Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rita Mano-Negrin
Department of Human Services
University of Haifa
Haifa 31905 Israel
rsso155@haifa.uvm.ac.il
and
Alan Kirschenbaum
Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management
Technion-Israel Institute of Technology
Haifa 32000, Israel
avik@ tx.technion.ac.il
Abstract
Occupational preferences and subsequent turnover behavior are part of a
complex relationship between employees and their occupational and
organizational labor markets. Both contribute to matching skills and jobs.
Differences in individual, occupational and organizational attributes can predict
the direction and intensity of preferences for organizational, occupations and job
locations. Occupational preferences, which reflect the attractiveness of
alternative positions within and outside the employing organization, are
examined as central antecedents of occupation-specific turnover behavior. Over
700 medical employees and a follow-up sample of 81 "quitters" were analyzed
from a cross-sectional data set drawn from a representative medical
organizational sample,. The results suggest that occupational preferences, and
their impact on actual turnover behavior, are primarily influenced by the impact
of organizational and occupational employment opportunities. The implications of
such potential job shifting within and between work organizations are of a direct
relevancy for human resource managers.
OCCUPATIONAL PREFERENCES AND TURNOVER DECISIONS:
INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONAL AND LABOR MARKET EFFECTS
INTRODUCTION
Staying in or leaving an organization is an integral part of the behavioral decision
set of its employees. The decision sequence is affected by individual perceptions
of the work place and the market and has an impact on social and demographic
processes within the organization (Dalton, 1997). Part of this turnover process
involves selecting a destination option. An employee simply does not leave a
position into an amorphous labor market. He or she takes into account
alternative positions, be they within or outside their present work site. We will
argue occupational preferences reflected in desired positions may be an
important clue to understanding employees' internal organizational transfers and
outright turnover. We will borrow a basic idea from traditional migration studies
that sees labor shifting as dependent on the availability and access ability of
alternative job locations (Dalton 1997; Breeden 1990). Individuals do not just
leave their jobs; rather they make a change from their present occupational
position in favor of an alternative specific occupational destination. Job shifting,
within this framework, comes to reflect a matching process between skills and
job opportunities (Granrose & Portwood, 1987) and involves moving from one
task-position to another, one organizational job-site to another, one type of
occupational group to another or totally withdrawing from the labor market. Such
types of turnover in the guise of employee relocation (Magnus & Dodd, 1981;
Fisher & Shaw, 1994), corporate transfers and career mobility (Kirschenbaum,
1991) became the primary pathways entailing occupational preferences. In this
sense, turnover behavior conceptually incorporates both a "job origin" and "job
destination" within its framework. Yet, the relevance of occupational preferences
on turnover decisions and the role individuals and organizational settings play in
defining them is overlooked in the majority of turnover models (Campion, 1991).
Organizational studies have attempted to bridge the gap between individual and
organizational attributes stressing how individual level decisions concerning
turnover - and the direction it takes - tend to be related to how opportunities are
viewed. The linkage is based on the assumption that employees have a range of
alternative job opportunities including new jobs at similar or different firms,
occupational sectors or job-site locations. An early study by Spitze and Waite
(1980) suggested that preferences for types of work are the outcome of past
work experiences and present jobs. Similarly Griffeth and Hom (1988) found that
(salesmen's) turnover behavior depended on organizational and occupational
group differences in work-related attitudes, but that turnover itself was finely
tuned to their choice of a destination. Finally, Tolbert and Moen (1996)
suggested that gender differences in work attainments reflect men and women's
choices of certain occupations rather than structural effects. However, the
interplay between individual preferences and organizational, or structural, effects
may also generate work experiences (Herriot & Pemeberton 1996).
These work experiences can be further evaluated under various opportunity
structures at the organizational occupational and local labor market.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Organizational theory suggests the existence of two basic mechanisms of
advancement and consequently an occupational preference (Althauser &
Kalleberg, 1981). First, an organizational pathway, which generates variations in
internal opportunities which then "shape" diverse career lines and finally affect
work related outcomes and employee attachment (Caldwell & O'Reily 1990).
