to leave in a Malaysian context", Personnel Review, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 569-592.
Mackenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M, Fetter, R.F, (1991), “Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Objective Productivity as Determinants of Managerial Evaluations”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No.1, pp. 123-150.
Moorman, R.H. and Blakely, G.L. (1995), “Individualism-collectivism as an individual difference predictor of organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 127-142.
Morrison, E.W. (1994), “Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: the importance of the employee’s perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 1543-1567. Motowidlo, S.J. (2000), “Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organizational citizenship behavior in human resource management”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 115- 126.
Organ, D. W. (1988), “Issues in organization and management series. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome”, Human Performance, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 85-97.
Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M. and Blume, B.D. (2009), “Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: a metaanalysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 122-141. Podsakoff, P.M. and MacKenzie, S.B. (1994), “Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 351-363.
Price, J., Mueller, C. (1981), “A causal model of turnover for nurses”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 543-565.
Salehzadeh, R., Pool, J.K, Lashaki, J,K, (2015), “Studying the effect of spiritual leadership on organizational performance: An empirical study in hotel industry”,
International Journal of Culture Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 346-359.
Shanker, M., (2018), “Organizational citizenship behavior in relation to employees’ intention to stay in Indian organizations”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 24 No.6, pp. 1355-1366
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983), “Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature and antecedents”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68, pp. 653- 663.
Sweeney, P.D. and McFarlin, D.B. (1993), “Workers’ evaluations of the ‘ends’ and the ‘means’: an examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice”, Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 55, pp. 23-40.
Tett, R.P. and Meyer, J.P. (1993), “Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and turnover: path analysis based on meta-analytic findings”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 342-346.
Van Breukelen, W., van der Vlist, R. and Steensma, H. (2004), “Voluntary employee turnover: combining variables from the ‘traditional’ turnover literature with the theory of planned behavior,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 893-914.
X.-P., Hui, C. and Sego, D.J. (1998), “The role of organizational citizenship behavior in turnover: conceptualization and preliminary tests of key hypotheses”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 6, pp. 922-931.