2 Enter your Paper Title Here. Enter your Name Here. Enter Your Paper Title Here. Enter Your Name Here. ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION AND EFQM BUSINESS EXCELLENCE MODEL: AN IMPLEMENTATION ON TURKISH QUALITY AWARD WINNERS Dr.Ozkan Tutuncu, Dr.Ozlem Dogan

3 INTRODUCTION Excellence models affect performance and help organizations achieve organizational excellence. Furthermore employee satisfaction is another concern of organizational excellence.

4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH The link between employee and customer satisfaction has been verified empirically (Dahlgaard et al., 1998; Eskildsen and Dahlgaard, 2000). It has a limitation about data that was obtained by one company. The paper focuses on identifying the relationship between BEM and JS that creates satisfied employees in business excellence process.

5 BASIC CONCEPTS Excellence as the outstanding practice in managing organization and achieving results. Job satisfaction as pleasantness or unpleasantness of employees while working.

6 EXCELLENCE MODEL Five ‘Enabler’ criteria; Leadership, policy and strategy, people management, researches and partnerships, and process. Four ‘Results’ criteria; Customer satisfaction, people satisfaction, impact on society and key performance results.

7 BUSINESS EXCELLENCE

8 Job Descriptive Index Work itself Promotion Wages Supervision Co-workers JOB SATISFACTION

9 THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THE STUDY To determine the relationship between excellence model and job satisfaction. Hypothesis H1: There is a correlation between BEM and JS. H2: BEM factors are perceived more important then JS factors. H3: Personel relationships are perceived more important than material benefits among BEM applied companies in Turkey.

10 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A survey that contains JDI and EFQM Criteria are applied to Turkish Quality Award Winners employees in A five-point Likert scale was used in this part, ranging from ‘definitely agree’ (1) to ‘definitely disagree’ (5). Five companies and institutions have won EFQM Business Excellence Award in 2004.

11 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Survey is planned for all of them. However, one company is refused to participate in this survey. Approximately 9000 employees work in these organizations. In total, 400 questionnaires distributed by the researchers and 371 questionnaires were returned (2 of them eliminated).

12 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The questionnare is consisted of four parts. The first part involved 26 likert type survey items regarding employees’ satisfaction such as “My colleagues are friendly”. The second part of the instrument included 36 items designed to measure the level of the employees’ perception levels on EFQM Excellence model criteria and presented statements such as “Leaders motivate, support and recognize the organization’s people”.

13 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The third part was devoted to investigating the relationship between employees’ perception level on Business Excellence Model and Job Satisfaction (2 questions). The final part involved 6 questions regarding basic demographic characteristics of the respondents such as “How old are you?”. The survey instrument was pilot tested among 25 employees.

14 RESEARCH FINDINGS Number% % SEXEDUCATION Female10830,4High school6819,1 Man24769,6University24167,7 Total Post graduate4713,2 AGETotal356100, , ,3TOTAL WORKING YEARS , , and above267, Total357100,0More than 10 years TENURE (PRESENT JOB) Total Less than 1308, , , ,4 21 and more12535,6 Total351100,0

15 RESEARCH FINDINGS The reliability tests have been implemented on data. As a result of the test, the general Cronbach alpha of data is found to be as 0, 98.

16 Canonical Correlation Analysis Relating levels of Dependent and Independent Set Measures of overall Model Fit for Canonical Correlation Canonical Function Canonical Correlation Canonical R 2 F Statistics Probability Multivariate tests of significance Value Approx. F Statistics Probability Wilks’ lambda Pillai’s trace Hotelling’s trace Roy’s ger

17 CANONICAL RESULTS The table shows the canonical coefficients of JS and BEM variables. Canonical Function 1 has been found significant from the significance tests and redundancy values (p=0.0001, F=16.54, Canonical R 2 =0.53). Canonical Function 2 has not been taken into consideration since it is significant but poor redundancy percent with lower loadings (p=0.005, F=2.58, Canonical R 2 =0.068).

18 CANONICAL RESULTS Canonical Function 1Canonical Function 2 LoadingsCross-loadingsLoadingsCross-loadings Criterion set JS-Job Satisfaction BEM-Business Excellence Models Explained Vairance Predictor Set Work itself Wages Promotion Co-workers Supervision Leadership Policy People Partners Processes Results ,9080 %78, % Explained variance Canonical Coefficient % % Redundancy R 2 %53.3%6.8

19 CANONICAL RESULTS In Function 1, both dependent variables (criterion set) have loadings exceeding JS loadings 0.87 BEM loadings 0.91 This indicates a high correlation between JS and BEM and supports Hypothesis 1.This indicates a high correlation between JS and BEM and supports Hypothesis 1.

20 CANONICAL RESULTS All the independent variables loadings has positive values. Leadership (0.86, BEM) Partners (0.83, BEM) Processes (0.82, BEM)

21 CANONICAL RESULTS Policy (0.80, BEM) People (0.78, BEM) Supervision (0.75, JS) Work itself (0.74, JS)

22 CANONICAL RESULTS Results (0.69, BEM) Promotion (0.60, JS) Co-workers (0.42, JS) Wages (0.21, JS)

23 CANONICAL RESULTS The BEM components have mostly had positive and strongest impact on BEM and JS. As far as JDI components are concerned, supervision, work itself and promotion has also positive but relatively moderate impact on criterion set. It supports Hypothesis 2.

24 CANONICAL RESULTS Wages factor has minimum affect on BEM and JS. Wages loadings 0.21 It supports Hypothesis 3.

25 CANONICAL RESULTS In order to validate the canonical correlation analysis, sensitivity analysis of the independent set also has been made. Independent variables like leadership, partnership and supervision have been deleted but there have not been significant changes at the factor loadings. This analysis ensures the validity of the data.

26 CONCLUSION The relationship between the enablers of the EFQM criteria and the results can also be interpreted. The enablers of the study have more canonical loadings compared to the results. Process management more important than results. One reason is the formulation of the results in the survey as a whole through a questionnaire whose validity was previously proved while the results in the EFQM Model consist of four parts.

27 CONCLUSION Wages do not have an important place in this relationship. Employees do not evaluate their job satisfaction in relation with their wages in the process towards business excellence. Organizational goals are more important than individual goals for Turkish employees.

28 CONCLUSION Management that want to implement business excellence model practically should also take supervision, work itself, promotion and co-workers variables into consideration besides BEM’ s factor. The strong relationship between JS and BEM shows that organizations that implement business excellence models should be aware of job satisfaction which has a supporting role for the successful implementation.