Second, an occupational pathway, which provides incumbents of the
occupational group with a "protected" area for advancement based on
occupational group criteria that may span local employment markets. These
mechanisms point employees toward different occupational options. This is done
in several ways: for example, well developed internal organizational and
occupational labor markets are considered effective means of controlling
outward turnover and minimize voluntary, career-related departures (Petersen &
Spilerman, 1990).
The same can be said of the way that employee retaining policies affect
employee attachment. Such policies have both a direct -through higher salaries-
(Idson & Feaster, 1990) and an indirect -through organizational experience-
effect on turnover decisions (Beehr & Juntunen, 1990; Diprete & Krecker, 1991).
Internal organizational labor markets, usually located in large firms (Idson & Feaster
1990) are reported as generating lower voluntary career-related departures (Benson,
Dickinson & Neidt, 1987). By contrast, in external labor markets it is the constant flux
in supply and demand for labor affecting unemployment rates at the occupational,
industrial and regional levels that affects alternative opportunities for employment
(Zagorski 1990) and enhances / impedes turnover rates.
Thus, internal and external labor markets generating alternative types of opportunities
provide two different mechanisms for advancement, which are likely to affect the
actualization of a turnover decision. Consequently, an occupational preference for
an intra-organizational job shift and its "sheltered" conditions reflects employees'
interest in a internal career advancement.
OCCUPATIONAL PREFERENCES
One possible way of examining the interplay between individual characteristics
and opportunities is by testing occupational preferences. Provided that
employees initiate turnover on the ground of alternative positions, be they within
or outside their present work site (Dalton 1997; Breeden 1990), individuals leave
their current jobs towards alternative occupational destination. The choice of an
occupational destination may well depend upon the tradeoff between macro-
market, organizational and particularly occupational attributes of the individual.
This tradeoff can be affected by the occupational groups stnegth in the external
labor market as suggested by the market viability argument. This claims that
the higher the market viability, usually reflecting the degree of control over
professional knowledge, the greater the mobility of the occupational group. The
market viability hypothesis, originally presented as an analytical, macro-level
framework to explore mobility patterns, has not been linked, however, to
individual or occupational level turnover differences (Bridges, 1995).
HYPOTHESES
On the basis of the reported model the following hypotheses were formulated:
higher need for a matching between skills and opportunities ( Noe et. Al. 1990;
Kirschenbaum & Golberg 1976), H1: The longer the distance in a prospective
change the higher the effect of the individual skills (demographic and
METHODOLOGY
To document the linkage between individual or organizational attributes and
occupational preferences, we chose to examine Israel's public-sector medical
organizations.
Organizational Sample
The sample database was drawn from a cross sectional analysis of eight medical
was based on a Ministry of Health master list of hospitals (Israel Ministry of Health,
1991). From this list only general service hospitals were selected (25% of all hospitals).
selected on the basis of organizational size (number of beds and employees), affiliation
identifying the size, location, and affiliation of the organizational labor markets
(see also Variables).Organizations ranged in size from small (<350 employees; n=1),
moderate (351-2500 employees; n=5), large (2500+ employees; n=2). These were located
in isolated peripheral (n=2), semi-urbanized (n=3) or metropolitan areas (n=3) and were
affiliated to four medical sector groups (Government n=2, National Health Insurance n=3,
Private n=1; Municipal n=2). Basic turnover-related determinants, such as pay level
THE SAMPLE
On the basis of this organizational-level sample a closed-end questionnaire was
sent to a random sample of 15% of the overall organizational population drawn
from each organization's master pay-roll, not including sub-contracted service
workers. Four occupational sectors (physicians, nurses, paramedical/laboratory
and clerical / administrative employees) were identified. The respondents'
sample (N=707, a 30% average return rate) was representative of the Israeli
national medical-sector, labor-force (Israel Central Bureau of Statistics 1991).
All employees --including physicians-- were salaried workers (a total of 2500 employees).
707 hospital employees (a response average rate of 30%) returned the questionnaires.
