You are on page 1of 94

A STUDY ON WORKPLACE VIOLENCE FACTORS IN UNIVERSITY UTARA MALAYSIA

A thesis submitted to College of Business in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Human Resource Management University Utara Malaysia

By: Mohammad Ahmad Mohammad Hussain

Mohammad Ahmad Hussain, May 2009. All Rights Reserved

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful and Most Compassionate.

First, I would like to express my appreciation to Allah, the Most Merciful and, the Most Compassionate who has granted me the ability and willing to start and complete this study. I do pray to His Greatness to inspire and enable me to continue the work for the benefits of humanity.

I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation and deep gratitude to my project supervisor, Assoc.Prof Dr. Husna Johari, who had provided continuous guidance, encouragement, support and advice in assisting me to complete this research paper. Her remarkable ways and professionalism in explaining and guiding me throughout the completion of this research has allowed me to see things in a more rational and critical view. I am also grateful for the encouragement that I received from my family, especially my Dad, Mom, Brothers and Sisters. Their outstanding patience and unconditional love in supporting my quest and love for education has been extraordinary.

Special thanks my dearest friend Choo, who had given time, understanding and support through all the phases of this research, Thank you. Finally, I wish to thank my dearest friends Anas, Ammar, Yasser, Hussain, Paramjeet and my lecturers in University Utara Malaysia, for all their help.

Thank you Mohammad Ahmad Hussain College of Business University Utara Malaysia

DECLERATION

The author is responsible for the accuracy of all opinion, technical comment, factual report, data, figures, illustrations and photographs in this dissertation. The author bears full responsibility for the checking whether material submitted is subject to copyright or ownership right. UUM does not accept any liability for the accuracy of such comment, report and other technical and factual information and the copyright or ownership rights claims.

Mohammad Ahmad Mohammad Hussain College of Business University Utara Malaysia 06010, Sintok Kedah, Darul Aman, Malaysia 11th, May 2009

PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree from the University Utara Malaysia, the author agree that the University Library may make it freely available for inspection. The author further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by my supervisor or in their absence by the Dean of the Graduate School. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to University Utara Malaysia for any scholarly use which may be made of any material from my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part, should be addressed to:

Dean of Postgraduates and Research College of Business, University Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah Darul Aman, Malaysia.

ii

ABSTRAK
Kajian ini dijalankan untuk mengkaji perhubungan antara persekitaran tempat kerja, perhubungan antara rakan sekerja serta gaya pengurusan dengan keganasan di tempat kerja di Universiti Utara Malaysia. Pemboleh ubah bebas ialah keganasan di tempat kerja manakala pemboleh ubah terikat ialah persekitaran tempat kerja, perhubungan rakan sekerja dan gaya pengurusan.

Kajian ini dijalankan secara kuantitatif di mana data-data diperoleh melalui kajian pengedaran borang soal selidik kepada 102 respondent yang berada di peringkat pengurusan dan dipilih secara rawak di institusi pengajian awam di negeri Kedah. Data yang dikutip dianalisa dengan menggunakan perisian SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) versi 16.0.

Hasil kajian menunjukkan perhubungan yang siknifikan antara pemboleh ubah bebas iaitu persekitaran kerja dan pemboleh ubah terikat iaitu keganasan di tempat kerja. Manakala dua pemboleh ubah bebas yang lain iaitu perhubungan antara rakan sekerja dan gaya pengurusan didapati tidak ada perhubungan yang siknifikasi dengan keganasan di tempat kerja.

iii

ABSTRACT

The main purpose of this study is to examine is there any relationship between working environment, co-worker relationship, and management style and workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia. The dependent variable is workplace violence. The independent variables are working environment, co-worker relationship, and management style.

This study is conducted quantitatively where data is collected through distribution of questionnaires to 102 respondents of employees of the managerial level and selected randomly in a public learning institution in Kedah. The data that have been collected were processed using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) 16.0 software.

The findings show that there is a positive significant relationship between working environment and the workplace violence, while the other factors, co-worker relationship and management style, shows no relationship with the workplace violence.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENT

PAGE

PERMISSION TO USE DECLERATION ABSTRAK ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES

i ii iii iv v ix x

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

INTRODUCTION PROBLEM STATEMENT RESEARCH QUESTIONS RESEARCH OBJECTIVES SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS 1.6.1 Workplace Violence

1 3 4 5 5 7 7

1.6.2 Management Style 1.6.3 Working Environment 1.6.4 Co-Worker Relationships 1.7 CONCLUSION

8 8 8 8

CHAPTER 2 LITRETURE REVIEW 2.1 INTRODUCTION 2.1.1 Types of workplace violence 2.2 CASUAL FACTORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE 2.2.1 Social learning theory 2.2.2 Working Environment 2.2.3 Management Style 2.2.4 Co-workers relationships 2.3 2.4 2.5 PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE RESEARCH FRAME WORK JUSTIFICATION OF HYPOTHESES 2.5.1 Hypothesis 1 2.5.2 Hypothesis 2 9 11 13 14 16 19 21 23 25 27 27 27

vi

2.5.3 Hypothesis 3 2.6 CONCLUSION CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 3.2 3.3 INTRODUCTION RESEARCH DESIGN SOURCES OF DATA 3.3.1 Primary Data 3.3.2 Secondary Data 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 SAMPLING DESIGN UNIT ANALYSIS ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND DATA COLLECTION METHOD MEASUREMENT 3.8.1 Questionnaire 3.9 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES 3.9.1 Frequency Distribution 3.9.2 Reliability Analysis

28 28

29 29 30 30 30 31 32 32 33 33 33 35 35 35

vii

3.9.3 Hypothesis Testing 3.9.4 3.10 3.11 Pearson Correlation Coefficient

36 36 37 39

PILOT TEST CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND FINDINGS 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 INTRODUCTION SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS SAMPLE PROFILE (RESPONDENTS PROFILE) RELIABILITY ANALYSIS DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS RESTATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS TEST OF HYPOTHESES CONCLUSION CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATION, AND CONCLUSION 5.1 5.2 5.3 INTRODUCTION RECAPITULATION OF THE STUDY DISCUSSION 5.3.1 Research Question One 49 50 51 52 40 40 41 42 44 44 45 48

viii

5.3.2 Research Question Two 5.3.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 Research Question Three

55 56 57 58 59 59 60 62

THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS LIMITATIONS RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE STUDIES CONCLUSION

REFERENCES APPENDICES

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace Table 3.1: The layout of the questionnaires Table 3.2: The Range and Interpretation of Cronbachs Alpha Value Table 3.3: Cronbachs Alpha for Pilot Test Table 4.1: Responses Rate Table 4.2: Respondents Profile Table 4.3: Reliability Analysis Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics of the Dependent and Independent Variables ix

PAGE 11 34 37 38 40 41 43 44

Table 4.5: Inter Correlations for Major Variables Table 5.1: A Summary of Results of Hypotheses Testing

46 51

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Workplace Violence Model Framework

PAGE 26

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1

INTRODUCTION Historically, managers did not give violence any attention and they consider it

as a personal matter. Their excuse was that any problem happen with the employee is not their problem, or it is too risky to handle it, or it is hard to identify the victim. However, nowadays, managers begin to give the subject more and more attention. They knew that violence have its effects on the employees and on the organization as a whole, and it will cost too much by ignoring. Broadly defined, workplace violence includes physical assault, threatening behavior and verbal abuse (Whitmore & Kleiner, 1999).

Violence at workplace reveals abroad interest in issues surrounding violence at work. However, workplace violence is not merely an episodic problem created by deranged persons, but it is highly complex issue, rooted in wider social, economic, organizational and cultural factors. Violence at work is increasingly becoming a cause for concern within the organizations.

Workplace violence can strike anywhere, and no one is immune. Some workers, however, are at increased risk. Among them are workers who exchange money with the public; deliver passengers, goods, or services; or work alone or in small groups, during late night or early morning hours, in high-crime areas, or in community settings and homes where they have extensive contact with the public. 1

Violence at workplace does not come from nothing, it generates from small incidents that happened. Violence in the workplace not only affects the victims, but also coworkers who may feel angry, fearful, stressed, and depressed as a result. Workplace violence is sometimes caused by a laid-off employee, an estranged spouse, or a stressed-out worker (Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995).

Violence can be generated from inside the organization or from the outside. Often it occurs because of the surrounding environment. It can occur inside or outside the workplace and can range from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and homicide, one of the leading causes of job-related deaths. On 31 March 1986 at the California State Employment Development Department in Garden Grove, California, an employee who was upset with his supervisor and wanted a transfer shot and killed the supervisor and then himself (Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995).

Violence has many faces, some of which are far more covert than actual physical assault and encompasses sexual harassment, bullying and carefully veiled intimidation and isolation (Corney, 2008). Workplace violence continues to be considered a prevalent problem for organizations. Its effects include lowered productivity, increased employee stress and absenteeism (Corney, 2008), lawsuits, increased insurance premiums, tarnished reputations (e.g., Atkinson, 2000), reduced customer satisfaction (Walkup, 1999), and costly property damage. Business is frequently a battlefield, with employees waging war against each other.

According to McCune (1999), three people are murdered in the workplace every day in the USA, while an estimated 1 million workers 18,000 a week are

assaulted each year. In addition to the direct costs (medical and legal) of workplace violence, related costs also include a decline in company morale and consequent loss of productivity, increased absenteeism, higher employee turnover, and damage to a companys credibility and reputation (Carll, 1999).

