1. Work motivation among healthcare professionals in the Saudi hospitals Presented by Nouf Sahal Al-Harbi Supervised by: Dr. Saad Al-Ghanim 2008

2. Introduction: Improving health professionals is at top priority of decision makers at all levels, including politicians, healthcare professionals and administrators. Improving health professionals is at top priority of decision makers at all levels, including politicians, healthcare professionals and administrators.

3. Introduction: Enhancing healthcare providers motivation is an important strategy that should be acknowledged by all those involved in the provision of health care to patients.

4. Selected definitions Motivation is considered to be the desired positive willingness that prompts a person to action. Motivation is the desire to serve and perform effectively (Karabi, Peter, Karen & Marie, 2001). Motivation is the desire to serve and perform effectively (Karabi, Peter, Karen & Marie, 2001). According to Mariolein (2006) motivation at work can be defined as a worker's degree of willingness to make and maintain an effort towards achieving an organization's goal. According to Mariolein (2006) motivation at work can be defined as a worker's degree of willingness to make and maintain an effort towards achieving an organization's goal.

5. Significance of the study Health care organizations are characterized by unique characteristics that makes motivation an important topic for a research study. That is :  Hospitals are, by their nature, humanitarian facilities. That is, they are run and operated by human beings, their inputs are mainly human beings and their outputs are designed to be human beings as well.

6. Significance of the study  Therefore, health decision makers find it important to motivate those who are involved directly in the provision of health care to patients.

7. Significance of the study  The literature indicates that understanding what motivates and what demotivate health personnel is an important aspects of the health care administration.

8. Objectives of the study

9. To determine the extent of work motivation in Saudi hospitals. To determine the extent of work motivation in Saudi hospitals. To determine the major motivating factors for health care professional. To determine the major motivating factors for health care professional. To determine methods of increasing motivation among health professional To determine methods of increasing motivation among health professional This study was designed with the following objectives in mind:

10. Methodology  Design of the study  Data collection tool  Data analyses This part will cover the following topics:

11. Design of the study Work-related Work-Motivation Aspects Personnel-related Education-related Financial-related outcome

12. Data Collection Tool This is a descriptive-analytical study using a self-administered questionnaire (Arabic and English versions).

13. Data Collection Tool  The questionnaire was designed to collect information on different variables which serve the purpose of the study..

14. Data Collection Tool  The questionnaire was used to find out factors influencing the motivation of health care staff in the Saudi hospitals.

15.   Other than the demographic characteristics, the questionnaire consists of four dimensions related to health staff motivation: Work-related aspects Health personnel-related aspects Education and training-related aspects Financial and promotion aspects Data Collection Tool

16. Study Population and Sample   For this study, stratified random samples of physicians and nurses and other health staff working in MOH, other governmental hospitals and private hospitals were selected to comprise the study population.   450 questionnaires were distributed and the general response rate was 80.4%.

17. Study Population and Sample PercentageReturnedDistributed Type of Hospital 83.3125150 MOH hospital 90.7136150 Other Governmental hospital 76.3101150 Private 80.4362450 Total  Data in this study were collected between Oct. and Nov. 2007.

18. Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire A number of steps were taken into account to increase the content validity of the questionnaire. For example: A review of the literature A review of the literature Comments of experts Comments of experts Pilot study of 30 questionnaire Pilot study of 30 questionnaire

19. Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire  The reliability of the questions in the questionnaire were assessed using Cronbach's alpha as follows: 0.73 for work-related aspects. 0.93 for personnel-related aspects 0.95 for education and training aspects 0.71 for financial and promotion aspects 0.81

20. Data Analysis For the purpose of this study, the following data analyses were used: Descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics. This includes a general description of the study sample, in terms of frequencies and percentage, and where applicable, means and standard deviation.

21. Data Analysis Inferential statistics: Inferential statistics: Mainly, ANOVA (analysis of variance) and t-test (t-test of equality of means) were employed in order to determine whether the study respondents’ responses differ according to their: Mainly, ANOVA (analysis of variance) and t-test (t-test of equality of means) were employed in order to determine whether the study respondents’ responses differ according to their: Hospital type Hospital type Occupation Occupation

22. Results

23. Results of Descriptive Statistics

26. Mean=35.88, SD=9.34

30. Mean=11.24, SD=8.1 yrs

31. Other = Paramedical and administrative staff

32. Summary of mean scores of respondents The following tables summaries responses given about each dimension of variables. The following tables summaries responses given about each dimension of variables. In each dimension, the aspects are ranked in descending orders. That is, they are ranked according t their importance as perceived by respondents. In each dimension, the aspects are ranked in descending orders. That is, they are ranked according t their importance as perceived by respondents.

33. The respondents were asked to report their attitudes on a number of aspects which were thought influence their motivation. These responses were coded on a 5-point likert scale (which can be expressed as follows) 1 = none 2 = very little 3 = little 4 = much 5 = very much Note !!!