This included nurses (n=357) physicians (n=128), paramedical employees (n=42)
laboratory employees (n=82) and clerical employees (n=112). Occupational sample
sizes compared with their equivalent national distributions were as follows:
nurses (46%:36%); physicians (19%:12%); paramedical/laboratory (18%:19%)
and clerical-administrative employees (17%) for which no information was
available in the national data source). All employees -including physicians- were
salaried workers with salary level and work conditions based on collective
bargaining agreements. The proximity of these distributions can be viewed as
compensating for the relatively low rate of return, which can be attributed to the
limitations of the mail-return based research method. The "quitters"
demographic-profile was mainly female (65%), dominated by nurses (43%),
followed by physicians (28.4%), Israeli-born (63.5%), aged 31-40 (36.8%) and
41-50 (29.4%) years old, married (79%), having 1-3 children (64.2%), with an
academic education (50.7%) and with a 3-10 years length of organizational
experience (51.8%). Women's turnover rate was twice as high as that of their
male counterparts (7/100 vs. 3.5/100). The turnover rate of the two occupational
groups (nurses and physicians) was nevertheless similar (0.04). Differences by
employment status show that the proportion of permanent employees in the
"quitters" group (70.3%) was lower than within the "stayers" group (85.5%), but
surprisingly most of these "quitters" were from tenured positions (70.3%).
Metropolitan-located and large-size organizations were characterized by similar
turnover rates (0.056 and 0.060 respectively). Quitters were differentiated also
by occupational preferences (for a detailed description see Appendix 4).
Information on turnover rates in the medical sector was not available in the
national data source.
VARIABLES
Objective Opportunities: (a) Organizational Location (a proxy for local labor
market opportunities) was measured in terms of organizational location in three
types of urban areas: metropolitan, semi-periphery (located within a short
distance of a major metropolitan area) and periphery areas. (b) Organizational
affiliation: a dummy variable for four major affiliation groups (type of ownership):
government, municipal-local authorities, health-insurance and private ownership.
(c) Organizational size ranged from small (up to 350 employees) to large (4500+
employees). Organizational size, location and affiliation were used as proxies for
organizational and occupational opportunities (see Method) Perceived
Organizational Opportunities: Perceived internal-organizational and perceived
external-occupational labor-market opportunities were measured by single Likert
type items (ranging from 1 -lowest perception- through 4 higher perception).
They included measures of (a) Perceived existence of departmental
opportunities, (b) Perceived existence of organizational opportunities and (c)
Perceived attainability of organizational positions (internal recruitment).
Perceived Opportunities were measured by (a) Perceived existence of national-
level labor market opportunities (b) Perceived existence of local labor market
opportunities and (c) Perceived attainability of occupation specific positions.
Actual Turnover was measured in terms of the respondents voluntary (quit)
separation from the work place during the first year following the administration
of the cross-sectional field study questionnaire. Non-voluntary separations were
not included and represented only a very small proportion of those who left their
positions. The "stayed/quit" code was determined from organizational reports
that indicated which employees on the original pay-roll were absent at the end of
one year. Occupational Preferences: Occupational preferences was
operationalized in two ways to tap (a) the "physical" distance and the (b) the
"social" distance relative to the present one. Short "phys" distances included a
shift between departments within the same organization while long "physical"
distances included shifts between geographic locations. Minimal ''social"
distances involved moves between medical-related positions within the same
organization while substantial ''social impact" distances involved an occupational
sector change (Long, Tucker & Urton 1988).
Respondents were required to choose one or more occupational preferences
(number of responses differs from original occupational sub samples sizes) and
evaluate them on a four-point Likert type single-item scale (ranging from 1=low to
4=high) answering to the following statement: "I wish I could change my present
job for a ..................".. Responses were later collapsed into four basic distance
categories by type of degree of distance involved in the prospective change:
Physical Distance including: 1. Intra-Organizational Choices: the same type of
job but in another department; 2. Inter-Organizational Choices: (a) the same type
of job but in another hospital, (b) the same type of job but in a bigger hospital (c)
the same type of job but in a private hospital, or (d) the same type of job but not
in a hospital; 3. Inter-Location Choices: the same type of job but in another city
Social distance including 1. Inter-Occupational Choices: another kind of job.
Work attitudes: originally measured as single items, were later combined into
constructs using scale reliability measures (Alpha Cronbach). Attitudes (level of
importance or satisfaction) were measured by Likert-type scales ranging from
1=low to 4=high. Three constructs were used: WORK ENVIRONMENT-
satisfaction with work arrangements, work load, physical accommodations,
schedule flexibility, work condition (Alpha Cronbach = ); RETURNS-
importance given to salary, pension funds, non-monetary benefits and career
prospects (Alpha Cronbach = ); and CAREER PROSPECTS, evaluation of
organizational career opportunities, departmental opportunities, internal labor
markets (Alpha Cronbach = ). (Mano-Negrin 1998).
These initial results from the bivariate analysis suggest that occupational
preferences accurately reflect differences in individual and organizational
attributes. To further explore these findings, we test how each set of the
predicting variables demographic, organizational determinants, occupational
group, objective and subjective opportunities and work attitudes affect
occupational preferences. The impact of these variables on occupational
preferences was examined using seven logistic regression equations, one for
each occupational preference.
The findings from Table 1 suggest that demographic attributes, a central set of variables in
work-related analysis have a significant effect on all occupational preferences with the strongest effect
revealed in regard to the largest social distance i.e. the change towards an occupational change. This
suggests that largest distances as expected would be more constrained by effects of age and family
responsibilities which provide a set of constraining effect in work-related decisions (Shaw 1987). Similarly,
organizational determinants had the largest effect in regard to the larger distances such as inter-
organizational and inter-location preferences, also suggesting that once organizational returns have been
assured the willingness to move is affected by the extent to which the occupational preferences will further
ensure at the very least the previously achieved returns. This is further revealed by the effect of objective
opportunities on type of occupational preferences. In the case of organizational size, larger
organizations affected occupational preferences in two opposing ways: first,
reluctance to move outside a department suggests the existence of opportunities
at the departmental level. At the same time, organizational size enhanced
occupational preferences toward other hospitals, suggesting less willingness to
be employed in large medical centers. In addition, as expected, organizational
location in larger metropolitan areas negatively affected both inter-organizational
and inter-location occupational preferences suggesting that competing
opportunities in the same local labor market do not necessarily affect the need to
seek opportunities elsewhere.
These effects however can only be effective if occupational group effects have been accounted for. The
findings from Table 1 suggest that occupational preferences were affected by
type of occupational group. First, nurses were reluctant to work in larger
organizational settings (as indicated by the negative sign). Paramedical
employees, however, look forward to working in a non-hospital setting, whereas
physicians are constrained to working in a hospital. Physicians are more inclined
toward an inter-location change whereas paramedical employees seemed to
avoid such "long" physical-distance changes. Both groups, however, in contrast
to nurses and clerical employees, resisted inter-occupational change, probably
because of high occupational group investments.
Taking the analysis one step further, to test out third question we
compared actual turnover behavior differences among the occupational sectors.
in light of employees' occupational preferences.
Observing the _2LL estimates and the model improvement estimates it can be
generally seen that (a) models including demographic attributes only describes
significantly turnover behavior only for paramedical employees whereas
organizational determinants affect only the physicians turnover behavior. No
single model, whatsoever, was identified as capable of significantly determining
either nurses of clerical (both female occupations) employees turnover. This
suggests that turnover behavior in these cases is a more complicated process
involving a mixture of different work and non-work related aspects. This indeed
seems to fit the traditional studies of womens turnover behavior suggesting that
womens work behavior reflects their roles as secondary bread -winners and
basically responsible for family duties (Tolbert & Moen 1998) .
When the overall impact of opportunities is tested it can be seen that a model
containing objective opportunities does not provide a good model for the
prediction of turnover except in the case of paramedical employees. This implies
that objective opportunities for this occupational group are not directly affected
by organizational size and labor market characteristics i.e. labor market forces.
Yet, once opportunities are perceived to exist, then they enhance turnover
behavior. In fact this seems to apply to most occupational groups.
