European Journal of Scientific Research

ISSN: 1450-216X / 1450-202X Vol. 96 No 1 February, 2013, pp.24-37

http://www.europeanjournalofscientificresearch.com

Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries:

A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad

Norudin Mansor
Faculty of Business Management
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Terengganu, Malaysia
E-mail: norudinm@tganu.uitm.edu.my

Atiqah Kamarudin
Faculty of Business Management
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Terengganu, Malaysia
E-mail: atiqahkam89@hotmail.com

Noorul Huda Zakaria

Faculty of Business Management
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Terengganu, Malaysia
E-mail: noorulhuda@tganu.uitm.edu.my

Abstract

Employee satisfaction is supremely important in an organization because it is what

productivity depends on. Satisfied employees are more likely to be creative and innovative
and come up with breakthroughs that allow a company to grow and change positively with
time and changing market condition. A good environment will increase employees
satisfaction and directly improve employees performance. This paper attempted to
illustrate the relationship between ergonomic, motivation and job performance as to the
employees satisfaction. It is also expected to identify which variable found to be the most
significant towards the employees satisfaction. In addition it also aim to explore the
significant differences between the selected demographic profiles towards the employees
satisfaction besides examining the perception level of each division on satisfaction,
ergonomic, motivation and job performance. Gearing for getting meaningful generalization,
the study only focused on four departments in TM Bhd in the state of Johor which are
Corporate Center, Business Support, IT & Network Technology and TM Retail. Structured
questionnaires were constructed to collect the raw data. The finding of this study revealed
that there were significant relationships between ergonomic, motivation and job
performance towards employees satisfaction in TM Bhd. Consequently, employees
satisfaction level can be improved by directly improving these factors.

Keywords: Satisfaction, ergonomic, motivation, performance

Background of the Study

Employee is another asset for every organization that plays an important role in running their business.
Hence, employee satisfaction is one of the key elements where productivity depends on. With the
favorable satisfaction issues, obviously they would produce superior quality performance in optimal
time and lead to growing profit. While satisfactions trigger the feeling of comfort at the workplace,
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 25

ergonomic workplace may further trigger motivation among the employees. It is through job
satisfactions that promote health as well as affecting the quality of service rendered (Crossman and
Bassem, 2003). If the employee feels motivated to their job hence they are satisfied with what they are
working on. While conflict is the most common social phenomenon in organizations, it will lead to
dissatisfaction. Friction between employees, conflicts among departments, and confrontation among
organizations can threaten the development of enterprises (Wall and Callister, 1995; Jehn, 1997) and
has a great impact on staff relationships at work (Barki and Hartwick, 2001; Rahim, 1983). According
to Chen et al., (2012), conflicts can lead to compromise of job satisfaction, reduced motivation, and
lack of engagement and thus lower employees performances.
Ergonomic or Human Factors is a multi-disciplinary study of the relationships between the
person and the environment. Ergonomics include information about how human beings are affected by
their environment, especially at the workplace. It is intended to enhanced safety, productivity, quality
of life and thus affecting the job performances of employees. Similarly, office environment which are
considered safe and comfort may also influence the employees performance. Roper and Yeh (2007)
reported that, although ergonomics have been applied for many years, mostly by industrial designers, it
has recently gained attention in the facility management area. For a facility manager, ergonomics may
be specifically defined as the study of how to improve fit between the physical demands of a
workplace and the employees who perform the work. This involve considering the variability in human
capabilities when selecting, designing, or modifying equipment, tools, work tasks, and the work
environment. The goal of ergonomics itself enables workers to be more effective by matching the
requirements and demands of the job to the abilities and limitations of the work rather than trying to
force the workers to fit into the job.
Managers must always remember that they are responsible for a subordinates performance.
They are the primary source for inspiring the employees to perform well in doing their job. Motivation
from management can be in terms of financial or non-financial. Motivation in term of financial are like
bonus, promotion and different kind of incentive while non-financial are like organizing events for the
employees such as Family Day, awarding vacation for the best employees performance, and hosting
events that inspire employees. Understanding what motivate employees is one of the key challenges for
managers (Milne, 2007). Although it is not possible directly to motivate others, it is nonetheless
important to know how to influence what others are motivated to do, with the overall aim of having
employees identify their own welfare within the organization (Bruce and Pepitone, 1999). Motivation
can be divided into two types which are intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. According to Deci (1971),
in intrinsically motivated behavior there is no reward except with the task itself. Reward and
recognition come within the discussion on extrinsically motivated behavior that occurs when an
activity is rewarded by incentives not inherent in the task. Assessing employees performance in an
organization is useful for improving organizations performances as it leads to maximizing profit and
minimizing the cost. For any discussion about employee or job performance, what needs to be
highlighted is that, there are two way process that tie in the manager and the employee, with the
Human Resource Manager undertake the role of a mediator. For instance, any discussion about
employee performance has to include the manager and the employees as it is imperative for both
parties to realize their responsibilities to ensure that the process is smoothened.
In the nutshell, ergonomics, motivation from management, and job performance may influence
employees satisfaction in performing their job. Thus management and employee must work together
in order to get the tasks properly and smoothly done while ensuring employees are satisfied while
working. The internal customer which is the employees need to be satisfied and exposed to happy
working experienced first before they can delight their customers.
Telekom Malaysia Berhad (TMB), Malaysias broadband champion and leading integrated
information and communications group, offers a comprehensive range of communication services and
solutions in broadband, data and fixed-line. As a market leader, TM is driven by stakeholder value
creation in a highly competitive environment. The Group emphasized on delivering an enhanced
customer experience via continuous customer service quality improvements and innovations, whilst
26 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria

focusing on increased operational efficiency and productivity. Leveraging on the extensive global
connectivity, network infrastructure and collective expertise, TM is well positioned to propel Malaysia
as a regional Internet hub and digital gateway for South-East Asia. TM remains steadfast in its
transformation into a new generation communications provider to deliver an enhanced and integrated
digital lifestyle to all Malaysians, and opening up possibilities through connection, communication and
collaboration, towards our shared vision of elevating the nation into a high-income economy.

Problem Statement
Job satisfaction is one criterion for establishing the health of an organization and rendering effective
services (Fitzgerald et al., 1994) and will affect the quality of service (Crossman and Bassem, 2003).
The organizations success depends on their employees performance and these performances may
influence their employees satisfaction. While establishing the above relationship, ergonomics
elements also signify its role in improving productivity at the workplace. The goal of ergonomic itself
is to provide maximum productivity with minimal cost. Ergonomics seeks to prevent such injuries by
studying the relationship between the workplace and people at work in order to improve the efficiency
and comfort while on the job. Based on the pilot interview, with several staff of TM Bhd, it was
disclosed that there were two cases of ergonomic involving muscular disorder injuries. The manager is
advised to use manual handling at the workplaces due to the cases. The requirements of the job must be
matched with the workers capabilities in order to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal injuries resulting
from handling materials manually or the way the job needs to be performed. If the condition in the
workplaces especially in office environment is not efficient, the employees may not feel comfortable
to do their work and thus, their performances may be drop.
Employees satisfaction is also very much related to motivation. Motivation given by the
management may trigger the employees to perform their job better. From the perspectives of the
employees, organizations are now asking them to share whatever they have based on the positions they
hold (Milne, 2007) and they are looking forward for financial reward in terms of pay and bonuses
(Anthony and Govindarajan, 2007; Kunz and Pfaff, 2002) and make them to understand that the
incentive systems as related to satisfaction (Stringer et al., 2011). Based on the pilot qualitative
investigation with several staff of TM Bhd, there was a difference motivation level between
departments of the Human Capital Business Driver (HCBD) department and Consumer Sales
department. Several respondents from HCBD department denote that they are not highly motivated and
having low interaction with their manager. A few of the staff also said that they refused to do overtime
unless the manager asks them to do it. They felt stressful on the workplace environment, as well as
unhappy with colleagues and boss relationship. Compared to the Consumer Sales department, most of
the staff mentioned that they are highly motivated because of getting support from the manager. Any
event of sales, the manager and employees will work together and support each other and thus
motivating them to make the sales, indirectly they will earn more commission from the sales. The
staffs were mentioning that the environment at the workplaces is very important to motivate or
encourages their staff to work more efficient and effective. It is different from the HCBD department
where most of the staff said that they are less motivated when talking about the working atmosphere
especially the relationship with their manager.

Objective of the Study

I. To illustrate the relationship between ergonomic, motivation and job performance with the
employees satisfaction.
II. To identify the most significant variable contribute towards the employees satisfaction.
III. To examine the perception level of each division towards employees satisfaction, ergonomic,
motivation and job satisfaction.
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 27

Significant and Scope of the Study

The research which is descriptive in nature, focused on TM Berhad in the state of Johor concerning
employees job satisfaction as the dependent variable and ergonomic, motivation and job performance
as the independent variables. Based on the population of 1220, the sample of 300 respondents was
considered. Extra precautionary measures were taken to overcome any problem arises with the
instrument collected on the sample.

