Theoretical Framework on factors influencing employee turnover
Over the years, a significant amount of research has been done on phenomenon of employee
turnover and several theories have been written and available to explain why employees decide to
leave the current organization(Ongori, 2007). This study will be achored on the Organizational
equilibrium theory (OET) of employee turnoverby March and Simon (1958). This theory has a
big influence in the study of employee turnover. The theory states turnover occurs when
individuals perceive that their contributions to an organization exceed the inducements they
received from that organization. The inducements impacts on the intent to leave and employee’s
ease of movement and are more related to individual level factors (Hom and Griffeth, 1995). The
theory further highlights the aspect of employees being faced two sided reactions; pull and push.
Both impact on employees’turnover decision. Pull take the form of higher salary, better
opportunity and organizational goodwill that attack on employeesand causes them to away from
the organization. On the other hand, psychological forces always push employee towards new
employment (Josefek and Kauffman, 2003).
Using the OET, Allen and Griffeth (2003) put forward a comparatively complete integrating
research model for discussing the relation between employees’ performance level and their
withdraw tendency, and also voluntary turnover. They proposed the use of this model in three
analytical routes: first, is employees’ performance character in organizations will influence their
job satisfaction and organization commitment; secondly, employees’ performance character will
influence their turnover behaviors through movement in the labor market with a definitive
variable of apperceived mobility easiness; and the third concerns the different key degrees of
employees’ performance in organizations influencing their turnover behavior in a more direct
way, so-called “short-circuiting” (Messersmith, 2007).
Barnard also used the same through but provided a systematic framework where he discussed
human motivations that are involved in the decision to belonging, which is also known as the
organizational equilibrium. He argued that the equilibrium of an organization means the capacity
to maintain efficiency of an organization (Mano, 1994). Organizations are dependent on the
continuity of participants’ contributions and in order to maintain this, organizations have to offer
equitable inducements. Thus Barnard’s specific evolution is the decision to participate, in other
words balancing of burdens by satisfactions which results in continuance (Barnard, 1994).
According to Barnard, if the personal sacrifice is bigger than the inducements he gets, then the
person will withdraw his contributions and will leave the company.
Mano extended Barnard’s theory into the Barnard-Simon Organizational Equilibrium theory,
which builds on Barnard’s observations. Simon argued that the achievement of organizational
equilibrium contains the condition that the sum of contribution of all employees ensures the kinds
and quantity of necessary inducements (Mano, 1994). However, he did not consider the functions
of the organization, such as the process of creation, transformation or exchange of utilities where
Barnard also placed his emphasis (Mano, 1994). The Organizational Equilibrium Theory
indicates clearly that the movement desirability and perceived mobility by employees are the
most important theoretical precursor variables for their turnover behavior.
Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework is a framework that is structured from a set of broad ideas and theories