The findings in Table 2 also reveal that internal perceived opportunities do not
affect turnover behavior. Yet, external perceived opportunities significantly
enhance physicians (1.8367), paramedics (3.89), and clerical employees (
3.323) turnover behavior. This tendency, contrasts the negative effect of the
number of previous positions in the employing organization on turnover for
physicians (-1.3896), and that of length of service for clerical employees (-.0316)
or the effect of a tenured position for nurses (-1.2364). It seems then that internal
opportunities are effective through the objective organizational characteristics
rather than perceived effects. This provides an overall (though partial)
assessment of the second hypothesis, suggesting that turnover behavior is
affected by opportunities through individual, organizational and occupation
variations.
But are these differences occupationally based? To complete the analysis the
above parameters where inserted in a single model containing occupational
groups as dummy variables and the interaction terms between parameters
revealed as significant in the specific occupational group analysis.
Overall the findings showed that (a) the turnover decisions depend on the
combination individual organizational and labor market determinants (b) the type
of occupational preference involved in a turnover decision depends on the
marketability of occupational group and its gendered needs (c) the effect of
occupational preferences on turnover decisions is a fairly accurate determinant
of turnover provided that individual, organizational and occupational
characteristics are controlled for. This provides an overall (though partial)
assessment of the second hypothesis, suggesting that turnover behavior is
affected by opportunities through individual, organizational and occupation
variations.
LIMITATIONS
The present study focuses on medical sector employees' occupational
preferences and turnover decisions. Our own limited exploratory study has
shown that occupational preferences, regulated by opportunities and constrained
by occupational skills, are an effective way to predict turnover. While the
dynamics of these changes are clear in the present methodological context,
future studies should use larger and more occupationally diverse samples. The
specificity of our sample in terms of occupational composition and their public
sector affiliation limits the generalizability of the results, stressing nevertheless
that occupational preferences can be helpful in understanding additional
complexities of work outcomes and processes. Moreover, longitudinal studies
should be pursued. These studies could control for time-related effects such as
unemployment rates, organizational decline following increased competition or
privatization processes and national-level health policy that generate major side-
effects on work and employment choices.
Table 1: Logistic Regression Estimates of Demographic, Organizational, Occupational, Perceived and Objective Opportunities on Occupational Preferences
Involving a Change In Organizational Job Site, Geographic Location and Occupational Sector. + ++
Organizational Determinants
Income 32.77** 28.77* 42.59*** 30.32* 29.07* 40.23*** 32.64**
Length of Service (Months) 8.91* 3.21 8.44 6.56 5.21 7.12 9.16
Extent Of Employment (Hrs/Wk) 12.30 18.75 29.60** 13.46 16.01 35.00*** 28.21**
Tenured Position (1= Tenured) 5.90** 3.25* 2.44* 1.39* 3.89** 4.10 6.91*
Objective Opportunities
Organizational Size 8.93 10.64 24.13*** 2.37 5.62 29.65** 4.77
Perceived Opportunities
*p>.05**p>.01***p>.001
Appendix 3: Pearson Correlation of Occupational Preferences by Work Attitudes.
OCCUPATIONAL work salary career work salary career work salary career work salary career
PREFERENCES conditions prospect conditions prospect s conditions prospects conditions prospects
NURSES PHYSICIANS PARAMEDICAL CLERICAL
Another Department -.0112 .1116* .0121 .0736 .0586 .0688 -.1249 .0259 -.0768 -.0584 -.1101 -.1092
Another Hospital -.1135* -.0433 .0062 .0352 .0030 .0514 -.1177 -.0702 -.0250 .0866 .1825 .0223
Larger Hospital -.0942 .1238* .0922 .0618 .1121 .1134 .0230 .0666 .0062 .0084 -.0624 -.0765
Private Hospital -.1608** -.0764 -.0022 .0866 -.0043 .0372 -.2278* -.0972 -.0818 .1070 .0414 -.0302
Not a Hospital -.0906 .0297 -.0171 -.0682 -.0441 .0354 -.1819* -.1341 -.0105 .0788 .0590 -.0896
Another City -.0395 .1208* -.0088 .0803 .1065 .2160* -.0512 .0196 .0697 -.1036 .0923 -.0125
Another Occupation -.1484** -.0245 -.0920 .0196 .0316 .2084* .0854 .1069 -.0313 -.0897 .0751 -.1398
*p>.05**p>.01***p>.001