1.2

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Apparently, workplace violence has caused increment of unnecessary expenditure in organization such as lower productivity, higher absenteeism and turnover, higher insurance cost and lawsuits. With the current global economics falling, management is zooming into organization effectiveness and minimizing the operating cost in order to stay competitive in the market. Besides that, employees are expecting the employer to provide a safe working environment for them. Those companies that meeting employees expectation will be a focus for the talents and become an employer of choice.

The occurrence of workplace violence is not usual; to be more specific those who are working in the public sector are much more exposed to the violence. Staff in these occupations frequently deal with the public under stressful circumstances and often consider violence as an inevitable part of their jobs (McGrath & Goulding, 1996). This research is intended to examine the relationship between management style, working environment and co-workers relationship on workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia (UUM) and how these factors has the impact on employees.

Many researchers have done among different countries to find out which factors could contribute to more violence inside the organizations. Factors like stress, working environment, organizational structure, co-worker relationshipetc.

(Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995). Accordingly, this research examines the impact of the organizational structure and supervisor interactions, environmental working conditions, and co-workers relationships in organization. People perceive behavior differently, so what one employee sees as threatening, another will describe as merely annoying. The causes of violence also vary enormously from one situation to another. In other words, to examine the relationship between the factors and the workplace violence (McGrath & Goulding, 1996).

The working environment, the nature of the employees relationship, and the structure of the organization can all generate any type of workplace violence. Workplace violence is not only a crisis that can be classified as a strictly localized only in our country. Rather, violence in the workplace is a global problem that transcends the boundaries of a particular country, work setting, or occupational group (Chappell and DiMartino, 1998).

1.3

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This research was conducted to find the relationship of the independent variables, which are working environment, organizational structure, and co-workers relationships with the dependent variable, which is the arise of violence in the workplace. This research intends to answer the following questions:

1) Is there any relationship between working environment conditions and the extent of workplace violence in UUM 2) Is there any relationship between management style and the extent of workplace violence in UUM 3) Is there any relationship between co-workers relationships and the extent of workplace violence in UUM

1.4

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the study is to examine which among variables contributes to workplace violence and which attributes drive management toward decrease the violence level in the organization. Specifically, the objectives of this study are listed below:

To examine whether working environment conditions affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM. To examine whether management style affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM. To examine whether co-workers relationships affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM.

1.5

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The significance of this study can contribute many advantages to many parties such as corporations, regulators, policy makers, and the analytical and empirical

researches. This research can open the eye of the managers pertaining to this subject. Although there are many studies have been conducted pertaining to this subject on the factors that can contribute to the violence in workplace. According to Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner (1995), workplace violence is sometimes caused by a laid-off employee, an estranged spouse, or a stressed-out worker. However, this study will be more detailed on certain factors that could contribute to workplace violence. Moreover, further studies done by researchers found that uncertainty and fear caused by organizational change led to more aggressive acts of violence such as intimidation, humiliation and bullying of employees by managers, ultimately leading to the end of participants careers (Bryant & Cox, 2003).

This study will improve the management understanding on which factors that could affect the workplace violence, increase their information above this area via providing additional evidence on workplace violence, and ultimately attempting to prevent the workplace violence in the organization. Historically managers tried to avoid dealing with these kinds of issues, however, this study aimed to provide the management a comprehensive view on workplace violence and views workplace violence as a workplace issue that warrants serious attention.

It will also give the employees a better view of how workplace violence can happen and hence minimizing the level of their involvement.

Furthermore, this study can provide the organization an awareness about the factors that can be the cause for workplace violence in the organization in its all types whether it were physically, mentality, verballyetc. such as working environment,

co-workers relationships, and management style. Hence, taking into a preventive action on how to minimize the workplace violence effectively to achieve the organization effectiveness as a whole such as increasing productivity, lower the attrition and absenteeism and reduce the stress level among its employees. Not to forget, the awareness of this issue can save the organization from any legal liability, because violence can cause suffering, disability and even death.

As well benefited UUM as an established institution, the researcher also hopes that this study will give a very big impact to UUM employees on the awareness of workplace violence and also can be useful for them to understand the approaches to be taken in order to prevent them from this subject matter. This knowledge is hopefully would be useful as a source of information for the future research regarding this issue and personally be exposed to the research working environment, develop a research skill and also getting information direct from the public.

Finally, it also can add to the existing literature on workplace violence and can be used as one of the references or guidance for future research as well as enriching the literature in human and social development.

1.6

DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

1.6.1 Workplace Violence Workplace violence is any physical assault, threatening behavior and verbal abuse that occurs in the workplace or whiles the victim is in the workplace or on duty.

1.6.2 Management Style The general manner, outlook, attitude, and behavior of a manager in his or her dealings with subordinates. Organizations may have, or seek to have, distinctive management styles, and sometimes train employees to try to ensure that a preferred style, fitting in with the desired corporate culture, is always used. Management styles can vary widely between extremes of control and consultation.

1.6.3 Working Environment The work environment is comprised of the physical location, equipment, materials processed or used, and the activities of an employee while engaged in the performance of his work. There are no stated exclusions of place or circumstance.

1.6.4 Co-Worker Relationships These are the daily interactions necessary for conducting business and involve the necessity of co-workers to interact, understand and share in transaction.

1.7

CONCLUSION

This chapter has presented the background of the study as an introduction. This chapter also describes the problem statements, research questions, research objectives and the significance of the study.

CHAPTER 2 LITRETURE REVIEW

2.1

INTRODUCTION

Workplace violence has been on a steady increase over the past decade. Nearly every form of media has carried stories of violence in the workplace. Numerous studies and reports show the amount of violence and conflict in the workplace has dramatically increased in recent years. According to one study, the rate of workplace homicide has tripled in the last decade (Whitmore & Kleiner, 1999).

Right now a majority of working adults have either witnessed, personally experienced, or seen in the media numerous violent acts in the a workplace setting. Just as the term of carjacking did not exist nine or ten years ago, similarly workplace violence is now too familiar to us (Carll, 1999).

There are many incidents that happen within the organizations but never been exposed, because most of the organizations trying to put so much effort in order to keep these incidents away from the media and the people. In another way they do not want their image to be ruined in the community.

Since the definition of what exactly the workplace is can be problematic, being able to draw significant correlations between violence, behavior, and other occupational-related independent variables is extremely difficult.

Historically, workplace violence was narrowly defined to include only physical assault or homicide that occurred at the workplace. Nevertheless, this has been expanded by researchers, campaigners, and official bodies to embrace a much wider spectrum of disagreeable interpersonal experience that has had the effect of greatly inflating the apparent incidence of violence.

So, to understand the true meaning of violence at workplace, we should understand what we mean by violence and what do we mean by workplace. Violence can be defined as Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence. Its the use of physical force against persons that potentially causes fear, injury or death. Damage, in some contexts, is also considered a form of violence.

The definition of violence is often widened to include threats of physical force and substantially abusive language and harassing actions. Bulatao and VandenBos (1996) attempt to define workplace as follows: workplace violence appears to be to refer to crimes of violence that occur in the workplace or while the victim is at work or on duty. Violence today is not confined to bad areas. It touches all communities.

Violence can come from outside an organization or have its origin within an organization. External violence is perpetrated by people outside the organization and maybe aimed at individual staff or directed at the organization itself. Internal violence organization is on culture of aggression (Bulatao & VandenBos 1996). Some situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace are stated in the following table (Bulatao & VandenBos 1996).

10

Table 2.1: Situations of violence that occur inside and outside the workplace Inside the workplace Outside the workplace Internal worker; external assailant External worker; external assailant unknown, unknown, e.g. Petrol station attendant e.g. Mobile security guard confronted by an robbed by an unknown gunman intender Internal worker; external assailant known, e.g. Social security officer assaulted by an angry client Internal worker; internal assailant unknown, e.g. Psychiatric nurse attacked by new admission Internal worker; external assailant known, e.g. Worker sexually harassed by a colleague External worker; external assailant known, e.g. Manager stalked and attacked by a retrenched worker outside the office External worker; internal assailant unknown, e.g. Police officer confronted in a domestic violence situation External worker; internal assailant known, e.g. Mental health worker on home visit to an aggressive patient

So what is violence at workplace? Many researchers defined violence at workplace as a purposeful or reactive behavior, which produces damaging or hurtful effects, physically or emotionally, on people (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002). Whitmore & Kleiner (1999) said that workplace violence includes physical assault, threatening behavior and verbal abuse.

Violence can be defined as Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence. It is the use of physical force against persons that potentially causes fear, injury or death. Damage, in some contexts, is also considered a form of violence. The definition of violence is often widened to include threats of physical force and substantially abusive language and harassing actions.

2.1.1 Types of workplace violence There are four types of violence, can be listed as follows: 1) Intrusive violence: it a violence that occurs in the workplace by an outsider who has no legitimate relationship to the workplace such as terrorists acts, criminal intent by 11

strangers, drug related aggression, robberies, and protesting in a violent way against the organization policies and practices.

2) Consumer related violence: this type of violence is widely known and recognized. It involves violence practices and acts by consumer/clients/patients (and family) violence against staff. Another type of consumer related violence is called vicarious trauma, which mean according to Gill, Fisher, & Bowie (2002), workers or employees who were displaying signs of traumatization (psychological shock) as a result of dealing with violent client. In addition, not forget the result of having the vice versa violence, an act from the staff towards the consumer/clients, or patients.

3) Relationship violence: this relationship violence involves bullying and harassment from the staff themselves on other ones. This one can also involve any aggressive acts from former employees with an employment-based relationship with the organization. This kind could include a former spouse, a family member, or any another significant. The last is what called a domestic violence, violence that happen between two who have a relationship.