Literature Review
Employee Satisfaction
Employee or job satisfaction is an important factor for the organization success. Various definitions are
available in clarifying the meaning of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction has been defined as a set of
favorable or unfavorable feeling with which employees view their work (Norudin Mansor et al., 2012).
Robbins (2005) defined job satisfaction as a collection of feelings that an individual holds towards his
or her job. Spector (1997) gave the meaning of job satisfaction as how people feel about their jobs and
different aspects of their jobs. The relationship between job satisfaction and performance is still open
to question, it would be unwise to assume that high job satisfaction leads to high performance, or that
high performers are satisfied with their jobs (Euske et al., 1980). These pleasures are not limited to
salary, but can include factors such as the way employees are treated and valued by management, and
the degree to which the company takes their input into consideration (Hanafiah and Normah, 2007).
Satisfaction is the contentment of a desire which is come true or to achieve sacred fulfillment from a
wish (Muhammad Ehsan Malik et al., 2012). Different factors have different affect on job satisfaction
proven by the previous studies. According to Norudin Mansor et al. (2012), factors influencing job
satisfaction were examined by the content theory such as the Maslow Hierarchical of Needs,
Herzbergs Two Factors Theory, and the Existence, Relatedness and Growth theory. The Herzberg
Theory can be divided into two conditions that are satisfier or motivator, and dis-satisfier or hygiene
factors which are not able to provide motivation or satisfaction. As mentioned by Herzberg et al.
(1959), satisfier includes the work itself, responsibility achievement, recognition, advancement and
growth while dis-satisfier includes working position, interpersonal relationship, salary status, job
security, supervision, company policy and personal life. Furthermore, employees position also plays a
role towards level of satisfaction. This is proven as mentioned by Geddes et al., (2003), managerial
employees felt more satisfaction as compared to employees of non managerial positions and
managerial position has positive effect on job satisfaction. Numerous factors influence employee job
satisfaction, as reviewed by Rad and Yarmohammadian (2006). Job satisfaction has been observed to
affect levels of job dissatisfaction, absenteeism, grievance expression, tardiness, low morale, high
turnover, quality improvement and participation in decision-making (Yiing and Kamarul, 2009).
Dissatisfaction towards the job may bring new problem to the organization such as employee strike,
reluctant to continue their work; employees may leave the company, so on and so forth. More satisfied
workers are less likely to leave their employer (Shields and Ward, 2001; McEvoy and Cascio, 1985;
Freeman, 1978), have lower rates of absenteeism (Clegg, 1983) and have higher productivity
(Mangione and Quinn, 1975). Identifying factors that influence job satisfaction provides administrators
and managers with necessary, meaningful information to make intelligent decisions regarding
interventions aimed at increasing employees job satisfaction (Lambert et al., 2001). Numerous
evidences show that the important issues in organizations have always been the employee satisfaction
and retention (Hanafiah and Normah, 2007). Job satisfaction is an issue of importance to business
owners and top managers because low levels of job satisfaction are related to increased absenteeism
(Porter and Steers, 1973; Scott and Taylor, 1985). Companies can save significant amounts of both
time and monetary resources because satisfied workers are less likely to create absenteeism and
turnover issues for the company (Droussiotis and Austin, 2007). If companies want to manage turnover
28 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria

and absenteeism effectively, managers must develop an understanding of factors that affect employee
satisfaction (Oshagbemi, 2000).

Ergonomic
Ergonomics is a significant factor in achieving and maintaining high levels of worker productivity,
hence increase the workers performance. Brooks (1998) mentioned that ergonomic is concerned with
all aspects of designing for people. It is the applied science of equipment design intended to reduce
operator fatigue or discomfort and has become an indispensable area of knowledge for todays facility
managers. Ergonomic can be one of the factors that can influence or affect the performance of
employees. This is because ergonomic is usually regarding the work office environment and it is
generally taken for granted that all design is concerned with creating objects and spaces to serve the
needs of their user. According to the TM Group Ergonomic Guidelines, it is said that ergonomic fitting
the working environment to the employee and not fitting the employee to the working environment. To
show how importance ergonomic in the workplace, the OSH Act 1994 require employers to provide a
safe working environment which also means to minimize chronic injuries due to working environment
hazards because of lacking ergonomic considerations. Ergonomic usually connected with cumulative
trauma disorders (CTD). CTD are a major cause of lost time in many labor-intensive industries and it is
categorized under musculoskeletal injuries. McMahan (1999) mentioned that CTD occur in the
musculoskeletal and nervous systems, and may be caused or aggravated by repetitive motion, forceful
exertion, vibration, mechanical compression, and sustained or awkward posture. So that, Roper and
Yeh (2007) said that these ergonomic solutions in workplace design are needed to compensate for the
diminished physical capacities of older workers. This is because mostly older workers are easily get
fatigue or muscular injuries rather than younger workers. Overall, if the employees regardless their
ages, notice repeated pain or injury related to their work, the specific environment may need to be
analyzed, equipment adjusted or added, and procedures modified. Despite that, furniture or equipment
also can attributes to the ergonomic condition in the workplace. The office furniture needs to support
the worker, the workers equipment and the task being performed (Rudolph and Kleiner, 1990).
Meaning that, the furniture such as chairs, should be adjustable and freedom of movement in order to
reduce any CTD and the same goes to the others furniture or equipment such as tables, computer
monitors, so on and so forth. Ergonomic also has to do with feeling comfort in the workplace or work
environment that may influence and give an impact to the employees performance. As mentioned
CTD is familiar to the ergonomics, therefore, ergonomic risk factors should be identified and reduced
to lower the risk of getting musculoskeletal injuries for all employees. In turn, employees should take
ergonomics seriously and participate in the endeavor to reduce the risk of developing musculoskeletal
injury.

Motivation
Ross (2002) mentioned that, motivation at work has been a popular area of research for much of this
century, especially from the 1930s onwards. Need-satisfaction based models have influenced more
contemporary research and have provided a more informed understanding of work motivation. If jobs
are unskilled and easily accomplished, employees will become bored and frustrated. This situation will
give rise to job dissatisfaction unless job elements are changed in a positive way. As noted by
Takahashi (2006), the three benefits, like rapid advancement in gaining higher positions, a high level of
compensation, and engagement in interesting and challenging work, contribute to the improvement of
workers motivation and job satisfaction. Job characteristic also can be the one of sources that can
motivate employees to do their work rather than monetary factor. Wiley (1997) said that exploring the
attitudes that employees hold concerning factors that motivate them to work is important to creating an
environment that fosters employee motivation. Employees also can get motivated to do their job when
their colleagues were also motivated and giving support from each other during performing their tasks
(Bjerke et al., 2007). Many of those working with the business segment stated that they were motivated
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 29

by their specific tasks and the position they held as well as the responsibility they have and the
flexibility they enjoy. Motivation has divided into two types which are intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. As mentioned by Deci (1971), in intrinsically motivated behavior there is no reward except
with the task itself. Reward and recognition programs come within the discussion on extrinsically
motivated behavior that occurs when an activity is rewarded by incentives not inherent in the task.
Keaveney (1992) said that intrinsic motivation refers to an individuals feeling of challenge or
competence derived from performing a job. Intrinsic motivation was found to exert a significant
negative impact on emotional exhaustion. It is also said that high levels of intrinsic motivation resulted
in high levels of job performance, job satisfaction, and affective commitment to the organization
(Osman and Mehmet, 2006).

Employees Performance
Human resource management (HRM) has emerged as an important discipline that is used in many
fields. In a highly competitive environment, HRM has become a strategic imperative tool for most
organizations, at a minimum long-term total cost (Manoharan et al., 2012). Performance appraisal (PA)
is seen as one of the most critical of HRM tools (Ratzburg, 2008). PA is used to determine how an
employee is performing in their job, and communicates the information back to the employee. It
provides input for the training and development needs of employees. As reported by Hailesilasie
(2009), employee performance depends on individual and group behavior. Oreg (2003) mentioned that,
factors determining individual differences in job performance include cognitive ability,
conscientiousness, goal orientation and motivation. Motowidlo and Van Scotter (1994) proposed two
dimensions of employee performance. Task performance (or technical job performance) is the behavior
associated with maintaining and servicing an organizations technical core. Employees performance
can be increased by giving them training instead of offering them with financial reward such as bonus
or incremental in salaries, claims and other form of incentives. Workplace training and performance
appraisals have the same objective which is to improve performance in terms of both behavior and
results (Kirkpatrick, 2006). An effective PA programs should do more than set salary and promotion
decision based on past performance. It should aid in the development of a performance improvement
plan that utilizes coaching to increase skill development. This puts it in the same category as training,
which is all about looking ahead and developing practical programs that result in improved
performance (Kirkpatrick, 2006; Thomas, 1997). Once the strengths and weaknesses have been agreed
on, weaknesses should be converted into training needs. The employee and manager should then
jointly develop a performance improvement plan, and the manager can develop a coaching plan to
ensure that the agreed on training needs are met. When both of them work together to create
development plan, this results in improves performance (Thomas, 1997).

Research Methodology
Research Design
This research is descriptive in nature. Through this descriptive approach the research is expected to
ascertain and able to describe the characteristics of the variables of interest in a situation. The design
was formulated by selecting the three main independent variables after a comprehensive review of the
past literature. It is further elaborated in the diagram as provided in the theoretical framework as
depicted in Figure 1 below:

Instrumentation and Data Collection

All the research variables are measured through pre-formulated questionnaire. The questionnaire is
been divided into five (5) sections which are A, B, C, D, and E. Each question was measured using a
five-point Likert scale technique varies from strongly disagree to strongly agree. In section A, the
30 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria

question is for demographic profile of respondent in terms of gender, division, position, the length of
working with present employer, time period worked for the task, and their present work shift. In
section B, the question is related to the main theme of the study which is satisfaction. The section
involved measuring the understanding the current status of the staff satisfaction on their present job. In
section C, the questions measured ergonomic in terms of comfort, equipment or furniture, and design
workstation. While section D attempted to measure information on how the respondent are motivated
to do their work. The last part of the question in Section E is related to job performance which is
intended to measure how far the performance will enhance their satisfaction.
All the quantitative data were collected by distributing the written set of questionnaire to the
respondent. The process of distributing questionnaires was done through email distributed to the
respondent that are far away from Johor Bahru such as Kluang, Kota Tinggi and others district that
possibly consume more time and effort to reach. The potential respondent were reminded to check and
respond back to the questionnaire attached in the e-mail. As for those within the nearby locality, the
personally administered questionnaire was adopted to get a respondent and allow us to collect the all
complete response from respondent in a short time. We had used this method to collect data from
samples of TM Berhad in Taman Sentosa, Johor Bahru and Bukit Timbalan, Johor Bahru. With the two
strategies, the feedback obtained is therefore encouraging.

Theoretical Framework

Figure 1: Research Framework describing relationship between ergonomics, motivation, job performance,
with employees satisfaction

The main theme of this investigation is determinant of employees satisfaction among TM

Berhad employees. The Independent variables are made up of ergonomics, motivation, job
performance that may influence the dependent variable in either positive or negative way. The variance
of dependent variable is accounted for by the independent variable.

Hypothesis Formulation
Seven (7) hypotheses was formulated as shown below:
H1: There is a significant relationship between ergonomic and employees satisfaction.
H2: There is a significant relationship between motivation and employees satisfaction.
H3: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and employees satisfaction.

Sampling Procedures
The sampling frame is derived from the list of the TM Bhd divisions of employees in the state of
Johor, for the year 2012 which is approximately 1220 employees. Based on the population, the sample
of 300 respondents were selected. Ensuring that the sample size used in this study need to have
sufficient statistical power, we therefore followed the suggested rule of thumb in determining the size
based on the procedure proposed by Krejice and Morgan (1970).
The sampling method for the study used probability approach that is through stratified random
sampling. We believed through this technique, the populations have the probabilities attached to their
being chosen as sample subjects, thus the findings can be confidently generalized to the population. By
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 31

using this sampling method, all groups were adequately sampled and comparisons among 4
departments of TM Bhd were made possible. The execution of the final stage of sample was done by
lucky draw of the names from each department.

Finding and Analysis

Reliability Analysis
The data collected was subjected to the analysis of reliability of measures by testing for both
consistency and stability. Consistency indicates how well the items measuring a concept hang together
as a set. According to Sekaran & Bougie (2010), the reliability which is less than 0.60 is generally
considered to be poor, those in range of 0.70 to be acceptable and those over 0.80 to be good. The
result for the Cronbachs reliability test of this research is shown in table 1. For the employees
satisfaction, motivation and job performance variables, all of the questions are reliable to be used as
indicated with the alpha value of more then 0.70. Ergonomic variable that was made up of three parts
consist of comfort, furniture or equipment, and design workstation initially measured based on 27
items was 0.926. It seems that few items were overlapping which may lead to the issue of multi-
collinearity. Thus the strategy of dropping 3 items found to be appropriate with the new reliability
value for ergonomic is 0.911.

Table 1: Reliability Testing

BEFORE ADJUSTED AFTER ADJUSTED

SECTION ITEM ALPHA ITEM ALPHA
Employee satisfaction 9 0.807 9 0.807
Ergonomic 27 0.926 24 0.911
Motivation 8 0.887 8 0.887
Job performance 12 0.821 12 0.821

Frequency Distributions
The distribution of sample is displayed in the table 2 below. Out of 300 respondents, 155 were male
staff and 145 were female staff participated in the survey. Of the total number, 82% were from
nonexecutive, while 18% were at executive position. There were four divisions which are IT &
Network Technology represented by 72.7%, TM Retail (18%), TM Corporate Center (1.&%) and TM
Support Business (7.7%). Of the total sample, 20.0% of them have been working for the company
around 12-17 years, those who had been working with present employer with less than 1-5 years and
18-23 years made up of 18.7% each. The lowest percentage shown among the employees working
with the present employer at the range of 36 years and above that was only 1%. Referring to the length
of time work in the task, 32.3% of them were in the range of less than 1-5 years, followed by those
within the range of 12-17 years with 27.3%, 30-35 years with 3.7% and none have been working in the
particular task for 36 years and above.

Table 2: Respondents Profile

frequency percentage
gender male 155 51.7
female 145 48.3
division it & network technology 218 72.7
tm corporate center 5 1.7
tm retail 54 18.0
tm support business 23 7.7
32 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria
Table 2: Respondents Profile - continued

position executive 54 18.0

non-executive 246 82.0
length of service <1-5 years 56 18.7
6-11 years 35 11.7
12-17 years 60 20.0
18-23 years 56 18.7
24-29 years 48 16.0
30-35 years 42 14.0
36 years & above 3 1.0
length of working in the task <1-5 years 97 32.3
6-11 years 43 14.3
12-17 years 82 27.3
18-23 years 42 14.0
24-29 years 25 8.3
30-35 years 11 3.7
36 years & above - -

Correlation of Coefficient
The analysis of correlation was performed to test the relationship between all the variables involved.
The rules of thumb have been proposed by De Vaus (2002) to characterize the strength of association
between variables, based on the absolute size of the correlation of coefficient.

Table 3: Pearson Correlation Coefficient for Variables

ERGONOMIC MOTIVATION PERFORMANCE

JOB Pearson Correlation 0.367(**) 0.434(**) 0.201(**)
SATISFACTION Sig.(2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

The results of the coefficient analysis showed that the relationship between ergonomic,
motivation and job performance with the employees satisfaction among TM Bhd having a moderate
correlation as indicated by the p value of 0.367, 0.434, and 0.201 respectively. All the factors revealed
that they were having a significant relationship toward employee satisfaction based on 0.000 as in the
table 3 above.

Multiple Regression Analysis

Regression analysis is performed to address hypothesis 4. As regression and correlation are closely
related, regression assumes the dependent is predicatively linked to the independent.

Table 4: Coefficient (a) table

Unstandardized coeff Standardized coeff

Model T Sig.
B Std. error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.381 0.256 5.388 0.000
Motivation 0.309 0.041 0.375 7.468 0.000
Ergonomic 0.232 0.043 0.276 5.333 0.000
Job performance 0.084 0.050 0.086 1.687 0.093
a. Dependent Variable: Job Satisfaction

Table 4 displayed the combination between ergonomic, motivation and job performance
coefficient regression. Motivation had a higher value that is 0.375, followed by ergonomic with beta
value of 0.276, and the lowest was 0.086 that is job performance. The t-value showed that the
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 33

combination of motivation, ergonomic and job performance had significant relationship with
satisfaction among TM Bhd. employees, but the factor of job performance as displayed with the beta-
value of 0.086 found to be not significant at 0.093.

Table 5: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Sig. F Change
1 0.531 a 0.282 0.274 0.311 0.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), job performance, ergonomic, motivation

As shown in Model Summary (table 5), the value of adjusted R Square of 27.4% from the three
(3) independent variables were able to explain the relationship with employees satisfaction among TM
Bhd. The evidence became stronger through the significant that is at 0.000.

Mean Analysis
The computed mean values of 3.87, 4.20, 3.92, and 3.72 for the Employees Satisfaction, Motivation,
Job Performance and Ergonomic respectively suggested the importance of each selected variables to be
moderate except for dimension concerning ergonomic that needed more attention from the
management of TM Bhd.

Table 6: Mean value for the measurement constructs

Items Mean value Standard deviation

Employees satisfaction 3.87 0.365
Motivation 4.20 0.444
Job performance 3.92 0.374
Ergonomic 3.72 0.435

Conclusion and Recommendation

This study set out to determine ergonomic, motivation and job performance as factors that affect
employees satisfaction. The second objective is to identify which factors is the most significant
towards the employees satisfaction. While the last objective attempted to explore the significant
differences between the selected demographic profiles towards employees satisfaction.
This study has found that, there were significant relationship between ergonomic, motivation
and job performance towards satisfaction among TM Bhd employees. The Pearson Correlation for
ergonomic is 0.367, motivation is 0.434 and job performance is 0.201. Comparing on the linear
relationship, out of three independent variables, motivation provides more influence on satisfaction
among the employees. Money is one of a good motivator. Generally, all employees work for money,
and the need for money, good salary, and good incentives are the key factors in satisfying them. No
doubt the organization can increase the employee salary and compensation hoping to utter employee
satisfaction, but the issue here is why does job performance becomes the least important variable even
though they are motivated to do their job. Therefore, on the second thought, not all people only look
after the money, in addition, ergonomic factor also seems to have relations towards employees
satisfaction as depicted by the results above. A good work conditions will provide positive impact on
performance and ultimately increased employee job satisfaction. Therefore measuring ergonomic
factor by intruding further into elements like defining the comfort, furniture or equipment arrangement
and also the designed workstation, more likely affects employees satisfaction. Revisiting back the
research issue, we therefore provide the following recommendations:
Provide training and equipping: Top management need to be serious to add value to their
employees as it will ultimately add value to the company or the organization. Building up and
equipping the employees with specific training for their jobs always increase productivity. Job training
34 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria

will always add value to the organization but it will incurred cost. But to bear the total cost will be the
fiercest part to the top management. Thus many times it end up with employees are often not trained
well enough to take the responsibility of making decisions that are necessary to achieve desirable
results. Even if they are sufficiently trained, many employees are prohibited from making decisions by
employers who have not placed enough trust in them. Employees are often forced to work within the
confines of very rigid practice guidelines and policies. In order to allow employees to achieve results
for clients and experience the related satisfaction, it is necessary for employers to train employees and
then empower them with the freedom to make decisions for clients. Adopting the concept of
organizational learning is one way of realizing the competitiveness of the employees (Norudin Mansor
and Azyanee Lukman, 2012), and thus helping the employee to adapt with the new environment and
new job task. With training and support given to the employee, it will motivate them to do the task and
increase satisfaction with the working environment.
Give recognition and appreciation: This strategy is very inspirational as it can boost the
employee morale and offer a greater sense of achievement. Further, the employees understand that they
are been appreciated and that their effort matter beyond earning a paycheck. Management also should
always show their appreciation to the employees even with the simple words like thank you and
beware, not to compare or comment the staff in front of other staff. Even though the intention is to give
them lesson, but for the employee, it will humiliate them in front of the others. Management should be
more sensitive towards their employees in terms of make them feel appreciated by their supervisor and
equip the employees needs that related to the job task and thus increasing performance.
Employee evaluation: An effective employee evaluation is an interactive process where the
manager gives his input on the employee's performance, and the employee gets the chance to point out
what she has learned throughout the year. Managers create a plan along with the employee for the
coming year on how the employee can develop and improve their performance, hence increase their
satisfaction. Comprehensive employee evaluations are mostly important to the ongoing satisfaction of
employees. This is important in order to meet any organizational and individual needs. It is also to find
out how well the employee is performing the job and establish a plan of improvement where necessary.

Future Research
For future research, it is suggested that several other variables such as working environment,
promotion exercises to be included in the study. This internal environment is determined by the
employees feelings towards their jobs, colleagues, and employers. Some employees are simply bored
in their current positions or they believe the company is not utilizing their talent.

References
[1] Anthony, R. and Govindarajan, V. (2007), Management Control Systems, 12th ed., Irwin,
Singapore.
[2] Barki, H. and Hartwick, J. (2001), Interpersonal Conflict And Its Management In Information
System Development, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 195-228.
[3] Bjerke, R.,Ind, N., and Paoli, D.D., (2007), The Impact of Aesthetics on Employee Satisfaction
and Motivation, EuroMed Journal of Business, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 57 73.
[4] Brooks, A., (1998), Ergonomic Approaches to Office Layout and Space Planning, Facilities,
Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 73-78.
[5] Bruce, A. and Pepitone, J.S. (1999), Motivating Employees, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
[6] Chen X. H., Zhao K., Liu X., Wu D.D, (2012), Improving Employees' Job Satisfaction And
Innovation Performance Using Conflict Management, International Journal of Conflict
Management, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.151 172.
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 35

[7] Clegg, C. W. (1983), Psychology Of Employee Lateness, Absence, And Turnover: A

Methodological Critique And An Empirical Study. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68
No.1, pp.88-101.
[8] Crossman, A. and Bassem Abou-Zaki, (2003),Job Satisfaction And Employee Performance Of
Lebanese Banking Staff, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 368 376.
[9] Deci, E.L., (1971), Effects of Externally Mediated Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 18, pp. 105-15.
[10] De Vaus, D. (2002). Analyzing Social Science Data. SAGE Publication Great Britain.
[11] Droussiotis, A., and Austin, J., (2007), Job satisfaction of Managers in Cyprus, EuroMed
Journal of Business, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 208 222.
[12] Euske, K.J., Jackson, D.W. and Reif, W.E. (1980), Performance and Satisfaction of
BankManagers, Journal of Bank Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 36-42.
[13] Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R., Brignall, S., Silvestro, R. and Voss, C. (1994), Performance
Measurement in Service Businesses, the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants,
Cambridge.
[14] Freeman, R. B. (1978), Job Satisfaction as an Economic Variable. American Economic
Review, Vol. 68, pp.135-141.
[15] Geddes, Lori, A. and John S. Heywood. 2003, "Gender and Piece Rates, Commissions and
Bonuses," Industrial Relations, Vol. 42, pp. 419 44.
[16] Hailesilasie, G., (2009), Determinants of Public Employees' Performance: Evidence from
Ethiopian Public Organizations, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 238 253.
[17] Hanafiah Haji Hasin, and Normah Haji Omar, (2007), An Empirical Study on Job Satisfaction,
Job Related Stress and Intention to Leave Among Audit Staff in Public Accounting Firms in
Melaka",Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 21 39.
[18] Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Synderman B. B. (1959). The Motivation to Work. Wiley & Sons
Inc. New York.
[19] Jehn, K.A. (1997), A Qualitative Analysis Of Conflict Types And Dimensions In
Organizational Groups, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42, pp. 530-57.
[20] Keaveney, S.M., (1992), An Empirical Investigation of Dysfunctional Organizational Turnover
Among Chain and Non-Chain Retail Store Buyers, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp.
145-73.
[21] Kirkpatrick, D.L. (2006), Training And Performance Appraisal - Are They Related?, Training
& Development, Vol. 60, No. 9, pp. 44-5.
[22] Krejcie, R. and Morgan, D. (1970), Determining Sample Size for Research Activities,
Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30, pp. 607-610.
[23] Kunz, A. and Pfaff, D. (2002), Agency Theory, Performance Evaluation and the Hypothetical
Construct Of Intrinsic Motivation, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp.
275-95.
[24] Lambert, E. G., Hogan, N.L., and Barton, S.B.,(2001), The Impact of Job Satisfaction on
Turnover Intent: a Test of a Structural Measurement Model Using a National Sample of
Workers, The Social Science Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 233-250.
[25] Mangione, T.W. and Quinn, R.W. (1975), Job Satisfaction, Counterproductive Behavior and
Drug Use At Work. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, pp.114-116.
[26] Manoharan, T.R., Muralidharan, C., and Deshmukh, S.G., (2012), A Composite Model for
Employees' Performance Appraisal and Improvement, European Journal of Training and
Development, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 448 480.
[27] McEvoy, G. M. and Cascio, W. F. (1985), Strategies For Reducing Employer Turnover: A
Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70, No. 2, pp. 342-353.
[28] McMahan, S., (1999), Ergonomic Solutions for Reducing the Risk of CTDs, American Journal
of Health Studies, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 199-205.
36 Norudin Mansor, Atiqah Kamarudin and Noorul Huda Zakaria

[29] Milne, P., (2007), Motivation, Incentives and Organizational Culture, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 11, No.6, pp. 28 38.
[30] Motowidlo, S.J. and Van Scotter, J.R. (1994), Evidence That Task Performance Should Be
Distinguished From Contextual Performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, pp. 475-
80.
[31] Muhammad Ehsan Malik, Rizwan Qaiser Danish and Yasin Munir, (2012), The Impact of Pay
and Promotion on Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Higher Education Institutes of Pakistan,
American Journal of Economics, pp. 6-9.
[32] Norudin Mansor and Azyanee Luqman (2012). Strengthening Employees Competency
Through Organizational learning: A Case of Malaysian Islamic Insurance Company, World
Applied Sciences Journal, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp 996-1005.
[33] Norudin Mansor, Jannah Munirah Mohd Noor and Nik Fakrulhazri Nik Hassan, (2012), Job
Satisfaction among the Bankers: An investigation on Islamic Financial Institution in Eastern
Region of Malaysia, Asian Social Science, Vol.8, No. 10, pp.186-196.
[34] Osman M. Karatepe, and Mehmet Tekinkus, (2006), The Effects of Work-Family Conflict,
Emotional Exhaustion and Intrinsic Motivation on Job Outcomes of Front-Line Employees,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 24, No.3, pp. 173 -193.
[35] Oreg, S., (2003), Resistance to Change: Developing an Individual Differences Measure,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 4, pp. 680-93.
[36] Oshagbemi, T. (2000), Is length of service related to the level of job satisfaction?, International
Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 27, pp. 213-26.
[37] Porter, L. and Steers, M. (1973), Organizational Work and Personal Factors In Employee
Turnover and Absenteeism, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 80, pp. 156-76.
[38] Rad, A.M.M. and Yarmohammadian, M.H. (2006), A Study Of Relationship Between
Managers Leadership Style and Employees Job Satisfaction, Leadership in Health Services,
Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 11-28.
[39] Rahim, M.A. (1983), A Measure Of Styles Of Handling Interpersonal Conflict, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 368-76.
[40] Ratzburg, W.H., (2008), Performance Appraisal Defined, available at:
www.geocities.com/wilfratzburg/ performanceappraisal.html (accessed 27 September 2009).
[41] Robbins, S.P. (2005), Organizational Behavior, 11th ed., Pearson Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
[42] Ropper, K.O., and Yeh, D.C., (2007), Ergonomic Solutions, for an Aging Workforce, Journal
of Facilities Management, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 172-178.
[43] Ross, D.L., (2002), An Exploratory Study of Work Motivation Among Private and Public
Sector Hospital Chefs in Australia, Journal of Management Development, Vol.21, No. 8, pp.
576 588.
[44] Rudolph, P.A., and Kleiner, B.H., (1990), Building an Effective Office Space, Work Study, Vol.
39, No. 3, pp. 6-10.
[45] Scott, K.D. and Taylor, G.S. (1985), An Examination of Conflicting Findings on the
Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism: A Meta-Analysis, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 599-612.
[46] Sekaran, U and Bougie, R. (2010), Research Methods for Business, A Skill-Building Approach,
5th Ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. U.K.
[47] Shields, M. and Ward, M. (2001), Improving Nurse Retention In The National Health Service
In Enland: The Impact Of Job Satisfaction On Intentions To Quit. Journal of Health
Economics, Vol. 20, pp. 677-701.
[48] Spector, P.E (1997), Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Employees Satisfaction in Telecommunication Industries: A Case of Telekom Malaysia Berhad 37

[49] Stringer, C., Diaham, J., and Theivananthampillai, P., (2011), Motivation, Pay Satisfaction, and
Job Satisfaction of Front-Line Employees, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management,
Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 161-179.
[50] Takahashi, K., (2006), Effects of Wage and Promotion Incentives on the Motivation Levels of
Japanese Employees, Career Development International, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 193 203.
[51] Thomas, S.L. (1997), Performance Appraisals: Any Use For Training?, Business Forum, Vol.
22, No. 1, pp. 29-32.
[52] Wall, J.A. Jr and Callister, R.R. (1995), Conflict and Its Management, Journal of Management,
Vol. 21, pp. 515-58.
[53] Wiley, C., (1997), What Motivates Employees According to Over 40 Years of Motivation
Surveys, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 263 280.
[54] Yiing, L.H., and Kamarul Zaman Bin Ahmad, (2009), The Moderating Effects of
Organizational Culture on the Relationships between Leadership Behaviour and Organizational
Commitment and Between Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction and Performance,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 53 86.