Employee Performance
The dependent variable in the current study was employee performance in nonprofit
organizations in Uasin Gishu County. To determine employee performance, the researcher
provided the respondents with a range of opinions of a Likert scale to help solicit their views
on this variable where 1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neutral, 4= agree, 5=strongly
agree. The findings are presented in table 4.2
Table Parameters of employee performance
Statement N=148 SD
D N A
SA
Accomplished Goals
I was able to meet all my performance
goals as agreed in last year.
F
33 42 13 35 25
%
22.3 28.4 8.8 23.6 16.9
Staff turnover interferes with
achievement of individual goals in an
organization.
F
13 20 27 33 55
%
8.8 13..5 18.2 22.3 37.2
Efficiency and Effectiveness.
I have been very efficient and
Effective in work over the last one
year.
F
40 38 27 29 14
%
27 25.7 18.2 19.6 9.5
Staff turnover interferes with efficiency
and effectiveness of an employee in an
organization.
F
15 21 23 32 57
%
10.1 14.2 15.5 21.6 38.5
Timeliness and Quality Service
I have been able to offer quality and
timely services to my clients over the
past one year.
F
35 40 28 27 18
%
23.6 27 18.9 18.3 12.2
My clients are always very satisfied with
quality and time taken to receive their
services.
F
39 29 24 28 28
%
26.4 19.6 16.2 18.9 18.9
Staff turnover interferes with timeliness
and quality of services offered to clients
in this organization.
F
10 19 22 35 62
%
6.8 12.8 14.9 23.6 41.9
Accomplished Work load
I have accomplished my entire work load
within the specified period in the past.
F
38 39 34 28 9
%
25.7 26.4 23. 18.9 6.1
Staff turnover affects individual ability to
accomplish his / her work load within a
specified period in an organization.
F
10 30 34 48 26
%
6.8 20.3 23 32.4 17.6
As the table displays, most of the respondents 75(50.7%) disagreed that they have
accomplished their goals while 13(8.8%) were neutral and the remaining 60(40.5%) agreed
that they have accomplished their goals. Further, the majority of the respondents 88(59.5%)
concurred that staff turnover interfered with their achievement of individual goals in the
organization while 27(18.2%) had no opinion and 23(22.3%) did not perceive staff turnover
as an impediment to achieving individual goals.
In regards to efficiency and effectiveness, most of the respondents 78(52.7%) disagreed,
27(18.2%) had no opinion, and 56(29.1%) agreed that efficiency that they have been efficient
and effective in their work over the last year. However, the majority 89(60.1%) concurred
that staff turnover interferes with their efficiency and effectiveness while 23(.55%) were
neutral and 36(24.3%) disagreed that fellow employees leaving and joining the organization
interferes with their effectiveness and efficiency.
It can also be seen in the table that most of the respondents 75(50.7%) disagreed that that
they have been able to offer quality and timely services to their clients over the past one year
while 28(18.2%) were neutral and 45(30.4%) agreed that they have been timely in their
provision of quality services. However, most of the respondents 68(45.9%) disagreed that
their client are very satisfied with quality and the time taken to receives their services while
24(16.2%) were neutral and 56(37.8%) agreed that their clients are satisfied with the quality
and timeliness of their services. The majority of the respondents 98(65.4%) blamed their lack
of provision of timely and quality services on staff turnovers while 29(19.6%) did not blame
staff turnover on the low quality and slow provision of services. From these findings, it can
be deduced that despite the claims by most of the staff that they offer timely and quality
services, most of the clients were not satisfied with the timeliness and quality of the services
they offer showing that staff turnover does affect the quality and timeliness of services
offered.
The table then shows that the most 77(52%) of the respondents disagreed that they have
accomplished their entire workload within the specific period in the past while 34(23%) did
not offer their opinion and only 37(25%) of the respondents claimed that they accomplished
their entire workload within the specified period in the past. most of the respondents 74(50%)
linked their lack of accomplished workload on staff turnover while 34(23%) did not offer an
opinion and 40(27%) disagreed that staff turnover is to blame for their lack of delivery of
workload within a specified time period.
Generally, the perceptions of employees on the effect of staff turnover on their performance
are evident. The staff generally agreed that staff turnover affects their performance as
individuals. For instance, the employees linked staff turnover to their inability to accomplish
personal goals, lack of organizational efficiency and effectiveness, timeliness and quality and
workload. Therefore, the findings suggest that employee turnovers lead to an increase in the
workload as the current employees carry the workload of the other employees before they are
replaced further, training new employees take time and as such accomplishment of goals,
efficiency, effectiveness and provision of quality and timeliness is hindered. With the human
capital fluctuating in the organization, customer’s perception of quality, and timeliness of
services is affected as Kirby, (2005) reveals customer satisfaction, customer service
timeliness delivery, quality of the service and responsiveness determines the nature of
outcomes on customer results. According to the human capital theory, people are the best
input in organization since their competencies influences the efficiency of inputs. Therefore,
the findings of the current study are in line with the human capital theory as the continued
change in human capital through turnovers negatively affects outputs. Further, the Federal
Enterprise Architecture (2005) reveals that inputs quality brought to an organization
influences output nature and are characterized by processes and activities. Therefore, quality
dimensions, financial efficiency, productivity and innovational management in an
organization system are characterized by organizational human capital.
Voluntary Turnover of staff on employee Performance
The first objective of the current study sought to establish the influence of voluntary turnover
of staff on employee’s performance in nonprofit health care providers. First off, the
researcher asked the respondents their reason for transfer from previous organization and the
table 4.3 presents their responses.
Table Reason for transfer
Reason Frequency Percent
poor remuneration 92 62.2
work load 22 14.9
career advancement 31 20.9
management conflict 3 2.0
Total 148 100.0
As the table 4.3 displays, the majority of the respondents 92(62.2%) cited poor remuneration
for their transfer, 31(20.9%) cited the need to advance their careers. 22(14.9%) stated that the
workload was too much and 3(2%) stated that conflict with the management led to their
transfer. Based on these findings, the researcher can deduce that poor pay packages is one of
the leading reasons for employee turnover. These findings support Armstrongs’ (2011) who
argues that likely contribution to staff turnover is the chances of receiving high
remunerations elsewhere.
The respondents were asked to indicate future career plans with the responses being
presented in figure 4.7
Fig 4.7 Respondents’ career plans
As displayed, the majority of the respondents 63(42.6%) cited change in employer or career
as their future career plans while 38(25.7%) stated they had plans to advance their education,
20(13.5%) claimed that they plan to seek promotions while 17(11.5%) claimed they had
other plans and 10(6.8%) stated they had no plans for their future. These findings suggest
that the most common plans among the respondents was to seek other more competitive and
probably less pressing workload with better remuneration packages. However, it is clear that
for some, there are no plans for their future
The researcher also wanted to understand the career plans the organization had for the
respondents. The table 4.4 provides the results.
Table Organization’s career plans
Career Plans Frequency Percent
Education 26 17.6
Promotion 13 8.8
Others 31 20.9
None 78 52.7
Total 148 100.0
The table 4.4 shows that most of the respondents 78952.7%) stated that their organization
had no career plans set for them while 26(17.6%) asserted that their organization planned to
further their education, 13(8.8%) were set for promotion, 31(20.9%) claimed that there were
other plans set for them by the organization. However, it is evident from the majority of
responses that the organizations have no set plans for the future careers of its employees
which may also contribute to staff turnovers.
The researcher also went forth to ask the respondents to indicate the benefits they get from
working in the new organization. Their responses are as presented in the table 4.5
Table Benefits
Frequency per cent
Compensations 60 40.5
Benefits 45 30.4
work-life balance 22 14.9
performance recognition 13 8.8
Growth and Development 8 5.4
Total 148 100.0
As the table displays, most of the respondents 60(40.5%) cited compensations as
the main benefits they derive from the organization while 45(30.4%) cited
monetary benefits, 22(14.9%) cited the ability of the organization to provide work-
life balance, 13(8.8%) cited the ability of the organization to recognize their
exceptional performance at work and 8(5.4%) claimed that their organization
provided an opportunity for growth and development. These findings suggest that
the majority of organizations retain their employees due to monetary
compensations and benefits. However, they are not well liked for provision of
work-life-balance, performance recognition and growth and development.
To determine voluntary turnover, the researcher provided the respondents with a
range of opinions of a Likert scale to help solicit their views on this variable where
1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neutral, 4= agree, 5=strongly agree. The
findings are presented in table