12

4) Organizational violence: this can occur in many ways, one of the types is organizational violence against the staff. Laying off employee without a proper reason could be the trigger for violence to occur. A rapid and ruthless change in the organizational could put the employees under the pressure, which will be the trigger for such incidents and violent acts. Those staff who is themselves poorly trained, under pressure and stress due to the organizational acts, can make a perfect environment for an external assailant to gain access to capitalize on known weakness from the organization security. Which will hurt the consumers and other customers that want the service from the organization. An organization due to a change may provide a climate that can assault itself and other customers as well (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002).

2.2

CASUAL FACTORS OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE

There are many aspects that contribute to the workplace violence; one of these is that the company hired the potential aggressor and that the victims of the offence are co-workers exposed to the potential wrath on a daily basis. As we stated earlier, violence does not come from nothing, it appears from small incidents that occur in the workplace.

13

Co-workers relationships, management style, and working environment are factors of workplace violence that can arise the violence in the workplace.

2.2.1 Social learning theory

Social learning theory (imitation of behavior derived from social interactions) has been linked to a variety of settings and a variety of human behaviors. In these studies, it was found that four elements associated with social learning theory were supported and may be related to workplace violence in one or two ways (Alexander & Langford, 1992). The fist is internal to the organization, where social learning may be associated with the culture or environment of the organization.

The other is external, where the subject is influenced through family, society and other environments outside the organization. In both instances, the four major components of social learning and differential association (learnt behaviors from deviant social groups) are present: imitations of admired models, individual definition regarding deviant behavior, extent of differential association and the extent of differential reinforcement (Akers, 1973).

Whether it is inside or outside the workplace, possible aggressors start the violence for the acceptance or the rewards through their awareness of what they see as acceptable or rewarded behavior (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002).

14

If aggressiveness -permeates much of the workplace- then, it seems likely that only members of the work group may begin to assimilate such behavior. In a similar way, they may bring some of their negative behaviors to the workplace from their personal life society. Differentials associations in and of itself is not negative. Differential association means that a person may join a group that it is in control of the majority of a desired individual reinforces. These reinforces are mainly peer acceptance, power, security and nurturing (Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002).

Frustration is believed to derive from unsatisfied feelings of incongruence and/or contradiction with ones environment, whether that is at home or at work (Holland, 1973).

Studies focusing on the relationship between frustration and violence have suggested strong relationships between frustration and aggressive behavior. Frustrations cultivated on the job, at home, within relationships and other environment may influence a person to be violent (Rich & Woods 1985).

In meaning, frustrated workers may respond violently to a variety of stress factors, such as social factors, economic factors, and management related factors.

15

2.2.2 Working Environment

Working environment is characterized by an authoritarian management style and changeable/ unpredictable supervision; an atmosphere where the work and dignity of employees are undervalued; and, an environment that includes frequent invasions of privacy, a high degree of secrecy, more demands, and less support (Johnson, 1994).

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, during the year that ended July 1993, recorded more than 1,000 murders, six million threats and more than two million workers physically attacked while on the job (Van Aalten, 1994).

Authoritarian workplaces, which include those where employees have little say in how they do their jobs or environments where managers bully employees, tend to have higher rates of on the- job violence (Johnson & Indvik, 1996). Some researchers have suggested that authoritarian

management styles and strict job performance standards which give employees little control over their work were factors in several workplace shootings that occurred in the last few years (Travnick, 1994).

The working environment may be an important factor in influencing the types of workplace violence experienced within the organization. It could be posited that an active management culture could be part of minimizing the impact of internal and external violence upon organizations.

16

The physical condition of the facility, exposure to toxic waste, polluted air and water or merely less than clean conditions have been found to influence such negative attitudes and behaviors in the workplace (Bower, 1992; Altman, 1993).

In dictatorial workplaces, that includes those employees who does have the right to make an opinion or in an environment where those who have been bullied by managers, be likely to have a higher rates of workplace violence.

According to Johnson & Indvik (1996), there have been some cases where certain risk factors observed in individuals were exacerbated by an overlay of destructive supervision that engendered in violence. Thus, this considered as a toxic work environments for employees (Johnson et al., 1994).

A toxic work environment is characterized by an authoritarian management style and changeable/ unpredictable supervision; an atmosphere where the work and dignity of employees are undervalued; and, an environment that includes frequent invasions of privacy, a high degree of secrecy, more demands, and less support (Johnson, 1994).

A toxic workplace is usually highly stressed, understaffed and run in an authoritative, disciplined style with lots of labor-management disputes and a high rate of worker compensation claims. It is an environment where people feel management does not listen (Roan, 1994).

17

Society expects companies to provide a safe working environment and that includes safety from violent acts. Therefore, episodes of violence have the potential to result in lawsuits against both the company and individual employees, particularly those with supervisory authority (Johnson & Gardner, 1999).

Current economic conditions, with an abundance of acquisitions, divestitures, layoffs, and major departmental reorganizations, can be very stressful for both the individuals and the organizations affected (Lind, and Otte, 1994). Meaning that, these issues can put the organization in a situation that can push the employee to the edge. Eventually incident might occur, and violence is on the door.

The likelihood of liability decreases when preventive measures and early interventions are taken to avoid or defuse potentially deadly situations (Zachary, 1998).

A troubled work environment can also lead to incidents of workplace violence. It is the employer who must assume responsibility for the violence and stress that arises within the workplace (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

According to Kinney and Johnson (1993), the characteristics of a troubled work environment can consists of chronic labor/management disputes, frequent grievances filed by employees, extraordinary numbers of

18

injury claims; especially psychological injuries, understaffing or excessive demands for overtime, many stressed workers, and authoritarian management.

In talking about the working environment, we should not forget the effect of a diverse workplace on the employees. According to (Johnson, Lewis, & Gardner, 1995), a diverse workplace can create a great deal of tension in the workplace, and if diversity is not handled properly, it can lead to explosive situations.

The differences in the characteristics, culture, and misunderstanding with regard to language, inappropriate gesture, and cultural norms in the diverse environment can and had led to violence.

2.2.3 Management Style

Interactions between management and employees are important factors relating to workplace violence (Bacharach, 1998). Management style and/or leadership abilities play a major role in employees opinions and attitudes towards companies and their members. A managers style of leadership has often been found to be incongruent with the employees perception of that style (Minor & Henry, 1995).

This misalignment and miscommunication of intentions can cause mistrust, confusion and resentment (Leo, 1995). In addition, managers are often called upon to direct people to perform unpleasant or disagreeable tasks.

19

These may include administering discipline or even withholding employee benefits. These wok environment transactions certainly increase tensions. A manager who is adept at communicating and skilled in interpersonal relations may minimize or divert aggressive behaviors from employees.

Management-employee communication problems are overwhelmingly at the root of workplace violence incidents. Employees may also be upset with their managers over work assignments, the way they are treated in general, or the way they are talked to. Also, employees kill because they are not promoted (Johnson & Indvik, 1996).

Some researchers have suggested that authoritarian management styles and strict job performance standards which give employees little control over their work were factors in several workplace shootings that occurred in the last few years (Travnick, 1994).

Employees are less likely to be disgruntled when employers keep them apprised of developments that may affect their livelihoods such as layoffs. Employers should announce these decisions early and arrange for outplacement services and counselling for laid-off employees (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

Management style and organizational structure can influence levels of the violence from inside the organization as the origins may lie in bad management rather than malicious intent. A highly competitive business

20

environment can elevate stress levels and increase the potential for violence. Quasi-military hierarchical and rigid management styles, and marked supervisor/employee divisions, exacerbate a them and us culture, foster resentment and anger and also increase the probability of violence.

High-risk scenarios include management toleration of bullying, job insecurity, workers facing unemployment with little chance of re-employment, workers with a strong sense of entitlement who feel cheated, unforgiving workers, a loss of self-esteem and stability amongst workers and disciplinary suspensions.

2.2.4 Co-workers relationships

Violence arises at work because the workplace is where their abusers can most easily find the targeted victims. Therefore, the workplace becomes a potentially dangerous place not only for those victims but for their co-workers as well (Johnson & Gardner, 1999). A New York Victims Service agency study finds that 74 percent of abusers make threatening calls or visits to their victims' workplace. When that happens, co-workers are drawn into potentially life-threatening situations (Popham, 1998). Another source of agitation is inter-employee relationships. These are the daily interactions necessary for conducting and involve the necessity of coworkers to interact, understand and share in transactions.

21

Personality styles, conflicts, ethnic, racial or gender biases, along with differences in personal work habits, may combine to cause aggravations among co-workers. People, who operate from a need to control relationships, or those who suffer from self-esteem problems, often tend to develop dysfunctional views of working relationships (Ford & Linney, 1995). Coworker relationships tend to become confused in the workplace (Woititz, 1987).

These are different from close interpersonal relationships that may develop between employees. Unwelcome interpersonal relationships or attractions can enhance the emotional context of work relationships and can be negative in nature. Romantic obsessions with other employees have been cited as significant motives for violence in the workplace (Barnett & Martinez, 1995). The difficulty with these obsessions is that when they occur in a private or social setting. In the workplace however, many workers can be helpless in removing themselves from the proximity of the stalker (Dietz, 1995). Nevertheless, co-workers who feel they have been wrongly targeted for termination, passed over for a promotion, rejected romantically, or denied a fair wage increase can be candidates to commit violent retaliation (Ramsey, 1994). At Kraft General Foods in Illinois, early 1994, a male employee shot and killed a female co-worker at one of the companys plants. The victim recently had broken off a relationship with her killer (Anfuso, 1994). Good relationships with colleagues are crucial. Open discussion is essential to encourage positive relationships. A good relationship with the 22

workers will lead to more calm environment and healthy one, which will give the workers the secure that can make him more productive and a high motivated one.