34. Work-related aspects

35. *Mean scores: 1=none, 2=very little, 3=little, 4=much, 5=very much 3.72±1.19 240 (66.9) 87 (24.2) 32 (8.9) Technology available at work 3.77±0.97 245 (68.2) 107 (29.8) 7 (1.9) Organization climate 3.80±0.99 268 (74.4) 71 (19.7) 21 (5.8) Physical conditions at work 3.93±0.97 277 (76.7) 71 (19.7) 13 (3.6) Clearness of job description 4.15±1.08 283 (78.2) 62 (17.1) 17 (4.7) Stress at work 4.16±0.92 302 (84.4) 48 (13.4) 8 (2.2) Working hours 4.22±0.97 299 (82.6) 54 (14.9) 9 (2.5) Workload 4.30±0.95 309 (86.3) 39 (10.9) 10 (2.8) Nature of the work Mean±SD * Much (%) Little (%) None (%) Aspects Work-related aspects

36. Personnel-related aspects

37. *Mean scores: 1=none, 2=very little, 3=little, 4=much, 5=very much 3.31±1.25 175 (48.6) 145 (40.3) 40 (11.1) Appreciation of achievements 3.53±1.18 214 (60.3) 111 (31.3) 30 (8.5) Authority a person is having 3.56±1.12 199 (55.1) 144 (39.9) 18 (5.0) Participation in decision-making 3.63±1.12 211 (58.3) 129 (35.6) 22 (6.1) Management support 3.98±1.14 282 (77.9) 54 (14.9) 26 (7.2) Type of patients dealing with 3.99±0.86 271 (75.5) 84 (23.4) 4 (1.1) Colleagues support 4.00±0.99 277 (76.7) 74 (20.5) 10 (2.8) Type of staff dealing with 4.19±0.82 321 (89.2) 29 (8.1) 10 (2.8) Relationships with colleagues Mean±SD* Much (%) Little (%) None (%) Aspects Personal-related aspects

38. Training and education-related aspects

39. Training and education aspects *Mean scores: 1=none, 2=very little, 3=little, 4=much, 5=very much 3.57±1.10 194 (53.6) 148 (40.9) 20 (5.5) Chances for training 3.67±1.23 223 (61.9) 107 (29.7) 30 (8.3) Continuous medical education 3.74±1.01 228 (63.0) 121 (33.4) 13 (3.6) Accessibility to information sources 3.81±0.91 243 (67.3) 108 (29.9) 10 (2.8) Availability of information Mean±SD * Much (%) Little (%) None (%) Aspects

40. Financial and promotion-related aspects

41. *Mean scores: 1=none, 2=very little, 3=little, 4=much, 5=very much 3.11±1.35 146 (40.6) 148 (41.1) 66 (18.3) Chances for promotion 3.23±1.36 177 (49.3) 117 (32.6) 65 (18.1) Financial incentives to staff 3.48±1.08 176 (48.8) 172 (47.6) 13 (3.6) Salary Mean±SD* Much (%) Little (%) None (%) Aspects Financial and promotion aspects

42. Top-5 Aspects (as perceived by respondents)

43. Work-related4.15±1.08 Stress at work 5 Work-related4.16±0.92 Working hours 4 Personnel-related4.19±0.82 Relationships with colleagues 3 Work-related4.22±0.97 Workload 2 Work-related4.30±0.95Nature of the work1 DimensionMean±SD Aspects No. Top-Five Aspects influencing respondents motivation Most aspects influencing respondents motivation relate to work aspects

44. A comparison between physicians and nurses ONLY for significant variables

45. In all variables that reach a significant differences, physicians have a higher mean scores than nurses (ONLY significant differences in the aspects are shown here) 1.066 3.73 176 Nurse 0.019 1.095 4.06 90 Physician Continuous medical education

46. Recommendations Based on the results of the study, the following recommendations were made:  Understanding factors influencing motivation is an important step towards better performance and stability at work for the sake of the care of patients.

47.  Healthcare administration should pay attention to the top-five factors reported in the study. These factors relate mostly to work and personal factors. Recommendations

48. Recommendations  Future research should focus on aspects which increase the motivation among health workers.

49. Conclusion Employee performance is a function of motivation and competency. Employee performance is a function of motivation and competency. To improve or maintain organization effectiveness, it is important for the administrators to know their employees and how to improve or maintain their work motivation To improve or maintain organization effectiveness, it is important for the administrators to know their employees and how to improve or maintain their work motivation

50. LIMITATIONS Despite the benefits of this study, a number of limitations deserve mention:

51. LIMITATIONS The study did not cover all hospitals, both in MOH and “ other ” governmental agencies. Therefore, the results are only limited to hospitals under investigations. Further research should increase the number of hospitals in different cities in the Kingdom

52. LIMITATIONS Another limitation of this study is related to the methodology used. In this research, the questionnaire is used which is not the best data collection tool. Another limitation of this study is related to the methodology used. In this research, the questionnaire is used which is not the best data collection tool. Further research should either use interviews or focus groups with health care providers. A combination of more than one data collection tool is recommended.

53. LIMITATIONS All data reported here were based on “ self- reported ” responses. This has a problem of bias which may have influenced the results. All data reported here were based on “ self- reported ” responses. This has a problem of bias which may have influenced the results.

56. Results of Inferential Statistics ANOVA

57. ANOVA Results When NOVA test was used, it has been found that there was a significant differences between the three healthcare sectors (MOH, other governmental and private sectors) in of the aspects included in the study. This can be seen in the next slide : When NOVA test was used, it has been found that there was a significant differences between the three healthcare sectors (MOH, other governmental and private sectors) in all of the aspects included in the study. This can be seen in the next slide :

59. A closer look to the significance in the detailed outputs of the SPSS indicates that there was a significance difference between the responses of the and the responses given by staff in the MOH and other governmental sectors in all aspects included in the study. This can be seen in the next tables: A closer look to the significance in the detailed outputs of the SPSS indicates that there was a significance difference between the responses of the private sector and the responses given by staff in the MOH and other governmental sectors in all aspects included in the study. This can be seen in the next tables: