Dysfunctional Staff Turnover
The fourth and last objective of the study sought to examine how dysfunctional turnover of
staff relates to performance of employee in nonprofit healthcare providers. 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 .
Table Dysfunctional Staff Turnover
Statement N=148 SD
D N A
SA
There has been resignation of very competent
employees to join other competent programs /
institutions.
F
58 27 26 20 17
%
39.2 18.2 17.6 13.5 11.5
Given opportunity I would transfer my
competency to a different employer.
F
12 19 36 25 56
%
8.1 12.8 24.3 16.9 37.8
I believe that my skills and knowledge is
beyond the current work / services offered in
this organization.
F
12 21 41 27 47
%
8.1 14.2 27.7 18.2 31.8
The table 4.9 shows that the majority of respondents 85(57.4%) disagreed that there have
been resignation of very competent employees to join other competent programs or
institutions while 26(17.6%) were neutral and 37(35%) agreed that there indeed have been
competent employees who have resigned to join other competent institutions.
It was also found that the majority of employees 81(54.7%) would transfer their competency
to a different employer given an opportunity while 36(24.3%) did not offer their opinion and
31(20.9%) asserted they would not transfer their competencies elsewhere given the
opportunity. Lastly, the researcher found that most of the respondents 64(50%) believe that
their skills and knowledge is beyond their current work/services offered in the organization
while 33(22.3%) asserted that their skills and knowledge are not beyond the services and
work offered by the organization.
These findings suggest that resignation of competent employees to join competing
organization is minimal, but the employees feel that if they get an opportunity they would
take their skills and competencies elsewhere as they perceive their current posts as a waste of
their skills and competencies. According to Testa (2008), organization is obliged to avoid
turnover rates especially for skilled professionals as it may have detrimental effect on human
capital cost. He argued that competitors may employ the same person in the same department
in their abilities. The cost on employer according to Johnson et al. (2000) may be about 50%
of the salary the worker earned annually to hire and train a new individual for replacement. It
is prudent for management to get down to reasons for turnover, particularly for the employs
that performs highly resigning in the department through exist interview that are costly too.
Regression Analysis
To determine the influence of staff turnover on performance and the extent by which every
independent variable predicts staff performance, the model of multivariate regression was
used. With aid of SPSS computer program Version 20 this was done at 95% confidence
interval.
Table: Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of
the Estimate
1 .400a.060 .136 1.40378
a. Predictors: (Constant), functional turnover, voluntary turnover, involuntary turnover,
dysfunctional turnover
From the table 4.10, it can be seen that functional turnover, dysfunctional turnover,
involuntary turnover and voluntary staff turnover (independent variables) predicted
the employee performance (dependent variable) by 60% and indication that
employee performance is predicted with some factors which were beyond the
scope of the current study.
Table ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square
F
Sig.
Regression 53.196 4 13.299 6.749 .000b
1 Residual 279.824 142 1.971
Total 333.020 146
a. Dependent Variable: PERFROMANCE
b. Predictors: (Constant), FUNCTIONAL, VOLUNTARY TURNOVER,
INVOLUNTARY, DYSFUNCTIONAL
As displayed in the table, the independent variables in the study (functional
turnover, dysfunctional turnover, involuntary turnover and voluntary staff turnover)
had a statistically significant influence over the dependent variable (employee
performance) as indicated by the p value (p=0.000<0.05). The p-value was lower
than the pre-set threshold of 0.05, to determine the statistical significance of the
independent variables over the dependent variable. Further, it can be seen that the
model was well defined and the influence of the independent variable on the
dependent variable was not by chance.
Table: Coefficients
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardize
d
Coefficients
T Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 34.332 3.721 9.226 .000
VOLUNTARY_TURNOVER .076 .046 .134 1.664 .004
INVOLUNTARY .061 .080 .061 .765 .001
DYSFUNCTIONAL .193 .082 .207 2.372 .019
FUNCTIONAL .258 .097 .226 2.644 .009
a. Dependent Variable: PERFROMANCE
Y=34.3+0.076X1+0.061X2+193X3 +258X4+ e
The table 4.12 shows the coefficient findings which reveal that the independent
variables had a statistically significant effect on the dependent variable. Each of the
variables met the pre- set threshold of 0.05 to determine whether the independent
variable had a significant influence on the dependent variable. The first
independent variable under examination was
voluntary staff turnover to determine the extent of its influence on employee
performance. The findings revealed that voluntary staff turnover had significant
influence on employee performance at p value (p=0.004<0.05). Similarly,
involuntary staff turnover was found to have a significant influence on the
employee performance evidenced by the lower than the pre-set p value
(p=0.001<0.05). Dysfunctional staff turnover was the third independent variable
and the coefficient findings shows that it had a significant influence on the
employee performance at p value (p=0.019<0.05). Lastly, the findings also showed
that functional staff turnover had a statistically significant influence on employee
performance at p value (0.009<0.05).
All beta values were positive which imply that an improvement in one unit of the
independent variables would enhance employee performance. Functional turnover
had the greatest influence as far as employee performance is concerned where an
improvement of one unit of functional turnover would lead to an improvement in
employee performance. Dysfunctional turnover was also found to impact employee
performance where an improvement of one unit of dysfunctional turnover would
lead to an improvement in performance by .0207. An improvement of one unit of
voluntary turnover was found to impact employee performance by 0.134 while
involuntary staff turnover affected employee performance by 0.61.