2.3

PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE Studies indicate that the tactics taken most often by employers doing nothing

or simply hiring extra security personnel are inadequate (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997). So employers have to put some measures in order to prevent or to reduce workplace violence. The prevention program should include a publicized policy statement that violent or abusive behavior towards staff will not be tolerated. It should also have written policies, education and training programs for staff and incident reporting systems (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997).

Other scholars like (Whitmore & Kleiner, 1999), suggests that employers can take several measures to prevent workplace violence, beginning at the hiring stage and continuing through out employment to the point of termination. We can summrize prevention steps as follow: Support from senior management The support from the top management and opening more

communication channels with the employees can prevent the occurrence of workplace violence. When the leaders are aware of what is happening in the organization and opening their ears for the incidents that happen, employees will be more awareness and will report any incident that might occur. While

23

absence of visible, tangible support from the highest levels, even the most well designed program will fail to produce the necessary level of change and security. The Team Forming a management team to develop, review and implement policies dealing with the workplace violence. The team should include senior management, human resources personal, a mental health consultant who is expert in workplace violence, legal counsel, security, and any other related personal (Carll, 1999). Policies and procedures Every company should have in place a policy that says that any statement that is thought to be threatening; is made in the presence of any employee; and concerns the company, a contractor, another employee or the person himself or herself should be reported confidentially to the human resources or security department (Stewart & Kleiner, 1997). It should be clear that the creation of any effective policy depends on the support from the top and the team. Training The purpose of the training is to ensure the implementation of the policy and procedures that support it. Its purpose is not, as some assume, to impart the ability to predict or spot dangerousness. For a workplace violence prevention program to be effective, employees at all organizational levels must be equipped to provide early and reliable notification of possible signals (Gill,

24

Fisher, & Bowie, 2002). Not to forget the management has to prepare the staff with practical security procedures and training in conflict management.

Terminations and layoffs: using common sense and planning The return of the fired employee to exact murderous revenge has become the symbol of the overall fear of workplace violence. On 14 November, 1991, a fired employee killed three former co-workers and wounded six others using a rifle. He then shot himself in the head. He and one other wounded employee died two days later (Stuart, 1992). So in order to prevent this from happening, organizations need to plan and follow the procedures in doing such actions.

Security Improve the security measures, installing new systems surveillance system, and develop a working relationship with the police might help the organization to prevent and block any attempt for the violence.

2.4

RESEARCH FRAME WORK

The framework depicted below is developed based on literature review and research problems. This model focuses on the factors that may have effect on workplace violence. The independent variables are the predictors to workplace violence include variables such as management style, co-workers relationship, and environmental working conditions. Workplace violence is the dependant variable.

25

Research framework consist two variables namely dependent variables and independent variables. Considering all factors of the independents and dependent variables, the model of the study is depicted the following figure.

Management Style

Co-workers Relationship

Workplace Violence

Working Environment

Independent Variable Variable Figure 2.1: Workplace Violence Model Framework

Dependent

26

2.5

JUSTIFICATION OF HYPOTHESES This study consists of three hypotheses, they are:

2.5.1 HYPOTHESIS 1 This hypothesis is to study whether the findings of previous studies that have been done on workplace violence in other countries, and shows that co-worker relationships have an impact in contributing the violence in the workplace, as in UUM. H0: There is no significance relationship between co-workers

relationship and workplace violence. HA: There is significance relationship between co-workers

relationship and workplace violence

2.5.2 HYPOTHESIS 2 This hypothesis has been put to see whether there is any relationship between the management style and workplace violence. This factor consider important in contributing the workplace violence according to the other researchers. H0: There is no significance relationship between management style

and workplace violence HA: There is significance relationship between management style

and workplace violence

27

2.5.3 HYPOTHESIS 3 Other researchers; Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002; Bower (1992); Altman (1993), have found that there is a relationship between working environment and workplace violence. Thus hypothesis 3 stated that: H0: There is no significance relationship between working

environment and workplace violence. HA: There is significance relationship between working environment

and workplace violence.

2.6

CONCLUSION This chapter had presented a review of literature that focused on the

relationship between working environment, co-workers relationship, and management style and violence at workplace. The following chapter describes in the detail the procedures and methodology that were used for data collection and analysis in this investigation.

28

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1

INTRODUCTION

Upon existing academic literature, several determinants explain the relationship between violence and factors that contribute to it. Different theories such as social learning theory used to explain those factors. This chapter will discuss on research methodology that covers research design, research framework, the data collection, which is primary and secondary data, and sampling techniques and procedures used for the analysis of the data. Furthermore, these types of methodology and design are used to find the information in order to solve the problem.

3.2

RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a frame work or blue print for conducting the research project. It specifies the details or the procedures necessary for obtaining the information needed to structure and to solve research problem (Malhotra, 1999).

The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that contributed to workplace violence. This type of research is a correlational study because involve independent variables such as working environment, management style and supervisor interactions, and co-worker relationship. These factors may or may not contribute to workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia.

29

3.3

SOURCES OF DATA Two types of data were used, namely primary data and secondary data.

3.3.1 Primary Data Primary data is information that first obtained by the researcher on the variables of interest for the specific purpose of study (Uma Sekaran, 2000). In undertaking this research, researcher will distribute a set of questionnaires to the managerial staff in UUM.

3.3.2 Secondary Data According to Sekaran (2000), Secondary data refer to the information gathered by someone than the researcher conducting the current study such as company record, publication, industry analysis offered by the media, web publications and so on. Unlike the primary data, secondary data is readily prepared, thus not so expensive and time consuming to be obtained. Researcher will used secondary data to get more information that support primary data in order to accomplish the research, help research to support and strengthen the information gained from primary data and also help researcher to interpret primary data clearly.

For this study, researcher gathered the secondary data from UUM website, annual reports, and other books that are related with in this field of study as well as articles in the magazines to support the literature review and deny the argument. The secondary data consists of both internal and external data sources.

30

External Sources Books and references that related to this research Journals and articles Articles from internet

Internal Sources UUM website UUM magazines / publications

3.4

SAMPLING DESIGN

This study is correlation study that was conducted with the aim of delineating the important variables that are associated with the problem. The field survey was conducted through to distribution of questionnaires to targeted respondent. The respondents are the managerial staff in UUM.

According to Hopskin (2000), the safest way to insure sample to represent the population is to use a random selection procedures especially if the study don not have a proportional representation of population subgroups. For the purpose of this study, the researcher proposes to use simple random sampling because this method provides least bias and offers the most generalizability (Sekaran, 2003). An even/odd selection was used to choose the respondents from the data that have been collected from the register department in UUM.

31

3.5

UNIT ANALYSIS

The unit of analyses is the managerial staff in UUM in Kedah. According to Sekaran (2003), a 10% of the population will represent the population. 120 respondents were chosen in the sampling process.

3.6

ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND

The University Utara Malaysia was formally incorporated on 16th February 1984, with the unique mission to provide academic excellence in the areas of business management education, IT and quality management. Faced with this challenging task, the University has, since its inception, ensured that its academic niche areas are focused on such disciplines as management, accountancy, economics, information technology, entrepreneurial development, tourism management, banking and finance, social development, human resources development and international affairs management. From its humble beginnings in Tanah Merah, Jitra, in 1990, the University moved to Sintok, 48 kilometers north of Alor Setar, the state capital of Kedah Darul Aman and 10 kilometers east of Changlun, a small town on the North-South Highway. The 1,061 hectares campus is surrounded by tropical rain forests set against a background of mountains. The Sintok and Badak Rivers run through the campus creating a truly unique feature as well as making it one of the most beautiful campuses in Malaysia.

Source: The Official Web Site of University Utara Malaysia; www.uum.edu.my

32

3.7

DATA COLLECTION METHOD

Data will be collected using a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of 31 items. The questionnaires were distributed to 120 respondents who will be the managerial staff in UUM, a 102-questionnaires will concluded in the analysis. The questionnaire were adapted and modified to be suited the employees in UUM, it was adapted and modified from Iowa Department of Human Services, http://www.dhs.state.ia.us/; and www.workplaceviolence911.com/docs/Wpvtool.pdf, Cheryl Anderson (2002).

3.8

MEASUREMENT

A questionnaire was used as the research instrument. The instrument was basically to identify the factors that contribute to workplace violence in UUM. Most of the questions used in this survey questionnaire were adapted to UUM conditions and design, were considered suitable for managerial staff.

3.8.1 QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire consists of 4 sections. Section A consists of the questions to gather the information about the profile of the respondent. Section B, C, D and E south to measure items that are related to workplace violence.

33

Table 3.1: The layout of the questionnaires Section Variables

Number of items

Scale

Respondent Background A Age Gender Race Working Experience Academic Qualifications Place of Employment

Multiple choices

(B)Working Environment B, C, D, and E (C)Co-worker relationship (D)Management style (E)Violence

5 7 7 6

Five-point Likert scale (1-Strongly disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Uncertain, 4-Agree and 5-Strongly agree)

Two scales were used in this research. First is nominal scale used in section A, Likert scale used for sections B, C, D, and E. Likert scale is used when responses to various items that measure a variable can be tapped on 5 points scale which can thereafter be summated across the items.

The scale down below show the measure used in the Likert scale designated instrument using Likert scale with score from 1 to 5 (Sekaran, 2003). Every score shown as follows:

1 Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Uncertain

4 Agree

5 Strongly agree

34

3.9

DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

There were many procedures that researcher must follow before achieving a final result of the study. After collecting the information from the questionnaires, the data preparation must be obtained such as checking the data for accuracy, key in the data into the computer, and transforming and coding the data, developing and documenting a database structure. The questions were coded to enable for analysis using Statistical Packages for the Social Science (SPSS) to measure relationship and differences between variables in this research. Next, the frequency distribution, reliability analysis (Cronbachs Alpha Reliability Coefficient), and hypothesis testing were conducted.

3.9.1 Frequency Distribution According to Malhorta (1999), the objective of frequency distribution is to obtain a count of number of responses associated with different values of one variable and to express these counts into percentage terms.

3.9.2 Reliability Analysis This analysis is an indication for the stability and consistency with which the instrument measures the concept and helps to access the goodness of a measure. In the Cronbachs Alpha reliability analysis, the closer Cronbachs Alpha is to 1.0, the higher the internal consistency reliability. (Cronbachs Alpha; Cronbach, 1946) measures;

35

1. Reliability less than 0.6 considered poor. 2. Reliability in the range 0.7 is considered to be acceptable 3. Reliability more than 0.8 are considered to be good

3.9.3 Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis testing is a test that will determine whether should we accept or reject the hypothesis. If the observation value is greater than the critical value, then the decision rule of the hypothesis testing is to accept the alternative hypothesis (HA) The important role of the hypothesis is to suggest variables to be included in the research design. The analysis of the hypothesis will be using Pearson Correlation Coefficient.

3.9.4

Pearson Correlation Coefficient A statistical procedure for analyzing associative relationships between

a metric dependent variable and one or more independent variables. For this research, the relationship between violence at workplace as dependent variable and working environment, management style and co-workers relationship, as the independent variables were tested. The scale model suggested by Davies (1971) used to describe the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable, are as shown below:

36

(a) 0.7 and above very strong relationship, (b) 0.50 to 0.69 strong relationship, (c) 0.30 to 0.49 moderate relationship, (d) 0.10 to 0.29 low relationships and (e) 0.01 to 0.09 very low relationship.

3.10

PILOT TEST

Before the questionnaire is distributed to the actual respondents, the questionnaire was pre-tested in order to discover its reliability and validity. The pilot test is beneficial to this dissertation since invaluable and effectively of the questionnaire can be obtained to improve its reliability and validity. Reliability is the degree to which measures are free from random error and therefore yield consistent result. The closer Cronbachs Alpha is to 1.0, the higher the internal consistency reliability.

Table 3.2: The Range and Interpretation of Cronbachs Alpha Value Range 0.60 and below Within the range of 0.70 0.80 and above Interpretation Poor Acceptable Good

37

Furthermore, the purpose of the pre-testing is to ensure the questionnaire meets the researchers expectation in terms of information to be obtained. Furthermore, the objective of this pre-testing actually is to identify and correct the weaknesses of the questionnaire especially for this on design questionnaire.

In conducting the Pilot Test, 30 managerial staffs of UUM were selected randomly as a respondent based on the convenience of time and location. The language of the questions is thoroughly checked for its appropriateness and grammar usage. This weaknesses and mistake then identified and being improved in actual questionnaire to avoid errors. The results of the reliability tests are presented in the table 3.3. The Cronbachs alpha scores suggest accepted level of reliability of the measurement of the variables.

Table 3.3: Cronbachs Alpha for Pilot Test Variables Section B, C, D: VIOLENCE FACTORS (IV) (19 items) Working environment 0.691 0.690 0.789 Cronbachs Alpha Scores 0.780

Management style

Co-worker relationship

Section E: VIOLENCE AT WORKPLACE (DV) (6 items) 1 item dropped

0.677

38

3.11

CONCLUSION

This chapter discussed the research method proposed for this study. This chapter also presents the theoretical framework and research hypothesis. Besides, it includes the discussion of sampling design, data collection, questionnaire, measurement and data analysis.

39

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND FINDINGS

4.1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter reports the results of data analysis. Firstly, the organizations profile of the sample in terms of demographic profile of the respondents is described. This is followed by the presentation of results of the analysis of independent and dependent variables using the reliability analysis. Lastly, the results of hypothesis testing are also presented. This study aims to achieve the research objectives as well as answers the research questions highlighted in chapter one. In addition, this study intends to verify the hypotheses made in chapter three. 4.2 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS A set of 120 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents, whom were the managerial staff working across UUM departments. A one-week gap has been given to respondents. The total number of questionnaires received was only 120. 18 questionnaires were incomplete. Hence, the usable questionnaires for this research were 102. The response rate was 85% of total questionnaires distributed as shown in Table 4.1. Table 4.1: Responses Rate Total Questionnaires distributed Collected questionnaires Usable questionnaires Discarded questionnaires Uncollected questionnaires 120 120 102 18 % 100 100 85 15 -

40

4.3

SAMPLE PROFILE (RESPONDENTS PROFILE) The survey demonstrated the details concerning demographic characteristics or

respondents profile as shown in Table 4.2 below. Table 4.2: Respondents Profile Demographic 1. Age Group

Categories Below 25 25-34 years old 35-44 years old 45-54 years old More than 55 years old Male Female Malay Chinese Indian Others Primary Secondary Diploma Degree Master/PhD

% 16.7 45.1 35.3 2.9 0 41.2 58.8 87.2 0 10.8 2.0 0 47.1 23.5 22.5 6.9

2. Gender

3. Race

4. Academic Qualification

5. Place Of Employment

College Offices Clinic Uni. Departments Others Below 2 yrs 2-4 yrs 5-7 yrs 8-10 yrs More than 10 yrs

22.5 3.9 52.9 20.6 20.6 13.7 30.4 6.9 28.4

6. Working Experience

As to the age of the 102 respondents, the majority of the respondents were in the category of 25 to 34 years (45.1%) followed by the age category of 35 to 44 years (35.3%), coming to the aged below 25 years old (16.7%), and lastly respondents aged 41

from 45-55 years old (2.9%). The study indicates that majority of the respondents are female (58.8%) while the remaining are male (41.2%).

Out of the 102 respondents, the majority of respondents were Malay people, representing the highest race (87.2%). Followed by the Indians (10.8%), while the rest were under category of Others with (2.0%). As for the academic qualification, 47.1% of the respondents are Secondary holders, followed by the Diploma holders (23.5%). (22.5%) of the respondents are Degree holders, and only (6.9%) of the respondents having a Master/PhD.

The study shows that highest number of respondents was working in Uni. Departments (52.9%). Followed by the category of College Offices (22.5%). (20.6%) of the respondents were under the category of Others and lastly (3.9%) of the respondents were working in a Clinic. As for the working experience, the majority of respondents were in the category of 5 to 7 years (30.4%), followed by the working experience category of more than 10 years (28.4%). Thirdly, respondents with below than 2 years experience (20.6%). Followed by respondents with 2 to 4 years experience (13.7%). Lastly, (6.9%) of the respondents with 8 to 10 years work experience.

4.4

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

This study uses Cronbach Alpha to test the reliability of the instruments used. Hence, ensures consistent measurement across time and across the various items in the instrument.

42

Reliabilities less than 0.6 are generally considered poor, while those in the range of 0.7 are accepted reliabilities and those over 0.8 considered good. Reliability analysis being analyzed according to the independent variables, which consists working environment, management style, and co-workers relationships while the dependent variable is workplace violence.

Table 4.3: Reliability Analysis Variables 1. Dependent Variable Workplace Violence 2. Independent Variables Working Environment Management Style Co-Worker Relationship

No. of Items

Reliability Alpha

0.688

5 7 7

0.754 0.776 0.761

As shown in table 4.3, the researcher gathered an alpha value 0.754 for the first independent variable, which is working environment. It means that all five (5) questions asked to the respondents about the working environment, can considered having a high reliability value. The second independent variable, management style, the researcher gained an alpha value of 0.776, meaning that all seven (7) questions asked about the management style can considered having a high reliability value. For the last independent variable, co-worker relationship, the researcher found an alpha value of 0.761. That means, all of seven asked to the respondents about the co-worker relationship, can considered having a high reliability value. Lastly, for the dependent variable, violence at workplace, there are six (6) questions that being asked to the respondents. The alpha value that has being obtained from the analysis is 0.725 with one item dropped. The overall alpha values were considered as acceptable. 43

4.5

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

In order to describe the responses for the major variables under study, descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation on the dependent and the independent variables were obtained. The following Table 4.4 shows the results of the analysis.

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics of the Dependent and Independent Variables Variable Mean Standard Deviation Workplace Violence Co-worker Relationship Management Style Working Environment 3.230 3.6275 3.6036 3.4529 0.7494 0.64491 0.66488 0.79200

From the results of the above Table, it can been seen that the means of all variables fall between 3.230 and 3.627. This indicates that there were no extreme values for the mean.

4.6

RESTATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis is a statement that the researcher sets out to accept or reject based on the data collected method. Below are the hypotheses that the researcher used in the analysis.

44

HYPOTHESIS 1 H0 : There is no significance relationship between co-workers relationship and workplace violence. H A: There is significance relationship between co-workers relationship and workplace violence

HYPOTHESIS 2 H0 : There is no significance relationship between management style and workplace violence H A: There is significance relationship between management style and workplace violence

HYPOTHESIS 3 H0 : There is no significance relationship between working environment and workplace violence. H A: There is significance relationship between working environment and workplace violence.

4.7

TEST OF HYPOTHESES

To test all the hypotheses under the study, the researcher used correlation analysis method. In this research, the researcher used Pearson Correlation Method since this method is suitable to use when the two variables is in an interval scale. Notice that all variables used in this research are in interval scale. The Pearson product moment correlation was used in order to assess and understand the direction

45

and significance of the relationships of the variables used. The results are shown in table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Inter Correlations for Major Variables Workplac Working e Violence Environment Workplace .325 ** Violence Working Environment Management Style Co-worker Relationship **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). -

Management Style -.131

Co-worker Relationship .137

-.124

.470**

-.185

The results in the above Table shows clearly that the correlation between the violence at workplace (dependent variable) and co-worker relationship (independent variable) is Pearson Correlation (r) = 0.137 with p-value = 0.137

The correlation is positive and still can be accepted in the relationship between the two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this method, the significant level is at 0.01.

This also indicates that there is a positive relationship but not significant between workplace violence and co-worker relationship.

The Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.137, indicates that when reliability increase about 100% workplace violence will increase 13.7%.

46

Table 4.5 shows that the correlation between the workplace violence (dependent variable) and management style (independent variable) is Pearson Correlation (r) = -0.131 with p-value = 0.188

The correlation is negative and cannot be accepted in the relationship between the two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this method, the significant level is at 0.01.

The probability of making mistakes is only 1%, and the level of confidence is 99%. The p level is more than 0.01, at the level of significance of 0.01. This also indicates that there is no positive significant relationship between workplace violence and management style. The Pearson Correlation coefficient is -0.131, indicates that when reliability increase about 100% workplace violence will decrease 13.1%.

In Table 4.5, the results shows clearly that the correlation between the workplace violence (dependent variable) and working environment (independent variable) is Pearson Correlation (r) = 0.325 with p-value = 0.001

The correlation is positive and can be accepted in the relationship between the two variables, as the Pearson Correlation is less than 0.5 coefficients. In this method, the significant level is at 0.01.

The probability of making mistakes is only 1%, and the level of confidence is 99%. The p level is more than 0.01, at the level of significance of 0.01.

47

This also indicates that there is a positive significant relationship between workplace violence and co-worker relationship. The Pearson Correlation coefficient is 0.325, indicates that when reliability increase about 100% workplace violence will increase 32.5%. thus hypothesis three is accepted.

4.8

CONCLUSION

From the above findings, correlation analysis concludes that only working environment is considered having a positive significant relationship and correlated to workplace violence.

48

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATION, AND CONCLUSION

5.1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter further discuses the findings of this study based on the research questions developed as well as literature reviews that have been mentioned in chapter two. The objectives of this study were to determine the relationship between three independent variables, namely co-worker relationship, management style, and working environment and workplace violence as the dependent variable.

This chapter also will further discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this study as well as the recommendation by the researcher for the studied organization University Utara Malaysia and for future study, which is related with workplace violence and all three factors namely, working environment, management style, and co-worker relationship. I hope that it is a useful study for other future researchers who would like to go in depth about these variables.

Lastly, this chapter is end up with a conclusion part whereby the overall contain of this study was concluded.

49

5.2

RECAPITULATION OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study is to examine is there any relationship between the factors of workplace violence and the workplace violence in the UUM. This research study three independent factors, which were, working environment, c-worker relationship, and management style and their contribution to workplace violence. The main objective of the study is to examine which among variables contributes to workplace violence. Specifically, the objectives of this study are listed below:

To examine whether level of environmental working conditions affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM. To examine whether level of management style affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM. To examine whether level of situation of co-workers relationships affects the extent of workplace violence in UUM.

Three main hypotheses were developed to explore the relationship between these factors and workplace violence: a) There is significant relationship between co-workers relationship and workplace violence b) There is significant relationship between management style and workplace violence

50

c) There is significant relationship between working environment and workplace violence. From this research, the major significant findings from the three main hypotheses are presented in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.1: A Summary of Results of Hypotheses Testing Hypothesis H1 There is significant relationship between co-workers relationship and workplace violence There is significant relationship between management style and workplace violence There is significant relationship between working environment and workplace violence.

Results Rejected

H2

Rejected

H3

Accepted

5.3

DISCUSSION

Although there are many factors that can contribute to the occurrence of workplace violence, such as stress, organizational structure, interpersonal issues...etc. the researcher only choose three factors to study in the UUM contexts to see whether these factors have their impact on the workplace and the employees that could result in the end with violent incident or not. The researcher wants to test if there is a any relationship between these three factors namely, working environment, management style, and co-workers relationship and the workplace violence in the UUM.

The result of this study shows that there is a positive significance relationship between one of the variables that is working environment and workplace violence. On

51

the other hand, a positive but not significant relationship occurs between co-worker relationship and workplace violence. Whereas for the last variable, management style, the results has shown a negative relationship between the factor and the workplace violence. It very clear from the results that workplace violence is mainly affected by the working environment, that means workplace violence could occur in the organization, and other factors does not have that significant influence which could contribute to workplace violence. Below are some discussion for each research questions.

5.3.1 Research question one

The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is positive correlations between working environment and workplace violence. That means, working environment is a primary factor that can contribute to workplace violence in UUM. The results show that there is a great possibility of violence might occur. Therefore, UUM management must look into it more deeply and discover what are the factors that can make the working environment such a violence factor.

As previously illustrated in the literature and based on the findings from other researchers, it was found that workplace environment have a great effect on the employees productivity, performance, and morality, not forgetting their psychological stage. In other words, from a logical standpoint, it makes sense that a workplace psychosocial environment that either accommodates or tolerates behavioral problems would also be deficient in

52

quality practices (Bennett & Lehman, 1999). For example, increased customer sensitivity requires traits and behaviors such as reliability, responsiveness and trustworthiness (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, 1988), work behaviors that are negatively associated with drug or alcohol abuse (Lehman & Simpson, 1992). Even thought specialization in a particular job scope has been proven that could bring higher productivity. However, limitation an employee job scope in a particular area could make the particular employee feel bored and eventually stress with his / her job. In a stressful working environment, employee tends to act and behave out the norms. Hence, management should consider the implications of job routines and consider enhancing the employee work life with job enrichment such as temporary job rotation among employee in the department. By the new work station set up, new faces, and the new challenges in job rotation will provide employee a brand new feeling in work. Fresh, excitements from the job rotation will make an employee becoming engaged with his organization and motivated to work. It is a well-known fact that with the pleasant working mood, employee will perform greater productivity, greater creativity and reduction in work stress. In additional, from the strategically point of view, job rotation will also enhance understanding among colleagues on their peers job daily function. This understanding is essential for the team to work together as it built a solid based among the colleague to have a common ground that could enhance the communication between peers.

53

Besides that, organization could also consider to have a plan for the employee recreational activities such as providing some in house sports facilities for the employee to release their stress while working. This strategy has been long employed by some giant multinational companies such as Agilent Inc and Google Inc. whereby the company provides sport facility in the plant such as squash court, tennis court which employees can be stay away from their job and release their stress by playing during working hours. Some conservative management will raise the questions on such arrangement if this plan will affect the employee productivity. However, the researcher believe that in the modern management era, management should practice a difference perception which putting more trust to its employees and believe employees could perform better in democratic policy. Furthermore with the increase of Z generation employees involving in workplace, management has to learn to adapt to the new management style to deal with the change of the population in organization. Apart from that, management should also consider to open up more channels of communication to allow its employees to express their opinions / thought in a way to reduce the stress in workplace. Open communication could enhance the employee working experience and also an essential factor in employee work satisfactions. Open communication can be implemented by reducing the layers in upward communication, frequent meeting session that allowing employees to express themselves openly, and so on. Also not forgetting some outdoor activities such as team building, potluck picnic which in informal setting which also leads to more relax mood and make the communication upward, downwards happens freely. 54

5.3.2 Research question two

The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is no correlations between management style and workplace violence. That means that management style does not have the impact on the workplace violence in UUM.

The negative correlation between management style and workplace violence in UUM does not mean that UUM management can simply ignore the weight of this factor. One the other hand, UUM management should be aware and be prepared for influence of this variable by taking some proactive approaches to avoid future regret. This is because there are some researchers that have been conducted in developed countries such as United States and Europe has found that management style does have a significant impact on the workplace violence.

Perhaps at the point of time, this variable - management style still does not reached the alarming stage in Malaysia and in UUM specifically as what happened in some developed countries. According Rahman and Shamsudin (2000), to a study by the International Labor Organization (ILO) shows it may be a relief to many of us in Malaysia to find that, based on the ILO survey, workplace violence has not yet reached an alarming situation in this country. But this is not to deny its existence in Malaysian organizations since a number of government agencies and bodies are directly involved with the incidents of workplace violence in this country.

55

The statistical figures are very small; they may not really mirror the reality of the incidences of workplace violence or indicate the insignificance of it. This is because oftentimes, cases of workplace go unreported (Atkinson, 2000). Indeed, if violent cases were to be recorded, then it will not come as a surprise for a higher figure to be reported.

5.3.3 Research question three The results exhibited in table 4.5 shows that there is no significant relationship between co-worker relationship and workplace violence in UUM.

This finding is also inconsistent with the research finding which some researchers in developed country have done. The researcher of this study is trying to understand the reason why the findings is not consistent with other researches done in developed countries and found that the relationship among co-workers in UUM are close to each other as they treat each other as brother and sister. This strong relation is influenced by the national culture and values of the country that encourages everyone to treat their friends / co-worker as family members.

Due to the strong relationship that has been built for years, if there is any disagreement happens between them, they can tolerate with the disagreement. For this reason, co-worker relationship does not have

significant impact on the workplace violence in UUM. On the contrary, the relationship among the co-worker in the developed countries are weak and

56

formal basics, in the event of any disagreements in work, there is no tolerations and will further lead fighting or violence behavior.

5.4

THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

The study has proven that working environment is an important factor that can contribute to workplace violence. According to Stewart and Kleiner (1997), a troubled work environment can lead to incidents of workplace violence. The finding in this study is consistent with other researchers findings which working environment provides the fertile ground for the violence to occur (Johnson & Indvik, 1996; Johnson, 1994; Roan, 1994). In sum, individuals working in environments where aggression and conflict is commonplace are more likely to develop aggressive behaviors and engage in conflicts than others in gentler environments.

However, these research findings on the other two factors, which are management style and co-worker relationship, are inconsistent with the findings done by other researchers. This study found that there are no relationship between these two factors and the occurrence of the violence in workplace. However, other researchers found that management styles, co-worker relationship, and strict job performance standards are considered factors for the violence in the workplace (Travnick, 1994; Gill, Fisher, & Bowie, 2002; Johnson, 1994). In other words, the way conflict is managed in organizations may have a more important effect on the level of aggression and violence in the workplace.

57

5.5

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this study might provide some insights to the management particularly to UUM in formulating the strategies to deal and prevent violence in workplace. This is critical since UUM is moving toward to achieve the status of being one of the world class universities, facing environmental challenges, globalization, economics recession, diversity that happens in the workplace.

From the present study, the working environment is found to contribute to the workplace violence. Hence, UUM management should tackle this factor by enhancing the working environment in term of workplace security, enhancing workplace communication channels, improving workplace physical condition such as proper handling of toxic waste, balance and equality in work load distribution among the staffs and so on.

In addition, management also need to undergo a proper training to the employees in order to prepare the employees on the awareness of workplace violence and how to deal with any violent incident that might occur in the workplace.

This study also show to the management the awareness of such factors in influencing the workplace violence. In addition, there are other factors that are not been studied in this research yet should not be overlooked by the management.

58

5.6

LIMITATIONS This study has some limitations such as: a) The present study had only focused on employees working in a public sector. Different results might be obtained if the study looked at private sectors. b) The sample choice of this study was only based on employees from academic sector. Hence, the results should not be generalized for the other sectors. Furthermore, the sample size was small. c) The present study had involved a limited number of independent variables. Different results might be generated if other different predictors are used.

5.7

RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE STUDIES

Opportunities for the future study have emerged as a result of this study. Finding shows that there is a significant relationship between the workplace violence and working environment. Researcher would like to suggest to other interested researcher who might do the same or similar study to extend the scope of the study and the other factors that could contribute to the workplace violence in depth. Secondly, the researcher would like to suggest in the future research that it would be better if there were more or different variables involved rather than three variables as been done in this research. The future researchers can expand the context or environment by implementing at other private or public organization.

Thirdly, is to use intensive research technique such as observations and interviews to expand the understanding of the relationship process.

59

Hopefully, for the next researcher they should figure out a way to achieve higher responds rate, quicker respond time and higher quality responses from the respondents. Researcher believes that this study does give a significant contribution to future studies.

5.8

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings and analysis on the data, it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship between the working environment and workplace violence and insignificant relationship between co-worker relationship and management style and workplace violence. That means working environment is considered as of the factors that can be contributed to workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia.

Although studying the factors that influence workplace violence is not easy as it seemed, due to their infrequent occurrence. However, improving the understanding of their potential causes and increasing their predictability is extremely useful because these factors can be devastating for the organization and the individuals involved.

Knowing which factor that have the most influence on the organization and employees will help the management to be aware of that particular factor and try to minimize its influence on the workplace in order to create a pleasant working environment to its employee, which eventually will bring a result of higher productivity, and profitable outcomes to the organization.

60

As a conclusion, workplace violence is not acceptable in any organization and management should go all out and formulate effective strategies to prevent and deal from its occurrence and provide a pleasant and peaceful working place for the employees.

61

REFERENCE Akers, R. (1973). Deviant behavior: a social learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth; Sutherland, H. (1947) Sanctions and social deviance: The Question of Deterrence. New York: Prager; Akers, R. (1985). Deviant behavior: a social learning approach (3edn). Belmont, CA: Watdsworth. Alexander, R. and Langford, L. (1992). Throwing down: a social learning test of students fighting. Social Work in Education. 14 (2), 114-125. Altman, I. (1993) Dialectics, physical environments, and personal relationships. Communication Monographs, 60(1), 26-35. Anfuso, C. (1994), Deflecting workplace violence. Personnel Journal, 73(10), 66-77. Atkinson, W. 2000. The everyday face of workplace violence. Risk Management, 47(2): 12-18. Bacharach, S. (1998). Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Violent and Deviant Behavior in Organizations. Stamford, CA: JAI Press. Barnett, O. and Martinez, T. (1995). Jealousy and romantic attachment in maritaly violent n non-violent men. Journal Interpersonal Violence, 10(4), 473-487 Bennett, J. B., & Lehman, W. E. K. (1999). The relationship between problem coworkers and quality work practices: a case study of exposure to sexual harassment, substance abuse, violence and job stress. Work & Stress, 13(4), 299-311. Bower, B. (1992). Sick building exert stressful impact. Science News, 141(17), 26063 Braverman, M. (1993). Violence: The Newest Worry on the Job. New York Times, December 12: 11 Bryant, M., & Cox, J. W. (2003). The telling of violence: Organizational change and atrocity tales. Journal of Organizational Change, 16(5), 567-583. Bulatao, E. and VandenBos, R. (1996). Workplace violence: its scope and issues. In VendenBos, J. and Bulatao, E. (eds.) Violence on the Job: Identifying Risks and Developing Solutions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1. Carll, E. K. (1999). Violence in our Lives: Impact on Workplace, Home, and Community: Allyn & Bacon, A Viacom Company, Needham Heights. Chappell, D. and DiMartino, V. (1998), ``Violence at Work'', International Labor Office, Geneva

62

Corney, B. (2008). Aggression in the workplace: A study of horizontal violence utilising Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenology. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 22(2), 164-177. Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2008). Business Research Methods (10th ed.): McGraw Hill Companies, Inc., New York, NY 10020. Davis, J.A. (1971). Elementary Survey Analysis. Englewood Cliff, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Dietz, P. (1995) a stalker could be any one. USA today, 11 Jan, A11 Ford, M. and Linney, J. (1995). Comparative analysis of juvenile sexual offenders, Violent non-sexual offenders, and status offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10(1), 56-71. Gill, M., Fisher, B., & Bowie, V. (2002). Violence at work: causes, patterns and prevention. Willan Publishing, Hasslo St, Portland, Oregon. Holland, J. (1973). Making vocational choices: A thoery of careers. New York: Prentice Hall; Mantell, M. and Albrecht, S. (1994). Ticking bombs: Defusing violence in the workplace. Burridge, IL: Irwin professional. Hopsken, W. G. (2000). Quantitative Research Design, Sportscience Journal, 4(1) Johnson, D. L. (1994). Workplace violence: why it happens and what to do about it. EAP Digest. 14(3), 18-22. Johnson, D., Kiehlbauch, J. and Kinney, J. (1994), Break the cycle of violence, Security Management, 38(2), 24-8. Johnson, P. R., & Gardner, S. (1999). Domestic violence and the workplace: developing a company response. Journal of Management Development, 18(7), 590-597. Johnson, P. R., & Indvik, J. (1996). Stress and violence in the workplace. Employee Counselling Today, 8(1), 17-24. Johnson, P. R., Lewis, K., & Gardner, S. (1995). Fire me? Bang! Bang! Youre dead! Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10(7), 28-36. Kinney, J.A. and Johnson, D.L. (1993). Breaking Point: The Workplace Violence Epidemic and What to Do about It, National Safe Workplace Institute, Chicago, IL. Lehman, W. E. K., & Simpson, D. D. (1992). Employee substance use and on-the-job behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology , 77, 309-321. Leo, J. (1995). Just too much rage. US News and World Report. 118(18), 22-23.

63

Lind, S. and Otte, F. (1994), Management styles, mediating variables, and stress among HRD professionals, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 5 (4), 301-16 Malhotra, N. K. (1999). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation: New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. McCune, J. (1999), ``And you thought TV was violent'', Management Review, 88(6), 8. McGrath, H., & Goulding, A. (1996). Part of the job: violence in public libraries. New Library World, 97(1127), 413. Minor, M. and Henry, C. (1995). Preventing workplace violence: Positive Management Strategies. New York: Crisp Publications. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: Multiple-item scale for measuring customer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64, 12-40. Popham. A. (1998), Companies learn domestic violence is, in fact, their business', The News Tribune, April 5, p. G2. Rahman. R. & Shamsudin F. M. (2000), Violence at the workplace in Malaysia: The role of Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1994, Paper presented at NIOSH 3rd Annual National Conference on Occupational Safety and Health, Bangi, Malaysia. Ramsey, R.D. (1994), Violence on the job: how safe is your workplace?, Supervision,55(8), 6-9. Rich, M. and Woods, E. (1985). Aggressors or victims: gender and race in music videos. Pediatrics, 101(4), 669-675. Roan, S. (1994), Violence at work: experts say precautions are the key, The Philadelphia Inquirer, G1, G6 Stewart, M. R., & Kleiner, B. H. (1997). How to curb workplace violence. Facilities, 15(1/2), 511. Stuart, P. (1992). Murder on the job. Personnel Journal, 71(2), 72-84. Travnick, J. (1994), Averting workplace violence, Risk Management, 41(5), 13-20. Van Aalten, C.B. (1994), Violence in the workplace, The NCO Journal, 4(2), 1617. Walkup. C. (1999). Customer satisfaction: Security. Nation's Restaurant News, September 13: 102-104

64

Whitmore, L., & Kleiner, B. H. (1999). Violence In The Workplace. Management Research News, 22(8), 12-17. Woititz, J., (1987). Home Away from Home, Health Communications, Inc., Pompano Beach, FL. http://www.dhs.state.ia.us http://www.workplaceviolence911.com/

65

APPENDIX A

RESEARCH TITLE: A Study On The Factors That Contributed To Workplace Violence In University Utara Malaysia, In Sintok Kedah. Dear valued respondent, I, Mohammad Ahmad Mohammad Hussain, am a final year student of Master program in University Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah. This set of questionnaires is designed to study on the factors that contributed to the workplace violence in University Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah.

The questionnaire contained four (5) parts which has been designed to be easy to complete. Please read the questions carefully before you answer it. It would greatly appreciate if you would respond to the questions as honest as possible. Your response will be kept strictly confidential to ensure the utmost privacy. The data obtained will be used for academic purposes only.

Thank you very much for your time, consideration and cooperation. I greatly appreciate your contribution and help in furthering this research endeavor. Cordially,

Mohammad Ahmad Hussain Master in Human Resource Management College of Business University Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah.

SECTION A RESPONDENT BACKGROUND Questions below are about your background. Please tick [ ] in the appropriate box.

1. Age (until 1 January 2009) Below 25 35 to 44 years 55 and above [ [ [ ] ] ] 25 to 34 years 45 to 54 [ [ ] ]

2. Gender Male [ ] Female [ ]

3. Race Malay Indian [ [ ] ] Chinese Others [ [ ] ]

4. Academic Qualifications Primary Diploma Master/PhD 5. Place of employment


College offices Uni. Departments

[ [ [

] ] ]

Secondary Degree

[ [

] ]

[ [

] ]

Clinic Others

[ [

] ]

6. Working experience (with UUM) Below 2 years 5 to 7 years More than 10 years [ [ [ ] ] ] 2 to 4 years 8 to 10 years [ [ ] ]

SECTION B WORKING ENVIRONMENT Please read the following statements, and circle ( O ) appropriately in the box that best explains your opinion. Circle ( O ) only one number for each statement. 1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Uncertain 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree

My job is routine- (using the same method/doing the same thing every day)?

My current workplace is safe

I feel safe while working with customers

My job is tiring

I am happy with my current working environment

SECTION C MANAGEMENT STYLE Please read the below statements, and circle ( O ) appropriately in the box that best explains your opinion. Circle ( O ) only one number for each statement. 1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Uncertain 4 Agree 1 2 5 Strongly agree 3 4 5

I believe my superior always give me helpful advice

I believe my Superiors are Knowledgeable about the job

I believe my superiors are always available when needed

I believe my superiors always take action when incidents occur

I believe my superiors employees effort

always

appreciate

I believe my superior will threaten to hit or throw something at me when the job is not well done

I believe my organization have a clear policy about workplace violence

SECTION D CO-WORKER RELATIONSHIP Please read the below statements, and circle ( O ) appropriately in the box that best explains your opinion. Circle ( O ) only one number for each statement. 1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Uncertain 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree

My colleagues are friendly

My colleagues are supportive

I am always having informal social gathering with my colleagues

I feel safe to work with my colleagues

I believe other co-workers have hidden motives

I will report any incident that happen to my colleagues

I believe that other co-workers have good intentions

SECTION E WORKPLACE VIOLENCE Please read the below statements, and circle ( O ) appropriately in the box that best explains your opinion. Circle ( O ) only one number for each statement. 1 Strongly disagree 2 Disagree 3 Uncertain 4 Agree 5 Strongly agree

I feel anxious in my current workplace

Violence could happen in my workplace

I believe I would be given an appropriate sexual gift

There is a lot of fights happens in my work

I believe that violence is consider as part of the job by managers, supervisors and/or employees

I believe that punching, hitting, or yelling is the solution to get things done

APPENDIX B

Pilot Test-Reliability Statistics for Working Environment Cronbach's Alpha .691 N of Items 5

Item-Total Statistics Scale Corrected Cronbach's Scale Mean if Variance if Item-Total Alpha if Item Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Deleted Routine Safe in the Workplace Safe Working Environment Job Tiring Happy Working Environment 12.733 12.867 12.700 12.567 13.133 10.616 11.637 20.286 9.564 9.706 .724 .733 -.347 .756 .733 .517 .539 .911 .482 .495

Pilot Test-Reliability Statistics for Management Style Cronbach's Alpha .690 N of Items 7

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted Superior give Advice Knowledgable Superior Superior Available when Needed Superior Take Action Superiors always Appreciate 22.433 22.200 22.633 22.433 22.600 8.047 8.028 9.068 9.495 7.834 Corrected Item-Total Correlation .814 .720 .468 .517 .652 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .563 .575 .642 .642 .583

Superiors threaten me Organization Have violence policy

23.200 22.500

11.131 8.810

-.149 .490

.876 .634

Pilot Test-Reliability Statistics for Coworker Relationship Cronbach's Alpha .789 N of Items 7

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted My Colleagues are Friendly My Colleagues are Supportive Social informal gathering with Colleagues Safe working with Colleagues Coworkers Hidden Motives Report any incident happen to Colleagues Coworkers have good intentions 21.000 21.033 18.552 18.654 Corrected Item-Total Correlation .725 .802 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .721 .711

21.333

30.368

-.446

.896

21.067 21.433 21.233 20.900

19.237 18.185 16.392 20.093

.634 .640 .781 .636

.739 .735 .700 .742

Pilot Test-Reliability Statistics for Workplace Violence Cronbach's Alpha .589 N of Items 6

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted Anxious Workplace Violence In my Workplace inappropriate Sexual Gift Fights In My Work Violence consider part of the job Punshing,Hitting,Yellin g 14.200 14.467 15.000 14.000 13.933 14.233 16.234 14.809 11.931 13.448 16.340 9.978 Corrected Item-Total Correlation .020 .237 .423 .793 .226 .536 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .677 .579 .496 .434 .581 .425

Pilot Test-Reliability Statistics for all Independent Variables Cronbach's Alpha .780 N of Items 19

Item-Total Statistics Scale Scale Mean if Variance if Item Deleted Item Deleted Routine Safe in the Workplace Safe Working Environment Job Tiring Happy Working Environment Superior give Advice Knowledgable Superior Superior Available when Needed Superior Take Action Superiors always Appreciate Superiors threaten me Organization Have violence policy My Colleagues are Friendly My Colleagues are Supportive Social informal gathering with Colleagues Safe working with Colleagues 63.733 63.867 63.700 63.567 64.133 63.100 62.867 63.300 63.100 63.267 63.867 63.167 63.333 63.367 67.926 69.154 84.493 63.702 65.637 78.024 78.395 78.079 80.990 76.547 83.706 81.316 69.264 70.240 Corrected Item-Total Correlation .613 .671 -.182 .737 .639 .291 .227 .265 .058 .320 -.149 .000 .627 .634 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted .750 .749 .811 .736 .746 .775 .778 .776 .784 .773 .811 .788 .751 .752

63.667

87.954

-.390

.813

63.400

67.697

.714

.744

Coworkers Hidden Motives Report any incident happen to Colleagues Coworkers have good intentions

63.767 63.567 63.233

68.323 66.668 74.875

.579 .618 .359

.752 .748 .770

DATA ANALYSIS FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION


Age Frequency Below 25 25-34 Valid 35-44 45-54 Total 17 46 36 3 102 Percent 16.7 45.1 35.3 2.9 100.0 Valid Percent 16.7 45.1 35.3 2.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.7 61.8 97.1 100.0

Gender Frequency Male Valid Female Total 42 60 102 Percent 41.2 58.8 100.0 Valid Percent 41.2 58.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 41.2 100.0

Race Frequency Malay Valid Indian Others Total 89 11 2 102 Percent 87.3 10.8 2.0 100.0 Valid Percent 87.3 10.8 2.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 87.3 98.0 100.0

Academic Frequency Percent Secondery Diploma Valid Degree Master/Phd Total 48 24 23 7 102 47.1 23.5 22.5 6.9 100.0 Valid Percent 47.1 23.5 22.5 6.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 47.1 70.6 93.1 100.0

Employment Place Frequency Percent College Offices Clinic Valid Uni. Departments Others Total 23 4 54 21 102 22.5 3.9 52.9 20.6 100.0 Valid Percent 22.5 3.9 52.9 20.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 22.5 26.5 79.4 100.0

Experience Frequency Percent Below 2 yrs 2-4 yrs 5-7 yrs Valid 8-10 yrs More than 10 yrs Total 21 14 31 7 29 102 20.6 13.7 30.4 6.9 28.4 100.0 Valid Percent 20.6 13.7 30.4 6.9 28.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 20.6 34.3 64.7 71.6 100.0

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Descriptive Statistics N DV.Violence IV1.WorkingEnvi IV2.Mgt.Style IV3.Coworker Valid N (listwise) 102 102 102 102 102 Mean 3.230 3.4529 3.6036 3.6275 Std. Deviation .7494 .79200 .66488 .64491

RELIABILITY
Case Processing Summary N Valid Cases Excluded a Total 102 0 102 % 100.0 .0 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics for all Independent Variables Cronbach's Alpha .707 N of Items 19

Reliability Statistics for Working Environment Cronbach's Alpha .754 N of Items 5

Reliability Statistics for Management Style Cronbach's Alpha .776 N of Items 7

Reliability Statistics for Co-worker relationship Cronbach's Alpha .761 N of Items 7

Reliability Statistics for Workplace Violence Cronbach's Alpha .688 N of Items 6

CORRELATIONS

Correlations DV.Violence IV1.WorkingEnvi IV2.Mgt.Style IV3.Coworker Pearson Correlation DV.Violence Sig. (2-tailed) N IV1.WorkingE nvi Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation IV2.Mgt.Style Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation IV3.Coworker Sig. (2-tailed) N 102 .325** .001 102 -.131 .188 102 .137 .170 102 102 -.124 .216 102 .470** .000 102 102 -.185 .063 102 102 1 .325** .001 102 1 -.131 .188 102 -.124 .216 102 1 .137 .170 102 .470** .000 102 -.185 .063 102 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

You might also like